are adaptions RAW?

[A Tad Insane]

I've seen many TO builds use adaptions, such as divine anima mage. Yet the thing about TO is it uses very strict RAW, but adaptions are barely even encouraged for a dm to use, and mostly to help shoehorn things into the world should lore/fluff clash. But what is the playground's opinion?

[Drachasor]

I believe it is "allowed" in TO only when the adaption explicitly indicates all changes and how they work. Basically they have to be written like a group of ACFs so that there's zero guesswork involved.

[Red Fel]

I believe it is "allowed" in TO only when the adaption explicitly indicates all changes and how they work. Basically they have to be written like a group of ACFs so that there's zero guesswork involved.

That's my position as well. If the "adaptation" explicitly states what changes are made to the default, then it's more like a variant or ACF, and fine even under strict RAW.

Contrast this with the Unarmed Swordsage adaptation, which is poorly worded and its impact debated. (Yet somehow it is frequently recommended.)

[Psyren]

Agreed with above - some are simply too vague (Arcane Swordsage, Psionic Chameleon) to really be useful in a TO or even PO discussion because everybody's version will be different.

Other adaptations are crystal clear what you need to do, such as Psionic Mindbender and Psionic Trickster.


There is a third category though - where it's reasonably clear what you need to do, even if all the specifics aren't fully defined. For example Shadowmind's adaptation lets you swap out Cloud Mind and Read Thoughts for two other powers; while those two powers aren't defined, since you know what levels those first two powers are you can reasonably select two other powers of the same level instead. And because Read Thoughts is a discipline power you know that at least one is on the table.

[eggynack]

Contrast this with the Unarmed Swordsage adaptation, which is poorly worded and its impact debated. (Yet somehow it is frequently recommended.)
I think that's mostly because it fills that role so well, doing the monk thing in a fun and interesting way. People will often make exceptions for things they like, and a lot of people like the unarmed swordsage. Also, even if it is a bit unclear, it's not all that hard to wrap your head around how it should work.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I think that's mostly because it fills that role so well, doing the monk thing in a fun and interesting way. People will often make exceptions for things they like, and a lot of people like the unarmed swordsage. Also, even if it is a bit unclear, it's not all that hard to wrap your head around how it should work.

I agree with all of this, but want to expand it a little.

Unarmed Swordsage also isn't used in TO or even near TO builds and it isn't even a net increase in power unless you're dipping it and getting unarmed strike instead of a bunch of proficiencies you aready have. Even this is generally thught of as fine, because it's too expensive feat/class wise to be o.k at unarmed for corner situations like disarmed and attacked in bed by default in d20.

[Zweisteine]

Adaptions are used in TO if it suits the optimizer. You'll find a few optimized builds built around adaptions, and some that make some use of them.

TO generally does stick to strict RAW, but some parts or that are disputed, and some TOers do make use of variants, adaptions, and even the occasional houserule.

[Andezzar]

The Unarmed Swordsage nearly has enough information to be considered RAW.

The Arcane Swordsage however is very vague. There is no restriction what spells you can take instead of maneuvers (only a guideline what is "most appropriate"). Additionally such spells are cast as maneuvers. Maneuvers are Extraordinary Abilities, unless the description says it is a Supernatural Ability. Spells never claim to be Supernatural Abilities. Now this means as long as he is able to move a 17th level arcane swordsage can cast Wish every other round without any components. He can even do that in an AMF or a dead magic zone.