Shifters - Are they Overpowered?

[Alaris]

Hey all, came here with a pretty simple question. I'll give the background for it.

I run a D&D 3.5 game, and it is generally low-optimization. However, occasionally, one or two players can make it to the game who like to optimize to some degree, and I can usually keep control, even when they do. That said, I have one player who has inquired about playing a Shifter.

I've taken a cursory glance at the race, and I didn't see anything inherently broken... but I am curious of the Playground's view.

I don't allow Tome of Battle, and people generally don't make Overpowered Wizards or other Casters... so that's the background there.

So... is it easy to make a Shifter extremely cheesy? What are some things I would need to look out for, if I approve his request?

Thank you all kindly.

EDIT: I mean the Shifter RACE, not Class.

[Zanos]

With various feat and PrC support, they can make better melee combatants than the core melee classes. If you think a warblade is too much you might have problems with a well built and played shifter overshadowing, say, a fighter.

They aren't overpowered by a longshot in my point of view, but it's probably different for your group.

[Snowbluff]

Nothing about them seems particularly OP to me. :l

[eggynack]

Their abilities aren't particularly great, as the temporary boost only levels the class back to a +0 mod, but you can do some pretty cool things with the race, especially on druids. I wouldn't call anything they do especially overpowered, however. There's a fancy handbook on the topic hereabouts (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=13383.0), and a second one over here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?225294-3-5-The-Shifter-Handbook-(WIP)). As the fact that it has two separate handbooks indicates, shifter is definitely among the most complicated races out there, if not necessarily the most powerful.

[Alaris]

Nothing about them seems particularly OP to me. :l

It's not that I necessarily thought they were, I'd just heard some things in the woodwork about this or that, and figured I'd inquire on the playground. I see they have their own personal feat trees and whatnot, which is cool. And I like the general fluff of the race, so I'm leaning towards allowing it. It shouldn't be too hard to incorporate, and the other players shouldn't feel overshadowed, if I'm reading things right.

[Rebel7284]

Moonspeaker is a powerful shifter-only prestige class. However, a druid doesn't really need it to totally overshadow the rest of the party.

[eggynack]

Moonspeaker is a powerful shifter-only prestige class. However, a druid doesn't really need it to totally overshadow the rest of the party.
Yeah, they're pretty sweet for a solid four level period. Beyond that, sticking with straight druid for substitution level purposes is probably a better idea. The only thing past that point is gate stuff, and that comes online ridiculously late, and at the same time as shapechange. The shifter druid is definitely one of the more interesting and out there archetypes, particularly due to the distance it puts between you and standard progression, but I'd hesitate to say that it's necessarily stronger than straight druid.

[HunterOfJello]

EDIT: I mean the Shifter RACE, not Class.

As with all races, classes, feats, etc. you can use them in combination with other things to become very powerful or you could not use them in combination with other things and be pretty weak.

How good is the race by default without using shifter-only items, PrCs, feats, or other options? They're pretty terrible.

The race is actually terrible on its own and their implementation was horrible. Being able to shift a single time per day for less than a handful of rounds is a really bad implementation of the mechanic and makes them a fairly lousy race overall.

If you are worried about the character being stronger than others in the same party, then you will need to look at the entire build and not just the race. Any review of a shifter that says they are a good race is assuming that the player is optimizing quite a bit since they are just not a good race by default.

[Alaris]

Nothing about them seems particularly OP to me. :l


As with all races, classes, feats, etc. you can use them in combination with other things to become very powerful or you could not use them in combination with other things and be pretty weak.

How good is the race by default without using shifter-only items, PrCs, feats, or other options? They're pretty terrible.

The race is actually terrible on its own and their implementation was horrible. Being able to shift a single time per day for less than a handful of rounds is a really bad implementation of the mechanic and makes them a fairly lousy race overall.

If you are worried about the character being stronger than others in the same party, then you will need to look at the entire build and not just the race. Any review of a shifter that says they are a good race is assuming that the player is optimizing quite a bit since they are just not a good race by default.

Just looking for general capability. Presuming he has access to the Shifter-only feats and Prestige Classes, and perhaps items. The idea I've gotten from the thread is that they're okay, but not exceedingly powerful compared to the PHB Races.

I'll keep an eye on the thread while I consider my decision. Leaning towards yes, as I previously said.

[Kol Korran]

Shifters can make decent rangers, barbarians and druids (It's hard to mess up a druid). But on their own they are not much to worry about. The only thing i'd look out for is the weremaster PRC, as it is in the ECS book. It can be quite overpowered, but the designers quickly made an errata to it (Mostly fixing the ability increases to something more sane).

Some shifter feats are quite good. Others can be quite awful. Usually shifters tend to take such feats since they increase their times to shift per day, but any shifter feat they taker means they are not taking other feats... I know of some DMs who try to support the race by "fixing it"- giving some extra shifter feats every few levels and such.

[John Longarrow]

I don't allow Tome of Battle, and people generally don't make Overpowered Wizards or other Casters... so that's the background there.

As a question, why ban Tome of Battle but allow wizards?
From level 1-4, most ToB builds work better than normal melee combatants AND melee combatants tend to be more powerful in combat than casters.

Starting about level 5, casters start becoming much more powerful than melee combatants. By level 10, casters tend to outshine melee even without any attempt at optimization.

Are you so heavily redacting spells that the casters don't overshadow the melee types in battle? i.e. removing most meta-magic feats, cutting buffs, and removing battle field control spells? If not, ToB allows melee types to keep up with casters from 5-15th level better than core melee classes.

[Jeff the Green]

As a question, why ban Tome of Battle but allow wizards?
From level 1-4, most ToB builds work better than normal melee combatants AND melee combatants tend to be more powerful in combat than casters.

Starting about level 5, casters start becoming much more powerful than melee combatants. By level 10, casters tend to outshine melee even without any attempt at optimization.

Are you so heavily redacting spells that the casters don't overshadow the melee types in battle? i.e. removing most meta-magic feats, cutting buffs, and removing battle field control spells? If not, ToB allows melee types to keep up with casters from 5-15th level better than core melee classes.

I suspect part of it has to do with floor/ceiling issues. A poorly built Wizard (such as an evoker banning conjuration and transmutation) is far less powerful than a poorly built Warblade. For casual gaming this makes a difference.

[John Longarrow]

Jeff the Green
Yea, its harder to mess up on a warblade, but its also a lot harder to be highly effective.
I've a preference for ToB classes, though this may be becaues most games I'm in have a lot of multi-classing.

[Jeff the Green]

Jeff the Green
Yea, its harder to mess up on a warblade, but its also a lot harder to be highly effective.
I've a preference for ToB classes, though this may be becaues most games I'm in have a lot of multi-classing.

Oh, sure. But in a casual game where no one can optimize much or where the players who can are holding back so as to not overshadow the others you're unlikely to see a highly effective anything. Maybe a druid.

[Alaris]

I suspect part of it has to do with floor/ceiling issues. A poorly built Wizard (such as an evoker banning conjuration and transmutation) is far less powerful than a poorly built Warblade. For casual gaming this makes a difference.

Part of it is definitely this.

Honestly, the players don't optimize. You're more likely to see the "Evoker Wizard" in my game than you are to see the "Conjuration Specialist" with various minmaxed feats and spells.

Unfortunately, I experienced first-hand the power of ToB classes, in a Warblade. I was playing in another game, as a mid-Op Wizard (Transmutation Specialist), and it was... surprising. While yes, if I had optimized further, I could have done better... combats were primarily the Warblade charging in and dishing out damage nearing 50+ per hit at level 4 or 5.

While yes, I'm sure you can blame part of it on the DM for 'not providing adequate challenge to all players,' I honestly can't blame him. As a DM myself, it's hard to balance between High-Op (ish) and low-Op characters.

At the end of the day, in a low-mid Op game, a ToB classes come out powerful right out of the box, while you generally have to work for it for other classes. My players are fine playing a Ranger or Fighter, instead of a Warblade or Swordsage.

Only one of my players ever had an issue with me barring ToB classes, and he has since shrugged it off and moved on to play a Beguiler (in the past), and a Duskblade soon. I know The Playground doesn't tend to like people who bar ToB from their games... but our game works fine without it.

TL/DR: My players have no issues with me barring ToB, we've had little to no issues with people overshadowing others using Casters, so why change it now?

Edit #2: I also have a few general rules. If the players began to optimize heavily, or decide they want a more high-Op game, we would have a group discussion. Hell, every couple of months of game-time, I hold a "Rules Session," where players can propose new rules, and the group votes on them. If people wanted Tome of Battle in, they could vote on it. Granted, they would certainly have to make the case to me, the DM, but my opinion CAN be changed.

[atemu1234]

In short, compared to other races (looking at you, Drow) it is far from overpowered. It's interesting, for the most part unique, but no more powerful than any other player race really.

[Jeff the Green]

In short, compared to other races (looking at you, Drow) it is far from overpowered. It's interesting, for the most part unique, but no more powerful than any other player race really.

Wait, what? Compared to drow, everything is overpowered.

[Alaris]

In short, compared to other races (looking at you, Drow) it is far from overpowered. It's interesting, for the most part unique, but no more powerful than any other player race really.

Indeed. Given what people have stated, and the research I have done earlier today, I see nothing inherently overpowered about the race, or it's feats, compared to other base races. I think I'm going to allow it... the Player has said he wants it mostly for flavor anyway... so it should work out. ^_^

Thanks for your help everyone.

[Boci]

Unfortunately, I experienced first-hand the power of ToB classes, in a Warblade. I was playing in another game, as a mid-Op Wizard (Transmutation Specialist), and it was... surprising. While yes, if I had optimized further, I could have done better... combats were primarily the Warblade charging in and dishing out damage nearing 50+ per hit at level 4 or 5.

How were they doing this?

7 damage from a greatsword
1 damage from magic (+1 weapon)
3.5 damage from punishing stance
6 damage from strength (assuming 18 strength)

That is a total of 17.5 damage per swing. Maneuvres can increase that, but not by 33+, and he can only use a single maneuvres once before needing to refresh, and he still has to hit to deal damage, which should happen more than a miss, but not with every swing. I think the player misunderstood (or worse was deliberately cheating) how ToB worked.

[Amphetryon]

Unfortunately, I experienced first-hand the power of ToB classes, in a Warblade. I was playing in another game, as a mid-Op Wizard (Transmutation Specialist), and it was... surprising. While yes, if I had optimized further, I could have done better... combats were primarily the Warblade charging in and dishing out damage nearing 50+ per hit at level 4 or 5. Power Attack + Leap Attack on a Barbarian 3/Fighter 2 can fairly reasonably approximate those numbers, with the books that you haven't banned (and Shock Trooper would make the hits more reliable the very next level). So, I'm curious as to why this particular example is used as if to justify the ban.

It's your campaign, and if your Players aren't complaining, rock on, but the above justification seems a poor one.

[HammeredWharf]

In TC's case, banning ToB seems to be ok. Well, anything is ok if the players are ok with it. Still, I'll pitch in and say ToB classes generally dish out less damage than optimized core melee. Their saving grace is that they deal enough damage and aren't shut down as easily. For example, Glitterdust pretty much disables a standard charger, while a warblade is unlikely to care about it because of Mind Over Body.


How were they doing this?

7 damage from a greatsword
1 damage from magic (+1 weapon)
3.5 damage from punishing stance
6 damage from strength (assuming 18 strength)

That is a total of 17.5 damage per swing.

+10 from full Power Attack, +21 from Soaring Raptor Strike. Of course, it's situational and you can't pull it off every round, but it's quite impressive. However, I remember playing with a whirling frenzy barbarian who dealt ~40 damage every round at lvl 1, so there's that.

[Boci]

+10 from full Power Attack

Which has nothing to do with ToB, and gives you a -5 to attack, which increases the chance of doing 0 damage for that round.


+21 from Soaring Raptor Strike. Of course, it's situational and you can't pull it off every round,

Precisely. Only useable against large targets, every other round at best, requires a jump check at DC equal to targets AC, is only available at level 5, not 4, and still falls short of the 33 extra damage needed. We can combine this with the power attack mentioned above, in which case we have a 5th level warblade only fighting large creature, illegally using the same maneuvre every round, and somehow always passing a jump check and hitting with a +5 to hit modifier. (+5 for level, +4 for strength, +1 for magic weapon, -5 for power attack)

[HammeredWharf]

We can combine this with the power attack mentioned above, in which case we have a 5th level warblade only fighting large creature, illegally using the same maneuvre every round, and somehow always passing a jump check and hitting with a +5 to hit modifier. (+5 for level, +4 for strength, +1 for magic weapon, -5 for power attack)

Oh, but our warblade is optimizing! He's a dragonborn water orc, so he gets +6 from Str. He's above the enemy, so he gets a +1 to hit from that. Also, Soaring Raptor Strike gives him a +4 to hit. So, his attack bonus is +12. Not bad at all for a lvl 5 character, but easily achievable with a barbarian/fighter build.

[Boci]

Oh, but our warblade is optimizing! He's a dragonborn water orc, so he gets +6 from Str. He's above the enemy, so he gets a +1 to hit from that. Also, Soaring Raptor Strike gives him a +4 to hit. So, his attack bonus is +12. Not bad at all for a lvl 5 character, but easily achievable with a barbarian/fighter build.

And non of that has anything to do with ToB, with the exception for soaring raptor strike. And even with +9, he is still not going to auto hit.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying you cannot do 50+ damage every round with a melee character, I'm just saying any such build be either be misreading the rules of ToB, or using other sources, or a mixture of both.

[Phelix-Mu]

Beware Weretouched Master. It's one of the Eberron PrCs for shifters, and in its original incarnation, it was probably too strong for the OP's brand of campaign. The errata cut it down to size quite a bit, but you have to look for the errata (and it was errata'd twice in two different places, and tied into the problems with the changes to the polymorph line). Worth watching out for if you are in a setting where ToB martial is a grade above the baseline optimization of the campaign.

[HammeredWharf]

And non of that has anything to do with ToB, with the exception for soaring raptor strike. And even with +9, he is still not going to auto hit.

Half of his damage (24,5) comes from Soaring Raptor Strike + Punishing Stance and the +4 to hit is nothing to sneeze at.


Just to clarify, I'm not saying you cannot do 50+ damage every round with a melee character, I'm just saying any such build be either be misreading the rules of ToB, or using other sources, or a mixture of both.

Eh, not every round. The OP wrote "per strike" and a lvl 5 warblade can do 50 damage per strike. He just needs a round of downtime, which he probably gets when he's OHKOing CR-appropriate foes.

Anyway, whether this makes ToB OP or not is beside the point, because I only meant to answer your question. Personally, I highly recommend ToB to just about everyone, because it makes many classic archetypes (dual-wielding without sneak attack, one-handed swashbuckling, throwing people around with your mighty kung-fu, being a great warrior who doesn't pee his pants every time something scary shows up) possible in a mid-op game without the hassle they require without ToB. However, if a group of people doesn't mind playing without ToB, it's their own business.

[Boci]

Half of his damage (24,5) comes from Soaring Raptor Strike + Punishing Stance and the +4 to hit is nothing to sneeze at.

Which can only be used every other round at beast and against large+ enemies. Meaning Tob provides an extra 3,5 damage against any medium sized foe, which is something to sneeze at.


Anyway, whether this makes ToB OP or not is beside the point, because I only meant to answer your question.

But you haven't answered my question, because your build isn't doing 50+ damage every round, but every other round at best.



Eh, not every round. The OP wrote "per strike" and a lvl 5 warblade can do 50 damage per strike. He just needs a round of downtime, which he probably gets when he's OHKOing CR-appropriate foes.

Doesn't seem that way. Dire lion survives, manticore survives, djunni is killed, so is a nightmare, but they have 24 AC. And again, this assumes they only fight large creatures.

[Rebel7284]

The best thing a warblade can do is usually NOT 50 damage, it's the White Raven Tactics on the spellcaster. :D

[HammeredWharf]

Doesn't seem that way. Dire lion survives, manticore survives, djunni is killed, so is a nightmare, but they have 24 AC. And again, this assumes they only fight large creatures.

Having checked out Optimization By The Numbers, the average CR 5 foe has 56 HP and 17 AC, meaning the warblade who deals average damage would bring it down to 6 HP in one hit 80% of the time, if it's larger than the warblade. Hitting a CR 17 Jump check shouldn't be much of a problem. Keep in mind that a wizard could cast Reduce Person on the warblade, giving him a small penalty to damage, but allowing the use of SRS on medium-sized foes. Without SRS, the warblade can still deal around 30 damage with Emerald Razor, and that's a touch attack. I can see how that could look OP in a low-OP group whose sword&board fighter is dealing 3,5 (longsword) + 4 (str) + 1 (magic) + 5 (PA) + 2 (Weapon Specialization) = 15,5 damage per strike, has a Will save of "failed" and moves 20 ft per round.

[Boci]

Having checked out Optimization By The Numbers, the average CR 5 foe has 56 HP and 17 AC, meaning the warblade who deals average damage would bring it down to 6 HP in one hit 75% of the time, if it's larger than the warblade.

A DC: 17 jump check may not be too much of a problem, but it does mean that the warblade is not hitting 75% of the time. You also aren't taking flying, incorporeal or miss chance into account. Plus if we use the +9 attack modifier its a 52% chance of making the jump check and attack roll.


Keep in mind that a wizard could cast Reduce Person on the warblade, giving him a small penalty to damage, but allowing the use of SRS on medium-sized foes.

With require an action and a spell from the wizard, and a spell commonly not used (and remember, in this group wizard is usually an evoker, so it doublt won't be an issue for the OP in this group). Plus this can be countered with with the enemy debuffing the warbblade.

Maybe ToB is too power for this group, but the personal experience story was probably off.

[Alaris]

Woah, thread exploded a bit.

Lessee what I can remember. Keep in mind that I was a player in this game, and thus did NOT have access to the other player's Character Sheet. On top of that, it has been a while... but the damage stuck in my mind, being that it kind of cemented my ban of them.

I know he was playing a Half-Giant. 2 Flaws were allowed for 2 extra Feats. I believe he got an extra "Initiator Level" or something from Central Casting.

At the end of the day, yeah, you guys are probably right in that this is not a great reason to ban ToB. But it was banned before this particular 'incident' took place, and this just made me more wary of it. I mean, like I said, we are low-mid Op. We don't usually have Fighters or Rangers or whatnot dealing that much damage per round (not that they can't, if built right... they just usually don't).

Allowing ToB Classes makes the PHB Melee classes pretty obsolete... my players like the flavor of them, like to play them and work with what they have. If they end up interested in ToB, they can bring it up at the rules session and we can discuss it. My ban isn't concrete, and if a consensus among the players decides that they want to play it, and they can convince me, then I will allow it.

Edit: Fixed some wording and misunderstandings.

[Boci]

Allowing ToB Classes makes the PHB Melee classes pretty obsolete... my players like the flavor of them, like to play them and work with what they have. If they end up interested in ToB, they can bring it up at the rules session and we can discuss it. Until then, things work fine the way they are. ^_^

Fair enough, but would your players even know to bring it up? Maybe if you said "I'm allowing ToB on probation" they would try it out and be interested in it. If the group doesn't optimize, ToB should be a problem, provided casters do take out of combat spells as well (I don't know if this is the case. Is it all evocation, or mostly evocation but also things like teleport, dimension door, the occassional summon monster?)


My ban isn't concrete is a consensus among the players decides that they want to play it, and can convince me.

Okay fair enough, never mind then.


I know he was playing a Half-Giant. 2 Flaws were allowed for 2 extra Feats. I believe he got an extra "Initiator Level" or something from Central Casting.

You seem to know this already, but just to be clear: half-giant and flaws have nothing to do with ToB, and you cannot boost your IL level with official sources. Plus with half-giant the list of soaring raptor strike targets drops even lower, and with the +1 LA they don't get it until level 6. So don't bring this incident up as an ex-ample of ToB's power, that will save some confusion.

[Alaris]

You seem to know this already, but just to be clear: half-giant and flaws have nothing to do with ToB, and you cannot boost your IL level with official sources. Plus with half-giant the list of soaring raptor strike targets drops even lower, and with the +1 LA they don't get it until level 6. So don't bring this incident up as an ex-ample of ToB's power, that will save some confusion.

Fair enough. I failed to actually explain the incident all that well... was just a 'bad' incident in my mind, in that the rest of the party kinda felt outshined. Stuff happens.

Thanks, though.

Edit: Fixed some wording again...

Edit 2: I kinda figured the flaws giving him 2 extra feats would help. I'm not sure if feats can help with Maneuvers or whatever... I imagine they can, since feats can help with spells.

Half Giants can have higher strength (20, I guess?), and access to Psionic Feats. The downside, of course, is that you get a +1 LA.

The Size issue is not an issue for Half-Giants, since they only count as Large if it would benefit them. Otherwise, they are Medium.

[Boci]

Fair enough. I failed to actually explain the incident at all... was just a 'bad' incident in my mind, in that the rest of the party kinda felt outshined. Stuff happens.

Thanks, though.

No problem. And of course there is the fact that ToB being so complicated does allow for this to happen. Its not that ToB allows this kind of stuff, it allows a munchkin to better hide OP stuff behind the the frame of ToB is the rest ofthe group isn't as clear on how it works, so there is that too consider on the flip side.

Edit: By the way if your group likes core melee and wants to keep it, they could always consider dipping ToB to try it out, its not an all or nothing thing, you can go fighter 6 / warblade 2 for example. Might be a way for them to test it if you or they want to.


[B]Edit 2: I kinda figured the flaws giving him 2 extra feats would help. I'm not sure if feats can help with Maneuvers or whatever... I imagine they can, since feats can help with spells.

Honestly feats benefit full attacking more than they benefit menauvres, because more attacks makes the feat relevant more. At low level (assuming no haste or other method of getting an extra attack before +6 BAB with a full attack) extra feats benefit a martial adept about as well as any martial character.


Half Giants can have higher strength (20, I guess?), and access to Psionic Feats. The downside, of course, is that you get a +1 LA.

Again, that will help any melee class, not just ToB. Plus my calculations assumed 18 strength, increasing it to 20 doesn't make a huge amount of difference.


The Size issue is not an issue for Half-Giants, since they only count as Large if it would benefit them. Otherwise, they are Medium.

Fair enough, but he could still only use that against large+ enemies, and every other round at best. Also you cannot use a maneuvre if you charge unless the maneuvre specifically says so. Not sure if this was an issue.

[Twilightwyrm]

How were they doing this?

7 damage from a greatsword
1 damage from magic (+1 weapon)
3.5 damage from punishing stance
6 damage from strength (assuming 18 strength)

That is a total of 17.5 damage per swing. Maneuvres can increase that, but not by 33+, and he can only use a single maneuvres once before needing to refresh, and he still has to hit to deal damage, which should happen more than a miss, but not with every swing. I think the player misunderstood (or worse was deliberately cheating) how ToB worked.

Lets assume for the moment that these specs are more or less correct (i.e. that he didn't do anything to boost his STR beyond 18). Lets also assume the person in question was 5th level, because the OP said 4th or 5th, and getting this at 4th would require a bit more hoop jumping. Let's also assume the Warblade in question has taken two specific feats: Power Attack (because why not) and Martial Study (Burning Blade). With the single addition of this boost, the Warblade can now attack as follows:

7 (Greatsword) + 1 (+1 Weapon) + 6 (STR) + 3.5 (Punishing Stance) + 3.5+5 (Burning Blade) +10 (Power Attack) = 36.
Now add either of the following and you get 50+: Bonecrusher (+4d6, +4 on crit confirmation), Soaring Raptor Strike (6d6 vs large).
Additionally, Battle Master's Charge (46 average) and Charging Minotaur (49 average) don't necessarily boost average damage above 50, but in practice would end up dealing 50+ damage a good portion of the time.
Further, this precludes him having taken a single level of Whirling Frenzy Lion Totem Barbarian, having taken Flashing Sun instead of Burning Blade, both, or all of these.
For the record, with Whirling Frenzy, assuming both attacks hit:
7 (Greatsword) + 1 (+1 Weapon) + 9 (STR) + 3.5 (Punishing Stance) + 3.5+5 (Burning Blade) +10 (Power Attack) * 2 (Whirling Frenzy's 2nd Attack) + 7+6 (Charging Minotaur's Bull Rush damage) = 91 average damage.
OR with Flashing Sun & Burning Blade, assuming both attacks hit:
7 (Greatsword) + 1 (+1 Weapon) + 6 (STR) + 3.5 (Punishing Stance) + 3.5+5 (Burning Blade) +10 (Power Attack) * 2 (Flashing Sun) = 72 average damage.

Now granted, in the actual crunch, most of the damage is coming from either Barbarian, or aping a Swordsage, but for a person just watching this build being played, it will appear that the Warblade itself is doing all of this. Indeed, for the first and third scenarios, it can be fairly easily accomplished with a straight Warblade, fairly light on either shenanigans (looking at you Feral Dragonborn Water Orcs). But, given all the options available even to the basic build, seeing the Warblade hit for around 50 damage every round or so can give the an impression similar to what the OP has.

EDIT: Half-Giant eh? That would alter things slightly. The basic Warblade build's damage would go to 39.5 before maneuvers, meaning 50+ is easily doable with Charging Minotaur (51.5) or Battle Leader's Charge (49.5). Bonecrusher would boost it to 53.5 on average. So yeah, I can see this.

[Boci]

Lets assume for the moment that these specs are more or less correct (i.e. that he didn't do anything to boost his STR beyond 18). Lets also assume the person in question was 5th level, because the OP said 4th or 5th, and getting this at 4th would require a bit more hoop jumping. Let's also assume the Warblade in question has taken two specific feats: Power Attack (because why not) and Martial Study (Burning Blade). With the single addition of this boost, the Warblade can now attack as follows

Kinda late to the party on that one. It was in fact 4th level, because of half-giant LA (meaning it could also have been 3rd level), and it happened largely because of other sources. Plus your own assumption is that all attacks will hit (not necessarily likely with -5 to hit from power attack) and even then this is a 1 round thing. They cannot do the same next round.

[Twilightwyrm]

Kinda late to the party on that one. It was in fact 4th level, because of half-giant LA (meaning it could also have been 3rd level), and it happened largely because of other sources. Plus your own assumption is that all attacks will hit (not necessarily likely with -5 to hit from power attack) and even then this is a 1 round thing. They cannot do the same next round.

A bit. It was only three posts after the one I quoted when I started typing though. I didn't really expect things to go as fast as they apparently did.
Well really, it is more like -3, since you get the +2 on a charge, to say nothing of any other to-hit bonuses that might be in play (of which there are potentially quite a few). And yes, it is kind of a one round thing, although even if we take off the 8.5 from Burning Blade, it is not that far outside the realm of probability that (with higher rolls) a Warblade could, say follow Charging Minotaur a normal refresh attack, then with Battle Leader's Charge, and still get near or over 50 damage (form the perspective of another anyways). Not on average, granted, but especially with a 20 str and a Large Greatsword involved, not outside the realm of possibility. (While it is possible he was 3rd, the +1 would account for the "4th or 5th" original statement.)

[Phelix-Mu]

@Alaris: Basically, nothing explodes a thread's size like ToB debates. Or debates about ToB fluff. Or claims that an optimized monk can beat a wizard of equal optimization. Or people that fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the Paladin's Code. Or....

Hehe, I personally feel that ToB is good for some tables, and not so good for others. Most people around here seem to be fans; the fact remains that some people just want to roll some dice and do some vanilla murderface, up-close-and-Conan-style. For these people, maneuver cards, maneuvers prep'd, and so forth, might just not be what they are looking for.

My baseline assertion is that it takes all kinds. Every player is different, every table is different. This isn't good or bad, it's just the nature of the game. So if ToB isn't right for your table, it isn't right, and no amount of internet debate may be able to change this.

That said, onward with the internet debate! After all...

IT'S THE INTERNET!

[Amphetryon]

@Alaris: Basically, nothing explodes a thread's size like ToB debates. Or debates about ToB fluff. Or claims that an optimized monk can beat a wizard of equal optimization. Or people that fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the Paladin's Code. Or....

Hehe, I personally feel that ToB is good for some tables, and not so good for others. Most people around here seem to be fans; the fact remains that some people just want to roll some dice and do some vanilla murderface, up-close-and-Conan-style. For these people, maneuver cards, maneuvers prep'd, and so forth, might just not be what they are looking for.

My baseline assertion is that it takes all kinds. Every player is different, every table is different. This isn't good or bad, it's just the nature of the game. So if ToB isn't right for your table, it isn't right, and no amount of internet debate may be able to change this.

That said, onward with the internet debate! After all...

IT'S THE INTERNET!

*insert obligatory XKCD reference explaining internet debates*

[Boci]

Most people around here seem to be fans; the fact remains that some people just want to roll some dice and do some vanilla murderface, up-close-and-Conan-style. For these people, maneuver cards, maneuvers prep'd, and so forth, might just not be what they are looking for.

Wasn't Conan actually an intelligent and resourceful fighter capable of adapting his strategy to suit new opponents and their fighting style, therefor making ToB a better representation of his character? Its funny how this happen. Sherlock Holmes is often used as an example for when someone wants to make a non-combatant skill monkey, despite the fact that Holmes was quite a formidably opponent when it came to fighting.

[HammeredWharf]

Allowing ToB Classes makes the PHB Melee classes pretty obsolete...

Actually, that's not true at all, assuming you're not using straight Core melee builds like barbarian 20. Even with ToB in use, barbarians still deal the most damage, fighters are still useful for bonus feats, rogues are still the best at rogue things, rangers are still the same and well, monks are already obsolete in Core.


A DC: 17 jump check may not be too much of a problem, but it does mean that the warblade is not hitting 75% of the time. You also aren't taking flying, incorporeal or miss chance into account. Plus if we use the +9 attack modifier its a 52% chance of making the jump check and attack roll.

A lvl 5 warblade's jump: 8 (ranks) + 2 (tumble) + 2 (item) + 4 to 6 (str) = 16 to 18. A DC 17 check means succeeding all the time.

[Alaris]

Kinda late to the party on that one. It was in fact 4th level, because of half-giant LA (meaning it could also have been 3rd level), and it happened largely because of other sources. Plus your own assumption is that all attacks will hit (not necessarily likely with -5 to hit from power attack) and even then this is a 1 round thing. They cannot do the same next round.

True. It was 5th level (and thus, 4 for him), as I just checked my own character sheet for that campaign.

I honestly couldn't say if he was partially other classes. He could've been part Barbarian, or Fighter, or the like. This example of ToB is, admittedly, kind of bad, because I don't know enough about the build. I've given what I know, and w/ some multiclassing and stuff, Twilightwyrm proved that it could be possible.

@Phelix-Mu - Yeah... it's good for some tables, not for others. It's really as simple as that. I don't think our table needs it yet, if ever. And if we do, it will happen. ^_^

[Boci]

A lvl 5 warblade's jump: 8 (ranks) + 2 (tumble) + 2 (item) + 4 to 6 (str) = 16 to 18. A DC 17 check means succeeding all the time.

If you are willing to invest the resources, sure (13 skill points and a custom magical item). Also remember this an average, it doesn't really work that way. Against a nightmare the DC becomes 24 for example. And oh look, it wasn't even soaring raptor strike.


True. It was 5th level (and thus, 4 for him), as I just checked my own character sheet for that campaign.

I honestly couldn't say if he was partially other classes. He could've been part Barbarian, or Fighter, or the like. This example of ToB is, admittedly, kind of bad, because I don't know enough about the build. I've given what I know, and w/ some multiclassing and stuff, Twilightwyrm proved that it could be possible.

But Twilightwyrm was assuming 5th level to have access to 3rd level maneuvres. Without that, as they noted, its basically a whirling frenzy barbarian with some nice but by no means crucial damage boosts from ToB (and one or two of those maneuvres isn't even a warblade one). Plus with the +10 damage from power attack he would have been taking -5 to each attack, reducing the chances of them hitting. And it takes multiple attacks, not a single strike.

Here's the number's crunched for you:

Whirling frenzy barbarian 1 / Swordsage 1 / Warblade 2

Full attack routine whilst raging assuming a base strength of 20): +4/+4 4d6+24 (average of 38 damage per hit, but he's unlikely to hit much with those to hit modifiers)
Requires: 1 whrling frenzy (so he needs a feat on extra rage to be able to do this in every encounter), power attack for -5, burning blade, in punishing stance

Next round his damage drops by 1d6+3.

ToB is contributing: 2d6+3 points points of damage (that comes with the price of -2 to AC, and 1d6+3 is only valid for 1 round, then the maneuvres needs to be regained)

[Phelix-Mu]

Wasn't Conan actually an intelligent and resourceful fighter capable of adapting his strategy to suit new opponents and their fighting style, therefor making ToB a better representation of his character? Its funny how this happen. Sherlock Holmes is often used as an example for when someone wants to make a non-combatant skill monkey, despite the fact that Holmes was quite a formidably opponent when it came to fighting.

I see this all the time. Yes, we can straightjacket any character into almost any character build with enough monkey-wrenching (and mixed metaphors). But this doesn't mean that Conan was a Warblade or w/e. He never cried out "IRON HEART SURGE!", even if that was pretty close to what he was doing.

Mechanics and their narrative representation change significantly from table to table. Thus, there is no "best representation" of an otherwise narrative character from novel or movie x or y; they aren't D&D characters, so constraining them to any mechanic is usually an artistic process, at best, and thus totally subjective. You may like your IHS Conan. I may like my Steadfast Determination Fighter/Barbarian Conan, or something similar.

Again, it takes all kinds, and we really can't prescribe any kind of ideal martial interpretation or mechanic. Especially because, even for all its awesome, ToB still can't hold a candle to even a fairly basic level of Tier 1 or 2 optimization. Snoopy band-aids can't cover that gaping wound; somebody get the medic.

EDIT: Sorry if my opening sounded like an attack. I've just read one-too-many "Gandalf is a 6th Level So-an-So" threads. Nothing against you or what you said, Boci, it just put me in mind of something that has been bothering me a bit.

[Alaris]

But Twilightwyrm was assuming 5th level to have access to 3rd level maneuvres.

While I am not 100% versed in how Maneuvers work, could it be possible that he had access to 3rd level maneuvers with the additional +1 Initiator Level from Central Casting? Again, this is obviously an outside factor, and not something that can happen in a vanilla game, but I'm curious.

[Boci]

I see this all the time. Yes, we can straightjacket any character into almost any character build with enough monkey-wrenching (and mixed metaphors). But this doesn't mean that Conan was a Warblade or w/e. He never cried out "IRON HEART SURGE!", even if that was pretty close to what he was doing.

It also doesn't mean he wasn't. My point is that (and bear in mind I know very little of the Conan character, I just repeat what others have said) despite becoming the face for simple "hit with sharp metal pointy stick" Conan was in fact a resourceful and intelligent character capable of adopting numerous tactics and strategies, and therefor not a good face for the core fighter, despite being used quite often as one.


While I am not 100% versed in how Maneuvers work, could it be possible that he had access to 3rd level maneuvers with the additional +1 Initiator Level from Central Casting? Again, this is obviously an outside factor, and not something that can happen in a vanilla game, but I'm curious.

Well yes, but that's an argument against Central Casting, not ToB. How is there 3rd party sources on ToB though? Its not OGC, you shouldn't be able to reference the mechanics.

[Alaris]

It also doesn't mean he wasn't. My point is that (and bear in mind I know very little of the Conan character, I just repeat what others have said) despite becoming the face for simple "hit with sharp metal pointy stick" Conan was in fact a resourceful and intelligent character capable of adopting numerous tactics and strategies, and therefor not a good face for the core fighter, despite being used quite often as one.



Well yes, but that's an argument against Central Casting, not ToB. How is there 3rd party sources on ToB though? Its not OGC, you shouldn't be able to reference the mechanics.

It's a general character history creator. It will give you a "Generic Boost" of some kind, and the DM is to interpret how it works in the confines of the game. In that case, the DM chose it gave +1 Initiator Level.

Like I said, it's an outside boost, so it's not really relevant to "how OP is ToB", but I'm just giving context for the damage potential.

[Phelix-Mu]

It also doesn't mean he wasn't. My point is that (and bear in mind I know very little of the Conan character, I just repeat what others have said) despite becoming the face for simple "hit with sharp metal pointy stick" Conan was in fact a resourceful and intelligent character capable of adopting numerous tactics and strategies, and therefor not a good face for the core fighter, despite being used quite often as one.

See my edit above.

Also, there is nothing, nothing that stops a core fighter from being resourceful, intelligent, and all that and more. If the DM is okay with a core fighter leaping around with his greatsword and chopping enemies in half to a pulsating shower of blood and gore, then yay, that covers the violence bit. Now you just need some role play to imagine strategies and move about tactically in combat. If the DM supports this, you may even gain benefit mechanically. Can we guarantee it? No. But neither can we guarantee IHS interpretation, or able refluffing of the ToB maneuvers, or really how any DM will handle anything.

ToB is good. I'd even go so far as to say that ToB is great. That makes it neither mandatory nor guaranteed to increase fun.

And, again, I'm not saying that you said it did. Just that that is the direction this kind of argument often leads in.

[Boci]

It's a general character history creator. It will give you a "Generic Boost" of some kind, and the DM is to interpret how it works in the confines of the game. In that case, the DM chose it gave +1 Initiator Level.

Okay, the DM should not have done that. I guess its an understandable mistake if they were unfamiliar with ToB, but yeah, should have asked forum advice or something.


Also, there is nothing, nothing that stops a core fighter from being resourceful, intelligent, and all that and more. If the DM is okay with a core fighter leaping around with his greatsword and chopping enemies in half to a pulsating shower of blood and gore, then yay, that covers the violence bit. Now you just need some role play to imagine strategies and move about tactically in combat. If the DM supports this, you may even gain benefit mechanically. Can we guarantee it? No. But neither can we guarantee IHS interpretation, or able refluffing of the ToB maneuvers, or really how any DM will handle anything.

So how would you make Conan as a fighter? I ask because even people who do not use ToB say he is a fighter / rogue, not a straight up fighter. Besides, when you said Conan, you didn't seem to be referring to an intelligent, resourceful fighter.

[Phelix-Mu]

Intelligence and resource are largely in prep for combat or in moving about and so forth. While maneuvers may help, they aren't crucial to the process. Even an Int score of 13 is a good bit above average, and Wisdom is probably a better reference point of cunning and clever fighting. As long as this Conan-ish doesn't dump his mental stats, he can probably Conan just fine.

What does Conan really need? Probably just a greatsword and someone familiar with the character enough to role play him and act in combat in-character. Really, the dice and mechanics represent almost nothing of the stuff that we recognize from novels and movies, Conan or otherwise. Because neither of those formats are turn-based. Thus, the entire interpretation thing is basically just smoke and mirrors and approximation.

I just disagree with anyone saying that "x version is better than y version" when there is absolutely no objective measuring stick or metric by which to gauge "better."

Nothing personal.

[Boci]

I just disagree with anyone saying that "x version is better than y version" when there is absolutely no objective measuring stick or metric by which to gauge "better."

So any class can represent Conan equally well? Of course not. Just because there is no objective measuring stick doesn't mean different approaches are automatically all equally valid.

Besides, my origional point was that you appeared to be misuing Conan as an example of a simple fighter, when he isn't.

[Twilightwyrm]

But Twilightwyrm was assuming 5th level to have access to 3rd level maneuvres. Without that, as they noted, its basically a whirling frenzy barbarian with some nice but by no means crucial damage boosts from ToB (and one or two of those maneuvres isn't even a warblade one). Plus with the +10 damage from power attack he would have been taking -5 to each attack, reducing the chances of them hitting. And it takes multiple attacks, not a single strike.


I think this needs a bit of clarification: The only 3rd level maneuver I was discussing was Bonecrusher (though I did mention SRS). Charging Minotaur, Burning Blade, Flashing Sun, and Battle Leader's Charge are 1st, 1st, 2nd, and 2nd level maneuvers respectively. I was assuming 5th mostly because the increased PA damage made more sense. Without that, it is two less damage from PA...and that's pretty much it. And you keep mentioning the -5 (or -4, since he was 4th level), but considering the Warblade in question is charging, with a +5 STR, +4 BAB, +2 from charge, +1 from weapon, and possible other bonuses, you end up with +8 or better to hit. Flashing Sun cuts into this by -2, but besides that...+8 or better against CR 5 creatures isn't bad.
Let's be clear on something though: I do agree that I don't think ToB was the main culprit here, and I don't think it should be as hastily thrown in with the banned material as it too often is. Sure, it is a significant contributor to damage, but it mostly just suffers from a high optimization floor, and thus the perception of being overpowered. I don't seethe other main melee damage dealing classes being terribly overshadowed. Now, if it doesn't make sense for your game, it doesn't make sense for your game. Psionics, Soulmelds and Vestiges are all cool subsystems, all are reasonably powerful (in relation to arcane/divine magic anyways), but I can see how the additional subsystems might not make sense for some games. The Sublime Way is merely similar in this regard.

[Boci]

I think this needs a bit of clarification: The only 3rd level maneuver I was discussing was Bonecrusher (though I did mention SRS). Charging Minotaur, Burning Blade, Flashing Sun, and Battle Leader's Charge are 1st, 1st, 2nd, and 2nd level maneuvers respectively. I was assuming 5th mostly because the increased PA damage made more sense. Without that, it is two less damage from PA...and that's pretty much it. And you keep mentioning the -5 (or -4, since he was 4th level), but considering the Warblade in question is charging, with a +5 STR, +4 BAB, +2 from charge, +1 from weapon, and possible other bonuses, you end up with +8 or better to hit. Flashing Sun cuts into this by -2, but besides that...+8 or better against CR 5 creatures isn't bad.

+8 is nearly cutting your potential damage in half. Also you cannot full on a attack on a charge, so no flashing sun on a charge. Lion totem barbarian doesn't change this because FS requires a full round action, not a full round attack.

So that makes the first attack: +8 4d6+30 (44 damage). But it is now charging, so does not work on difficult terrain and can otherwise be disrupted. Plus its hitting at just over 50% of the time.

[Alaris]

I think this needs a bit of clarification: The only 3rd level maneuver I was discussing was Bonecrusher (though I did mention SRS). Charging Minotaur, Burning Blade, Flashing Sun, and Battle Leader's Charge are 1st, 1st, 2nd, and 2nd level maneuvers respectively. I was assuming 5th mostly because the increased PA damage made more sense. Without that, it is two less damage from PA...and that's pretty much it. And you keep mentioning the -5 (or -4, since he was 4th level), but considering the Warblade in question is charging, with a +5 STR, +4 BAB, +2 from charge, +1 from weapon, and possible other bonuses, you end up with +8 or better to hit. Flashing Sun cuts into this by -2, but besides that...+8 or better against CR 5 creatures isn't bad.
Let's be clear on something though: I do agree that I don't think ToB was the main culprit here, and I don't think it should be as hastily thrown in with the banned material as it too often is. Sure, it is a significant contributor to damage, but it mostly just suffers from a high optimization floor, and thus the perception of being overpowered. I don't seethe other main melee damage dealing classes being terribly overshadowed. Now, if it doesn't make sense for your game, it doesn't make sense for your game. Psionics, Soulmelds and Vestiges are all cool subsystems, all are reasonably powerful (in relation to arcane/divine magic anyways), but I can see how the additional subsystems might not make sense for some games. The Sublime Way is merely similar in this regard.

Well, I can confirm one thing for you now. You just mentioned Bonecrusher, which I recognize as one of the Maneuvers he did use. So that might help clear things up. Either way.


Okay, the DM should not have done that. I guess its an understandable mistake if they were unfamiliar with ToB, but yeah, should have asked forum advice or something.

There have been far higher bonuses in his game for Central Casting stuff, so it didn't really concern me too much. Hell, one of my characters got Stone Shape several times per day.. Another got the Sudden Quicken feat for free.

That particular game was high-ish power. The one I run is not, hence the concerns.

[Boci]

Well, I can confirm one thing for you now. You just mentioned Bonecrusher, which I recognize as one of the Maneuvers he did use. So that might help clear things up. Either way.

That means that he was indeed using 3rd level maneuvres. It also means he wasn't charging, because you cannot use bonecrusher on a charge. Also rules out multiple attack.

So +6 8d6+20 damaging (average 48 damage), assuming punishing stance, burning a feat on burning blade, full power attack and bonecrusher (also makes the target vulnerable to crits). Its fits, but that's an abyssal attack value, and as said before, he can do this at best one every 3 round (because he needs to recover bone crusher and burning blade). Plus this required the DM to make a call he probably shouldn't have (allowing the +1 IL).

[Alaris]

That means that he was indeed using 3rd level maneuvres. It also means he wasn't charging, because you cannot use bonecrusher on a charge. Also rules out multiple attack.

So +6 8d6+20 damaging (average 48 damage), assuming punishing stance, burning a feat on burning blade, full power attack and bonecrusher (also makes the target vulnerable to crits). Its fits, but that's an abyssal attack value, and as said before, he can do this at best one every 3 round (because he needs to recover bone crusher and burning blade).

Are there any feats that increase the speed at which you can recover maneuvers? Remember, 2 extra feats, on top of 1st level and 3rd level ones. So 4 feats total.

[Boci]

Are there any feats that increase the speed at which you can recover maneuvers? Remember, 2 extra feats, on top of 1st level and 3rd level ones. So 4 feats total.

He has to be burned to get burning blade, we are assuming 1 for power attack, so that leaves 2. Adaptive style could work, but means he's doing nothing for a full round. Sudden recover will work 1/day and allow him to attack on the round in which he recovers bone crusher, so yeah it can be done every 2 rounds, but there is not way to do it every round. Plus he shouldn't have had bonecrusher in the first place.

[Rebel7284]

You can recover all expended maneuvers with a single swift action, which must be immediately followed in the same round with a melee attack or using a standard action to do nothing else in the round (such as executing a quick, harmless flourish with your weapon). You cannot initiate a maneuver or change your stance while you are recovering your expended maneuvers, but you can remain in a stance in which you began your turn.

Underlined the two option. There is nothing faster. :)

[Alaris]

He has to be burned to get burning blade, we are assuming 1 for power attack, so that leaves 2. Adaptive style could work, but means he's doing nothing for a full round. Sudden recover will work 1/day and allow him to attack on the round in which he recovers bone crusher, so yeah it can be done every 2 rounds, but there is not way to do it every round. Plus he shouldn't have had bonecrusher in the first place.

Yeah, okay. Fair enough.

Well, it was a while ago, I'm not too concerned with calling him out or anything at this point. Things happen with new systems we don't know in-and-out.

Sincerely though, thanks for the help. ^_^

[Boci]

Yeah, okay. Fair enough.

Well, it was a while ago, I'm not too concerned with calling him out or anything at this point. Things happen with new systems we don't know in-and-out.

Sincerely though, thanks for the help. ^_^

Yeah, calling him out on it its pointless for a number of reasons, just bare in mind he probably wasn't following the rules.

[John Longarrow]

Alaris

If your party rogue is feeling a little.... left out... in combat, sword sage works very well as a flavorful mix. It gives a bunch of 'neat things to do' when dipping without going too far overboard. Sword Sage is also one of the harder initiators to optimize. Something to look at, especially if you want the party to face some thief or assassin (or MONK) that you want to be more colorful than most.

From the sounds of it, your group is more into style over substance (game mechanics). Sword Sages get a lot of customization and flair, especially for sneaky builds. Think of it as comparable to beguilers without the ability to find trap. Great dip for Rogues though.

[Trinoya]

Alaris, this is your DM speaking.

Mr. Ps half giant had his IN-levels early, not in addition to, thanks to his character history, and his actions were possible due to the house rules of the campaign and his equipment (remember he was seeking artifacts). Hope I cleared up your confusion on where his stuff was coming from, but I can't really disclose information on his sheet.

Suffice to say he wasn't even the strongest person in the party.


On topic:

If Mr. P wants to play a shifter let him. Just make sure to ask him what he is going for like I did, he's pretty chill and open about what he wants to do.

[Twilightwyrm]

+8 is nearly cutting your potential damage in half. Also you cannot full on a attack on a charge, so no flashing sun on a charge. Lion totem barbarian doesn't change this because FS requires a full round action, not a full round attack.

So that makes the first attack: +8 4d6+30 (44 damage). But it is now charging, so does not work on difficult terrain and can otherwise be disrupted. Plus its hitting at just over 50% of the time.

Right, fair enough. For Flashing Sun (assuming full PA) it would be +4, which is indeed pretty bad. (Similar deal with Bonecrusher, though it would normally be irrelevant, as the Warblade in question is 4th level) My bad. This is and interesting case though, because the DM was granting him Initiator Levels, so that kind of throws a wrench into things here, especially when combined with two bonus feats from flaws.
This being said, +8 or higher with Charging Minotaur or Battle Leader's Charge isn't a bad base. While normally I would grant you this isn't a good idea, as you'd rather hit more than half the time, we aren't currently sure what other bonuses the guy has in play. Negating difficult terrain can be as simply as a good jump check, and Charging Minotaur doesn't allow AoOs to potentially disrupt it. This isn't even taking into account the possibility of him somehow having gotten his hands on a +2 weapon (which could then have Valorous) or various other potential factors. What gets me is that, from what I understand, most Warblades don't take Martial Study (Burning Blade). I suppose he could have been using Psychic Renewal to recover it for use again the next round, but it seems like a lot of effort for a very short term payoff...

[Boci]

Alaris, this is your DM speaking.

Mr. Ps half giant had his IN-levels early, not in addition to, thanks to his character history, and his actions were possible due to the house rules of the campaign and his equipment (remember he was seeking artifacts). Hope I cleared up your confusion on where his stuff was coming from, but I can't really disclose information on his sheet.

Suffice to say he wasn't even the strongest person in the party.

I thought the other party members felt useless next to him, Alaris did with his transmuter. Was party imbalance not a problem?

[Alaris]

I thought the other party members felt useless next to him, Alaris did with his transmuter. Was party imbalance not a problem?

Some missing data; this game ran for about... 3 or 4 sessions maybe?

For most of the encounters, his damage capability was pretty effective at barreling through them. We did run into a few where the DM upped the ante, and we became quite useful.

Combat was mostly his domain, while buff/debuff/utility was mine and the Cleric's domain.

I did feel outshined in combat, but towards the end, there were (as stated above) combats that required more than the "Door-Basher" that was our Warblade. Had the game continued, I think it would have balanced out better. Live and learn.

Edit: More clarification, since I am... terrible at giving all the information at once. I was playing a Transmuter/Cleric, hoping to go Theurge (I know, not optimized no lectures, please!). And the other player was a Drow-Cleric. Was just going over the notes of that particular 'campaign,' and wow... we were unoptimized by PHB standards. Sorry for the confusion.

Edit 2: And... wow. I have forgotten way too much about that game apparently. His damage and superiority in combat just stuck out to me so much that it tainted the entire memory. See below (Trinoya's post) for actual details. I am fail.

[Trinoya]

I thought the other party members felt useless next to him, Alaris did with his transmuter. Was party imbalance not a problem?

Most players have a tendency, in my experience, to see something shiny that another player does and believe it made their character useless.

The party consisted of a transmuter who was primarily a merchant (in what was a merchant themed 'economic zone'), a cleric running from her past (or towards it), a half giant seeking out ancient and powerful artifacts to increase his hulk smash attacks, and a creepy girl with a creepier past (skill themed character). The party balance was more perfect than I have ever had in any game prior. No one could outshine any one else in their fields. Smasher, caster, healer, skill... what more could a DM want.

In the five combats that were had in all most of the party opted for other activities rather than going for pure combat. Anything that was not a pure combat action the Half Giant was completely incapable of doing, and in that respect the player of the half giant felt significantly left behind (to quote, "I knew I should have played a skill based character,") while the rest of the party tended to shine much better.

When you consider the game was more heavily oriented to roleplay and actually dealing with the consequences of your actions the half giant was really the weakest character in the party. Or, in other words, "Damage is nice, but there are always more guards to arrest you."

[Boci]

Edit: More clarification, since I am... terrible at giving all the information at once. I was playing a Transmuter/Cleric, hoping to go Theurge (I know, not optimized no lectures, please!). And the other player was a Drow-Cleric. Was just going over the notes of that particular 'campaign,' and wow... we were unoptimized by PHB standards. Sorry for the confusion.

So it was just the three of you? Who was the strongest then, the Drow Cleric with 2 LA? Because according to the DM the warblade wasn't the most powerful character. Then again this game did seem to be house rule heaby. And yeah, don't say you were playing an optimized transmuter if you were optimizing for theurge. It changes things.


Most players have a tendency, in my experience, to see something shiny that another player does and believe it made their character useless.

The party consisted of a transmuter who was primarily a merchant (in what was a merchant themed 'economic zone'), a cleric running from her past (or towards it), a half giant seeking out ancient and powerful artifacts to increase his hulk smash attacks, and a creepy girl with a creepier past (skill themed character). The party balance was more perfect than I have ever had in any game prior. No one could outshine any one else in their fields. Smasher, caster, healer, skill... what more could a DM want.

In the five combats that were had in all most of the party opted for other activities rather than going for pure combat. Anything that was not a pure combat action the Half Giant was completely incapable of doing, and in that respect the player of the half giant felt significantly left behind (to quote, "I knew I should have played a skill based character,") while the rest of the party tended to shine much better.

When you consider the game was more heavily oriented to roleplay and actually dealing with the consequences of your actions the half giant was really the weakest character in the party. Or, in other words, "Damage is nice, but there are always more guards to arrest you."

So who was the strongest character? Or do you mean no party member was individually?

[Alaris]

So it was just the three of you? Who was the strongest then, the Drow Cleric with 2 LA? Because according to the DM the warblade wasn't the most powerful character. Then again this game did seem to be house rule heaby. And yeah, don't say you were playing an optimized transmuter if you were optimizing for theurge. It changes things.

It was 4. As I said in a second edit, my memory of that game is honestly fail, and i sincerely apologize. We had the Theurge (Me), the Half-Giant Warblade, the Drow Cleric, and the Human(?) Rogue(? or Bard?).

As far as combat was concerned, I think the Warblade was the strongest. But outside of combat, he was essentially useless (if Trinoya is right, which I think he is).

>.> Not playing this game for 1 Year+ really muddles the memories..

[Boci]

Why was the warblade useless outside of combat? They get 4 skill points per level from a not too shabby list. What was he spending them on?

[Trinoya]

So who was the strongest character? Or do you mean no party member was individually?

They were about to be on a train with a mystery and a few other problems soon. The skill based character would have been the strongest at that point. At least until the boss fights at which point it would be the giant, at least until the magic fight at which point it would be the casters.

No one is ever the 'strongest' throughout an entire campaign, just at different points in the story. Ironically the 'most powerful' character in the games history was/still is Alaris's monk/wizard/fatespinner.


Why was the warblade useless outside of combat? They get 4 skill points per level from a not too shabby list. What was he spending them on?

Because he had chosen poorly on his skill selection and Warblade was not his only class. He had thrown all of his effort into being able to break things. Not being able to talk to them. He found it quickly difficult considering he had no capability to bluff or sense motive in the least. His social skills were basically nothing (1 rank in sense motive, 1 rank in intimidate iirc).

[Boci]

They were about to be on a train with a mystery and a few other problems soon. The skill based character would have been the strongest at that point. At least until the boss fights at which point it would be the giant, at least until the magic fight at which point it would be the casters.

No one is ever the 'strongest' throughout an entire campaign, just at different points in the story. Ironically the 'most powerful' character in the games history was/still is Alaris's monk/wizard/fatespinner.

Fair enough, I got confused when you said "Suffice to say he wasn't even the strongest person in the party." Also, what did the warblade spend his skills on to be useless out of combat?

[Trinoya]

Mostly knowledges to help him in his artifact quest.

[Alaris]

Mostly knowledges to help him in his artifact quest.

Yeah... shooting for the stars from level 5. Dem Weapons of Legacy.

Being socially & intellectually stunted aside from that knowledge would make you pretty inept in situations OTHER than combat.

I do apologize for painting a different picture than what was the reality, folks. I remembered the events incorrectly and misled people. Appreciate the DM coming to clean that up.

[eggynack]

No one is ever the 'strongest' throughout an entire campaign, just at different points in the story.

I don't doubt that you managed campaigns where no one dominated thoroughly throughout the whole thing, but I think it is certainly possible to maintain such an advantage in some games. The system is seriously imbalanced, such that that's likely a true thing even with reasonably even levels of competence across the party members.

[Trinoya]

I don't doubt that you managed campaigns where no one dominated thoroughly throughout the whole thing, but I think it is certainly possible to maintain such an advantage in some games. The system is seriously imbalanced, such that that's likely a true thing even with reasonably even levels of competence across the party members.

I only refer to my own games, not the system as a whole, my job as a DM is to make it so that system works to give all my players something to contribute with.

[Amphetryon]

It was 4. As I said in a second edit, my memory of that game is honestly fail, and i sincerely apologize. We had the Theurge (Me), the Half-Giant Warblade, the Drow Cleric, and the Human(?) Rogue(? or Bard?).

As far as combat was concerned, I think the Warblade was the strongest. But outside of combat, he was essentially useless (if Trinoya is right, which I think he is).

>.> Not playing this game for 1 Year+ really muddles the memories..

At low levels, a Theurge concept compares poorly to a straight Warblade, as does a Cleric saddled with a Level Adjustment and (often) a Rogue or Bard. This is particularly the case if combat is the unit of measure. It's not that the Warblade is a strong Class, it's that the other Characters were not particularly strong within a low-level environment, barring specific optimization choices.

If Level 4 - 5 is the reference point, the Warblade is likely to appear very strong in that particular set of specific circumstances; almost any straight T3, T2, or T1 Class without an LA would appear so.