Spellcaster Variant Swordsage

[starburns]

So I was going through Tome of Battle looking at the unarmed variant swordsage for a monk-like character when I saw the Magical Variant. For anyone who doesn't know, the magical variant sacrifices light armor proficiency and a lowered hit die for the ability to learn and cast spells instead of maneuves of an equivalent level.

That got me to thinking, that gives you a caster level, spellcraft (though that may have to be houseruled as a class skill), and access to epic spell casting at epic levels, all while being a melee focused class. What's more is you can learn arcane spells from no specific list; there are three recommended disciplines of magic, recommended not required, but no spell lists which opens you up to any spell that can be cast as arcane. That opens up magic feats, arcane prestige classes, all kinds of cool stuff.

I wanna know everybody's thoughts on this, and thoughts on the presumed assumption that the spells are only once a day as opposed to the maneuver recovery mechanic.

[Trundlebug]

Not many people touch the Arcane Swordsage idea as it's too vague and open to abusive interpretation.

Besides for some (like myself) who have gamed for a long time, ToB is refreshing and frankly I don't want an arcane ss in my setting. Spellcasters have enough without giving them a melee chassis with potentially unlimited castings. It could be neat, but the idea as is seems to obviate multiclassing and newer cleaner classes like duskblade.

Frankly to me the idea is too clean for D&D. Seems like it belongs in another game. So as to say it's too good :smallsmile: YMMV.

[Jeff the Green]

It's probably manageable if you significantly restrict the spells they can choose as maneuvers. I think one suggestion made a while ago was to let them pick from one of the fixed-list casters' lists.

I still wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

[starburns]

I definitely agree, the idea is stupidly powerful. Still though, would you guys think the wording favors the idea spells are spontaneously cast as slots, have to be prepared, cast specifically once a day, or follow the maneuver recovery mechanic?

[Alex12]

I definitely agree, the idea is stupidly powerful. Still though, would you guys think the wording favors the idea spells are spontaneously cast as slots, have to be prepared, cast specifically once a day, or follow the maneuver recovery mechanic?

I think they'd count as prepared, much the same way a swordsage "prepares" his or her maneuvers. So you'd have a very small number of spells known, and an even smaller prepared, and you could only have one copy of a spell prepared at any given time. You'd also want to dramatically nerf the spells available. Blasting is probably okay- you could use the Desert Wind fire blasts as a metric for allowable power, self-buffs and limited utility spells would need some nerfing (passwall would be fine, but teleport isn't), and so on. I'd have no problem with a swordsage who uses haste and fireball, but animate dead and ice assassin don't seem thematically appropriate.
With those limits, I'd allow the swordsage-style recovery mechanic.

[Xerlith]

I advocate this adaptation (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?187632-Arcane-Swordsage-Making-it-actually-work).

It's great and balanced while keeping with the spirit of the class the creators wanted it to be.

[Jeff the Green]

I advocate this adaptation (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?187632-Arcane-Swordsage-Making-it-actually-work).

It's great and balanced while keeping with the spirit of the class the creators wanted it to be.

It's still going to require ample Rule 0. For example, it would allow you to get a permanent wraithstrike effect as a 6th-level stance.