3.5 ToB: Are stances maneuvers, or not?

[graeylin]

in 3.5 Tome of Battle, are Stances (a type of or considered) maneuvers?

In the Yes camp:
Page 5 of Tome of Battle:
Stance: A stance is a special type of maneuver


Page 39 of Tome of Battle:

"As you attain higher levels, you usually use your low-level maneuvers less often (if you haven't already traded them out for higher-level stances, as described in the martial adept class descriptions in Chapter 1)."

Thus, yes they are, they are a SPECIAL TYPE of maneuver, and you can trade low level maneuvers in for higher level stances.


On the No camp

Page 43 Tome of Battle

"A stance is not a maneuver, but a specific fighting method that you maintain from round to round."

Thus, no they aren't.

Elsewhere in the book, Stances and maneuvers are separated into two, distinct sections throughout the book, which also lends evidence to the "no" side.


The ultimate question: If I have a magical item that grants a maneuver (say, white raven crown): Can I get a stance with it? Why or why not, by RAW?

[Psyren]

Good question, let's check the ToB errata... *cries*

[Blackhawk748]

Good question, let's check the ToB errata... *cries*

....Just a sec... i KNOW its around here somewhere....

[graeylin]

My copy of the errata says "Rotsa Ruck, Shaggy"

[bekeleven]

RAI: I don't think they are intended to be maneuvers for most purposes (Otherwise why would martial stance require martial maneuver as a prerequisite, and why would stances have their own columns in classes?)

RAW: Is 5 your lucky number, or 43?

[Drork]

I believe the confusion comes from the fact there are different uses of maneuver in D&D. The PHB speaks of combat maneuvers as in trip/grapple or anything that isnt a standard attack. ToB has stances and maneuvers which in the board sense are combat maneuvers from the PHB.

This is my read.
Page 5: Yes stances are considered combat maneuvers from the PHB.
Page 39: Contradicts page 10,16, and 22. It looks like a copy pasta gone wrong from sorcerer spells. So no you cant trade them out.
Page 43: Stances are special kinds of combat maneuvers from the PHB, but in this book they are not maneuvers as we have been using the words sorry it took us 43 pages to clear that up should have done it on page 5.

When looking at your ultimate question when you look at the "martial scripts" "scroll" of maneuver there does not seem to be a reason why you could not put a stance in it. The only difference is the scroll states a martial maneuver where the crown states maneuver ... So this leads me to believe the answer is no (also the scroll discuses stances where the crown does not) Is there a huge advantage to getting access to an extra stance type. Given you can only use it once per day, perhaps there is something broken Im not seeing but would it really be overly strong given you must cover the prerequisites for the ability so someone with no Maneuvers (non stance kind) can not get a stance out of it. Someone with a maneuver already has at least once stance by the time your getting the item more than 1. Ultimately it comes down to the DM.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Stances known count as maneuvers for meeting prerequisites of of other maneuvers or stances from that discipline. They also count as "using a maneuver" from a discipline for Discipline weapons (the +1 property), only because the text specifically confirms it to be so.

They do not count as maneuvers for most anything else. Not for being put on martial scripts, or readied with crown of the white ravens type items, and of course are not eligible choices of the Martial Study feat.

[graeylin]

Stances known count as maneuvers for meeting prerequisites of of other maneuvers or stances from that discipline. They also count as "using a maneuver" from a discipline for Discipline weapons (the +1 property), only because the text specifically confirms it to be so.

They do not count as maneuvers for most anything else. Not for being put on martial scripts, or readied with crown of the white ravens type items, and of course are not eligible choices of the Martial Study feat.

Because....

They are maneuvers when they need to be, and aren't when they shouldn't be?

[graeylin]

Given you can only use it once per day, perhaps there is something broken Im not seeing but would it really be overly strong given you must cover the prerequisites for the ability so someone with no Maneuvers (non stance kind) can not get a stance out of it. Someone with a maneuver already has at least once stance by the time your getting the item more than 1. Ultimately it comes down to the DM.

Given I am not intimately familiar with TOB, I need to ask:

Where does the "use once per day" aspect come from?

I thought maneuvers, especially stances, where repeatable, or long term/all day things.

For instance, getting Flame's Blessing (immune to fire) all day long would be a nice thing, for the price.

[Rizban]

Given I am not intimately familiar with TOB, I need to ask:

Where does the "use once per day" aspect come from?

I thought maneuvers, especially stances, where repeatable, or long term/all day things.

For instance, getting Flame's Blessing (immune to fire) all day long would be a nice thing, for the price.

The once per day he was referring to was the Martial Script items, which are effectively reusable spell scrolls that hold maneuvers. A maneuver on a script can only be used once per day through the script.

[SinsI]

Stances known count as maneuvers for meeting prerequisites of of other maneuvers or stances from that discipline. They also count as "using a maneuver" from a discipline for Discipline weapons (the +1 property), only because the text specifically confirms it to be so.

They do not count as maneuvers for most anything else. Not for being put on martial scripts, or readied with crown of the white ravens type items, and of course are not eligible choices of the Martial Study feat.
Martial script entry says:
"For example, if you would normally be limited to one stance at a time, that restriction still applies".

So they do grant stances.

I think the proper reading is that Stances are not Maneuvers for the purpose of Expending, Readying and Recovery (as indicated on page 38) or any other thing that has explicit distinction between Maneuvers and Stances (i.e. class entry table has a separate column for Stances Known and for Maneuvers Known) - but they are Maneuvers for all entries that don't exist separately for the two.

I.e. Martial Study can't grant you stances because there exists a separate Martial Stance feat, but if there were no such feat you could use it to gain a stance.

[Crake]

Page 5 is a summary early in the book, page 39 is quite clearly a typo (since stances cant be traded out as you level up) and page 43 is in the chapter specifically describing how the abilities all work, so i'd say page 43 is the most relevant passage and thus would hold the highest precedence

[T.G. Oskar]

The most sensible approach would be to treat any of the maneuver-granting items as a manifestation of Martial Study: you are granted one maneuver for as long as you keep it, but the item has its own rules regarding the maneuver it grants. Note that it follows a similar approach: you need to meet the prerequisites for the maneuver gained. In that situation, you have to judge from the closest approximation, which is the Martial Study feat (as it behaves pretty much exactly as the item).

SotS mostly hits it on the spot: stances are not maneuvers, but they count as such for maneuver/stance prerequisites, and specifically for Discipline Weapons and their bonus to attack. For everything else, they count as their own feature, and thus not as a maneuver.

[graeylin]

Good lord, the more I look at ToB, the more I think the entire staff must have been drunk when writing it.


Martial scripts grant maneuvers, which include stances, but other magical items that grants maneuvers don't. Because page 5 doesn't mean what they meant it to mean, page 39 doesn't either, because page 43 isn't a typo.

Unless, it was. Then page 5 would make sense with the scripts, but not the crowns, unless....

[SinsI]

Good lord, the more I look at ToB, the more I think the entire staff must have been drunk when writing it.


Martial scripts grant maneuvers, which include stances, but other magical items that grants maneuvers don't. Because page 5 doesn't mean what they meant it to mean, page 39 doesn't either, because page 43 isn't a typo.

Unless, it was. Then page 5 would make sense with the scripts, but not the crowns, unless....
There's just one ordinary magic item in ToB (with variations on its name based on the school of the maneuver it grants). I don't think it would be a stretch to allow that item to grant both stances and maneuvers.

[Rizban]

There's just one ordinary magic item in ToB (with variations on its name based on the school of the maneuver it grants). I don't think it would be a stretch to allow that item to grant both stances and maneuvers.

Variations on the name, weight, and body slot.

[graeylin]

One of my concerns is the low price for granting some of the stances (or maneuvers). Granted, there are low price magics in all books, I am just worried that for 3000 gold, everyone will have 50' teleport at will (or, concentration instead of will saves, or... Steely strike (a +4 to all attack rolls) in an Arena/PVP game.

Am I wrong to worry about abuse?

[SinsI]

Not at will. You have to recover the maneuver after using it. If not TOB class, they will only give a single use of that maneuver per encounter, otherwise it is 1 use per 5 minutes. And Anklets of Translocation is 1400 gp, 2/day and teleports you 10 feet - so 3000 gp for slightly improved version is adequate.
Also, you have to actually meet maneuver's prerequisites, so you will only get access to Shadow Jaunt after level 6. Note that Martial Study can be taken as fighter bonus feat, so a wand of Heroics grants the same benefits, is cheaper and doesn't take any slots - though only grants the benefit for 30 minutes per use.

[graeylin]

So, is a stance a continual effect, then, from the Crown? Or not?

Say, the child of shadows stance, given by one of the special magic items. Is that a continuous concealment (as long as you are moving 10') for 3000 gold?

[SinsI]

So, is a stance a continual effect, then, from the Crown? Or not?

Say, the child of shadows stance, given by one of the special magic items. Is that a continuous concealment (as long as you are moving 10') for 3000 gold?
I don't see why not. Darkness is a 1st level spell that grants concealment, and Heroics can grant Martial Stance too (though you would need to first get yourself a Martial Study to get a maneuver).

[Marlowe]

Good lord, the more I look at ToB, the more I think the entire staff must have been drunk when writing it.



Meh, you say that as though there wasn't shonky and incomplete writing all through 3.5. I'm still waiting for DM confirmation that Improved Buckler Defense actually gives my character Improved Buckler Defense when she's two-handing her longsword.

Anyway. Maneuvers and Stances are very different mechanically, and one word means "a movement", while the other word means "A posture". They're not exactly opposites but they don't mean anything close to the same thing. I'd say one writer just used the terms without even considering there was a possibility of confusion, and then others adopted and used them without even thinking for a moment about what they meant.

[graeylin]

I don't see why not. Darkness is a 1st level spell that grants concealment, and Heroics can grant Martial Stance too (though you would need to first get yourself a Martial Study to get a maneuver).

Ah, thanks. That gives me a comparison/price point.

helpful!

[StreamOfTheSky]

Because....

They are maneuvers when they need to be, and aren't when they shouldn't be?

I stated how it should work, by any measure of common sense. I wouldn't mind houseruling the discipline weapon thing either, though I doubt anyone would ever take it if stances no longer counted. I have no interest in what the strict RAW is, strict RAW is strictly silly.