PDA

View Full Version : Is ToB worth picking up?



Jade_Tarem
2007-04-22, 02:49 PM
Quick question.

I've been thinking about picking up a new DnD book for the summer, once college finals are done, and one general consenus I keep running into on this board is that ToB is a good buy (means Tome of Battle, right?). In fact, people keep speaking in such glowing terms of it that the vibe that comes across is:

"Tome of Battle - it's like drinking unicorn giggles!"

I don't mean that to be derogatory. I just want to know if it really is that good - or at least worth getting.

Thanks.

MeklorIlavator
2007-04-22, 02:53 PM
Its not the greatest book ever, but its one of the better books that came out within the past year. Fun and generally balanced classes, with cool new mechanics. Though if you like a more "realistic" DnD, flavor will need to be changed.

Krimm_Blackleaf
2007-04-22, 03:03 PM
Not 'realistic' really, but no more realistic than manifesting pure element into a destructive sphere of fire. I love the book, it makes me like warriors again with a balanced and flavorful mechanic.

BardicDuelist
2007-04-22, 03:10 PM
Part of it is how your DM is with new mechanics. Most DMs hate it when they first read it, while players love it. Many claim it to be too "anime."

I personally think it is a good book if the flavor fits your campaign, and it can be tweaked fairly easily if your DM will allow it.
I don't think it as good drinking unicorn giggles, but it isn't bad at all.

My advice: Talk to your DM and see if (s)he wants to use it. If you are the DM, get it if you like what you hear.

Drascin
2007-04-22, 03:21 PM
Answer me this: do you feel melee combat in D&D could do with a bit more spectacularity? Ever felt that meleers didn't live up to a lot of the standards of heroics in truly epic fantasy? Do you like any kind of over-the-top action films and/or anime?

If the answer to even one of these is anywhere away from a rotund "no", then at least give it a chance.

Basically, it gives you new classes that can fight in new and fun ways, and have a much-welcomed versatility. Whether it is the skilled warblade, to who swordmanship is second nature; or the ki-powered swordsage that can turn shadow and steel against you; or the enduring crusader who is surrendered by a sea of enemy corpses and still can keep on fighting, there is an common undercurrent in the classes here.

Namely, they're all cool as hell. And, as we all know, that is good, because cool calls to players, and happy players means players less likely to whine due to some nonsense :smallwink:.

Nah, now more seriously. As a DM, I personally liked the book, it gives the possibility to create warriors (both PCs and NPCs) with a lot more dramatic flair and "fantasy feel" than your average PHB class. But be warned, if you are of the kind that feel that Tolkien-esque settings are the only real way of fantasy, you're not getting much from here, because this book's not aimed at you. This is about mystic martial arts, skill with weapons which ends up being quite superhuman in the high end, and awesome-hero-saves-the-day moments (instead of "hero-sighs-and-coup-de-graces-enemy-after-wizard-saves-the-day", which tended to be more usual in D&D).

So, all in all, I do recommend it over a lot of other supplements (only other real contender could be XPH). But what do I know, I'm just a noob :smallamused:

Tellah
2007-04-22, 03:26 PM
Well, are you ready to give up on the Barbarian, Fighter and Paladin for anything but dip classes? Free use of the ToB encourages that. Personally, I was talking about making a system of fighting styles that mirrored spell-casting for years, so I bought the book the minute it hit the shelves.

Catch
2007-04-22, 03:28 PM
I'll give an emphatic "yes" to your question.

Not only are all the classes powerful, fun to play, and interesting, the flavor of the book actually caught my attention. The lore that goes along with the Nine Swords mythology is actually pretty intriguing and makes for a very satisfying set of mechanics.

Plus, all the hubbub about ToB is true; the base classes outlined in it are what the martial classes in the core books should be. Without going into huge amounts of detail, the short of it is that ToB characters are almost as good as casters.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-22, 03:29 PM
I don't necessarily feel that it doesn't fit in a Tolkein-ien world. One of the biggest problems with ToB is that Desert Wind -- almost assuredly the most supernatural, "anime-ey" of the disciplines is alphabetically first, so it's first in the book. Some people read a page and a half of DW techs and immediately discard the book as the Tome of Windscars. In all honesty, most of the disciplines fit well in pretty much any environment - for example, every discipline that Warblades have access to.

It's a great book. The three base classes are all extremely malleable, and each of the disciplines (except for Desert Wind, amusingly enough) provide the use of abilities that are both neat and useful.

Edit:
Well, are you ready to give up on the Barbarian, Fighter and Paladin for anything but dip classes? Free use of the ToB encourages that.I'd argue that the Fighter and Paladin were already dip classes; even Melee Weapon Mastery only requires 4 fighter levels. And the Barbarian actually comes out ahead of ToB in terms of raw damage output, at least until 10th-12th level or so. And that's not to say that he absolutely does eat it, just that I've only seen numbers crunched up to that point.

Morty
2007-04-22, 03:29 PM
ToB has great mechanic, but flavor doesn't really catches me. It's very debatable wheter it's worth getting. If you don't mind fighters doing obviously supernatural stuff, it's great. But I can't get used to the idea of every combatant in the world being dedicated martial artist. Maybe it's because I play very 'mundane' campaigns where players are just another bunch of misfits, and in low-magic games by that.

Zagreen
2007-04-22, 03:31 PM
It's cool. It probably won't fit very well in a really gritty campaign (at least not without some massive adaptation) but it's not so "out there" as some people make it out to be. If you have paladins and fighters and swashbucklers in your campaign, it's not much of a stretch to include crusaders and warblades.

Swordsages might be more of a stretch since they have more overtly mystical abilities, but they're not so much different from monks, so if you've got monks around swordsages aren't going to require too much suspension of disbelief.

Also? Best set of PRCs ever. I don't think there's any other book out there with this many good PRCs that doesn't have at least a couple of crappy ones stinking things up.

Assassinfox
2007-04-22, 03:50 PM
ToB has great mechanic, but flavor doesn't really catches me. It's very debatable wheter it's worth getting. If you don't mind fighters doing obviously supernatural stuff, it's great. But I can't get used to the idea of every combatant in the world being dedicated martial artist. Maybe it's because I play very 'mundane' campaigns where players are just another bunch of misfits, and in low-magic games by that.

Most of the stuff in the book isn't supernatural. Desert Wind, Devoted Spirit, and Shadow Hand are big offenders in that regard, but everything else is pretty mundane.

For example, here's some flavor text for one of the 9th level strikes:

"Your supreme focus and perfect fighting form allow you to make a single devastating attack. You execute a flawless strike to drop your foe with a single attack."

What about that is "supernatural" ? All that comes to mind when reading that is Roy making one of his crazy overhead swings.

Saph
2007-04-22, 03:56 PM
I'm in Jade Tarem's position - heard a lot about ToB, and thinking about getting it. My question:

How much effort does it take to learn and integrate ToB into the rest of the D&D books? At the moment my group mostly plays core, with dips into the Complete Series and the Spell Compendium.

I like the idea of a new set of spell-like melee mechanics, but there's no point in getting a new book if you can't get the rest of your group to learn it.

- Saph

Morty
2007-04-22, 03:58 PM
Most of the stuff in the book isn't supernatural. Desert Wind, Devoted Spirit, and Shadow Hand are big offenders in that regard, but everything else is pretty mundane.

For example, here's some flavor text for one of the 9th level strikes:

"Your supreme focus and perfect fighting form allow you to make a single devastating attack. You execute a flawless strike to drop your foe with a single attack."

What about that is "supernatural" ? All that comes to mind when reading that is Roy making one of his crazy overhead swings.

Sure, not everything. But as you said, some disciplines are obviousy supernatural. And even without it, I just can't get over with every single fighter in the world being martial artist. I'll probalby include ToB in my next campaign- the mechanics is really sweet- but it'll require major changes in fluff.

Assassinfox
2007-04-22, 04:00 PM
Sure, not everything. But as you said, some disciplines are obviousy supernatural. And even without it, I just can't get over with every single fighter in the world being martial artist. I'll probalby include ToB in my next campaign- the mechanics is really sweet- but it'll require major changes in fluff.

Do you imagine fighters to be dullards who only know how to swing weapons overhead in a blind rage? "Martial Arts" is little more than just knowing how to fight. If you wanted to eliminate "martial arts" from the world, ban the Fighter, Monk, and Ranger classes. And restrict any class from getting a BAB higher than +1.

The_Snark
2007-04-22, 04:04 PM
Mechanically? Good book. It gives melee types lots more tactical options; you don't have to use Power Attack to deal serious damage now. A lot of my favorite maneuvers aren't orientented around doing more damage, but around gaining some sort of tactical advantage such as better mobility. That's why it helps even things with the casters- it gives options aside from just hitting and doing damage.

Flavor-wise, I'm torn. Crusaders are easy to fit in; in any world where there are paladins, there can be crusaders also. They have the same flavor, essentially; divine smiting and endurance. Warblades aren't overtly magical; they're highly trained, dedicated warriors, but could range from savage jungle barbarian champions to the general in front of an army to a lone warrior who can rip through hordes of enemies. Not common, exactly, but not outside fantasy stereotypes at all. The swordsage is the one most people object to, particularly the Desert Wind and Shadow Hand disciplines, which involve supernatural abilities. Generally, I reflavor those as magic, and use them only when it's appropriate (swordsages from desert countries or swordsages with ties to a god of shadows, for example).

On the other hand, if you like the core fighter-classes this book might not be the best; the crusader pretty clearly outshadows the paladin, the warblade is pretty clearly superior to the fighter and barbarian, and the swordsage is better than the monk.

Seconded on the PrCs, though. They're imaginative, flavorful, and- here's the best part- not at all essential to making a good character. None of them is more powerful than the new base classes presented; there are no something-for-nothing options, which is a major problem with a lot of prestige classes these days.


edit-

Do you imagine fighters to be dullards who only know how to swing weapons overhead in a blind rage? "Martial Arts" is little more than just knowing how to fight. If you wanted to eliminate "martial arts" from the world, ban the Fighter, Monk, and Ranger classes. And restrict any class from getting a BAB higher than +1.

Actually, I don't think Tome of Battle's appropriate to a low-power, gritty campaign either. Tome of Battle classes are all sort of best-of-the-best types, which may not be appropriate to the campaign; fighters and rangers are much more appropriate to a game in which the characters are low-level and haven't trained for fighting all their lives.

Morty
2007-04-22, 04:08 PM
Do you imagine fighters to be dullards who only know how to swing weapons overhead in a blind rage? "Martial Arts" is little more than just knowing how to fight. If you wanted to eliminate "martial arts" from the world, ban the Fighter, Monk, and Ranger classes. And restrict any class from getting a BAB higher than +1.
You're missing the point, I think, or I haven't worded it correctly. What I meant was, that really good fighter, is, well, really good figher- not dedicated to some mystical path of martial arts. That's mostly fluff though, as I can ignore the fluff descriptions of manuevers and simply treat them as result of fighter's training.
Besides, I quite like Ranger class, and there's no equivalent for him in ToB- at least none that I know of.

Assassinfox
2007-04-22, 04:10 PM
You're missing the point, I think, or I haven't worded it correctly. What I meant was, that really good fighter, is, well, really good figher- not dedicated to some mystical path of martial arts. That's mostly fluff though, as I can ignore the fluff descriptions of manuevers and simply treat them as result of fighter's training.
Besides, I quite like Ranger class, and there's no equivalent for him in ToB- at least none that I know of.

Ooooh, sorry. I misunderstood. :smallredface:

Drascin
2007-04-22, 04:19 PM
I don't necessarily feel that it doesn't fit in a Tolkein-ien world. One of the biggest problems with ToB is that Desert Wind -- almost assuredly the most supernatural, "anime-ey" of the disciplines is alphabetically first, so it's first in the book. Some people read a page and a half of DW techs and immediately discard the book as the Tome of Windscars. In all honesty, most of the disciplines fit well in pretty much any environment - for example, every discipline that Warblades have access to.

I agree with you, you know. I'd have little problem with Warblades and even Crusaders in a lot of low-to-no-magic scenarios. But my observations indicate that a lot of people disagrees, so I was kinda covering my back there, just in case.

But, Leonidas was so a Warblade, and last time I checked Ancient Greece qualified as a "low-magic setting", right? :smallwink:

Oh, and a question, if you'll excuse the offtopic, and maybe rant, given that I have the tendency to ramble a lot (this is not directed at you, Merlin, but more of a general question). Why do people keep citing something being "anime-ey" as a bad thing? First, please define what you consider too anime, and second, well, ok, if you intend to run low-magic, I can see why it wouldn't fit, but if you're running something like Eberron, WTF? It not only fits, but goes well with the feel of the world!

Also, it's not like a guy being able to charge his sword with his life energy and crap like that wasn't about par for the course in this game long before ToB was even an idea in some crazy designer's mind. Only then it was fine because it was ooohhh, a spell, with its components and its babble and its everything, but a warrior who, through work and special learning ('cause let's not forget, the ToB classes are not exactly average Joes. Warblades are not called Sword Princes just because, you know), learns to touch even a little bit of the magic energies that not only animate him, but fill up every molecule of the world he has lived in for all his life is somehow a Naruto-level retardedness, just because his preferred method of engagement is to hit the things that bleed with his pointy stick? So a swordsage with an affinity for flame that allows him to use his internal ki (or lifeforce or incarnum or whatever you want to call spirit energy in your campaign) to fuel flames is unacceptable and breaks flavor, but a ranger who has never seen a spell in his life getting the ability to summon animals out of thin air through some hazy connection to nature, or a monk getting blatantly supernatural abilities due to the exact same source as the swordsage is perfectly valid? Uh? :smallconfused: Double standard much?

Sorry if I came off a bit aggressive. Believe, me, that couldn't be farther from my intentions. It's just that I don't understand. And I like understanding things, so I sometimes get a bit demanding in asking for answers :smallredface:.
---------------------------------------

@Saph: If your group already gets vancian casting, they'll get the maneuver system in no time. Don't worry about that. Hell, my group doesn't really dominate vancian casting and is extremely hazy on most rules, and one of them is playing a Crusader and other a Warblade, with little to no problems :smallsmile:.

And I should really go to bed. Staying up for 23 hours straight id turning my brain into puddle.

Person_Man
2007-04-22, 04:23 PM
I highly suggest it. It makes melee builds a lot more playable and fun.

My only caveat is that newbish players have a hard enough time with basic D&D mechanics. Any game with ToB content tends to be far beyond them. So in the group I DM, which is a mix of veterans and newcomers, we don't use it. But I'll occasionally use it as a player for one shot campaigns.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-04-22, 04:49 PM
Everyone else has already said exactly why it's a good book already, so I don't need to add to that.

I will say, though, that it's probably easier to learn how to play Blade Magic than normal magic. First, there are fewer maneuvers than spells, so less reading on a level up. Second, there are no spellbooks to worry about; you have a few known maneuvers (generally some number + 1/2 your level; 5+level for a Swordsage), and some subset of those maneuvers readied (prepared), generally half of them; regardless, there are a lot fewer maneuvers for the player to learn than there are spells. Third, you don't need to learn the resource conservation of the core casters that can easily cripple a poorly-played wizard, since you get all of your maneuvers back with a minute of downtime.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-22, 05:59 PM
Oh, and a question, if you'll excuse the offtopic, and maybe rant, given that I have the tendency to ramble a lot (this is not directed at you, Merlin, but more of a general question). Why do people keep citing something being "anime-ey" as a bad thing?I would hope that you're not directing it at me; while I certainly didn't make it clear, I've enjoyed a lot of anime in my time - including Naruto. All things considered, your average D&D game isn't that much different from a shonen (your Dragonball Zs, Narutos, Bleaches, and whatnot); you have a group of people who apparently do nothing in their lives but fight running around trying to kill other guys who do nothing in their lives but fight.

I had a bit more here, but I don't want to drag this off-topic. If you want to discuss the "YEAH MORE LIEK VIDEO GAME MAGIC" or "PFFFT ANIME" sentiment that sometimes come up, I'd recommend making another thread.
How much effort does it take to learn and integrate ToB into the rest of the D&D books? At the moment my group mostly plays core, with dips into the Complete Series and the Spell Compendium.I'd say very little. The martial adepts are all very dip-able, thanks to the way that initiator level scales. (Similar to caster levels, but other classes provide +1/2. So a Bard 4/Crusader 1 has IL 3.) As a result, they can be attractive dips to introduce new abilities for old characters. If your players don't want to leave the classes they're already in, the Martial Study and Martial Stance feats open up some simpler avenues for getting a new technique or two. What this ends up meaning is that players are likely going to want to actually put some of the book to use, which is always nice. No one likes buying a book and playing Theories and NPCs with it.

Fluff-wise, again, this stuff is very similar to what's already in a campaign. The Warblade flavor is extremely similar to the fighter flavor described in the PHB 2, the Crusader flavor is very similar to Paladin and Cleric flavor, and the Swordsage is very similar to Monk flavor.

In terms of the level of mechanical complication, I'd again say that it's pretty low. Maneuvers are all very short-term effects, so you're not going to be stuck tracking a mess of different variables. There's nothing that even approaches the level of messiness of Polymorph, Alter Self, or even Web and Grease. Also, the WotC website actually made printable maneuvers cards as a web enhancement; I'd recommend downloading a set (Diamond Mind would be a good one to check out) to look over the mechanics.

bosssmiley
2007-04-22, 06:11 PM
Should you get ToB:9S?

Let's put it like this: have you ever enjoyed any wushu movie?
If so there's good, flavourful and balanced stuff in this book for you.

MeklorIlavator
2007-04-22, 06:17 PM
Merlin is right about the cards, especially if you have a Crusader. They have a random recovery mechanic, and it helps to represent this by making a deck out of all the maneuvers he has. Really cuts down on the bookwork.

AllisterH
2007-04-22, 07:16 PM
I think the reason why people say it is "Too anime" is because a lot of people only know Arthurian (Medieval)/LotR (specifically the LotR)/Conan fantasy and in those mythologies, a human fighter isn't that far from what we have now.

(As an aside, it should be noted that if people read the entire Tolkein library concerning Middle-Earth, they'll note that the initial races of man were blatantly superhuman. They were doing some crazy level stunts in the earlier Ages even among the humans. Things that even a high level warblade has no chance to do.)

However, people don't have much experience/knowledge of Celtic and/or Scandanvian mythology where they have regular humans chopping off the tops of mountains and those were the SIDEKICKS basically.

Another point that people forget is that in Conan and Arthurian lore, magic generally speaking, was EVIL and wasn't intended to be used by the good guys (other than Merlin, how many good spellcasters did the knights of the round table meet) thus the D&D paradigm shouldn't be held to that standard.

Jade_Tarem
2007-04-22, 07:26 PM
Thanks for all the responses. I think that I will give ToB a shot.

martyboy74
2007-04-22, 07:28 PM
Plus the PrCs kick ass. Especially the Jade Pheonix Mage. After all,

Jade Phoenix Mages have the coolest capstone ability ever. They explode. Low on health? explode. Surrounded? expolde. Outsiders? explode. Explode? explode. Come back a few rounds later with all your hp.

Annarrkkii
2007-04-22, 08:31 PM
Best. Supplement. Of 3.5.

In my opinion, of course. I straight, 20-level swordsage (that's right, a melee class you can take ALL THE WAY THROUGH 20) can have any style or flavor you want. Change the flavor text and maneuver names and you can have a whole new breed of classes. Ban Devoted Spirit, Shadow Hand, and Desert Wind, give Crusaders Iron Heart, and you've gotten rid of nearly all the supernatural aspects of it. Even Shadow Hand can be saved from being too supernatural with a flavor text twist and a few revised maneuvers. Its default flavor is fairly Oriental Adventures, but not very much so.

IT doesn't make melee combat quite comparable to spellcasting at high levels, but ToB characters can continue too contribute long after normal meleeists have become nothing more than a charge to open the fight and a damage sponge afterwards.

PnP Fan
2007-04-22, 11:26 PM
I also support purchasing the ToB. I've enjoyed my limited experiences with it. Integrating it mechanically is no more complicated that another set of spells. If you want to use the full anime-ish flavor, you might consider how that flavor will fit in your setting, but that shouldn't be too hard if you've already incorporated things like Monks, that don't really have a place in Western Culture to start with.
The only downside that I can see to the classes introduced in the ToB is that they are three more classes that overshadow the basic Fighter. *sigh* Not that Fighter's can't benefit from the book, but I suspect that they won't get as much out of it as a full Initiate character.

Dausuul
2007-04-22, 11:33 PM
I'm a huge fan of the Tome of Battle; it has ignited in my heart an enthusiasm for playing melee warriors that was previously reserved only for arcane casters. Tome of Battle classes are just so much fun! They have so many more tactical options than the standard "I hit you, you hit me back" fighter.

That said, there is one caveat to keep in mind: These classes are powerful. Like, full caster class powerful (well, maybe not quite that bad, but pretty close). So if you bring them into your game, prepare for balance issues if some people switch and others don't.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-22, 11:38 PM
C'mon. They aren't "pretty close" to caster power. They're just good, survivable melee types.

JaronK
2007-04-22, 11:50 PM
They're nowhere near full caster power. They are, however, able to contribute to a high level party and provide some degree of flexibility. I suppose that's near godlike power, if you're used to being a core fighter 20...

JaronK

The_Snark
2007-04-22, 11:55 PM
They're not full-caster power.

They can create party dissension, though. If you have a party with a warblade and a fighter, the fighter will feel overshadowed. A lot. Same for a party with both a crusader and a paladin. This is especially bad if the group's spellcasters tend towards the less godly side; a sorcerer or wizard with lots of direct-damage spells won't totally overshadow a fighter. A warblade played by any halfway compentent player will overshadow all but the best of fighters, and since they focus on the same area (melee combat) it's immediately obvious. So if you use it, make sure everyone has equal access to it- it's not good material to bring in halfway into a campaign when a new character is introduced to the group.

Innis Cabal
2007-04-22, 11:57 PM
very much yes

Cybren
2007-04-23, 12:34 AM
hey the fighter can always spend all his feats getting into Master of Nine or something

JaronK
2007-04-23, 01:26 AM
True. And to be honest, the creators of ToB said they were trying to replace the core melee classes that weren't able to keep up. The fighter is kinda hard to actually bring up to anywhere near decent, so the Warblade is basically the new fighter... it's what the fighter should have been, honestly.

JaronK

Dausuul
2007-04-23, 01:28 AM
C'mon. They aren't "pretty close" to caster power. They're just good, survivable melee types.

Okay, yeah, after a little more consideration I will concede this. Still, a Tome of Battle melee type can stay relevant well past the point where ordinary fighters fall by the wayside.


hey the fighter can always spend all his feats getting into Master of Nine or something

Hmm, let's see.

Master of Nine requires the feats Adaptive Style, Dodge, Blind-Fight, Improved Initiative, and Improved Unarmed Strike. In addition, it requires maneuvers in six disciplines and 10 ranks each in four discipline skills.

The fighter doesn't get any maneuvers, so he'd have to take Martial Study six times, plus the five other feats. A fighter doesn't get 11 feats until level 12. In addition, only two of the discipline skills (Intimidate and Jump) are fighter class skills, which means the fighter couldn't get 10 ranks in them until level 17.

So at 18th level, the fighter can take his first Master of Nine class level.

Cybren
2007-04-23, 01:29 AM
Actually master of the nine requires adaptive style which requires one of the martial adept base classes so that wouldn't even work.

The_Snark
2007-04-23, 01:36 AM
Not to mention you can't take Martial Stance more than three times, and Master of Nine requires more maneuvers than that.

Tome of Battle's not bad with converting already made melee characters to Tome of Battle characters, though, because of the 1/2 initiator level thing. Multiclass into warblade at fighter level 10 or whatever, and you can pick up some decent-level maneuvers. Still sorta feels like you'd have been better if you'd started with warblade, though... which is true, really.

AmoDman
2007-04-23, 01:41 AM
Honestly, what doesn't a 20 Fighter feel overshadowed by? A Bard? Maybe? Who cares. Fighter's not a straight base class anyway. If someone took it straight, I'd allow them the option of some re-structuring...

p.s.

And I'm not just in the "What the Fighter should have been..." camp, I'm in the "What the Fighter, Monk, and Paladin should have been," since it effectively replaces all of them...past dips, which is fine, since they sucked.

SpatulaOfDoom
2007-04-23, 02:15 AM
Only read the title of the post and I'll join in with no doubt all the other people in saying "Yes Tome of Battle is a good buy" IMHO depending on which class/school you pick it's what the fighter should have been.

Jack Mann
2007-04-23, 02:22 AM
One thing I've done in the past is run a game to level five for new players, and then, when they've become comfortable with the mechanics, allowed them to rebuild their fighters, barbarians, and so forth into martial adepts.

EDIT: Oh, and for the record? Unicorn giggles cause cancer.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-04-23, 02:57 AM
ToB has become my melee bible. I now ignore non-martial adept melee classes pretty much outright, with very few exceptions (marshal and knight spring to mind, for obvious reasons). You like melee? You like having fun? You'll like ToB.

Tengu
2007-04-23, 05:25 AM
I think that Wizards realised that core melee classes are a lost cause, so instead of trying (and failing) to balance them with the casters they released a set of new ones that will at least not feel completely outmatched by the wizard and CoDzilla in everything they do.

martyboy74
2007-04-23, 06:11 AM
EDIT: Oh, and for the record? Unicorn giggles cause cancer.
What doesn't...:smallsigh:

Morty
2007-04-23, 06:28 AM
I think that Wizards realised that core melee classes are a lost cause, so instead of trying (and failing) to balance them with the casters they released a set of new ones that will at least not feel completely outmatched by the wizard and CoDzilla in everything they do.

:smallsigh: It's probably because it's easier to release a book with new classes than with changes to existing ones. It's perfectly possible to make core meleers viable on high levels.
BTW, I'm curious: how would you build standard, power-attacking heavy-armored fighter using ToB?
And one more thing:we know that melee characters have troubles contributing on high levels. ToB character are stronger, so they don't. But what about low levels? Core meleers aren't underpowered then, yet ToBers are probably stronger than them.

Roderick_BR
2007-04-23, 06:47 AM
ToB is worth if you think that meleers are too weak. It gives you "special moves" for combatants, like the ability to attack and move, gain attack/defenses bonuses and others buffs. It's like making anime maneuvers available to fighters.

Assassinfox
2007-04-23, 06:56 AM
... am I the only one that read the book and didn't stereotypically compare it to anime? :smallannoyed:

Abardam
2007-04-23, 06:58 AM
It makes two-weapon fighting hot.

martyboy74
2007-04-23, 07:01 AM
... am I the only one that read the book and didn't stereotypically compare it to anime? :smallannoyed:
With banally long move names like Five Shadow Creeping Ice Enervation Strike, yes.

Assassinfox
2007-04-23, 07:02 AM
With banally long move names like Five Shadow Creeping Ice Enervation Strike, yes.

That name made me think of Kill Bill, actually.

kamikasei
2007-04-23, 07:13 AM
With banally long move names like Five Shadow Creeping Ice Enervation Strike, yes.

I don't recall such language being used in Cowboy Bebop, or FLCL, or Akira, or Ghost in the Shell, or Azumanga Daioh, or Noir, or Elfen Lied... It does sound like something you might hear in Dragonball Z, or Naruto, or any number of wire-fu flicks. Doesn't seem so much anime as a genre of Eastern martial arts fiction found in both anime and live-action.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-23, 07:15 AM
A low-level fighter or barbarian could easily keep up with a low-level swordsage or warblade. Low-level maneuvers aren't particularily impressive, and you don't have many of them.

Dausuul
2007-04-23, 07:19 AM
:smallsigh: It's probably because it's easier to release a book with new classes than with changes to existing ones. It's perfectly possible to make core meleers viable on high levels.
BTW, I'm curious: how would you build standard, power-attacking heavy-armored fighter using ToB?

Either a greatsword-wielding Crusader, or a warblade who (picks up Heavy Armor Proficiency/dips fighter/springs for mithral full plate/just wears medium armor and deals with it).

I'm currently playing a power-attacking, greatsword-wielding warblade, although he wears light armor rather than medium or heavy. When he has the cash, I plan to switch to mithral full plate. His maneuvers include a couple of damage-boosting strikes like Mountain Hammer, some defensive ones like Moment of Perfect Mind to cover his lousy Will save and Iron Heart Surge to get rid of random annoying conditions, and a few tactical ones like Emerald Razor and Mithral Tornado. Emerald Razor is a truly wonderful maneuver for a power attack monkey, and it's only level 2.

Armor class is his Achilles heel, though.

Morty
2007-04-23, 07:19 AM
A low-level fighter or barbarian could easily keep up with a low-level swordsage or warblade. Low-level maneuvers aren't particularily impressive, and you don't have many of them.
Heh. So barbarian can, but fighter can't? Not surprising. And what about ranger? He's not exactly front-line combatant, so I guess it's not much of a problem.

Either a greatsword-wielding Crusader, or a warblade who (picks up Heavy Armor Proficiency/dips fighter/springs for mithral full plate/just wears medium armor and deals with it).
Warblade would probably be better, since crusader is more like paladin than fighter.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-23, 07:24 AM
I said a low-level fighter or barbarian could. At low levels, the fighter isn't bad. Not great, but not bad.

The ranger... is mediocre, as usual. A ranger using archery does fine. The paladin is relatively better by comparison than he is at high levels, since he's getting his best class features (Divine Grace, Turn Undead to power divine feats).

The Crusader is pretty much the rock god of level one, though.

Starsinger
2007-04-23, 07:24 AM
... am I the only one that read the book and didn't stereotypically compare it to anime? :smallannoyed:

I didn't even think of anime. I thought of videogames like SaGa Frontier.

As for the point of the thread, I hate melee characters. I've never once honestly considered one. Then I read Tome of Battle... now I'm itching to make a Swordsage, to the exclusion of my typical spell casting, although Jade Phoenix Mage sounds fun too.

If you want a melee character without a serious case of magic envy I recommend the book.

Morty
2007-04-23, 07:32 AM
I said a low-level fighter or barbarian could. At low levels, the fighter isn't bad. Not great, but not bad.
Whooops. Somehow I missed 'fighter' in your post :smalleek:
I'm currently reading through low-level manuevers, to see how they look, as I'm planning to use ToB in campaign I'll be running. The flexibility of the mechanics is worth sculpting flavor to make it tolerable.

Drascin
2007-04-23, 08:01 AM
... am I the only one that read the book and didn't stereotypically compare it to anime? :smallannoyed:

I'm with starsinger here. In both of his points, actually. My first thought was for some videogames (well, let's be honest here. My first thought was "WOOOOO!!! This thing rules!", but that is my irrational part and doesn't add much to the conversation, now does it? :smallwink:), not anime.

And yeah, it's so much more fun it's not even comparable. Unlike you, star, I had always liked to run up to things and hit them with pointy sticks... but the core melee was so boring I always ended up playing a war cleric instead of a fighter just to have something to do besides saying "I hit it". Now, my druid is entering swordsage, and I'm playing two warblades. And I'm enjoying every bit of it ^^.

Talya
2007-04-23, 08:24 AM
How do these new base classes compare to say, my Dervish build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41791&page=2)?

More importantly, could you mix classes like this into such a build with any level of success? Seems to me their unique "maneuver" capabilities would not lend themselves quite so well to it, but maybe I'm wrong...

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-23, 08:46 AM
They compare all right. Both are solid melee builds that stay viable for a long time. The CoCL build isn't that strong--it's a bunch of precision damage, and ToB makex getting Dex to non-precision damage easy with a Swordsage dip--and Dervish's maneuverability is better in some ways than the mobility ToB maneuvers and worse in others.
The ToB classes start out and progress more smoothly, though--there's no awkward "Swashbuckler 3/Fighter 2/CoCL 1 with wasted feats" point.

They are great for mixing with other classes. Initiator Level is a bit like caster level, only your initiator level in [Class X] is [Class X levels] + 1/2 of all your other levels.

Starsinger
2007-04-23, 08:50 AM
They are great for mixing with other classes. Initiator Level is a bit like caster level, only your initiator level in [Class X] is [Class X levels] + 1/2 of all your other levels.

I'll admit that I don't read the book that often, and so I'm not entirely sure. Does this mean that a Swordsage 5/Sorcerer4 has the maneuvers known of a 7th swordsage or do I just initiate as if I was Swordsage level 7?

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-23, 08:53 AM
It means your Initiator Level is 7, for effects reliant on IL (for example, Searing Blade is a boost that adds 2d6+IL fire damage to each hit for one round).
However, what maneuvers you can learn also depend on Initiator Level, like the levels of spells you can learn depend on spellcaster level. So if you were to jump back into Swordsage, for Swordsage 5/Sorceror 4/Swordsage +1, your Swordsage IL would be 8, and you could learn a 4th level maneuver with that swordsage level, as opposed to a third-level (like you'd be limited to if you were just Swordsage 6).

Person_Man
2007-04-23, 08:56 AM
Best. Supplement. Of 3.5.

It's definitely a good book. But I would say that the PHBII is better. Virtually everyone uses the PHBII, and its great for new and veteran players alike. ToB has more crunchy goodness, but plenty of people don't use it because it adds an entirely new set of mechanics to an already confusing game.

Starsinger
2007-04-23, 08:58 AM
It means your Initiator Level is 7, for effects reliant on IL (for example, Searing Blade is a boost that adds 2d6+IL fire damage to each hit for one round).
However, what maneuvers you can learn also depend on Initiator Level, like the levels of spells you can learn depend on spellcaster level. So if you were to jump back into Swordsage, for Swordsage 5/Sorceror 4/Swordsage +1, your Swordsage IL would be 8, and you could learn a 4th level maneuver with that swordsage level, as opposed to a third-level (like you'd be limited to if you were just Swordsage 6).

Oh wow, that makes Jade Phoenix Mage look even better, thanks Bear with Lasers! Now to pester my cousin into DMing a game which allows ToB

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-23, 09:01 AM
For Jade Phoenix Mage, keep in mind that the ToB prestige classes that grant maneuvers give +1 Initiator Level/level. A Crusader 1/Wizard 6/Jade Phoenix Mage 5 has a Crusader IL of 1 (Crusader) + 3 (Wizard) + 5 (JPM) = 9.

Starsinger
2007-04-23, 09:03 AM
Wow... this cake just keeps getting even more icing. I think I've found a gish class that I can love.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-23, 09:05 AM
I really liked the JPM when I first saw it, too. I was slightly disappointed--it doesn't grant you enough maneuvers known for my tastes; you wind up with weaker-than-standard-for-the-level maneuvers doing single hits. It can be a very solid class, though.

Leon
2007-04-23, 10:08 AM
ToB is a great book and definatly worth getting

Im a big fan of the Ruby Knight Vindicator PrC and the the Shadowsun Ninja (except for the turn into a NPC Vampire part)

(now i'd just like to see some Martial Adepts in DDM)

Pax_Chi
2007-04-23, 12:52 PM
As with pretty much everyone else here, I can't recommend this book enough. It's a fun way to give the melee guys their own flavor and adds a very cinematic feel to melee combat now. While it doesn't truly equalize a caster and a melee class, it does close the distance a bit and gives a melee'er options not even the best feats can supply. They can do better damage, get better defense, pull off some impressive counters and have much more crowd control abilities. I really don't know what more can be said.

Talya
2007-04-24, 01:11 PM
Damn. Looking through this book, I think I understand the appeal.

What I was most worried about, by the descriptions elsewhere, is that these classes would render traditional classes utterly useless, even to dip in for a couple levels. But they don't. What's sweet is you can make a good character even better at higher levels simply by taking one of these...and they scale!

Take my Swashbuckler/Fighter/Champion of Corellon/Dervish I linked earlier. It's 19 when it finishes dervish progression. If at that point it were to take a level of any of crusader, swordsage, or warblade, it gets much better...which is made so much sweeter by the initiator level being level 10 for that very first level of warblade or crusader. (I stay away from swordsage for the BAB penalty, but it would be good, too, for the initiative boost if nothing else. The character already has weapon focus in its weapons, so that part doesn't help any.) The 5th level boosts and stance alone would make it all worthwhile.

Dervish friendly 5th level or lower maneuvers and stances:
Dancing Mongoose (Tiger boost) - heck, even the name is nice. And extra attacks are always welcome in a dervish dance. Combine with A Thousand Cuts, and the Dervish is making 18 attacks in a single round...
Step of the dancing Moth (Shadow stance) - again with the dancing name. Makes dervish dance easier.
Shifting defence (Set Stance) - 5 foot moves after AOOs against you miss during a dervish dance help you dance even further
Dancing Blade Form (Iron stance) +5' reach...reach? With finessed scimitars???? SWEET!

Etc. etc. etc. Not many 5th level boosts, would have to drop lower to find maneuvers appropriate for full attacks, but still nice.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-24, 05:35 PM
Note that due to semantic tomfoolery, your first stance must be a 1st level one, regardless of your IL at the time. The text implies that it was thinking from a straight-classed perspective, but it literally states that your first stance known has to be a 1st level one. I'd certainly let a character grab a higher level stance if his IL was high enough, but it's something to talk to your DM about individually.

Talya
2007-04-24, 05:42 PM
Note that due to semantic tomfoolery, your first stance must be a 1st level one, regardless of your IL at the time. The text implies that it was thinking from a straight-classed perspective, but it literally states that your first stance known has to be a 1st level one. I'd certainly let a character grab a higher level stance if his IL was high enough, but it's something to talk to your DM about individually.

Gah. A RAW martial adept dervish build... It tasks me, it tasks me, and I shall have it! I'll chase it round Good Hope, and round the horn, and round the norway maelstrom, and round perdition's flames before I give it up!

Back to the drawing board...

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-24, 06:01 PM
Gah. A RAW martial adept dervish build... It tasks me, it tasks me, and I shall have it! I'll chase it round Good Hope, and round the horn, and round the norway maelstrom, and round perdition's flames before I give it up!

Back to the drawing board...To be fair, there are a couple decent 1st level stances. If you go Swordsage, Step of the Wind (SS), Child of Shadow (SH), and Blood in the Water (TC, requires 1 other TC maneuver, also available as Warblade) synergize nicely with the Dervish Dance. Flame's Blessing (DW), and Island of Blades (SH) aren't half bad, either. As a Crusader, Martial Spirit (DS), while certainly not impressive at the level you'll likely be getting it at, does work nicely with a solid TWF build. The other DS stance and both the WR ones are just generally good, too.

Also keep in mind that if you take that martial adept level somewhere in the middle of your build, you can try to free up a feat slot for Martial Stance later on to grab a 3rd or 5th level stance.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-24, 06:02 PM
Child of Shadow is great for a Dervish--whee, free Concealment.

martyboy74
2007-04-24, 06:04 PM
Especially if he's managed to pick up some SA dice. That'll add up fast for a Dervish.

Annarrkkii
2007-04-24, 06:05 PM
Child of Shadow = Win.

Absolute Steel Stance is decent as well.

Talya
2007-04-24, 06:06 PM
Also keep in mind that if you take that martial adept level somewhere in the middle of your build, you can try to free up a feat slot for Martial Stance later on to grab a 3rd or 5th level stance.
Feats are at a premium. Plus if I take that martial adept level earlier, there's this terrible experience penalty to deal with.

I'm actually considering rebuilding it and replacing two levels of fighter with swordsage or warblade, ending up with 3 swash, 2 fighter, 3 martial adept, 2 champion of corellon, and 10 dervish.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-24, 06:09 PM
Why do you want 3 CoCL? You get Elegant Strike at level 2. 3 swash/2 fighter/2 CoCL/10 Dervish/3 Martial Adept works fine. 3 swash/3 martial adept/2 CoCL/10 Dervish/+2 martial adept would be even better if you could cram the feats in.

Picking up Swordsage and using short swords instead of scimitars will let you take Shadow Blade for Dex to damage.
Then you can take the Gloom Razor tactical feat, which is even more useful when Dervish Dancing.