Stances as Maneuvers, Martial Study, and Maneuver-Granting Items

[Endarire]

Greetings, all!

1: Can I use a Crown of White Ravens or a similar maneuver-granting item to let me learn/use a stance of that school and level instead of a maneuver?

2: Can I use Martial Study to learn a stance of a discipline to learn a martial stance of that discipline?

[Darrin]

1: Can I use a Crown of White Ravens or a similar maneuver-granting item to let me learn/use a stance of that school and level instead of a maneuver?


This is not clear from the rules. In general, you may use magic items to qualify for prestige classes/feats if you're wearing the item continuously when you level up. So the RAW would probably be yes. However, the Tome of Battle Unofficial Errata Project (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=335.0) said no:

"The maneuver is added to your list of maneuvers known for the purposes of readying maneuvers, but not meeting prerequisites of feats, prestige classes, magic items, maneuvers, or any other effect that requires maneuvers known."

Your best answer here is to decide what works best for your group.



2: Can I use Martial Study to learn a stance of a discipline to learn a martial stance of that discipline?

No. Martial Stance is used to learn new stances. You must know at least one maneuver in a discipline (via class levels, Martial Study, or one of the Crown of the White Raven items if your DM allows) before you can take Martial Stance as a feat.

[HammeredWharf]

No and no. Stances aren't maneuvers. They're considered maneuvers for the purpose of meeting prerequisites, but other than that they're a separate type of abilities.

[Emperor Tippy]

No and no. Stances aren't maneuvers. They're considered maneuvers for the purpose of meeting prerequisites, but other than that they're a separate type of abilities.

That is not what the rules in ToB actually say.

"A Stance is a special type of maneuver."

Stances are, rules explicitly, maneuvers.

---
That being said, ToB is very badly worded and edited.

[Endarire]

Turns out I asked this same question (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=7491.0) about 6.5 years ago. We still didn't come to a definitive conclusion.

Was curious if anything surfaced since then. Seemingly, the debate is the same. The intention is pretty clear - stances are sorta maneuvers but not really because they're stances. But even the Tome goes against itself by saying that stances are maneuvers then stances aren't generally maneuvers.

Thankee, all! Smile! Jesus loves you!

[Darrin]

"A Stance is a special type of maneuver."


That's on page 5. The text contradicts itself later on page 43:

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

So the RAW could go either way. I don't really see that it hurts or breaks the rules either way. Personally, I'm fine with Crown of the White Raven used to qualify for Martial Study/Stance.



That being said, ToB is very badly worded and edited.

Not nearly as bad as Tome of Magic or Magic of Incarnum. I found ToB to be one of the easier and more straight-forward sourcebooks to understand. There are maybe 3 or 4 "problem spots" they needed to clarify: Tumble vs. Thicket of Blades, White Raven Tactics abuse, and the confusing Iron Heart Surge gobbledygook are the biggest head-scratchers.

[HammeredWharf]

I think it's pretty clear that stances aren't supposed to count as maneuvers, unless otherwise specified. If they count as maneuvers for Martial Study, Martial Stance shouldn't even exist. Similarly, you'd be able to get things like Assassin's Stance for 3K gold with Heroics (Martial Study) + a Shadow Hand item. RAW aren't absolutely crystal clear on this, but it's a bit like losing access to Dragon Disciple by getting its capstone or removing the sun with IHS. One could argue it's intended, but... it's probably not.

[Crake]

That's on page 5. The text contradicts itself later on page 43:

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

So the RAW could go either way. I don't really see that it hurts or breaks the rules either way. Personally, I'm fine with Crown of the White Raven used to qualify for Martial Study/Stance.



Not nearly as bad as Tome of Magic or Magic of Incarnum. I found ToB to be one of the easier and more straight-forward sourcebooks to understand. There are maybe 3 or 4 "problem spots" they needed to clarify: Tumble vs. Thicket of Blades, White Raven Tactics abuse, and the confusing Iron Heart Surge gobbledygook are the biggest head-scratchers.

I've always imagined that the page 43 text takes obvious precedence over the page 5 text, the same way that the long spell descriptions take precedence over the short spell descriptions.