Monsters with Tome of Battle Classes

[kuhaica]

Is it even possible? I would figure that Humanoid, Goblinoid and such would be able to. But what about things like Dragons, Minotours, Giants and other creatures. Is there anything saying it can't happen?

Or is this simply a DM Ruling

[Technetium43]

Tome of Battle. Not Tomb. Also, technically there's no restriction on taking ANY classes as long as the alignment fits, and the creature has an intelligence score.

[kuhaica]

I see. That's what I figured. Also I fixed that, I blame auto correct.

[Tiri]

Tome of Battle. Not Tomb. Also, technically there's no restriction on taking ANY classes as long as the alignment fits, and the creature has an intelligence score.

Don't you need an Intelligence score above 2, not just an Intelligence score?

[Technetium43]

Don't you need an Intelligence score above 2, not just an Intelligence score?

... Maaayybe? I'd have to go look at the monster rules, but I was mostly just referring to 'not non-sentient'.

[Kelb_Panthera]

RAW, the only requirement for taking class levels is an int score of 3 or better and -maybe- a limb or limbs that allow the manipulation of tools. SS goes into detail on the matter.

However, SS also suggest that a DM should use his best judement on whether a creature should be able to take a given class. Non-humanoid (shape, not type) creatures taking up an initiator class stretches credibility pretty hard.

Without SS guidelines, check the statblock. Unless the advancement line says "by character class," it can't take class levels. That also strains credibility too, however, so hope SS is in play.

[ghanjrho]

Monsters actually benefit a LOT from taking a level or two of Tome of Battle classes. Monsters generally have more Racial Hit Dice than class levels, and all non-ToB Hit Dice count as 1/2 initiator levels.

[Ludic]

You can, but I would veer away from it.

Remember, anything you give your monsters, you have to allow your players to have. Otherwise you have a lot of angry players and a dead game.

Tome of Battle is quite the can of worms. As soon as you open it, expect to see some really broken stuff from your players

I played a swordsage in a campaign where the DM didn't really understand what I was making, with two wounding shortswords and a high wisdom score (because swordsage maneuver DCs are wisdom based, also wisdom to AC while in light or no armor), I was reducing monsters constitution by four to six points every round. Topped off with Shadowblade, which tacks my dex modifier onto my weapon damage in addition to strength . . .

Sure I didn't deal a lot of physical damage, but when you're taking my full attack or my shadowed hand maneuvers full freight and losing 3HP per HD, plus my weapon damage, in a level 15 campaign, I don't have to deal a lot of damage. And this wasn't even an optimized character, it was just my first try at a swordsage.

[Coidzor]

Is it even possible? I would figure that Humanoid, Goblinoid and such would be able to. But what about things like Dragons, Minotours, Giants and other creatures. Is there anything saying it can't happen?

Or is this simply a DM Ruling

Many giants have martial cultures and would be able to see the benefits of mastery of blade magic.

There's an entire Sovereign Archetype in Eberron for making a Dragon able to benefit from Tome of Battle content.

Minotaurs could definitely learn how to use maneuvers and would probably love Stone Dragon.

The number of RHD that they have actually comes in handy in this case, because it boosts their Initiator Level substantially, so that adding even a single level of Warblade can be quite the game-changer.

[Sayt]

Tome of Battle itself has several initiating monsters, and ....Dragons of Eberron, I think, has a template that lets a dragon swap it's spellcasting for initiation.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I played a swordsage in a campaign where the DM didn't really understand what I was making, with two wounding shortswords and a high wisdom score (because swordsage maneuver DCs are wisdom based, also wisdom to AC while in light or no armor), I was reducing monsters constitution by four to six points every round. Topped off with Shadowblade, which tacks my dex modifier onto my weapon damage in addition to strength . . .

Sure I didn't deal a lot of physical damage, but when you're taking my full attack or my shadowed hand maneuvers full freight and losing 3HP per HD, plus my weapon damage, in a level 15 campaign, I don't have to deal a lot of damage. And this wasn't even an optimized character, it was just my first try at a swordsage.

You realize that has more to do with the wounding property and extra attacks than it does the swordsage? Imagine, for a moment, that it had been a TWF rogue with a few useful items; say an anklet of translocation, the displacement armor special ability, maybe a pair of boots of speed, etc.

[KillianHawkeye]

It's pretty clear that a giant or a dragon or any creature capable of taking class levels could make use of Tome of Battle if they really wanted to.

There are two things, however, that I would try to keep in mind when determining if such a thing would be somewhat common or extremely rare. First, anything with that kind of size and strength is likely to rely on its natural gifts rather than developing actual skill at fighting. If you can squash a house, you don't usually need to practice weapon drills and fighting styles. Skill is what allows someone who's lacking in natural talent to equal or exceed their superiors, and that's why Tome of Battle or other skill-intensive fighting styles are mostly used by humans and goblins and other "weak but smart" kinds of creatures.

Second, the Tome of Battle classes are more similar to the wizard or cleric or monk, classes that are gained through long years of study and practice and devotion. Remember they call it "blade magic" for a reason. It would be very uncommon for someone from an uncivilized society to pursue that knowledge. If I were to imagine some creature like an orc or a giant or a lizard-man who was trying to be better at fighting, I'd picture them taking levels in barbarian or fighter, not warblade or knight, and definitely not monk or swordsage. By the same token, a giant who tried to learn magic probably wouldn't be a wizard when there are easier routes to take. And I'm not saying that an orc can't be a monk or that a lizard-man can't be a knight, but if they do then they are playing against their type and you need to have a story or some explanation for why they are such an exception to the status quo. You can't just drop in a Lawful Good succubus into an adventure without having an origin story in mind for how it got to be that way, and to a lesser extent that's true of a civilized orc or a gentlemanly giant. They can exist, but it's very abnormal for the way those creatures are usually depicted.

If you're playing in an unusual setting, like the world where the Elder Scrolls video games take place, and orcs and lizard-men and cat people are just regular members of society like humans and elves, then it wouldn't be strange at all for them to take the same exact classes a human takes. And that would be totally fine, but most published D&D settings are not like that. Most settings are filled with groups of people who live within civilized society, other groups who live on the fringes of society, and yet others who live apart from society altogether. It's unrealistic to suppose that individuals from such disparate groups will be likely to have the same sorts of opportunities in life.



tl,dr; Sure, you could have a minotaur who learns to tap dance, but it's probably either an exceptional minotaur, or the minotaurs of your setting fit into civilized society unusually well.

[Ludic]

You realize that has more to do with the wounding property and extra attacks than it does the swordsage? Imagine, for a moment, that it had been a TWF rogue with a few useful items; say an anklet of translocation, the displacement armor special ability, maybe a pair of boots of speed, etc.

Not true, at all. Go look into the Shadow Hand. The entire style is ability score damage. At level 15 with two wounding shortswords, assuming all of my attacks hit, you do the same con damage as one strike with Bloodletting Strike, which still does Con damage regardless of if they make the save or not. Wounding Shortswords only compound on what the Shadow Hand style already does. If you aren't building TWF you would do less con damage over your full attack than Bloodletting Strike does.

[Crake]

Not true, at all. Go look into the Shadow Hand. The entire style is ability score damage. At level 15 with two wounding shortswords, assuming all of my attacks hit, you do the same con damage as one strike with Bloodletting Strike, which still does Con damage regardless of if they make the save or not. Wounding Shortswords only compound on what the Shadow Hand style already does. If you aren't building TWF you would do less con damage over your full attack than Bloodletting Strike does.

A lot of the guys around here are pretty familiar with tome of battle, don't worry. And since you can only do a single bloodletting strike before you have to regain your maneuvers (a full round action, assuming you have adaptive style), you're losing out a whole full attack every second turn. That's 6+ attacks you're missing out on. Add on a necklace of natural attacks for a free wounding snap kick and the con damage is piling nice and high regardless of whether you're a swordsage or not.

Honestly Ludic, I'd be more worried about wounding weapons combined with tiger claw stuff that lets you get extra attacks and full attack after moving. 8+ hits on a charge is much scarier than 1 hit that deals some con damage with a save. And of course, lets remember that there are plenty of enemies that would just straight up ignore your ability damage, alas as is the way of 3.5

And that's assuming you're JUST focusing on dealing con damage, and not using any of your other swordsage maneuvers, which you probably will be. Tome of battle is honestly far from broken, if anything it brings martials better in line with casters and makes for a more dynamic and fun experience for the players. As a DM, i try to refrain from using tome of battle too much beyond just the occasional martial study here and there, simply because it creates a LOT of bookeeping that I'm generally not willing to do, trying to keep track of all the different enemies and which maneuver they've used etc.

Oh, by the way, shadow blade replaces str to damage, it doesn't add to it, and only for shadow hand weapons while in a shadow hand stance (though I'm assuming you fullfilled those pre-requisites pretty easily :smalltongue:)

The real issue with tome of battle arises when the DM is not prepared for the sudden shift, and it makes things SEEM overpowered for the typical group that was used to the fighter going "I move in and power attack for 2d6+17 damage" as his entire turn, when suddenly his turn becomes "I move in and stone power with crusader's strike, dealing 2d6+9+8d8 damage, gaining 10 temporary HP, and healing 2 hp from my martial stance, then I activate white raven tactics and let the fighter, who I'm flanking with, get a chance to full attack from his current position".

But then, stop and ask yourself, is what just happened there REALLY so overpowered when you look at the stuff the wizard was doing?

[Ludic]

Oh, by the way, shadow blade replaces str to damage, it doesn't add to it


No it doesn't, the table says it replace, the text says it adds. Text > Table. There's also no errata making Shadowblade changed to replace in the text that I'm aware of.


The table also says Shadow Sun . . . Which is weird.

[PersonMan]

There are two things, however, that I would try to keep in mind when determining if such a thing would be somewhat common or extremely rare. First, anything with that kind of size and strength is likely to rely on its natural gifts rather than developing actual skill at fighting. If you can squash a house, you don't usually need to practice weapon drills and fighting styles. Skill is what allows someone who's lacking in natural talent to equal or exceed their superiors, and that's why Tome of Battle or other skill-intensive fighting styles are mostly used by humans and goblins and other "weak but smart" kinds of creatures.

I wouldn't be so sure on the bolded bit. A giant may not need skill to crush puny humans and elves, but nobody argues that humans wouldn't take ToB classes because "they can already just use their superior strength and size to crush rats and other small animals"; a giant would probably learn advanced combat techniques to fight other giants, rather than humans. After all, a giant can't crush a real house, just one of those laughable huts the little races live in - and really, when you're fighting for dominance with other giants who can also crush laughable little-people-huts, you're on equal footing. Until you learn advanced techniques, and get the edge you need to beat them.

[KillianHawkeye]

I wouldn't be so sure on the bolded bit. A giant may not need skill to crush puny humans and elves, but nobody argues that humans wouldn't take ToB classes because "they can already just use their superior strength and size to crush rats and other small animals"; a giant would probably learn advanced combat techniques to fight other giants, rather than humans. After all, a giant can't crush a real house, just one of those laughable huts the little races live in - and really, when you're fighting for dominance with other giants who can also crush laughable little-people-huts, you're on equal footing. Until you learn advanced techniques, and get the edge you need to beat them.

I guess that makes sense from the giant's point of view.

On the other hand, imagine for a moment that we lived in a world where the dogs and cats and squirrels and things were just as smart as we are, had their own organized societies, and sometimes found themselves in conflict with us over territory or resources or whatever. I'd have no doubt that, with us humans as the clear superiors physically, the smaller critters would be the first to develop some skill or special ability to even those odds.

It's always the underdog in any conflict who has the greater motivation to advance in order to maintain their existence. If humans were at the top of the ladder, we'd only have to worry about fighting each other. We're not worrying about the mice, at least not until they develop rodent-fu or stinky cheese assassination technique or some other means to even the odds.

So back to the humans and elves and such in your typical D&D worlds. They know that they're more like mice. They can't physically compete with all the giants and dragons and dire whatsits. They aren't super intelligent like devils or mind flayers or whoever. One of the great things about playing D&D is that it puts us in the position of being the underdogs. In a world where most things are either bigger and stronger or meaner and smarter than us, skill is more often than not our saving grace whether those skills are for fighting, magic, sneaking around, or just knowing the right thing at the right time. We wouldn't need to develop such advanced skills if we were the giants, we have them because we're the mice.

[The Glyphstone]

I'd expect giants to have their own self-developed specialized combat techniques, but they would be oriented towards fighting other giants, and of less use against small squashable things. On the other hand, a giant who ends up on the wrong end of some little-people fighting techniques and survives them might be smart enough to consider how useful those techniques would be if someone with real size and strength learned how to pull them off. And it only takes one to start the trend, if they're capable of passing on what they learn to other giants in turn.

[Nifft]

In my games, boss monsters can totally be Martial Initiators.

I've never run a team of ToB monsters fighting in unison, but that might be fun too -- albeit a bit of a bookkeeping challenge.

[Sian]

ToB explicitly mentions that Hobgoblins in particular are often Warblades, and Crusaders can easily be seen/used as the holy warrior class for less civilized races that doesn't have access to Paladin (for incompatible alignment reasons), but are not savage enough for mass Barbarians ... Swordsage is the only one I have a somewhat difficult time seeing monstrous races being with any kind of regularity.

Furthermore, Dragons of Eberron describes how a fair number of dragons in that setting are able to take Tiger claw maneuvers/stances

[Kelb_Panthera]

Not true, at all. Go look into the Shadow Hand. The entire style is ability score damage. At level 15 with two wounding shortswords, assuming all of my attacks hit, you do the same con damage as one strike with Bloodletting Strike, which still does Con damage regardless of if they make the save or not. Wounding Shortswords only compound on what the Shadow Hand style already does. If you aren't building TWF you would do less con damage over your full attack than Bloodletting Strike does.

Bloodletting strike; 1 attack, 4 con damage with a save for half, +1 for wounding weapon.

Full attack with TWF; 4 attacks with 1 con damage each, no save. Level 15 adds one more attack and evens it out.

So, yeah, I'm blaming the wounding weapons, unless you're gonna tell me you never used dancing or raging mongoose, since the weapon applies to -every- attack and you can only use bloodletting strike once per encounter barring a wasted turn to refresh.

ToB does add some powerful options to melee but nothing resembling OP, much less broken.

[Sian]

Bloodletting strike; 1 attack, 4 con damage with a save for half, +1 for wounding weapon.

Full attack with TWF; 4 attacks with 1 con damage each, no save. Level 15 adds one more attack and evens it out.

So, yeah, I'm blaming the wounding weapons, unless you're gonna tell me you never used dancing or raging mongoose, since the weapon applies to -every- attack and you can only use bloodletting strike once per encounter barring a wasted turn to refresh.

ToB does add some powerful options to melee but nothing resembling OP, much less broken.

In length ... I'm inclined to believe that Tome of Battle aren't OP, but rather that either the DM got severely blindsided and falls back on "You are a martial character, you shouldn't be able to be creative or strong" ... Or someone misunderstood something, and it doesn't work the way you believe it does.

[NomGarret]

Heck, ToB states that hobgoblins basically created the Iron Heart discipline. So, from my point of view, any game that incorporates ToB into the world should have that filter into monstrous races to a reasonable lesser extent.

Consider how likely a race is to take any class which requires a similar amount of training. Not many gnolls are going to have the patience for it, but how many have the patience to become clerics? A dragon certainly has the capacity to be an initiator, but most will find focusing on being a bigger, badder dragon is a better use of their energy. Then again, the same could be said about dragons taking levels in any class.

[Particle_Man]

Thri-keen do good Tiger Claw maneuvers because of their jump bonus.

And large groups of monsters that use White Raven maneuvers can be terrifying.

[Thurbane]

A lot of non-humanoid entries in the Villainous Competition rounds use ToB classes.

As a DM, throwing some ToB on a monster can be a lot of fun. If you don't want to add class levels, using feats (Martial Study/Martial Stance) is also cool.

I always let monster RHD count towards initiator level, as well (I've seen RAW arguments for an against this).

Fun fact: not long after ToB came out, I was one of it's most vocal detractors. I actually bought a copy, and was so unhappy with it, I took it back to my FLGS as a trade in on Cityscape. These days I really like ToB, and am really looking forward to running a Warblade or Swordsage as my PC one of these days.

[Pleh]

There are two things, however, that I would try to keep in mind when determining if such a thing would be somewhat common or extremely rare. First, anything with that kind of size and strength is likely to rely on its natural gifts rather than developing actual skill at fighting. If you can squash a house, you don't usually need to practice weapon drills and fighting styles. Skill is what allows someone who's lacking in natural talent to equal or exceed their superiors, and that's why Tome of Battle or other skill-intensive fighting styles are mostly used by humans and goblins and other "weak but smart" kinds of creatures.

Dragons cast like sorcerers, but not because they study magic. Magic comes as naturally to them as flying does to birds.

As a DM, you can easily have dragons who have innate initiator skill. Many Asian martial studies mimick the motions of animals (ever wonder why it's called "tiger claw"?), so it is perfectly normal to consider some of these abilities to come instinctively to some monsters.

[danielxcutter]

I'd expect giants to have their own self-developed specialized combat techniques, but they would be oriented towards fighting other giants, and of less use against small squashable things. On the other hand, a giant who ends up on the wrong end of some little-people fighting techniques and survives them might be smart enough to consider how useful those techniques would be if someone with real size and strength learned how to pull them off. And it only takes one to start the trend, if they're capable of passing on what they learn to other giants in turn.

Like Stone Dragon? Yes, I know that it's the "weakest" of the nine schools, but it could rock(pun very much intended) with the ridiculous strength and size of a giant.

[NomGarret]

I dunno. Would a stone giant consider taking up the lesser races' attempt at emulating their strength beneath them?

[Necroticplague]

Thri-keen do good Tiger Claw maneuvers because of their jump bonus.
Also, because they have multiple arms, which makes them better for the full-round-attack by MWF.

[The Glyphstone]

Like Stone Dragon? Yes, I know that it's the "weakest" of the nine schools, but it could rock(pun very much intended) with the ridiculous strength and size of a giant.

Stone Dragon maybe, though I was thinking of Setting Sun. If Giants have a tendency to settle things amongst themselves with fists, clubs, and/or rocks as is likely, being the first guy in the tribe to bust out some sweet wrestling moves could garner you a big advantage. Plus, it's got several maneuvers that give advantages when fighting larger or smaller enemies, so it's likely to be a school someone uses against a giant in the first place.

Incidentally, I had never thought of it till now, but I don't think there is anything in the Setting sun throwing maneuvers that say you can't just throw your opponent straight up. They fall prone in midair, take damage, then will immediately fall back into their existing space for even more falling damage.

[Esprit15]

Also, because they have multiple arms, which makes them better for the full-round-attack by MWF.

Girralon Windmill Flesh Rip was basically made for them.

[Pleh]

I dunno. Would a stone giant consider taking up the lesser races' attempt at emulating their strength beneath them?

That's just fluff. What if the giants invented the technique and the small people are the ones emulating?

[KillianHawkeye]

Dragons cast like sorcerers, but not because they study magic. Magic comes as naturally to them as flying does to birds.

Yeah? What's your point? The same is basically true for normal sorcerers.

[danielxcutter]

Yeah? What's your point? The same is basically true for normal sorcerers.

Except that most sorcerers don't have breath weapons, wings, and six natural attacks per turn, and they have to actually level up instead of automatically advancing casting with racial HD. And they aren't larger than a small house.

[Pleh]

Yeah? What's your point? The same is basically true for normal sorcerers.

My point is that some monsters have instinctive access to what PCs consider to be class features. They don't have to train to learn it, it's in their blood. There's no reason these abilities have to be limited to Magic abilities only.

After all, lions get Pounce just like barbarians do (in fact, barbarians get their pounce from lions) and they aren't taking class levels. Sorcerers get dragon-like spellcasting from dragons. There is no reason a DM couldn't make initiator skills and innate skill to certain monsters.

[The Glyphstone]

My point is that some monsters have instinctive access to what PCs consider to be class features. They don't have to train to learn it, it's in their blood. There's no reason these abilities have to be limited to Magic abilities only.

After all, lions get Pounce just like barbarians do (in fact, barbarians get their pounce from lions) and they aren't taking class levels. Sorcerers get dragon-like spellcasting from dragons. There is no reason a DM couldn't make initiator skills and innate skill to certain monsters.

ToB does this, actually. The Naityan Rakshasa, the Reth Dekala, and the Valkyrie all have innate maneuver-use.

[Kish]

I dunno. Would a stone giant consider taking up the lesser races' attempt at emulating their strength beneath them?
One might. Another might see it as a way to show them that a giant still does it better.

[Morty]

If a monster has the ability to cast Fireball, it doesn't mean it goes through the same motions doing it that a PC wizard or sorcerer would. The same applies to martial maneuvers. And it'd help physical monsters like giants feel like actual threatening monsters, as opposed to a big pile of HP and attacks. It would need to be restricted to major enemies, though, or becoming a bookkeeping headache. Sometimes, a big wall of HP and attacks is all you need in a monster - initiator levels would fit where you need something more.

[Coidzor]

Honestly, when I think of giants with Initiator Levels, I think of Frost Giants and Fire Giants, since they're the ones described with militaristic, martial-oriented/obsessed societies.