PDA

View Full Version : What's broken in ToB and XPH?



mudbunny
2007-07-31, 01:00 PM
To reward myself for a weekend spent working outside while my pregnant wife and her brother sat on their rears and watched, I bought Tome of Battle and the Expanded Psionics Handbook. I have only started reading the XPH, and haven't touched the ToB yet, but everything I have heard tells me that they are broken.

How broken is broken?

Are we talking broken right out of the gate, or broken if you take the
ruight feats, and can fast-talk the DM into accepting a rules interpretation.

As for why I bought them, well, I bought the Eberron Campaign setting, with a goal to eventually DM some games in it, and psionics seemed to be pretty much built into the system. And the ToB appealed to me because it gave me the impression that it would add a bit more style to the fighter side of the game.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-31, 01:03 PM
There is no brokenness :smallbiggrin:

Psionics is better balanced than magic as a whole, though I haven't used it enough to find exceptions. ToB, if heavily optimized, makes obscenely good characters, but is normally better than regular fighter, worse than wizard.

Example of heavy optimizing: I made a ToB character, who, at ECL 20, can take down the Tarrasque in one round. This relies on big T winning initiative at point-blank range.

Note, of course, if you consider regular melee classes balanced, an/or your players play weak casters, etc, ToB is probably more powerful than you might be used to.

EDIT: Whoops, forgot about mystical swordsage adaption. Don't do it. Ever. It's cheese.

Pauwel
2007-07-31, 01:08 PM
The only really broken thing in ToB is the Mystical Swordsage adaption that lets you cast certain Wizard spells as menoeuvres; no one in their right mind would allow that.
Besides that, there isn't really anything broken it. Powerful yes, broken no.

The_Snark
2007-07-31, 01:11 PM
Expanded Psionics Handbook: Not a lot of this is broken, really; spells can do essentially anything they can. They have a bit more versatility in how they spend their power points, but to make up for that, they have to spend more to get increased effect based on manifester level. Spellcasters, in contrast, get most of those same effects for free. The one thing they do noticeably better than spells are mind-affecting powers, which makes sense thematically and is largely because manifesting a power is a lot less obvious than casting a spell.

The Psychic Warrior is similar in some ways to a cleric, except that they have fewer powers and gain bonus feats. Solid class, definitely not broken. The Wilder is generally considered weak, but I've always thought it was underestimated; they only know a few powers, but they're really good with those. The Soulknife is weak.

The main thing to remember about psionics is that you can never spend more power points than your manifester level. If you ignore that, it quickly becomes very broken.

The Tome of Battle is a little different. If you play with wizards that like to use Fireballs and Magic Missile, it will seem broken. The classes are more powerful than some of the core fighting classes—the warblade outdoes the fighter, the crusader generally is better than a paladin, the swordsage is better than the monk. It's designed for a game in which magic is used cleverly (Solid Fog, Forcecage, Glitterdust, and such are the mark of such games), and almost always for something other than simple damage. In those sorts of games, Tome of Battle helps keep melee characters viable by giving them tactical options (for damage, an optimized barbarian can generally get more).

So, neither is really all that broken. The XPH is no more broken than spellcasters are, probably less if you strictly observe the rules. The Tome of Battle isn't broken, but it is designed for high-powered games; if your games aren't high-powered, it might not fit in well.

Morty
2007-07-31, 01:12 PM
I can't speak for ToB, but -correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no psionic expert- most of the "psionic is broken" rants appear because their authors forget that you can't spend more power points on single power than your manifester level.

Dr. Weasel
2007-07-31, 01:18 PM
Used together, the two books are very well balanced. They are both between the Wizard/Druid and Monk/Fighter power levels and both use more fluid and adaptable mechanics than the core Arcane/Divine magic systems.

They do both give the 'broken' vibe to inexperienced first-time readers because the Psychic Warrior class as well as all of the ToB classes make Paladins, Fighters and Monks obsolete, which they really already were.

One of the complaints one of my friends had and cited as a clear case for the ToB's brokenness was a feat making unarmed strikes four monk levels better. The feat isn't even as good as Weapon Specialization until high levels.

I started using those books as the base of a campaign world along with the PHB2 classes, Rogues, Bards, Battle Sorcerers, and specialist casters like the Warmage and Dread Necromancer. The end result seems to be well balanced and makes parties rely more heavily on each other in the absence of any Batman Wizards and without much easy healing. The parties end up playing more smoothly since most classes have more spells per day than the core casters.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 01:19 PM
To reward myself for a weekend spent working outside while my pregnant wife and her brother sat on their rears and watched, I bought Tome of Battle and the Expanded Psionics Handbook. I have only started reading the XPH, and haven't touched the ToB yet, but everything I have heard tells me that they are broken.

How broken is broken?

Are we talking broken right out of the gate, or broken if you take the
ruight feats, and can fast-talk the DM into accepting a rules interpretation.

As for why I bought them, well, I bought the Eberron Campaign setting, with a goal to eventually DM some games in it, and psionics seemed to be pretty much built into the system. And the ToB appealed to me because it gave me the impression that it would add a bit more style to the fighter side of the game.

Both of these books are better balanced than typical arcane and divine caster. Tome of Battle characters look good compared to vanilla Fighters, especially core-only vanilla Fighters, but that's not really a problem; Tome of Battle characters are fine balance-wise, and they're a whole lot of fun (as well as, yes, quite stylish). Psionics aren't broken-free, but they're certainly far less broken than wizards/sorcerers/et al.

Psions get problematic in the same places arcanists do: Polymorph-equivalent powers, Time Stop-equivalent powers... however, the polymorph stuff costs XP for psions.
I saw a fairly convincing comparison of the psionic powers with arcane spells--RPGnet, maybe. Basically, nearly every good psionic power except the best damage ones has an arcane equivalent, while most of the really good arcane spells just don't have a psionic equivalent.

Quietus
2007-07-31, 01:20 PM
I can't speak for ToB, but -correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no psionic expert- most of the "psionic is broken" rants appear because their authors forget that you can't spend more power points on single power than your manifester level.

Another big part of it is that until 3.5, any psionics that existed was entirely borked. From what I understand, in 2e, it was absolutely ridiculous, and in 3.0, there were the annoying mental attack/defense modes, which if you weren't psionic, could stun you just for existing. THAT was pretty broken.

Dragonmuncher
2007-07-31, 01:23 PM
That's the main thing they forget, yes.

Myth: The XPH is Overpowered (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=331253)

ToB is powerful, but it mainly serves to make melee classes fun and viable to play in the later stages of the game.

tainsouvra
2007-07-31, 01:44 PM
If you consider the core books balanced enough for spellcasting, you will find the Expanded Psionics Handbook equally balanced. For example, Psions are very well-designed to rival, but not surpass, the Wizard in power over the course of a core-rules-compatible day.
If you consider the core books imbalanced in that they make casting too powerful, you will find the Expanded Psionics Handbook equally imbalanced, for the same reasons.

If you consider the core books balanced enough for Fighters, you will find the Tome of Battle fairly overpowered. The classes presented are, in general, significant improvements over the Fighter class.
If you consider the core books imbalanced in that they make Fighters too weak at mid-to-high levels, you will find the Tome of Battle balanced, for the same reason.

Most players seem to consider spellcasters powerful, but already tailor their games to make it all work out--they do just fine with XPH. Most players also seem to consider Fighters underpowered at mid-to-high levels, and thus find ToB a good addition. If you think spellcasters are too powerful, you will have to do the same kind of changes to XPH as you did to the core casters. If you think Fighters are balanced at any level, you probably don't want to allow ToB.

Matthew
2007-07-31, 01:46 PM
Yeah, basically they aren't broken, but like just about any material put out there for 3e there are ways and means to break them.

Tome of Battle and Tome of Magic introduce 'powered up' Martial Characters and 'powered down' Spell Casting Characters. Used together you may get a greater degree of balance between Player Characters, but individually they are more powerful than standard Martial Characters (past about Level 5 or so) and less powerful than standard Spell Casting Characters (again, past about Level 5 or so).

Ramza00
2007-07-31, 01:49 PM
The only way to break psionics is to combine it with arcane magic or other plain silly broken things.
Arcane 1:
A circle magic wizard casting mental pinnacle and then giving the power points to a psion (through metaconcert, soul crystal power in magic of incarnum, or accessing bestow power through the psion)
Arcane 2: The prc in dragonmarked which allows you to give up 1 use of a spell or spell like ability to cast inflict spells. Warlock then gives up invocations 1 at a time to cast inflict spells in a dwomer of transference

Plain Silly: Two psions of 18th lvl or higher using psychic chiurgery combine with a thought bottle to learn every 9th lvl power that is on the psion list and every 8th lvl or lower on a unique discipline or other class list.
Plain Silly 2: The new Arcane Erudite which learns arcane spells but uses power points instead of preparing them. Pay 2 additional power points to bypass any material component, no matter its cost.

Wait I made a mistake non silly use without arcane interaction, using Soul crystal and Twin Power can generate power points, but can't be done till near epic levels and with a book you don't have.

-----------

Psionics is balanced, I am just listing the few theoretical ways to break it. For every psionic way to break the game, there are 10 more arcane ways to break the game.

Darrin
2007-07-31, 02:02 PM
Are we talking broken right out of the gate, or broken if you take the
ruight feats, and can fast-talk the DM into accepting a rules interpretation.

ToB's not really all that broken. If you're looking for Wuxia-style martial arts combat rather than "Oh... the monk did 3 damage again", then ToB is every kind of awesome plus chrome finish. While there are some fairly impressive combos out there, you only really have to watch out for a couple maneuvers:

White Raven Tactics (WR 3rd) - Use a swift action to give any ally (including yourself) another turn later in the round. While not game-breaking broken, it can work as a low-level duplicate of the 9th level Diamond Mind capstone "Time Stands Still" (two full-round attacks as a full-round action). The sticking point rules-wise is whether "any ally" includes yourself (and by RAW it does), but even if the DM disagrees, giving one of your allies the equivalent of two full-round actions a round is still pretty overpowered for a 3rd level maneuver. Combined with Ruby Knight Vindicator and lots of turn attempts (RKV can spend a turn attempt to gain a swift action or recover a maneuver), then things get just a wee bit wacky.

Iron Heart Surge (IH 3rd) - Incredibly useful, ends any status effect or condition you might be suffering from. This includes fatigue, exhaustion, frenzy, sicken, dazed, deafness, blindness, nausea, ability damage, you name it... then it starts getting a little silly, including a lot of spell effects and area effects. Magical darkness? *poof* gone. Vampire got a bit frisky, gave you some negative levels? *poof* gone. Anti-magic field? *poof* gone.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 02:09 PM
ToB's not really all that broken. If you're looking for Wuxia-style martial arts combat rather than "Oh... the monk did 3 damage again", then ToB is every kind of awesome plus chrome finish. While there are some fairly impressive combos out there, you only really have to watch out for a couple maneuvers:
Hey, ToB isn't all Wuxia. A Crusader or Warblade can quite easily be just a really strong, skilled guy hacking at things with a sword.


White Raven Tactics (WR 3rd) - Use a swift action to give any ally (including yourself) another turn later in the round. While not game-breaking broken, it can work as a low-level duplicate of the 9th level Diamond Mind capstone "Time Stands Still" (two full-round attacks as a full-round action). The sticking point rules-wise is whether "any ally" includes yourself (and by RAW it does), but even if the DM disagrees, giving one of your allies the equivalent of two full-round actions a round is still pretty overpowered for a 3rd level maneuver. Combined with Ruby Knight Vindicator and lots of turn attempts (RKV can spend a turn attempt to gain a swift action or recover a maneuver), then things get just a wee bit wacky.
The latest ruling is that you *can't* use it on yourself, which fits--traditionally, "all allies" includes oneself, while "a (single/specific) ally" doesn't.


Iron Heart Surge (IH 3rd) - Incredibly useful, ends any status effect or condition you might be suffering from. This includes fatigue, exhaustion, frenzy, sicken, dazed, deafness, blindness, nausea, ability damage, you name it... then it starts getting a little silly, including a lot of spell effects and area effects. Magical darkness? *poof* gone. Vampire got a bit frisky, gave you some negative levels? *poof* gone. Anti-magic field? *poof* gone.
You have to be able to "move freely", take the standard action, and "roar with effort". Additionally, the effect needs to have a duration. That means that you can't get rid of dazing, you can't use it in in a frenzy (you're too busy attacking people, on permanent negative levels, on nausea (can't take the standard action)...
It does get ridiculous, however. You can technically end a continent-wide epic spell you're in the middle of, as long as it's got a duration.

mudbunny
2007-07-31, 02:11 PM
White Raven Tactics (WR 3rd) - Use a swift action to give any ally (including yourself) another turn later in the round. While not game-breaking broken, it can work as a low-level duplicate of the 9th level Diamond Mind capstone "Time Stands Still" (two full-round attacks as a full-round action). The sticking point rules-wise is whether "any ally" includes yourself (and by RAW it does), but even if the DM disagrees, giving one of your allies the equivalent of two full-round actions a round is still pretty overpowered for a 3rd level maneuver. Combined with Ruby Knight Vindicator and lots of turn attempts (RKV can spend a turn attempt to gain a swift action or recover a maneuver), then things get just a wee bit wacky.

It's funny that you mention this, according to WotC (it came up in my RSS feed today), WRT does not work on yourself.




Sage Advice (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070731a)

Q: Dear Sage
Can you use White Raven Tactics (Tome of Battle p94) on yourself to gain another turn right after your current initiative score?
--Robert

A: No. White Raven Tactics doesn’t work on the initiator himself.

Darrin
2007-07-31, 02:33 PM
It's funny that you mention this, according to WotC (it came up in my RSS feed today), WRT does not work on yourself.

Interesting.

But then it wouldn't be the first time WotC has been inconsistent or contradictory about a ruling.

Haven't heard about the "all allies" or "an ally" thing before. The glossary in the PHB made no such distinction.

Kurald Galain
2007-07-31, 02:33 PM
I saw a fairly convincing comparison of the psionic powers with arcane spells--RPGnet, maybe.

Do you have a link please?

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 02:45 PM
Do you have a link please?

I'm sorry, I don't... I don't read the site much, it was quite some time ago, and I'm sure they've had any number of "are psionics broken?" discussions before that and since then.

Person_Man
2007-07-31, 02:51 PM
I define "broken" as a rule that makes a relatively balanced party impossible. The DM can always power up or power down encounters. Nothing is broken unless there is a serious imbalance between PC builds, and that imbalance bugs one or more of the players. Thus a Samurai can be just as game breaking as an Incantatrix.

Various high power combinations can easily be found in both. Go over to the optimization board, and you can find lots of them.

Within Psionics, the Pyrokineticist, Schism, and Psychic Surgery are often cited.

Within the Tome of Battle, virtually everything will raise your run of the mill melee classes to the full caster level. Though usually, people who rant about it don't understand that you can only use one Swift or Immediate action per turn, and/or they don't understand that a Standard Action is not necessarily the same as an attack action, and/or that a Full Round Action is not necessarily the same as a full attack action, and/or they don't understand they you have to spend an action (and thus, not attack) to recover maneuvers during combat.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-31, 03:02 PM
Within the Tome of Battle, virtually everything will raise your run of the mill melee classes to the full caster level.

Mmm. Not to optimized caster power (without excessive cheese) for the most part, but decent full caster power. Probably not CoDZilla, nor full batman (Maximised shivering touch! Quickened shivering touch! Imbue familiar with Sp. Ability empowered shivering touch! 3d6x1.5+3d6+18 dex damage!)

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 03:04 PM
Mmm. Not to optimized caster power (without excessive cheese) for the most part, but decent full caster power. Probably not CoDZilla, nor full batman (Maximised shivering touch! Quickened shivering touch! Imbue familiar with Sp. Ability empowered shivering touch! 3d6x1.5+3d6+18 dex damage!)

I read the "being batman guide" a bit ago, but doesn't it actually tell you not to use Shivering Touch?

tainsouvra
2007-07-31, 03:09 PM
I read the "being batman guide" a bit ago, but doesn't it actually tell you not to use Shivering Touch? Yes
...because it's so powerful that the sheer cheese-ness of it led the author to advise against it.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-31, 03:09 PM
That's not full-out batman style. Maximised, optimized casters, use everything at their disposal.

But wait. If they do that, ToB classes can as well. Ok.. Slow, stinking cloud and solid fog?

Hmm. 3 spells/round is still powerful, even if 1 must be spell slot level 5 or less, and the other level 5, or more with cheese.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 03:19 PM
Yes
...because it's so powerful that the sheer cheese-ness of it led the author to advise against it.

Yeah, that's kinda my point. If the guy who wrote the "batman guide" suggested it not be used, doesn't that mean the "batman wizard" shouldn't use it? The "completely powergamed to the hilt" wizard, maybe, but you'd think a "batman wizard" would be a wizard who's played mostly according to the batman guide.

Person_Man
2007-07-31, 04:14 PM
Mmm. Not to optimized caster power (without excessive cheese) for the most part, but decent full caster power. Probably not CoDZilla, nor full batman (Maximised shivering touch! Quickened shivering touch! Imbue familiar with Sp. Ability empowered shivering touch! 3d6x1.5+3d6+18 dex damage!)


Crusader 1/Paladin 4/Ruby Knight Vindicator 7

WotC has clarified that you can use White Raven Tactics on yourself (though your Initiative is lowered by one each time you use it, which means other others might be able to act in between your various actions).

1) Do you normal turn.
2) Use White Raven Tactics on yourself to gain another turn.
3) Use a Turn Undead attempt and use Divine Impetus to gain another Swift Action.
4) Use a Turn Attempt and use Divine Recovery to recover White Raven Tactics.
5) Use White Raven Tactics to give yourself another turn.
5) Repeat steps 3-5 until you run out of Turn Undead attempts.

Considering how easy it is to gain extra Turn attempts (via Nightsticks and/or boosted Cha), that's a lot of actions in one turn.

And this is just one such example. Certainly, a full caster can do similar things (Celerity FTW!). But I would say that using ToB that its clearly possible to put an optimized melee build on the same plane of existence as an optimized caster build.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 04:21 PM
Someone in the thread already linked to a "Sage Advice" reply that clarified that you can't use White Raven Tactics on yourself--what's more, a single broken-trick-build doesn't really mean much.

mudbunny
2007-07-31, 04:31 PM
Crusader 1/Paladin 4/Ruby Knight Vindicator 7

WotC has clarified that you can use White Raven Tactics on yourself (though your Initiative is lowered by one each time you use it, which means other others might be able to act in between your various actions).

Actually, you can't.



Sage Advice (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070731a)

Q: Dear Sage
Can you use White Raven Tactics (Tome of Battle p94) on yourself to gain another turn right after your current initiative score?
--Robert

A: No. White Raven Tactics doesn’t work on the initiator himself.

PinkysBrain
2007-07-31, 04:36 PM
You can still use WRT with ping pong tactics, in combination with the RKV (or the crusader if you don't reset readied maneuvers when all his maneuvers have been granted) it is broken ... and even when not used in a broken way it's just plain overpowered for it's level.

Martial classes can do scary tricks at low level (a TWF swordsage combining burning blade with either wolf fang strike or flashing sun for instance). Also Aptitude weapons are a bit overpowered and the maneuver granting magic items are too poorly explained.

For the XPH some of the higher level powers are problematic, but then high level spells are much worse. At lower level energy Missile is just too good (it was nerfed in complete psionics but they didn't bother to errata it for the XPH). Claws of the Beast damage can also get ridiculous after expansion.

Dausuul
2007-07-31, 04:45 PM
Yeah, White Raven Tactics is a problem. I would ban that maneuver outright. However, it's the only thing in the entire book (other than mystic swordsage) that I feel warrants a flat-out ban; which is pretty damn good, considering the potential the ToB had to be horrifically broken.

And no, an optimized ToB character does not stack up to a full caster.

Tor the Fallen
2007-07-31, 05:06 PM
Example of heavy optimizing: I made a ToB character, who, at ECL 20, can take down the Tarrasque in one round. This relies on big T winning initiative at point-blank range.

I made a telepath that could reliably Dominate the Tarrasque at level 11, and a less optimized one that could do it at level 13.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-31, 05:12 PM
Point given. This emphasizes the flexibility of the caster, and ability to exploit (not in an abusive way, but use) weaknesses of creatures.

Tor the Fallen
2007-07-31, 05:19 PM
Psionics is certainly limited in its cheesiness, but it is by no means 'balanced.' Psions will still show up fighters.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-31, 05:20 PM
Psionics is certainly limited in its cheesiness, but it is by no means 'balanced.' Psions will still show up fighters.

Beating a fighter != unbalanced.

Tor the Fallen
2007-07-31, 05:26 PM
Beating a fighter != unbalanced.

I consider any class that can easily defeat half the core classes unbalanced.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-31, 05:28 PM
I consider any class that can easily defeat half the core classes unbalanced.

So I guess that means you include the Wizard, Cleric, and Druid as broken then too, yes? At least you're consistent.

Douglas
2007-07-31, 05:29 PM
Don't forget Sorcerer in that list.

blue_fenix
2007-07-31, 05:33 PM
Word of warning about ToB: It is way more powerful at low levels than standard fighters and only becomes balanced and acceptably better than standard fighters after about level 6. The reason for this is that many of the best maneuvers in ToB are a standard action which includes a single attack. When you only get one attack on a full-attack action anyway, you should ALWAYS use a maneuver if you have one available. At 6, the choice between using a maneuver and full-attacking becomes actually worth considering and from there on out ToB is a perfectly wonderful fix for melee class weaknesses without turning them into casters.

As for expanded psionics, just chant the mantra to your self "You can only spend as many points on a power as you have manifester levels" over and over. Not remembering this rule is the absolute number one reason people think psionics is broken, because without this rule a level 20 psion can spend 300 powerpoints on one power to do 300d6 of whichever type of energy damage he feels like, and various other ridiculous cheese.

Tor the Fallen
2007-07-31, 05:41 PM
Don't forget Sorcerer in that list.

Anything with full casting or manifesting or whatever this weeks flavor of magic is, is on that list. Once you hit about level 10, there's no mechanical need for a monk, barbarian, fighter, rogue, ninja, samurai, or whatever else that doesn't get 9 levels of spells. Druids and Clerics can tank just fine, cast a bunch of cool stuff, and well, wizards are wizards. The telepath can always dominate a few dozen BBEGs for getting hit by sticks, if for some reason the Fleshraker Druid and his wyrm sized animal companion aren't up to task.

Skjaldbakka
2007-07-31, 05:51 PM
I find that ToB replaces Fighter, Paladin, and Monk with Warblade, Crusader, and Swordsage. There are a few exceptions in that monk and paladin might still be used for purposes of PrC X. I would never play a fighter if ToB were available- except maybe to splash for feats.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 05:55 PM
Word of warning about ToB: It is way more powerful at low levels than standard fighters

Not really. ToB's "peak performance" at low levels is at level 3, when you just get a +2d6 damage maneuver. Realistically, that gets used once an encounter. The rest of the time, a barbarian will do more damage, and by level 3 a fighter can have, say... combat reflexes, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Stand Still.

tainsouvra
2007-07-31, 05:58 PM
Anything with full casting or manifesting or whatever this weeks flavor of magic is, is on that list. I applaud your usage of a consistent standard. I agree with you that, if all casters are overpowered, Psions are just as overpowered as the rest of them. Please do not take my next comment as detracting from that agreement with your consistency.

I would, however, like to propose something to you. If Sorcerers, Druids, Wizards, Clerics, Psions, et al are more powerful than noncasters, and some noncasting classes with extraordinary ability are likewise more powerful than their rivals, that indicates that more than half of the game (those with some casting ability or spectacular noncasting ability) are more powerful than the remaining portion of the game (those with no casting ability and no noncasting spectacular abilities). While this is certainly an example of imbalance, usually it's better to focus on the outliers as the source of the imbalance--in this case, non-ToB noncasters--and fix a smaller number rather than cry cheese at the majority and fix nothing.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-31, 05:59 PM
EPH was very well done.

The Psychic Reformation power and Schism are both unusual powers which are awfully powerful for their level and effects.

Energy Missile is pretty powerful at lower levels. Just give it to the BBEGs and have them use it intelligently against a party.

Psychic Reformation can be easily forgotten once it can be duplicated with Bend Reality.

I would only allow Psychic Reformation in a game if a Limited Wish can mimic the mechanics.

I wouldn't allow the White Raven Tactics in a game then it can't be abused.

Krimm_Blackleaf
2007-07-31, 06:02 PM
I've experienced use of both ToB and XPH and I can say neither is at all broken in any way. Some people say all the things you can do with it, but think of all the things you can do with everything else. Both psionics and manuevers are by far less powerful and far more balanced than arcane magic. As mentioned before, you can only spend power points equal to your manifester level on powers and 9th level manuevers are about as strong as your average 6th level arcane spell.

Ulzgoroth
2007-07-31, 06:20 PM
I don't see where level 6 gains much significance. Sure, the full attack may sometimes be a better idea than using a standard-action strike. But the warblade's got full BAB too, and can enhance that full attack with a stance and possibly a boost, even if they haven't got a full attack-like strike. The fighter full attacks. The warblade full attacks in Punishing Stance, and has Moment of Perfect Mind and maybe Wall of Blades ready to deal with magical or mundane threats before the next round.

Starbuck_II
2007-07-31, 07:22 PM
I don't see where level 6 gains much significance. Sure, the full attack may sometimes be a better idea than using a standard-action strike. But the warblade's got full BAB too, and can enhance that full attack with a stance and possibly a boost, even if they haven't got a full attack-like strike. The fighter full attacks. The warblade full attacks in Punishing Stance, and has Moment of Perfect Mind and maybe Wall of Blades ready to deal with magical or mundane threats before the next round.

Wall of Blades just uses attack roll for 1 attack to AC. Maybe it would help against a Ray true, but still only 1 that round(assuming you choose to get that one back soon).

Arbitrarity
2007-07-31, 07:25 PM
Also, if you use a counter, no boost next round, or any other swift action. My Sorceror/JPM was annoyed at his inability to use arcane wrath after using firey riposte.

Matthew
2007-07-31, 07:28 PM
Wall of Blades just uses attack roll for 1 attack to AC. Maybe it would help against a Ray true, but still only 1 that round(assuming you choose to get that one back soon).

Still, pretty handy though. Wall of Blades resembles very closely the Mounted Combat mechanic, not to mention the Block/Parry Mechanic from 2e AD&D.

Arbitrarity
2007-07-31, 07:33 PM
Scoprion parry, Fool's strike, and Manticore parry are almost the same as well, interestingly. They are the manuvers where you can start saying "Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!" (at least fool's strike).

Hmmm. What would a living geas/Quest define as the conditions of the geas/quest?

Fax Celestis
2007-07-31, 07:39 PM
Scoprion parry, Fool's strike, and Manticore parry are almost the same as well, interestingly. They are the manuvers where you can start saying "Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!" (at least fool's strike).

There's some really funny things you can do with those too. What happens when a living geas/quest spell hits itself, for instance?

Saph
2007-07-31, 07:46 PM
Not really. ToB's "peak performance" at low levels is at level 3, when you just get a +2d6 damage maneuver. Realistically, that gets used once an encounter. The rest of the time, a barbarian will do more damage, and by level 3 a fighter can have, say... combat reflexes, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Stand Still.

Yes, but a Barbarian gets to rage once per day. A ToB character can keep going for as long as they have hitpoints, and for a Warblade or a Crusader, that's pretty damn long.

A Fighter's more variable, but unless the Fighter's very well built the Warblade will still blow him out of the water, in addition to having more skills and more HP.

The problem with ToB isn't high levels (where melee classes need the help). It's at low levels, where melee classes are already good but ToB ones are just so much better.

- Saph

Matthew
2007-07-31, 07:54 PM
Not sure about that, Saph. Could you produce a build (For instance, War Blade Levels 1-5) to support this?

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 07:58 PM
Yes, but a Barbarian gets to rage once per day. A ToB character can keep going for as long as they have hitpoints, and for a Warblade or a Crusader, that's pretty damn long.
At level 4, the Barbarian gets another rage. He can also take Extra Rage. The barbarian is going to be quite competitive, and ahead when he rages (so, for the big fight of the day).
During that rage, the barbarian is getting +4 STR, which is like +2 AB/+2 damage and applies to everything else STR applies to. Power Attack can turn that into +6 damage. 2d6 is 7 damage on average. So the Barbarian is pretty much constantly using Mountain Hammer.
And if he took the Whirling Frenzy variant...


A Fighter's more variable, but unless the Fighter's very well built the Warblade will still blow him out of the water, in addition to having more skills and more HP.
Poorly built fighters aren't really worth talking about; if Sally Swordswoman took Skill Focus: Perform(Dance), Weapon Focus, and Great Fortitude, of course she isn't going to perform well in combat.
Meanwhile, Tammy Tripper with the spiked chain or guisarme, Improved Trip, and Stand Still is going to be more effective than the Warblade, who can't have those feats. The Warblade gets +2d6 damage once an encounter, +1d6 another time, a concentration check instead of one will save... the fighter controls the movement of everything within reach, and can wear heavy armor, too (and between that and the abiltiy to keep enemies prone and/or still, more survivability). And the Warblade's likely to have a lower STR, since a Warblade needs every attribute the Fighter needs, only Dexterity is more important (medium armor), and Intelligence is significantly more important.


The problem with ToB isn't high levels (where melee classes need the help). It's at low levels, where melee classes are already good but ToB ones are just so much better.
You'll need to show me how that's the case, because I think I just showed how it isn't. At high levels, ToB classes are that much better, sure. At low levels, the difference is minimal--and not always in the favor of the Tome of Battle classes. The Warblade performing Strikes of Perfect Clarity and delivering Mountain Hammers and shifting stances is going to be more fun to play, probably--but not more powerful. A fighter can really dominate melee for the first four levels or so.
After that, things get trickier.

Saph
2007-07-31, 08:20 PM
It's not that Fighters can't compete with Warblades at low levels with the right build: properly optimised, they can. The issue is that it takes vastly more optimisation to make a really effective level 5 fighter than it takes to make a really effective level 5 warblade. It's actually more difficult to make a level 5 warblade that ISN'T really effective.

As a practical matter, most people just aren't that good at optimising, or don't care enough, and those that do often prefer to play spellcasters. It's true that it's possible to design a level 3 fighter that can beat a level 3 warblade, but that doesn't change the fact that the average level 3 warblade is vastly better than the average level 3 fighter, needs less work to design, and has better long-term prospects (since he can change his maneuvers as he goes up levels, while the fighter can't change his feats).

Most D&D players are not hardcore optimisers. For those people, Warblades are going to be much more powerful than Fighters.

- Saph

tainsouvra
2007-07-31, 08:23 PM
Saph, you could just as easily turn that around and say that Fighters are the problem. It takes more optimization to make them competitive, and most D&D players aren't concerned with doing that optimization. By that logic, Warblades should be standard issue while Fighters are an option for the heavy-optimizers :smallcool:

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 08:31 PM
It's not that Fighters can't compete with Warblades at low levels with the right build: properly optimised, they can. The issue is that it takes vastly more optimisation to make a really effective level 5 fighter than it takes to make a really effective level 5 warblade. It's actually more difficult to make a level 5 warblade that ISN'T really effective.
Are you really sure about that? A poor choice of maneuvers and stances and feats can make a Warblade ineffective just like a poor choice of feats and bonus feats can make a fighter ineffective.
It's hard to make a Barbarian ineffective if you give him a two-handed weapon and his best score in Strength. Harder than to ruin one than to ruin a Martial Adept, I'd say.


As a practical matter, most people just aren't that good at optimising, or don't care enough, and those that do often prefer to play spellcasters. It's true that it's possible to design a level 3 fighter that can beat a level 3 warblade, but that doesn't change the fact that the average level 3 warblade is vastly better than the average level 3 fighter, needs less work to design, and has better long-term prospects (since he can change his maneuvers as he goes up levels, while the fighter can't change his feats).

The Warblade can swap out maneuvers, but hardly all of them, and there's no guarantee that he'll make better choices (besides, by the time he's swapped out two, Fighters are already lagging behind).


Most D&D players are not hardcore optimisers. For those people, Warblades are going to be much more powerful than Fighters.

- Saph
Level 3 is the level most biased in favor of low-level martial adepts, since that's when they get second-level maneuvers; a Fighter with Weapon Focus and Power Attack at level 2 isn't really worse than a level 2 Warblade with, say, Extra Readied Maneuver, or Two-Weapon Fighting (for Tiger Claw). At level 4, Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Dodge, and Weapon Specialization aren't very good, but they're competitive with a similarily unoptimized Warblade.

Frankly, a level 3 fighter with Dodge, Mobility, and Combat Expertise, say, is going to suck, whether you compare him to a Warblade or not. He'll suck compared to the Barbarian with Weapon Focus and Power Attack, too.

If you compare unoptimized Fighters, compare them to unoptimized Warblades--which exist. I've seen them. I've been in a game with a guy who took Monkey Grip, Two-Weapon Fighting, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword, with plans to take Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting next. Unsurprisingly, he wasn't very effective.

With Tome of Battle, people who don't optimize that well can still be sort of effective as melee characters, and people who do optimize well aren't any better off playing Warblades than Fighters at low levels--so what's the problem? The only people who're better off are the people who don't optimize.

Matthew
2007-07-31, 08:32 PM
I dunno. Fighters get access to Ranged Weapons and Heavy Armour, which kind of puts them ahead of War Blades at the levels where such things matter (i.e. at Low Levels). I'm not convinced you need a really good build to be equal to a War Blade at Levels 1-5.

Wolfwood2
2007-07-31, 08:35 PM
Poorly built fighters aren't really worth talking about; if Sally Swordswoman took Skill Focus: Perform(Dance), Weapon Focus, and Great Fortitude, of course she isn't going to perform well in combat.

The skill focus was over the top. But a fourth level human fighter might legitimately have taken, say, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword), Weapon Focus (Bastard Sword), Power Attack, Cleave, Iron Will, and Weapon Specialization: Bastard Sword and fight with a Bastard Sword and Shield and feel like she's pretty darn outclassed.

And those are perfectly legitimate non-optimizer but still okay feats that a player might take.

Dausuul
2007-07-31, 08:41 PM
The Warblade gets +2d6 damage once an encounter, +1d6 another time, a concentration check instead of one will save...

Why do you say the warblade only gets to use these abilities once an encounter? At level 5, encounters will often last long enough for the warblade to recharge a couple of times. They're not like swordsages, remember--all they have to do is attack without maneuvers for a round.

Matthew
2007-07-31, 08:41 PM
Sure, but that Level 4 Fighter is going to have access to Ranged Weapons and probably have a better overall Armour Class at that stage. It was silly to waste a Feat on Bastard Sword, but maybe she's aiming for Exotic Weapon Master?

Matthew
2007-07-31, 08:42 PM
Sure, but that Level 4 Fighter is going to have access to Ranged Weapons and probably have a better overall Armour Class at that stage. It was silly to waste a Feat on Bastard Sword, but maybe she's aiming for Exotic Weapon Master?

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 09:07 PM
The skill focus was over the top. But a fourth level human fighter might legitimately have taken, say, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword), Weapon Focus (Bastard Sword), Power Attack, Cleave, Iron Will, and Weapon Specialization: Bastard Sword and fight with a Bastard Sword and Shield and feel like she's pretty darn outclassed.

And those are perfectly legitimate non-optimizer but still okay feats that a player might take.

Exotic Weapon Procifiency(Bastard Sword) is not an okay feat. But, really, let's compare.

Sally Swordswoman
Human Fighter 4
STR: 18 (17 +1 at level 4), DEX 12, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 8, CHA 11. Reasonable but not really optimized 28-point-buy stats--no INT 13, CHA 11 for "roleplaying value", because Sally wants to be a little airheaded but kinda pretty.
Sally has a +1 Bastard Sword, +1 Heavy Shield, Full Plate, and a MW +4 STR longbow.
Feats: Exotic Weapon Proficiency(Bastard Sword), Power Attack, Cleave, Iron Will, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization.

Sally attacks at +10, doing 1d10+7 damaage (11-12, on average). She Cleaves through one-hit-die mooks and two-hit-die mooks with low hit dice (or if she rolls well). She can usually afford to Power Attack a little, especially when flanking. Her saves are Fort +6, Ref +2, Will +2.
Her AC is 10 + 8 armor + 1 dexterity + 3 shield, a total of 22.
Edit: Wanda, due to her d12 hit dice, will have 5 more hit points (on average, with the first hit die maxed) than Sally. Not really significant.


Wanda Warblade is no more optimized. Wanda's a dwarf, because she thinks dwarves are gruff and tough, and besides hit points are totally awesome.
Stats: STR 15 (14 +1 at level 4) , DEX 14, CON 14 (12 +2 racial), INT 14 (Warblades need it!), WIS 10, CHA 10 (12 -2 racial) because she doesn't want to be ugly, dwarves are already unpretty.
Feats: Exotic Weapon Proficiency(Bastard Sword) - good for the goose, good for the gander. Power Attack - same here, and it's a classic.
Wanda's got a +1 Bastard Sword, +1 Heavy Shield, and +1 Breastplate (no heavy armor proficiency), and a Ring of Protection +1.

Wanda picked Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Steel Wind, and Stone Bones, with Stonefoot Stance because it fits a dwarf. She then picked up Charging Minotaur at 2nd, Mountain Hammer at 3rd, and swapped Stone Bones for Wall of Blades (stylish!) while taking the Stance of Clarity at 4th.
She doesn't use Stance of Clarity except when there's one enemy, and readies Mountain Hammer, Wall of Blades, Sapphire Nightmare Blade, and Steel Wind.

Wanda's AB is +7, and her normal attack does 1d10+3, or 8-9 damage on average. WHen using Mountain Hammer (no more than once every four rounds) that jumps to 1d10+10 average damage.
If Sally lowered her AB to +7 with Power Attack, she'd be doing 1d10+10 all the time.
When using other maneuvers, Wanda does less damage. She also can't Cleave, although once every four rounds or so Steel Wind makes up for it. Wall of Blades is useful against Scorching Ray. Wanda also gets +2 to confirm crits.

Wanda's AC is 10 + 2 (dex) + 6 (armor) + 3 (shield) + 1 (ring), or 22--like Sally's. Stance of Clarity can improve this against single opponents, which aren't that common at this level.

Wanda's saves are Fortitude +6, Reflex +5 (Battle Clarity), Will +1.

I'd say that Sally's even a little better. Upgrading Wanda a little--a more optimized stat spread, maybe--could put her ahead, but doing something as simple as giving Sally a greatsword and replacing Exotic Weapon Proficiency with something useful would put her a whole step ahead. The Warblade could catch up by using Punishing Stance and knowing when to switch between it and Stance of Clarity.

Wanda has no ranged attacks. Sally can shoot a bow at +6 for 1d8+4, and starts encounters like that, then drops it once enemies get into range.
Wanda has far more out-of-combat utility than Sally--Mountain Hammer cuts through doors, and Wanda has 6 skill points per level and far more useful class skills, including Diplomacy for social situations

They're even; Sally may even be a little ahead.
Both optimized or both unoptimized, Fighters and Warblades are about equal at low levels.

Stephen_E
2007-07-31, 10:02 PM
I can't speak for ToB, but -correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no psionic expert- most of the "psionic is broken" rants appear because their authors forget that you can't spend more power points on single power than your manifester level.

Well that and the perfectly correct point that Psionics are balanced for a "4 encounters per day" game, and many of us have never played in such a campaign is our lives. If you normally have less than 4 encounters a day then Psionics are considerably more powerful than magic.

Otherwise there are some broken powers, but then Magic has it's share (polymorth). Things been what they are it'll be years before they get round to fixing the Psionic broken powers, afterall how long did it take them to make a serious effort to rein in polymorth.

Stephen

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 10:09 PM
Well that and the perfectly correct point that Psionics are balanced for a "4 encounters per day" game, and many of us have never played in such a campaign is our lives. If you normally have less than 4 encounters a day then Psionics are considerably more powerful than magic.


Er, if you only have a couple of encounters a day, couldn't the arcane casters just cast all of their highest level spells just as easily as the psion can keep manifesting high-level powers?

Jasdoif
2007-07-31, 10:23 PM
Er, if you only have a couple of encounters a day, couldn't the arcane casters just cast all of their highest level spells just as easily as the psion can keep manifesting high-level powers?Not necessarily. A psion can pour all their daily power points into level 9 powers, while a caster is limited by their actual number of level 9 slots. A level 17 specialist wizard with 30 Int has 3 level-9 spell slots; a level 17 psion with 30 Int can manifest 9th-level powers 17 times during the day.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 10:32 PM
Not necessarily. A psion can pour all their daily power points into level 9 powers, while a caster is limited by their actual number of level 9 slots. A level 17 specialist wizard with 30 Int has 3 level-9 spell slots; a level 17 psion with 30 Int can manifest 9th-level powers 17 times during the day.

Sure, he can, but what good will that do him? 9th-level spells are more combat-potent--as are 8th-leve, and 7th-level. You don't always have to use a maximum-level spell slot to wipe out the enemy; a wizard can go through his *high*-level spell slots, and they'll be more effective than the psion's high-level powers, too; it doesn't matter that he's occasionally using an 8th-level spell, it just matters that he's using up all of his best ones.

Ramza00
2007-07-31, 10:39 PM
Not necessarily. A psion can pour all their daily power points into level 9 powers, while a caster is limited by their actual number of level 9 slots. A level 17 specialist wizard with 30 Int has 3 level-9 spell slots; a level 17 psion with 30 Int can manifest 9th-level powers 17 times during the day.
Have you compared 9th lvl powers side by side to 9th lvl spells? If so you would notice the 9th lvl powers are more limited and not as powerful. Just because they are both 9th lvl doesn't make them equal.

BardicDuelist
2007-07-31, 10:45 PM
Admittedly (even though I rarely use either of those books) they are more well balanced than the current magic system. It is harder to break. If the thematic elements suit you (which they probably would in ECS), they work really well. I personally don't care for them, but it has nothing to do with balance issues.

Stephen_E
2007-07-31, 10:50 PM
If you only have two encounters a day the Psionic can pump his manifester level in pts into each and every use of his powers. The Mage can't match that. There are also other features regarding pre-chosen spells and choose the power you want that also help the Psionisist in this situation.

This takes nothing away from Psionics been better constructed than magic, but it designed to be equivalent to magic at a set elvel of encounters per day. If you shift these down or up it becomes more or less powerful than the mage. Not necessarily to broken levels, but basically more in most campaigns IME, more powerful (of course when combined with people forgetting or ignoring the limit on pts spent per use, and things become horribly broken).

Stephen

Rachel Lorelei
2007-07-31, 10:53 PM
If you only have two encounters a day the Psionic can pump his manifester level in pts into each and every use of his powers. The Mage can't match that. There are also other features regarding pre-chosen spells and choose the power you want that also help the Psionisist in this situation.
For two encounters a day, the mage could use nothing but his two highest spell levels. I'm not sure why the fact that the psion is manifesting *9th* not *8th* level powers is important, since they're still weaker... the point is, neither of them needs to hold back in any way.

Stephen_E
2007-07-31, 11:45 PM
For two encounters a day, the mage could use nothing but his two highest spell levels. I'm not sure why the fact that the psion is manifesting *9th* not *8th* level powers is important, since they're still weaker... the point is, neither of them needs to hold back in any way.

What about the 3rd lrv Psion/Wiz comparison.
At 7th lev, 10th lev ecetre.
Why do you focus on just 20th level builds?

Lets look at an 8th lev Wizard, non-specalist, 20 Int.
3 4th, 4 3rd, 4 2nd, 6 1st.

Psion, 8th lev, 20 Int
78 power pts.

At a conservative estimate we'll say 2/3rds of the Wiz's spells at each level are significantly useful in one of the two encounter situations (I'm assuming a non-blaster mage. It gets worse for other reasons if we compare blaster mages vs Psions).
So in the 2 encounters he can cast 2x4th lev spells,
3x3rd lev, 3x2nd and 4x1st.

The Psion can use any of his powers at max str 9 times with 6 pts left (you can actually do better if you have the ability to take ability damage to gain additional pts). Because he choose the power and then boosts it to his limit the Psion can ussually find a power to use that is going to be on the high side of effective.

So basically the Mage equals the Psion for the 1st encounter (5 rounds = 2x4th, 3x3rd) and gets left behind on the 2nd encounter.

Stephen

tainsouvra
2007-08-01, 12:17 AM
So basically the Mage equals the Psion for the 1st encounter (5 rounds = 2x4th, 3x3rd) and gets left behind on the 2nd encounter. Do your 8th-level non-blaster Wizards honestly use 2 fourth-level and 3 third-level spells all on a single encounter? :smalleek: That's two, maybe three encounters worth of spells, by my reckoning.

lord_khaine
2007-08-01, 04:07 AM
you are forgetting a few issues here, first of all that when you isnt trying to nuke things, then spells are a bit more efficient at making your opponents suck.
and that wizards generally gets better millage out of their low lv buff spells than psions, who have to work a bit harder to protect themself.

Roderick_BR
2007-08-01, 02:37 PM
ToB is a lot stronger than any normal melee character (barring CodZillas) and can unbalance the game if the others players are playing fighters and monks with only the core books. Their main force is the ability to use their abilities all day long.

Psyonics... I didn't read it yet, but a friend claimed that he could make a character that can defeat any mage. I need to check the book and then see if he isn't misinterpreting the rules again.

selfcritical
2007-08-01, 02:40 PM
ToB is a lot stronger than any normal melee character (barring CodZillas) and can unbalance the game if the others players are playing fighters and monks with only the core books. Their main force is the ability to use their abilities all day long.

Psyonics... I didn't read it yet, but a friend claimed that he could make a character that can defeat any mage. I need to check the book and then see if he isn't misinterpreting the rules again.

You can definately make a melee character with XPH that can eat the Frenzied Berserker for lunch.

tainsouvra
2007-08-01, 03:02 PM
Psyonics... I didn't read it yet, but a friend claimed that he could make a character that can defeat any mage. I need to check the book and then see if he isn't misinterpreting the rules again. I have no doubt that he is doing one or both of these:
1) Misinterpreting the rules.
2) Dramatically underestimating the resources of an arcane spellcaster.

Players boasting of power are quite often comparing a specialized, prepared, and optimized character against a vague, unprepared, and unoptimized opponent--in other words, a worthless comparison in the first place. Take it with a grain of salt.

mudbunny
2007-08-01, 03:39 PM
Psyonics... I didn't read it yet, but a friend claimed that he could make a character that can defeat any mage. I need to check the book and then see if he isn't misinterpreting the rules again.

You could probably pick any class and create a character that would be able to defeat any specific other character. However, if you are optimized vs a specific class, I can guarantee that you are well below optimum against another character class.