Knight Build Feats (3.5 and PF)

[OGDojo]

So im building a Knight who's whole job is to stop opponents from getting past him and make it very hard for them to attack his allys.

i have most of his progress up to level 11 figured out but im having issues with what comes after. i want him to do decent damage but his main focus is to stop people and just be annoying as hell.

He wields a Kusari-Gama and a heavy steel shield and uses the kusarigama's reach to trip and impede opponents doing damage and stopping them in their tracks.
i would like to have my character planned to level 20 just in case my DM plans on making it a longer campaign. do you have any suggestions on feats from level 12-20 (Also im using the pathfinder feat progression so please keep that in mind) im allowed to use pathfinder AND D&D 3.5 feats
he has "Balanced" on his Kusari Gama and with monkey grip it should allow him to wield a size Huge Kusari gama allowing for a 2d6 damage output plus strength.
he also has bracers of Greater reach (basically doubles his reach, Magic item, probably in the magic item compendium) so that his threatened radius is closer to 30-40 feet.

Any suggestions?
Human Knight:
5d6 reroll 1s and 2s: 18 18 16 17 18 18 (rolled Really good)
Flaws: shakey and inattentive
Mutations: Ability decay -4 cha, powerful Build, second wind Minor
weapon: Balanced Gargantuan Kusari-Gama. 3d6 +str.

Feats so far by Level.
1. Marial Stance (Devoted Spirit)
1. Martial Study (Iron Guards Glare)
1. EWP KusariGama
1. Combat Reflexes
3. Monkey Grip
5. Combat Expertise
5. Quick Draw (Bonus From knight)
7. Improved Trip
9. Stand Still
10. Endurance (Bonus From Knight)
11. Hold the line
13. Step up
15. Press The Wall
15. Die Hard (Bonus from Knight)
17. Reach Defense
19. Saving Shield

[PraxisVetli]

So im building a Knight who's whole job is to stop opponents from getting past him and make it very hard for them to attack his allys.

i have most of his progress up to level 11 figured out but im having issues with what comes after. i want him to do decent damage but his main focus is to stop people and just be annoying as hell.

He wields a Kusari-Gama and a heavy steel shield and uses the kusarigama's reach to trip and impede opponents doing damage and stopping them in their tracks.
i would like to have my character planned to level 20 just in case my DM plans on making it a longer campaign. do you have any suggestions on feats from level 12-20 (Also im using the pathfinder feat progression so please keep that in mind) im allowed to use pathfinder AND D&D 3.5 feats
he has "Balanced" on his Kusari Gama and with monkey grip it should allow him to wield a size Huge Kusari gama allowing for a 2d6 damage output plus strength.
he also has bracers of Greater reach (basically doubles his reach, Magic item, probably in the magic item compendium) so that his threatened radius is closer to 30-40 feet.

Any suggestions?

Feats so far:
Marial Stance (Devoted Spirit)
Martial Study (Iron Guards Glare)
EWP KusariGama
Combat Reflexes
Monkey Grip
Powerful Build
Quick Draw
Stand Still
Hold the Line
Bodyguard

The DMG2 has the Sudden Stunning enchantment, for a cheap 2000gp add the ability to trigger a Ref (10+½ level +Cha mod) vs Stun for 1d4+1 rounds, your Cha mod/day.
It's pretty solid.

[Anthrowhale]

Combat Expertise(a prereq, but also handy) + Improved Trip(+4 to trip attempts, free attack on trip) + Knockdown (=free trip attempt on 10+damage) seems worth considering.

[liquidformat]

what race and classes are you?

[Crow_Nightfeath]

Could continue bodyguard into "In Harm's Way", basically you take an attack for an adjacent ally
Pathfinder toughness is worth noting too, because it's +1hp/lv
Combat expertise -> improved trip/improved disarm/etc.
Reposte, where if someone tries to attack, while you are actually using combat expertise, and they miss, you get an attack of opportunity on them. It doesn't say it needs to be a melee attack that misses.

I'm still looking for others

[OGDojo]

what race and classes are you?

i am a human Knight, with powerful build from using mutations

[ChaosStar]

1. Marial Stance (Devoted Spirit)
1. Martial Study (Iron Guards Glare)


These two need to be switched. Martial Stance requires Martial Study. Also Knight isn't an Initiator class so yo can't take Martial Study at 1st.

[OGDojo]

These two need to be switched. Martial Stance requires Martial Study. Also Knight isn't an Initiator class so yo can't take Martial Study at 1st.

it doesnt note that as a prerequisite, but i did switch them on my sheet, i noticed the mistake but its more i knew that i needed both so i have both. but yeah it says nowhere that the class needs to be an "Initiator class" in order for me to take it at first level.

the prerequisite for the second is that you must have the first, so taking them both at level 1 should be possible

[ChaosStar]

it doesnt note that as a prerequisite, but i did switch them on my sheet, i noticed the mistake but its more i knew that i needed both so i have both. but yeah it says nowhere that the class needs to be an "Initiator class" in order for me to take it at first level.

the prerequisite for the second is that you must have the first, so taking them both at level 1 should be possible

1 level of non-Initiator classes(every base class except Crusader, Swordsage, and Warblade) counts as 1/2 for getting Maneuvers. If you don't have 2 levels in a non-Initiator class than you don't even count as having 1 level to take maneuvers. Also each maneuver would be a 1/encounter power if you don't have any levels in an Initiator class.

[Crow_Nightfeath]

Well with Martial Study it's a big debate whether or not that feat allows you to take it at level one. About half the people say you can and half day you can't, and there's no official ruling. It would be a thing up to the DM at this point.

[Mr Adventurer]

You might be able to take the feat, but Table 3-1 in the Tome of Battle is quite clear about initiatior level minimums to select manoeuvres.

[AnimeTheCat]

You might be able to take the feat, but Table 3-1 in the Tome of Battle is quite clear about initiatior level minimums to select manoeuvres.

I think it's fine personally and according to RAW. The table you're referencing is called "Highest-Level Maneuvers Known". The section "Multiclass Characters" says,


If you are a multiclass martial adept and you learn a new maneuver by attaining a new level in a martial adept class, determine your initiator level by adding together your level in that class +1/2 your levels in all other classes. Look up the results on the table below to determine the highest-level maneuver you can take. You still have to mee a maneuver's prerequisite to learn it.

I bolded an extra part becuase this wording leads me to think that your initiator level isn't a prerequisite for learning a maneuver. This is further supported by the maneuver descriptions actually having a section labeled "Prerequisites" such as with Firey Assault which has a prerequisite of 2 desert wind maneuvers.

Furthermore, I don't think that the table applies to characters that don't have martial adept class levels. The reason I think this is because the text of the feat Martial Study makes a specific and distinct differentiation between a character with martial adept level and without, even going so far as to describe how a character without interacts with suddenly getting additional maneuvers via class levels that are not swordsage, warblade, or crusader. The feat says,


Select any maneuver from the chose discipline for which you meet the prerequisite. If you have Martial Adept levels, this maneuver becomes one of your maneuvers known. If you do not have martial adept levels, you can use this maneuver once per encounter as a martial adept with an initiator level equal to 1/2 your character level.


Because the Fighter, Knight, Barbarian, Rogue, etc. do not have any martial adept levels, the maneuver doesn't become one of their "Maneuvers Known" meaning that they don't have to follow the strict guidelines put forward by that table. That is, the table is non-applicable to them because they don't have any maneuvers known. A Warblade, Swordsage, or Crusader, is bound to that table, but it's ok because they have full initiator levels and will progress more quickly anyway and don't have this problem to begin with, even at level 1. It really balances out quite nicely.

In the case of a level 1 fighter taking the feat and selecting a maneuver, they are effectively a level 0 initiator for the purpose of determining the effects of the maneuver. This means that maneuvers such as Crusader's Strike would only heal 1d6 damage, because you have no initiator level to add to it. This can potentially make some maneuvers useless, but since you don't have any maneuvers known, you are limited in the same way that a martial adept is.

Ultimately, I think this is ok. You have one use per battle, and there are really no maneuvers in the book that don't have prerequisites that are actually so great that they can end an encounter in a single use. Especially not in the same way that a wizard can with a single level 1 spell in some cases. Rather, maneuvers are typically single target abilities and are rarely disruptive to the battlefield.

In short, since the table references Highest-Level Maneuvers Known, and since characters without martial adept levels don't have a maneuvers known, nor does the feat give them a maneuvers known table or anything, characters without martial adept levels aren't bound by the same level restrictions as characters with martial adept levels. All they need is to meet the prerequisites listed in the maneuver's description in chapter 4 of Tome of Battle.

[OGDojo]

I think it's fine personally In short, since the table references Highest-Level Maneuvers Known, and since characters without martial adept levels don't have a maneuvers known, nor does the feat give them a maneuvers known table or anything, characters without martial adept levels aren't bound by the same level restrictions as characters with martial adept levels. All they need is to meet the prerequisites listed in the maneuver's description in chapter 4 of Tome of Battle.

This acutally cleared up ALOT of misconceptions for me cuz i honestly thought i was going to have to redo my whole character and feat tree and this saved me alot of time, thank you!!

[AnimeTheCat]

This acutally cleared up ALOT of misconceptions for me cuz i honestly thought i was going to have to redo my whole character and feat tree and this saved me alot of time, thank you!!

Just remember that I described my interpretation based on how I've read the rules. If your DM decides otherwise, just go with it and have fun.

[Mr Adventurer]

Seems like a misreading that leads to a counter-intuitive result, to me. It gives non-martial adepts earlier access to manoeuvres than actual martial adepts. Witness also the manoeuvres above 1st level that have no other manoeuvres as prerequisites. Do I understand that this interpretation allows non-martial adepts, and only non-martial adepts, to gain these at character level 1 with the feat?

[AnimeTheCat]

Seems like a misreading that leads to a counter-intuitive result, to me. It gives non-martial adepts earlier access to manoeuvres than actual martial adepts. Witness also the manoeuvres above 1st level that have no other manoeuvres as prerequisites. Do I understand that this interpretation allows non-martial adepts, and only non-martial adepts, to gain these at character level 1 with the feat?

Yep. It's hardly the strangest thing the 3.5 rules have to offer though.

[Mr Adventurer]

So it's a purposeful misreading, OK.

[StevenC21]

As far as I can tell, it is RAW.

So yes. It is just a very strange rule. But it is RAW.

[AnimeTheCat]

So it's a purposeful misreading, OK.

It's not a misreading at all. Show me where non martial adepts have a "maneuvers known", or show me where the feat Martial Study grants them a maneuvers known. If a class doesn't have or isn't granted a very specifically worded feature, how exactly are they bound to rules for that class feature? "Maneuvers Known" is a class feature of the Crusader, Swordsage, and Warblade. It has written rules in the class descriptions and is identified on their class table. All other classes, except for prestige classes that grant them, do not have that information included. Lastly, because of the wording of the section that has that table in it, as well as the wording of the section that discusses prerequisites, I don't think this is an intentional misreading, but rather a logical and correct reading of a potentially poorly written rule.

[ChaosStar]

it's not a misreading at all. Show me where non martial adepts have a "maneuvers known", or show me where the feat martial study grants them a maneuvers known. If a class doesn't have or isn't granted a very specifically worded feature, how exactly are they bound to rules for that class feature? "maneuvers known" is a class feature of the crusader, swordsage, and warblade. It has written rules in the class descriptions and is identified on their class table. All other classes, except for prestige classes that grant them, do not have that information included. Lastly, because of the wording of the section that has that table in it, as well as the wording of the section that discusses prerequisites, i don't think this is an intentional misreading, but rather a logical and correct reading of a potentially poorly written rule.

That's not what he was taking about! Martial study doesn't let you have a 5th level Maneuver at Level 1 if you have no Initiator Levels! The Maneuver Level is in fact a prerequisite!

[AnimeTheCat]

That's not what he was taking about! Martial study doesn't let you have a 5th level Maneuver at Level 1 if you have no Initiator Levels! The Maneuver Level is in fact a prerequisite!

ok... so when you respond could you please not bold everything? It comes across as pretty rude. Also, when you respond could you actually point to what you're quoting in the rules that is making you state what you're stating?

You say that maneuver level is in fact a prerequisite. I think you mean initiator level, and I get why you may think that. But when you follow the logic train down what the rules as written say, only characters with levels in a martial adept class are bound to that, strictly rules as written speaking. Characters who do not have any levels in a martial adept class do not have any maneuvers known, therefore how are they bound to a table determining minimimum initiator level for maneuvers known. Where do the rules state that initiator level is a prerequisite? I emphasize that specific word because that word is used very specifically in maneuver descriptions.

[gkathellar]

Select any maneuver from the chosen discipline for which you meet the prerequisite.

SELECTING MARTIAL MANEUVERS
Much like spells, martial maneuvers are organized by level. Higher-level maneuvers are more powerful than lower-level ones. As you gain levels, you have the option to select higher-level maneuvers. Your level in a martial adept class determines the highest-level maneuvers you can select. For example, a 5th-level warblade can select maneuvers of 3rd level or lower.

PREREQUISITE
In addition to meeting the class and level requirements before you can learn a maneuver, you must meet a certain set of requirements to be able to choose that maneuver as one you know.

Emphasis mine in all cases.

The RAW here isn't good by any means - it takes three quotations from three different pages to make the case for the obvious, intuitive RAI - but this is one of those occasions where a fairly strict reading does lead us to a pretty transparent conclusion.

The only really asinine reading I can make a case for is that non-martial adepts can't select any maneuvers at all, since, "Your level in a martial adept class determines the highest-level maneuvers you can select." However, the table that then clarifies that remark uses the term "Initiator Level," so that's pretty clearly blown out of the water.

[AnimeTheCat]

Emphasis mine in all cases.

The RAW here isn't good by any means - it takes three quotations from three different pages to make the case for the obvious, intuitive RAI - but this is one of those occasions where a fairly strict reading does lead us to a pretty transparent conclusion.

I think you're emphasizing the wrong part in the "Prerequisites" paragraph. The beginning part, "In addition to meeting the class and level requirements" is NOT what is specifically labled as a Prerequisite. Later on in that very sentence it describes what the prerequisites are by saying "you must meet a certain set of requirements". That certain set of requirements is what is being labeled as the specific Prerequisite in the case of maneuvers. My reasoning on this is purely due to how the maneuver descriptions are written. Take the Desert Wind maneuver Desert Tempest for example. It lists quite specifically as follows:



Level: Swordsage 6
Prerequisite:Two Desert Wind maneuvers
Initiation Action: 1 Full-Round Action
Range: Personal
Target: You

(emphasis mine, though it is bolded in the book. I suppose "un"emphasis mine?)

Now, in the description, you clearly see what the prerequisite is. The Prerequisite is labeld as "Two Desert Wind maneuvers". Having those two maneuvers is the "certain set of requirements" discussed in the Prerequisites paragraph. This is combined with the specific wording of the Martial Study feat. The Martial Study feat only says "select any maneuver from the chosen discipline for which you meet the prerequisite." At this precise moment, the playing field is level for both Martial Adepts and non Martial Adepts. If this is where it ended, there would be no problems and both could take maneuvers of any level, so long as they meet that prerequisite line in the maneuver description. Things change later in that paragraph though because the feat goes on later to say "If you have Martial adept levels, this maneuver becomes one of your maneuvers known." Because of this line right here, martial adepts or any character with martial adept levels is restricted by their "Maneuvers Known" mechanic listed in their class entry. The feat goes on to describe how characters without martial adepts use this feat saying, "If you do not have Martial Adept levels, you can use this maneuver once per encounter as a martial adept with an initiator level equal to 1/2 your character level." The feat doesn't list your initiator level as a requirement for selecting the maneuver, but rather describes how you use the maneuver you selected (for maneuvers like Crusader Strike which adds your initiator level to the amount healed).


The only really asinine reading I can make a case for is that non-martial adepts can't select any maneuvers at all, since, "Your level in a martial adept class determines the highest-level maneuvers you can select." However, the table that then clarifies that remark uses the term "Initiator Level," so that's pretty clearly blown out of the water.

It does say initiator level, but that's because it's being referenced by both martial adepts AND multi-classed martial adepts, who would have an initiator level different from their class level. The table is still referencing a class ability Maneuvers Known that other classes (fighter, Barbarian, etc) don't have and that the Feat Martial Study don't give them. So it's really not clearly blown out of the water. The table sets rules for a class feature characters without levels in a martial adept class don't have and aren't given by any other source.

[OGDojo]

@AnimeTheCat @gkathellar
It seems to me more of a "Dm Ruling" thing because the wording isnt specific enough. the DM's that i have talked to about this basically said that they treat it like this

"the feat does not say that you cant take it at level 1, and no book states that you cant take a marial stance or strike at 1/2 initiator level, so therefore your initiator level for this instance is 1/2 (Minimum of 1) for the purposes of this feat."

At least that was the answer that i got from two Dms, one that has been playing for 25+ years and Dming for 24 years. the other who has been Dming for 10ish years. however if anyone knows someone from wizards that can make a definate ruling on this i would love to hear it :)