PDA

View Full Version : Martial Adepts



Twilight Jack
2007-10-08, 11:46 AM
Alright boyos and lovelies, I just wrapped my fingers around the Tome of Battle and I've quite enjoyed what I'm seeing. I've a couple questions for the crunchier amongst you, however.

I've seen much ado about the distilled awesome that is the Warblade, but not much on the relative power of the Crusader and Swordsage. I'd love to see a discussion conducted by the min/maxiest of all the forumgoers, comparing and contrasting the strengths and weaknesses of all three classes against each other and the strengths of the Core warrior classes (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger).

Anyone who posts that all warriors suck and that "Wizerds (or CoDzillas) are teh ROXXOR!!!11onehundredeleven!!" will be sacked. This discussion is for the benefit of Mr. Kite, who would like to play a character that swings a sword.

Crow
2007-10-08, 11:48 AM
Well, as first one to respond to this thread...

Is that David Bowie in your avatar?

Twilight Jack
2007-10-08, 11:56 AM
No. It's originally a pencil sketch of Jonathan Rhys-Myers, in the role of Brian Slade from the movie Velvet Goldmine. It's been slightly modified in Photoshop for my purposes, which is to depict Twilight Jack, a character I play in a long-running Mutants and Masterminds game as well as a general role-playing alter ego in numerous online multiplayer games in which I've taken part.

doorknobdeity
2007-10-08, 11:56 AM
if I wanted to watch animu I'd watch dragonballz

Seriously, I like it. The crusader I'd consider a bit weak, because of the unreliable recovery mechanic: you just can't count on having access to the right maneuver at the right time. The swordsage pretty much demands the Adaptive Style feat, which kind of sucks, and the lower BAB makes some high-level maneuvers (the 9th level Diamond Mind one, for example) less useful than they would be for a warblade. Other than that, I don't think they're weak, just require a bit more planning.

KIDS
2007-10-08, 12:00 PM
I actually consider Crusader and Swordsage the stronger of the three; Warblade looks nice on paper, and is strong, but those two have more options and better survivability despite that famed d12 HD. All 3 are quite powerful, though.

And oh yes, fighters suck. Wait, no... (kidding)...

Twilight Jack
2007-10-08, 12:15 PM
Actually, my biggest problem(s) with the Warblade come in the flavor. The whole "seeker of personal glory" angle really restricts the possible concepts available to the character. It seems more suited to a prestige class than a base class. It's different when you're talking about bards or druids or paladins or any of the other core classes. Their flavor is directly tied to their mechanical concept. You can't be a paladin without being dedicated to the causes of law and good, because that's what a paladin is. With the warblade, though, the flavor is incidental to the concept. You could easily create a warblade who didn't fit this mold.

I also have a bit of an issue with Intelligence being the stat that boosts all the warblade's abilities, as I think Wisdom would be the better choice for the kind of preternatural combat sense those abilities describe (or even Charisma, if you wanted to tie the flavor of personal glory into the concept more strongly). In the same way, I would prefer that the swordsage used Intelligence instead of Wisdom, to give him some distance from the monk from which the class is so obviously adapted and also to reinforce the idea of someone who comes by their skills through tireless study (like a wizard does).

Brawls
2007-10-08, 12:45 PM
Actually, my biggest problem(s) with the Warblade come in the flavor. The whole "seeker of personal glory" angle really restricts the possible concepts available to the character. It seems more suited to a prestige class than a base class. It's different when you're talking about bards or druids or paladins or any of the other core classes. Their flavor is directly tied to their mechanical concept. You can't be a paladin without being dedicated to the causes of law and good, because that's what a paladin is. With the warblade, though, the flavor is incidental to the concept. You could easily create a warblade who didn't fit this mold.

I also have a bit of an issue with Intelligence being the stat that boosts all the warblade's abilities, as I think Wisdom would be the better choice for the kind of preternatural combat sense those abilities describe (or even Charisma, if you wanted to tie the flavor of personal glory into the concept more strongly). In the same way, I would prefer that the swordsage used Intelligence instead of Wisdom, to give him some distance from the monk from which the class is so obviously adapted and also to reinforce the idea of someone who comes by their skills through tireless study (like a wizard does).

WRT your first point, I am in complete agreement. I think the 'seeker of glory' tag is completely incidental to the actual class. I will be multi-classing my character from Fighter 6 to Warblade next level. Given his backstory and his character concept focused on honor/shame society, I am not using the idea of personal glory as a motivation. Instead, I will be playing him as unconsciously being interested in demonstrating the superiority of his Master's fighting style (resulting from his hero worship). As I said, I will try to play this as something he is almost not aware of consciously, but that influences certain RP and combat situations.

WRT your second point, I'm not so sure about the stat basis for the classes. I can see you point, but I don't find myself reacting strongly one way or the other. For my character, it is an Intelligence-based class progression. For him, he now has the combat experience to start putting some of his Master's esoteric teachings in perspective and is begining to 'figure out' manuevers and stances and how they actually work in combat. If it were Swordsage that was based on Int, he would be multi-classing to that class. He will be focusing primarily on Diamond Mind, and while I don't plan on using the "Battle of Wills" aspect of the class, it provides a little fluff that goes along with the tactical warrior, that uses intelligence as well as his physical presence to win conflicts.

PS - I thought it was Bowie as well.

Brawls

Mr. Friendly
2007-10-08, 12:50 PM
I like it, it has some neat stuff.

I think of the three martial classes, the rank would be this for me:


Crusader
Warblade
Swordsage


Not that I think the Swordsage is bad, just that it takes a lot of finesse and multiclass to make it the killing machine it needs to be.

Truthfully the Crusader and Warblade are more or less even in terms of power, I give the edge to Crusader though because I like randomness.

As to how they compare to Core... you should have included the Monk in your list.

Here is my comparative breakdown:

Crusader, Paladin and Ranger are all more or less equal. You can talk smack about all of them, but compared to the other choices on the field (with the exception of Monk and Swordsage) they have the best scaling power. At high levels each is fearsome in their own way. They get Tier 1.

Barbarian and Warblade I would say are at Tier 2 because they scale pretty well, they are good classes and you can ride them the whole way to 20, yet they lack the versatility of the above classes and multiclassing seems required.

Tier 2.5 is Monks and Swordsages; they are both excellent classes without a doubt, but multiclassing also seems needed and they are both difficult classes to play well. They are also very heavily MAD. (Multiple Attibute Dependant) Not that the Tier 1 classes are not MAD also, but their versatilty and stand aloneness mitigates that. They are great classes when you are guaranteed superb stats.

Lastly is the lowly Fighter at Tier 3. Bottom of the barrel, this is the class that all the above classes multiclass to for 1, 2 or (rarely) 4 levels and never return. So, in it's own way, it is the best class, since everyone stops by for a level (and more important a feat) or two. It totally lacks versatility (generally; you can build a "generic" non-specialized character, however you will be outdone at all things be everyone else) and it has no real motivation for taking the class to 20.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-10-08, 12:54 PM
What does the Swordsage need? He takes either Strength and Wisdom or Dexterity and Wisdom, with CON secondary. Shadow Blade means that you can make a Swordsage with just one high attribute, really.

And swordsages are so much better than monks it's not even funny.

Mr. Friendly
2007-10-08, 12:57 PM
What does the Swordsage need? He takes either Strength and Wisdom or Dexterity and Wisdom, with CON secondary. Shadow Blade means that you can make a Swordsage with just one high attribute, really.

And swordsages are so much better than monks it's not even funny.

I don't know. I watched a Swordsage in our group miss all the time even with Shadow Blade, so I am a bit sour on the Swordsages skills.

Darrin
2007-10-08, 12:58 PM
I actually consider Crusader and Swordsage the stronger of the three; Warblade looks nice on paper, and is strong, but those two have more options and better survivability despite that famed d12 HD. All 3 are quite powerful, though.


In practice, I believe the Crusader comes out as the strongest pure tank. The ability to attack and heal in the same action, combined with their delayed damage mechanic makes them incredibly tough to wear down. Their automatic recovery mechanic also means they never run out of maneuvers or have to waste a full or swift action to recover. Their only real downside is the limited number of disciplines to choose from, and most of their available strikes restrict them to a single attack per round. As a single combatant they make the best AoO/battlefield control specialists, but even that's chump change compared to the havoc they can unleash in a group.

The SwordSage is probably the weakest of the three martial adepts, mostly because of the average BAB, but it's hard to tell because they get so many friggin' maneuvers. Or maybe it's not that they are weaker but just harder to play effectively, since they require a lot more thought put into managing their maneuvers/combos. They are so flexible, they can do just about anything... figuring out what that "anything" is is generally the tough part. The one thing they don't do so well is tanking, but if you're looking for something other than a front-line fighter, chances are good that SwordSage will get you there faster than Crusader or Warblade.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-10-08, 01:13 PM
I don't know. I watched a Swordsage in our group miss all the time even with Shadow Blade, so I am a bit sour on the Swordsages skills.

Well, uh, you're supposed to take Weapon Finesse to go with your Shadow Blade.

At lower levels, the Finesse/TWF/Shadow Blade Swordsage moves in, gets two attacks with Wolf Fang Strike + Burning Blade, with +WIS to damage on them if he's level 4+. At higher ones, he can start fights with Pouncing Charge + Dancing Mongoose, getting six attacks at level 10 or so with WIS to damage on each one, using Dex for both attack and damage.

Oh, and between their high AC and Child of Shadow they can tank *just* fine. :smallsmile:

I'd say that Swordsages are better than they look and Warblades look great but aren't really quite as good as the other two (although they are plenty good in their own right).

Kaelik
2007-10-08, 01:13 PM
ToB is excellent.

Crusader/Warblade/ and Swordsage are the three best melee classes.

Not only are they more powerful, but they also have more options.

Crusaders when built right cannot die. They make excellent tanky/control characters.

Warblades are good versions of fighters. They can be useful even on a standard action, and they can survive better as well.

Swordsages are amazing. Using Shadow Hand they can do amazing things usually reserved for casters. Effective flight or Dimension Door? Yes please. Or use the unarmed strike variant and setting sun maneuvers to be what the Monk should be.

As far as power/usefulness I would say

Swordsage
Crusader
Warblade
Ranger with Spell Compendium
Barbarian
Core Ranger
Paladin
Fighter
Monk

Kyeudo
2007-10-08, 01:23 PM
Crusaders are the energizer bunnies of the ToB, as someone much more awesome than I once said. They just keep smashing away every round with at least one manuver, maybe a manuver and a boost on their lucky turns. Just pick a pile of awesome manuvers and you'll be happy to get whatever you get. They also are the Charisma using ToB class.

Swordsages are like battle surgeons, using their manuvers to move around the battlefield, avoid damage, and inflict pain to the most important and most vulnerable parts of the battlefield. Playing a swordsage as a tank is like playing a wizard as a blaster: They can do alright, but they never reach their true power. Adaptive Style is to Swordsages what Wild Spell is to Druids, a chunk of awesome to be grabbed as soon as possible and used frequently. The Swordsage is the Wisdom using ToB class.

Warblades are like machine guns. They unleash a steady stream of fire is short bursts. Warblades are the middleground between the Crusader and the Swordsage. They are less tank-like, yet they are not the most highly mobile. The move between enemies and anihilate as they go. The Warblade is probably the easiest class of the ToB to learn to play well. Warblades are the Intelligence using ToB class.

I personaly prefer to play the solid warblade compared to the flighty swordsage, but each is composed of a different brand of sheer awesome. I'm never playing a paladin again, not when I could play a crusader.

Lord Tataraus
2007-10-08, 01:23 PM
In practice, I believe the Crusader comes out as the strongest pure tank. The ability to attack and heal in the same action, combined with their delayed damage mechanic makes them incredibly tough to wear down. Their automatic recovery mechanic also means they never run out of maneuvers or have to waste a full or swift action to recover. Their only real downside is the limited number of disciplines to choose from, and most of their available strikes restrict them to a single attack per round. As a single combatant they make the best AoO/battlefield control specialists, but even that's chump change compared to the havoc they can unleash in a group.

The SwordSage is probably the weakest of the three martial adepts, mostly because of the average BAB, but it's hard to tell because they get so many friggin' maneuvers. Or maybe it's not that they are weaker but just harder to play effectively, since they require a lot more thought put into managing their maneuvers/combos. They are so flexible, they can do just about anything... figuring out what that "anything" is is generally the tough part. The one thing they don't do so well is tanking, but if you're looking for something other than a front-line fighter, chances are good that SwordSage will get you there faster than Crusader or Warblade.

I agree with all that. From experience, the Swordsage is the toughest to pull off and really does need a lot of planning, but if you do it right it is an amazing hit-and-run guy as well as avoiding attack. Really, it has replaced monks completely in my book, especially with the unarmed variant. As for the Int synergy for Warblades vs. Wis synergy that Swordsages have, I have this to say: The Warblade is a warrior who has trained for years and perfected his art by an equal amount of studying and physical practice. The Swordsage learns in a more mystic manner, seeing his art as a connection to something spiritual, much like the monk. That's what I see as the reasoning, Warblade is like a wizard who needs to study, while the Swordsage is like a sorcerer who has it in him and needs to focus to let his power out.

Rachel Lorelei
2007-10-08, 01:31 PM
Swordsages are like battle surgeons, using their manuvers to move around the battlefield, avoid damage, and inflict pain to the most important and most vulnerable parts of the battlefield.
They can be. They can also be tanky damage dealers.


Playing a swordsage as a tank is like playing a wizard as a blaster: They can do alright, but they never reach their true power. Adaptive Style is to Swordsages what Wild Spell is to Druids, a chunk of awesome to be grabbed as soon as possible and used frequently. The Swordsage is the Wisdom using ToB class.
I think that Swordsages are as good at being straightforward tanks as at being "battle surgeons". This applies to both STR-based and DEX-based swordsages. And if you add two Psychic Warrior levels for access to Force Screen dorjes and extra powers, they're -awesome- tanks. D8 is just 1 HP/level less than D10. The Swordsage's extra AC, better overall saves, and potential concealment (Child of Shadow) makes up for it.