Book of 9 Swords question

[KnightOfV]

Preparing for a new campaign where the DM is planning on encounters being more of a 'hit and run' city-based style then your typical hack n' slash dungeon. I'm basing a character concept around a 9 section whip (DM gave me permission to stat basically as a spiked chain but warned that I was inviting disaster on crit fumbles )

Was thinking about trying to pull this off with a fighter/monk tripper build, but then glanced over 9 swords on a whim.

Big question was, Swordsage looks appealing but am a little confused with the so called preferred weapons in a style. Shadow Hand is the only one that has spiked chain as a 'preferred weapon'. Does this mean I can't perform Setting Sun or Iron Heart maneuvers with the chain, and have to switch to a thematically appropriate weapon first? Or does the preferred weapon thing just apply for bonuses such as for feats like Blade Meditation? This is my first time considering a character with 9 Swords and I'm trying to figure out the basics, and I'm looking for any help I can find. A page number in the book where they clarify this would be appreciated also. Thanks playgrounders!

[NEO|Phyte]

Only certain specific things (mostly feats) require favored weapons.

[tyckspoon]

Favored weapons mostly apply to the school-related feats; for example, to enjoy the use of Shadow Blade (grants Dex to damage while in a Shadow Hand stance) you must also be using a Shadow Blade weapon. The maneuvers themselves can be performed with whatever weapons you want.

[averagejoe]

The maneuvers themselves can be performed with whatever weapons you want.

So long as they are capable of performing the correct type of attack that maneuver requires (melee, for example).

[KnightOfV]

Thanks for quick responses! Cool, so I could use Setting Sun trip/throws with the chain as well as more damaging strikes from other schools, but I can still take feats to specialize with Shadow Hand/spiked chain synergy. Very helpful, I'm liking Swordsage more and more. Definitely will work better than a vanilla tripper build.

[Rainbownaga]

The problem with tripping with a chain is that the range with most of those tripping techniques is 'touch' rather than 'attack'.

The TOB doesn't explain what this means, but trying to use a meteor throw with a spiked chain would be like trying to shocking grasp with a dagger. In other words it doesn't work.

[ZeroNumerous]

The TOB doesn't explain what this means, but trying to use a meteor throw with a spiked chain would be like trying to shocking grasp with a dagger. In other words it doesn't work.

Duskblade. Daggerspell Mage. Spellstoring Dagger.

[Rainbownaga]

Duskblade. Daggerspell Mage. Spellstoring Dagger.

Exactly, you need a special feature to do it. Unfortunately their are no special features I am aware of to channel maneuvers through weapons.

[Pluto]

The TOB doesn't explain what this means, but trying to use a meteor throw with a spiked chain would be like trying to shocking grasp with a dagger. In other words it doesn't work.

Eh. Most of a tripper's action happens on the other guy's turn.

It's the same principle as the gish with the polearm: use your standard action to cast a spell/initiate a maneuver, use the targets' actions to deal weapon damage.

[DragoonWraith]

If your DM is open to homebrew, you might consider using my Chthonic Serpent discipline - it's designed around whips and chains and other soft weapons.

Though I worry about the "crit fumbles" rule. Crit fumbles are already a "melee can't have nice things" type feature, and it sounds like your DM doesn't like spiked chains and is going to punish you for using them by making the crit fumbles worse. I obviously have no real knowledge of the situation, but that's what it sounds like to me, and I'd be very wary of that.

[Ecalsneerg]

Additionally, ask him if he plans to enforce critical fumbles on iterative attacks. If so, I'd also ask why a level 1 Warblade is only a quarter as likely to fumble as the level 20 Warblade who should really know better.

[Emmerask]

So if there is a crit fumble table in place we can assume that there will be a crit hit table too? if so a crit build is very nice and powerfull.

I think the tattooed monk has a reroll tattoo which would be a decent countermeasure to crit fumbles ;)
so perhaps swordsage/tattooed monk/shadow sun ninja?

/edit and don´t listen to those carebears crit and fumble tables are fun

[Kaiyanwang]

So if there is a crit fumble table in place we can assume that there will be a crit hit table too?

This is a good point. If you introduce a rule making the PCs having the chance to make a mess with an hit, they should be likely to make a masterpiece with 20, 20, hit, and one-shotting the BBEG.

[Eloel]

Crit Fumbles 'can' be fun. If you have to confirm them.

So, if you roll a 1, you auto-miss. Then you roll again. If the reroll also misses (by any amount), you crit-fumble.

Kinda 'the other way around' for critical hits.

[Emmerask]

Crit Fumbles 'can' be fun. If you have to confirm them.

So, if you roll a 1, you auto-miss. Then you roll again. If the reroll also misses (by any amount), you crit-fumble.

Kinda 'the other way around' for critical hits.

Yes thats how we use crit fumbles as well

[Yuki Akuma]

Crit Fumbles 'can' be fun. If you have to confirm them.

So, if you roll a 1, you auto-miss. Then you roll again. If the reroll also misses (by any amount), you crit-fumble.

Kinda 'the other way around' for critical hits.

You and I have very differing definitions of the word 'fun'.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

/edit and don´t listen to those carebears crit and fumble tables are fun

Lets save time: The 7 page thread on this topic from a week ago.

If you don't want to follow the link: The debate comes down to how often they come up, how severe they are, and whether they get more common as you level. Some people have dealt with "Roll a 1, then roll percentiles to see what body part you cut off."(I wish I was joking) Others deal with "Roll a 1, roll another dice, if it's 1, drop your weapon or similar effect". The argument is based entirely on personal experiences, and is generally useless. That said, Fumbles are another nerf to melee, and who wants that?

[Kaiyanwang]

You and I have very differing definitions of the word 'fun'.

Fun is very subjective. One could love the unpredictability of autokills and fumbles. Another one crit multipliers of x4, but not autokills. another one a more "flat" damage autput like 4th edition or 3.5 warlock.

Speaking for my experience, autokills and fumbles improved my games.

PCs don't understimate even the puny kobold, because can kill anyone with a lucky shot. This makes a world grittier, where draw a sword is something that lead to consequences.

Impredictable combat (slight PC optimization, strategy and tactics have their great place, but are not all) makes a pleasant adrenaline relase.

This lead to epic situations where a bad situation is resolved by a blow of the melee hero. Remember, with 20, 20, hit, the player is lucky, but the character is awesome. Is an additional chance of spotlight for meleers. I admit that in fumbles I'm more mercyful, but the fine-tuning of rules is a DM duty, IMHO.

Think about Isildur. Isn't that a 20, 20 hit on Sauron?

EDIT:

Lets save time: The 7 page thread on this topic from a week ago.

Missed. Thank you, I go to read.

[2xMachina]

Eh, it depends on the crit fumble table.

Some are fine. Lose 1 iterative attack/provoke AoO is balanced against normal crits, but some of the crazier ones suck.

EDIT: Double Ninja'ed!

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Fun is very subjective. One could love the unpredictability of autokills and fumbles. Another one crit multipliers of x4, but not autokills. another one a more "flat" damage autput like 4th edition or 3.5 warlock.

Speaking for my experience, autokills and fumbles improved my games.

PCs don't underestimate even the puny kobold, because can kill anyone with a lucky shot. This makes a world grittier, where draw a sword is something that lead to consequences.

Fumbles that are a 1-in-40 or smaller chance of coming up and simply provoke an AoO aren't the issue. Fumbles that make you auto-crit yourself, or cut off a limb(Gosh, hope you weren't TWF), or throw your weapon at an ally, those are the ones that people object to. And for some reason, I've seen a lot more of the second type than the first.

Once you get past that, then you can worry about the fact that you're hurting melee and making the weakest types of martial characters even weaker. And I'm still not sure what the benefit of Fumbles is, exactly.

[Kaiyanwang]

Once you get past that, then you can worry about the fact that you're hurting melee and making the weakest types of martial characters even weaker. And I'm still not sure what the benefit of Fumbles is, exactly.

I see your point. I admit that my fumbles are "lose the weapon", "hit a friend" and similar things, mainly, and are low chance. But consider about meleers:

- You can fumble with an attack spell too. And a sadistic DM can be really nasty in that case

- Consider fumbles mirrored by autokills rules - I was talking of them as a whole.

I guess I should continue to answer in the tread you posted - sorry for derailment.

[endoperez]

Fumbles that are a 1-in-40 or smaller chance of coming up and simply provoke an AoO aren't the issue.

I actually really like that mechanic! I agree that most fumbles aren't fun, but this is interesting, and looks like it could be useful for the players too.

[Emmerask]

I agree that crit fumble tables should in general boost melee chars and not lower their power for me this is done with crit tables (and crits are more likely to happen then fumbles).
But crit tables without crit fumbles would be not an option for me but I allways let my players vote if they want crit and fumble tables as of yet no group has not wanted mine after I explained the actual mechanics I use

[KnightOfV]

The problem with tripping with a chain is that the range with most of those tripping techniques is 'touch' rather than 'attack'.

The TOB doesn't explain what this means, but trying to use a meteor throw with a spiked chain would be like trying to shocking grasp with a dagger. In other words it doesn't work.

Thanks Rainbownaga for pointing that out, don't know how I missed that, there's always good ol' improved trip when I'm not using maneuvers I suppose. Still sounds like swordsage is the way to go.

And my amazement on how fast threads can get derailed will never cease. For whatever it's worth (which may not be much but this was my original post and I feel responsible for bringing it up) my DM's a fair guy and we have a crit fumble system that works for us that is usually more for comedy than mechanical impairment. Yea there's a chance I might smack myself in the back of the head with the chain and give everyone at the table a good laugh, but I'll also occasionally turn a nat 1 into a hit where I strike the enemy out of blind luck. We're a pretty lighthearted group and I doubt it'll be a problem.

[Optimystik]

Without further derailing the thread, I would enjoy crit fumbles as long as they apply to the baddies also and just result in HP damage or temporary penalties instead of disfigurement. (i.e. "You stumble and the chain slashes your own cheek" instead of "You stumble and are now missing a foot, apply a permanent penalty to your speed.")

Does it apply to natural weapons? How about weapons you can mentally control, like a Soulknife, or Eldritch Glaive, or Totemist stuff?

[FMArthur]

Isn't failing a roll enough? It just makes me think of an innately hostile game world when I play with such rules. Like fate itself wants you to fail as hard as possible. Worse, both the people I played using critical failures also made any d20 roll capable of critical failure and made up what went wrong.

And you could never tell beforehand what might happen when you fail at something. Sometimes it was "you forget about the rope in your hands and fall for minor damage", sometimes it was "you pee in his face by accident" and sometimes it was just "oops, you rolled a 1 on your balance check. Poor clipping mechanics cause you to fall through the floor forever".

Needless to say, I am horrified by the idea more from faulty past experience than from the real mechanics behind it.