Arcane Swordsage?

[Zergrusheddie]

This almost seems like a joke. Tome of Battle has a blurb about making an Arcane Swordsage but doesn't really give any information on the class like what spells it can cast or what it's casting stat is.

I wish everyone the very best of Holidays.
-Eddie

[true_shinken]

This almost seems like a joke. Tome of Battle has a blurb about making an Arcane Swordsage but doesn't really give any information on the class like what spells it can cast or what it's casting stat is.

I wish everyone the very best of Holidays.
-Eddie

That's because the adaptation section is just a guideline for houserules. Adaptations are not full classes and tend to have problems - even Unarmed Swordsage, so frequently mentioned in this forum, doesn't get Improved Unarmed Strike and loses the Wis bonus to AC as written.

[Ernir]

It is, well, an unfinished suggestion for an ACF rather than an actual ACF. It is something you could fill in at your table.

Taking what little there is written at face value, it gets... seriously powerful. I don't recommend it.

The concept is workable, though. Just needs a significant amount of homebrew before it's an actual, playable variant.

[Coidzor]

So anyone seen someone share their take on it that seemed reasonable?

[Greenish]

even Unarmed Swordsage, so frequently mentioned in this forum, doesn't get Improved Unarmed Strike and loses the Wis bonus to AC as written.

Well, Unarmed Swordsage gets "Unarmed Strike, as a monk", and the description of "Unarmed Strike" for monk includes IUS:

Unarmed Strike
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. <snip>

As for armour, well, that'd probably gotten errataed had there been an errata. Besides, unarmed swordsage can wear leather or masterwork studded leather with no ill effects without even burning a feat on proficiency.

[Critical]

If the spell selection is strict, it can perform on-par with fellow ToB classes and simply make things more interesting and flavorful. If that condition is met, the class's especially good for E6. Speaking of which, check out my E6 Arcane Swordsage in my sig.

[Ernir]

So anyone seen someone share their take on it that seemed reasonable?

Douglas posted one that I really like.

[Godskook]

@OP, Arcane Swordsage is one of those options that most people don't want to even admit is there, since the RAW is so unbalanced and incomplete.

That's because the adaptation section is just a guideline for houserules. Adaptations are not full classes and tend to have problems - even Unarmed Swordsage, so frequently mentioned in this forum, doesn't get Improved Unarmed Strike and loses the Wis bonus to AC as written.

1.The problem with the AC bonus is not a problem with the UASS, but rather one with the Swordsage originally.

2.By RAW, the UASS *does* grant IUS, at first level. Greenish thief'd me.....

3.A dip into anything with armor proficiency(such as warblade or crusader) fixes the armor issue just fine.

4.Light(technically medium too, thanks to mithral) Armor with no ACP can be worn by a UASS by RAW to get his wisdom bonus back without taking *ANY* penalties, dipping, or buying the feat.

[true_shinken]

Well, Unarmed Swordsage gets "Unarmed Strike, as a monk", and the description of "Unarmed Strike" for monk includes IUS: As for armour, well, that'd probably gotten errataed had there been an errata. Besides, unarmed swordsage can wear leather or masterwork studded leather with no ill effects without even burning a feat on proficiency.

No, no. Unarmed Swordsage gains Monk's unarmed strike progression. The only thing that progresses is damage.

3.A dip into anything with armor proficiency(such as warblade or crusader) fixes the armor issue just fine.

4.Light(technically medium too, thanks to mithral) Armor with no ACP can be worn by a UASS by RAW to get his wisdom bonus back without taking *ANY* penalties, dipping, or buying the feat.

Of course you can work around that. The fact that you have to work around that makes it clear it's an issue.

[Coidzor]

No, no. Unarmed Swordsage gains Monk's unarmed strike progression. The only thing that progresses is damage.

Well, they're in the same boat as monks then, as the class they're cribbing the progression from is not explicitly proficient in Unarmed Strikes either.

[true_shinken]

Well, they're in the same boat as monks then, as the class they're cribbing the progression from is not explicitly proficient in Unarmed Strikes either.

Monks at least gain Improved Unarmed Strike, though.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Well, they're in the same boat as monks then, as the class they're cribbing the progression from is not explicitly proficient in Unarmed Strikes either.

Wrong, Monks are not proficient with US since their proficiencies says:
"Monks are proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling."

And the Simple Weapon Proficiency says:
"Special

All characters except for druids, monks, and wizards are automatically proficient with all simple weapons. They need not select this feat. "

Meanwhile the Swordsages do get simple weapon proficiency.



Also by RAW Shinken is right, the adaptation section only mentions unarmed strike progression, not the unarmed strike class feature, though I have never found a DM that insisted on me taking Improved Unarmed Strike to not provoke when using an Unarmed Strike. Yes it is a houserule, but an extremely common one.

[Coidzor]

Ok, so they're actually the opposite sides of the same coin then.

[true_shinken]

Ok, so they're actually the opposite sides of the same coin then.

It's actually yet another piece of evidence that stuff in the adaptation section is not supposed to be used as ACFs like most people do. It's not complete, simply put.
Can you use it? Sure you can. But you need a few houserules first.

[Coidzor]

It's actually yet another piece of evidence that stuff in the adaptation section is not supposed to be used as ACFs like most people do. It's not complete, simply put.
Can you use it? Sure you can. But you need a few houserules first.

Or isn't ready to play without tweaking. Because if you're not supposed to use it at all, then they wouldn't have printed it.

[true_shinken]

Or isn't ready to play without tweaking. Because if you're not supposed to use it at all, then they wouldn't have printed it.

But that's exactly what I said

[Kylarra]

So anyone seen someone share their take on it that seemed reasonable?

I don't remember who on this forum said they played one, but they ended up with a spell list akin to that of the Duskblade, blasty type spells with a few buffs.

[playswithfire]

I don't remember who on this forum said they played one, but they ended up with a spell list akin to that of the Duskblade, blasty type spells with a few buffs.

Warmage spell list is probably another good option.

[Douglas]

Douglas posted one that I really like.

Huh, and here I was going to go hunt up my old post and link it myself. Thanks.

[Runestar]

Being able to cast arcane spells at-will? Buffs seem the most obvious use. You can ensure your entire party enters combat with bull's str always on.