Un-Vancianing the Book of Nine Swords - A Possible Project?

[Eldan]

So. The Book of Nine Swords. A problematic tome, we all know that.

On the one hand, it gives the martial classes tactical options, versatility and power. And it works. It's balanced, even.

On the other hand, as many argue, it doesn't actually make much sense, purely from the fluff. Why do fighters have to prepare their strikes ahead of time? Why, oh, why, can they only do a given maneuver once per combat?

So, I propse a general overhaul of the system. Let's do away with limited numbers of maneuvers per encounter and preparation. Let's rewrite the system.


The basic idea I had was something like this. We start the system by making several stances. More than one per discipline, from level one. And every discpline furthermore gets several maneuvers.

Now, we limit when strikes can be executed. Strikes, boosts and counters can only be executed while in a stance of that school. But they can be used as often as you want to (probably just one per turn, though). Many initiators can already use their maneuvers pretty much at will, or at least refresh them easily.

Now, some strikes might be a bit strong for that, I admit. There might have to be some limits. Perhaps a further distinction between strikes, so that some can only be used in certain situations, similar to counters. "Use this only against flat-footed targets".

Would anyone be interested in properly developing this system?

[eftexar]

I don't know how much I'll hang around this thread, but I'll help start the brainstorming by throwing out a couple ideas I've toyed with.

A good way of limiting maneuvers, since you want them to only be usable during the disciplines respective stance, is that you could have the stance be mutable depending on maneuvers initiated.
For example maybe a boost doesn't change the stance, but a strike or un-categorized maneuver might require you to change to a different stance and a counter might simply end the stance altogether.

I don't like levels in my maneuvers. Truthfully I don't even really like them in spellcasting. So I was thinking of a few different ways you could do it:

• Split them up into 4 categories like invocations.
• Give them prerequisites, sort of like feats.
• Just list a minimum level and call it a day.
• Limit it by BaB so it's multiclass friendly with other melees.

Speaking of BaB I would suggest this formula for saves: 10 + 1/2 BaB + relevant modifier. There's no reason the DCs shouldn't scale or that they should be based off of martial skill. Plus this would let the DCs scale along with prestige classes without needing excessive wordage.

[Eldan]

Hm. BAB would make a fairly good limiter, yes. And even save calculation would work that way. I like it.

[vasharanpaladin]

...You lost me at "strikes can only be initiated from a stance of the same school." Please don't try to fix what isn't broken.

And with that, I'm gone again.

[Eldan]

See, I care much less about balance than I care about systems making sense intrinsically. There is never a proper fluff explanation for why maneuvers work as they do. So I want to change them.

And the stances bit makes sense to me. I mean, I have only done a little bit of martial arts myself. But I'd still think that you would only do certain strikes from certain stances.

[Grinner]

I think the idea of elevating the martial classes into something consistent with the classic heroes is fine. There's no way they could keep up, otherwise. What threw me off as well was the Vancian mechanic. From an intradiegetic viewpoint, it made absolutely no sense.

What about Invocations, though? I thought those would have been the logical mechanic to use for a fantastic martial class.

[Eldan]

Are we thinking of the same invocations? The spell-like abilities?

[Grinner]

Are we thinking of the same invocations? The spell-like abilities?

The basic at-will mechanic, yes. Not so much the spell-like ability part. Instead of using spell slots or spell points, they would get a small number of unlimited use techniques. We could even use the existing maneuvers, just like how the Warlock's invocations are based on spells off the Wizard/Sorceror spell list.

[Eldan]

Ah, yes. That was indeed my idea. Convert most of the existing maneuvers into at-will techniques. They would just need some checking to see if they still work.

[Grinner]

Oh...well...jolly good, then.

[genericwit]

What bout something like power points [maneuver points? martial points?], and then just adding a few stances per discipline. Then you could augment these maneuvers up to gain access to stronger versions of the maneuver. For example, a basic shadow hand maneuver could be shadow stride, costing 1 point to use as a standard action; if you use 3 points, it's a move action; if you use 5 points, it's a swift action; and if you use 7 points, it's an immediate action. For the diamond mind, you could have time stands still as a basic maneuver; 1 point gets you one extra attack, 3 gets you 2, 5 gets you three, 7 gets you four, and 9 allows you to take 5 [providing you have something like haste, rapid shot, or flurry of blows].

Just a thought, though, and it seems like you're trying to avoid using a point system. Alternatively, you could have more powerful versions of the basic maneuvers simply be unlocked by having an initiator level of whatever.

Of course, this makes the stance mastery ability *much* better, as it's the only way someone could use two maneuvers from different schools [e.g. inferno blade + time stands still].

[Eldan]

Hmm. Maybe something like fatigue points? I wouldn't want to tie them to constitution, though. THat would make that stat too good, I think. Plus, I don't want to make this system too complicated. Keep it simple.

Automatic scaling could be better. Something like:

"Tiger's Leap, Strike: make a jump check as part of your attack. If your jump check beats his AC, the attack deals an additional +1d6 damage per two points of Base attack bonus you have."

[Devronq]

Im actually doing a big homebrew project and i made them feats. Because of the prerequisites only certain classes can chose them and they have a cooldown rate. Some can be used 1/round some once every second round some 1/min etc

[Kane0]

So you plan on making four ranks of maneuvers based off of bab (least at bab +1, lesser at bab +6, greater at bab +11 and master at bab +16)? Then grant a certain number of maneuvers known, with all that you have known available at all times?

sounds fine to me, but a lot of maneuvers will need to be rebalanced for at will use (IHS, White raven hammer, etc)

[Just to Browse]

Switching your maneuver access by switching between stances doesn't unbalance the system as long as it's easy to switch between stances. Do that, and have stances access maneuvers, and just make maneuvers at-will--if someone grants me an extra standard action, I should be able to use my steel wind strike twice in a round, because not doing so is about as un-sensible as limited usage per combat.

[Mithril Leaf]

This would solve the entirety of my issues with Bo9S. Literally all of them. So much so, that I'd actually play a warblade over a psion or binder occasionally.

[Xefas]

I don't suppose you've seen the thing that I did?

As far as what you're talking about - my solution was to keep Maneuvers Readied, but make it more fluid. The selection of which maneuvers to ready is more of a tactical plan moment-to-moment, than a list of your capabilities for the encounter. For one, you can prepare multiple instances of the same maneuver (with some caveats). Nothing stops you from trying to stab a guy the same way over and over if you really want to. For two, you can spend a swift, move, or standard action to refresh varying amounts of maneuvers and, with a full-round action, completely trade out your entire loadout of readied maneuvers from your (highly increased) pool of Maneuvers Known and refresh everything. For three, there's no more "5 minutes of meditation" required, at any point.

Spoiler

Show

Narratively speaking, when you ready Raging Behemoth Charge, World-Breaker Grip, and two Screaming Meat Shields, you're saying "My plan is to, in the next few seconds, charge into the fray, grab a dude, and then use him as a club to beat up his friend."

But, if that plan doesn't work out - as is often times the case in the heat of battle, you can take a step back, shake off your tunnel vision (a thing that happens), and come up with a new plan. Maybe you Charge in, only to have your target be revealed as an illusion. There's an enemy spellcaster afoot, so you spend a Swift action to trade in Fury Is Freedom before your turn ends, allowing you to Counter a hostile spell if need be.

On your next turn, you spend a Move Action to swap in Impatient Slaughter Speed, to close the distance with the enemy spellcaster, and finally use that World-Breaker Grip to tear into him.

*Infernal Monster Maneuvers

Effectively, your entire arsenal is at your command at any given time. But you're no more omnipotent than a real fighter. You can be caught off guard by an unusual strategy, or simply have your initial onslaught be rebuked, and you have to take between 0.5 to 6 seconds to inhale, exhale, and figure out how best to rip into your foe in the next exchange. Combat is a really fast, confusing, scary place to be, and you can't always pull out every esoteric piece of knowledge you ever learned about fighting at less than a moment's notice, while trying not to die. At a moment's notice? Sure.

Just food for thought, I guess.

[TuggyNE]

A good way of limiting maneuvers, since you want them to only be usable during the disciplines respective stance, is that you could have the stance be mutable depending on maneuvers initiated.
For example maybe a boost doesn't change the stance, but a strike or un-categorized maneuver might require you to change to a different stance and a counter might simply end the stance altogether.

Slightly different idea: have the idea of footwork, flow of battle, etc represented by "positioning", which lasts until you next make an attack of any sort. Different strikes, and maybe boosts and counters, require you to be positioned in a specific way, and also put you in a new position (perhaps some maneuvers would put you in different positions depending on some effect or aspect of your target or something).

Positioning would be distinguished from stance by being more transient and immediate and less intentional and general.

Take that for what it's worth.

[Starbuck_II]

Have you ever read Heroes Against Darkness (a 4E type clone, free though), instead of At will, Encounter, daily.
All powers are at will or at will (with penalties) or cost anima (mana basically).

Like the Berserkers level 4 power 3d weapon + Str bonus, using it causes -4 AD and ED until end of next turn.
This would be a encounter power in normal 4E (without the penalty).

[Just to Browse]

Slightly different idea: have the idea of footwork, flow of battle, etc represented by "positioning", which lasts until you next make an attack of any sort. Different strikes, and maybe boosts and counters, require you to be positioned in a specific way, and also put you in a new position (perhaps some maneuvers would put you in different positions depending on some effect or aspect of your target or something).

Positioning would be distinguished from stance by being more transient and immediate and less intentional and general.

Take that for what it's worth.

Positioning would be kind of a pain, because it requires the DM knowing all your stances and how to beat them in order to appropriately challenge you, it'll require a diagram (maybe two depending on where people move) and also tends to cause a lot of power-shuffling if implemented in a meaningful way.

About the furthest this could be taken is specific symmetrical positions at adjacent or reach range, and even that might be pushing it.

[Eldan]

I'd say that Stances cover positioning well enough. It's more or less what the name means. We don't need to make it any more complicated.

[Eldan]

So, as a start, I'll just list the effects each school can cause, independent of the numbers involved, We can see about scaling them later.
Two schools first, rest later.

Desert Wind:

Spoiler

Show

Strike effects:
Dazzle creatures
Shoot cone of fire
Shoot ray of fire
Bonus fire damage
Make enemy explode
Shoot fire around corners
Fly while charging
Lingering fire damage
Move-by attack
Ring of fire around enemies
Trail of fire when charging

Boost Effects:
Bonus fire damage
Increased reach
Enemy counts as flanked
Bonus movement speed

Stance effects:
Fire resistance
Attackers take fire damage
Bonus fire damage
Hover on fire column

Counter effects:
When hit, hit back with fire
AC bonus against incoming attack
Teleport next to foe

Devoted Spirit:

Spoiler

Show

Strike effects:
Heal on successful hit
Give allies bonus to hit
Overcome damage reduction
Bonus damage
Slow enemies
Enemies shaken
Gain DR, or concealment, or saves and AC, depending on alignment
Burst heal
Take con damage for bonus damage

Stance effects:
Make allies harder to hit
Heal yourself with successful hits
5 ft. steps provoke attacks
Roll 11s, or drain allies, or heal allies or increase damage, depending on alignment
Cannot die to hit point damage

Counter effects:
AC and shield bonus for ally
Counter attack with shield bash

Boost effects:
Enemies must attack you or suffer AoO

[Amechra]

I had to link this. Sorry.

[Just to Browse]

I had to link this. Sorry.

You forgot to put shameless plug tags around that.

Eldan, before you start trying to convert disciplines, it'd probably be a good idea to know how the disciplines scale and how access works. For example, do Warblades pick four disciplines and then get all stances/maneuvers from those disciplines, or are they still limited?

The problems I see occurring are option paralysis with bloating combat abilities--if I get two maneuvers from four disciplines, I have eight abilities from level 1 not counting stances. At level 8, I will have 32 abilities--if we allow some of those to be redundant (like the Mighty Throw series), then that's still 24 things you're juggling at one time.

This could be avoided by requiring hyper-specialization (1, maybe 2 schools), but then characters get super inflexible and you can start running into the Sneak Attack problem.

Of course you could just require players to learn a certain number of maneuvers (instead of unlocking all maneuvers from a given discipline each level), but that'll create the problem that ToB already has--namely, players will cherrypick and all warblades will be basically the same.

Also, writing double the number of maneuvers sounds like a lot of work.

[Eldan]

I will probably keep it as it is now. You have a llimited number of maneuvers you know and they have requirements. Having them scale better even helps with this over conventional initiators, as low-level maneuvers are relevant for longer. Some already are now (Sudden Leap comes to mind), but all those that just add +xd6 damage become a bit pointless later on.

The sheet of a Crusader would look something like this:

[B]Devoted Spirit:[B]
Stances:
Stance 1: heal 1 hit point plus one hit point per 2 points of base attack per hit you score on an enemy.
Stance 2: squares you threaten are considered difficult terrain for enemies.

Strikes:
Strike 1: if this strike hits, heal an ally 1d6+1 point per base attack bonus.
Strike 2: an enemy you hit becomes shaken. If you have more than 10 points of base attack bonus, they become frightened instead.

Stone Dragon:
Stance: gain one point of damage reduction /adamantine per point of base attack bonus
Strike: deal +1d6 points of damage reduction per two points of base attack bonus and ignore damage reduction.

Really not that bad, in terms of tactical diversity.

And Amechra, while that is an interesting class, it's not really what I had in mind.

[Deepbluediver]

This sounds interesting; I'm all for making more things spontaneous.

So you plan on making four ranks of maneuvers based off of bab (least at bab +1, lesser at bab +6, greater at bab +11 and master at bab +16)? Then grant a certain number of maneuvers known, with all that you have known available at all times?

sounds fine to me, but a lot of maneuvers will need to be rebalanced for at will use (IHS, White raven hammer, etc)

Does that mean medium BAB classes won't be able to get the highest rank of amnuevers in normal gameplay? Will that be a problem?

I don't know how much I'll hang around this thread, but I'll help start the brainstorming by throwing out a couple ideas I've toyed with.

A good way of limiting maneuvers, since you want them to only be usable during the disciplines respective stance, is that you could have the stance be mutable depending on maneuvers initiated.
For example maybe a boost doesn't change the stance, but a strike or un-categorized maneuver might require you to change to a different stance and a counter might simply end the stance altogether.

That sounds good, but what about stances that could be part of more than one school? Would something like that make sense?

[*]Give them prerequisites, sort of like feats.

Shadowcasting was an alternate magic system that seemed just like normal arcane casting, except you had to learn lower level spells in a certain path first. Would something like that help keep players from skipping all over the place?

[eftexar]

Deepbluediver, while putting stances into multiple schools would be real to life, as many martial arts borrow from each other, I don't think it would work as well with game mechanics.

I would rather see a feat, or maybe a class ability, that allows strikes from a single favored discipline to be used during another discipline (or maybe even any other discipline).

tuggyne, that sounds like a pretty neat idea, but I'm not sure how you would implement it. Because of how the disciplines are split, and the fact a warrior may not have access to all them, he might eventually reach a point where he can't keep switches anymore.

[Eldan]

ToB already has that. Higher level maneuvers require 1-3 maneuvers of the same discipline, usually.

[eftexar]

The problem with requiring other maneuvers though is that it tends to block people into focusing on one discipline. I would rather have prerequisites that fall more in line with those of feats.

Plus, if you restricted maneuvers with feat-like prerequisites, they wouldn't need anything remotely resembling levels.

[Eldan]

Those, however, tend to limit people to certain builds.

Like, right now, I can use Tiger Claw on a strength-focused pseudo-barbarian Warblade or a dexterity focused two-weapon fighting swordsage. One hacks people to pieces, the other is a whirlwind of cuts. The first might also take Iron Heart, the other Shadow Hand for a teleporting assassin.

If Tiger Claw suddenly required one of those two attributes, the other one would be gone as a possibility.

My Warblade could be an intelligent graduate of a military academy or a brutal thug. The more prereqs you have, the more difficult such diversity of build becomes to achieve.