Does the ToB make normal melee-based classes obsolete?

[Overlord]

Hi everyone.

I'm considering buying the Tome of Battle/allowing it into my game. But I'm very concerned that it will make the core (and other splatbook) melee classes obsolete. I definitely understand that the normal melee classes are way underpowered compared to the spellcasters. But while the ToB classes may be more balanced, do they completely outshine the Fighter, Barbarian, etc. (Frenzied Berserker foolishness aside)?

I'm going to be DM'ing for a group based largely of newbies, and while I could easily put the ToB classes to use with my NPCs, I think the more complex maneuvers rules might be too much for them or slow things down. I certainly don't want to just replace all of the core melee classes with the homebrewed versions that may or may not be balanced in comparison with the classes the rest of my group will be playing (no offense to the creators of said homebrewed classes).

Any input on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[Fourth Tempter]

Completely? No. Largely? More or less, as they were intentionally designed without the many problems melee characters suffer from.

Maneuvers slow things down far less than, say, an effective attack-of-opprtunity based Fighter does, and the Barbarian by and large exceeds a Warblade's damage through the levels. The classes are not so much more powerful as they are more versatile and better suited to their niches (the Crusader is meant to be a tank--and the class design actually supports that).

[Dausuul]

Hi everyone.

I'm considering buying the Tome of Battle/allowing it into my game. But I'm very concerned that it will make the core (and other splatbook) melee classes obsolete. I definitely understand that the normal melee classes are way underpowered compared to the spellcasters. But while the ToB classes may be more balanced, do they completely outshine the Fighter, Barbarian, etc. (Frenzied Berserker foolishness aside)?

For the most part.

I'm going to be DM'ing for a group based largely of newbies, and while I could easily put the ToB classes to use with my NPCs, I think the more complex maneuvers rules might be too much for them or slow things down. I certainly don't want to just replace all of the core melee classes with the homebrewed versions that may or may not be balanced in comparison with the classes the rest of my group will be playing (no offense to the creators of said homebrewed classes).

If you're DMing for newbies and don't want to add the complexity of ToB, I would suggest nixing the prepared caster classes and restricting casters to sorcerors and favored souls only. The spontaneous casters are easier to understand, less broken at high levels, and, if you ask me, a lot more fun to play. Your players are unlikely to know all the game-breaking combos and super-spells; newbies tend to go for blaster casters, which are tolerably well balanced against fighters. Just keep an eye on the casters' spell selections and have a quiet chat with anyone who starts picking up the game-breakers, and you should be good.

(Also, put some reasonable restrictions on polymorph, e.g., nothing that's not in the regular Monstrous Manual.)

Of course, this also depends on what level you're planning to run the game to.

[Tellah]

I'm going to be DM'ing for a group based largely of newbies, and while I could easily put the ToB classes to use with my NPCs, I think the more complex maneuvers rules might be too much for them or slow things down.

I've got a player in my game who's quite new to D&D, and he's doing quite well at playing his Crusader--probably the most complex of the three ToB base classes. The abilities and breadth of choices look a little daunting on paper, but remember that any given character knows very few maneuvers and fewer stances. Once you've printed out cards from the Wizards website for your maneuvers, maneuvers seem much less daunting. At first level--and you'd better start at first level--you'll only have a stack of 5-8 cards in front of you.

[Overlord]

I will be limiting them (temporarily, at least) to spontaneous casters, and I'm not worried about their min/maxing abilities being an issue. Will ToB classes just make things worse until I let them play Wizards and Clerics/Druids?

[Closet_Skeleton]

I think the general consensous would be that no, the PHB already did.

Then again, that might just be the opinion of the most vocal group, not necesaraly representing the people who prefer to roleplay.

Or the group that doesn't realise the most vocal group prefers to roleplay as well and are just bitter because they never noticed anything wrong.

[Quirinus_Obsidian]

I've got a player in my game who's quite new to D&D, and he's doing quite well at playing his Crusader--probably the most complex of the three ToB base classes. The abilities and breadth of choices look a little daunting on paper, but remember that any given character knows very few maneuvers and fewer stances. Once you've printed out cards from the Wizards website for your maneuvers, maneuvers seem much less daunting. At first level--and you'd better start at first level--you'll only have a stack of 5-8 cards in front of you.

Those cards saved my arse, and really sped up my attacks. They are a lot easier than flipping thru the ToB pages.

Also, ToB is not unbalancing to the game. If this is a group of newbies that have little to no experience with the game, I would stick with the generic base classes in the PHB and then slowly ease them into the Complete (x) series, and then the ToB last, for those that enjoy hitting things with a stick.

[JaronK]

ToB just made the other melees into more obviously dip classes. A one level dip into Barbarian is awesome, and a two level dip into Fighter helps too. Rangers are still fine, as Scout 4/Ranger 16 is a great archer combo, but that's archery.

I would strongly recommend that newbies to the game be given ToB instead of Fighters and such. It's really a big improvement in all respects, not just power.

JaronK

[SpiderBrigade]

Indeed, I agree with JaronK. The ToB classes are not only able to contribute more, they also have a lot more options available to them. That helps with the power, but also makes them more interesting for a new player. Instead of "I attack with my greataxe!" for every round, they can get into some meaningful decision-making on what maneuvers to use.

[Saph]

I wouldn't recommend using ToB in a newbie game.

The core melee classes are balanced just fine against the core caster classes at low levels or with new players. Casters require a fair bit of skill to play well - honestly, the chances of a new player figuring out how to make a really broken Wizard all by himself is just about zero. And at levels 1-4, casters have so few spells that they're underpowered if anything.

The time to pick up ToB is after your players have mastered the D&D combat system, are starting to get bored of just saying "I attack" turn after turn, and are getting up to levels 7, 8, 9, or higher. Until then it's not really necessary, and will add an extra layer of complexity to a game which is quite complex enough already.

- Saph

[Tellah]

Well, ask your players how comfortable they are with learning the rules. If you, the DM, know the rules quite well, then you'll be able to guide them easily. Furthermore, complexity may not be a bad thing in your games. Seen another way, ToB maneuvers encourage players to learn the rules deeply. They hint at combinations of tactics that a clever player might use to his advantage, and knowing only a few maneuvers means that the player will have just a few favored tactics, the rules for which he'll know quite well by the third or fourth use of a particular combo.

[SpiderBrigade]

It really does depend on your players, and how excited they are likely to be by actually learning what their abilities do and deciding which ones they'd like to use. I've definitely seen players who, conceptually, really want to play a preparation-based caster, but then the flexibility paralyzes them. Half their time is spent asking the older hands what spells would be good to memorize, or if they should cast their healing yet, etc.

That's actually another place where ToB classes form a good middle ground - you get those abilities every fight, so there's a lot less worry about "using up" or "wasting" them. That means they can try different things all the time until they find a combination they like, without having to rest 8 hours.

[Roderick_BR]

There are rules to allow ToB maneuvers for non ToB characters, but they suck.
For example, a feat allow you to learn one maneuver, usable once/encounter, without recovery options. You could make something like allow a character to recover them as normal, and to change old maneuvers for new ones when they level up.

[kemmotar]

If your newbies feel bad just saying i attack turn after turn or casting fireball after fireball then, if you have the time and are feeling up to it, you could help them choose a warblade maybe (he has an average amount of maneuvers and stances and no special features or too complex maneuvers) and you could explain the battle system to them along with the maneuvers from the disciplines the warblade can choose.

All in all its not that difficult if the others will abandon the game if they jut charge, roll, kill for the rest of the campaign. A way to keep them would be interesting storyline, RP and stuff like that until they get used to the system and can do more than just go on from one monster killing quest to the next...

Also if they're the type that gets bored really easily start things off at lvl 2 or 3 so that you're something more than a commoner with an axe...that way you leave out the rat killing quests and probably the PCs will not give up after a dire rat has been giving them trouble

You can even let them drop into some LA 1 races for RP...for example a tiefling or aasimar. Especially in your first campaign ever you should take a mildly good party...so aasimar can also be a good choice for flavour...

Maybe introduce a mildly sexually interesting NPC alongside the PCs...maybe a sorcerer so you can save them in cases where they really need to...dying in your first campaign is a let down...Then they can also roleplay the hitting on the DM who is actually a CHA20 elf sorceror for laughs