Why is Thicket of Blades so great?

[jmax]

I've seen lots of posts and handbooks that say Thicket of Blades, a 3rd-level stance from Devoted Spirit, is the best stance in all of Tome of Battle and even that nothing from Pathfinder's Path of War matches it. But none of them say why it's so great, and I haven't been able to figure it out.

To my eye, it just lets you sock an enemy for some extra damage that they would otherwise be able to avoid. That's nice, but it hardly seems earth-shattering. Why is that so powerful? Aside from builds that specifically optimize attacks of opportunity at the expense of everything else, of course.

The only benefits I can see are:

• Enemies can't run away without you stabbing them (unless they use tactical teleportation).
• Enemies can't go around you without you stabbing them (unless they use tactical teleportation).
• You can stab casters who for some reason can't cast defensively (unless they use tactical teleportation) - but it still doesn't interrupt the casting.

The whole thing can be almost completely defeated by a 1400-gp Anklet of Translocation - and at its best, it's just letting you stab your enemy once. What am I missing?

[Max Caysey]

I've seen lots of posts and handbooks that say Thicket of Blades, a 3rd-level stance from Devoted Spirit, is the best stance in all of Tome of Battle and even that nothing from Pathfinder's Path of War matches it. But none of them say why it's so great, and I haven't been able to figure it out.

To my eye, it just lets you sock an enemy for some extra damage that they would otherwise be able to avoid. That's nice, but it hardly seems earth-shattering. Why is that so powerful? Aside from builds that specifically optimize attacks of opportunity at the expense of everything else, of course.

The only benefits I can see are:

• Enemies can't run away without you stabbing them (unless they use tactical teleportation).
• Enemies can't go around you without you stabbing them (unless they use tactical teleportation).
• You can stab casters who for some reason can't cast defensively (unless they use tactical teleportation) - but it still doesn't interrupt the casting.

The whole thing can be almost completely defeated by a 1400-gp Anklet of Translocation - and at its best, it's just letting you stab your enemy once. What am I missing?

Certain builds like tripping will synergize with this, meaning that your enemy provoces AoO more often, resulting in more trips, resulting in more damage!

[RandomPeasant]

Most enemies don't have tactical teleportation. If your DM is arming up opposition with the tools to counter your tactics, thicket of blades gets worse, but that doesn't happen a lot of the time. Usually you face pre-stated NPCs or monsters out of the manual. It is also generally paired with Mage Slayer, which removes "cast defensively" as an option for spellcasting foes.

[noce]

It is also paired with things that impede movement, like tripping or the feat Stand Still. And with reach and Combat Reflexes.
Basically, you're right saying it's not great for someone that doesn't focus on aoo, but it's one of the best things you can get for those who do, and many such builds include Crusader for this reason.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Because it triggers AoO's from 5ft steps. Or in other words "that ability everything that doesn't want to melee uses to get out of full-attack range".
5ft steps are a big part of melee combat (both offensive and defensive) and options to mess with them are rare. That's what makes ToB so good.

Combined with tripping and Stand Still that means you can force enemies to stay in your reach. Or, if you use a reach weapon, stay in your reach but out of theirs.
Add Mage Slayer to that to also stop defensive casting and you can easily lock down most spellcasters in addition to mundanes - most NPCs don't have no-AoO teleport options.

[Gnaeus]

I've seen lots of posts and handbooks that say Thicket of Blades, a 3rd-level stance from Devoted Spirit, is the best stance in all of Tome of Battle and even that nothing from Pathfinder's Path of War matches it. But none of them say why it's so great, and I haven't been able to figure it out.

It is, however, easily matched in POW. To give only one example, Eternal Guardian stance makes everything you threaten difficult terrain. That has similar effects in preventing 5 foot steps, also limits enemy movement, also curses everything you hit, and is Level 1.

[jmax]

Certain builds like tripping will synergize with this, meaning that your enemy provoces AoO more often, resulting in more trips, resulting in more damage!

It is also generally paired with Mage Slayer, which removes "cast defensively" as an option for spellcasting foes.

It is also paired with things that impede movement, like tripping or the feat Stand Still. And with reach and Combat Reflexes.
Basically, you're right saying it's not great for someone that doesn't focus on aoo, but it's one of the best things you can get for those who do, and many such builds include Crusader for this reason.

Combined with tripping and Stand Still that means you can force enemies to stay in your reach. Or, if you use a reach weapon, stay in your reach but out of theirs.
Add Mage Slayer to that to also stop defensive casting and you can easily lock down most spellcasters in addition to mundanes - most NPCs don't have no-AoO teleport options.

This fits more with my understanding - that it's not amazing by itself but rather as an essential part of many dedicated builds, most of which fundamentally break down without it. Which essentially makes it a Stance Tax instead of a Feat Tax.

It is, however, easily matched in POW. To give only one example, Eternal Guardian stance makes everything you threaten difficult terrain. That has similar effects in preventing 5 foot steps, also limits enemy movement, also curses everything you hit, and is Level 1.

Yeah, I've found lots of things that compensate just fine for enemies being able to take five-foot steps, many of which are quite simple and easily obtained. That Anklet of Translocation, for example.

[Zancloufer]

This fits more with my understanding - that it's not amazing by itself but rather as an essential part of many dedicated builds, most of which fundamentally break down without it. Which essentially makes it a Stance Tax instead of a Feat Tax.

I wouldn't call it a "Stance Tax". "Feat Tax" tends to describe something that is useless on it's own but required to pick up something else. Thicket of Blades, and the feats you take with it all work on their own, they just work better when combined. Thicket of Blades will still stop someone from making 5ft steps around/away from you, Stand Still lets you stop movement of anyone moving through your square, reach weapons still threaten a larger area.

You combine them and all of a sudden anyone who gets within 10ft of you can't move anymore. You can even interrupt charges aimed at you with it. Many of the martial control feats/stances/manoeuvres have great synergy with each other, but that doesn't make the individual parts literally useless without the others.

[jmax]

I wouldn't call it a "Stance Tax". "Feat Tax" tends to describe something that is useless on it's own but required to pick up something else. Thicket of Blades, and the feats you take with it all work on their own, they just work better when combined. Thicket of Blades will still stop someone from making 5ft steps around/away from you, Stand Still lets you stop movement of anyone moving through your square, reach weapons still threaten a larger area.

You combine them and all of a sudden anyone who gets within 10ft of you can't move anymore. You can even interrupt charges aimed at you with it. Many of the martial control feats/stances/manoeuvres have great synergy with each other, but that doesn't make the individual parts literally useless without the others.

That does synergize quite nicely. And I know a certain Paladin in my party who would probably love that combo.

[Twurps]

Yeah, I've found lots of things that compensate just fine for enemies being able to take five-foot steps, many of which are quite simple and easily obtained. That Anklet of Translocation, for example.

If, for the measly cost of only 1 feat/stance, I can trick my DM into providing 1400GP worth of extra loot on all of my enemies, that's a pretty decent feat already.
More likely, the stance will work as intended most of the time, which is even better, and only gets shut down some of the time. Is there any feat/spell/build that doesn't get 'shut down' at least to some extend, some of the time?

[AsuraKyoko]

It is, however, easily matched in POW. To give only one example, Eternal Guardian stance makes everything you threaten difficult terrain. That has similar effects in preventing 5 foot steps, also limits enemy movement, also curses everything you hit, and is Level 1.

Yeah, POW has a lot of incredibly powerful stances. There isn't anything that does exactly what Thicket of Blades does; most of the similar options work a bit differently, and are a bit less absolute in their effect. Thicket of Blades isn't as good as a stance that gives you an extra standard action each round, though, which is, in my opinion, the best stance in POW (it's a lot harder to get than Thicket, though).

[AvatarVecna]

Why it is so powerful? Aside from AoO builds

This is the realistic answer. For any chargen resource, there's basically never going to be a "this the best thing to invest in, always and forever, no matter what the rest of your build is doing". The exceptions tend to be utterly, indescribably broken mechanics like Leadership. More frequently, when somebody says something is "the best", they tend to mean something like "it has great synergy with more things than other options competing for the same resource". And for noncasters, AoO builds have a ton of support that all combines very dangerously together. It's like asking why kobold is considered the most powerful race when human combines the best with most any build; kobolds aren't top-tier race because of their general power, it's because there's a rather particular build that needs a kobold, and it breaks the game.

A typical Fighter 12 is getting three iteratives per round and maybe a single attack of opportunity.

A Fighter 12 who is doing crit-fishing (and has picked up the stance "Blood In The Water" for that purpose) is getting a bit better attack and damage, and is probably dual-wielding for 11 attacks per round (including five AoOs from high Dex) with 15-20/x2 weapons, so he's doing pretty well for himself. Provided he isn't regularly fighting constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, undead, and/or swarms. If he's fighting those regularly, his crit-fishing stuff is worthless.

A Fighter 12 who's going the AoO route (and has picked up the stance "Thicket Of Blades" for that purpose) is making up to 21 attacks per turn (and 5 trip attempts), most of which are directed at anybody who does basically anything within 10-30 ft of him depending on build. In a typical dungeon crawl, "does basically anything within 30 ft" can be read as "participates in the combat". Attack the fighter? Get punished. Attack someone else? Get punished. Try to move away? Get punished. Try to cast a spell? Get punished. Withdraw? Get punished. 5 ft step? Believe it or not, punished. A reach/AoO fighter is a nightmare to deal with in most games, and tactical teleportation is basically the only way you're shutting them down. I'm sure there are some very good stances in ToB. But most of them don't pair so very well with what is already one of the waaaaay better options for non-casters to be doing, just on pure damage numbers, let alone how it can maybe prevent movement.

The whole thing can be almost completely defeated by a cheap item

Monsters don't buy items. That's really what it comes down to. Monsters that face adventurers tend to be powerful enough that like 99% of humanoids are literally nothing to worry about in groups as small as 5. And it's just as well, because their opportunities for going to market and purchasing a magic item without causing a panic are generally going to be limited. Most monsters don't tend to just go shopping peacefully - if they did, they wouldn't be considered monsters, they'd be considered weird-looking people, and slaughtering them would come with more moral and ethical baggage. Mid-high level monsters tend to only have to worry about other monsters, and can't really go buy magic items, so why bother? They're strong enough to eat anybody who comes at them swinging a sword.

Tactical teleportation is a very useful ability against a number of player tactics, but "being bigger and tougher" is more useful, most of the time. A giant doesn't need tactical teleportation to survive a wrestling match with a hobbit monk. Sure, the tactical teleportation could get him out of a pin, but like...that's a very minor concern. There's this guy swinging a 30 ft chain around the entire room, smacking you if you try to run past him to the squishy mages? Whatever, he'll hit you once and then you can slaughter the actual threat.

Except then he hits you a second time. And a third. And now you're on the ground, how did that happen? You try to stand up as part of your movement, and get smacked three times and knocked back over. You try to cast a spell or attack the fighter, and get smacked three times. You try to crawl away with what remains of your movement, and get smacked three times. By the time you realize you're screwed, it's already over, you've been hit a dozen times by a fighter who's an actual threat to you. You're already dead.

Most monsters are not tactical machines that are aware of the potential mechanical threats players can bring to bear, except in a broad sense. Most monsters lack both the funds, the opportunity, and the motive to go buy magic items that counter semi-common player tactics. Most monsters do not have inherent teleportation abilities, and most of the ones that do, it takes up their standard action. So now instead of costing them their movement and dealing some damage, the AoO build has cost them the ability to attack anybody at all.

The AoO build is less effective against enemies who are 1) aware of semi-common fighter strategies, and 2) have the means and opportunity to purchase items or cast spells to counter those tactics. The AoO/reach build is less effective against ranged enemies, or in big open spaces, or in fights with hordes of enemies. That is to say, the AoO/Reach build is weak against other players when you're not fighting them in a dungeon. But fighting a mechanically-knowledgeable, well-equipped caster in an open field isn't that common to face on the player side of the screen. Certainly it can come up, but you're not going to get shut down nearly as often as the crit fisher is, whose fighting style is effortlessly countered by 5 creature types. The AoO/Reach style is just one of the better non-caster fighting styles already, and Thicket Of Blades combines exceptionally well with it.

EDIT: And yes, the AoO build and Reach build tend to use weapons that aren't compatible with each other, but I'm pretty sure there's a way around that. The easiest way is to just take the weird dual-wield feat for Jack B Quick, and put up with less reach (say, 15 max instead of 30 max or whatever nonsense the Reach Monster build gets). But the point still stands.

[Gruftzwerg]

I wouldn't call it great by itself as others said. It is a good/great option for a niche build (tripper) and that's it.

Imho there are much more interesting low lvl (niche) stances: (just to name a few)

Child of Shadow: 20% misschance if you moved 10ft this round. Great for uberchargers (add Robilar's Gambit/Karmic Strike for extra cheese) or for skirmish builds (e.g. Scouts).

Blood in the Water: stacking +1 bonus on attack and dmg for each crit. Great for critfishing builds.

Island of Blades: allows for easy flanking and thus for easy sneak attacks without the hassle to reposition each time.

Assassins Stance: +2d6 sneak attack isn't sole for rogues. Also a great stance to qualify for stuff without spending (class) lvls.



...and if you should invest more into Initiator lvls, there is "Shifting Defense" (Swordsage 5). Imho the best defensive stance, but a bit harder to get. As long as you have AoO left (hint: Combat Reflexes) you can move a 5ft step to avoid an "attack". This lets you avoid most melee attack unless the enemy has reach and even ranged attacks if there should be any cover within 5ft. Overall imho the best stance, but either needs SS Initiator lvls or wait for the lvl 18 feat to pick it up.

[Ramza00]

Stance of the Thunderbrand is superior PoW, it is HD09 aka 5th level though instead of HD05 aka 3rd level.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

EDIT: And yes, the AoO build and Reach build tend to use weapons that aren't compatible with each other, but I'm pretty sure there's a way around that.

That's not really difficult. Spiked gauntlet (adjacent) + guisarme (reach) with no feat investment, or Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Spiked Chain) either one would work very well.

[AvatarVecna]

That's not really difficult. Spiked gauntlet (adjacent) + guisarme (reach) with no feat investment, or Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Spiked Chain) either one would work very well.

I was referring to the sword axe feat or whatever it is that helps turn every AoO into two attacks, a trip, and a follow-up attack on successful trip. Hard to Aptitude a feat that specifies two different weapons, and hard to get those two weapons to have significant reach. Certainly difficult to get the 60 ft wide zone of denial a reach monster build tends to get abusing spiked chain. There's probably a way to combine them to absolutely terrifying effect, but even just Inhuman Reach on Jack B Quick is pretty effective.

[Darg]

...and if you should invest more into Initiator lvls, there is "Shifting Defense" (Swordsage 5). Imho the best defensive stance, but a bit harder to get. As long as you have AoO left (hint: Combat Reflexes) you can move a 5ft step to avoid an "attack". This lets you avoid most melee attack unless the enemy has reach and even ranged attacks if there should be any cover within 5ft. Overall imho the best stance, but either needs SS Initiator lvls or wait for the lvl 18 feat to pick it up.

The stance doesn't say you avoid the triggering attack. However it would let you avoid subsequent attacks if you are out of range.

I was referring to the sword axe feat or whatever it is that helps turn every AoO into two attacks, a trip, and a follow-up attack on successful trip. Hard to Aptitude a feat that specifies two different weapons, and hard to get those two weapons to have significant reach. Certainly difficult to get the 60 ft wide zone of denial a reach monster build tends to get abusing spiked chain. There's probably a way to combine them to absolutely terrifying effect, but even just Inhuman Reach on Jack B Quick is pretty effective.

High Sword Low Axe is the name, from complete warrior. Double Hit from miniatures is what gets you the off-hand attack added to the AoO.

[Gruftzwerg]

The stance doesn't say you avoid the triggering attack. However it would let you avoid subsequent attacks if you are out of range.

Customer Care replied this way to clarify Shifting Defense and it ended up being in the inofficial ERRATA.
But let's have a look at the ability text: (and reveal the misleading part imho)

(1) You duck and move as you dodge your opponent’s attacks. Slowly but surely, each attack gives you the opportunity to move across the battlefield.

(2) Your ability to read your opponents’ moves and use their strength against them allows you to shift your position during a battle. Each failed attack gives you the split-second you need to move without drawing attacks.

(3) While you are in this stance, you can make an immediate 5-foot step each time an opponent attacks you. Moving in this manner consumes one of your attacks of opportunity in the current round. You cannot move in this manner if you have no attacks of opportunity remaining. This movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

(added some numbers for better visualization)

(1) Fluff text. No rules are presented here.

(2) Still fluff text. While it talks about "failed attacks", it doesn't tell you if the enemy would have missed anyway or if you are actively evading the attack. No clear mechanics presented here.

(3) Here we have the rules. And those sole require that an "opponent attacks you" (declaring an attack; before the result of the roll) and not that an "opponent hits you" (confirms his Attack roll against you AC). The way Shifting Defense is worded, it break the flow of the attack (keyword: "immediate" 5ft step) and you act before it resolves, thus denying the hit/attack even if it would have been normally a "hit".

__

Even without the inofficial ERRATA, a careful reading shows what it does. It's just the flufftext in (2) which is a bit misleading (formatting error: (2) should have been "italic").
But the rules presented are still clear.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I was referring to the sword axe feat or whatever it is that helps turn every AoO into two attacks, a trip, and a follow-up attack on successful trip. Hard to Aptitude a feat that specifies two different weapons, and hard to get those two weapons to have significant reach. Certainly difficult to get the 60 ft wide zone of denial a reach monster build tends to get abusing spiked chain. There's probably a way to combine them to absolutely terrifying effect, but even just Inhuman Reach on Jack B Quick is pretty effective.

Aptitude on a guisarme and spiked gauntlet combo works just fine with High Sword Low Axe, although I do admit that spiked chain might be a bit off. You could technically have the aptitude spiked chain hit twice, with each hit counting as a different part of the combo, though.

[Darg]

Customer Care replied this way to clarify Shifting Defense and it ended up being in the inofficial ERRATA.
But let's have a look at the ability text: (and reveal the misleading part imho)

(added some numbers for better visualization)

(1) Fluff text. No rules are presented here.

(2) Still fluff text. While it talks about "failed attacks", it doesn't tell you if the enemy would have missed anyway or if you are actively evading the attack. No clear mechanics presented here.

(3) Here we have the rules. And those sole require that an "opponent attacks you" (declaring an attack; before the result of the roll) and not that an "opponent hits you" (confirms his Attack roll against you AC). The way Shifting Defense is worded, it break the flow of the attack (keyword: "immediate" 5ft step) and you act before it resolves, thus denying the hit/attack even if it would have been normally a "hit".

__

Even without the inofficial ERRATA, a careful reading shows what it does. It's just the flufftext in (2) which is a bit misleading (formatting error: (2) should have been "italic").
But the rules presented are still clear.

It's the Stand Still argument. You move out of a threatened square which triggers the AoO used for Stand Still. If they never moved out of the space then they never triggered the AoO which means Stand Still is never used. It's a paradox. To prevent the paradox you have 2 options: the immediate action happens after the triggering action or they happen simultaneously. There is no rule that says immediate actions supersede the action that triggers them.

The unofficial errata changes how the stance works, it does not declare that immediate actions do supersede the action that triggers them.

[Gruftzwerg]

It's the Stand Still argument. You move out of a threatened square which triggers the AoO used for Stand Still. If they never moved out of the space then they never triggered the AoO which means Stand Still is never used. It's a paradox. To prevent the paradox you have 2 options: the immediate action happens after the triggering action or they happen simultaneously. There is no rule that says immediate actions supersede the action that triggers them.

The unofficial errata changes how the stance works, it does not declare that immediate actions do supersede the action that triggers them.

Sorry but I don't buy the "Stand Still" argument. It's like saying when a caster fails his concentration check after a AoO, the trigger of that AoO (casting a spell) never happened.
The declaration of an action is enough for an "immediate action" to trigger. That "action" doesn't always resolve normally depending on what the immediate action does. When the intended/declared action is no longer possible anymore, that action is wasted.
While Stand Still stops the movement before the enemy may cross the boarder of the 5ft square, the enemy still has started to move (use his moveaction). Even if his position didn't has changed because his movement has been stopped within the 5ft square. The triggering attempt was still there.

Another fitting example are how immediate action teleports are use defensively in combat (to "dodge attacks").

In chase of Shifting Defense, the stance allows you to move 5ft immediately in response to the declaration of the attack (attack != hit; as already said). After that 5ft step the enemies action resolves "normally" as intended, if it is possible at all. If you are still in range of the (melee/ranged) attack, the enemy still "attacks" you. If you are out of his reach now, the enemy is now in the state where his declared action is now illegal and thus wasted (declaring illegal actions wastes that action for that turn, because you are trying something impossible).

The argument that "Shifting Defense kicks in before the "hit" (attack roll vs AC) is confirmed" still stands as it is. The trigger here is the attempted "attack" and not a confirmed hit nor a confirmed miss.

[Darg]

Spell cast interruption is an explicit fail state that has rules backing it up. "Avoiding attacks" however does not have any rules explaining a fail state. Lacking anything that says you actually fail the attack, you don't fail the attack. The rules are permissive; they permit you to do things. Without that permission it just doesn't work without rule 0.

The trigger here is the attempted "attack" and not a confirmed hit nor a confirmed miss.

The rules explain that the attack roll is what represents the attempt. There is no concept of "declaring a target."

An attack roll represents your attempts to strike your opponent. It does not represent a single swing of the sword, for example. Rather, it indicates whether, over several attempts in the round, you managed to connect solidly.

By that description it's perfectly possible to have gotten at least one attempt off before they move and so you still get an attack roll.

[Gruftzwerg]

Spell cast interruption is an explicit fail state that has rules backing it up. "Avoiding attacks" however does not have any rules explaining a fail state. Lacking anything that says you actually fail the attack, you don't fail the attack. The rules are permissive; they permit you to do things. Without that permission it just doesn't work without rule 0.

The Shifting Defense "rules" by itself doesn't cause the the attack to fail. For that we have rules such as "reach/threatened squares" and "Line of Sight".

Shifting Defense kicks in when when an attack is declared on you and allows you to move immediately 5ft.

If as result, you end up being out of reach/LoS, the enemy attacks fails due to those rules. Shifting Defense doesn't cause attacks to automatically fail. That is not what the ability does. Thus it doesn't need to tell you what other rules does. Nor does it need to tell you that now the enemy might be out of reach/los. Sure, it would explain the ability better and prevent misinterpretations, but it is not an requirement for the ability to function.

The rules explain that the attack roll is what represents the attempt. There is no concept of "declaring a target."

Have a look at Full Attack:

...You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones. ...

Specifying or assigning a target equals to "declaring a target" in my English common sense. (Note that neither specifying, assigning nor declaring are defined in 3.5 and thus, we can fall back to common sense interpretation.)

You always declare what you intend to do and any possible targets (objects/enemies/allies/..) involved. Doesn't matter if its an attack, an ability or a spell. But because most of those trigger based counter abilities are either niche or high lvl, most people tend to forget (or aren't aware) that they are constantly declaring their intended actions (including targets) before they resolve.

By that description it's perfectly possible to have gotten at least one attempt off before they move and so you still get an attack roll.

You are trying to justify that the enemy gets an "attack roll" with referencing to the attack roll rules (logical at first glance but not for this chase). But when you move out of your enemies reach/LoS with SD, your enemy doesn't get an attack roll at all. Because his declared action is now invalid and thus is wasted.