I'm fairly new to D&D (only been playing for a year or so) and I live in a small town. I haven't been able to really see many classes played over a long period of time. I was reading this thread about multiclassing. The Book of 9 Swords was brought up in passing and it's not the first time I've heard it was "broken." I'm in a campaign right now where the other party member is playing a swordsage and I haven't seen too much of a problem...but there is only two of us so the DM really focuses on tailoring it to our strengths and weaknesses. Someone else in the thread I linked to mentioned something about the "Complete" series of books being poorly conceived. So, I wanted to get this forum's opinion on the matter. So, I have three questions:
1. Why is the Tome of Battle considered broken?
2. What other books or classes seem broken/overpowered/underpowered?
3. To turn the conversation around a bit, what about the good classes...ones well thought out and well done. Any stand out in your mind?
If you think a single-classed fighter should be the benchmark power level of your campaign, then the Tome of Battle classes will seem overpowered.
If you think a wizard with a good prestige class should be the benchmark power level of your campaign, then the Tome of Battle classes won't seem overpowered at all.
1. Why is the Tome of Battle considered broken?
2. What other books or classes seem broken/overpowered/underpowered?
3. To turn the conversation around a bit, what about the good classes...ones well thought out and well done. Any stand out in your mind?
Not much to add to Hogarth's excellent post. In terms of independent responses, I'd suggest the following:
1. Class design in 3.0 was more or less based around hamstringing the warrior classes: they lost the ability to move and full attack, they lost the exclusivity of iterative attacks and their iterative attacks were assigned penalties, they lost the ability to reliably disrupt spellcasting (Concentration checks), their level progression at high levels was pegged to the spellcasters' instead of being accelerated, and their high-level saves got a lot worse. As a result, full casters at high level pretty much own 3.0/3.5. The Tome of Battle tried to overcome these nerfs by essentially designing martial classes as if they were spellcasters. People who never played 1e, and/or who think that 3.0/3.5 are OK at high levels, will therefore perceive this attempt at re-equalization as "breaking" the game.
2. Many of the full bases classes from the "Complete" books are pretty weak -- essentially fighters with their feats chosen for them (e.g., Samurai, Swashbuckler) -- and/or overly-focused. For example, the Duskblade is very powerful in a limited area of expertise, but nigh-well useless outside of that area. If your game is 100% melee combat, the duskblade will be overpowered. If your game is 5% melee combat and 95% investigation and skills/utility spells use, the duskblade will sit on the sidelines and sulk.
3. The Pathfinder rogue and barbarian are well-conceived. They get good options in and out of combat, and the options scale to some extent with level (advanced talents, etc.), unlike the fighter's feats.
I love the Bo9S. If you think it's broken, take a look at a monk with Vow of Poverty and that will set a new benchmark.
Heh. If you want to REALLY break the Vow of Poverty, give it to a 3.5 druid with the Natural Spell feat... imagine a dire bear with much better stats, no weaknesses, almost as many bonus feats as a fighter, and full spellcasting abilities.
Vow of Poverty is broken, actually all those vows are broken...
I don't allow them...
Nononono, it MUST be the monk that's broken. AND the Druid. And a lot of other things. ;-P
Nononono, it MUST be the monk that's broken. AND the Druid. And a lot of other things. ;-P
Well, in all seriousness, the monk is broken... in the sense of not functioning effectively (i.e., being useless), IMHO. The druid in 3.5 was a bit overpowered to begin with; nerfing him in Pathfinder was a good thing. The big problem with the Vow of Poverty is that it disproportionately helped classes that needed no help (e.g., druid) and did a lot less for classes that desperately needed help (e.g., fighter).
Vow of Poverty is broken, actually all those vows are broken...
Vow of Abstinence and Vow of Purity are broken? You must have a lot of poison and disease in your campaign.
You must have a lot of poison and disease in your campaign.
And no clerics and no paladins...
Anything is broken if a Rules Lawyering or Power Mongering gamer tries. See the Locate City Nuke and Pun Pun. These two are obvious enough that most sane DMs wouldn't allow them, based on a combination of game balance, fairness, and world versimilitude.
Druids are broken, sorcerors with magic missle and access to a lot of metamagic feats are broken, spell compendium is broken, magic item compendium is broken, book of nine swords is broken, warlocks are broken, spiked chains are broken, etc etc, ad infinitum.
I play with EVERYTHING produced by WotC, including Forgotten Realms material where thematically appropriate (I don't play in FR, so Red Wizards don't work, but I don't mind slipping in a Academy of the Crimson Order or something to make it possible).
I'm lucky, my players all want to tell a story together, play vibrant and fully developed characters, have some fun with each other, and work towards the goal of the adventure/campaign/adventure path as a group. As such, I have no issues with power abuses or imbalances. But not everyone can be as lucky as me, to have gamers who's goals naturally incline them to be disinterested in exploting loopholes or damaging the collective experience by imbalancing their characters by exploiting obviously exploitable material.
|
As someone else alluded to, B9S is very much a test-bed for 4e ideas and concepts, although we didn't really know that at the time.
As such, it doesn't "fit in" as well with a lot of the rest of the 3.5 game mechanics. We choose not to play with it for that reason, issues of "brokenness" aside. We don't like where the game was taken with B9S, and not coincidentally, it turns out we didn't like where the game was taken with 4e...
I don't know if it's "broken" or not - I think I've seen worse probably. And as others have said, a sufficiently motivated powergamer can find ways of breaking and exploiting just about every class there is. Ask me sometime about a Dwarven Defender I saw at 10th level with an AC in the 50s. Who is going to be able to ever hit that?
Ask about the Gnomish Frenzied Berzerker a friend made (in an attempt to make this very point, that anything can be broken if you try hard enough) who used his Gnomish battlepick to deal several hundred points of damage every round.
If you think a single-classed fighter should be the benchmark power level of your campaign, then the Tome of Battle classes will seem overpowered.
If you think a wizard with a good prestige class should be the benchmark power level of your campaign, then the Tome of Battle classes won't seem overpowered at all.
This. I love TOB. I hate batman and codzilla and their omnipotence. TOB is the only viable 3.5 answer to their one man show stuff. A must have indeed.
TOB is the only viable 3.5 answer to their one man show stuff.
No.
Like The Black Bard, I allow EVERYTHING 3.0-3.5 ever produced, whether it is from Wizards themselves or anyone else. Unlike The Black Bard, I have players who are simultaneously interested in making a cool story together AND creating very powerful combinations of classes/feats/spells/racial abilities, etc.
Still, I have never had a character in any of my campaigns who could not be dealt with, or who sucked the fun out of it for any of the other players. It is generally accepted around my gaming table that the more powerful you make your character, the more powerful I'M going to make the bad guys I throw against you.
One party I'm currently running is an evil party with four party members. We have a human dread necromancer, a human crusader (from Bo9S), an elven assassin (core class, from Green Ronin's Assassin's Handbook), and a drow priestess of Lolth. So far the crusader is pumping out a LITTLE more damage than any other single member of the party, but we're not high level yet. 100 points of damage to a target at high level is cool and all (even though the MOST often a ToB character would be able to use that maneuver would be every other round), but I have yet to see the crusader come up with anything as sick as the Circle of Death/Plague of Undead combo that the dread necromancer will be pulling off in a few levels.
I love the Bo9S. If you think it's broken, take a look at a monk with Vow of Poverty and that will set a new benchmark.
My friend and I were talking about ridiculous characters once...he came up with a frost giant monk with the Vow of Poverty.
2. Many of the full bases classes from the "Complete" books are pretty weak -- essentially fighters with their feats chosen for them (e.g., Samurai, Swashbuckler) -- and/or overly-focused.
I was never a fan of the samurai in Complete Warrior. I liked the Staredown class feature. But, the rest is very "meh." For example, Iaijutsu Master...the samurai is treated like having Quick Draw but only with the katana and wakazashi. If you can draw a katana quickly, you can draw other weapons quickly, too. No thanks. I ended modifying the fighter slightly to better evoke the feel of it in a campaign I was in.
I liked many others in the Complete series. I thought to Swashbuckler was pretty cool, the ninja and scout were good replacements if no one wanted to play a rogue and it was a dungeons crawl, and I found the Warlock to be an interesting idea.
|
|
Anything is broken if a Rules Lawyering or Power Mongering gamer tries. See the Locate City Nuke...... and Pun Pun.
I have a player in my game right now working up to a smaller version of the Locate City Nuke. He thinks I don't know what's going on and where he's heading so when an asteroid comes down as he starts casting his version and smashes him it's gonna be a big surprise. I warned everyone not to pull that kind of crap or else. Now they will learn what "or else" means in games I run. A night of making a new PC and not gaming will teach him.
|
|
I had a 6th level gnome tunnel through a tunnel collapse (30ish feet) of petrified wood(stone) with punches. He was a combo of 2 or 3 classes from TOB and used the maneuver to overcome DR and a certain stance to accomplish this. Precision damage happens with every hit also if using TOB, because you don't really need to flank if someone in the group is using a certain stance. If you don't mind that a dual-wielding, precision damage based, medium BAB character can do more damage(and consistantly does) than a full BAB, power-attacking barbarian, then no TOB isn't bad.
However I found it to be too much of a powergaming, munchkiny dream that spits on a bunch of the core classes. Some will say that those classes should be spit on but I think trashing core and adding overpowered in it's place is Bad Thing.
Just my opinion.
Anything is broken if a Rules Lawyering or Power Mongering gamer tries. See the Locate City Nuke...... and Pun Pun.I have a player in my game right now working up to a smaller version of the Locate City Nuke. He thinks I don't know what's going on and where he's heading so when an asteroid comes down as he starts casting his version and smashes him it's gonna be a big surprise. I warned everyone not to pull that kind of crap or else. Now they will learn what "or else" means in games I run. A night of making a new PC and not gaming will teach him.
Side track: What is locate city nuke?
Side track: What is locate city nuke?
It's a way of applying the metamagic feat Explosive Spell to a spell with a large area of effect (like Locate City, which has an AoE of several miles). Then casting the spell will push any affected creatures to the edge of the area of effect (and it does damage based on distance traveled).
There are more steps involved, but that's the gist of it.
|
|
Side track: What is locate city nuke?Anything is broken if a Rules Lawyering or Power Mongering gamer tries. See the Locate City Nuke...... and Pun Pun.I have a player in my game right now working up to a smaller version of the Locate City Nuke. He thinks I don't know what's going on and where he's heading so when an asteroid comes down as he starts casting his version and smashes him it's gonna be a big surprise. I warned everyone not to pull that kind of crap or else. Now they will learn what "or else" means in games I run. A night of making a new PC and not gaming will teach him.
Editted* Better explanation above.
Holy crap..
I had a 6th level gnome tunnel through a tunnel collapse (30ish feet) of petrified wood(stone) with punches. He was a combo of 2 or 3 classes from TOB and used the maneuver to overcome DR and a certain stance to accomplish this. Precision damage happens with every hit also if using TOB, because you don't really need to flank if someone in the group is using a certain stance. If you don't mind that a dual-wielding, precision damage based, medium BAB character can do more damage(and consistantly does) than a full BAB, power-attacking barbarian, then no TOB isn't bad.
However I found it to be too much of a powergaming, munchkiny dream that spits on a bunch of the core classes. Some will say that those classes should be spit on but I think trashing core and adding overpowered in it's place is Bad Thing.
Just my opinion.
I would really like to see the build of this gnome. The thing is, if it is a mix of 2 or 3 classes from ToB, then it would not have access to the higher-level maneuvers like a single-ToB-class 6th level character would. That, plus the maneuvers from one class should not stack with the maneuvers from another class, IIRC (meaning they should have to "refresh" each classes set of maneuvers a different way).
What is the combo exactly that allows this medium BAB dual-wielder to do more consistant damage than a power attacking barbarian? And I trust the barbarian is using a 2 handed weapon to get the most out of power attack, yes?Any neat trick ANY Tome of Battle character may have can be done at MOST every other round...and only if you're a Swordsage or Warblade. The Swordsage must do nothing for a whole round to refresh even one maneuver (unless they have a feat which allows them to reset them all, but STILL by doing nothing for a round), and the Warblade refreshes its maneuvers by making a single, normal melee attack...NOT a maneuver.
Also, any maneuver or stance in the ToB can be taken by any character of any class, through a feat (or chain of feats).
|
I was never a fan of the samurai in Complete Warrior. I liked the Staredown class feature. But, the rest is very "meh." For example, Iaijutsu Master...the samurai is treated like having Quick Draw but only with the katana and wakazashi. If you can draw a katana quickly, you can draw other weapons quickly, too. No thanks. I ended modifying the fighter slightly to better evoke the feel of it in a campaign I was in.
I liked many others in the Complete series. I thought to Swashbuckler was pretty cool, the ninja and scout were good replacements if no one wanted to play a rogue and it was a dungeons crawl, and I found the Warlock to be an interesting idea.
I think that if you want true Samurai flavor, Rokugan does a good job capturing it.
The problems I have with Swashbuckler, Ninja, and Scout is that you could just as easily have done class variants of the Fighter, Rogue and Ranger to get the same flavor.
Last, there's a post above about problems with Monks. Here. Here. I'm playing a monk currently, and despite his cool little talents and nice saves, he's still pretty much the bottom of the totem pole in the group. Here's ways to put the Monk on par with the other classes:
1. I think one key fix would be to up his HD to d10, since a monk pretty much serves front line.
2. I think that the other thing would be to allow flurry of blows go with all monk weapons ...
3. and for that matter, turn to the previous page of PRPG beta with the fighter's weapon categories and allow a monk to train in a category as opposed to being assigned one generic category. (Then as bonus feats, monks could take on more categories.)
|
|
I had a 6th level gnome tunnel through a tunnel collapse (30ish feet) of petrified wood(stone) with punches. He was a combo of 2 or 3 classes from TOB and used the maneuver to overcome DR and a certain stance to accomplish this. Precision damage happens with every hit also if using TOB, because you don't really need to flank if someone in the group is using a certain stance. If you don't mind that a dual-wielding, precision damage based, medium BAB character can do more damage(and consistantly does) than a full BAB, power-attacking barbarian, then no TOB isn't bad.
However I found it to be too much of a powergaming, munchkiny dream that spits on a bunch of the core classes. Some will say that those classes should be spit on but I think trashing core and adding overpowered in it's place is Bad Thing.
Just my opinion.
I would really like to see the build of this gnome. The thing is, if it is a mix of 2 or 3 classes from ToB, then it would not have access to the higher-level maneuvers like a single-ToB-class 6th level character would. That, plus the maneuvers from one class should not stack with the maneuvers from another class, IIRC (meaning they should have to "refresh" each classes set of maneuvers a different way).
What is the combo exactly that allows this medium BAB dual-wielder to do more consistant damage than a power attacking barbarian? And I trust the barbarian is using a 2 handed weapon to get the most out of power attack, yes?
Any neat trick ANY Tome of Battle character may have can be done at MOST every other round...and only if you're a Swordsage or Warblade. The Swordsage must do nothing for a whole round to refresh even one maneuver (unless they have a feat which allows them to reset them all, but STILL by doing nothing for a round), and the Warblade refreshes its maneuvers by making a single, normal melee attack...NOT a maneuver.
Also, any maneuver or stance in the ToB can be taken by any character of any class, through a feat (or chain of feats).
This was over a year ago so I don't remember the exact build, only the final results and the decision to ban the book after our entire group checked to make sure the dual-wielder was legit. He was. And of course the Barb was 2-handing. I didn't say he out classed the barb at 6th level either, although he was close. I was more like 9th when he consistently outdid the barb. Island of blades stance allows you and allies to flank all adjacent foes, without having to manuever into a true flank position and works constantly, allowing all precision damage, all the time. Add in whatever strikes are helpful. And sorry, He was mostly a swordsage/rogue with a touch of either warblade or crusader. We also had a Crusader in the group that loved to be in Thicket of Blades stance constantly. Those 2 with the Barb were chewing through EL 15 encounters with barely a scratch at 9th level. Sometimes it didn't even get into the 2nd round and if it did, more often than not, the bad guys were usually paralyzed or something from a strike and were no longer even a threat. That book + powergamers = Broken. If you don't have powergamers then you should be fine.
Having had only short bits of contact with Bo9S material it seemed to me like it took all the power a full spell caster could bring into a fight but without having the dozens or hundreds of options to navigate, thus opening that level of opening to players who aren't typically nitty gritty detail driven.
I guess I'm saying that Bo9S just make that level damage/power more accessible and thus looks 'broken' compared to earlier options which were either underpowered to start with or required a good deal of planning to execute, both meta-game number crunching and in-game combat setup.
|
|
Also a twfer with the right feats has around 4-6 attacks at 9th level, each one with a +2 flank, sometime more because of party buffs or maneuvers, that do weapon damage + 3d6 sneak attack + whatever weapon stuff you have. Usually he hit with 3 or 4 attacks so you have between 9d6 and 12d6 just from sneak attacks. 3 or 4-d4+1(+1d6 elemental) from the weapon and add it all together for an average of 52.5-70 damage without any crits. What's a 22-24 str barb power attacking with a greatsword at level 9 do?
Ah, Island of Blades....I THOUGHT that would come up. Still, to make the precision damage viable he had to take some serious rogue to get the sneak attack that high. That stance works best in concert with a pure rogue of some sort, to maximize the sneak attacks. So that's not just cheapness with the Tome of Battle, it actually REQUIRES core stuff to be taken advantage of.
And even then, there are WAY worse powergamer things than the B09S...even in the Dragon Compendium! I have a friend planning a halfling wizard/force missile mage/abjurant champion. He has (correctly) calculated that as an 8th level spell, he will be able to blast an empowered, maximized, quickened, etc. (I forget the exact combo of metamagic feats) magic missile with a combination of time stop or something like that to do OVER 124 points of damage with NO chance of missing, it punches through the shield spell, and damage reduction does not apply. And all THAT without rolling even a SINGLE DIE! That is going to be a treat to have to deal with...but I will.
In short, I defend the Bo9S as just another good supplement.
To comment on the origonal post, I would like to share one of the reasons I seem to think that ToB is a bit broken.
Imagine a wizard who, as a wwift plus standard action at any time, can suddenly say "all my spells are refreshed."
That is how a warblade works. As a swift plus standard action, they can refresh thier martial manuvers, and have them all availible once again to be used.
Now it woudln't be that bad if all thier attacks, like most fighter attacks, are single targets, and have a decent damage cap, but at even mid-levels, they gain attacks that not only deal massive damage to single targets (as well as ignore the DR of ANY target). At higher levels, they start gaining area attacks (lighting throw) whose DC is totaly broken. Instead if it being based on 10 + Stat bonus + manuver level, it is based on an attack roll of min +15 BAB +abil mod + magical and feat bonuses + a d20. And, he can do it 7200 times in one day, where as how many 8th level spells can a 15th level wizard cast in one day? A bit broken I think.
1. Why is the Tome of Battle considered broken?
Imagine a wizard who, as a wwift plus standard action at any time, can suddenly say "all my spells are refreshed."
Well, except that the spells aren't as good as wizard spells, and require you to hit in melee for them to take effect. This, coupled with the fact that using almost any maneuver prevents you from taking iterative attacks, takes away a bit from the "brokenness." Couple that with the fact that refreshing maneuvers, unless I'm misremembering, takes a full-round action for a warblade -- a full round in which he isn't fighting -- and I'm not convinced that anything at all is overpowered.
And, unlike a wizard, he can't teleport, summon monsters to fight for him, locate enemies, or any of that good stuff at all. All he can do is fight in melee -- that's it. In that respect, the warblade is really no better than the duskblade.
Couple that with the fact that refreshing maneuvers, unless I'm misremembering, takes a full-round action for a warblade -- a full round in which he isn't fighting -- and I'm not clear that anything at all is overpowered.
I think you're mixing up the swordsage (full round doing nothing) and the warblade (standard action, which can involve hitting someone).
But I agree with your point -- generally speaking, maneuvers aren't as good as spells (although they may be as good as damage-dealing spells in some cases). Nevertheless, there are some maneuvers/feats that I don't care for, either because they're silly or poorly worded (e.g. White Raven Tactics which allows some kind of dumb initiative shenanigans).
Nevertheless, there are some maneuvers/feats that I don't care for, either because they're silly or poorly worded (e.g. White Raven Tactics which allows some kind of dumb initiative shenanigans).
Amen. There's a lot of stuff in there I don't use simply because it seems wanky or silly, but that's an issue of personal taste more than of anything being "broken."
P.S. Thanks for the correction on the warblade vs. swordsage. Sure wish WotC hadn't been quite so obssessed with the words "war" and "blade" when naming classes... Warmage, Warpriest, War Mind, War Hulk, Warblade, Mindblade, Swiftblade, Duskblade, Invisible Blade...
|
|
Nevertheless, there are some maneuvers/feats that I don't care for, either because they're silly or poorly worded (e.g. White Raven Tactics which allows some kind of dumb initiative shenanigans).Amen. There's a lot of stuff in there I don't use simply because it seems wanky or silly, but that's an issue of personal taste more than of anything being "broken."
P.S. Thanks for the correction on the warblade vs. swordsage. Sure wish WotC hadn't been quite so obssessed with the words "war" and "blade" when naming classes... Warmage, Warpriest, War Mind, War Hulk, Warblade, Mindblade, Swiftblade, Duskblade, Invisible Blade...
Well, coming up with anything else requires imagination.
THe manuevers may not, in general, be as good as most spells, but any manuver that a warblade has, or even a swordsage, can be used every other round (which is where I got the 7200 times a day). Lightning throw is a 30 ft. line with a DC based off thier attack roll, doing your damage plus 12d6. Granted this is probbaly the most broken of the manuvers (I cannot think off hand if there is any other as broken right now). NOw immagine a wizard or sorcerer who could fire off, say a 6d6 lighting bolt (reduce the damage for the increase of the range) every other round.
NOw immagine a wizard or sorcerer who could fire off, say a 6d6 lighting bolt (reduce the damage for the increase of the range) every other round.
Of course, by taking the lightning reserve feat from one of those Complete books, the same wizard could fire off a 9d6 lightning bolt every round all day -- and still have all his utility spells, which the fighter lacks.
Shoot, by crafting a staff, the wizard could fire off a 15d6 chain lightning spell every round (or a 30d6 disintegrate), with excellent save DCs. Not 7,200 times a day, but more than enough times to finish the adventure and go home and craft another one.
The thing is, we have an ingrained tendency to accept "anything goes" for wizards, but not for warriors. That's OK, and works out nicely, if the combat system is skewed in the warrior's favor (as it was in 1st edition)... but it's not so good if the base system actually favors the wizard to begin with (as 3.0 did). Bo9S took the 3.0/3.5 combat system and the wizard's power as the established baselines that weren't going to change, and tried to make the warriors fit that new paradigm. At high levels, they're a LOT better than 3.5-ed. fighters, but they're still not quite up to the power of wizards and clerics.
|
|
NOw immagine a wizard or sorcerer who could fire off, say a 6d6 lighting bolt (reduce the damage for the increase of the range) every other round.Of course, by taking the lightning reserve feat from one of those Complete books, the same wizard could fire off a 9d6 lightning bolt every round -- and still have all his utility spells, which the fighter lacks. Shoot, by crafting a staff, the wizard could fire off 15d6 chain lightning spells every round, with excellent save DCs.
The thing is, we have an ingrained tendency to accept "anything goes" for wizards, but not for warriors. That's OK, and works out nicely, if the combat system is skewed in the warrior's favor (as it was in 1st edition)... but it's not so good if the base system actually favors the wizard to begin with (as 3.0 did). Bo9S took the 3.0/3.5 combat system and the wizard's power as the established baselines that weren't going to change, and tried to make the warriors fit that new paradigm.
Yep. Made them more "magical" or "wuxiaish" or "animeish" or whatever. Simple fix of the move/action dynamic and spell disruption does the trick, but it isn't flashy enough to sell a book.
Meh.
Okay, I had completly forgotten about the Reserve feats. And with the Storm Bolt Reserve, you are indeed right, the sorcerer/wizard gets a mini lighting bolt, but even better. Dang, I just looked at it. It does not say it even allows a saving throw.
Ouch.
I would like to add thought the DC for Lighting Throw should be based as all of the other TOme of Battle powers are. Rather than an attack roll.
Meh... a lot of people here is arguing about very specific situations... like the gnome with mountain hammer who can destroy walls at 6th level....in many rounds.
so what? batman can simply ignore them even before... while codzilla could chop through them.
TOB offers a simple way to obtain competitive melee characters without spending hours on manuals and feat combos and without a monstrous system mastery. Imho it offers to melee (and even ranged) combatants non casters the love they need. Not every TOB school suits every campaign, but for example Iron heart suits parfectly even a Conan campaign, while setting sun suits an oriental one.
It offers some tricks that allow a fighter not to become the caster's puppy with only a thought.
TOB is powerful, but its exploits have to be used carefully... a single class barbarian is much more effective in melee damage and stamina, while a warblade has nasty tricks and strikes that allows him to accomplish amazing feats and endure spells and effects that barbarian couldn't.
Core 3.5 "fighters", without a strong party support and a strong magic items dotation are simply WEAK. It's a fact. Casters classes are self-sufficient and "competitive" at almost every level. A strong 3.5 fighter, without a darn magic sword, could'n t even beat a stupid melee opponent with only a decent damage reduction, which SHOULD be its scope in game.
Luckily for me, PF RPG has understood this quite well... look to new feat effects and class abilities (feats against DR, feats that inflicts an effect after a critical, no critical immunity, barbarian and monk "special moves" that are disguised maneuvers...)... they're more tobbish than you could imagine at first glance.
so what? batman can simply ignore them even before... while codzilla could chop through them.
Batman? Codzilla?
Please explain these odd references.Also what is tobbish?
|
|
It's a way of applying the metamagic feat Explosive Spell to a spell with a large area of effect (like Locate City, which has an AoE of several miles). Then casting the spell will push any affected creatures to the edge of the area of effect (and it does damage based on distance traveled).
There are more steps involved, but that's the gist of it.
Oh, that's easy...
PC: "I cast locate city with Explosive Spell on Arcanthia City."
Me: "Mmmkay. The spell goes off on you. Take 348d6 damage" (or whatever)
PC: "WHAT?"
Me: "The city had spell turning on contingency."
It's a way of applying the metamagic feat Explosive Spell to a spell with a large area of effect (like Locate City, which has an AoE of several miles). Then casting the spell will push any affected creatures to the edge of the area of effect (and it does damage based on distance traveled).
There are more steps involved, but that's the gist of it.
Oh, that's easy...
PC: "I cast locate city with Explosive Spell on Arcanthia City."
Me: "Mmmkay. The spell goes off on you. Take 348d6 damage" (or whatever)
PC: "WHAT?"
Me: "The city had spell turning on contingency."
Area effect spells are not affected by Spell Turning. :-)
The whole thing is absurd. Teleport has a range of 100 miles per level; does that mean I can lay waste entire continents with it? "Well," you smugly reply, "Locate city has it listed as area of effect, not range." Well, poo-poo on that; it really means range, not area, but the goofy stat block gives you limited selections as to how and where you can enter those values.
PC: "I cast locate city with Explosive Spell on Arcanthia City."
Me: "Mmmkay. The spell goes off on you. Take 348d6 damage" (or whatever)
PC: "WHAT?"
Me: "The spell provides you with the knowledge of where the city is. 'You' are the area of effect."
I just looked up the Explosive Spell feat and the Locate City spell.
"Explosive Spell can be applied only to spells that allow
Reflex saves and affect an area (a cone, cylinder, line, or burst)."
Locate City doesn't allow a Reflex save, so you shouldn't be able to use that feat on that spell.
|
|
Area effect spells are not affected by Spell Turning. :-)
Did I say spell turning? <chuckle> I meant greater spell turning. Yeah. Works just like spell turning except it works on all spells. Mmm hmm. With a wish thrown on top to make the damage unavoidable and unresistable.
Being an evil GM means never having to say you're sorry. :-D
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Hey, Obed's GGG,
Hogarth was giving us the quick-and-dirty version.
Holy Beholder, a poster over on the Gleemax formus, had this, more extensive explanation:
1. Use the Snowcasting Metamagic(Frostburn) feat to give Locate City(RoD) the [Cold] descriptor.
2. Use the Flash Frost Spell (PHBII) metamagic feat to cause the spell to deal 2 points of cold damage per spell level (In this case, 1, so 2 points of damage).
3. Use the Energy Substitution (Electricity) (CArc) to cause the [Cold] descriptor to change to the [Electricity] descriptor. This may or may not change the 2 points of cold damage to lightning damage, but it doesn't matter.
4. Apply the Born of Three Thunders (CArc, I think) metamagic feat to this monster of a spell. All it requires is that the spell has the electricity descriptor or the sonic descriptor and deals hit point damage. This causes half of the spell's damage to be electricity damage and half sonic damage, for 1 point of damage each. More importantly, it then gives the targets a Fortitude save in order to avoid being stunned for one round. If they fail this save, they then get a Reflex save to avoid being knocked prone. Both of these saves are at the same save DC as the original spell was.
5. Note that this horrible mishmash of metamagic feats now has a Reflex save.
6. Apply the Explosive Spell(CArc I think) metamagic feat to this thing. On a failed Reflex save, they're ejected to the edge of the spell, taking 1d6 damage for every 10' they traveled.
7. There are 528 10' increments in a mile, and Locate City has a radius of ten miles per level.
9. Get yourself immune to both electrical and sound damage, so YOU don't risk get blown up.