Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Using Book of Nine Swords with Pathfinder


Conversions

1 to 50 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Andoran

First off I know how some on this board dislike the book. So to avoid any confusion this thread is about:

Using stuff from BO9S with Pathfinder. How would you incorporate it and how would you convert it.

NOT a thread where you tell me how you hate the book, or how broken it is or how you would not allow it at your table or anything negative about hsort of something that I may need to be careful about ion terms of game mechanics. I really do no want this thread to turn into a fight betwwen the pro and con factions who dilike and like the book. Ignore the above and you will be reported to the mods.

So enlighten me on how to use the book.


memorax wrote:

First off I know how some on this board dislike the book. So to avoid any confusion this thread is about:

Using stuff from BO9S with Pathfinder. How would you incorporate it and how would you convert it.

NOT a thread where you tell me how you hate the book, or how broken it is or how you would not allow it at your table or anything negative about hsort of something that I may need to be careful about ion terms of game mechanics. I really do no want this thread to turn into a fight betwwen the pro and con factions who dilike and like the book. Ignore the above and you will be reported to the mods.

So enlighten me on how to use the book.

Convert Hit Dice. d6, d8, d10.

No increase to abilities...their maneuvers etc, make them equal to Pathfinder characters.

Remove any save or die abilities.


Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:


Convert Hit Dice. d6, d8, d10.

No increase to abilities...their maneuvers etc, make them equal to Pathfinder characters.

Remove any save or die abilities.

IIRC Hit dice are taken care of as I believe Sword Sage had a Moderate BAB and d8 HD while the two with good BAB had d10 and d12.

I'd personally drop the d12 to a D10 for the Warblade(?). Of course, I'm not a fan of Bo9S so take that advice how you will.


Well, we use it as is and have had no issues.

Though, Xaaon is right in that, since Paizo dropped them, the save or die stuff should be dropped or modified.

I love my Paizo Evoker Wizard/Warblade/Jade Phoenix Mage. Her Bo9S abilities came in handy when my GM hubby threw a demon at us that was immune to my standard spell set.

And he'd better give me a chance to learn some spells that will work on demons in the future. [I *HATE* vancian magic]


I believe Richard Baker spoke out on this subject, changes where:

-No recovery Method for any class

-Perception replaces Concentration

-Crusader D12's hitpoints

The rest escapes me. Personally I just use the concentration/perception part and use logic on the combat maneuvers.

Cheliax

Spiral_Ninja wrote:

Well, we use it as is and have had no issues.

Though, Xaaon is right in that, since Paizo dropped them, the save or die stuff should be dropped or modified.

I love my Paizo Evoker Wizard/Warblade/Jade Phoenix Mage. Her Bo9S abilities came in handy when my GM hubby threw a demon at us that was immune to my standard spell set.

And he'd better give me a chance to learn some spells that will work on demons in the future. [I *HATE* vancian magic]

Is there anyone playing a Pathfinder in your campaign? Is s/he overshadowed by your Warblade?


joela wrote:
Is there anyone playing a Pathfinder in your campaign? Is s/he overshadowed by your Warblade?

We're multi-classed with Paizo except for one character. The idea was we were a team trained by a Master of Nine who were sent to check on a colony with massive loss issues...100 indentured servants a month in/100 a month vanished. [the mindflayer trio secretly running the place have a lot to do with that]

We have my wizard/warblade [1 level of warblade], a cleric/crusader and a full warblade, who actually won that fight for us. I took out the elemental subordinates I could affect, kept them gone and the cleric kept the warblade up.


Glutton wrote:

I believe Richard Baker spoke out on this subject, changes where:

-No recovery Method for any class

-Perception replaces Concentration

-Crusader D12's hitpoints

The rest escapes me. Personally I just use the concentration/perception part and use logic on the combat maneuvers.

Make the second change, ignore the first and third.

Barbarian kept his d12, after all ;p

Cheliax

Spiral_Ninja wrote:
joela wrote:
Is there anyone playing a Pathfinder in your campaign? Is s/he overshadowed by your Warblade?

We're multi-classed with Paizo except for one character. The idea was we were a team trained by a Master of Nine who were sent to check on a colony with massive loss issues...100 indentured servants a month in/100 a month vanished. [the mindflayer trio secretly running the place have a lot to do with that]

We have my wizard/warblade [1 level of warblade], a cleric/crusader and a full warblade, who actually won that fight for us. I took out the elemental subordinates I could affect, kept them gone and the cleric kept the warblade up.

thanks, spiral_ninja.


I'm running for a Swordsage right now and it is a nightmare. He's a very smart player, and it is a very cool class. I happen to like the concepts in Bo9S but don't think it plays very well with basic combat.

A level 6 swordsage took out a Stone Golem in like 3 rounds with nonsupernatural abilities that do great amounts of damage, thereby bypassing DR and its magic immunity.

Cheliax

meatrace wrote:

I'm running for a Swordsage right now and it is a nightmare. He's a very smart player, and it is a very cool class. I happen to like the concepts in Bo9S but don't think it plays very well with basic combat.

A level 6 swordsage took out a Stone Golem in like 3 rounds with nonsupernatural abilities that do great amounts of damage, thereby bypassing DR and its magic immunity.

Interesting.

Wait. How'd the swordsage's nonsupernatual abilities bypass DR? Is that a specific maneuver? (I don't have the B09S book in front of me.) The DR applies to everything except adamantine and magic, which it doubly deals with its immunity.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

The Mountain Hammer line of maneuvers allow you to add a number of d6s to a single strike, while bypassing DR. It's from the Stone Dragon school, the one school available to all martial adepts. It should be noted that the swordsage has to spen a full-round action doing nothing if he wants to reuse a maneuver, so he still shouldn't have been able to 'obliterate' the golem in 3 rounds. No martial adept can spam the same maneuver two rounds in a row.

As for adapting the book--use Perception for the relevant Concentration checks, and replace other skills with their Pathfinder equivalents. It's a bit of a patchy fix, since several disciplines will have overlapping 'key skills', but very few disciplines actually have any mechanics relating to the key skills. That's really the only changes that need to be made.


Funny enough, pound for pound, a PF fighter will outdamage pretty much any ToB class ;)

Cheliax

Revan wrote:
The Mountain Hammer line of maneuvers allow you to add a number of d6s to a single strike, while bypassing DR.

Ah. Thanks!


joela wrote:
meatrace wrote:

I'm running for a Swordsage right now and it is a nightmare. He's a very smart player, and it is a very cool class. I happen to like the concepts in Bo9S but don't think it plays very well with basic combat.

A level 6 swordsage took out a Stone Golem in like 3 rounds with nonsupernatural abilities that do great amounts of damage, thereby bypassing DR and its magic immunity.

Interesting.

Wait. How'd the swordsage's nonsupernatual abilities bypass DR? Is that a specific maneuver? (I don't have the B09S book in front of me.) The DR applies to everything except adamantine and magic, which it doubly deals with its immunity.

This was a few weeks ago, but one was the Mountain Hammer as mentioned (15 dmg), Insightful Strike (concentration check to damage, which is 1d20+class level+wisdom. 25 dmg right there on his roll) and Fire Riposte which, while Supernatural, AFAIK doesn't allow SR so still bypassed it (he rolled 16 on his 4d6). That's just 2 actions really.

It was just one encounter, and I have no problem letting players shine, but it genuinely took me aback how quickly they were able to take out an APL+4 encounter, after 4 previous encounters, without blinking an eye.


memorax wrote:

First off I know how some on this board dislike the book. So to avoid any confusion this thread is about:

Using stuff from BO9S with Pathfinder. How would you incorporate it and how would you convert it.

NOT a thread where you tell me how you hate the book, or how broken it is or how you would not allow it at your table or anything negative about hsort of something that I may need to be careful about ion terms of game mechanics. I really do no want this thread to turn into a fight betwwen the pro and con factions who dilike and like the book. Ignore the above and you will be reported to the mods.

So enlighten me on how to use the book.

In 3.5.

This book was insanely overpowered.

In pathfinder.

Just some hit die changes. Some save or die changes. Some skill changes.

Thats about it.


VictorCrackus wrote:

In 3.5.

This book was insanely overpowered.

:|


Oh, yes, the Concentration issue.

My GM chose to replace it with the Martial Lore skill from Bo9S.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

We've been running it pretty much as written. Picking a skill to replace Concentration where required is about as complicated as it gets.

As for balance, PF classes are so over-the-top that ToB is at best level with them. Divine Surge might benefit from a tad bit of a nerf (add 8d8 to one attack and is available low-level) but almost everything is fine.

Anyone who is upset about a Swordsage mowing through a golem hasn't dealt with my player's purely PF paladin mowing throw evil creature after evil creature after evil creature. Hey, yeah, save a smite for every BBEG. Yes, I could design around it, but fact is most bad guys are evil, many are evil outsiders, and well... paladin becomes un-hittable and massacres BBEG.

Andoran

Thanks to all for the suggesstions keep them coming. And remember I did ask not to tell me it was overpowered or broken and taht includes referincing the book to 3.5. rules.


We have run it. In pf a fighter does more damage on a full attack. So do paladins fighting evil or rangers vs favored or scout (archetype) rogues. TOB classes make far better use of standard actions and mobility. Other than being REALLY versatile they are ok. We treat them as being rare and exotic- all TOB classes are Tian in our pf world.

Works but feels different....


Spiral_Ninja wrote:

Oh, yes, the Concentration issue.

My GM chose to replace it with the Martial Lore skill from Bo9S.

This is what I did also.

I also gave switched the warlord and crusader's hit die.
The book says anyone can take maneuvers and it is based on hit die to determine maneuvers. You have to have at least one level in a class for my games to get access to that class's maneuvers.


I'm all for giving Crusader a D12 HD.


I'm playing a Halfling Swordsage (Desert Wind and Shadow Hand are my primary schools) and another party member is playing a Goliath Monk (pathfinder ed). Right now we're both 5th Level and neck n neck for damage output in an average encounter. My AC is still much higher than his but his HP is much higher than mine. Over all, we're both playing similar type characters and filling different party rolls, but it seems balanced to me.

I don't think you have to do anything other than replace concentration skill with Martial Lore skill and you should be all set. You may want to nerf the Warblade's recovery method if you find the class to overwhelming (a simple 1 maneuver as a swift action, instead of all maneuvers, should do it.)

Cheliax

Ardenup wrote:

We have run it. In pf a fighter does more damage on a full attack. So do paladins fighting evil or rangers vs favored or scout (archetype) rogues. TOB classes make far better use of standard actions and mobility. Other than being REALLY versatile they are ok. We treat them as being rare and exotic- all TOB classes are Tian in our pf world.

Works but feels different....

+1, especially basing such PCs from Tian.

Cheliax

Senevri wrote:
I'm all for giving Crusader a D12 HD.

I think it's a bit strong. I'm multi-classing into Crusader at my next level and I figured the class was strong enough that I didn't even mention d12 hit die to my GM. I'm just quietly changing it.

Ardenup wrote:

We have run it. In pf a fighter does more damage on a full attack. So do paladins fighting evil or rangers vs favored or scout (archetype) rogues. TOB classes make far better use of standard actions and mobility. Other than being REALLY versatile they are ok. We treat them as being rare and exotic- all TOB classes are Tian in our pf world.

Works but feels different....

I question whether ToB classes are even better with standard actions than a Fighter with the Mobile alternate class features. But that's not the point.

Anyway, I think ToB is pretty well balanced with PF classes. I don't think that the recovery methods need to be eliminated. I'm not even sure why that would be needed...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have a Pact Binder in my game that we use more or less as is. I know it's not quite the same as Bo9S, but they had similar designs. I've tweaked any save or die abilities to match the nearest equivalent spell (when in doubt, make it work like finger of death or slay living.) The only thing that is a little awkward is that everything is a Supernatural ability and bypasses spell resistance and magic immunity. On the other hand, golems are only affected by fort saves that affect objects, so a bunch of stuff he does isn't really affective against them.

I would expect Bo9S classes to be no less of a close combat monster than a PF barbarian. They are a bit more complicated to play. I'd be interested in seeing some of their maneuvers translated into a feat chain for monks/fighters to use.


deinol wrote:

I have a Pact Binder in my game that we use more or less as is. I know it's not quite the same as Bo9S, but they had similar designs. I've tweaked any save or die abilities to match the nearest equivalent spell (when in doubt, make it work like finger of death or slay living.) The only thing that is a little awkward is that everything is a Supernatural ability and bypasses spell resistance and magic immunity. On the other hand, golems are only affected by fort saves that affect objects, so a bunch of stuff he does isn't really affective against them.

I would expect Bo9S classes to be no less of a close combat monster than a PF barbarian. They are a bit more complicated to play. I'd be interested in seeing some of their maneuvers translated into a feat chain for monks/fighters to use.

They do, sorta. There's a feat that lets you learn a maneuver, and with PF's extended number of feats...well, you see how it goes ;)


ProfessorCirno wrote:
VictorCrackus wrote:

In 3.5.

This book was insanely overpowered.

:|

At least in my group.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

*imagine vitriol-laced diatribe disparaging your group here*

Just so we observe proper internet protocol without wasting our time with more empty arguing. :)


Thank you for that.

It's EASY for the book to be overpowered. Imagine a group, with:
- Wisdom-focused monk
- A wizard who crafts potions and wands and whose staple spells are magic missile and fireball
- A finesse Fighter.

Then add a warblade or swordsage to the mix, whose combat capabilities are really HARD to screw up.

Better question would be, why _aren't_ those characters I mentioned first good in combat? They're rather iconic concepts, so they, they really need to work.

Or the game is, kinda wrong.


Senevri wrote:

Thank you for that.

It's EASY for the book to be overpowered. Imagine a group, with:
- Wisdom-focused monk
- A wizard who crafts potions and wands and whose staple spells are magic missile and fireball
- A finesse Fighter.

Then add a warblade or swordsage to the mix, whose combat capabilities are really HARD to screw up.

Better question would be, why _aren't_ those characters I mentioned first good in combat? They're rather iconic concepts, so they, they really need to work.

Or the game is, kinda wrong.

You're comparing an apple pie to a turd sandwich. The apple pie is not overpowered because the turd sandwich is a turd sandwich ;)

Cheliax

Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?


joela wrote:
Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?

I have used the warlord and the crusader. They work quiet well.

Cheliax

wraithstrike wrote:
joela wrote:
Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?
I have used the warlord and the crusader. They work quiet well.

Coolio. Have you added any particular houserules on them beyond converting them to the Pathfinder Roleplaying ruleset? Extra feats, for example?


wraithstrike wrote:
joela wrote:
Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?
I have used the warlord and the crusader. They work quiet well.

A friend of mine has this hilarious build with the crusader, the cleric, and the holy vindicator. The stigmata goes directly to steely resolve. XD

Cheliax

ProfessorCirno wrote:
Senevri wrote:

Thank you for that.

It's EASY for the book to be overpowered. Imagine a group, with:
- Wisdom-focused monk
- A wizard who crafts potions and wands and whose staple spells are magic missile and fireball
- A finesse Fighter.

Then add a warblade or swordsage to the mix, whose combat capabilities are really HARD to screw up.

Better question would be, why _aren't_ those characters I mentioned first good in combat? They're rather iconic concepts, so they, they really need to work.

Or the game is, kinda wrong.

You're comparing an apple pie to a turd sandwich. The apple pie is not overpowered because the turd sandwich is a turd sandwich ;)

OH MY GOD! + INFINITY!!1!!%!!

Now that all caps and agreement are over, the point is well made. Those are iconic archetypes and we could all wish that the rules supported making them good. But they don't. Its not the rules fault that finesse and two weapon fighting is always worse than a 2hander.

I think the real question is, when you have alternate classes that could theoretically make a finesse fighter do something approaching level appropriate damage with the Warblade or a Wisdom focused Monk that doesn't eat nuts with a Sword Sage, why do you have to hate them?


I'm all for running w/the classes and just adjusting anything that raises your eyebrows too high as/if it comes up in play. Adjust/redesign on the fly, and move forward.

I think the Bo9S works out well enough, and frankly - you've gotten the best advice so far as I can tell about conversion (ie: I can't really add anything to that discussion as it's pretty straight forward).

At *best* I'd say monitor/review the maneuvers very closely if anything before allowing them all willy-nilly into the game. You're call, though.

As for the "wisdom based monk" one feat can do that: Intuitive Strike - it's from Book of Exalted Deeds and grants the wis modifier in "to hit" rolls in place of str modifier.

If you pick that up for a monk, you're golden and can pump Wis like crazy and be equally effective in combat regarding 'to hit' and you reduce the MAD a bit as str can now be de-emphasized and Wis and Dex can become the primary focus abilities for you. It's pretty effective, too.


The Speaker in Dreams wrote:


As for the "wisdom based monk" one feat can do that: Intuitive Strike - it's from Book of Exalted Deeds and grants the wis modifier in "to hit" rolls in place of str modifier.

Well, it's one-half of the solution - You still have a damage problem.

Now, you DO need about 13 STR since you(monk) want power attack.

Intuitive Strike + Insightful Strike would give freedom to dump DEX to 13, at least.


Senevri wrote:
The Speaker in Dreams wrote:


As for the "wisdom based monk" one feat can do that: Intuitive Strike - it's from Book of Exalted Deeds and grants the wis modifier in "to hit" rolls in place of str modifier.

Well, it's one-half of the solution - You still have a damage problem.

Now, you DO need about 13 STR since you(monk) want power attack.

Intuitive Strike + Insightful Strike would give freedom to dump DEX to 13, at least.

Well ... sort of. There's the PF feat called "Pirahanna Strike" or something that basically lets you get PA benefits w/out a 13 str (and no 2-handed benefits of str either), but still ... 13 isn't *hard* to manage and, frankly, more useful - just pointing out the option, though. ;-)

I'm not sold on "you want power attack" for monk, though as it means reduction of "to hit" even though on a flurry you can at least try to 'keep pace' w/most full bab-types, so I can see the point there (I'm guessing it's to use PA on Flurry attacks only, yes?)

Ok, so, next up you have the ability to make Wis sky-rocket, so do it. Keep it up high and you know what magically goes up w/it and scales? Stunning Fist. Yup - get a NICE DC now by being able to focus upon Wis (rather than the MAD split playing w/out these options in play).

So, here's how the monk really doesn't *need* power attack to keep pace - open up a flurry w/a stun to boot - if the target fails (good, GOOD chance given you keep Wis as high stat), then it loses any/all dex bonus AND take another -2 to AC for being stunned outright. Point: lower AC ==> higher "to hit" rate for the Monk, so *always* open up w/a SF in conjunction w/a flurry and the Monk's damage will of necessity increase. You already have a good "to hit" boon on account of pumping Wis, and NOW, instead of just being able to hit and damage (a str build), you can hit - stun - and SET THE SUCKER UP for all the rest of your attacks, AND for your allies to dog-pile on top to boot! This is a good thing (vs. just straight str build guy).

Ok, so, adding some more stuff with levels - burn a ki point to get another attack at highest bab, and pick up Medusae's Wrath (or whatever), and you get 3 more attacks at highest "to hit" rate - all sort of contingent on circumstances, though:
1) Ki points in pool to spend - if you have none, or are running low, you may well NOT want to use this (take away 1 of the highest attacks). Still, +1 more attack at full bab is nice!

2) Medusae's Wrath grants 2 more strikes on a stunned opponent ... you following the build, yes? So ... open with the stun, get the stun ==> +2 MORE attacks against a lower AC target that really can't do anything (AND you're still setting him up for the rest of the party to dog-pile as well with similar bonuses).

Now, if all of this works out, the monk will flurry (that's now equal to a 2-wpn wielding attacker), stun, get a higher "to hit" chance out of the stun, and (if burning a ki point) pick up 3 MORE strikes over and above what any other 2-weapon wielder will be swinging with.

Honestly, with that many attacks at the highest "to hit" rate and keying that "to hit" off of your highest ability, the monk *will* be dealing out damage just fine ... just make prolific use of that Stunning Fist. It's *actually* a damn good option for helping out your team as well since the effect of "stun" lasts until just before your next turn.

If you *really* want to bring the pain and not burn so many SF uses, then pick up the Pain Touch feat (complete warrior). It adds 1 round of "nauseated" condition on the target. It reduces them to 1 move action for the turn at best. That's pretty darn useful, too (again, party and teamwork tactics here).

None of this is "out of the box" for the monk, though, but man ... the PF monk is *far* from helpless.

Just pointing out some useful combo's of feats from 3.x and PF that really, REALLY work well to make the monk shine. {'bout darn time, too!}


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ProfessorCirno wrote:
deinol wrote:
I would expect Bo9S classes to be no less of a close combat monster than a PF barbarian. They are a bit more complicated to play. I'd be interested in seeing some of their maneuvers translated into a feat chain for monks/fighters to use.
They do, sorta. There's a feat that lets you learn a maneuver, and with PF's extended number of feats...well, you see how it goes ;)

I was thinking more of taking each maneuver and turning them into feats. But yeah, it probably is easier to just use the generic one. As cool as book of a thousand combat feats would be, it's too much work for a fan project and can't have a published conversion since it isn't open content.

Andoran

Thanks to almost all who responded in the thread. I think it has run its course. Fell free to add to it. To those who still felt to add stuff about the book being broken. When I say don't tell me a product is broken I don't want to hear any statement that tells me the prosuct is broken. I despise the word. It gets thrown ouit to often for stuff that is not rules or mechanically broken. More for sometihng that a certain subset o DM feels is too good for the players to have.


joela wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
joela wrote:
Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?
I have used the warlord and the crusader. They work quiet well.
Coolio. Have you added any particular houserules on them beyond converting them to the Pathfinder Roleplaying ruleset? Extra feats, for example?

I remember doing was specifying what Iron Heart Surge could and could not do.

The Crusader chart for getting stances is incorrect. If you follow it you can't get the highest level stances. Use the warblade progression for the stances. I also don't allow you to take martial stances unless you have a level in that class, in case I did not mention it before. I think anything I did has already been listed in this thread. I did not have to do much.


VictorCrackus wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
joela wrote:
Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?
I have used the warlord and the crusader. They work quiet well.
A friend of mine has this hilarious build with the crusader, the cleric, and the holy vindicator. The stigmata goes directly to steely resolve. XD

I don't think that was the intent. I don't even know if it is rules legal, but if the DM lets him get away with it. :)

Cheliax

wraithstrike wrote:
joela wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
joela wrote:
Getting back to the OP's use of the supp without getting into a discussion of it's a bad supp/overpowering/etc., has anyone used the various classes in lieu of the Pathfinder fighter, monk, etc., as originally suggested in Bo9S?
I have used the warlord and the crusader. They work quiet well.
Coolio. Have you added any particular houserules on them beyond converting them to the Pathfinder Roleplaying ruleset? Extra feats, for example?

I remember doing was specifying what Iron Heart Surge could and could not do.

The Crusader chart for getting stances is incorrect. If you follow it you can't get the highest level stances. Use the warblade progression for the stances. I also don't allow you to take martial stances unless you have a level in that class, in case I did not mention it before. I think anything I did has already been listed in this thread. I did not have to do much.

Thanks!


One of my players loves the tome of battle to death. His most recent character is a warblade/crusader/swordsage, aiming to get into the mast of the nine (just one level of swordsage and crusader, the rest warblade.) So far, it hasn'r been too much of a problem. We replaced Concentration with Autohypnosis from the XPH. The biggest problem is that 4 schools now belong to the Acrobatics skill. However, I threw an equal level fighter at him. Although the fighter is still weak when compared to the spell casting classes, Paizo did a damn good job fixing it, and it's power is on par with a warblade, as long as you remove the save or die effects. The new power attack really helps, and some of the new options in the Advanced players handbook are incredible.

To sum it up, use it as is, but what we did was this

1) Concentration replaced by sutohypnosis
2) Change save or die effects into effects like finger of death (10 damage per initiator level on a failed save).

Thats all.


I add "Dual Strike" to crusader at 20th, mirroring "Dual Boost" from s.sage. I like symmetry, and it really doesn't overpower anything.

Death effects to 10/initiator level, and autohypnosis (or perception) changed out for the concentration skill both make sense.

Otherwise... Not sure there's really anything else to do. I've played extensively with the ToB, both in 3.5 and in PF, and they really do balance out w/PF base classes.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
sheadunne wrote:

I'm playing a Halfling Swordsage (Desert Wind and Shadow Hand are my primary schools) and another party member is playing a Goliath Monk (pathfinder ed). Right now we're both 5th Level and neck n neck for damage output in an average encounter. My AC is still much higher than his but his HP is much higher than mine. Over all, we're both playing similar type characters and filling different party rolls, but it seems balanced to me.

I don't think you have to do anything other than replace concentration skill with Martial Lore skill and you should be all set. You may want to nerf the Warblade's recovery method if you find the class to overwhelming (a simple 1 maneuver as a swift action, instead of all maneuvers, should do it.)

Heya sheadunne!

I'm the sucker running the above. Add to the above a Dwarven Bard, a Spellscale Warmage(converted fairly eaisly)/Ranger.

Now that's a party...no humans!

I agree that the book seems fine. For Pathfinder conversion, drop/convert the save or die stuff.

In retrospect, the Warblade's ability to recover is WAY more powerful compared to the other 2, and I do think it should be pared down as opposed to boosting the other 2.


For our retired 3.5 game, I converted my Black Guard PC into an epic Anti-Paladin20th /Unholy Vindicator 10th/Cleric 1st/Crusader 6th. So we decided to necro that campaign and running onwards with the PF conversions of our old classes.

The previous character had more martial adept levels, but I replaced most of that with the Unholy Vindicator prestige class.

So far, it all seems to work fine, no problems or disparities. Also fun running an Anti-Paladin at epic levels.

GP


Veldan Rath wrote:
sheadunne wrote:

I'm playing a Halfling Swordsage (Desert Wind and Shadow Hand are my primary schools) and another party member is playing a Goliath Monk (pathfinder ed). Right now we're both 5th Level and neck n neck for damage output in an average encounter. My AC is still much higher than his but his HP is much higher than mine. Over all, we're both playing similar type characters and filling different party rolls, but it seems balanced to me.

I don't think you have to do anything other than replace concentration skill with Martial Lore skill and you should be all set. You may want to nerf the Warblade's recovery method if you find the class to overwhelming (a simple 1 maneuver as a swift action, instead of all maneuvers, should do it.)

Heya sheadunne!

I'm the sucker running the above. Add to the above a Dwarven Bard, a Spellscale Warmage(converted fairly eaisly)/Ranger.

Now that's a party...no humans!

I agree that the book seems fine. For Pathfinder conversion, drop/convert the save or die stuff.

In retrospect, the Warblade's ability to recover is WAY more powerful compared to the other 2, and I do think it should be pared down as opposed to boosting the other 2.

To be fair, the Crusader's recovery is the most powerful.

It's just also the funkiest.

1 to 50 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Conversions / Using Book of Nine Swords with Pathfinder All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.