I have a player interested in making a character using this book. I have a copy on PDF, but I haven't gone through it that much. My initial concerns are that the classes might be too powerful and make other martial classes seem obsolete, and that adding that making fighters as complex as spell casters will result in even more cumbersome combat enounters that will be frustrating and overly drawn out.
I know there are people out there using this book, so if anyone can let me know what their experience has been, and whether they think bringing this book into the campaign is a good or bad idea, let me know. As a final note this particular player is a munchkin.
I've got a player running a warblade on one night and a swordsage on another. The warblade does seem to be very powerful but the swordsage doesn't seem too bad. The warblade average damage is 17 points of damage at 4th level with a masterwork katana.
He doesn't slow combat down because he uses the maneuver cards from WOTC site.
Don't allow the book until you've read the whole thing. Then, you'll be in a position to make an informed choice.
Personally, I thought the power-level of the classes looked about fine (but I haven't seen it in actual play, as my players weren't interested). But I don't see that adding this system would slow the game down any more than having magic or psionics in the game does. It's just one more FX system.
And definately get the manoeuvre cards from Wizards.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I had a visiting player from out of town in my most recent game and he asked me, point-blank, if there was anything I wouldn't let him play. I told him "No, you're only going to be here for one game session. Make whatever the hell you want as long as it fits into the setting (Iron Kingdoms)."
He made a warblade. He made a warblade... with Monkey Grip and an oversized Fullblade (Arms & Equipment Guide). 18 Strength (due to his gauntlets of ogre power) and all this mess allowed him to swing for 3d8 + 9 + 5d6 damage every other round. This was at level 7 and he had something like +16 to hit.
Be very careful allowing this book into your games. I let this guy get away with it because, like I said, he was only there for one game. I had never seen this book before and, now that I know what it is capable of, I will probably never allow it again unless the game is BASED around the ideas in this book.
He made a warblade. He made a warblade... with Monkey Grip and an oversized Fullblade (Arms & Equipment Guide). 18 Strength (due to his gauntlets of ogre power) and all this mess allowed him to swing for 3d8 + 9 + 5d6 damage every other round. This was at level 7 and he had something like +16 to hit.
That doesn't sound like the Warblade was particularly the problem. The fullblade/Monkey Grip combo is really cheesy, not least because the A&EG is a 3.0 book that wasn't updated - in "Sword & Fist" where the fullblade originally appeared, this combo was explicitly ruled out by the fullblade already being one step too large.
The other major problem I can see is that I don't think the math on that +16 to hit is right. +7 BAB, +4 Str, -2 MG gives +9, which leaves another +7 or so to find. You can get some of it through feats, and some through stances, but all of that? I might well be wrong, but it sounds like an awful lot.
In my campaigns we have a human sword sage and a Goliath warblade. Neither seem truly overpowered but it continually amazes me the variety of situations that the swordage can solve. If your party is going to be short a rogue or a wizard or some such, this can be a nice addition. I am trying to make sure he doesn't steal all of the glory from the other players since he can do so much. The Goliath does a ton of damage, but then that is what they are made to do.
I agree that the maneuver cards are great as well.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
The other major problem I can see is that I don't think the math on that +16 to hit is right. +7 BAB, +4 Str, -2 MG gives +9, which leaves another +7 or so to find. You can get some of it through feats, and some through stances, but all of that? I might well be wrong, but it sounds like an awful lot.
The gigantic weapon wasn't really the bulk of the problem. He could have done the same thing with a greatsword and done 3d6 instead of 3d8 which doesn't make a whole lot of difference in my opinion.
I believe my figures might have been off on his ability scores. I know that he had a +1 weapon and his strength might have actually been 20. Also, I think the attack bonus was 14 instead of 16. He had Weapon Focus as well. The sheet is sitting in my house somewhere, I'll have to hunt it down to find out what was going on with it. If I recall correctly, the maneuver he kept using gave him a +4 to hit as well, which contributed to his bonus.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Here's my rule of thumb regarding balance:
1. Take the character class in question. Assume the character has 18's in every stats and is equipped with optimal magic items and feats from any D&D book ever published. Calculate the maximum possible damage that he could do if he critted in a single attack expending all resources available to him for the day in conditions that favor his combat style over all others. Disregard any penalties to attack rolls or the average AC of an opponent of an appropriate CR. Assume the opponent fails any saves or skill checks and that the character makes any required skill checks.
2. Compare that number to the amount of damage that could be inflicted by a fighter of equal level using a longsword and built using the standard array of stats (15,14,13,12,10,8). If you don't know the number, it's okay to assert that it's "around 10."
3. If the number calculated via #1 is greater than the number calculated via #2, the class is broken.
Ta-Da!
(sorry, I have nothing constructive to offer, and I mean this in a generally lighthearted manner since no one has really posted arguments like this and FS has even gone so far as to post based on actual playtesting experience. But it's only a matter of time before someone makes an argument based on the reasoning presented above and I just want to get in my jab early.)
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
If I recall correctly, the maneuver he kept using gave him a +4 to hit as well, which contributed to his bonus.Kept using? If it was a maneuver, he should only be using it once per encounter, unless he found some feat or PrC ability to overcome that limitation.
The warblade is able to refresh his combat maneuvers by opting to make only a standard attack in place of other actions. Therefore, he was able to use the following pattern:
Special Maneuver, regular attack, Special Maneuver, regular attack, Special Maneuver, etc. etc. etc.|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Oh, so bards really aren't broken, then? Awesome. ;)3. If the number calculated via #1 is greater than the number calculated via #2, the class is broken.
Sorry, I have nothing constructive to offer, and I mean this in a generally lighthearted manner since no one has really posted arguments like this and FS has even gone so far as to post based on actual playtesting experience. But it's only a matter of time before someone makes an argument based on the reasoning presented above and I just want to get in my jab early.
Wow, Sebastian, this is so much easier than making characters and playtesting them! I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier! Thanks a lot!
Seriously, though, the classes in the BoNS are very interesting and colorful but I believe they are only truly balanced against themselves. Will a warblade utterly annhilate a standard fighter or barbarian in a fight? Probably not. Will they fare a bit better (on average) with comparable gear? Yes and no. The warblade is big on damage-dealing and manages to keep up with a barbarian (while raging) on that front. The fighter does lag a bit behind on the damage scale but makes up for it with versatility and tactical maneuvering.
Our Iron Kingdoms game had a barbarian with a masterwork greataxe, the warblade with his ubersword, and a fighter/knight with a Caspian battleblade (IK Weap., 2d4 slashing, x3 crit) and shield. The warblade and barbarian were staying about equal with the barbarian devoting huge amounts of attack bonus (5 to 7 points) to Power Attack and the warblade... didn't even HAVE Power Attack. If he had, it would have been much, MUCH worse. The damage totals were between 26-34 on average for both of them. If the warblade had taken the Power Attack feat, his damage total probably would have averaged around 40-45 per hit.
The barbarian had about 2 more AC than the warblade did while in rage. The fighter/knight with shield and Combat Expertise easily managed to top the barbarian's AC by 10. While he was dishing out the least damage, his knight's challenge kept the enemy focused on him while the barbarian and warblade flanked. His high AC (around 22-24) kept him alive as most foes they faced had an attack bonus between +8 and +12. The barbarian's AC was 15 (13 in rage). The warblade's was 11 (due to a -2 AC penalty from his stance). Had either of these characters tried to survive a long fight, they would have suffered serious harm.
I think that the warblade's player's desire to not go TOO far was what made him avoid the Power Attack feat. If he was a true munchkin (which he's really not), he would have taken it in a heartbeat and obliterated the barbarian's damage totals with ease.
So, to summarize, if you have people playing 'core' fighter classes, you should probably avoid BoNS classes as they tend to overshadow the other classes. If your party consists of a warmage, a scout, a cleric, and a ninja, then maybe a warblade wouldn't be so bad. The warblade is only good at hurting things in melee. They have almost no flexibility in that role. If they aren't in melee, they're useless. If your party already has a fighter (or barbarian), though, don't diminish them by allowing someone else to make a warblade. That's my observation.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Wow, Sebastian, this is so much easier than making characters and playtesting them! I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier! Thanks a lot!
It brings a tear to my eye to see someone agree with that sentiment. If I had a nickle for every half-baked wacked-out this-class-is-so-broken tirade that gets posted on these boards based on the maximum damage that can be done in optimal conditions without the benefit of serious analysis or (god forbid) playtesting they'd have to strip mine the Earth's core to pay me off. Thanks for posting about your experience with the class, when you have the sheet in front of you, you should definately post more of the specifics to give a break down of the abilities.
I'd allow it. But that's partly because I've thoroughly read through it. It's nothing gamebreakingly powerful.
|
From the point of view of an actual playtester (not D&D, but various other games), you have to go with your intuition first. It is simply impossible to rigorously test each rules feature, much less each combination of multiple features.
The first step in this process is exactly the sort of thing that I've done here (I'll not speak for others): pointing out that certain things or combinations look problematic. Or, heavens forfend, "might be broken".
FWIW, I strongly prefer that others do the same. I appreciate it when someone says that "X is broken", since it allows me to notice more things that deserve further study, though this is only really useful if the statement includes reasoning. I feel exactly the same about dissenting opinions.
A particularly good example of this is the Warlock, which I find rather broken -- not because it is too strong, but because it's too limited. It does a very short list of things pretty well, and really very little else at all. (Which probably makes it a good NPC class, of course.) I doubt I'd have figured this out if it hadn't been for comments like "Warlock is teh broken!!! 14400 Fireballs per day!!!", even though those comments do not reflect the actual problems with the class.
I particularly like the way that the Hero System handles this issue. The game includes quite a few mechanics with stop-sign icons that are used to warn the GM about the strong potential for abuse. "Use time travel if you like, but be especially careful. This one ability is likely to dramatically change your entire game."
Since caveating my comments every time this issue arises is cumbersome, please take the above as an implicit qualifier whenever I make such a note. That my opinion is different from yours isn't necessarily an indicator that either of us is wrong; my game is quite probably very different from yours. The same is true of others.
|
|
I am currently playing a swordsage in one campaign, and I am not the tank, nor am I the magic heavy. My character contributes, sure, but does not overwhelm the other characters. I don't think that the Bo9S is broken so much, but I have only played a swordsage once and I am only fourth level. Just my experience so far...
I am definately interested in hearing what everyone thinks about it. A friend (and player/dm in my group) just picked it up. Mostly he has been eyeing the swordsage. I only got a chance to browse it, but I was pleased to see a feat. "superior unarmed strike". Finally a fighter can keep up (somewhat) with a monk on unarmed damage output. It always made no sense to me why a fighter, with all their feats and combat training, could not increase their unarmed damage beyond a d3. sorry, small rant.
Anyway, even if you have questions, there are always parts of a book that are worth while. pick and choose as you see fit. Take only what you want, need.
I was pretty much thinking along those lines as well eric the cleric.
My view is that the fighter class is an elite warrior, and I don't particularly like it being overshadowed by another warrior class.
If I look closely at warblade I notice that it has the same BAB and saves as a fighter, but only gets about half as many bonus feats (about 1 every forth level instead of one every second). However instead the warblade gets more skill points, better hit dice, a handful of other special abilities, and access to stances and manouvers that it can refresh during battle. To me this far outweighs not getting all the bonus feats of a fighter.
I'm also not totally clear on how the manouvers work. For instance if you can have 6 manouvers ready at one time do they all have to be different manouvers or can some be the repeats? Can you use the same manouver more than once or do you need to refresh them first? Furthermore, can you opt to only ready your highest level manouvers? I was looking through the book and one of the 9th level warblade manouvers allows the warblade to make a single attack and add 100 damage to it. It requires a standard action to ready it, but it still seems obscene if you could keep using that same manouver over and over again in a fight (granted you won't get access to this manouver until 17th level).
Referring to OP, I'd allow it on the basis that (1) you get to review all abilities and feats etc of the proposed character, with a possible yeh or nay at that stage, and (2) it's for a trial period of, say, four sessions. If you- and possibly other players- think the character is too powerful compared to other characters, then disallow it.
In this way, the munchkin player gets a chance to try something new, and if it does seem reasonable (or only slightly more powerful than other PCs), then let him continue.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I'm also not totally clear on how the manouvers work. For instance if you can have 6 manouvers ready at one time do they all have to be different manouvers or can some be the repeats? Can you use the same manouver more than once or do you need to refresh them first? Furthermore, can you opt to only ready your highest level manouvers? I was looking through the book and one of the 9th level warblade manouvers allows the warblade to make a single attack and add 100 damage to it. It requires a standard action to ready it, but it still seems obscene if you could keep using that same manouver over and over again in a fight (granted you won't get access to this manouver until 17th level).
You cannot 'prepare' duplicate manuevers. If you are able to prepare 4 maneuvers, they must all be different maneuvers. I'm not sure how other classes do it, but the warblade can refresh ALL of his prepared maneuvers by making a single melee attack instead of using a maneuver (alternately, he can simply spend a standard action doing a weapon flourish or something along those lines to refresh them). Therefore, with the horrendous +100 damage maneuver, you could conceivably deal +100 damage on the first round, make a regular melee attack on the second, and deal +100 damage in the third round as a warblade. When I read this maneuver, I cringed. I'm concerned about how it would play. I suppose it wouldn't be too much worse than a wizard dropping meteor swarms on people but it focuses all of its damage on one person instead of spreading it out. It overshadows a lot of death effects because death effects allow saves (generally) and hit point damage doesn't. Weird is a 9th level spell capable of killing an entire room full of people in the blink of an eye, though, so I don't really know if I'd call +100 damage overpowered or not. Certainly a pack of 5 warblades with this maneuver would make rather short work of big beasties like a dragon if they caught it in a place where it couldn't fly (their d12 hit dice would ensure survival from the breath weapon) but I think they would find themselves in trouble against anything with a ranged weapon that moved faster than they did (or god forbid, something that FLIES).
You show me a 20th level warblade with a +5 flaming greatsword and I'll show you a Scout 14/Sorcerer 6 that can kick his ass with a masterwork longbow and a quiver of Ehlonna (its probably going to take a LOT of arrows). Expeditious retreat, displacement, mirror image, and fly should be more than enough, but slow could make things interesting.
I'm still not sure if FS description quite fits. I read that the 100 dam manouver needs a standard action to initiate, so wouldn't that mean the warblade would have to spend a standard action preparing it. Then in the next round he could use. The round after that he could refresh his manouvers to get it back, and the round after that he could take an action to initiate it again. That would mean that once the Warblade used it the first time in a combat he could only continue to use it once every 3 rounds, which is suppose isn't all that crazy. I still for some reason as a dm cringe when I read that an ability tacks an extra 100 onto your damage roll, but I don't do that much gaming above 15th level.
I'm also not totally clear on how the manouvers work. For instance if you can have 6 manouvers ready at one time do they all have to be different manouvers or can some be the repeats? Can you use the same manouver more than once or do you need to refresh them first? Furthermore, can you opt to only ready your highest level manouvers? I was looking through the book and one of the 9th level warblade manouvers allows the warblade to make a single attack and add 100 damage to it. It requires a standard action to ready it, but it still seems obscene if you could keep using that same manouver over and over again in a fight (granted you won't get access to this manouver until 17th level).You cannot 'prepare' duplicate manuevers. If you are able to prepare 4 maneuvers, they must all be different maneuvers. I'm not sure how other classes do it, but the warblade can refresh ALL of his prepared maneuvers by making a single melee attack instead of using a maneuver (alternately, he can simply spend a standard action doing a weapon flourish or something along those lines to refresh them). Therefore, with the horrendous +100 damage maneuver, you could conceivably deal +100 damage on the first round, make a regular melee attack on the second, and deal +100 damage in the third round as a warblade. When I read this maneuver, I cringed. I'm concerned about how it would play. I suppose it wouldn't be too much worse than a wizard dropping meteor swarms on people but it focuses all of its damage on one person instead of spreading it out. It overshadows a lot of death effects because death effects allow saves (generally) and hit point damage doesn't. Weird is a 9th level spell capable of killing an entire room full of people in the blink of an eye, though, so I don't really know if I'd call +100 damage overpowered or not. Certainly a pack of 5 warblades with this maneuver would make rather short work of big beasties like a dragon if they caught it in a place where it couldn't fly...
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I'm still not sure if FS description quite fits. I read that the 100 dam manouver needs a standard action to initiate, so wouldn't that mean the warblade would have to spend a standard action preparing it.
Hmm... I don't own the book myself. Could anyone clarify this? Does it state in the 'casting time' or 'action' area that it takes one standard action to initiate and then another to enact it? That seems like an awkward and clunky description to me and I believe by 'initiate' it really means 'deliver.' Again, though, I don't own the book. I don't know. It seems like a pretty useless ability if you have to 'charge up' for a round before the attack went off.
Well I have the book and from what I understand manouvers require different actions to initiate. Some are swift or immediate actions, which would mean you could activate them and use them in the same round, but some of the more powerful ones require a standard action, which would mean you would need to spend a round psyching yourself up with some fancy sword kata and then the next round you could strike with the manouver. I think if you use this book you need to look real carefully at this and make sure that players are abiding by those rules, because they are one of the major forms of checks and balances to help monitor the power level of the abilities.
I'm still not sure if FS description quite fits. I read that the 100 dam manouver needs a standard action to initiate, so wouldn't that mean the warblade would have to spend a standard action preparing it.Hmm... I don't own the book myself. Could anyone clarify this? Does it state in the 'casting time' or 'action' area that it takes one standard action to initiate and then another to enact it? That seems like an awkward and clunky description to me and I believe by 'initiate' it really means 'deliver.' Again, though, I don't own the book. I don't know. It seems like a pretty useless ability if you have to 'charge up' for a round before the attack went off.
I recently allowed one of my PCs to play a warblade. After playing it for a while he decided it was too powerful and quit playing it himself. Thankfully, he was the right sort of player for experimenting with a new class, and I had arranged it so adding and removing the warblade (and anything to do with the book) was easy (it had to do with the campaign they are playing and the history of their world).
I personally think that the classes are fine in the right situation, with the right players, and in the right setting. In a straight up fight a warblade would kill most of the other martial classes, and is certainly the most lethal of the classes from the book (even though swordsage has more maneuvers). The classes from book of nine swords definetly have a anime/manga (slice through five enemies with one stroke)feel to them, and can become ruinous in the hands of number-crunching, egomanical powergamers. Of course, if the PCs enemies are also leaping around using maneuvers it becomes a lot less problematic.
Do what I did. Allow the PC to play the class for a while, but let him know that you reserve the right to withdraw the class from the setting and make him play something else if you find it upsets the balance of your campaign. Also, try to set him up as an outsider (such as a refugee from a far off-land that normally takes the PCs 6 months of travel to reach) so his character can be included and then withdrawn without causing too many hassles.
Well one thing I know I would do would be to give the warblade a d10 or d8 hd instead of the d12. That would help a little. Unfortunately, the player who wants to run the character is a self admitted munchkin min/maxer. I might let him try on the condition that if I felt the character needed to go for game balance issues he would be retired with no whining or grumbling. Futhermore, I'd keep the point buy for character generation down to around 25 or 28, as the warblade needs good stats in a lot of areas, so that would keep him spread a little more thin on some of his stats.
I recently allowed one of my PCs to play a warblade. After playing it for a while he decided it was too powerful and quit playing it himself. Thankfully, he was the right sort of player for experimenting with a new class, and I had arranged it so adding and removing the warblade (and anything to do with the book) was easy (it had to do with the campaign they are playing and the history of their world).
I personally think that the classes are fine in the right situation, with the right players, and in the right setting. In a straight up fight a warblade would kill most of the other martial classes, and is certainly the most lethal of the classes from the book (even though swordsage has more maneuvers). The classes from book of nine swords definetly have a anime/manga (slice through five enemies with one stroke)feel to them, and can become ruinous in the hands of number-crunching, egomanical powergamers. Of course, if the PCs enemies are also leaping around using maneuvers it becomes a lot less problematic.
Do what I did. Allow the PC to play the class for a while, but let him know that you reserve the right to withdraw the class from the setting and make him play something else if you find it upsets the balance of your campaign. Also, try to set him up as an outsider (such as a refugee from a far off-land that normally takes the PCs 6 months of travel to reach) so his character can be included and then withdrawn without causing too many hassles.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Sigh. I'm going to go out on a limb here and propose something shocking.
the warblade needs good stats in a lot of areas, so that would keep him spread a little more thin on some of his stats.
Maybe that's one of the balancing features you are overlooking to begin with.
For Christ's sake, let him run the material and just follow the g&$@$&n rules. Half the problems that get posted about new material are DM's screwing around with what they don't understand or not playing by the rules as written. Do what Phil said and have him ride in on a horse with no name. That way, if he is too powerful, you can revoke his passport and give the class the boot. But at least give the designers the benefit of the doubt that they sat down, saw the same (very obvious) issues you've raised, and yet still were willing to put their names on the cover and call it balanced.
It's like salting your food. You may love salt, but hell, at least try your food first before you drown out the flavor.
And, if it turns out the class is stupidly overpowered, post here, and tell us all about it.
Well my intention wasn't really to start a lot of speculation and discussion- I was mostly hoping that some people out there had been using the material and could add in their two cents based on experience, which some have done.
Sigh. I'm going to go out on a limb here and propose something shocking.
the warblade needs good stats in a lot of areas, so that would keep him spread a little more thin on some of his stats.
Maybe that's one of the balancing features you are overlooking to begin with.
For Christ's sake, let him run the material and just follow the g%&%#+n rules. Half the problems that get posted about new material are DM's screwing around with what they don't understand or not playing by the rules as written. Do what Phil said and have him ride in on a horse with no name. That way, if he is too powerful, you can revoke his passport and give the class the boot. But at least give the designers the benefit of the doubt that they sat down, saw the same (very obvious) issues you've raised, and yet still were willing to put their names on the cover and call it balanced.
It's like salting your food. You may love salt, but hell, at least try your food first before you drown out the flavor.
And, if it turns out the class is stupidly overpowered, post here, and tell us all about it.
My view is that the fighter class is an elite warrior, and I don't particularly like it being overshadowed by another warrior class.
If I look closely at warblade I notice that it has the same BAB and saves as a fighter, but only gets about half as many bonus feats (about 1 every forth level instead of one every second). However instead the warblade gets more skill points, better hit dice, a handful of other special abilities, and access to stances and manouvers that it can refresh during battle. To me this far outweighs not getting all the bonus feats of a fighter.
That was my initial response, but then I noticed it was a lot closer to another of the base classes.
Warblade vs. Barbarian
Same hit dice
Same number of skill points
Same save bonuses
Same base attack bonus
Both have a number of special abilities
(Also the Warblade bonus feats are far more limiting than the Fighter bonus feats.)
Sadly many warrior classes seem look overpowered compared to the Fighter.
No do not use.
If a class seems to be overpowered or unbalanced, I suggest waiting for the errata. Yes, this can be a while. The warlock had a major errata of the eldritch blast. It is very difficult to play test the warlock and classes from Bo9S because they have access to a wide variety of special abilities. Often some of these are fine while others scream out to min/max players.
The point of the warblade being more balance with a 25 or 28 point buy is a good one. If your players role 4d6 and get great results and want to play a specific class then the flags should go up.
One of the biggest balancing factors of the fighter is when having to move they only get one attack. A good counter to power attack is to use combat expertise. With the warblade you can do +50 or +100 points of damage as a standard action at highest base attack. I don't know how one would prevent the warblade from (after engaged in melee) from attacking then moving away, forcing the opponent to close, with one attack, and then use the manuever to do extra damage and move away again.
Many players can play a class and have no problems, another group can have a class min/maxed to dominate the party. I think a better evaluating term to use instead of broken or unbalance would be "What is the abuse level of this class?" The book of Nine Sword classes have a high abuse level.
I can't really believe what i am reading.
Should you alloe the Book of Nine Swords in your Game? YES!
Is a Warblade more pwerful than a Fighter? YES!
And you know what, that is the point. All the Warblade (and all the Bo9S classes really) is give the Martial Classes a way to compete with the casters at higher levels.
Assuming Standard DnD (25 - 28 pt buy and Normal Wealth by Level), a high level Warblade is the least of your worries. Once the Warblad is able to dish out +100 Damage level per attack, you have Spellcasters throwing around 9th level spells.
Don't compare the Warblade to the Fighter. The Fighter is HORRIBLY underpowered after about Level 4. All Bo9S does is allow the Martial Characters to remain useful into the Higher levels.
If you compare it what an equivalent level caster can do, then you will see they are still actually a little UNDER powered.
You make an interesting argument. Especially, after the party mage wrought in our last game session. The entomb spell from Frost burn is nasty.
I can't really believe what i am reading.
Should you alloe the Book of Nine Swords in your Game? YES!
Is a Warblade more pwerful than a Fighter? YES!And you know what, that is the point. All the Warblade (and all the Bo9S classes really) is give the Martial Classes a way to compete with the casters at higher levels.
Assuming Standard DnD (25 - 28 pt buy and Normal Wealth by Level), a high level Warblade is the least of your worries. Once the Warblad is able to dish out +100 Damage level per attack, you have Spellcasters throwing around 9th level spells.
Don't compare the Warblade to the Fighter. The Fighter is HORRIBLY underpowered after about Level 4. All Bo9S does is allow the Martial Characters to remain useful into the Higher levels.
If you compare it what an equivalent level caster can do, then you will see they are still actually a little UNDER powered.
Hehe, I thought you meant you were gonna put the swords like Townsaver, Coinspinner, Sheildbreaker and so on in your game; never heard of anything other than the fantasy novel of such, interesting.
|
|
I can't really believe what i am reading.
Should you alloe the Book of Nine Swords in your Game? YES!
Is a Warblade more pwerful than a Fighter? YES!And you know what, that is the point. All the Warblade (and all the Bo9S classes really) is give the Martial Classes a way to compete with the casters at higher levels.
Assuming Standard DnD (25 - 28 pt buy and Normal Wealth by Level), a high level Warblade is the least of your worries. Once the Warblad is able to dish out +100 Damage level per attack, you have Spellcasters throwing around 9th level spells.
Don't compare the Warblade to the Fighter. The Fighter is HORRIBLY underpowered after about Level 4. All Bo9S does is allow the Martial Characters to remain useful into the Higher levels.
If you compare it what an equivalent level caster can do, then you will see they are still actually a little UNDER powered.
That's awesome.
I can't really believe what i am reading.
Should you alloe the Book of Nine Swords in your Game? YES!
Is a Warblade more pwerful than a Fighter? YES!And you know what, that is the point. All the Warblade (and all the Bo9S classes really) is give the Martial Classes a way to compete with the casters at higher levels.
Assuming Standard DnD (25 - 28 pt buy and Normal Wealth by Level), a high level Warblade is the least of your worries. Once the Warblad is able to dish out +100 Damage level per attack, you have Spellcasters throwing around 9th level spells.
Don't compare the Warblade to the Fighter. The Fighter is HORRIBLY underpowered after about Level 4. All Bo9S does is allow the Martial Characters to remain useful into the Higher levels.
If you compare it what an equivalent level caster can do, then you will see they are still actually a little UNDER powered.
Under optimium conditions a spell caster is phenominally dangerous. However the D&D game has had these powerful spell casters around for a long time in one form or another. High level encounters often have SR through the roof. The environment is designed to limit some of the utility of their spells etc. The class itself is also generally weak as all hell as well with minimal hps and usually crummy AC.
None of this is true for any martial class in Bo9S. In essence if this book intends to make martial classes that can do what the mage can do when every thing is going the mages way its going to be totally busted. Most of the time things are not going the mages way or its a push over combat.
If you use spellthieves and have access to Dragon #353, I recommend allowing the "Hamper Magic" ability variant. Since a good number of the maneuvers in Nine Swords are supernatural effects (particularly the Desert Wind school), you can easily mitigate any powergaming that might occur.
|
I really like the Bo9S, even though I haven't gotten a chance to use it in game yet. I think mevers sums it up pretty well. +100 damage sounds pretty scary, but not once per encounter at 17th/18th level, when your wizards are really laying the smackdown and your power-attacking raging barbarians are doing 150 or so damage on a full attack anyway.
Hehe, I thought you meant you were gonna put the swords like Townsaver, Coinspinner, Sheildbreaker and so on in your game; never heard of anything other than the fantasy novel of such, interesting.
Hehe, nice. The Books of Swords are some of my favorites. I found an alright translation of them to 3rd edition a while ago. Not positive where, but I think it might have been on Sean K. Reynolds site.
I have a player looking at the warblade right now. He is the most effective player in the group already, so I know that it will do well what it is supposed to do. Haven't really read the mechanics myself, but he is pretty excited about them.
WE pretty much allow anything as long as it doesn't appear blatantly unbalanced. There have only been a few issues of this with things from WOTC. Mostly we find it in material from other companies that clearly haven't playtested anything before print.
Something that I have found about balancing and what is balanced and what isn't, etc.
A 20th level fighter is balanced if they can fight to a standstill against a 20th level crusader, or what have you. A class is balanced if in a four or five character party, a party with a fighter as the "tank" does about as well in a series of encounters as a party with a crusader for a "tank."
And yeah, I usually allow most things into the game and I don't worry about it too much unless it causes problems in the game, with the following caveat . . . if it doesn't fit the story, I don't let it into the game. That doesn't mean in another campaign I wouldn't allow that same thing, just that it doesn't make sense "thematically" in the current campaign.
Except for Power Word: Pain from Races of the Dragon . . . that IS broken.
|
I've played a swordsage in a one shot and am currently playing a ranger/ warblade in a longterm campaign. I have absolutely loved playing both characters. To me, playing a tank type and just swinging a sword over and over sounds incredibly boring. The Bo9S allows me to play a tank with tactical options. If you do a thorough study of the manuevers in the B09S, I think you will find that they focus on various options other then straight attacking. The 100 point damage manuever that has been brought up repeatedly is truly powerful on its face but only available at the very top levels, when a Power Attacking Barbarian or Fighter will do that anyways. Plus, it is a full round action, so you get one shot at it and no other attacks while a fighter of equal level has five or so. The warblade I play does not have incredible damage potential but can attack and disarm in the same attack, charge and bull rush at the same time, and turn invisible for his turn. These enable good tactical fighting options for the creative player which I feel can be lacking in some of the standard classes. I truly feel that these classes lend themselves to really creative, exciting gameplay and should be encouraged in there use.
My DM, a great man, and I are currently in talks about limiting the warblade's manuever use to once per encounter, without the ability to recover those manuevers in that same encounter. I am fine with that decision as he is all knowing and good in every way.
Long live the Bo9S!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
One other thing...I don't understand it when someone on these boards says, "I worry about this class outshining the others". What does that mean? If one player does something, anything, that is interesting and full of flavor, is that to be discouraged? If a player, with his 24 CHA Sorcerer, roleplays a wonderful scene in which he intimidates an evil flunky to the point of tears and self-wetting, is that player "Outshining" the others? Should the DM put the nix on it? Would the Sorcerer class then be cosidered overpowered? If a player often does exciting, imaginative things with his PC that make good use of his abilities, it should be rewarded. Also, it would, hopefully, inspire the other players at the table to take a fresh look at their PCs and wonder, "What cool things can I do with this Cleric of Kord?". An "Outshining" factor is not something inherent within each class, a rogue can be played with zeal and interest as easily as a fighter, monk, swordsage, wizard 4/ sorcerer 4/ blood magus 5/ whatever 8 can.
I was not looking at any references when the above multiclass combo was written, so please, don't correct its progression, its merely there for hyperbole sake.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
One other thing...I don't understand it when someone on these boards says, "I worry about this class outshining the others". What does that mean?
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, so I'm going to assume that you aren't.
What people are concerned about as far as "outshining" other classes is that one certain class/PrC/whatever will utterly dominate a combat situation. Say there's a fight against 8 ogres. When the cleric does his part and keeps the party alive through healing and buffs, he's doing his job fine. The wizard manages to kill 2 of them through use of magic. The fighter is fighting two at the same time, managing to kill one after a prolonged combat, and the warblade has sliced the other 4 apart with massively overpowered damage and comes to save the fighter, killing the one remaining ogre and bringing his kill count up to 5 for the combat. One character was responsible for over half of the kills in the combat and the other characters could not even come close. The players of the other characters are probably going to feel cheated that their character did not get to do anything "impressive" in that battle, so that's where the "outshining" comes in. It has nothing to do with roleplay. When someone "outshines" the rest of the group in roleplaying, it just means that player is a better roleplayer. It has nothing to do with mechanics or class/race.
Obviously this scenario is somewhat of an exaggeration meant for illustration of the point. I don't think warblades are THAT MUCH better than your average fighter.
|
|
...when someone on these boards says, "I worry about this class outshining the others". What does that mean?
I can't speak for anyone else, but my concern is that one class is better in every (or nearly every) circumstance than another. The specific concern in this regard is often with the Fighter. The Fighter doesn't have enough skill points (or enough variety in available skills) to compete with anyone there. He doesn't have spells. And his tricks are limited to this feats (which are usually combat focused). So if you do Fighter better than the Fighter character, Fighter becomes essentially an NPC class. (The same thing can happen with other classes, of course, but it's easier to demonstrate with Fighter because of the one-dimensional nature of the class.)
To be fair, the Fighter is broadly thought to be the weakest class. But it's mostly people who hang out in places where such matters are regularly discussed that understand this. This is not what (I argue) the average player does. And telling a more casual player, in effect, "Surprise! Your character sucks", isn't much fun for that casual player.
Nobody wants to play the sidekick inadvertently, and a class that is strictly better than the class that some other player is playing can force that person into an unchosen role.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I don't think the fighter is the weakest class, I think its the class that is incorrectly perceived as the weakest class. The problem, as usual, is that people just look at what it does on paper and not what it does in play. What happens is that people think "the fighter just gets a bunch of feats" and "all characters can get the same feats" ergo: "the fighter just gets the same stuff as every other character."
What this "analysis" ignores is that the cumulative effect of the fighter's feats play a significant role in combat. The fighter climbs feat trees faster, has more combat versitility, and only requires one or two good stats. All the Book of Nine Swords classes require multiple good stats, skill points invested in certain ways, and other sundry and hidden balancing mechanics.
There is much more to the game and the effectiveness of a particular class than damage per second.
|
|
The players of the other characters are probably going to feel cheated that their character did not get to do anything "impressive" in that battle, so that's where the "outshining" comes in.
But if they feel cheated then they should try harder to do something impressive to add flavor to their PC? Apart from results, which is a much more complex issue, shouldn't the fighter in your example make his actions more impressive through tactics or roleplaying? Using Power attack with great description, moving tactically, sundering a weapon, there are plenty of opportunities for every class to do something impressive. If players are feeling outshined and prefer to do something with more of an in game visual flare, doesn't most of that responsibility rest with them and not the classes themselves. A swordsage doing an extra 2d6 on an attack is, in and of itself, not very impressive and could easily be outshined by a fireball from a wizard. Again, the player of the PC is key.
I would also contend that sheer numbers don't equal excitement. If the fighter in your example, bull rushed an ogre into a pit of acid and the warblade merely cut 4 of them down, what would the other players remember?