What I would like to know is: which manoeuvres are completely broken?
Opinions seem to be quite polarised with respect to ToB/Bo9S, and I suspect that that might be due to a few different factors. Broken manoeuvres is one thing that I've heard of. Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to fine-comb all the manoeuvres for that sort of thing.
I suspect that another possible reason is that eager users overlook the "fine print" on p. 39, which differentiates between Initiator Level and Manoeuvre Level. This difference is particularly important to track when dealing with a multi-class character.
The anime/wuxia style may not appeal to everyone, nor fit into every campaign setting. As the old saying goes, your mileage may vary.
|
The anime/wuxia style may not appeal to everyone, nor fit into every campaign setting. As the old saying goes, your mileage may vary.
This is the biggest kicker for me, to be honest. I figure they have games and settings that appeal to this demographic (BESM (for anime), Rokugan/Oriental Adventures (for wuxia flavored games - the "native" settings for such concepts, if you will)), and I prefer not having such elements in my game.
Of course, the ToB series are splats, not core, and as such do not need to be allowed in my campaign, so I don't care that they exist.
I will say that the books should only be used in games with characters who all utilize those rules. They don't play well with the core classes.
|
I greatly enjoyed the material in the ToB/Bo9S. I liked the fluff, I liked the crunch, I just liked the whole book in general. To my knowledge, like the others have said, I don't think anything else was published concerning these classes. The group(s) I play in allow most of the splat books in 3.5, and we've never really had a balance issue. That is, with the exception of those who's aim it was to completely disrupt the balance, but those people will do that with whatever they use.
I've used the rules, primarily as opposition to pre-existing characters and the CRs that they generate are right on. I'd hazard that, like most of the 3.5 material, it's extremely balanced if used properly.
Honestly, I kept thinking that most of it was underpowered - compared to a wizard or fighter of equal level. (Or a wizard/fighter of equal level, for that matter.)
The ToB stuff couldn't hold a candle to barbarians, hellfire warlocks, and wizards with the right spells, but when used in the right combination the ToB classes could be quite powerful. I'm not sure what fighters you were playing with, but they never were very good in our campaigns.
What I would like to know is: which manoeuvres are completely broken?
Opinions seem to be quite polarised with respect to ToB/Bo9S, and I suspect that that might be due to a few different factors. Broken manoeuvres is one thing that I've heard of. Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to fine-comb all the manoeuvres for that sort of thing.
ToB was errata'ed and I recall at least some Sage Advice addressed broken maneuvers. So that's a good place to start.
From what I saw on char op boards, the biggest offenders are in White Raven especially when combined with other books. The worst were cases of A lets me to do B, which also grants me the ability to do A, which then... endless loops that were just absurd. If you use common sense of not being able to "loop" abilities that feed to each other, then that kills off probably all of the outrageously broken stuff.
As for minorly broken, I don't know offhand, but checking the errata and Sage Advice archives would probably get you what you need.
Overall, I think it's a great book, and Win fact my favorite WotC books were their "testing grounds" books because they weren't afraid to be different. Of course, there will never be support for them (except for Pact Magic - thank you Radiance House!!), but at least they are around.
What I would like to know is: which manoeuvres are completely broken?
Opinions seem to be quite polarised with respect to ToB/Bo9S, and I suspect that that might be due to a few different factors. Broken manoeuvres is one thing that I've heard of. Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to fine-comb all the manoeuvres for that sort of thing.
ToB was errata'ed and I recall at least some Sage Advice addressed broken maneuvers. So that's a good place to start.
From what I saw on char op boards, the biggest offenders are in White Raven especially when combined with other books. The worst were cases of A lets me to do B, which also grants me the ability to do A, which then... endless loops that were just absurd. If you use common sense of not being able to "loop" abilities that feed to each other, then that kills off probably all of the outrageously broken stuff.
As for minorly broken, I don't know offhand, but checking the errata and Sage Advice archives would probably get you what you need.
Overall, I think it's a great book, and Win fact my favorite WotC books were their "testing grounds" books because they weren't afraid to be different. Of course, there will never be support for them (except for Pact Magic - thank you Radiance House!!), but at least they are around.
Yes, I had heard (in vague terms) about logic-defying interpretations used to create endless loops.
Unfortunately, the official errata for ToB/Bo9S needs some errata itself! The .pdf document behind the WotC errata link has all of three errata for ToB - the rest are for Complete Mage (and not even with any comment identifying it as such).
I played in a game where one of the players used Bo9S for their main character class. I don't know all the names and such, I just remember Hunter's Stance, because the player used that frequently. I thought the class was overpowered, but didn't really pay attenction. But then one time we faced off against some major monster. One of the hits, the character did 75 hp damage before rolling any dice. That's 75 hp damage as his base and then he got to roll damage on top of that. There was nothing any of us in the rest of the party could to do equal that. Hell, the entire rest of the party couldn't equal that. And I was a straight wizard. It outstripped everything and everyone else. It was kind of like running around with Drizzt.
Don't get me wrong, I did plenty to hold my own in the group, since I focused my spells on dropping ability scores, but he was clearly better at dishing out damage. I can see some saying that that is what a fighter should do, but if you're trying to "balance" it, ask how it matches up against a PHB Fighter. PHB Fighter is standing still compared to that.
I see it as taking the toughness and raw HP of the Fighter combined with the damage dealing of the Wizard. That's not balanced. Not even close.
Unfortunately, the official errata for ToB/Bo9S needs some errata itself! The .pdf document behind the WotC errata link has all of three errata for ToB - the rest are for Complete Mage (and not even with any comment identifying it as such).
Nice. Gotta love their 3.5 support after 4e was announced!
I'd suggest digging through the old Sage Advice online (or whatever the online version was called). I'll see if I can get a chance to dig around for it as well, but that sounds more thorough than the 3 errata. Sheesh. The book is pretty well balanced and edited, but not that well!
I played in a game where one of the players used Bo9S for their main character class. I don't know all the names and such, I just remember Hunter's Stance, because the player used that frequently. I thought the class was overpowered, but didn't really pay attenction. But then one time we faced off against some major monster. One of the hits, the character did 75 hp damage before rolling any dice. That's 75 hp damage as his base and then he got to roll damage on top of that. There was nothing any of us in the rest of the party could to do equal that. Hell, the entire rest of the party couldn't equal that. And I was a straight wizard. It outstripped everything and everyone else. It was kind of like running around with Drizzt.
What level were the PCs? I do know some of the abilities focus more on flat bonuses rather than more dice, but 75 without dice is pretty extreme. 1d6+20 or 30 might be more common than 10d6, but 75??
I'm guessing that player was using some "creative" interpretations of the rules, but I could be wrong. I haven't played high level Bo9S yet, but so far in levels 1-10 I haven't found it to be totally out of whack. Or maybe I'm missing something. :)
I'm guessing that player was using some "creative" interpretations of the rules, but I could be wrong. I haven't played high level Bo9S yet, but so far in levels 1-10 I haven't found it to be totally out of whack. Or maybe I'm missing something. :)
Yeah, that sounds like something whacky. I don't know of any maneuver that adds a flat 75 points of damage. There are some that do flat damage. Strike of Perfect Clarity, for instance--adds 100 points of damage, but the character can only make a single melee attack. Inferno Blast deals 100 points of fire damage in a 60' radius burst, reflex save for half damage as a full-round action. For both, the character must be at least 17th level. The next level down has maneuvers that add variable damage--+6d8 , +10d6 fire, etc.--but nothing like +75 base damage. At that point in the game (17th level) Wizards are dropping imprisonment, weird, wail of the banshee, and time stop. They will end a fight vs. those high CR critters (many with 300-600 hp) much faster than smacking at it once per round.
I grow more certain with every passing ToB conversation that most bad experiences (not related to simply not liking the feel) come from players and/or DMs not grasping the mechanics of the system. They are a lot more complex than simply adding damage on to an attack.
I'm using ToB in my Savage Tides game right now and as we crest the 12th level and are heading into higher territory, the melee folks still feel as useful to the group in combat as the casters. I actually sometimes bend/ignore a few of the maneuver rules in the players' favor both to minimize random bookkeeping (I favor the story over the rules) and because the Wiz/Rog in the party is played by a very craft player that might otherwise outshine the other players.
Oh, and for the OP, I'm unaware of any additional maneuvers. I would recommend, however, picking up the Maneuver Cards if you haven't already. They're quite handy. I'm uncertain, however, if they contain the errata/fixes.
What level were the PCs?
We were around 9-11th level around that point. I forget exactly. It was 3 campaigns ago. It wasn't so much an interpretation of the rules as much as stacking bonuses. It took the player like 2-3 rounds to get the whole thing set up.
|
|
The main things people seemed to miss with ToB was that the fighter substitute, warblade, only had a few cool maneuveres and no heavy armour and the the swordsage, who had all of the cool tricks, had light armour and rogue BAB: so he tended to miss, or use finesse weapons.
That's great in theory, but swordsages get a bunch of maneuvers that boost the 'to hit' number while adding to damage. There are also maneuvers that allow you bypass DR and a variety of other stuff. I banned the book after a gnome swordsage punched through 30' of collapsed tunnel (stone and petrified logs) with his bare hands after setting off a trap and getting separated from the party. It took him a while but he had time.
|
|
The main things people seemed to miss with ToB was that the fighter substitute, warblade, only had a few cool maneuveres and no heavy armour and the the swordsage, who had all of the cool tricks, had light armour and rogue BAB: so he tended to miss, or use finesse weapons.That's great in theory, but swordsages get a bunch of maneuvers that boost the 'to hit' number while adding to damage. There are also maneuvers that allow you bypass DR and a variety of other stuff. I banned the book after a gnome swordsage punched through 30' of collapsed tunnel (stone and petrified logs) with his bare hands after setting off a trap and getting separated from the party. It took him a while but he had time.
What? Didn't you take into account the chance that as he progressed through the collapsed tunnel, the new tunnel he was practically digging would collapse upon him part of the way through? After all, the petrified logs were no longer supporting anything. Nothing was bearing the load anymore.
It would simply take one critical failure in an attack to cause the section of tunnel to colapse, again.
|
The main things people seemed to miss with ToB was that the fighter substitute, warblade, only had a few cool maneuveres and no heavy armour and the the swordsage, who had all of the cool tricks, had light armour and rogue BAB: so he tended to miss, or use finesse weapons.That's great in theory, but swordsages get a bunch of maneuvers that boost the 'to hit' number while adding to damage. There are also maneuvers that allow you bypass DR and a variety of other stuff. I banned the book after a gnome swordsage punched through 30' of collapsed tunnel (stone and petrified logs) with his bare hands after setting off a trap and getting separated from the party. It took him a while but he had time.What? Didn't you take into account the chance that as he progressed through the collapsed tunnel, the new tunnel he was practically digging would collapse upon him part of the way through? After all, the petrified logs were no longer supporting anything. Nothing was bearing the load anymore.
It would simply take one critical failure in an attack to cause the section of tunnel to colapse, again.
Critical failures, assuming a need of a 10 on a d20, only happen 2.5% of the time. Pretty unlikely to happen.
Depending upon if you like cinematic games or not this is not so bad.
And million euro question (darn dollar devaluation) was it game killing? Did everything just fall apart because he tunneled out? If not, no big deal.
|
|
The main things people seemed to miss with ToB was that the fighter substitute, warblade, only had a few cool maneuveres and no heavy armour and the the swordsage, who had all of the cool tricks, had light armour and rogue BAB: so he tended to miss, or use finesse weapons.That's great in theory, but swordsages get a bunch of maneuvers that boost the 'to hit' number while adding to damage. There are also maneuvers that allow you bypass DR and a variety of other stuff. I banned the book after a gnome swordsage punched through 30' of collapsed tunnel (stone and petrified logs) with his bare hands after setting off a trap and getting separated from the party. It took him a while but he had time.What? Didn't you take into account the chance that as he progressed through the collapsed tunnel, the new tunnel he was practically digging would collapse upon him part of the way through? After all, the petrified logs were no longer supporting anything. Nothing was bearing the load anymore.
It would simply take one critical failure in an attack to cause the section of tunnel to colapse, again.
Critical failures, assuming a need of a 10 on a d20, only happen 2.5% of the time. Pretty unlikely to happen.
Depending upon if you like cinematic games or not this is not so bad.
And million euro question (darn dollar devaluation) was it game killing? Did everything just fall apart because he tunneled out? If not, no big deal.
That part wasn't game breaking, the swordsage doing more damage than a well built Barbarian, round after round, and also having various other effects with his hits, was game breaking. Gnome Swordsage Vs. Dwarf Barbarian, both built well, equals a swordsage with better AC, all kinds of special effects he can toss out and more damage dealing ability than a power-attacking Barbarian. Tome of Battle in the hands of someone who can make good builds is dangerous.
|
|
That part wasn't game breaking, the swordsage doing more damage than a well built Barbarian, round after round, and also having various other effects with his hits, was game breaking. Gnome Swordsage Vs. Dwarf Barbarian, both built well, equals a swordsage with better AC, all kinds of special effects he can toss out and more damage dealing ability than a power-attacking Barbarian. Tome of Battle in the hands of someone who can make good builds is dangerous.
True; I know that the build I designed using a swordsage would have been relatively powerful, had it not been for my debilitating ADD (coming up with many, many character concepts and changing my mind an innumerable number of times before the campaign starts). Combined with flaws and traits it was going to be a very movement-oriented desert wind swordsage that would just run around setting people on fire while not being able to be hit.
... it was going to be a very movement-oriented desert wind swordsage that would just run around setting people on fire while not being able to be hit.
ROTFL!
I have a player whose character (a multi-class piece of insanity with three levels of Swordsage) is leaning in this direction.