There's no equivalent from Paizo publishing, so is Tome of Battle considered too powerful for Pathfinder games?
Is Pathfinder backwards compatible enough for ToB classes to just be dropped into the game?
Not at all OP. The Warblade is probably still better than the Fighter, but the new Paladin is probably better than the Crusader.
You're going to need a substitute for the Concentration skill, for the Diamond Mind style. I would go with Sense Motive or Knowledge (Religion).
There's no equivalent from Paizo publishing, so is Tome of Battle considered too powerful for Pathfinder games?
No. They're fine. I'd honestly recommending altering a few things on them to kill some dead levels, and adjust to the change in feat progression.
Is Pathfinder backwards compatible enough for ToB classes to just be dropped into the game?
Yes, but there are still some issues with ToB that need to be altered. Mostly skills, changing things to adjust to CMB/CMD, and also the errata on the book Wizards decided not to do (I'm looking at you Iron Heart Surge). Lots of things get switched to tumble, and concentration has to be changed to something (autohypnosis, sense motive, and perception are the common suggestions)
I don't have much experience with the Tome of Battle classes and the relative power level to Pathfinder, but I do know Dreamscarred Press is working on a conversion of the Tome of Battle to Pathfinder. I think it is called Path of War.
That is what it's called, but it's not a direct conversion. It's 3 new base classes and a new set of maneuvers.
ToB would likely be slightly underpowered for PF, but not cripplingly so.
The only issue is the issue of Dead levels, and occasional other things that are very un-Pathfinder about them, but they're not "too powerful" for it. I'd probably go with Path of War over it, since, even though I have my issues with it somewhat, they're designed based on Pathfinder rather than 3.5.
Paizo didn't make equivalents because the developers don't like them, but as is clear from many of their design decisions, they don't necessarily make such decisions based on what is overpowered or underpowered. And they tend to have rather skewed perspectives on what is over or underpowered, when they do make decisions based on that.
I love ToB,even iron heart surge yeah, what I'd say is adjust skills then have them played with the players yelling you how each level feels then adjust.
I feel it's one of the best "heroic" feeling books out there, and I honestly never felt the marital "magic" feel or that it was asiany. Fluff it to however you or the players want. Don't really understand why people get stuck on default flavor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ToB is great though I suggest Path of War from Dreamscarred press. It will have more support in PF in terms of archetypes, PrC, feats, and such.
|
Somebody has to dissent. Guess that is me.
Tome of Battle massively increases the power level of non casters. That will be nearly as true in Pathfinder as it was in 3.5
Characters using it will totally overshadow fighters, rogues, monks, etc.
Bringing non casters up in power may be a good thing but don't kid yourself. It IS a massive increase in power for most non casters.
all you need, is a new skill for diamond mind. i suggest perception, because a lot of the diamond mind flavor, is quite sensory, and perception, is the only sensory skill i can think of.
basing diamond mind off perception works wonders.
the main change i would make, is bonuses that apply to discipline specific manuevers, apply instead, when attacking with discipline specific favored weapons.
i would also change shadow blade's restrictions to passive, and make the feat require a shadow hand stance, despite providing passive benefits. but then, a swordsage stacking strength in addition to dexterity and wisdom to damage rolls with shadow hand weapons isn't a bad thing. it actually rewards investing in multiple attributes
well, for swordsage, crusader, warblade and Bo9S PRCs, i'd make the prepared manuevers useable at will, it wouldn't be too bad
Somebody has to dissent. Guess that is me.
Tome of Battle massively increases the power level of non casters. That will be nearly as true in Pathfinder as it was in 3.5
Characters using it will totally overshadow fighters, rogues, monks, etc.
Bringing non casters up in power may be a good thing but don't kid yourself. It IS a massive increase in power for most non casters.
You say that like the fighter, monk, and rogue aren't the weakest classes in the game. Overshadowing them is not a particularly high bar to jump. They're still nowhere NEAR cleric-druid-wizard power.
You say that like the fighter, monk, and rogue aren't the weakest classes in the game. Overshadowing them is not a particularly high bar to jump. They're still nowhere NEAR cleric-druid-wizard power.Somebody has to dissent. Guess that is me.
Tome of Battle massively increases the power level of non casters. That will be nearly as true in Pathfinder as it was in 3.5
Characters using it will totally overshadow fighters, rogues, monks, etc.
Bringing non casters up in power may be a good thing but don't kid yourself. It IS a massive increase in power for most non casters.
Hm I would say we leave that were it is and only focus on the ToB, don't want to see the thread plunge into the "martial problem".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's 100% fine. Is it possible that there's a few things in there that you can smoosh together with some other stuff and make something that looks a little unfair? Probably. But it's completely fine. If the question is "Is it too powerful for Pathfinder games?", at least. If the question is "Will it further marginalize already marginal classes?", then the answer is also "yes", but there's a huuuuuuge amount of ground between "things that would further marginalize marginal classes" and "too powerful for Pathfinder games."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can buy Path of War from the Paizo store or DriveThru RPG. It's essentially PF ToB.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
+1 on the suggestion to use the Path of War. Its probably your best bet and the easiest way to avoid any small rule change issues that might creap in between 3.5 and pathfinder.
As for its general power level vs pathfinder. Its a whoping depends. If your standard for martial power is the fighter/rogue/monk, then it will overshadow them. If your standard is the paladin and barbarian along with the cleric, wizard, druid, etc, then I'd say its just fine.
Iron Heart Surge, basically all you have to do is restrict it to conditions found on the Paladin's Mercy List.
The question was would it work fine in PF, NOT if it would overshadow fighters, rogues and monks. Yes, it will work just fine.
Damage wise, it's not going to be anything special, although it will do better on standard actions without significant investment.
==Aelryinth
|
Simple answer, no. The Tome of Battle classes were only OP compared to the classes that Wizards was actively trying to replace, specifically the Fighter and Monk. In Pathfinder they're a little underpowered, if anything.
I strongly back all of the recommendations that you check out the Path of War series from Dreamscarred Press. I spent a lot of time playing with the various classes during playtesting and there's some great material there, and it's actually made to play side-by-side with Pathfinder classes.
Which class from ToB were you thinking about playing? While Path of War does use three completely new base classes, they kind of match up role-wise to the original classes as follows-
Crusader- Warder
Swordsage - Stalker
Warblade - Warlord
The biggest differences-
Warder is a better tank and a worse healer than Crusader, with some great abilities for drawing attention from enemies and mitigating damage to other party members.
Stalker and Swordsage use very different mechanics but look the most alike of any of the classes. Stalker can be very powerful with a high-crit weapon.
Warlord is a CHA class instead of an INT class like the Warblade. These two classes are probably the most different of any of the pairings. Warlord gets some cool abilities to utilize Teamwork feats and is a legitimate "leader" class. Unlike the Warblade who was kind of a Fighter replacement, the Warlord plays a lot more like a good cavalier without a mount, but with a bunch of cool maneuvers and abilities tagged on.
Somebody has to dissent. Guess that is me.
Tome of Battle massively increases the power level of non casters. That will be nearly as true in Pathfinder as it was in 3.5
Characters using it will totally overshadow fighters, rogues, monks, etc.
Bringing non casters up in power may be a good thing but don't kid yourself. It IS a massive increase in power for most non casters.
Mmm.... No, it really isn't. It was a good improvement in 3.5, but that was back when characters in general got fewer feats, and Fighters had literally no class features other than feats. The game has come a long way since then. Power-wise, you won't see much difference, though you are going to see more versatility and out of combat utility than you'd get from the Fighter, but that says a lot more about the Fighter than any of these classes. Tome of Battle classes are going to compare very well to modern classes like the Cavalier, Paladin, Ninja, and in certain instances, the Magus, though the fact that they were balanced against an older system actually leaves them just a tad on the weak side for Pathfinder, though the fact that they get to play with action economy that looks more like an Inquisitor or Bards than a Fighter keeps them relatively viable. The Path of War classes are much more in sync with the Pathfinder game, though some of them do have a couple elements that still kind of lean towards their 3.5 roots (not that that's necessarily a bad thing).
|
I think Pathfinder is already overpowered for Pathfinder, so ToB is definitely no go :)
No seriously gimme
I want a Hard mode. Like now ! No more mr Nice guy !
I have experienced players who are way too comfy with the rules loopholes.
The PCs are not the problem. the opposition IS.
Best,
I think Pathfinder is already overpowered for Pathfinder, so ToB is definitely no go :)
No seriously gimme
** spoiler omitted **
Best,
Well not that you should have to rely on 3PP to get what you want, there's a one-shot scenario from Rite Publishing called Up from Darkness, where the PC party is expected to die, even TPK, multiple times in the same adventure with special mechanics on how they come back from the dead. This might be closer to what you're looking for...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Pathfinder is already overpowered for Pathfinder, so ToB is definitely no go :)
No seriously gimme
** spoiler omitted **
Best,
Stereofm, you really should check out Rappan Athuk and Slumbering Tsar from Frog God Games. Guaranteed to increase the body count!
Check out this thread:
|
I fully endorse Book of 9 Swords. I love the resource management of it. You can somewhat fire away since you know you will get..back your manuevers next fight, but you castill think.your way through when.it is.best to initiate each manuever.
I strongly suggest you look up the 3.5 F.A.Q. and read the topics it had on B9S.
|
I think Pathfinder is already overpowered for Pathfinder, so ToB is definitely no go :)
No seriously gimme
** spoiler omitted **
Best,
Stereofm, you really should check out Rappan Athuk and Slumbering Tsar from Frog God Games. Guaranteed to increase the body count!
Check out this thread:
I am one of SFM's players. And I can guarantee to you that we are playing on a rather relaxed mode optimization-wise.
Putting over-the-top threats in front of us will inevitably lead to an arms race where we optimize to the max. The game will become a mere game of numbers and rolls with VERY little opportunity for roleplay and fun.
The game needs more non-combat scenes and goals. And the monsters should have some nice tricks that go outside the usual constraints of the system without making an optimized (but not that much) PC useless or an easy kill. We need more surprises and out-of-the-box thinking in combat encounters rather than uberpowerful enemies.
Some examples I enjoyed confronting and conquering :
- monster goes through walls as if they do not exist
- enemy steals your actions and uses them to act several times each round
I think the key, whether in combat or non-combat scenes, is to encourage players' creativity.
By and large Tome of Battle is fine, though there's a handful of strikes and stances that can cause issues.
White Raven Tactics is probably at the top of that list - it doesn't directly help the initiator, but the initiator can use it to grant allies back-to-back actions. I played a crusader way back when, and a common thing I'd do is, after one of the other melee engaged an enemy, I'd also move up to that enemy, hit it with a strike for, say, a bonus 8d8 damage, and use my swift action to give the other melee a full-attack action against the poor SOB we were both on top of. I'd also use it to cause chain casts of spells, etc.
I'd recommend going with the 4E re-write of White Raven Tactics - the initiator has to decide at the start of his turn if he's using it, and his own turn immediately ends if he does use it. Still pretty strong, but the initiator doesn't get to take his own entire turn on top of giving an ally a bonus turn.
Desert Wind discipline has a set of boosts that grants Xd6+level fire damage to every melee attack for a round. At low levels it's trivial, but at high levels this can result in catastrophic damage spikes. Especially if combined with the Tiger Claw strikes that grant additional attacks.
There's also a few abilities that let the initiator move around and get into position as a swift action.
I guess the bottom line is that by-and-large Tome of Battle is fine, but there's a handful of abilities that will severely escalate the amount of rocket tag going on. So try to keep an eye for that sort of thing.
By and large Tome of Battle is fine, though there's a handful of strikes and stances that can cause issues.
White Raven Tactics is probably at the top of that list - it doesn't directly help the initiator, but the initiator can use it to grant allies back-to-back actions. I played a crusader way back when, and a common thing I'd do is, after one of the other melee engaged an enemy, I'd also move up to that enemy, hit it with a strike for, say, a bonus 8d8 damage, and use my swift action to give the other melee a full-attack action against the poor SOB we were both on top of. I'd also use it to cause chain casts of spells, etc.
I'd recommend going with the 4E re-write of White Raven Tactics - the initiator has to decide at the start of his turn if he's using it, and his own turn immediately ends if he does use it. Still pretty strong, but the initiator doesn't get to take his own entire turn on top of giving an ally a bonus turn.
Desert Wind discipline has a set of boosts that grants Xd6+level fire damage to every melee attack for a round. At low levels it's trivial, but at high levels this can result in catastrophic damage spikes. Especially if combined with the Tiger Claw strikes that grant additional attacks.
There's also a few abilities that let the initiator move around and get into position as a swift action.
I guess the bottom line is that by-and-large Tome of Battle is fine, but there's a handful of abilities that will severely escalate the amount of rocket tag going on. So try to keep an eye for that sort of thing.
WRT only grants standard actions, how were you giving the other melee a full attack?
It was at its most powerful when granting a spellcaster an extra cast spell per round.
The fire boost is frequently neutered by the fact that at the levels it becomes effective, everything and its mother is resistant to fire or immune, completely nerfing the ability.
Movement as a swift action enables you to move and full attack. It's no different then a strike that allows you the equal of full attack damage on a move. It's expected and useful, not overpowered.
==Aelryinth
oh, my t09s is five hundred miles away at the present. I'll have to get the wording off the WoTC boards. Tempest is good about the updates, too.
==Aelryinth
WRT only grants standard actions, how were you giving the other melee a full attack?
It was at its most powerful when granting a spellcaster an extra cast spell per round.
The fire boost is frequently neutered by the fact that at the levels it becomes effective, everything and its mother is resistant to fire or immune, completely nerfing the ability.
Movement as a swift action enables you to move and full attack. It's no...
Um, White Raven Tactics grants a full round of actions. Pulling out my copy of TOB and exact quoting:
When you use this maneuver, select an ally within range. Her initiative count immediately equals your initiative count -1. She then acts on her new initiative as normal. If she has already acted in the current round, she can act again.
Maybe the 4E fix dropped it down to only granting a standard action, but that's how it works by RAW.
As a side note, the official errata pdf for ToB is hilarious, since only the first two pages is the actual ToB and then it switches to being errata for a completely different book (Complete Mage, as best as I can tell).
Also the "everything at high levels is fire immune!" argument depends entirely on the campaign. The Desert Wind boosts get strong enough any enemy that isn't fire resistant/immune will usually die on the spot.
Though the Desert Wind boosts are easily fixed by just removing the +level component of the damage; just adding a bunch of dice is much more in line with the other ToB stuff and keeps the damage reasonable.
Which is what we actually wound up doing in the last campaign where we allowed ToB stuff; in what was a pretty extreme case, when we reached late game in the campaign we had a player who combined the Desert Wind boosts with enough other stuff that he started consistently doing 600+ damage a round. The Desert Wind stuff was managing to account for nearly 50% of the damage. Removing the +level component dropped his damage back to a saner level.
Well, another control factor for the Desert Wind is that it is ALL considered bonus dice, so it's not multiplied on crits. One of the key rules on ToB damage is it was all bonus, and not crit-multiplying.
+20 dmg a swing isn't all that broken when you compare it to Power Attack, which does the same for -6 to hit with a 2h'er. IN PF terms, it's just a smite you can use against non-fire immune stuff.
And it's EASY to prepare for. One Resist Energy spell at any level, and its a worthless boost. If the enemy knows they are going to be fighting you, that's a no-brainer.
And actually, the most broken thing about that White Raven definition was that you could use it on yourself, since you count as your own ally, and start initiative loops for multiple turns. That was how the RKV broke the skill, using turn attempts to do instant recharges of WRT for multiple actions one after another.
Granting someone else one extra turn doesn't sound all that broken next to some of the stuff mages can do. When you can CHAIN it, however...that's when things get nasty. After all, Swift Spells + Time Stop effectively grant casters multiple turns all at once.
It's power is in its versatility, more then anything.
==Aelryinth
It sucked that the Warblade got more skills than the Fighter and some nice bonuses, but overall, there was nothing in that book I would consider overpowered. Most vanilla warblade and fighter builds came out very close in damage output, on the balance.
White Raven Tactics eventually received massive errata, but I still didn't like the way it played.
Iron Heart Surge, basically all you have to do is restrict it to conditions found on the Paladin's Mercy List.Actually, Iron Heart Surge is pretty interesting when put in Pathfinder. It actually becomes sane with no adjustments because Pathfinder actually defines "condition".
The only PF condition that doesn't stop you from activating it (the OTHER problem with IHS is that you can't activate it if you can't act or can't decide your actions, despite everyone seeming to agree that mind control and paralysis are the things it SHOULD be able to do) and causes problems when IHSed away is disabled, and that's more of "what happens?" (I suggest "recover enough HP to put you to hit point") than any lack of balance or stopping the sun.
"Condition" isn't the only problem word. There is also "effect," whatever that is supposed to mean. Maybe "effect" is also clarified by the Pathfinder rules. I'm honestly not sure.
That's only half the problem, though. The other half is the bolded text.
Your fighting spirit, dedication, and training allow you to overcome almost anything to defeat your enemies. When you use this maneuver, select one spell, effect, or other condition currently affecting you and with a duration of 1 or more rounds. That effect ends immediately. You also surge with confidence and vengeance against your enemies, gaining a +2 morale bonus on attack rolls until the end of your next turn.
What the hell is that supposed to mean, when applied to a spell like entangle, or black tentacles, or any other area of effect control spell? Does the spell end immediately for the initiate, or does the spell just end, and stop effecting everyone? As far as I remember, it was the latter, which lead to this hilarious chain of logic:
- 1. I am a drow warblade who has prepared iron heart surge.
- 2. I walk outside and the sun causes me to blind.
- 3. The sun is the effect giving me the condition blind. The sun has a limited duration (Million+ years) great than one round
- 4. Iron heart surge immediately ends the sun?
|
|
Critical hits are a really big factor that people tend to miss when it comes to understanding the balance of the Bo9S and Path of War classes compared to standard characters. Not only do all of those bonus dice that the initiator classes get not get multiplied on a crit, but initiators are actually disincentivized to make full attacks since they're usually making standard action strikes. Since they're not full attacking, this offsets some of their anticipated damage at levels 6 and up, which changes their damage progression to a wave form pattern that's actually pretty equivalent to what even a Fighter will potentially do over the course of a day. Their ability to nova higher than Fighter's can be a bit misleading.
Almost universally, initiator abilities that are truly powerful are generally abilities that improve the party's total action economy, allowing a teammate to get in an extra turn or attack. That's true of modern core classes like the Cavalier as well though; Target of Opportunity and Coordinated Charge are both very potent abilities a Cavalier can use in conjunction with his teammates, and after he's activated Tactician, he doesn't even have to be the one whose action triggers their benefits. A Wizard casting a ranged offensive spell can trigger a Target of Opportunity attack for all party members after the Cavalier has shared the feat.
|
|
I think Pathfinder is already overpowered for Pathfinder, so ToB is definitely no go :)
No seriously gimme
** spoiler omitted **
Best,
Stereofm, you really should check out Rappan Athuk and Slumbering Tsar from Frog God Games. Guaranteed to increase the body count!
Check out this thread:
I am one of SFM's players. And I can guarantee to you that we are playing on a rather relaxed mode optimization-wise.
Putting over-the-top threats in front of us will inevitably lead to an arms race where we optimize to the max. The game will become a mere game of numbers and rolls with VERY little opportunity for roleplay and fun.
The game needs more non-combat scenes and goals. And the monsters should have some nice tricks that go outside the usual constraints of the system without making an optimized (but not that much) PC useless or an easy kill. We need more surprises and out-of-the-box thinking in combat encounters rather than uberpowerful enemies.
Some examples I enjoyed confronting and conquering :
- monster goes through walls as if they do not exist
- enemy steals your actions and uses them to act several times each roundI think the key, whether in combat or non-combat scenes, is to encourage players' creativity.
And we don't agree on this one.
There should be danger and the threat of losing, at least some of the time. And no the DM should NOT have to rework everything in the adventure so that happens. This is not what happens currently. Recently, I almost soloed a module with my "weak" by your standards build for Eldric with just the help of a cleric that healed me. I finished the end boss alone in three rounds. Should it not tell you something ?
Offering better options for the players to customize their characters is fine, but this is also exactly where the arms race is. The arms race IS there. So if you do not offer a higher challenge in the adventures while allowing every option available to the players, the game becomes a cakewalk. And I don't believe in restricting players choice too much.
I believe you will understand my point of view soon when you master Jade Regent and see for yourself.
|
|
Putting over-the-top threats in front of us will inevitably lead to an arms race where we optimize to the max. The game will become a mere game of numbers and rolls with VERY little opportunity for roleplay and fun.This is a comment that makes absolutely zero sense to me. Whether or not these over-the-top threats create an arms race, what on earth does that have to do with the amount of fun roleplaying happens?
I've had characters who were combat optimized to the hilt, but ended up spending 90% of my time roleplaying rather than fighting. Tons of fun to be had, irrespective of optimization
Note that this is not the usual RP vs Optimization debate. Or at least I do not intend this meaning, since I am a very strong proponent of the "RP and Optimization" stance.
That said, in a game with so much real time spent on combat scenes, you need your character to be able to survive these scenes in order to get some RP scenes and opportunities. And it is even more crucial if you want to add depth to your character through his reactions to events in the campaign. In other words, to have fun roleplaying a character and building his in-game story, you need him to stay alive for at least a few sessions.
I remember the time many years ago when my Rolemaster characters died every other session and I became quite competent at creating new ones quickly. It was NOT conducive to in-depth roleplay and fun.
Granted, this problem appears more in APs, but when your GM has little time free for the game, playing an AP is far better than not playing.
The problem IMO comes when the challenge level is so high that you have to play one of the uber-builds just to survive long enough to begin enjoying the game.
Because you are no longer playing the character you want (however optimized), but the build that is forced on you by the level of lethality. In other words, aiming too strongly at PCs' death is not good for creativity (and thus fun) IMO.
I truly believe that all facets of the game should encourage players' and GMs' creativity, because I feel that this is the real source of fun in RPGs.
|
|
While this is getting a bit off topic, I wanted to point out that Paizo has raised the overall difficulty of some of their most recent APs compared to the standard of the last several years, and adjusted the expected party parameters. Up until Reign of Winter, parties were expected to be of relatively low optimization and running on a 15 point buy. Since most groups actually run closer to a 20 or 25 point buy, that meant a lot of groups were already running above the AP and module expectations that had been set as the standard.
Reign of Winter and Wrath of the Righteous (and believe all APs going forward) have been adjusted to account for higher point buys and greater difficulty.
That being said, I've used or had players use the Path of War and Tome of Battle classes in Rise of the Runelords, Jade Regent, The Ruby Phoenix Tournament, and The Dragon's Demand without noticing any issues as regards their balance or performance in relation to other classes. Even the Fighter held up perfectly well during the lower level module The Dragon's Demand (though Fighter's normlly do hold up well during the first 5 levels of play).
It sucked that the Warblade got more skills than the Fighter and some nice bonuses, but overall, there was nothing in that book I would consider overpowered. Most vanilla warblade and fighter builds came out very close in damage output, on the balance.
White Raven Tactics eventually received massive errata, but I still didn't like the way it played.
I did a very large comparison between the Warblade and the Fighter on Regdar's Repository, and it got a lot of view.
It boiled down to the fact that the Warblade got 43 class abilities, and the Fighter got like 19.
Then when you add scaling class features vs. just feats, it got even worse. The Warblade was even rewarded in class for a high Int!
It was simply more fun to play. The only thing it lacked was ranged attack, since it didn't come with missile profs.
You could also take 3 capstones: The fighter Weapon Supremacy Feat, at level 20, was available if you had the pre-reqs: You could take the Warblade capstone of dual stances all the time (an excellent capstone), or you could take a level of fighter, grab extra Maneuver, and get one of the level 9 maneuvers you qualified for (like getting an extra 9th level spell known).
Just an excellent all-around class, always leaving you hungering for more maneuvers readied.
==Aelryinth
It boiled down to the fact that the Warblade got 43 class abilities, and the Fighter got like 19.
On the other hand, the Warblade couldn't bring as many of their abilities to bear at once. The two classes were a lot closer than many people realize. As you say, though, the Warblade was generally more fun, as having skills is fun, having situational powers is fun, and having more selectables is fun.
Well, that's not true.
The thing is, Warblade abilities scaled. Fighter abilities tended to stack, which duplicated scaling...but cost a whole lot more.
For instance, warblades got Int to special maneuvers. That's the same as a scaling bonus across trip, disarm, etc.
Their other abilities, like strikes, likewise were gotten rid of for better things (i.e. get rid of Weapon Spec for Greater weapon spec +2/+4 = going from Sapphire Nightmare Blade to Ruby Nightmare blade, etc).
Warblades also got bonus feats they could use, and of course general feats as well.
It's the 'feat tree' problem fighters have...yeah, they can complete those feat trees, and are one of the few classes that can, but when he gets something that costs him 1 feature and is equal or better then an entire tree, what can you do?
warblades can complete a maneuver tree, and then get rid of the out of date maneuvers. it's really rather unfair to fighters!
==Aelryinth