# Complete Warrior, anybody got it?  What's in it?



## johnsemlak (Nov 20, 2003)

Hey, I was suprised to see the Compete Warrior in stores so early.  Anybody got it?  What's in it?


----------



## John Crichton (Nov 20, 2003)

The title of your post threw me for a second. I thought that there was an Nintendo RPG book coming out or something. 

On a more serious note: If it's at the FLGS this weekend, I'll probably pick it up.

:: edited out some stupidity ::


----------



## johnsemlak (Nov 20, 2003)

Title edited .


----------



## diaglo (Nov 20, 2003)

stopped by my FLGS last night. didn't see it.

i bought City of Brass by Rob Kuntz for 4edHackmaster instead.


----------



## Breakdaddy (Nov 20, 2003)

diaglo said:
			
		

> stopped by my FLGS last night. didn't see it.
> 
> i bought City of Brass by Rob Kuntz for 4edHackmaster instead.




Is it good? I might pick this up too if its worth the $.


----------



## diaglo (Nov 20, 2003)

Breakdaddy said:
			
		

> Is it good? I might pick this up too if its worth the $.





at 30% off it is.  

there is some talk about it over on Dragonsfoot. and new maps, etc...


----------



## johnsemlak (Nov 20, 2003)

> Complete Warrior, anybody got it? What's on it?




Jeez, it's taken me twice to edit this darn title to making it gramaticillly coreckt.

And I'm an English teacher


----------



## shilsen (Nov 20, 2003)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Jeez, it's taken me twice to edit this darn title to making it gramaticillly coreckt.




Riiiiight


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Nov 20, 2003)

Games Plus in Chicago says they'll have it tomorrow - they always wait for the correct street date so I'd imagine it should be everywhere this weekend.


----------



## TracerBullet42 (Nov 20, 2003)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Games Plus in Chicago says they'll have it tomorrow - they always wait for the correct street date so I'd imagine it should be everywhere this weekend.




When is the "correct street date"?  When they say that they will have it tomorrow...does that mean it will arrive at the store?  Or will it be for sale?

Gotta love Games Plus....too bad there's not one in every state.


----------



## Psion (Nov 20, 2003)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Games Plus in Chicago says they'll have it tomorrow - they always wait for the correct street date so I'd imagine it should be everywhere this weekend.




I was able to order it at BAMM.COM (product link), not to mention its in the ENWorld store, so the street date is definitely here.


----------



## Limper (Nov 20, 2003)

Already? Is this a first?


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Nov 20, 2003)

TracerBullet42 said:
			
		

> When is the "correct street date"?  When they say that they will have it tomorrow...does that mean it will arrive at the store?  Or will it be for sale?
> 
> Gotta love Games Plus....too bad there's not one in every state.




I assumed that they meant it will be for sale tomorrow; that's how they've phrased it in the past.  WoTC sets the street date, and although stores generally receive product ahead of that date they're not supposed to sell it till the specified day, which in this case appears to be tomorrow.  I didn't specifically ask if they had already received their shipment, but I know Thalmin sometimes orders WoTC products from multiple distributors to hedge against shipping issues with any particular one, so I'd bet on it being there ready to go.  Can't hurt to call 'em tomorrow and double check, though.


----------



## johnsemlak (Nov 21, 2003)

Anyone got it now?


----------



## jmucchiello (Nov 21, 2003)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Anyone got it now?



Well, er.. yes, my wife pre-ordered it from buy.com and it arrived Wednesday. Unfortunately, I can't tell you about it until Christmas. 

Okay, I did flip through it. 75% of it is the prestige classes (with sample character). The core classes seem interesting. I wasn't pleased with the hexblade. It has abilities I was not expecting based on the names: at 3rd level it gains an ability where it can ignore partial results from spells when it makes the same. Like evasion but also works on those fort partial spells.

Exotic Weapon Master is a 3 level prestige class that is a must have for the dwarven urgosh wielders.

There are epic feats in the back. Someone will have to compare them to the epic handbook to see if they've been updated. A small amount of equipment. Some strange weapon style feats: Bear Claw style is something like a feat to improve Axe/Dagger TWF style characters.

But that was just a flip through the book. I'm sure you'd prefer a better read once it's available. I'll check back next month.


----------



## Spatula (Nov 21, 2003)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Okay, I did flip through it. 75% of it is the prestige classes (with sample character).



Hmmm, that's a good way to pad out the page count.


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

> at 3rd level it gains an ability where it can ignore partial results from spells when it makes the same. Like evasion but also works on those fort partial spells.




Like Mettle of the Sohei OA class and one of the PrC in Defenders of the Faith (Templar or Sacred Fist, IIRC) ?


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

> Hmmm, that's a good way to pad out the page count.




I would call that a massive turn-off, if I had any interest in the book before.


----------



## Viktyr Gehrig (Nov 21, 2003)

I'll admit, I'm a whore for good PrCs, and the idea of new base classes seems intriguing.

 Sample Characters are a bit of a turn-off for me, but, on the other hand, they can help illustrate both flavor and mechnical concerns. I don't mind them so much.


----------



## DM_Matt (Nov 21, 2003)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Well, er.. yes, my wife pre-ordered it from buy.com and it arrived Wednesday. Unfortunately, I can't tell you about it until Christmas.
> 
> Okay, I did flip through it. 75% of it is the prestige classes (with sample character). The core classes seem interesting. I wasn't pleased with the hexblade. It has abilities I was not expecting based on the names: at 3rd level it gains an ability where it can ignore partial results from spells when it makes the same. Like evasion but also works on those fort partial spells.
> 
> ...




BEG BEG BEG!

Prc List, feat count? index?

BEG BEG BEG!


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 21, 2003)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Exotic Weapon Master is a 3 level prestige class that is a must have for the dwarven urgosh wielders.




Presumably changed from the rather bizarre version in Master of the Wild which required rage as a class feature in order to be able to enter the exotic weapon master class


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

Bizarre? Nah:
Exotic == foreign == barbarian.


----------



## drnuncheon (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Bizarre? Nah:
> Exotic == foreign == barbarian.




If I had to pick any one class that would be tailor made for mastering weapons, I'd pick the only class that can specialize in a weapon.  Rage seemed like a tacked-on requirement to justify its presence in Masters of the Wild instead of Sword & Fist.

J


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

Anybody saw my sarcasm? I think it's lost.


----------



## Li Shenron (Nov 21, 2003)

I don't like the idea of more classes.
I already have the feeling that most of the PrCls are 3.5 revisions of old ones.
I think we'll be lucky if even a couple of new PrCls are interesting an original.

At this point I am curious about the rest of the book, if there is anything left   ... I thought this book was going to include at least new high-level combat feats. And I even dared to hope that it might have some extended combat rules, I don't remember which was the last D&D book that actually contained extra rules... probably the Epic Level Handbook. So what are those "combat maneuvers" and "rules for unusual combat situations"?


----------



## Li Shenron (Nov 21, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> If I had to pick any one class that would be tailor made for mastering weapons, I'd pick the only class that can specialize in a weapon.  Rage seemed like a tacked-on requirement to justify its presence in Masters of the Wild instead of Sword & Fist.




I agree. The EWM is one of the poorest PrCl ever written IMHO.


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

I would give that honor to the Forsaker.

The mere concept is stupid. I could understand it in a Shadowrun setting, but in Greyhawk, a magic-hater?

Hey, there's this novel PrC concept -- the Levitationist. He just can't stand gravity, he really, absolutely, positively *hates* gravity, and want to eradicate all gravity from the world. He gets big ability boost when he throw things high up; but lose them as soon as they begin to fall back, so that he must snatch and throw other stuff constantly.

He also has a honor code to kill all jugglers he may see, because jugglers use gravity for their art.


----------



## Li Shenron (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> I would give that honor to the Forsaker.
> 
> The mere concept is stupid. I could understand it in a Shadowrun setting, but in Greyhawk, a magic-hater?




Maybe it is outplaced, or hardly playable, but I don't think the concept is "stupid". Actually I think it's interesting. Instead from the point of view of the implementation, you are right that the Forsaker as well doesn't make much sense.


----------



## dravot (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Anybody saw my sarcasm? I think it's lost.



Did you look under the sofa cushions?  That's always the first place I look whenever I lose something.


----------



## dravot (Nov 21, 2003)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> Maybe it is outplaced, or hardly playable, but I don't think the concept is "stupid". Actually I think it's interesting. Instead from the point of view of the implementation, you are right that the Forsaker as well doesn't make much sense.



I think that it makes for a good one shot NPC, where the DM can set up proper circumstances for the forsaker to work, but for PCs, there's no way that I can see it working properly.

In our campaign we recently met an awakened gelatinous cube forsaker who was out buying magic items for lunch.


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

dravot said:
			
		

> In our campaign we recently met an awakened gelatinous cube forsaker who was out buying magic items for lunch.




I don't know what to say...







 or 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 or 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 or just


----------



## Li Shenron (Nov 21, 2003)

dravot said:
			
		

> I think that it makes for a good one shot NPC, where the DM can set up proper circumstances for the forsaker to work, but for PCs, there's no way that I can see it working properly.




When I said that the implementation rots, I was just thinking about the same point. It gets costly increases to ability scores for free, DR and stuff I don't remember anymore; that's a lot, and requires an adequate cost to counterbalance it, and here comes the fact that he has to destroy a daily specific amount of magic stuff.

The idea of a character who hates magic for some RP reason (easiest one: his beloved ones were killed by wizards...) is a good thing. Great for an NPC who may turn against PC casters or magic-equipped PCs. Even better for a PC who has to manage this attitude with the other PC's needs, but in this case it requires veteran roleplayers to make it work decently.

What is totally off is to implement this idea in the way it has been. Frankly, I think it should not have been made a PrCl at all, and instead it should be left as a RP-only idea at it was from the start. Or otherwise try a better effort to find something that makes sense: destroying a minimum amount of magic items per day has a terrible impact on the game, while receiving stat-increases and DR because of it is in my opinion completely nonsensical and smells like... well... magic   .

In conclusion, I agree with Gez that we should forsake the forsaker.


----------



## Psion (Nov 21, 2003)

I'll agree with LiSherron: I don't like new core classes unless there is a really good reason for it.

That said, I am at odds with those who dislike the sample characters. After LE1, Beyond Monks, and Unholy Warrior's Handbook, I really have learned to appreciate them. Not only are they a good illustration of the concept, but also serve as a sort of "stock NPC" version of the character that is convenient for quick use.

I'm on board with forsaking the forsaker.  Aside from possible exploits, I really don't care to revisit the 1e UA barbarian as a member of the party.


----------



## hong (Nov 21, 2003)

Psion said:
			
		

> That said, I am at odds with those who dislike the sample characters. After LE1, Beyond Monks, and Unholy Warrior's Handbook, I really have learned to appreciate them. Not only are they a good illustration of the concept, but also serve as a sort of "stock NPC" version of the character that is convenient for quick use.




And building them is also a fun way to satisfy one's inner gearhead.


Hong "satisfying his inner gearhead RIGHT NOW, IYKWIM etcetera" Ooi


----------



## Psion (Nov 21, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> And building them is also a fun way to satisfy one's inner gearhead.




Building them is fun, but it's not to convenient to do in the middle of a game if the need pops up. I dunno about anyone else, but I do a fair bit of ad hoccing and/or get flashes of inspiration of things to add into a game on the fly. Anything that helps facilitate that is a boon.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 21, 2003)

I've just come back from leafing through a copy in my FLGS, and I can say that I'll *not* be buying this. It doesn't have enough value-add for me.

I wasn't impressed by any of the new 20-level classes (interesting to see a swashbuckler there though), I looked through pages and pages of prestige classes. As you might expect, the halfling outrider gets a BAB  The exotic weapon master is a much better class now - nothing stupid in the entry requirements, and it is a 3 level class, at each level you can get an "exotic weapon stunt" from a long list of special tweaks for ranged and melee exotic weapons.

The ONLY bits that I would have found useful for my own campaign are the "Style feats" and the "Tactic feats". Both of these are neat ideas and I'll invent some of my own 

Style feats are primarily for various two-weapon combinations, and having a special style feat to go with it gives a little extra bonus - I think one is a sword and dagger style and if you hit an opponent with both weapons you get a free disarm attempt on them.

Tactics feats are "by DMs permission", and allow you to use up to 3 special tactics if the circumstances add up. e.g. the Giantkiller Tactical Feat gives three manouvers - the first one adds to your AC when fighting things two sizes bigger than you, the second one (called "death from below" ) gives you a big attack bonus if the giant creature missed you while you were defensively using the first feat and the third one is to do with clambering aboard a giant foe.

 - these aren't gospel descriptions, don't forget! I was only browsing in the bookstore and wanted to give you a flavour of the things that caught my eye.

Apart them that... spells yadda yadda, magic items yadda yadda. Nothing else caught my eye.

So although many people will find this great (especially if they use lots of prestige classes and want to update some old ones to 3.5e), I found it very disappointing. Once again they missed the chance to illustrate how to build concepts with multiclassing and feat choice, once again they missed the chance to illustrate helpful class variants and how to sort them out. I guess that is just more difficult to do than throw together a prestige class.

Hope the info amidst my ramblings is helpful!

Cheer


----------



## Urbannen (Nov 21, 2003)

I never bought any of the splatbooks.  Is this a good book for me?


----------



## hong (Nov 21, 2003)

Psion said:
			
		

> Building them is fun, but it's not to convenient to do in the middle of a game if the need pops up. I dunno about anyone else, but I do a fair bit of ad hoccing and/or get flashes of inspiration of things to add into a game on the fly. Anything that helps facilitate that is a boon.



 Actually, I was talking about the _designers_ satisfying their inner gearheads. It's just another stage in the creeping HEROization of D&D.


Hong "next step: d20 Vehicles of the Week" Ooi


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

The new base classes are a swashbuckler, a spellsword, and what?

Anyway, I have these roles already covered.
Hexblade: Between the AU mageblade, my homebrew "stormcerer" (I don't see how I could translate the same in English and make it sound cool, sorry; anyway the class could be compared to an arcane paladin or ranger), and the spellsword, eldritch knight, and bladesinger prestige classes; I think the role is already more than covered.

Swashbuckler: There's the AU unfettered, there's the rogue, there's the ranger, there's the monk, and there's the plain fighter. With the duelist prestige class. I don't have anymore room available.


----------



## Fingers Boggis (Nov 21, 2003)

just ordered it, wohoo, i was going to buy it there and then but they didnt have any in stock ("we're only going to order it in when requested," they obviously dont expect a huge demand) but im looking forward to seeing it, new core classes should be useful, specially the swashbuckler (for those of us who dont have AU) and as i didnt buy any of the splat books im equally looking forward to seeing some of the PrCs and im becoming a bit of a feat-a-holic at the moment, i bought OA the other day basically just for the martial arts feats. so this looks like a good book for me. one question i do have to anyone whos already got it is does it cover rogues like the warrior update issue of dragon did? and then a question to the community as a whole does anyone know what other "complete..." books we can look forward to seeing?

Fingers


----------



## buzzard (Nov 21, 2003)

Well I took a fairly cursory look at it at the game shop last night. I was underwhelmed. Mind you it was quite cursory, so don't attach much importance to the review. I didn't get to the style or tactics feats, but I did go through the normal feats to some extent, and it looks like (dare I say it?) fighters got the shaft. Pretty much the only high level fighter feat I saw was Improved Combat Expertise. BFD. Not much of a reason to keep being a fighter. Most of the feats had to do with Barbarian and Monk abilities. They also completely nerfed power critical. It used to be a neat once a day ability. Now it is utterly worthless (woo-hoo +4 to confirm!!!! with one weapon!!!!).

I will take another look to see what the tactical and style feats amount to, but at present I think I ought to go back and change my vote in the poll since I doubt I'll bother buying it now. 

buzzard


----------



## Westwind (Nov 21, 2003)

Any good archer PrCs that a Ranger might qualify for via virtual feats and maybe another feat or two?


----------



## buzzard (Nov 21, 2003)

Westwind said:
			
		

> Any good archer PrCs that a Ranger might qualify for via virtual feats and maybe another feat or two?




Maybe I missed them, but I didn't really see much in the way of archer PrCs. In fact Deepwood Sniper was missing. I guess OOBI was there. 

buzzard


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> The new base classes are a swashbuckler, a spellsword, and what?




I think I saw a 20 level samurai in there?


----------



## Tanis Half-Munchken (Nov 21, 2003)

dravot said:
			
		

> I think that it makes for a good one shot NPC, where the DM can set up proper circumstances for the forsaker to work, but for PCs, there's no way that I can see it working properly.



Who said that all the PrCs where popular? If the PC want's to `go his own way,' then you and him fudge up a one-shot PrC . . .


----------



## dagger (Nov 21, 2003)

Can someone provide me with a list (or a link to a list) of the base classes in the book? Thanks!


----------



## Shazman (Nov 21, 2003)

Yes, I would also like to know what the third base class is what the basic abilities and party roles the three of them fill.


----------



## Altamont Ravenard (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> my homebrew "stormcerer" (I don't see how I could translate the same in English and make it sound cool, sorry




What was it in French, Sorpête? Tempicien? 

AR


----------



## sabby (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> I would give that honor to the Forsaker.
> 
> The mere concept is stupid. I could understand it in a Shadowrun setting, but in Greyhawk, a magic-hater?




Actually, the forsaker is pretty darned true to the original Greyhawk barbarian.  In the old edition, Barbarians HATED magic and couldn't use it, they hated magic users (wizards), and they had a severe dislike that eventually adjusted down to just mere distrust of clerics.

So, Forsaker is pretty much just a souped up AD&D 1st Ed. Barbarian.


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

AR: Non, c'est "Magefoudre" le nom.

But lightningmage really don't sound good.


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

> So, Forsaker is pretty much just a souped up AD&D 1st Ed. Barbarian.




Yeah, but it don't make sense. It was there just to clone Conan -- I wish they would have copied Fafhrd instead, he's much much cooler.

It don't make sense because in GH, magic had always existed, and will always exist. It's one of the laws of nature. Hence  my "hate gravity" spoof.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2003)

dagger said:
			
		

> Can someone provide me with a list (or a link to a list) of the base classes in the book? Thanks!



Glad to.  There are three new base classes in the book:

*HexBlade*: Essentially a fighter/sorceror hybrid with something of a twist.  The hexblade gets a _very_ limited spell set (4th level spells by 20th), sorcerous abilities, a familiar at 4th, the ability to cast in light armor with no chance of spell failure and a variety of cursing and hexing powers.  For example, at first level the hexblade can cast a curse once a day that, if the target fails their save, will give them -2 to certain rolls for one hour.  _*Hexblades cannot be good.*_

*Samurai*: Different from the OA samurai, unless memory fails me, the Samurai is primarily dedicated to using the katana/wakizashi weapon combination, and has a variety of plugged-in feats to do so.  He gains Iajutsu, Ki Shout and other appropriate class feats to achieve this, as well as a TWF feat chain, and a fun ability called Staredown.  Eventually he gains a Frightening Presence ability.

*Swashbuckler*: A lightly-armored fighter, I suspect it won't really satisfy those who are looking for a swashbuckling class.  A dex-based fighter class with a large roguish skill set and lost of interesting feats.  The swashbuckler gets a striking ability similar to a sneak attack (precise strike?  that may be the new OoBI version) that stacks with sneak.  She may add her INT bonus and STR bonus when using light weapons, I believe, gets a couple of luck feats and some other interesting abilities.  Suprisingly, she never really gets any sort of AC bonus feat, except for a dodge bonus, IIRC.


Many of the PrCs that take up the book are from several of the classbooks, revamped for 3.5.  There are four or so archer prestige classes, half of which require you to be an elf/half-elf, I believe.  There is the Darkwood Stalker, Order of the Bow Initiate and some others, but I don't recall what they are as the book isn't here at work.  The bulk of the book is revamped PrCs.

Gez's statement is funny, above, because there is a mage prestige class that is essentially what he describes...a telekinetic class where the mage likes to throw his enemies into the air and far away.  There is also a class for large creature who like to throw things, the Hulking Hurler.

There is little by way of equipment, though there are some new spells and magic items, including a lot of gloves for monks.  The feat section also compiles from several books, and separates them into classes like Martial feats, Divine Feats (mostly DotF stuff like Divine Cleansing), fighting styles (ex: A dwarven style that uses hammer and axe in TWF style...hit successfully and they need to save or be staggered for one turn).

Overall, I like the book, but I could see how many would not.  I much prefer this to the classbooks, myself.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Yeah, but it don't make sense. It was there just to clone Conan -- I wish they would have copied Fafhrd instead, he's much much cooler.
> 
> It don't make sense because in GH, magic had always existed, and will always exist. It's one of the laws of nature. Hence my "hate gravity" spoof.



Yes, and it also was responsible for the Invoked Devastation and Rain of Colorless Fire, turning most of Wester Oerik into a vast, mostly uninhabitable desert and causing a mass migration of three societies into what is now the Flanaess.  Not to mention the whole Ur-Flan thing.  You find it hard to believe that there would be groups in Greyhawk, and some of the Flan and Rheenee in particular, who wouldn't want to destroy magic every time they encounter it?


----------



## Voadam (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Yeah, but it don't make sense. It was there just to clone Conan -- I wish they would have copied Fafhrd instead, he's much much cooler.
> 
> It don't make sense because in GH, magic had always existed, and will always exist. It's one of the laws of nature. Hence  my "hate gravity" spoof.




Conan's world doesn't have wizards and magic?


----------



## dagger (Nov 21, 2003)

Thank you very much!


----------



## Voadam (Nov 21, 2003)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> Glad to.  There are three new base classes in the book:
> 
> *HexBlade*: Essentially a fighter/sorceror hybrid with something of a twist.  The hexblade gets a _very_ limited spell set (4th level spells by 20th), sorcerous abilities, a familiar at 4th, the ability to cast in light armor with no chance of spell failure and a variety of cursing and hexing powers.  For example, at first level the hexblade can cast a curse once a day that, if the target fails their save, will give them -2 to certain rolls for one hour.  _*Hexblades cannot be good.*_




Sounds like an evil arcane paladin. Do they get spells at 1st level? do they have full BAB? Hit Dice? Full weapons and armor proficiency?



> *Samurai*: Different from the OA samurai, unless memory fails me, the Samurai is primarily dedicated to using the katana/wakizashi weapon combination, and has a variety of plugged-in feats to do so.  He gains Iajutsu, Ki Shout and other appropriate class feats to achieve this, as well as a TWF feat chain, and a fun ability called Staredown.  Eventually he gains a Frightening Presence ability.
> 
> *Swashbuckler*: A lightly-armored fighter, I suspect it won't really satisfy those who are looking for a swashbuckling class.  A dex-based fighter class with a large roguish skill set and lost of interesting feats.  The swashbuckler gets a striking ability similar to a sneak attack (precise strike?  that may be the new OoBI version) that stacks with sneak.  She may add her INT bonus and STR bonus when using light weapons, I believe, gets a couple of luck feats and some other interesting abilities.  Suprisingly, she never really gets any sort of AC bonus feat, except for a dodge bonus, IIRC.




So more punch for a smart light warrior, but no real AC help. That's too bad, melee combatants need a better AC than wizards. Looks like the unfettered have a better design.



> Many of the PrCs that take up the book are from several of the classbooks, revamped for 3.5.  There are four or so archer prestige classes, half of which require you to be an elf/half-elf, I believe.  There is the Darkwood Stalker, Order of the Bow Initiate and some others, but I don't recall what they are as the book isn't here at work.  The bulk of the book is revamped PrCs.
> 
> Gez's statement is funny, above, because there is a mage prestige class that is essentially what he describes...a telekinetic class where the mage likes to throw his enemies into the air and far away.  There is also a class for large creature who like to throw things, the Hulking Hurler.
> 
> ...




Does it redo mercurial swords, the wolverine claws, and the other wierd weapons from S&F?


----------



## Voadam (Nov 21, 2003)

Any changes in close quarters combat, that extra attack when denied dex feat or power lunge?


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2003)

Voadam said:
			
		

> Sounds like an evil arcane paladin. Do they get spells at 1st level? do they have full BAB? Hit Dice? Full weapons and armor proficiency?



No, they don't get spells until 4th level, if their CHA is high enough (0, IIRC). It might be 0 at 3rd, 1 at 4th. Don't have it in front of me, so that's IIRC. They have Fighter BAB, d10 I think, but only light armor proficiency and no shield proficiences. They gain a couple of different hex and curse abilities, eventually reaching a -6 by 20th level for their curse, and a couple of other 'make life unpleasant for your foes, particularly those within 30'' set of abilities. His familar can appear at 5th, but he's treated as a sorceror of 4 levels lower for it's computation (i.e. 10 level hexblade has the same familiar as a 6th level sorceror). His saves are 6, 12, 6, I believe.





			
				Voadam said:
			
		

> So more punch for a smart light warrior, but no real AC help. That's too bad, melee combatants need a better AC than wizards. Looks like the unfettered have a better design.
> 
> Does it redo mercurial swords, the wolverine claws, and the other wierd weapons from S&F?



I think the Unfettered are a different design ethic, truthfully. This version of the swashbuckler is clearly meant to be a social character as well as a light fighter, and gets good skill points and a large skill list. They get weapon finesse at 1st level, a special charge abilitiy that allows them to move unhindered over difficult terrain (say, jumping from tabletop to tabletop or swinging from a chandelier) and an ability that is basically the domain ability of the Luck domain, I think. There is a PrC in the book that does give an insight bonus to AC, and I think the intention was that you use a swashbuckler to get there (might have been the new version of Tempest, I can't recall for sure).

I don't recall seeing the goofy weapons in the book, but I only skimmed the equipment sections, so it's possible I just missed them. I hope not. 



			
				Voadam said:
			
		

> Any changes in close quarters combat, that extra attack when denied dex feat or power lunge?



I don't recall seeing any change to close quarters combat, but there were some feats in there that might account for that.  I skimmed the feats, as many of them were updates to 3.5 from the classbooks, and it was a long day, and I was tired on the train.


----------



## Aaron L (Nov 21, 2003)

Bah, hexbldes are evil??  And here I thougnt it might be the arcane warrior to balance out the psychic warrior.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2003)

Aaron L said:
			
		

> Bah, hexbldes are evil?? And here I thougnt it might be the arcane warrior to balance out the psychic warrior.



Evil, no.  Not good, yes.  They can be Neutral, but the implication was that because they cast hexes and curses on their enemies, they aren't nice people, and thus non-good.  You may consider that spurious logic, in which case you can safely ignore the requirement.  I don't think any of it's class abilities really required evil or neutrailty to work, and quite frankly I don't see how it's any more evil than smacking someone with a quivering palm, fireball or sneak attack.


----------



## Kahuna Burger (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Yeah, but it don't make sense. It was there just to clone Conan -- I wish they would have copied Fafhrd instead, he's much much cooler.
> 
> It don't make sense because in GH, magic had always existed, and will always exist. It's one of the laws of nature. Hence  my "hate gravity" spoof.




I'm sure drugs and alcohol have existed just as long  magic...  If they played as strong a part in the world as magic does, would you consider it stupid to have a class which forsakes all use of herbalism or alchemy, had a flavor requirement agaisnt drugs and alcohol, and got bonuses to saves agaisnt poison as well as some fort/con style advantages from their enforced bodily purity?

I'm looking forward to playing a forsaker with one minor flavor change. She will be a former spell adict, who at some point realized she was depending more on the buffs and cures than her own abilities, and went cold turkey off magic. Since the class actually doesn't require you to attack magic users, or even avoid their company, and the magic destruction effects only ONE of the class abilities, not all of them, it works well for that concept.

The hate gravity spoof was too far off to make a point, btw, it falls down    on too many levels. So it was just mildly funny, not argumentative...


Kahuna burger


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

I guess I prefer my homebrew "arcane paladin". (I say paladin only for the spellcasting/BAB combination.)

I have all spell/BAB combinations (BAB 20/Spell 4, BAB 15/Spell 6, BAB 15/Spell 9, BAB 10/Spell 9) for all magic (arcane, divine, nature), save psionic. Miss a "psionic cleric" and a "psionic paladin".


----------



## Gez (Nov 21, 2003)

KB said:
			
		

> I'm sure drugs and alcohol have existed just as long magic... If they played as strong a part in the world as magic does, would you consider it stupid to have a class which forsakes all use of herbalism or alchemy, had a flavor requirement agaisnt drugs and alcohol, and got bonuses to saves agaisnt poison as well as some fort/con style advantages from their enforced bodily purity?




Actually, yes. Unless it's a AU-style "Champion of Temperance"... 

Besides, it's not like alchemy and herbalism brings overwhelming boons to a character, so much that not using them is a privation that needs a class with special features to compensate.


----------



## Aaron L (Nov 21, 2003)

"Technology killed my family, so I will forsake the use of it.  However, my body has developed alternate strengths to compensate for my lack of technology.  Watch as the puny bullets of technology bounce of my skin!  See me run faster than the puny automobiles of technology!"

After reading about so many people wanting to play a Forsaker I was afraid I was the only one here to think they were hideously dumb


----------



## comrade raoul (Nov 21, 2003)

How about prestige classes? Does anyone feel like listing them? Are there any especially cool or troublesome ones?


----------



## Knight Otu (Nov 21, 2003)

I would very much like to see a table of contents for this book...


----------



## Kwyn (Nov 21, 2003)

I'm really looking forward to this book.

Our group is very traditional and it took us forever to shift to 3.0 and then 3.5.  When we moved to 3.5, we still hadn't even bought multiple copies of most of the splats, so this is a much needed addition for our group.   

Knowing that now we'll have a full set of prc's updated to 3.5, as well as three new core classes really makes me happy.  The Swashbuckler in particular looks attractive since I like lightly armored fighter types.

I think that anyone who didn't invest heavily in the 3.0 splats, this is a must have.

As to the person who said the fighter wasn't helped, I think that by default, the addition of new combat feats favors the fighter over anyone else.  They don't necessarily have to be fighter exclusive.  Most non-fighter melee types are pretty strapped for feats.  The addition of even more feats simply serves to crowd their choices even more while the fighter is able to accomodate the new feats by replacing some older feats that were perhaps only considered "average". 

Picking up my copy this afternoon.


----------



## jester47 (Nov 21, 2003)

How bout a table of contents?

This sounds like The Complete Warrior will at last allow me to dump off the splatbooks.  I was keeping them around for some of the feats and PrCs.  Most of which seem to be in the Complete Warrior.

Magic of Faerun and the DMG 3.5 covers all the cool arcane stuff and some of the druid ranger stuff from masters of the wild I thought was too weird mechanicly.  Song and Silence buffs were lackluster for bards and rogues, and everything else gets into this book it seems.  Cool, I may be one step closer to done.

Aaron.


----------



## Kwyn (Nov 21, 2003)

Oh, I have seen here, and elsewhere, complaints about the sample characters for each PRC.

I think it's a terrific addition.  As a DM, I love to have ready made characters available.  Not only does it help me understand how the class works, it lets me just drop one in on the fly, or add it as a planned part of my adventure, without having to spend an hour on it.  A great tool for DM's everywhere.

I can understand how players might not have much use for it, but those behind the screen no doubt have been asking for this.


----------



## the Jester (Nov 21, 2003)

Another request for, at least, a list of the prestige classes!  

Actually, I may be going to buy it today... debating, debating... not so much money these days...ermph...


----------



## orangefruitbat (Nov 21, 2003)

*I bought it - here's why*

Basically, this book is all the 3.0 splatbook stuff that's about fighting. Since I never thought the 3.0 books had enough good stuff for the money, I never bought any of them. That being said, I did like some of the feats and prestige classes.

This book has all of the splatbook stuff, but proofread, in colour, hardcover, and with some better balance.

You get some new basic classes - hexor, samurai, and swashbuckler. Interestingly enough, this samurai is different than the OA one - basically is a more constrained and stereotyped samurai. Probably fine for a European-style fantasy with a samurai in it. If I want to run a game in Kara Tura, I'd use the one in OA. There are also non-spellcasting variants of the ranger and paladin. The paladin gets a rage-like bonus once a day (increased STR and AC) when fighting evil, and can give weapons the good and ultimately the holy properties. These would defintely appeal to people who want to play rangers or paladins but don't want to bother with picking spells.

You get lots of prestige classes. Many are from the splats. There's yet another version of the bladesinger - this one adds spell-caster levels at every other class level rather than a separate spell list. Hooray. A new spellsword, a new Eye of Grumush, new Knight types and Hunter of the Dead. The Thayan Knight and the Purple Dragon are here in 3.5 form oddly enough. The exotic weapons master actually seems woth taking now. And there's one for shapechangers (including druids) who can partially shapechnage to gain benefits with natural weapons.


Lots of new feats. Most are from the splats, but with some minor tweaks. You get classics like Large and in Charge and Close-combat fighting. All those martial arts feats from SF and the extra rage feats. You also get reworked versions of all the divine feats (as someone who doesn't have DoF, this is a good thing). You get tactical feats, which are interesting as they provide specific bonuses under specific circumnstances. For example, there is one that allows you to improve your AC when fightinging someone using power attack. There are also weapon style feats which give you bonuses with certain weapon combos, including some that you wouldn't expect, like sword and axe. There's one for staff fighting that allows you to spin it around and improve your AC.

There's a section on monsters and fighting familiars. Great, the last thing I want as DM is more creatures for the party's menagerie of familiars, cohorts, bonded mounts and animal companions. Sigh.

There are some new weapons and armor. Nothing too crazy. The man catcher is back (good for us kuo-toan fans) and the elven thinblade. Some silliness like a dual-headed hammer. 

And then there is a section on medieval and fantasy warfare. Haven't really looked at it to see if it's any good.

To sum up, if you don't have the 3.0 splats, it's a good buy. If you have some or all of them, look it over for yourself and see if it's worth it.


----------



## Knight Otu (Nov 21, 2003)

Kwyn said:
			
		

> Oh, I have seen here, and elsewhere, complaints about the sample characters for each PRC.



I personally think having sample characters can be helpful, especially if they help to understand some rules better. But from what I read here, there will be 36 sample characters, one for each PrC. That does seem a bit much for me, and it would have been better, in my opinion, to reserve a number of these samples for a web enhancement. (Then again, such a treatment hides the samples from a large number of gamers that are not online.)


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Nov 21, 2003)

What about the spell-less Ranger?


----------



## Kahuna Burger (Nov 21, 2003)

Aaron L said:
			
		

> "Technology killed my family, so I will forsake the use of it.  However, my body has developed alternate strengths to compensate for my lack of technology.  Watch as the puny bullets of technology bounce of my skin!  See me run faster than the puny automobiles of technology!"
> 
> After reading about so many people wanting to play a Forsaker I was afraid I was the only one here to think they were hideously dumb




yeah, I've never seen a fantasy/science fiction story in which a "back to nature" type character competed with his technological superiors with strength, skills, wiles and semi supernatural abilities which compensated for his lack of weapons power...

Oh wait, thats actually a time honored archetype in dozens of stories...   

Anyway, certainly flavor issues are a weak reason to dismiss a PrC... If it doesn't fit your campaign,whatever, tons don't fit mine... but it can fit into a campaign and be a good addition.

kahuna burger


----------



## heirodule (Nov 21, 2003)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Tactics feats are "by DMs permission", and allow you to use up to 3 special tactics if the circumstances add up. e.g. the Giantkiller Tactical Feat gives three manouvers - the first one adds to your AC when fighting things two sizes bigger than you, the second one (called "death from below" ) gives you a big attack bonus if the giant creature missed you while you were defensively using the first feat and the third one is to do with clambering aboard a giant foe.




Why does this sound like it was inspired by arcade fighting games with their "special moves"?


----------



## Knight Otu (Nov 21, 2003)

heirodule said:
			
		

> Why does this sound like it was inspired by arcade fighting games with their "special moves"?



It doesn't sound like that to me. I mean, it doesn't involve rapid clicking on a button while twisting a joystick in quartercircles.  And I doubt there is a tactics feat that allows shooting a fireball at your opponent.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Nov 21, 2003)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> It doesn't sound like that to me. I mean, it doesn't involve rapid clicking on a button while twisting a joystick in quartercircles.  And I doubt there is a tactics feat that allows shooting a fireball at your opponent.




Shame that...


----------



## Psion (Nov 21, 2003)

I'm waiting for the Bability feat...


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2003)

heirodule said:
			
		

> Why does this sound like it was inspired by arcade fighting games with their "special moves"?



I don't know, why do you think it does? 

 They're pretty clearly identified and described as fighting styles, and most involve very specific circumstances. The first thing they looked like to me was styles from fighting schools, be they Kung Fu styles or fencing duelists. "_Obviously you've a-studied your Capella!_"

I don't have the book here, so giving a lengthy list of the Prcs is a bit difficult. There IS a sample character after each class, and I like this for two reasons. First, it's a handy NPC for use, right there. As a DM, that's just swell. Second, it helps illustrate how the class works in actual practice. There wouldn't have been any confusion about the obvious typo with the Arcane Trickster if a sample trickster had been provided with the class writeup, for example.

Now, working from memory:

*Chapter 1* is the writeup of the new core classes that I mentioned before. Each class is given the standard core class writeup. The main change in focus for the CW samurai is that he's a two weapon fighter who gets most of his abilities for using his diasho. Give him a mace, and he loses a lot of his abilities. The OA samurai was focused on just imbuing magic power on his ancestral weapon, which became more powerful with him. None of the new core classes outmodes the fighter at his chief task, although the samurai can match him as long as he stays within his focus.

There is a two-page treatise on how to change the ranger and paladin for a low-magic game, and as mentioned above, basically takes away spellcasting and gives a few spell-like abilities, such as casting Holy Weapon once/day or being able to cast 'trackless step'. It's very brief, but not bad.

*Chapter 2* is the bulk of the book, the Prestige Classes. There are quite a few, as you've seen listed. The lion's share are updated from the classbooks, or in some cases reworked while being updated. Most are for PC, although the Eye of Gruumsh and Thayan Protector are the exceptions.

In no particular order: _Frenzied Berserker, Thayan Protector, Ronin, Order of the Bow Initiate, Hulking Hurler, Darkwoods Stalker, Halfling Outrider, Tempest, Eye of Gruumsh, Knight of the Chalice, Hunter of the Dead, Spellsword, Tattooed Monk, Cavalier, Bladesinger, Justicar, Devoted Defender, Drunken Master, Exotic Weapon Master, Giant-Killer, Rage Mage, Ravager (I think), and Purple Dragon Knight_. There are more, naturally, such as the different shapeshifting classes, but I just don't recall them.​*Chapter 3* is Spells and Magic Items, IIRC. Slim pickings, as you might expect. A few new magic weapons, some armor types and not much more to speak of.

*Chapter 4* is Feats. There are a lot of them, as I mentioned, and many of them updated from several books, not just S&F. They appear to have been both updated and rebalanced in some cases.

*Chapter 5* is on running a 'Martial' campaign. It mostly discussed the PCs role in a military game or games with a strong martial theme. It's mostly fluff, but it looks decently written, though I haven't perused it that heavily, yet.


----------



## Knight Otu (Nov 21, 2003)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> ... Ronin, ...




Now that is just... not right. Ronin as prestige class?


----------



## sabby (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> It don't make sense because in GH, magic had always existed, and will always exist. It's one of the laws of nature. Hence  my "hate gravity" spoof.




No, but someone who gains strength from destroying an object he hated is a sort of fantasy staple.  One whose will is so strong that he can transcend both reliance and vulnerability to magic.

Honestly, if you want to complain about a prestige class, I can find dozens that are just so much more goofy and silly.  Forsaker gets stronger/sturdier/what have you, can heal much quicker, and needs to destroy magic items to "maintain that force of will."

Yes, Greyhawk always had magic.  It also had Barbarians who had REALLY GOOD SAVES VS Magic, high hitpoints, and had requirements to not own magic weapons.  (And a social, roleplaying requirement to destroy magic items.)


----------



## dagger (Nov 21, 2003)

If I recall correctly, 1e barbarians actually benefited from destroying items.


----------



## Bloodroot (Nov 21, 2003)

dagger said:
			
		

> If I recall correctly, 1e barbarians actually benefited from destroying items.




This is true.  In first edition, you gained experience points for acquiring magic items.  The barbarian could get experience instead from destroying them.


----------



## drnuncheon (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Anybody saw my sarcasm? I think it's lost.




The trouble with really subtle sarcasm is that sometimes there are people who have said such things in all seriousness.



			
				Gez said:
			
		

> AR: Non, c'est "Magefoudre" le nom.
> 
> But lightningmage really don't sound good.




Electromancer?

J


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Nov 21, 2003)

Can anyone with the book tell me if there is an updated version of the Sacred Fist in it? Or is there any other classes that focus purely on unarmed combat?


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Nov 21, 2003)

Are these tactical feats or fighting style feats, the same things as the fighting styles from OA, virtual feats that you didn't have to buy if you had all of the steep requirements?

Is there any room for modifying the samurai since it seems too focussed with the whole katana/wakizashi thing, when it's something in my campaign that would only come from one nation.  Could it be changed to used a long sword (aka Gum) and be a Hwoarang?

Did they take any feats from D20 Modern such as Agile Riposte, Elusive Target, or that one where you can avoid an opponent's strength bonus to hit you?

Is Mirror Move the spell that lets you emulate any feat you saw used, in that book?

Has the Bladedancer (aka the Flying Swordsman Prc) been revised?

Just how much extra damage does a Swashbuckler depend on?  And how much of this extra damage works on things that are immune to criticals?

What kind of spells do hexblades get?  Is it mainly ability enhancing transmutation spells?

What is there for Bards beyond some new spells?  Is their anything like a Skald Prc?


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Nov 21, 2003)

Gah.  Have book....I'm at work...can't look through it....more details..dying...


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Nov 21, 2003)

> There is a two-page treatise on how to change the ranger and paladin for a low-magic game, and as mentioned above, basically takes away spellcasting and gives a few spell-like abilities, such as casting Holy Weapon once/day or being able to cast 'trackless step'. It's very brief, but not bad.




That bites  When looking for a magic-less ranger, I was expecting a ranger _with *no* magic_. Maybe it's my Canadian English that is failing me.

There's supposed to be a magic-less ranger in UA.



> Did they take any feats from D20 Modern such as Agile Riposte, Elusive Target, or that one where you can avoid an opponent's strength bonus to hit you?



Unbalance Opponent ... I'd allow it, provided you needed a BAB of +16 and about 8 feats to qualify for it.


----------



## Tzarevitch (Nov 21, 2003)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> Can anyone with the book tell me if there is an updated version of the Sacred Fist in it? Or is there any other classes that focus purely on unarmed combat?




I can't spend much time looking at my copy since I am still at wor but As I recall, Drunken Master is back as is the Tattooed Monk from Oriental Adventures. I don't recall seeing Sacred Fist though (although that class really needs a re-write) and I didn't see any other real monk-type unarmed combat classes. Several of the monk-type feats did get re-writes though.  


Tzarevitch


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2003)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Now that is just... not right. Ronin as prestige class?



Yeah, yeah, I know.  It's actually an odd-duck prestige class, similar to the Blackguard in that when you take it, you can convert your Samurai levels into Ronin levels.  This is one place where the term 'prestige' really works against the concept. 

I remember when glancing over it last night, wondering why I would _want_ to become one.  I don't recall what makes it a class worth taking...or if it's a class you drop into.  Hmm.  'Shame' Classes?  Time for a new book. 



> Are these tactical feats or fighting style feats, the same things as the fighting styles from OA, virtual feats that you didn't have to buy if you had all of the steep requirements?



No, they're actuall honest to goodness feats.  These particular ones favor fighters more than others, since they use a valuable feat slot, and many are for weapon combinations.



> Is there any room for modifying the samurai since it seems too focussed with the whole katana/wakizashi thing, when it's something in my campaign that would only come from one nation. Could it be changed to used a long sword (aka Gum) and be a Hwoarang?



I don't see why you couldn't.  It's still a medium/light weapon combo, correct?  Most of the weapon-dependent feats, like the virtual quickdraw feat, would work fine with the Gum/Hwoarang combo (these are Korean?).



> Did they take any feats from D20 Modern such as Agile Riposte, Elusive Target, or that one where you can avoid an opponent's strength bonus to hit you?




Not that I noticed, but I may have missed them.  



> Is Mirror Move the spell that lets you emulate any feat you saw used, in that book?



No idea on this one.  I glazed right over the spells.  



> Has the Bladedancer (aka the Flying Swordsman Prc) been revised?



Yes.  Another trend I didn't like, a lot of Elf/Half-ELf only classes, as opposed to one halfling, one gnome, and one Orc/Half-orc.  I glazed over it, honestly.  The class itself hasn't really grabbed me that much.



> Just how much extra damage does a Swashbuckler depend on? And how much of this extra damage works on things that are immune to criticals?



Here, I'm not sure.  I believe that they have to abilities, one which is similar to sneak attack and one that is not.  My memory is weak on this one.  I know one ability was just like sneak attack (no good against critically immune creatures), but I think the other was not.



> What kind of spells do hexblades get? Is it mainly ability enhancing transmutation spells?



Honestly, I forgot to look for his spell list, but given his write-up, I would expect them to be more offensive hex and debuff spells.  The concept appears to be more of 'curse my enemy and cast his ruin upon the mountain' more than 'fear my terrible power'.



> What is there for Bards beyond some new spells? Is their anything like a Skald Prc?



There is one bard specific Prc that I don't recall the name of, but it was pretty amusing.  He could Inspire Recklessness and something else (Rage?) and was clearly a fighting man's bard, so he might do for your Skald, depending on what you're after.


----------



## Altamont Ravenard (Nov 21, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> AR: Non, c'est "Magefoudre" le nom.
> 
> But lightningmage really don't sound good.




I think I'm going to invent the FoutreMage in your honor if I ever use the BoEF 

AR


----------



## Tzarevitch (Nov 21, 2003)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> Just how much extra damage does a Swashbuckler depend on?  And how much of this extra damage works on things that are immune to criticals?




None. It doesn't get extra damage. It is like a rogue with figher BAB and no sneak attack or trap disabling. It picks up abilities relating to dodge and movement. 



			
				Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> What kind of spells do hexblades get?  Is it mainly ability enhancing transmutation spells?




Mainly low-level sorcerer spells that aren't conjurations or evocations. It tends to have buff-spells, movement spells and a couple of divinations. Its damaging spells tend to be the loe-level stat-damage types. 



			
				Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> What is there for Bards beyond some new spells?  Is their anything like a Skald Prc?




The War Chanter PrC. It is a quasi-bard with full BAB and no spellcasting enhancement. I think it kinda sucks personally, but it does give you the ability to use 2 bardic music abilities at the same time. It is more in tune with the norse warrior-skald than the mainline bard is. 

Tzarevitch


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Nov 21, 2003)

Tzarevitch said:
			
		

> I can't spend much time looking at my copy since I am still at wor but As I recall, Drunken Master is back as is the Tattooed Monk from Oriental Adventures. I don't recall seeing Sacred Fist though (although that class really needs a re-write) and I didn't see any other real monk-type unarmed combat classes. Several of the monk-type feats did get re-writes though.
> 
> 
> Tzarevitch





Yeah, I like the Sacred Fist but the introduction of material DR killed the class most completely than any other class in 3E when coupled with the fact that a Sacred Fist can never pick up any sort of weapon.


----------



## C-52 (Nov 21, 2003)

*ToC*

Can anyone who has it post a table of contents?

Is Expert Tactician in the book? Is it different than before? And is all of that Flick of the Wrist stuff in it too?


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 21, 2003)

*I've got the book here now...*

I'm sitting here with it, now, and here's the looks

CORE CLASSES:
* Hexblade is nummy. It's kind of along the lines of a ranger/paladin, except with morale-affecting/curse-inducing arcane spells at the higher levels. It meets my criteria for a 'new class' okay, and has one interesting special forbiddance -- you cannot be good....

* Samurai is iffy. It's a fighter focused on fear, effectively, and it seems a smidge on the mighty side. In addition, it'd probably work better as a PrC. Not horrendous, but certainly questionable. Still...

* Swashbuckler. HAH. As if there ever was a timely class? I tend to groove on it, in general, though I'd be tempted to ditch some of their HP (it's a d10) for some more movement-related abilities (such as a bonus to movement a la Monk or Barbarian), or maybe some sneaky-attacks (right now, the 'precise strikes' are done as extra things they can do with their criticals...which is cool).

*Paladins and Rangers Without Spellcasting: This option is *adored*, and I'll probably implement it right off the bat.

PRESTIGE CLASSES:
I love that they included ready-to-use example NPC's....! YAY!
A few standout things:
* Dark Hunter: 5-level underground assassin. Tasty.
* Darkwood Stalker: Orcslayer! This is cool...definately a good use of a PrC, but seems a bit generic...sneak attack , etc. vs. orcs, but nothing relating to any particular orc skill in general.
* Dervish: Berserking dancer of doom! Very fun!
* Gnome Giant-Slayer: Cool, but what about a dwarvish one? Still, fun!
* Halfling Outrider: The picture is beautiful, but somehow the image of a ten-year-old astride an ugly doggy will never be anything but comical to me. 
* Hulking Hurler: 3-level monster-based PrC with some cool throwing abilities.
* Huner of the Dead: Not a bad focused PrC...
* Invisible Blade: I'm not sure why they're invisible, but they're a nice knife-fighter PrC...
* Justicar: The picture = BAD ASS.  Plus, these guys fit snugly into Planescape (pre-Faction War) as Mercykillers. So I'm lovin'.
* Kensai: This ain't yo pappy's weaponmaster! I like it. The ability to add strength and become a warlord is sweet. 
* Master Thrower: This is one PrC I've got INSTANT use for! DELICIOUS!
* Master of the Unseen Hand: Very cool focuser on telekinesis, but it seems...odd...
* Mindspy: This is pretty sweet...they can detect when things want to hit them. Neat idea...
* Nature's Warrior: A druid who specializes in wild shape abilities...not a bad idea, but I'm not a HUUUGE fan of wild shape to begin with, so meh...
* Occult Slayer: My my my....seems a decent mage-slayer.
* Purple Dragon Knight: More Realmscreep? Eh...not a bad mass-leader PrC, so I'm happy.
* Rage Mage: This should've been multiclass...they don't add a lot to the sorcerer/barbarian combo
* Ravager: Leaves me a little cold...nice 'pain and fear' in name, but a good enough fighter can do that by unsheathing his sword alone. 
* Reaping Mauler: A great 'annoy the PC's' kind of class....grappling is obnoxious for anyone. I like it, though...a nice 'wrestler' PrC.
* Ronin: Interesting, but would someone with heavy armor get much of a chance to sneak-attack? Iffy....
* Stonelord: Shows that elementalists are not a wiz/sor only thing! I like! 
* Thayan Knight: MORE REALMSCREEP! ARG! Though this is mitigated by advice on how to genericize it, and it is a decent fantasy archetype (defender of a wizard)...still...blargh.
* War Chanter: Hmmm...I'm a fan. Nice direction to take bardic music. 
* Warshaper: Though the illustration looks bizzarre, I love the concept of the class...finally, someone who can just shape parts as needed!

More as I go through it...any specifics anybody wants?


----------



## jmucchiello (Nov 21, 2003)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> I personally think having sample characters can be helpful, especially if they help to understand some rules better. But from what I read here, there will be 36 sample characters, one for each PrC. That does seem a bit much for me, and it would have been better, in my opinion, to reserve a number of these samples for a web enhancement. (Then again, such a treatment hides the samples from a large number of gamers that are not online.)



No the sample characters are just there to pad space. Every sample character lists the PrC abilities it gains with the full text from the page before where you first read the PrC. Very annoying. They also went out of their way to make the sample characters "interesting" by using funky races.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 22, 2003)

Some of it pads, but each write-up takes about 1/4 page at most...with all 36, that's 9 pages, out of 160...we're looking at about 5%, right? Not too much padding...

Also, I don't see them using any races that aren't in the PHB, yet...


----------



## Michael Tree (Nov 22, 2003)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> Yeah, I like the Sacred Fist but the introduction of material DR killed the class most completely than any other class in 3E when coupled with the fact that a Sacred Fist can never pick up any sort of weapon.



The Living Greyhawk website has a document with unofficial 3.5 conversions of splatbook PrCs, for use in Living Greyhawk.  The conversion of the Sacred Fist includes a number of DR-beating abilities.


----------



## Olive (Nov 22, 2003)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> In no particular order: _Frenzied Berserker, Thayan Protector, Ronin, Order of the Bow Initiate, Hulking Hurler, Darkwoods Stalker, Halfling Outrider, Tempest, Eye of Gruumsh, Knight of the Chalice, Hunter of the Dead, Spellsword, Tattooed Monk, Cavalier, Bladesinger, Justicar, Devoted Defender, Drunken Master, Exotic Weapon Master, Giant-Killer, Rage Mage, Ravager (I think), and Purple Dragon Knight_. There are more, naturally, such as the different shapeshifting classes, but I just don't recall them.




Can anyone give the complete list, esp with a brief description for those which aren't straight updates from the splats?


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 22, 2003)

Check above: that's all the new ones (and it is, I would argue, the greater percentage of the Prestige Class chapter).


----------



## richie (Nov 22, 2003)

Thanks a lot Kamikaze Midget!!

I am a fan of the Wild shape ability, so I would like to learn a bit more about the "shifter" prcs. 

Has the Nature's Warrior access to other forms than just animals? What kind of bonuses does he get?

Concerning the Warshaper: How is this concept working?


----------



## Michael Tree (Nov 22, 2003)

richie said:
			
		

> Has the Nature's Warrior access to other forms than just animals? What kind of bonuses does he get?



That's possibly my favorite PrC in the book.  It's a 5-level class whose level stacks with Druid for determining wild empathy and wild shape abilities.  It has Fighter's BAB, gains +1 caster level at levels 2 and 4, and at levels 1, 3, and 5 gets to choose a special ability from a menu.  The special abilities only apply when the character is wildshaped, and confer bonuses like +3 to all natural attacks, better maneuverability and +30 speed for flying forms, +1 unnamed bonus to natural armor per class level, and a few elemental abilities.

It's great for Druids, and even better for Animal Lords. I know a certain Catlord who is going to be very very happy.


----------



## Grayhawk (Nov 22, 2003)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> ...any specifics anybody wants?



If it's not too much hassle, what are the specifics on the spell less Paladin and Ranger?


----------



## richie (Nov 22, 2003)

Michael Tree said:
			
		

> That's possibly my favorite PrC in the book.  It's a 5-level class whose level stacks with Druid for determining wild empathy and wild shape abilities.  It has Fighter's BAB, gains +1 caster level at levels 2 and 4, and at levels 1, 3, and 5 gets to choose a special ability from a menu.  The special abilities only apply when the character is wildshaped, and confer bonuses like +3 to all natural attacks, better maneuverability and +30 speed for flying forms, +1 unnamed bonus to natural armor per class level, and a few elemental abilities.
> 
> It's great for Druids, and even better for Animal Lords. I know a certain Catlord who is going to be very very happy.




Sounds extremely nice! 

What are the prerequisites?

And I suppose the +3 bonus to all natural attacks is bonus not stackable with Greater Magic Fang...


----------



## jmucchiello (Nov 22, 2003)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> Some of it pads, but each write-up takes about 1/4 page at most...with all 36, that's 9 pages, out of 160...we're looking at about 5%, right? Not too much padding...
> 
> Also, I don't see them using any races that aren't in the PHB, yet...



I remember them being longer than that and I know one of them was a Hobgoblin. Or my mind is playing tricks on me. I won't know till Christmas though.


----------



## V_Shane (Nov 22, 2003)

Wildshape...excellent. Read more! errrrr I'll read more.


----------



## the Jester (Nov 22, 2003)

Could you list the feats for us please?  (Anyone?)


----------



## Selvarin (Nov 22, 2003)

orangefruitbat said:
			
		

> You get lots of prestige classes. Many are from the splats. There's yet another version of the bladesinger - this one adds spell-caster levels at every other class level rather than a separate spell list. Hooray. A new spellsword, a new Eye of Grumush, new Knight types and Hunter of the Dead. The Thayan Knight and the Purple Dragon are here in 3.5 form oddly enough. The exotic weapons master actually seems woth taking now. And there's one for shapechangers (including druids) who can partially shapechnage to gain benefits with natural weapons.




Personally I'd rather get the +1 CL/every other level compared to what the previous bladesinger versions have had. So I'll add a hip-hip to your hurray (sp?). Puzzled by the extra FR PRC material but oh well.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Nov 22, 2003)

Some feats?

GENERAL Feats

Arcane Strike
Arterial Strike
Axiomatic Strike
Clever Wrestling
Close-Quarters Fighting
Dash
Defensive Strike
Defensive Throw
Destructive Rage
Earth's Embrace
Eagle Claw Attack
Extend Rage
Extra Rage
Extra Smiting
Extra Stunning
Eyes in the Back of Your Head
Faster Healing
Favored Power Attack
Fists of Iron
Fleet of Foot
Flick of the Wrist
Flying Kick
Freezing the Lifeblood
Greater Resiliency
Greater Two-Weapon Defense
Hamstring
Hold the Line
Improved Buckler Defense
Improved Combat Expertise
Improved Familiar
Improved Favored Enemy
Improved Mounted Archery
Improved Rapid Shot
Improved Toughness
Improved Two-Weapon Defense
Improved Weapon Familiarty
Instantaneous Rage
Intimidating Rage
Karmic Strike
Kiai Shout
   Greater Kiai Shout
Monkey Grip
Pain Touch
Phalanx Fighting
Pin Shield
Power Critical
Prone Attack
Ranged Disarm
Ranged Pin
   Ranged Sunder
Rapid Stunning
Roundabout Kick
Sharp-Shooting
Shield Charge
   Shield Slam
Swarmfighting
Throw Anything
Weaken Touch
Zen Archery

DIVINE Feats
Divine Cleansing
   Divine Resistance
Divine Might
Divine Shield
Divine Vigor
Sacred Vengeance

TACTICAL Feats
Cavalry Charger
Combat Brute
Elusive Target
Formation Expert
Giantbane
Raptor School
Shock Trooper
Sun School

WEAPON STYLE Feats
Anvil of Thunder
Bear Hug
Crescent Moon
Hammer's Edge
High Sword Low Axe
Lightning Mace
Net and Trident
Quick Staff
Spinning Halberd
Three Mountains


That a quick and dirty.  Right now, it would be far too much to type the full entry or requirements and short blurb description... 

For those who notice the numerous feats that were published in earlier books, those reprinted here are not reprintings, per se.  Almost every one has been updated.


Regards
Eric Anondson


----------



## Selvarin (Nov 22, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> The trouble with really subtle sarcasm is that sometimes there are people who have said such things in all seriousness.
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Try 'stormlord'. Much better.


----------



## Selvarin (Nov 22, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> That bites  When looking for a magic-less ranger, I was expecting a ranger _with *no* magic_. Maybe it's my Canadian English that is failing me.
> 
> There's supposed to be a magic-less ranger in UA.
> 
> ...




And how is that bad? They essentially lose their spellcasting capabilities but (from what I can tell) are given the ability to do 'x' or 'y' which is the equivalent of a spell, 1/2/3 a day. You're getting too hung up on the notion that the ability is _explained away_ in the form of a *spell*. Work with it.


----------



## Mucknuggle (Nov 22, 2003)

What are the changes to the Bladedancer? Is there a revised Weapon Master or is that supposed to be the Kensai PC? Could you please give more details on the Kensai abilities? Thx.


----------



## Gez (Nov 22, 2003)

So, by merging the scattered infos in KM's and WD's posts, the complete list of PrCs. In red, the new ones. 

1. Bear Warrior -- _Oriental Adventures_
2. Bladesinger (elf) -- _Tome & Blood, Races of Faerûn_
3. Cavalier -- _Sword & Fist_
4. Dark Hunter -- I have a doubt here, is it this one ?
5. Darkwood Stalker (elf) -- _Dragon #292_
6. Dervish
7. Devoted Defender -- _Sword & Fist_
8. Drunken Master -- _Sword & Fist_
9. Exotic Weapon Master -- Far cry from the one in _Masters of the Wild_
10. Eye of Gruumsh (orc) -- _Masters of the Wild_
11. Frenzied Berserker -- _Masters of the Wild_
12. Gnome Giant-Slayer (gnome) -- _Dragon #291_
13. Halfling Outrider (halfling) -- _Sword & Fist_
14. Hulking Hurler
15. Hunter of the Dead -- _Defenders of the Faith_
16. Invisible Blade -- _Dragon #303_
17. Justicar -- _Dragon #280_
18. Kensai -- _Sword & Fist, Oriental Adventures_
19. Knight of the Chalice -- _Sword & Fist_
20. Master of the Unseen Hand
21. Master Thrower
22. Mindspy
23. Nature's Warrior
24. Occult Slayer -- _Dragon #303_
25. Order of the Bow Initiate -- _Sword & Fist_
26. Purple Dragon Knight -- _Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting_
27. Rage Mage -- _Dragon #277_
28. Ravager -- _Sword & Fist_
29. Reaping Mauler -- _Dragon #303_
30. Ronin
31. Spellsword -- _Tome & Blood_
32. Stonelord (dwarf) -- _Dragon #278_
33. Tattooed Monk -- _Oriental Adventures_
34. Thayan Knight -- _Lords of Darkness_
35. War Chanter
36. Warshaper


----------



## Heretic Apostate (Nov 22, 2003)

So when is someone going to do a "Share the Love" through Amazon for the book?


----------



## jester47 (Nov 22, 2003)

picked it up today at work.  

Looks good.  At first I was disappointed by the Spellsword.  It no longer had the channel spell at first level, and the spellsword cache was gone.  

But reading the description of the new channel spell, I found it to be much more to my liking.  Where before you could only ever hope to channel up to a 3rd level spell, now you can channel ANY spell.  However now you have a per day limit.  So it banaces out.  Also, this version has a strong BAB.  

But what about the spellsword cache?  Well, seeing as how you have to have a +4 BAB, and be able to cast 2nd level spells (this fixes the fact that sorcerers had to wait until 6th level to take the class...)  It seems to me that a 2nd level spellsword is at least equivalent to a 7th level caster assuming that the character was a ftr1/wiz6 before he took the class of spellsword.  With 6 levels of arcane caster (esp wizard) it is not inconcievable to treat the sword as a wand of alternate medium.  But even then the cache is sort of clunky and while it did have limitations, it sort of gave the spellsword a major ring of spell storing.  In the end it is better that they craft of obtain a sword that acts like a wand.  

Also, while the class is good to stick with, you can also 3.0 ranger it, using the 1st level to get a +1 BAB, another level of spellcaster, and 10% ignore spell failure.  Not a bad deal if you are a wizard with a level of fighter.  

Also the Spellsword has a slightly better hit die than the Eldritch Knight.  

The hunter of the dead- well, they are no longer automaticly get the ability to use all simple and martial weapons and all types of armore or shields.  The character only has what it carries into the class.  Then they get more smites as they get more powerful.  Thats really the only change.  

Being a realms DM, I find the updates to the thayan knight and purple dragon knight handy.  I like the Hexer.  The swashbuckler and the samurai are handy, and might see some use.  

I like a lot of the classes.  

I think that when they put out the complete (spellcaster?) they will get all the feats and classes that they might have missed.  

I guess we will see.  

Aaron.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Nov 22, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> So, by merging the scattered infos in KM's and WD's posts, the complete list of PrCs. In red, the new ones.




More of them have appeared in Dragon before.


15. Invisible Blade
Dragon #303

16. Justicar

Dragon 307 or 309, can't remember exactly...

23. Occult Slayer
Dragon #303

28. Reaping Mauler
Dragon #303


----------



## Gez (Nov 22, 2003)

Thanks.

For the Justicar, a googlesearch told me it was #280. The #307 was about Githyanki, and the #309 was about good monster cultists; a justicar fits in neither, I think...


----------



## Arravis (Nov 22, 2003)

I'm very glad they re-did the Bladesinger... except the fact that Song of Celerity is now only a once a day thing. Damn, that just seems very wrong .


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 22, 2003)

Yeah, there are a few different races, but nothing drastic (like, they used a giant in a case where the prereq was to be Large or bigger). They've got a doppelganger for the mindspy, Other than those....pure PHB as far as I can tell.

The spell-less Paladin and Ranger...Paladin gets a good-aligned weapon, a +4 bonus to Str, Wis, or Cha for a few minutes 1/day, some extra lay-on-hands goodies for their mount (can heal negative conditions, ability score damag, etc. by spending more points), and a holy sword spell. Ranger gets +10 ft. speed, +4 to Con, Dex, or Wis like a paladin, neutralize poison, remove disease, and freedom of movement.

As for more detail on the shifters...the Nature's Warrior gains sort of 'wildshape bonuses' that they can use while in wild shape, such as +1/lv natural armor, +3 natural weapons, grappling, fast healing, and more fly speed. Warshapers can grow natural weapons of stuff they can wild shape into (it seems that they could basically always have one on), get reach, and change forms multipule times for the duration (or change form quicker). A bizzarre quality that seems to jack up the power level quite a whole lot...they get a +4 to Str and Con at 2nd level (?!). 

As for the Kensai, it works well as a more ONE SPECIFIC WEAPON master. There's no 'I use longswords' for this guy, it's "I use THIS longsword." He also gains some unusual leadership-style abilities....which is wierd, but whatever. All-in-all makes for a mild mish-mash, but certainly serves the goal of a knight or steward devoted to one weapon. They have to take oaths of service to lords and quests, so they're kind of mandated to be 'your royal ninny's patsy' sometimes.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 22, 2003)

Did they get Monkey Grip right?

-Hyp.


----------



## Fingers Boggis (Nov 22, 2003)

i really wish that feat list had been posted before i bought OA the otehr day, i only bought it for the feats and theyre all in this, which i order when i bought OA    ahhh well, looking forward to complete spellcaster    and does complete warrior cover rogues well or are we looking at a complete rogues as well?

Fingers


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Nov 22, 2003)

For those interested in my opinions on the book, I've posted a review on my own messageboards.

The Basalt Throne


----------



## hong (Nov 22, 2003)

Kahuna Burger said:
			
		

> yeah, I've never seen a fantasy/science fiction story in which a "back to nature" type character competed with his technological superiors with strength, skills, wiles and semi supernatural abilities which compensated for his lack of weapons power...
> 
> Oh wait, thats actually a time honored archetype in dozens of stories...




The silly thing about the forsaker is not that it shuns magic (although that's pretty silly too, given the implicit world assumptions for most D&D campaigns), it's that it gets powerups for actively _destroying_ magic items. I'm aware of not that many SF stories where the more zap guns or grav tanks you destroy, the more funky powerups you get.

Unless perhaps you were an amorphous energy-absorbing alien life-form of some sort. I think there was one in Forbidden Planet, a true classic of the genre. Clearly, more prestige classes should be based on Forbidden Planet. The parallels to D&D are so obvious.


Hong "I bags playing Robby the Robot" Ooi


----------



## drnuncheon (Nov 22, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> 7. Drunken Master
> 8. Exotic Weapon Master
> 19. Master of the Unseen Hand
> 20. Master Thrower




It's good to see that they're providing classes that work well together, and I expect that there will be more in the future "Complete *" books - an update of the Master Alchemist perhaps, or the Mind Master.

I do wonder if the Master Thrower can get his bonuses when he throws other Master Throwers, and if Master Throwers allowed to hurl themselves.  The latter seems a little borken.  It does explain why they changed the name of the other class from Weapon Master to Kensei, though - it'd be _way_ too munchkiny if the Master Thrower were able to throw them.

J


----------



## hong (Nov 22, 2003)

I am master... ah, to heck with it.


----------



## FireLance (Nov 22, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Thanks.
> 
> For the Justicar, a googlesearch told me it was #280. The #307 was about Githyanki, and the #309 was about good monster cultists; a justicar fits in neither, I think...




The Justicar was in Dragon #290 (Dec 2001), the scoundrels issue.

EDIT - Oh, and I think the Dark Hunter is new, although it is quite similar in some ways to the Cave Stalker in Dragon #292.  And, there is no Tempest PrC in CW.


----------



## Hardhead (Nov 22, 2003)

Can someone with the book tell me if Divine Shield works the same way as the Divine Might from the WotC prievew? (i.e., is it a free action to activate but only lasts one round?)


----------



## FireLance (Nov 22, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Did they get Monkey Grip right?
> 
> -Hyp.




Sorry for not tuning in earlier, but what did they get wrong the last time?

Anyway, Monkey Grip now allows you to use weapons one size category larger than you with -2 to hit.  You cannot wield a larger weapon in your off hand or use it with a double weapon, but a larger light weapon is still considered light.

This means you can Weapon Finesse and Monkey Grip a Large elven thinblade for 2d6 damage if you're Medium-sized.  Go ahead, go wild.

EDIT: Oh yes, Eagle Claw Attack now grants your Wis bonus to damage when you make an unarmed strike against an object.  Just thought you'd be interested.


----------



## FireLance (Nov 22, 2003)

Hardhead said:
			
		

> Can someone with the book tell me if Divine Shield works the same way as the Divine Might from the WotC prievew? (i.e., is it a free action to activate but only lasts one round?)




Nope, standard action to activate, lasts character level/2 rounds.  Also, the bonus seems to be untyped (unless it's an error) so it's useful even if you're using a +5 shield.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Nov 22, 2003)

*On the feats*



			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Did they get Monkey Grip right?
> 
> -Hyp.




*MONKEY GRIP [GENERAL]*
You are able to use a larger weapon than other people your size.
*Prerequisite:* Base attack bonus +1.
*Benefit:* You can use melee weaons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change.  For instance, a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handedweapon. You can wield a larger light weapon as a light weapon, or a larger tw-handed weapon in two hands. You cannot wield a larger weapon in your off hand, and you cannot use this feat with a doubleweapon.
*Normal* You can use a melee weapon one size categorylarger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, and the amount of effort it takes to use the weapon increases. A larger light weapon is considered a one-handed weapon, a larger one-handed weapon is considered a two-handed weapon, and you canno use a larger two-handed weapon at all.


So there you go.  Substantially clearer than before, IMO.

Also to note, the Improved Familiar feat is not a complete reprint of the DMG 3.5 version.  Instead, it gives a list of familiars that are more combat oriented.  Krenshar (3rd and N), Worg (3rd and NE), Blink Dog (5th and LG), Hell Hound (5th and LE), Hippogriff (7th and N), Howler (7th and CE), and Winter Wolf (7th and NE).

Regarding familiars, there is another section after all the Feats and Spells called *Guardian Familiars*.  These need a spellcaster to also have the Improved Familiar feat, but the _guardian familiar_ is the result of a process that would normally be considered a construct creation, i.e. Craft Construct feat, character spends gp, and xp, and must make Profession (engineer) checks as well. The _guardian familairs_ are Spark Guardian (7th, tiny), Guantlet Guardian (9th, small), and Blade Guardian (11th, medium). When the _ guardian familiar_ dies, the character does not need to wait a year before getting a new one.  After all, they already spent the xp.  But you can only have one at a time.


So there you go.


Regards,
Eric Anondson


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Nov 22, 2003)

Selvarin said:
			
		

> And how is that bad? They essentially lose their spellcasting capabilities but (from what I can tell) are given the ability to do 'x' or 'y' which is the equivalent of a spell, 1/2/3 a day. You're getting too hung up on the notion that the ability is _explained away_ in the form of a *spell*. Work with it.




Isn't that like the WarCraft II "Scout" class? They almost had it, but then they decided that spending all my ranks in Survival just wasn't good enough.

Now I just point and say "quarry's that way - get 'em!" Sheesh! Even Aragorn didn't manage to track down everything he went after (Smeagol escaped from him).

I'll feel real happy about it when I get hit with a _dispel magic_ too


----------



## Arravis (Nov 22, 2003)

Seems no one else finds issue with the new Bladesinger and Celerity being only once a day... ugh


----------



## Taren Seeker (Nov 22, 2003)

Arravis said:
			
		

> Seems no one else finds issue with the new Bladedancer and Celerity being only once a day... ugh




No, I think it's crap, but I don't have the book yet to see the entire class and make a final judgement.

Amazon _insists_ that CW's release date is still Dec 1st.


----------



## coyote6 (Nov 22, 2003)

Arravis said:
			
		

> Seems no one else finds issue with the new Bladedancer and Celerity being only once a day... ugh




Does Complete Warrior have the Blade Dancer (from Oriental Adventures in 3e, and basically a wuxia swordsman) or the Bladesinger (in 3e, from Tome & Blood [misprinted], Tome & Blood web enhancement [officially correct], and a FR supplement; basically, an elven fighter/magic-user)?


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Nov 22, 2003)

Tzarevitch said:
			
		

> None. It doesn't get extra damage. It is like a rogue with figher BAB and no sneak attack or trap disabling. It picks up abilities relating to dodge and movement.



Yes it does.  The swashbuckler gets his Int bonus to damage on any finesse-able weapon against anything that isn't immune to criticals.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Nov 22, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> Does Complete Warrior have the Blade Dancer (from Oriental Adventures in 3e, and basically a wuxia swordsman) or the Bladesinger (in 3e, from Tome & Blood [misprinted], Tome & Blood web enhancement [officially correct], and a FR supplement; basically, an elven fighter/magic-user)?




Complete Warrior has the *Bladesinger*. There is the *Dervish*, while I don't remember the OA *Blade Dancer*, is a PrC with a theme of dancing, and moving.


Regards,
Eric Anondson


----------



## Crothian (Nov 22, 2003)

Overall this seems like an okay book, but I wasn't that impressed with it.  I think the feats are the best section of the book.  But really I'm just happy the Halfling outrider has a BAB


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Nov 22, 2003)

I checked there's no Bladedancer, though it didn't really need that much of an update in my opinion.  The Dervish has nothing to do with the Bladedancer, since after all the Bladedancer is based on a Chinese swordsman, while the Dervish is based on an Arabic swordsman.


----------



## Arravis (Nov 22, 2003)

I meant Bladesinger... my apologies. Editing my query.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Nov 22, 2003)

Arravis said:
			
		

> Seems no one else finds issue with the new Bladesinger and Celerity being only once a day... ugh



No, I find no issue with it.  Remember that the new Bladesinger gets to cast any spells he wants, not just the 4 or 5 per level that were on his list before.  Being able to quicken any spell you want as many times per day as you want without increasing the spell level would be horribly broken, and I can't imagine how you could think otherwise.  It was only *barely* balanced in the old version because the Bladesinger's spell list didn't have anything too powerful on it.


----------



## Arravis (Nov 22, 2003)

In the Bladesinger in RoF he could do that with any arcane spell he knew that was 1 action to cast, actually, not just the ones on the spell list.

Just seems to me that with the new level caps on the ability, it should be more than once a day. I agree that it definately shouldn't be at will (which is the reason I had the class previously banned), but perhaps 3/day or 1/day + int bonus modifier, or some such.


----------



## Stormrunner (Nov 22, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> I do wonder if the Master Thrower can get his bonuses when he throws other Master Throwers, and if Master Throwers allowed to hurl themselves.  The latter seems a little borken.  It does explain why they changed the name of the other class from Weapon Master to Kensei, though - it'd be _way_ too munchkiny if the Master Thrower were able to throw them.
> 
> J



No, no - that's what the Hulking Hurler is for.

Though I do admit, when I first saw the name of that class my immediate thought was "HULK GOTTA HURL!".  Let's see now - short-ranged, cone-shaped breath weapon, does acid damage plus target is nauseated unless they make a Fort save; higher levels increase range and times/day, and provide other bodily fluid feats like Contagious Sneeze, Write Your Name and Hits The Fan.


----------



## Deaths_Fist (Nov 23, 2003)

Let me just say that, to whomever keeps writing the Tempest prestige class as being in that book, it is most definitely NOT THERE.  I got the book after reading this thread, thinking it would be there, and was disappointed.  Can somebody please correct this error and maybe suggest to Morrus that he take that reference off the main page in order to not mislead?


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Nov 23, 2003)

Deaths_Fist said:
			
		

> Let me just say that, to whomever keeps writing the Tempest prestige class as being in that book, it is most definitely NOT THERE.  I got the book after reading this thread, thinking it would be there, and was disappointed.




Dang. But you are correct, the Tempest is absolutely *not* in Complete Warrior. Too bad that got up in his list on the main page.


Regards,
Eric Anondson


----------



## Seule (Nov 23, 2003)

Questions I have:
How did they fix Power Critical?
What does the Cavalry tactical feat do?
What changes were made to the Cavalier?

You may be able to guess that I have a mounted character.  

  --Seule


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Nov 23, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> No, I find no issue with it.  Remember that the new Bladesinger gets to cast any spells he wants, not just the 4 or 5 per level that were on his list before.  Being able to quicken any spell you want as many times per day as you want without increasing the spell level would be horribly broken, and I can't imagine how you could think otherwise.  It was only *barely* balanced in the old version because the Bladesinger's spell list didn't have anything too powerful on it.




ditto though I don't think the old version was balnced.

IMO quicken is a lame feat at +4 levels but it is way too good of a special ability at +0 levels.  Maybe only once is too little but at most I'd make it once every 2 to 3 levels of bladesinger.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

Seule said:
			
		

> How did they fix Power Critical?




I think someone posted earlier that Power Critical is now a constant-effect feat that adds a +4 to your confirmation roll.

-Hyp.


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Nov 23, 2003)

I'm very disapointed that they don't have high level feats. I think not adding  abunch of bab 15+ feats into the PH was a big miss, and not correcting the error and having a bunch here is if anything even worse.  Fighter types and fighters especially need some high level feats so they don't keep restarting weak low level feat chains at high levels.


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Nov 23, 2003)

FireLance said:
			
		

> Sorry for not tuning in earlier, but what did they get wrong the last time?
> 
> Anyway, Monkey Grip now allows you to use weapons one size category larger than you with -2 to hit.  You cannot wield a larger weapon in your off hand or use it with a double weapon, but a larger light weapon is still considered light.
> 
> ...




I guess its ok though I wouldn't of added the not with double weapons or off hand weapons thing.  A -2 is a big enough hit that this is usually just a style feat that actually makes you weaker.


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Nov 23, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I think someone posted earlier that Power Critical is now a constant-effect feat that adds a +4 to your confirmation roll.
> 
> -Hyp.




And here I thought lots of criticals were a bad thing with there (IMO lame) removal of stacking of keen and imp crit.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

FireLance said:
			
		

> Sorry for not tuning in earlier, but what did they get wrong the last time?




No, not that they got anything wrong last time... just that there were ways they could have updated it for 3.5 that would have been very bad.

As it happens, it looks okay... even the 3d6 Large Greatsword does slightly less damage than a 2d6 Medium Greatsword Power Attacking for 2, under the new PA rules.

(Of course, with Enlarge Person, it means a 1st level party can now have a tank dealing 4d6 damage for one minute...)



> EDIT: Oh yes, Eagle Claw Attack now grants your Wis bonus to damage when you make an unarmed strike against an object.  Just thought you'd be interested.




Hmmph.  That makes it a non-useless feat.  Now I have to change my sig.

-Hyp.


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Nov 23, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Hmmph.  That makes it a non-useless feat.  Now I have to change my sig.
> 
> -Hyp.




Now its just a mostly useless feat.   

Seriosly its not terrible but it'd be low on my list of things to pick up usually.  I suppose if I was focussing on breaking things it would be cool, but overall I'm thinking sub par.  I think being able to add your wisdom bonus to your break chaince would be much cooler.  Though I suppose this might be really cool as is once you got adamantine hands going on.


----------



## dekrass (Nov 23, 2003)

*dagger fighters*

I missed the issue of Dragon with the invisible blade class, can anybody tell me what kind of abilities they get. I keep trying to make a good knife fighter, but they almost always come up weak.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Nov 23, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I think someone posted earlier that Power Critical is now a constant-effect feat that adds a +4 to your confirmation roll.




Indeed it does. Also, you can take the feat multiple times, either for a different weapon or the same weapon. If it is the same weapon, the feats' effects stack.

And the *Cavalry Charger* feat... You need Mounted Combat, Spirited Charge, Trample, and a BAB of +6.  Like all tactics feats, you get three maneuvers for situation that don't come up often.  First, _unhorse_, when you are mounted and charge a mounted foe you can attempt a bull rush for free. If you win his mount stays, while you move the foe.  Second, _leaping charge_ basically allows you spur your mount (with a Ride check) into a leap at the end of its' charge giving you a chance to deal a bit of extra damage. Lastly, _fell trample_ lets you make multiple overrun attempts against more than one foe and your mount gets a hoof attack against each foe you overrun.


Regards,
Eric Anondson


----------



## jgsugden (Nov 23, 2003)

These tactics feats sound interesting. I don't suppose we could twist your arm and get you to describe each of them a little ...


----------



## Melmoth (Nov 23, 2003)

MONKEY GRIP [GENERAL]
You are able to use a larger weapon than other people your size.
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: You can use melee weaons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change.

What does "the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon" mean?  Does this have something to do with Fatigue?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

Melmoth said:
			
		

> What does "the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon" mean?  Does this have something to do with Fatigue?




No.

It's whether the weapon is considered Light, One-Handed, or Two-Handed.

-Hyp.


----------



## Gez (Nov 23, 2003)

Corrected list, since the tempest was slipped in by accident.

1. Bear Warrior -- _Oriental Adventures_
2. Bladesinger (elf) -- _Tome & Blood, Races of Faerûn_
3. Cavalier -- _Sword & Fist_
4. Dark Hunter -- I have a doubt here, is it this one ?
5. Darkwood Stalker (elf) -- _Dragon #292_
6. Dervish
7. Devoted Defender -- _Sword & Fist_
8. Drunken Master -- _Sword & Fist_
9. Exotic Weapon Master -- Far cry from the one in _Masters of the Wild_
10. Eye of Gruumsh (orc) -- _Masters of the Wild_
11. Frenzied Berserker -- _Masters of the Wild_
12. Gnome Giant-Slayer (gnome) -- _Dragon #291_
13. Halfling Outrider (halfling) -- _Sword & Fist_
14. Hulking Hurler
15. Hunter of the Dead -- _Defenders of the Faith_
16. Invisible Blade -- _Dragon #303_
17. Justicar -- _Dragon #280_
18. Kensai -- _Sword & Fist, Oriental Adventures_
19. Knight of the Chalice -- _Sword & Fist_
20. Master of the Unseen Hand
21. Master Thrower
22. Mindspy
23. Nature's Warrior
24. Occult Slayer -- _Dragon #303_
25. Order of the Bow Initiate -- _Sword & Fist_
26. Purple Dragon Knight -- _Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting_
27. Rage Mage -- _Dragon #277_
28. Ravager -- _Sword & Fist_
29. Reaping Mauler -- _Dragon #303_
30. Ronin
31. Spellsword -- _Tome & Blood_
32. Stonelord (dwarf) -- _Dragon #278_
33. Tattooed Monk -- _Oriental Adventures_
34. Thayan Knight -- _Lords of Darkness_
35. War Chanter
36. Warshaper


----------



## Staffan (Nov 23, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> (Of course, with Enlarge Person, it means a 1st level party can now have a tank dealing 4d6 damage for one minute...)



Though in most cases that would be kind of pointless. Who cares if you're doing 4d6+6 or 1d8+3 damage, when the stuff you're fighting usually only has 5 hp or so?


----------



## Cheiromancer (Nov 23, 2003)

dekrass said:
			
		

> I missed the issue of Dragon with the invisible blade class, can anybody tell me what kind of abilities they get. I keep trying to make a good knife fighter, but they almost always come up weak.




It's a 5 level class, with dagger sneak attack.  1d6 at level 1, increases at levels 3 and 5.  The sneak attack only works with daggers (or kukris or punching daggers)

2nd level ability is a bleeding wound.  When you sneak attack with your dagger, you may sacrifice 1d6 of the extra damage to cause bleeding for 1 point per round.  A cure spell or DC 15 heal check will stop the bleeding.

3rd level you can feint as a move-equivalent action.  At 4th level you can take 10 on your bluff checks while feinting.  At 5th level you can feint as a free action.  

Good BAB, good reflex saves, 4 + int skill points.  d6 hit dice.


----------



## Viktyr Gehrig (Nov 23, 2003)

Feint as a free action?

Holy crap. There a per-round limit to that?


----------



## jgsugden (Nov 23, 2003)

Korimyr the Rat said:
			
		

> Feint as a free action?
> 
> Holy crap. There a per-round limit to that?



I have not seen the book, but a core rule has an effect here:

Effectively, there will be a limit. You can't perform actions in the middle of a full round action. With the exception of a 5' step (which is specifically allowed), you may not do anything between attacks in a full round action. So, a 5th level IB with the free action feint could feint as a free action, full attack, get a sneak attack if applicable on the first attack, and then proceed with more attacks. These remaining attacks can not benefit from a free action feint.

On the other hand, if there is no listed limit per round, an IB could feint as a free action, make his attacks and then feint as a free action against all his opponents so that they will get sneak attack damage if they provoke an AoO. That could get to be really annoying if a character has a tendency to get surrounded on a regular basis.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Nov 23, 2003)

Shard O'Glase said:
			
		

> I'm very disapointed that they don't have high level feats. I think not adding  abunch of bab 15+ feats into the PH was a big miss, and not correcting the error and having a bunch here is if anything even worse.  Fighter types and fighters especially need some high level feats so they don't keep restarting weak low level feat chains at high levels.




Same here. Who do we have to talk to in order to get a book of high-level fighter feats?


----------



## Felon (Nov 23, 2003)

Shard O'Glase said:
			
		

> I'm very disapointed that they don't have high level feats. I think not adding  abunch of bab 15+ feats into the PH was a big miss, and not correcting the error and having a bunch here is if anything even worse.  Fighter types and fighters especially need some high level feats so they don't keep restarting weak low level feat chains at high levels.




Amen.


----------



## Cheiromancer (Nov 23, 2003)

Korimyr the Rat said:
			
		

> Feint as a free action?
> 
> Holy crap. There a per-round limit to that?



 If I were to allow it, I would limit it to one feint in a round.  A "swift" action, to use the Miniature's Handbook term, not a free one.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

jgsugden said:
			
		

> With the exception of a 5' step (which is specifically allowed), you may not do anything between attacks in a full round action. So, a 5th level IB with the free action feint could feint as a free action, full attack, get a sneak attack if applicable on the first attack, and then proceed with more attacks. These remaining attacks can not benefit from a free action feint.




*QUICK DRAW [GENERAL]*
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: You can *draw a weapon as a free action* instead of as a move action. You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.

A character who has selected this feat may *throw weapons at his full normal rate of attacks (much like a character with a bow).*

*RAPID RELOAD [GENERAL]*
Choose a type of crossbow (hand, light, or heavy).

Prerequisite: Weapon Proficiency (crossbow type chosen).

Benefit: The time required for you to reload your chosen type of crossbow is reduced to *a free action* (for a hand or light crossbow) or a move action (for a heavy crossbow). Reloading a crossbow still provokes an attack of opportunity.

If you have selected this feat for hand crossbow or light crossbow, you may *fire that weapon as many times in a full attack action as you could attack if you were using a bow.*

*Ammunition:* Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), or sling bullets (for slings). When using a bow, a character can *draw ammunition as a free action*; crossbows and slings require an action for reloading. 

------

Looks to me like there are other free actions you can perform between the attacks of a full attack action...

After all: 

Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions *while taking another action* normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.

-Hyp.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Same here. Who do we have to talk to in order to get a book of high-level fighter feats?




Aren't Wizards bringing out a book that's like a 3.5 Sword and Fist update soon?

I bet that's where they'll put all the high level fighter feats.

After all, it'd only make sense, right?  

-Hyp.


----------



## Felon (Nov 23, 2003)

*Re: The Forsaker*



			
				Kahuna Burger said:
			
		

> I'm sure drugs and alcohol have existed just as long  magic...  If they played as strong a part in the world as magic does, would you consider it stupid to have a class which forsakes all use of herbalism or alchemy, had a flavor requirement agaisnt drugs and alcohol, and got bonuses to saves agaisnt poison as well as some fort/con style advantages from their enforced bodily purity?




Reaching big-time there. Magic is much more intrinsic to the life of an adventurer than drugs or alcohol are. 



> I'm looking forward to playing a forsaker with one minor flavor change. She will be a former spell adict, who at some point realized she was depending more on the buffs and cures than her own abilities, and went cold turkey off magic. Since the class actually doesn't require you to attack magic users, or even avoid their company, and the magic destruction effects only ONE of the class abilities, not all of them, it works well for that concept.




But doesn't the class actually require the character to refuse any form of magical aid? So when (not if) your forsaker fails a saving throw and suffers some form of permanent effect that only magic can cure--say, blindness, paralysis, or a dozen points of ability drain--your character is basically FUBAR? When your character dies, you'll refuse to be raised? When the party reaches 10th level and have the ability to transport themselves across the world instantaneously, will you start a constructing a giant catapult so that you can keep up with them? How about when the party starts engaging in planar travel? I'm sorry if my tone seems derisive, but it just seems so obvious to me that magic is not a minor, optional detail in D&D. 

Having said that, I haven't seen a new version of the Forsaker yet, so perhaps it addresses some of those problems. The old version could only heal 20 points of damage per day at its highest level, so hopefully that will be fixed if nothing else. I do think transportation is ultimately going to be a deal-breaker though.


----------



## SaemonHavarian (Nov 23, 2003)

Thanks guys for the info on the complete warrior.
I'm really interested in the new Swachbuckler class. 
Could someone please let us know as much as you can about this class?  Also, is there a particular prestige class in the book designed for the Swashbuckler?  If so, could you also tell us about it.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## jgsugden (Nov 23, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Looks to me like there are other free actions you can perform between the attacks of a full attack action...
> 
> Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions *while taking another action* normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.
> 
> -Hyp.



 Yes, I forgot that those two feats specify that you may do them during a full attack action. There are probably a few other examples that we both missed.

Still, the general rule is that you may not take free actions during other actions. You must, unless an exception is stated, complete one action before undertaking another. Would you allow a creature with a quickened greater teleport to use it in the middle of a full attack? Or a spellcaster to cast a quickened spell in the middle of a run action?

Your second quote ("Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally.") reminds us that you can perform free actions during the same round as other actions. It doesn't say that you can take free actions in the middle of other actions such as a full attack action. 

Afterall, if they intended for people to be able to use free actions during a full attack action, they wouldn't need to include your highlighted text in the quick draw or rapid reload feats.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

jgsugden said:
			
		

> Still, the general rule is that you may not take free actions during other actions. You must, unless an exception is stated, complete one action before undertaking another. Would you allow a creature with a quickened greater teleport to use it in the middle of a full attack? Or a spellcaster to cast a quickened spell in the middle of a run action?




Sure.

"While taking" another action.  "_While taking_ the Run action, I cast Quickened Magic Missile".



> Afterall, if they intended for people to be able to use free actions during a full attack action, they wouldn't need to include your highlighted text in the quick draw or rapid reload feats.




It's a benefit of the feat.  They're pointing out how it contrasts with the "Normal" section.

Since shooting a bow can use full iterative attacks, a lot of people forget that throwing daggers _can't_... without Quick Draw.  So specifically noting it in the feat description reminds people that they _need_ the feat to get their full allotment of attacks.

_Gruntharg swung his longsword, and cursed as the magic blade failed to even scratch the wolfman's hide.

"Use silver!" he called (Free Action - Speak), discarding the useless blade (Free Action - Drop Item) and whipping the silvered handaxe from his belt (Free Action - Quick Draw).  Muttering a rapid incantation (Free Action - Quickened True Strike), he slammed the axe unerringly into the lycanthrope's ribs.  As the silver seared the wolf's flesh, Gruntharg grinned, and discharged the Magic Missile stored in the weapon, further injuring the beast (Free Action - Spell Storing weapon), before swinging the axe a second time._

Works for me.

-Hyp.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Nov 23, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> Reaching big-time there. Magic is much more intrinsic to the life of an adventurer than drugs or alcohol are.



You've obviously never adventured with the right company.


----------



## Felon (Nov 23, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> You've obviously never adventured with the right company.




ROLMAO. Good one!


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> You've obviously never adventured with the right company.









-Hyp.


----------



## jgsugden (Nov 23, 2003)

Hypersmurf: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I see nothing in the rules to support your position, but I see nothing that definitiely excludes it either. 

On the other hand, on my side of the argument, they did call them free actions instead of calling them nonactions. There is nothing in the rules to indicate that you can break up one action to perform another action inside of it (in the absence of an explicit exception). The idea that you could seems rather odd. 

Out of curiosity, would you allow a sorcerer to cast feather fall (another free action) while casting a metamagiced spell (a full round action)?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 23, 2003)

jgsugden said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, would you allow a sorcerer to cast feather fall (another free action) while casting a metamagiced spell (a full round action)?




Is there a situation when this might actually come up?

Unlike Running or making a Full Attack, nothing actually _changes_ between the start and end of the spell.

While Running, you might gain or lose a line of effect. While Full Attacking, a creature might be killed, or disarmed, or whatever.

But why would someone need to cast another spell between the start and end of the casting of their metamagicked spell?

-Hyp.


----------



## Aaron L (Nov 24, 2003)

Actually, I'm pretty sure I read in a book that you can take a free action at any time during a round, including between attacks in a full attack.  I forget wear, but I am almost positive I did.


----------



## Gez (Nov 24, 2003)

> Out of curiosity, would you allow a sorcerer to cast feather fall (another free action) while casting a metamagiced spell (a full round action)?




It's a devious faint, since spells are usually thought of as a long string of utterance and gestures that must not be mixed or interrupted.

While between two swing of your arm (two attacks of a full attacks), you may open your hand and reach for another weapon.

That said, personally, since the feather fall is still (only a V component), if the other spell is silent (only a S component, maybe F or M); then, no problems. Well, I would require a Concentration check to success weaving two spells at the same time with only one mind -- not a common excercise -- but provided the check is a success, it works.

There are, of course, some limits to the free actions you may do; but they aren't limited by the fact you are making another action, rather by the circumstances. If a rogue has both his arms stuck inside a small hole, trying to activate or disable some puzzling device, I won't let him quick draw a weapon from his boot. Similarly, although saying one or two words in a free action, I won't let anyone use four or five free actions to speak in a round. 

It's a question of general common sense. Could the free action be performed without cancelling the main action?


----------



## jgsugden (Nov 24, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Is there a situation when this might actually come up?
> 
> Unlike Running or making a Full Attack, nothing actually _changes_ between the start and end of the spell.
> 
> ...



 A situation? For feather fall it is unlikely, but for other spells that have a casting time of 1 free action, perhaps it will be more likely to make sense.

And if nothing changes between the time you start and end a spell, you're doing it wrong. At the end of the spell, a spell effect occurs which usually has some effect on an environment. That effect was not there before the casting. It will be there after the casting.

As for changes before the spell casting begins and the time during which the spell is cast, the declaration of readied actions by others can disrupt these.

As a rather contrived, but possible, example: You want to cast an area dispel magic to remove the magical structure that you and an enemy is standing upon. You think your opponent (an archer) has readied an action, but you're not sure what it is. One possibility is that your opponent is readied to disrupt your next spell. Another possibility is that the enemy has readied an action to disrupt a spell after you destroy the structure (he knows that you know feather fall and is assuming that the falling damage will be worse for you than him.) If you cast the feather fall before the dispel magic, he might disrupt it and force you to either fall with him or no destroy the structure. If you cast it after the dispel magic, he might disrupt it and send you falling to your death. If you cast it *during* the casting of the dispel magic, he'd be less likely to disrupt it, though a very specific readied action might succeed if he knows enough about spellcasting.

In the end, it doesn't matter. There is one sentence which does clearly govern this situation in my games: The DM puts reasonable limits on what you can really do for free. With regards to the free action feint (the source of our discussion), any sensible DM would not allow it to be used repeatedly in a round, so this clause can be used by a sensible DM to close that hole.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 24, 2003)

jgsugden said:
			
		

> The DM puts reasonable limits on what you can really do for free. With regards to the free action feint (the source of our discussion), any sensible DM would not allow it to be used repeatedly in a round, so this clause can be used by a sensible DM to close that hole.




That's quite a generalisation.

Why would "any sensible DM" disallow it?

It's a special PrC ability.  It's less grotesque than a Rogue with a Ring of Blinking, given the add-BAB-to-Sense-Motive rule in 3.5.

There's a fight near the end of _Kiss of the Dragon_ where Jet Li repeatedly feints as a free action during a Full Attack.

What is it about feinting as a free action during a Full Attack that makes it automatically anathema to "any sensible DM"?

Yes, the DM always has the right to declare a given free action "unreasonable"... but why this one in particular?

-Hyp.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Nov 24, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> That's quite a generalisation.
> 
> Why would "any sensible DM" disallow it?
> 
> ...



My guess is the jgsugden is the sort of DM who's outraged that you can make multiple sneak attacks in a round at all, primarily because he doesn't realize that other characters are perfectly capable as putting out as much or more damage than the rogue in question without resorting to a tactic that only works SOME of the time.

Personally, my only issue with the ability is that it's got the potential to be a real pain in the ass - lots and lots of dice rolling for potentially no real benefit.


----------



## jgsugden (Nov 24, 2003)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> My guess is the jgsugden is the sort of DM who's outraged that you can make multiple sneak attacks in a round at all, primarily because he doesn't realize that other characters are perfectly capable as putting out as much or more damage than the rogue in question without resorting to a tactic that only works SOME of the time.
> 
> Personally, my only issue with the ability is that it's got the potential to be a real pain in the ass - lots and lots of dice rolling for potentially no real benefit.



 Your guess is wrong. Zero points. Thanks for playing, please don't bother to try again. 

I am, in fact, a rogue player in an epic campaign. In addition, I play many other campaigns and DM a few myself. I am very much in favor of a rogue being able to use his sneak attack ability whenever it is appropriate.

I do share your issue with dice rolling, but they did take an effort to minimize this by allowing the IB to take 10 on these rolls. That cuts the die rolls in 1/2.

Hypersmurf: First of all, we have way too much time on our hands considering how often we post. 

Second, why would any sensible DM not allow multiple feints in a round? The lack of time necessary to fit it all in would be my main reason. You give an example from a movie that I have not seen, so I can not speak to it, but in general, the feint process has a significant time restriction: It requires three things. You must perform the feint, the opponent must process what you have appeared to do and then your opponent must respond and perform an action taking your feint into account. If your opponent doesn't have time to respond, there is no way for you to take advantage of your feint.

That being said, a DM that ignores the 'real world' implications of the D&D abilities might disagree with my analysis, so my statement that any reasonable DM would not allow it was unfair. I take it back. Instead, I'll say that I couldn't see a DM choosing to allow it.

Anyways, I'm done hijacking this thread. I'll let this discussion lie. Let's hear more about this book ...


----------



## CRGreathouse (Nov 24, 2003)

How has the Devoted Defender changed since S&F?


----------



## Shazman (Nov 24, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Same here. Who do we have to talk to in order to get a book of high-level fighter feats?




There is a section on epic feats if that's what you're talking about.


----------



## Shazman (Nov 24, 2003)

Was anyone else disappointed and confused by the kensai class? It bears absolutely no resemblance to it's 1st edition namesake or the 3rd edition weapon master.  Instead, it's a bizarre combo of OA samurai, Master Samurai, and an oathbound from AU with a cleric's BAB and Will as teh only good save.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Nov 24, 2003)

Shazman said:
			
		

> There is a section on epic feats if that's what you're talking about.




By high-level I meant between 10th and 20th. Oh well, maybe there'll be another book with _enough_ high-level feats taking up something more than 25% of the book.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 24, 2003)

I guess something that you *could* do (and in fact I quite like the idea of it) is to ransack the prestige classes for abilities that you could turn into feat chains with high BAB requirements.

For instance, the Dervish could provide

Slashing Blades (pre: BAB 10+, )
Dervish Dance (pre: BAB 12+, Perform (dance) 5+ ranks)
Dance of Death (pre: dervish dance)
Tireless dance (pre: dervish dance)
A thousand Cuts (pre: dance of death)

After all, if the high level prestige class abilities should become available at around 15th-17th level, why not see what ones could be reasonably turned into a feat with a BAB prereq which put them at around that point?

Just an idea.

Cheers


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Nov 24, 2003)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I guess something that you *could* do (and in fact I quite like the idea of it) is to ransack the prestige classes for abilities that you could turn into feat chains with high BAB requirements.
> 
> For instance, the Dervish could provide
> 
> ...




I've thought about doing the same thing but I'm way too lazy.  The dervish dance is a nice one especially since I always felt there should be some way to pull something like that off, sort of like an enhanced spring attack where you can get your full attack on the move.


----------



## Psion (Nov 24, 2003)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I guess something that you *could* do (and in fact I quite like the idea of it) is to ransack the prestige classes for abilities that you could turn into feat chains with high BAB requirements.
> 
> For instance, the Dervish could provide
> 
> ...




Heh. It sounds like you almost described the way that Master of Arms works (I book I recommend but nobody buys). Most of the class abilities are also presented as feats.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Nov 24, 2003)

jgsugden said:
			
		

> Your guess is wrong. Zero points. Thanks for playing, please don't bother to try again.



Hey - all I really had to run with was your prior comments, which boiled down to "I don't like it so it's silly". Obviously from your explanation, that's not the case, so...


> Second, why would any sensible DM not allow multiple feints in a round? The lack of time necessary to fit it all in would be my main reason. You give an example from a movie that I have not seen, so I can not speak to it, but in general, the feint process has a significant time restriction: It requires three things. You must perform the feint, the opponent must process what you have appeared to do and then your opponent must respond and perform an action taking your feint into account. If your opponent doesn't have time to respond, there is no way for you to take advantage of your feint.




Well - the initial feint could well be one which works against all the opponents you threaten. The class IS basically a master of feinting.

The processing and response is entirely up to your opponents, and requires no time on your own part, beyond the ability to take advantage of it - all of which is rolled into the existing system of attacks of opportunity.

If you're talking about taking multiple feinted attacks in a round, then you're viewing the mechanic as far too closely bonded to the explanation of the maneuver - once again we have a master feinter. Is it too much to ask that perhaps he's pulling off a single feint which leaves his opponent so wide open he can take advantage of the opponent's response multiple times?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 24, 2003)

Psion said:
			
		

> Heh. It sounds like you almost described the way that Master of Arms works (I book I recommend but nobody buys). Most of the class abilities are also presented as feats.




Interesting. I presume you've reviewed it then? I don't remember hearing about it but I'll go and search the reviews database.

Cheers


----------



## Felon (Nov 25, 2003)

Shazman said:
			
		

> Was anyone else disappointed and confused by the kensai class? It bears absolutely no resemblance to it's 1st edition namesake or the 3rd edition weapon master.  Instead, it's a bizarre combo of OA samurai, Master Samurai, and an oathbound from AU with a cleric's BAB and Will as teh only good save.




Makes no sense to me either. Isn't the kensai supposed to be some sort of wandering "sword-saint", a sort of lone knight-errant who seeks ought wrongs to right? Doesn't really mesh with the whole warlord thing. 



			
				Psion said:
			
		

> Heh. It sounds like you almost described the way that Master of Arms works (I book I recommend but nobody buys). Most of the class abilities are also presented as feats.




I bought it, in part due to your review. It's cool.


----------



## Arcane Runes Press (Nov 25, 2003)

Shazman said:
			
		

> Was anyone else disappointed and confused by the kensai class? It bears absolutely no resemblance to it's 1st edition namesake or the 3rd edition weapon master.  Instead, it's a bizarre combo of OA samurai, Master Samurai, and an oathbound from AU with a cleric's BAB and Will as teh only good save.




Yeah. That class sort of boggles the mind. It's a class I can't see EVER taking, and a poor example of its namesake.

Actually, I'm much less than impressed with the book from the reading I've been doing. A real yawner. 

Patrick Y.


----------



## comrade raoul (Nov 25, 2003)

Shazman said:
			
		

> Was anyone else disappointed and confused by the kensai class? It bears absolutely no resemblance to it's 1st edition namesake or the 3rd edition weapon master.  Instead, it's a bizarre combo of OA samurai, Master Samurai, and an oathbound from AU with a cleric's BAB and Will as teh only good save.



You may be more interested in my recent treatment of the kensei, available here. It uses a pair of feats from _Arcana Unearthed_, but is easily adaptable to D&D campaigns.


----------



## Hardhead (Nov 25, 2003)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> If you're talking about taking multiple feinted attacks in a round, then you're viewing the mechanic as far too closely bonded to the explanation of the maneuver - once again we have a master feinter. Is it too much to ask that perhaps he's pulling off a single feint which leaves his opponent so wide open he can take advantage of the opponent's response multiple times?




My objection is based on game balance.  Sneak Attack simply isn't balanced if a rogue can do it every attack every time.  The damage a character able to do this could dish out boggles the mind.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 25, 2003)

Hardhead said:
			
		

> My objection is based on game balance.  Sneak Attack simply isn't balanced if a rogue can do it every attack every time.  The damage a character able to do this could dish out boggles the mind.




Hasn't Monte Cook been quoted as saying that the Rogue class was balanced under the assumption that he _would_ be Sneak Attacking every time?

Apart from that - with the BAB added to the Sense Motive check, he's unlikely to be successful on every feint...

-Hyp.


----------



## comrade raoul (Nov 25, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Hasn't Monte Cook been quoted as saying that the Rogue class was balanced under the assumption that he _would_ be Sneak Attacking every time?
> 
> Apart from that - with the BAB added to the Sense Motive check, he's unlikely to be successful on every feint...
> 
> -Hyp.



I think he was quoted as saying that the rogue was balanced under the assumption that he would sneak attack once or twice every _encounter_.


----------



## Aaron L (Nov 25, 2003)

That can't be right considering the fact that simply FLANKING an opponent lets you sneak attack.


----------



## Hardhead (Nov 25, 2003)

If the bad guy is moving smart, flanking can be hard with a four-person party (especially if one or two of them are hanging back casting spells).


----------



## Felon (Nov 25, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> By high-level I meant between 10th and 20th. Oh well, maybe there'll be another book with _enough_ high-level feats taking up something more than 25% of the book.




Now that I have a copy of the book, Psi, it may comfort (or at least interest) you to know that most of the Weapon Style feats require a pretty stringent chain of prerequisite feats. By the CW's definition, only a few characters manage to learn them. 

The same can be said of many of the Tactical feats...and they look like just plain fun. For instance, one of the Raptor School tactics is to jump down on top of your foe, and you decide before hand what the DC of the jump check is. DC15 = +2 damage, DC25 = +4. If you fail the check--whoops! Thud!

And Giantbane has a tactic called "climb aboard". You make a Climb check to scramble up a larger opponent's back, and it takes a -4 to attack you while you're up there. It can shake you off by making a grapple check opposed by your Climb check. 

Of course, against some monsters this stuff has to adjudicated properly...but that's what a DM's there for. Neat stuff.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 25, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> And Giantbane has a tactic called "climb aboard". You make a Climb check to scramble up a larger opponent's back, and it takes a -4 to attack you while you're up there. It can shake you off by making a grapple check opposed by your Climb check.




"I just figured out why you're giving me so much trouble."
"Why is that, do you think?"

-Hyp.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Nov 25, 2003)

Hardhead said:
			
		

> If the bad guy is moving smart, flanking can be hard with a four-person party (especially if one or two of them are hanging back casting spells).




It's a fairly rare situation when two characters can't manage to get a flank, especially when one of them can tumble. But even bearing that in mind, the thief BAB is sufficiently low that he's not likely to get more than a couple of hits in during a fight anyway, especially when you consider his low AC and hitpoints - and THAT is why it's not a problem if he can sneak attack on every attack - his hit rate is likely to be sufficiently less than a fighter that the damage will even out.

And at the sort of level that you're talking about feinting everyone you attack, you're also talking about the sort of level where rings of blink, items of improved invisibility, and insane hide checks are available. The whole feint for free thing is really just a different way for the guy to ensure a sneak attack with every swing.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 25, 2003)

Hardhead said:
			
		

> My objection is based on game balance.  Sneak Attack simply isn't balanced if a rogue can do it every attack every time.  The damage a character able to do this could dish out boggles the mind.




Although a rogue at lower level than the master of this prestige class could quite legitimately have a ring of invisibility or ring of blinking and be happily sneak attacking all the time against almost all of his sneak attackable opponents...

The limiting factor to all this is the relatively low durability of the rogue (and knife fighter). Lowish AC, low hp... most of the high sneak attack damage characters are like eggshells with hammers...

Cheers


----------



## Gez (Nov 25, 2003)

You can't sneak attack an enemy that is:
* Not flanked or denied the Dex bonus to AC;
* Concealed (any amount of concealment ruins your sneak attacks);
* Without anatomy (incorporeal, swarm, plant, ooze, constructs, undead, some outsiders, even some vermins);
* Wearing a fortification armor;

Maybe some other things which I forgot.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 25, 2003)

jgsugden said:
			
		

> There is nothing in the rules to indicate that you can break up one action to perform another action inside of it (in the absence of an explicit exception). The idea that you could seems rather odd.




Maybe you should check the rules.

Page 139 of the PHB:

Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort, and over the span of the round, their impact is so minor that they are considered free. *You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally.* However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.


----------



## Gez (Nov 25, 2003)

Hypersmurf already quoted that. No need to go all necromancer again on that hi-jacking issue.

The topic is: "Is there anything of value in the Complete Warrior?" and the question has got no good answer for now.


----------



## Felon (Nov 25, 2003)

Y'know, the other thread on CW degenerated into debating samurai. I think I like that better than having a thread degenerate over a rogue's ability to sneak attack--something that's hardly a new arrival on the scene.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 25, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Hypersmurf already quoted that. No need to go all necromancer again on that hi-jacking issue.
> 
> The topic is: "Is there anything of value in the Complete Warrior?" and the question has got no good answer for now.



 If you mean, 'hasn't got a good answer...._*for me*_', then I'm right with you.  If you meant "*for everyone"*, then I'd say you're wrong, as several folks have already chimed in that they thought it had same.  I know I think it's better money spent for my group than the BoED was, and looked to be more useful than the Draconomicon.


----------



## SaemonHavarian (Nov 25, 2003)

*Desperate Attempt to pull this thread back on topic*

Ahem, 

could anyone who has the complete warrior give us all a more complete breakdown of the Swashbuckler class.  What sort of abilities does it get at higher levels, and how do you think it compares with the fighter?

Also, is there a prestige class in the book specificaly designed for the swashbuckler?  If so, how does it compare with the duelist?

Thanks in advance.
Cheers.


----------



## Fingers Boggis (Nov 25, 2003)

ok so i just picked up the book today, only had time for a quick 10 minute flick though before i had to go to a lecture (damn this learning) but i thought id post my initial thoughts
as i took it out of the guys hands the first thing i thought was, hmmm the page count seems light, the price was also lighter than i was expecting though so thats not a huge complaint. got back to my room and literally flicked through, i was very impressed by some of the art (hexblade, blade singer, cavalier, frenzied berserker, halfling outrider and the justicar spring to mind instantly) and then less so by other (samurai, dark hunter, reaping mauler and ronin) and when i reached the full page art work i was very impressed
whilst i was expecting it the book is very mechanics heavy, i would have liked to have seen more in the vein of chapter 4
whilst ive yet to have a proper look none of the PrCs seem too unblancing and i can see me using quite a few, maybe, the section im really looking forward to pouring over this evenin however is the feats section, i seem to have a bit of a soft spot for feats at the minute ive moved on from PrCs lol

im bound to post more when ive read more

Fingers


----------



## heirodule (Nov 25, 2003)

Has anybody summarized the feats and classes from Sword and Fist which DIDN'T make the cut into CW?


----------



## andrew (Nov 25, 2003)

What does the book offer for the barbarians? From just skimming through this thread, it seems all they get is updated versions of the rage feats and frenzied berserker. Anything else for them?

What changes were made to the Frenzied Berserker PrC? What about Greater Resiliency?


----------



## Seule (Nov 25, 2003)

Someone commented that Improved Toughness was well done, I assume that's a replacement for the Dwarf's Toughness-Giant's Toughness-Dragon's Toughness chain?

  --Seule


----------



## Shazman (Nov 25, 2003)

Well except for the poor treatment of the kensai and no ninja PrC's, I liked the book.  The swasbuckler gets things like bonuses to acrobatic skills, dodge bonuses, better flanking bonuses, bonuses to Ref saves, adding int bonus to damage rolls, luck bonuses, and skill mastery wioth acrobatic skills. D10 hit dice, fort as good save, 4 + int skills per leves. The only barbarian Prc's I remember is frenzied berzerker, eye of Gruumsh, and bear warrior.  Greater resiliancy is there, but no expert tactician or power lunge. Lost of rage feats. Some good monk, two-weapon fighting, archery, and favored enemy feats as well. Improved toughness gives you an extra hp per level.


----------



## jmucchiello (Nov 25, 2003)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> By high-level I meant between 10th and 20th. Oh well, maybe there'll be another book with _enough_ high-level feats taking up something more than 25% of the book.



How many high level feats do you want? (Or how short a book are you willing to buy?) Feats don't take up a lot of space, ya' know.

{PLUG}
There is a preview of Character Customization in the June 2003 RPGNow Downloader monthly with a preview of the feat section. The book contains 8 feats with BAB > +10 required as well as 12 +8 BAB feats. The preview contains several of these feats. It is a 3.0 PDF and there are many places where 3.5 would require different prerequisites. (Not to mention some of the feats in 3.5 are different from how I wrote them in CC.)
{/PLUG}


----------



## ThirdWizard (Nov 25, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> "I just figured out why you're giving me so much trouble."
> "Why is that, do you think?"
> 
> -Hyp.



Now they just need the spell _raise mostly dead_.

My Complete Warrior arrives tomorrow! Along with BoED.


----------



## Shazman (Nov 25, 2003)

andrew said:
			
		

> What does the book offer for the barbarians? From just skimming through this thread, it seems all they get is updated versions of the rage feats and frenzied berserker. Anything else for them?
> 
> What changes were made to the Frenzied Berserker PrC? What about Greater Resiliency?




 The new frenzied berserker PrC doesn't get any DR, but does get diehard at first level, deathless frenzy at 4th level (can continue fighting at -10 hp and beyond for the duration of frenzy) and greater frenzy at 8th level (+10 to Str instead of +6).


----------



## Shazman (Nov 25, 2003)

SaemonHavarian said:
			
		

> Ahem,
> 
> could anyone who has the complete warrior give us all a more complete breakdown of the Swashbuckler class.  What sort of abilities does it get at higher levels, and how do you think it compares with the fighter?
> 
> ...



 Some of the high level abilities include: lucky (get to reroll a roll), acrobatic skill mastery, slippery mind, weakening critical (do 2 points of str dmg with crit), and wouning critical (do 2 points of con dmg with crit).  Dodge bonus and grace bonus (bonus to ref saves) max out at +4 and +3 respectively.


----------



## Hardhead (Nov 25, 2003)

> It's a fairly rare situation when two characters can't manage to get a flank, especially when one of them can tumble.




Not for this guy.  His opponents will always be flat-footed.


----------



## Bards R Us (Nov 25, 2003)

Just got it over the weekend.  Haven't read it yet, but I did check out some of the new core classes like Swashbuckler, which is pretty cool.  I'm thinking that the new classes in both this book and the Miniatures handbook will included in the 4th edition DnD, whenever that comes out.


----------



## Psion (Nov 25, 2003)

Bards R Us said:
			
		

> Just got it over the weekend.  Haven't read it yet, but I did check out some of the new core classes like Swashbuckler, which is pretty cool.  I'm thinking that the new classes in both this book and the Miniatures handbook will included in the 4th edition DnD, whenever that comes out.




You're scaring me!


----------



## Bards R Us (Nov 25, 2003)

Psion said:
			
		

> You're scaring me!




4th Ed is coming....next year! Muwhahahahahaha    j/k


----------



## D.Shaffer (Nov 25, 2003)

Felon said:
			
		

> Makes no sense to me either. Isn't the kensai supposed to be some sort of wandering "sword-saint", a sort of lone knight-errant who seeks ought wrongs to right? Doesn't really mesh with the whole warlord thing.
> 
> 
> > I prefer the old S&F version of the Kensai/Weapon Master better, but...
> ...


----------



## MerricB (Nov 25, 2003)

Seule said:
			
		

> Someone commented that Improved Toughness was well done, I assume that's a replacement for the Dwarf's Toughness-Giant's Toughness-Dragon's Toughness chain?
> 
> --Seule




*Improved Toughness*
Pre-reqs: Base Fort save +2
gives you +1 hp/hit die. (So, a 5th level character will get +5 hp when they take this feat, plus an additional hp for each additional level they get).


*Which Prestige Classes from Sword and Fist didn't make it?*

*Reprinted:*
Cavalier -> Complete Warrior (big changes)
Drunken Master -> Complete Warrior
Duelist -> Dungeon Master's Guide
Halfling Outrider - > Complete Warrior
Knight Protector of the Great Kingdom -> Complete Warrior (as Knight Protector)
Order of the Bow Initiate -> Complete Warrior
Ravager -> Complete Warrior

*Not Reprinted:*
Devoted Defender
Fist of Hextor
Ghostwalker
Gladiator
Lasher
Master of Chains
Master Samurai
Ninja of the Crescent Moon
Red Avenger
Tribal Protector
Warmaster
Weapon Master

*What about Feats?*
*Reprinted*
Close-Quarters Fighting
Eagle Claw Attack
Extra Stunning Attacks
Eyes in the Back of Your Head
Fists of Iron
Hold the Line
Monkey Grip
Pain Touch
Pin Shield
Prone Attack
Rapid Reload (in PHB)
Sharp-Shooting
Snatch Arrows (in PHB)
Throw Anything
Zen Archery

*Not Reprinted*
Blindsight, 5' radius
Circle Kick
Death Blow
Dirty Fighting
Dual Strike
Expert Tactician
Feign Weakness
Improved Overrun
Improved Sunder
Knock Down
Lightning Fists
Mantis Leap
Off-Hand Parry
Power Lunge
Remain Conscious (replaced by Die Hard in PHB)
Shield Expert

Cheers!


----------



## Psion (Nov 25, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *Improved Toughness*
> Pre-reqs: Base Fort save +2
> gives you +1 hp/hit die. (So, a 5th level character will get +5 hp when they take this feat, plus an additional hp for each additional level they get).




So WotC is abandoning the philosophy of avoiding feats that scale with level, are they? Sounds like a bad precedent.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 25, 2003)

Psion said:
			
		

> So WotC is abandoning the philosophy of avoiding feats that scale with level, are they? Sounds like a bad precedent.




You could view it as the equivalent of Spellcasting Prodigy for Constitution...

-Hyp.


----------



## dagger (Nov 25, 2003)

I'm not sure if the gamers on this board are a fair representation of the majority who purchase D&D products or not. But most of the gamers that I talk to around here have few issues with the feats they have been putting out.

I am not saying that anyone’s opinions are invalid, just that I don’t think it is that big of a deal to the masses as it is too some folks on here. I also think the masses will continue to purchase the WoTC products (and others) regardless. IMO

I don't have a problem with that feat either, if it matters, which it really doesn't.


----------



## Gez (Nov 25, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You could view it as the equivalent of Spellcasting Prodigy for Constitution...




I was going to say the same thing... If they worded it "you get a +2 bonus to your Constitution score for purpose of determining hit points", no one would object.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 25, 2003)

One trap that it might be worth avoiding is thinking that "this is how it worked in 3E therefore it's the only way."

WotC have recently demonstrated in several products that they're beginning to break what we assumed were rules of design.

e.g. In the MHb, several spell-casting classes have spell DCs dependent on one ability score and bonus spells dependent upon a different ability score.

Cheers!


----------



## Gez (Nov 25, 2003)

And a prestige class without a BAB. "See, the halfling outrider was really meant to have no BAB."

It's obvious that, as the team has changed, the design philosophies so did, too (especially if you picture in the need for renewal). While some of the changes come as interesting twist, some others come as ugly hack. Of course, not everyone will agree on what is in which category.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 25, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> Of course, not everyone will agree on what is in which category.




Indeed. 

I give WotC a lot of credit for this passage in the start of the CW, though:

This book includes material from other sources, including _Dragon_ magazine, web articles previously published on the Wizards of the Coast website, and earlier works like _Sword and Fist_. Much of this material has been picked up and revised based on feedback and commetnts from D&D players and DMs all around the world. We hope you like the changes we made to the prestige classes, feats, and other elements of the game as well as the large amount of brand-new material you'll find in these pages.

Remember, however, that Dungeons & Dragons is _your game_. If you've been playing with a particular prestige class or feat that we've picked up and revised, we hope you'll look at the new version and see why we made the changes - but you _don't_ have to play with the revised material if you don't want to. The Dungeon Master, as always, should make the final call about what material belongs in his or her game, and if you've been playing with an older version of something that appears in this book and you're having fun doing it, don't worry aout making a change. We think all the changes we've made are for the best, but it's your game, after all.

Cheers!


----------



## jayaint (Nov 26, 2003)

How behind am i... I just started on pg 8 of this thread..

Strange to anyone else that all the PrC's in CW are 5 levels only?

*shrug*

Also... i have only done the rude-five-minute-flip-thru @ barnes and noble, so i don't have the book in my grubby little hands.. is the warshaper better/worse than the shifter from MotW? I only caught a glimpse.

thanks.


----------



## Silveras (Nov 26, 2003)

jayaint said:
			
		

> How behind am i... I just started on pg 8 of this thread..
> 
> Strange to anyone else that all the PrC's in CW are 5 levels only?
> 
> ...




Quickly looking at the PrCs in my copy... I see 15 that are 10 levels, 2 that are 5 levels, and 2 that are 3 levels; and I only looked at half or less of them. 

No comment on the Warshaper vs. the Shifter; neither class' concept does much for me.


----------



## Felon (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> WotC have recently demonstrated in several products that they're beginning to break what we assumed were rules of design. e.g. In the MHb, several spell-casting classes have spell DCs dependent on one ability score and bonus spells dependent upon a different ability score.




Heck..new core classes for that matter show that they're starting to look at things differently.



			
				Gez said:
			
		

> I was going to say the same thing... If they worded it "you get a +2 bonus to your Constitution score for purpose of determining hit points", no one would object.




Don't kid yourself. *Someone* would object.


----------



## jayaint (Nov 26, 2003)

apparently farther behind than i would care to think... 

that many are 10 lvl... WOW... I apologize for my prior post then.. I guess my eyes just NOTICED the ones that weren't... 

any comments from doppleganger folks out there on the pros/cons of warshaper would still be appreciated... thanks


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 26, 2003)

Can you tell me more about this?

For instance, what are the other benefits of the elusive target feat? And what are the requirements?

And perhaps you could post the prereqs for the spinning halberd feat.

It'd be nice to see what the chain looks like.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Now that I have a copy of the book, Psi, it may comfort (or at least interest) you to know that most of the Weapon Style feats require a pretty stringent chain of prerequisite feats. By the CW's definition, only a few characters manage to learn them.
> 
> The same can be said of many of the Tactical feats...and they look like just plain fun. For instance, one of the Raptor School tactics is to jump down on top of your foe, and you decide before hand what the DC of the jump check is. DC15 = +2 damage, DC25 = +4. If you fail the check--whoops! Thud!
> 
> ...


----------



## MerricB (Nov 26, 2003)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> Can you tell me more about this?
> 
> For instance, what are the other benefits of the elusive target feat? And what are the requirements?
> 
> ...




*Elusive Target* [Tactical]
Pre-reqs: Dodge, Mobility, BAB +6.
Allows use of 3 tactical manuevers:
_Negate Power Attack:_ If the opponent you have nominated at the one you are dodging (per Dodge feat) attacks you with a Power Attack, the damage bonus is negated (but not the penalty to hit).
_Diverting Defense:_ If you are flanked, the first time in a round the opponent you are dodging attacks you, he automatically misses and must make an attack roll against the other flanker instead.
_Cause Overreach:_ If you move out of a threatened square, provoke an Attack of Opportunity and that attack misses, you may make a free trip attempt against that foe. The foe can't trip you if your attempt fails.

*Spinning Halberd* [Style]
Pre-reqs: Combat reflexes, Two weapon fighting, WF (Halberd)
When you make a Full Attack with the halberd, you get a +1 dodge AC and an additional attack with the halberd at a -5 penalty. This attack deal d6+1/2 Str bonus in bludgeoning damage.

Cheers!


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *Elusive Target* [Tactical]
> Pre-reqs: Dodge, Mobility, BAB +6.
> Allows use of 3 tactical manuevers:
> _Negate Power Attack:[/b] If the opponent you have nominated at the one you are dodging (per Dodge feat) attacks you with a Power Attack, the damage bonus is negated (but not the penalty to hit).
> ...



_

Nice. That really gives some teeth to dodge and mobility now doesn't it? A very nice feat for the spring attack or whirlwind attacking character. Also, a good reason for characters who wear heavy armor to take dodge and mobility.




*Spinning Halberd* [Style]
Pre-reqs: Combat reflexes, Two weapon fighting, WF (Halberd)
When you make a Full Attack with the halberd, you get a +1 dodge AC and an additional attack with the halberd at a -5 penalty. This attack deal d6+1/2 Str bonus in bludgeoning damage.
		
Click to expand...



This one's a lot more dodgy since it requires two suboptimal feats for any halberd user (combat reflexes is suboptimal since he doesn't have reach and TWF because it's a two-handed, non double weapon). The extra attack is spiffy but not too impressive (since it deals a lot less damage) and the +1 dodge bonus to AC is nice but not too significant either (since you're giving up the AC of a shield and incremental AC bonusses are more significant the higher your AC is to begin with._


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *Elusive Target* [Tactical]
> Pre-reqs: Dodge, Mobility, BAB +6.
> Allows use of 3 tactical manuevers:
> _Negate Power Attack:_ If the opponent you have nominated at the one you are dodging (per Dodge feat) attacks you with a Power Attack, the damage bonus is negated (but not the penalty to hit).
> ...




I like the first combat maneuver, but not the other two. Oh well, I'll just steal the first bit


----------



## MerricB (Nov 26, 2003)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> This one's a lot more dodgy since it requires two suboptimal feats for any halberd user (combat reflexes is suboptimal since he doesn't have reach and TWF because it's a two-handed, non double weapon). The extra attack is spiffy but not too impressive (since it deals a lot less damage) and the +1 dodge bonus to AC is nice but not too significant either (since you're giving up the AC of a shield and incremental AC bonusses are more significant the higher your AC is to begin with.




Combat Reflexes looks a lot better when you realise its the pre-req for Hold The Line (You get an AoO on anyone who charges you). 

Though I agree in general - it's a weaker style feat than some of the others.

Cheers!


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Combat Reflexes looks a lot better when you realise its the pre-req for Hold The Line (You get an AoO on anyone who charges you).




Speaking of which - did they think that one through when they rewrote it for 3.5?

What's the wording?

-Hyp.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 26, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Speaking of which - did they think that one through when they rewrote it for 3.5?
> 
> What's the wording?




"You may make an attack of opportunity against a charging opponent who enters an area you threaten. Your attack of opportunity happens immediately before the charge is resolved."

What was the possible issue with the wording?

Cheers!


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> "You may make an attack of opportunity against a charging opponent who enters an area you threaten. Your attack of opportunity happens immediately before the charge is resolved."
> 
> What was the possible issue with the wording?




Ha.

Not possible issue - they either missed it, or it was deliberate.

It means that if you have Hold the Line and a Reach weapon, you get two AoOs when someone charges; one for entering the area you threaten (ten feet away), and one when they leave your threatened square (to move to five feet away so they can attack).  Plus, potentially, a double-damage set-longspear-against-charge Readied Action, of course.

-Hyp.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 26, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Ha.
> 
> Not possible issue - they either missed it, or it was deliberate.
> 
> It means that if you have Hold the Line and a Reach weapon, you get two AoOs when someone charges; one for entering the area you threaten (ten feet away), and one when they leave your threatened square (to move to five feet away so they can attack).  Plus, potentially, a double-damage set-longspear-against-charge Readied Action, of course.






They may well consider it to be an "Attack of Opportunity triggered by Movement" - such would only trigger one AoO.

It's worth asking them about, though.

Cheers!


----------



## Silveras (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> They may well consider it to be an "Attack of Opportunity triggered by Movement" - such would only trigger one AoO.
> 
> It's worth asking them about, though.
> 
> Cheers!




Also, this seems to me one of those areas where the DM has to apply common sense. If you take the AoO, you un-set your weapon and lose the Readied Action, because you can't very well be bracing it for the charge if you're waving at the approaching opponent.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> They may well consider it to be an "Attack of Opportunity triggered by Movement" - such would only trigger one AoO.




The rules do not limit you to "one AoO triggered by Movement".

They limit you to one AoO triggered by "*moving out of* more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round".

The Hold the Line AoO is not provoked by moving out of a threatened square, but by moving into one.  It _does not_, as written, fall under the restriction, and is thus a separate opportunity.

That's why I said the wording was important.  As written in Sword and Fist, it would require a special note if it were to fall under the restriction in 3.5.  That note was not inserted.




> If you take the AoO, you un-set your weapon and lose the Readied Action, because you can't very well be bracing it for the charge if you're waving at the approaching opponent.




You've given up a standard action for the sole purpose of gaining extra damage if your opponent charges.  A Readied action does not occur until the triggering conditions are met.

As he enters the square, he provokes an AoO via Hold the Line.
Once he's in the square, your Readied Action triggers; you set your spear and get a double damage attack.
As he leaves the square, he provokes a movement AoO.

-Hyp.


----------



## Taren Seeker (Nov 26, 2003)

Anyone have the prereqs for the Exotic Weapon Master?

TIA


----------



## MerricB (Nov 26, 2003)

Taren Seeker said:
			
		

> Anyone have the prereqs for the Exotic Weapon Master?




BAB +6
Skills: Craft (Weaponsmithing) 3 ranks
Feats: Exotic Weapon Proficiency (any exotic weapon), Weapon Focus (any exotic weapon)
Special: Races that have familiarity with an exotic weapon (such as the dwarf's familiarity with the dwarven waraxe and the dwarven urgrosh) are considered to have the EWP for the purpose of meeting this feat.

Cheers!


----------



## Taren Seeker (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> BAB +6
> Skills: Craft (Weaponsmithing) 3 ranks
> Feats: Exotic Weapon Proficiency (any exotic weapon), Weapon Focus (any exotic weapon)
> Special: Races that have familiarity with an exotic weapon (such as the dwarf's familiarity with the dwarven waraxe and the dwarven urgrosh) are considered to have the EWP for the purpose of meeting this feat.
> ...




WHOOHOO! 3 ranks of Craft and I'm in.

I'm gonna lurve me this class.

Thanks MerricB.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 26, 2003)

Taren Seeker said:
			
		

> WHOOHOO! 3 ranks of Craft and I'm in.
> 
> I'm gonna lurve me this class.
> 
> Thanks MerricB.




Only three levels of the class, each of which gives an "Exotic Weapon Stunt". 

My favourite is as follows:
_Show Off:_ As a standard action, the character can display his mastery with an exotic weapon and confound his opponent. The character may make an Intimidate check against a single opponent within 30 feet that can see him, adding his base attack bonus to the result. If the result exceeds the opponent's modified level check (see the skill description on page 76 of the _Player's Handbook_), the opponent becomes shaken for 1 round per class level of the exotic weapon master.

Sure, there are better stunts, but I just like the idea of that one. 

Cheers!


----------



## Taren Seeker (Nov 26, 2003)

Heh...already did something similar. I wiped out a few guys with my Chain, did a big flourish (flicking the blood off my chain at them of course) and did my best "Kneel before Zod!" impression.

20 on intimidate check, the rest ran 

Hmm, that ability would def. come in handy for his Pit Fighting career though...


----------



## Silveras (Nov 26, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You've given up a standard action for the sole purpose of gaining extra damage if your opponent charges.  A Readied action does not occur until the triggering conditions are met.
> 
> As he enters the square, he provokes an AoO via Hold the Line.
> Once he's in the square, your Readied Action triggers; you set your spear and get a double damage attack.
> As he leaves the square, he provokes a movement AoO.




I disagree. I would argue that the Readied action *replaces* the AoO, mostly because you don't normally *get* an AoO upon the arrival of a charging opponent. In other words, while not spelled out in the rules explicitly, this is one of those areas where the DM has to let common sense over-rule the letter of the rules. Bracing the weapon for a charge makes it useless for AoOs because it is not free to be wielded "spontaneously" as the opportunity arises. The weapons which can be so set are generally reach weapons, so the readied attack would take place *before* the opponent could leave the threatened space. Being braced to get double damage, a hit means the charge was stopped; a failure means the opponent (now leaving the original threatened square) is no longer far enough away for the reach weapon to be used (the weapons that can be set cannot be used on opponents closer than 10 feet). 

I would allow either the readied attack, or the two AoOs, but not both. 

I am also saying I know you disagree. I believe this is one of those DM judgement call areas, and that is how I would rule it, as well as why. YMMV, and that's fine.


----------



## Pants (Nov 26, 2003)

Taren Seeker said:
			
		

> Heh...already did something similar. I wiped out a few guys with my Chain, did a big flourish (flicking the blood off my chain at them of course) and did my best "Kneel before Zod!" impression.
> 
> 20 on intimidate check, the rest ran
> 
> Hmm, that ability would def. come in handy for his Pit Fighting career though...



You could have accomplished all of that with just a 'Kneel before Zodd!' impression


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Nov 26, 2003)

Taren Seeker said:
			
		

> Heh...already did something similar. I wiped out a few guys with my Chain, did a big flourish (flicking the blood off my chain at them of course) and did my best "Kneel before Zod!" impression.
> 
> 20 on intimidate check, the rest ran
> 
> Hmm, that ability would def. come in handy for his Pit Fighting career though...



I did something similar after pulling off a double-crit-instant-kill with a spiked chain.  The DM ruled that I wrapped the chain around the guy's neck and tugged as hard as I could, and essentially invented the chainsaw.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 26, 2003)

Silveras said:
			
		

> The weapons which can be so set are generally reach weapons...




Reach:
Longspear

Non-Reach:
Halberd
Spear
Trident
Urgrosh

... sure about that?  



> Being braced to get double damage, a hit means the charge was stopped;




Hmm?  A hit with a set spear doesn't stop a charge; they carry on moving unless you kill them.  That's the whole point of feats Large and in Charge or Movement Check, which specifically _do_ stop a charge.

-Hyp.


----------



## Taren Seeker (Nov 26, 2003)

Pants said:
			
		

> You could have accomplished all of that with just a 'Kneel before Zodd!' impression




Hey I'll have you know I do a GREAT "Kneel before Zod".

It's all in the attitude.

OT, but has anyone gotten CW from Amazon yet? They STILL claim to not have it in stock.


----------



## Silveras (Nov 26, 2003)

Taren Seeker said:
			
		

> Hey I'll have you know I do a GREAT "Kneel before Zod".
> 
> It's all in the attitude.
> 
> OT, but has anyone gotten CW from Amazon yet? They STILL claim to not have it in stock.




Yes. Mine arrived today, shipped Saturday/Sunday. 

I canceled my long-standing order (which, as of last Friday, still said "Expected Dec. 5") and placed a new one after looking it up again (which said "Usually Ships in 1-2 days").


----------



## Silveras (Nov 26, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Reach:
> Longspear
> 
> Non-Reach:
> ...




:: sigh :: I hate being wrong like that. I usually do try to check my claims before shooting off my mouth. Now I get to try and figure out what I was reading when I thought I was looking at weapons set for a charge.   



			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Hmm?  A hit with a set spear doesn't stop a charge; they carry on moving unless you kill them.  That's the whole point of feats Large and in Charge or Movement Check, which specifically _do_ stop a charge.




Quite correct; I was assuming a kill in my enthusiasm.


----------



## Taren Seeker (Nov 26, 2003)

Sigh...Amazon.ca is still listing it as not in stock.

BAH


----------



## Marion Poliquin (Nov 26, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> AR: Non, c'est "Magefoudre" le nom.
> 
> But lightningmage really don't sound good.




No offense but I think that Lightningmage sounds much better than Magefoudre. In fact, I think Magefoudre sounds awful. If I were to use such a class name in my game, I give my players exactly 1.4 second before they come up with "Tu sais où tu peux le mettre ton Magefoutre ?".


----------



## Felon (Nov 26, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> My favourite is as follows:
> _Show Off:_ As a standard action, the character can display his mastery with an exotic weapon and confound his opponent. The character may make an Intimidate check against a single opponent within 30 feet that can see him, adding his base attack bonus to the result. If the result exceeds the opponent's modified level check (see the skill description on page 76 of the _Player's Handbook_), the opponent becomes shaken for 1 round per class level of the exotic weapon master. Sure, there are better stunts, but I just like the idea of that one.




"Fear my net! My scary scary net! Watch me unfold it with blinding speed! Now watch me..fold it back up again! Now I put on my head! Scared yet?"    

Hehe. Yeah, the EWM is pretty cool. Imagine pulling the Bruce Lee _Enter the Dragon_ move with a pair of nunchaku. Hmm. Guess monks have an advantage in regards to this class, since they're already proficient with a number of exotic weapons.


----------



## Olive (Nov 27, 2003)

Silveras said:
			
		

> Quite correct; I was assuming a kill in my enthusiasm.




With the two AoOs Hyp argues the feat gives, that kill is more likely!


----------



## Gez (Nov 27, 2003)

Marion Poliquin said:
			
		

> No offense but...




Yeah, Teträm, but that's to be expected when playing with other trolls.


----------



## Seule (Nov 27, 2003)

Marion Poliquin said:
			
		

> No offense but...



Y'know, I think that's the first time I've ever seen that phrase used that way.  Usually it's shortform for "I'm going to say something really offensive, but I don't want you to be able to do anything about it."
In this case, as far as I can tell, it means "If you are really touchy you could take this the wrong way, and I don't want that."
Novel.

Anyway, to drag this back on topic, if my wife hasn't gotten the hint from my incessant harping of 'Cool!' and 'Listen to this!' inspired by the kind people on this thread and bought me the book for Christmas, I'll be buying it as soon after as I can.  It looks right up my alley.

  --Seule


----------



## Endur (Nov 27, 2003)

After owning the book for a week, I think this is the best balanced non-core book I have bought from WOTC.  Most of the other non-core books had serious issues with play balance.  There are still some minor issues with play balance in this book, but they are better than most other WOTC splat books I have seen.

With regards to the Swashbuckler and Samurai classes, I think these are neat alternatives to the fighter class.  You keep fighter BAB, fighter saves, and fighter hit points.  But, from there we change.  The Swashbuckler only has light armor profiency, but gains 4 skill points per level.  The Samurai has heavy armor profiency, but no shield profiency, and 2 skill points per level.  Both the Samurai and Swashbuckler have a different skill list from the fighter class.  These two fighter alternatives have special ability lists instead of the bonus feats a fighter gets.

I think these classes are well-balanced alternatives.  A power gamer won't like these alternative classes, but I think they do a credible job of describing a swashbuckler or samurai character class.  The book does not say, but I think the Swashbuckler and Samurai should have access to the Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization feats. 

Likewise, I think the non-spellcasting variants of Paladin and Ranger are also balanced.

What is unbalanced in this book?  Well, the unbalanced areas in this book are really two; old existing things that were always unbalanced (Frenzied Berserker, etc.) or new items that didn't receive much playtesting in terms of how these feats stacked with other feats (Heedless Charge, etc.).


----------



## Rolzup (Nov 27, 2003)

Endur said:
			
		

> I think these classes are well-balanced alternatives.  A power gamer won't like these alternative classes, but I think they do a credible job of describing a swashbuckler or samurai character class.  The book does not say, but I think the Swashbuckler and Samurai should have access to the Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization feats.




It's got me interested in working up a knife-fighting character, which I would have thought impossible before.  Three levels of Swashbuckler, three levels of Rogue, then right into Invisible Hand...and then maybe a few levels of master Thrower to have him tossing daggers all over the damned place.

Plus you've got some decent Barbarian options -- love the idea of the Bear Warrior -- some good fighter/mage possibilities...I dunno.  I like it, all-in-all.  Lots of good ideas, and I expect to get a good bit of use out of the book.  

Rolzup


----------



## hong (Nov 27, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> My favourite is as follows:
> _Show Off:_ As a standard action, the character can display his mastery with an exotic weapon and confound his opponent. The character may make an Intimidate check against a single opponent within 30 feet that can see him, adding his base attack bonus to the result. If the result exceeds the opponent's modified level check (see the skill description on page 76 of the _Player's Handbook_), the opponent becomes shaken for 1 round per class level of the exotic weapon master.
> 
> Sure, there are better stunts, but I just like the idea of that one.




Eh, it's silly.

What happens if someone does not have this feat? Does that mean they can't attempt a showoff stunt to intimidate people? A 10th level fighter with Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec and Greater Weapon Focus in any weapon, exotic or otherwise, should know more than enough fancy techniques to make mooks quake in their pants. This is basically an example of too many feats making the character stupid. Normally the maxim is applied to skills, but the underlying principle is the same.

I can understand it if there was some _supernatural_ element in play; perhaps a special ability like dragon fear or a magic spell ("supernatural" here being used in its plain-English sense, not its D&D jargon sense). For example, I have no problem with the S&F master of chains being able to scare people as a spell-like ability; it's magic. But there's nothing magical about this feat.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 27, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> Eh, it's silly.
> 
> What happens if someone does not have this feat? Does that mean they can't attempt a showoff stunt to intimidate people? A 10th level fighter with Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec and Greater Weapon Focus in any weapon, exotic or otherwise, should know more than enough fancy techniques to make mooks quake in their pants. This is basically an example of too many feats making the character stupid. Normally the maxim is applied to skills, but the underlying principle is the same.
> 
> I can understand it if there was some _supernatural_ element in play; perhaps a special ability like dragon fear or a magic spell ("supernatural" here being used in its plain-English sense, not its D&D jargon sense). For example, I have no problem with the S&F master of chains being able to scare people as a spell-like ability; it's magic. But there's nothing magical about this feat.




It's a class ability, hong, not a feat. Get it right.

Of course someone can use the normal rules for Intimidate to do a showoff stunt to Intimidate people. This "exotic weapon stunt" just makes that option somewhat better.

Could you conceptually create an ability or feat that does the same for other characters? Of course you can! It is merely that the EWM is particularly trained and skilled in intimidating his opponents with his weapon - there's a certain logic behind it with most EW being more powerful or unusual than the standard weapons.

Cheers!


----------



## hong (Nov 27, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> It's a class ability, hong, not a feat. Get it right.




Whatever. It should not even be a class ability. It should be something that's doable as a standard application of Intimidate, and by heck, if someone wanted to show off his katana moves IMC (not that I actually have katanas IMC but by definition anything that makes mooks believe it is uber enough to cut through tanks is a katana) I wouldn't have any problem with letting them make an Intimidate check to obtain the exact same results as given here.



> Of course someone can use the normal rules for Intimidate to do a showoff stunt to Intimidate people. This "exotic weapon stunt" just makes that option somewhat better.




How?



> Could you conceptually create an ability or feat that does the same for other characters? Of course you can! It is merely that the EWM is particularly trained and skilled in intimidating his opponents with his weapon - there's a certain logic behind it with most EW being more powerful or unusual than the standard weapons.




Most EWs are unusual. Most EWs are not, however, that powerful.


----------



## Wormwood (Nov 27, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> How?



Would this work? Intimidate _is _a class skill for Fighters now (IIRC)

From the SRD:
_Demoralize Opponent:_ You can also use Intimidate to weaken an opponent’s resolve in combat. To do so, make an Intimidate check opposed by the target’s modified level check (see above). If you win, the target becomes shaken for 1 round. A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws. You can intimidate only an opponent that you threaten in melee combat and that can see you.


----------



## hong (Nov 27, 2003)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Would this work? Intimidate _is _a class skill for Fighters now (IIRC)
> 
> From the SRD:
> _Demoralize Opponent:_ You can also use Intimidate to weaken an opponent’s resolve in combat. To do so, make an Intimidate check opposed by the target’s modified level check (see above). If you win, the target becomes shaken for 1 round. A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws. You can intimidate only an opponent that you threaten in melee combat and that can see you.




Well, there you go.  Regardless, I still say this is something that shouldn't be exclusive to EW masters. There's nothing particularly exotic about scaring people in combat. Call it "Combat Presence" and make it a fighter feat, and away you go.

EDIT: In fact, I think I'll do that right now!


----------



## Gez (Nov 27, 2003)

In my opinion, the Exotic Weapon Master should have been named the Weapon Poseur and be available for any weapon, not only exotic ones. And possibly rolled into one with the Kensai. Which should not have been named thus, since there was already the Kensei.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 27, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> In my opinion, the Exotic Weapon Master should have been named the Weapon Poseur and be available for any weapon, not only exotic ones. And possibly rolled into one with the Kensai. Which should not have been named thus, since there was already the Kensei.




Quite possibly.

However, even if so, this class is still inspiring hong to change things and do things based on it - a success, I would say. 

Cheers!


----------



## hong (Nov 27, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> Well, there you go.  Regardless, I still say this is something that shouldn't be exclusive to EW masters. There's nothing particularly exotic about scaring people in combat. Call it "Combat Presence" and make it a fighter feat, and away you go.
> 
> EDIT: In fact, I think I'll do that right now!




And here it is:

COMBAT PRESENCE [general, fighter, martial arts]

Your presence strikes fear on the battlefield.

Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6, Cha 15+, Intimidate skill.

Benefit: As a move action, you can make an Intimidate check against all foes within 30 feet. Your Intimidate check is opposed by each target's modified level check (1d20 + character level/HD + Wisdom bonus [if any] + modifiers to saves against fear). If you beat a target's check result, that foe is shaken for 2d4 rounds. A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws. You can intimidate only opponents that can see you.

Normal: As a standard action, you can make an Intimidate check against one target, opposed by their modified level check (see above). If you win, the target becomes shaken for 1 round. You can intimidate only an opponent that you threaten in melee combat and that can see you.



Changes from CW ability:
- You no longer add your BAB to your Intimidate check. Being able to consistently intimidate someone twice your level is silly.

- Affects all foes within 30', not just one foe.

- Takes a move action, not a standard action.

- Lasts 2d4 rounds.

Comments?


----------



## Gez (Nov 27, 2003)

Bad timing...


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 27, 2003)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> From the SRD:
> _Demoralize Opponent:_ You can also use [/font]Intimidate to weaken an opponent’s resolve in combat. To do so, make an Intimidatecheck opposed by the target’s modified level check (see above). If you win, the target becomes shaken *for 1 round*. A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws. You can intimidate only an opponent that you threaten in melee combat and that can see you.




(my bold emphasis)

You know, this demonstrates one of the design "features" of D&D that bugs me tremendously.

It lasts for 1 round. In other words you give up your attack(s) that round in order to give them a whooping -2 penalty on all their attacks. It is slightly worse than stunning fist (at least that makes them drop something). 

The only possible benefit that I can imagine is that because the various fear conditions stack you could intimidate someone who is already shaken from some other cause and bring them to fear (or perhaps even panic), but it would take a pretty rare set of conditions to enable that to happen, I'd imagine.

Maybe they decided that 1r effects were balanced for "team play", but it makes them almost worthless tactics in one-to-one combat, and that is a shame.

In all our campaigns we changed the duration to "as long as you remain in combat with them" (we also allowed it to be opposed with an intimidation check of your own instead of a level check).

Cheers


----------



## hong (Nov 27, 2003)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> It lasts for 1 round. In other words you give up your attack(s) that round in order to give them a whooping -2 penalty on all their attacks.




"If you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk." -- Tuco, _The Good, the Bad and the Ugly_

Can we get back to whinging about CW now, as opposed to whinging about 3.5E?


Impressions about the prestige classes:

It looks like they've copied a lot of the flavour text verbatim from S&F and other previous sources. This is sometimes unfortunate.

The cavalier, for instance, is still described as the "quintessential knight in shining armour", but it's still just a guy on a horse. It's an uber guy on a horse, mind you, but only the most literal-minded would take that as the defining essence of the phrase "knight in shining armour".

At the other end of the spectrum vis-a-vis literal-mindedness, the order of the bow initiate is still concerned with Zen waffle about truth and whatnot. Although it's been toned down significantly, and they've majorly reworked the mechanics so that it's no longer just a souped-up machine-gun archer. The end result is that the flavour text now has some (barely discernible) relevance to the class, which is good.

The new OotBI is also severely nerfed compared to the S&F original. This is perhaps appropriate, since the original OotBI was by consensus one of the more broken classes around; however, IMO they went a bit too far. I can't think of many situations where ranged precision will be useful, and the Sharp-Shooter feat is rendered totally irrelevant by Improved Precise Shot.

The kensai is utterly dumb. The class isn't so bad in game balance terms, but for ghu's sake, what on earth does it have to do with a kensai? It's nothing like a 1E kensai, or a S&F/OA weapon master/kensai. Even the underlying schtick, that of a character devoted to a master or ideal, has precious little to do with historical/folkloric kens[e]i.

The ronin is also pretty dumb, albeit not as much as the kensai. Again, the mechanics aren't too bad, but it's basically just a fighter/rogue wearing heavy armour. I wonder who decided that the concept of a wandering, masterless adventurer working for pay was unique and flavourful enough to base a prestige class on. At a guess, I'd say 99% of PCs are wandering adventurers working for pay. It's completely pointless.

A great opportunity was lost when they declined to name the master thrower as the master tosser. Oh yes.

The new bladesinger looks pretty good though. It's a pity they needed three iterations before they finally got it right (T&B, errata'd T&B, this one). Some reckon that it's weaker than the DMG arcane knight, but I think it's a tossup.


----------



## Darkness (Nov 27, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> A great opportunity was lost when they declined to name the master thrower as the master tosser. Oh yes.



 We should demand errata for that. If enough people complained, maybe they'd come to their senses.


----------



## the Jester (Nov 27, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> COMBAT PRESENCE [general, fighter, martial arts]
> 
> Your presence strikes fear on the battlefield.
> 
> ...




I think 2d4 rounds is too long.  I'd go with 1d4.  A -2 to most everything most all your enemies around you rolls is a pretty extreme penalty.  I'd also make it a standard action.  

As written, it's just about as good as a _prayer_ spell, and of course it's usable at will.  Abilities like this are exactly what I think prestige classes ought to have; the unique abilities that are require ultra-specialized training.  Cuz after all, anyone can already try to intimidate an enemy in combat- this just makes it extremely effective.

It might be okay as-is at the top of a feat chain, though.


----------



## hong (Nov 28, 2003)

Darkness said:
			
		

> We should demand errata for that. If enough people complained, maybe they'd come to their senses.




It's Darkness!!1!1! He has returned from the dead! Run for your lives!!11

Where have you been, Darkness? We Austrians gotta stick together, you know.


----------



## hong (Nov 28, 2003)

the Jester said:
			
		

> I think 2d4 rounds is too long.  I'd go with 1d4.  A -2 to most everything most all your enemies around you rolls is a pretty extreme penalty.  I'd also make it a standard action.




I'll make it a standard action, tone it down to 1d6 rounds (which is the same as Kiai Shout) and make it usable once/encounter. How's that?



> As written, it's just about as good as a _prayer_ spell, and of course it's usable at will.  Abilities like this are exactly what I think prestige classes ought to have; the unique abilities that are require ultra-specialized training.  Cuz after all, anyone can already try to intimidate an enemy in combat- this just makes it extremely effective.
> 
> It might be okay as-is at the top of a feat chain, though.




Well, I don't think there's anything inherently exceptional or unique about intimidating people on the battlefield. The standard use of the skill is pretty wimpy, as PS said; this just makes it more viable. You'll have to be fairly high level to get the most out of it anyway.


----------



## Gez (Nov 28, 2003)

hong said:
			
		

> It's Darkness!!1!1! He has returned from the dead! Run for your lives!!11
> 
> Where have you been, Darkness? We Austrians gotta stick together, you know.




It's a long while you havn't been to Topherland, heh? He hanged there with the other nuts. Err, tophs.


Anyway, to go back on the current hijack:



			
				hong said:
			
		

> - You no longer add your BAB to your Intimidate check. Being able to consistently intimidate someone twice your level is silly.




Another way to avoid that would be to let the foes add their own BAB to their own check. Metagame reasonning: It's roughly the way the 3.5 anti-feint Sense Motive check works. In game reasonning: "Feh, he thinks he's impressive, performing that old trick?". Result: Wizards and sorcerers (and commoners!) are more vulnerable to this intimidation than fighters or barbarians.


----------



## hong (Nov 28, 2003)

Gez said:
			
		

> It's a long while you havn't been to Topherland, heh? He hanged there with the other nuts. Err, tophs.




No, I haven't been with the low-hanging nuts for a while. Err, tophs. 



> Another way to avoid that would be to let the foes add their own BAB to their own check. Metagame reasonning: It's roughly the way the 3.5 anti-feint Sense Motive check works. In game reasonning: "Feh, he thinks he's impressive, performing that old trick?". Result: Wizards and sorcerers (and commoners!) are more vulnerable to this intimidation than fighters or barbarians.




That certainly makes sense. I'd rather not make it an "official" mechanic as such, though. As far as possible I want to remain within the framework of the existing rules, as opposed to making up new ones of my own.


----------

