Why the fuck do people have a problem with TOB? Seriously, I have no idea why.
The people that always say it's OP then immediately pick a full caster class, or a cleric/druid.
They're so full of shit.
They're also the same people that abuse psionics and prestige classes.
Just because YOU would play a swordsage and make some ridiculously bullshit Ddgelord mcTeleportsbehindyou doesn't mean I will.
I just want to play my warrior that specializes in hitting things hard and leading the group.
So your thread about guns>melee went to shit and people left so now you're starting this?
Are you bored?
Mainly I have a problem with people still talking about D&D 3.5
>>46177476
That wasn't my thread. I just posted in it.
I don't fucking care about guns vs melee. Want to see other players experiences with ToB, and if there's a legitimate reason that it should be banned.
I would say I am pretty bored, but that's not entirely relevant.
>>46177503
There isn't a legitimate reason it should be banned.
Most people have a problem with the thematics of it. It's literally "give your fighting guy magic spells" under a very thin veil of "they're not spells because they're labeled EX, really!"
They do a moderate job of maight fighty characters playable, they do a less good job of making them versatile, and they do a terrible job of making them unique and interesting to play outside of what spe- what maneuvers you hve picked.
>>46177457
this is about 5e, but it's even more relevant to 3e.
>The main takeaway I want to leave you with though is this: When you read something like Tunnel Fighter and think “Oh wow, that’s broken. They’d better nerf that.” Reconsider! Just because an option is better than a default option for the fighter--and to be clear, Tunnel Fighter is actually a pretty terrible option compared to Great Weapon Master for reasons I won’t go into here--does not mean that it is unbalanced. Right now, martial class design would have to go a long, long way to break the fighter class.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17AKvlmI-4urcO2YMt6HMJmCLUoayZuo1gT0wQfBXlmQ/edit
essentially, people compare new martial options with the existing martial options, rather than spellcasters. the warblade makes the fighter obsolete in a very obvious way, so it's considered OP. people don't notice that the fighter is already obsolete in less obvious ways.
It wasn't particularly "elegant." The design was clunky and didn't mesh particularly well with the rest of the game, which is also why I didn't particularly like psionics. Which is funny, because TOB and Psionics do mesh well together, and basically exist as a separate game from the rest of D&D.
Here's the thing, OP.
The people who call the ToB overpowered are the same people who don't believe in or dismiss Caster Supremacy as a non-issue. What they're saying is 'The Tome of Battle is overpowered compared to core fighters'. Which is correct. But it's also not an issue- It's a fix. The Tome of Battle is what D&D Martials always should have been.
It's a similar issue to the people who think Psionics are overpowered. I always love this image for explaining it.
>>46177673
Literally this, I'm a barb in 5e and the wizard complains about how much damage I deal and how "invulnerable" I'm, the joke? He's the one who always renders encounters moot, either with summons, battlefield control spells, Ages, he also knows how to fucking play it so he doesn't spend resources like a retard, but yeah, barbs are overpowered
>>46177807
I do find it funny that this seems to be more and more commonly said about 5e. When it first launched people were claiming caster supremacy was over, but apparently even if it was dialed down a little, it's still a real concern.
Then again, I've been salty as hell in 5e ever since they neutered it in the playtests.
>>46177457
Wizards and fighters are staples of TTRPGs. Nobody questions the nature of magic (it's magic I ain't gotta explain shit) while melee combat is expected to be plausible. This is fine in low-magic fantasy settings, where the best a wizard can do is throw around fireballs and do some minor debuffs. The problem arises when a high level wizard or cleric is a mortal god or the literal avatar of his deity while the fighter still swings around a sword, just much harder than before.
Tome of Battle was more or less a last ditch effort fo fix that (and probably a test for 4th edition) by drawing inspiration from Oriental mysticism (wuxia and anime). People hate this because they believed now it would be justifies to play something "stupid" like the wandering swordsmaster who spits fire out of his sword and can use secret katana techniques to cut his enemies into a million pieces. The problem is that this is the ONLY way to make high level fighters competitive with high level mages in a high fantasy setting.
ToB took a lot of inspiration from anime. And that's a GOOD thing.
The worst part is that 90% of feats/abilities I would like my character to have are denied. I asked to get Spirit Lion Totem for my Barbarian at ~level 5-6, got denied. I asked to get Leap Attack when I could get it, denied.
It seems like my DM's would prefer to limit martial classes to "hit things"
Although casters in this campaign have to purchase spell book/scrolls and read them/memorize them to get spells. So far, after one session, the highest amount of gold we have if the rogue who a pocket full of 80GP, whereas my dipshit Half-Orc Barbarian (named Kurtok) has 15gp. Prices for items stay the same.
I even suggested TOB be allowed if they had to buy their "spells" and train with them, and still got a no.
No fun allowed with character creation, apparently. The DM's are more than happy to allow random shit in the game, if it meets rules of cool and whatnot, which i appreciate.
Althought my friend basically gets whatever he wants because his rogue doesn't deal as much damage as I do. He got a bag of marbles, a sack of flour and a headband (sling) at level 1 on top of his gear, where I got literally a chain shirt and a longsword and that was it.
half tempted to take the feats anyway and tell the DM's to fuck themselves. Half the time when it comes to fights anyway, EVERYBODY ELSE dies because their characters cannot fight to save their lives, whereas my characters are 90% designed to beat something until it dies, so everybody looks at me with sad puppy eyes to kill the big thing. I'm half tempted to just let the party get TPK'd the next time it happens, put on a smug smile and say "Should have picked Tome of Battle faggots"
>>46178349
No gaming is better than bad gaming.
>>46177457
Surprised the anti-weeb crowd hasn't mobbed the thread yet, but I guess they're not home from school yet.
There's a certain strident portion of westaboo players who think naming your moves -- or even having special moves at all -- is weeb and that it doesn't belong in muh European fantasy.
They sadly don't know what they're fucking talking about, because named systems and named maneuvers have been a part of European swordplay for centuries.
>>46178443
>playing wandering duelist with ancient school called "destreza"
>GM starts yelling weeaboo while eyes injected in fury and foaming at the mouth
>Show pic related to my DM and tell him my character is going to use one of them
>He has a seizure, incoherent speech comes from his mouth, the only word we recognize is "weeb"
>>46178745
>kreigsmesser
Nice taste/
>>46178745
>>46178663
>tell me GM my character uses a cavalry saber
>show him this picture
>he kneejerks so hard he cracks the hardwood table
>starts yelling and shrieking and throwing dice, rulebooks, and anything else he can reach
>only word I can understand is "weeb"
>>46178443
Those are mostly STANCES not MOVES
And even in case of moves, moves in actual swordplay is SITUATIONAL, like, you react to enemy moves/stances to counter them when you see opportunity, not "gathering strentgh" and pulling SUPER DUPER STRONG HITprefferably shouting the name out loudout off ass to deal more dmg to enemy. Which is animu tier. Which is also what BOWFM is all about.
>>46177457
Partially, it's because 3.X took all the interesting shit you could do as a martial away and made it a feat. Want to grapple? Need a feat for it. Want to trip? Need a feat for it. Etc, etc.
Where before, it was more between the player and the DM, and usually some sort of dice roll.
>>46179026
Welp, school's out, it seems.
>>46178443
You jinxed it.
>That player who hates anime, anything related to Japan and that martials are able to contribute
>He always replies "Sorry, I don't watch animoo shit" to any example of European martial heroes doing heroics
>Plays always casters
>His characters always have spiked raven black hair and heterochromia and if he can be half demon half angel with only one wing the better
>Always yells the name of the spells he cast
>Doesn't get the irony
I know three fags like this, from different cities, they don't even know each other, srly, who breeds them?
>>46179119
Irony is difficult for people with no self-awareness
>>46179119
Echo chambers, hugboxes and freeform roleplaying forums.
I've never had a problem with TOB but i think thats because of how i view characters
Any character above level 5 is more than human/elf/whatever they're better than 98% of the population and capable of inhuman feats of skill
In setting I've always explained the fighters ability to get tail whipped by a dragon and live is due to his body being strengthened from absorbing ambient magic in the environment so more overt magical displays I have no problem with
>>46177503
>if there's a legitimate reason that it should be banned.
For people still playing 3.5, "martial classes shouldn't be able to do anything more interesting than full attack" is plenty legitimate reason.
>>46179161
What's that from?
Also, that seems like a good solution to the age old double standard of 'Magic can do anything, Martials must stringently obey realism'.
>>46179026
Please, point out where do you have to yell the name of the disciplines you use
Also this >>46179119
What's the difference between saying the name of the spell you cast and saying the name of the technique you're using? if you prefer I don't say shit and leave the GM in the darkness
>What do you do?
>Cast a spell/use a technique
>Which?
>Sorry, can't tell you, it's weeb if a do
>>46179182
That's one of the shorts from The Animatrix, a series of animated shorts based on The Matrix. I think that one is called Program.
>>46179182
Animatrix an animated film comprised of shorts set in the Matrix universe all done by different animation studios
I can't be fucked to care because no one outside of pathfinder society plays by the rules anymore.
Maybe on day the autists complaining about it will realize this and have a stroke. Have fun sleeping at night knowing your game could be utterly unrecognizable in the hands of another group.
>>46179182
Animatrix
>>46179227
>>46179205
>>46179193
Thanks, I thought I recognized it. I'd love to see a martial arts anime done in that style.
>>46179218
You joke about that but there really are people on this very board who will get legitimately upset knowing that people aren't playing a given game the exact way they play it.
Here, I'll trigger at least a few of them right now: I ran a D&D 3.5 game and banned core material. Nothing from the Player's Handbook was allowed. We all had lots offun.
>>46179218
>no one outside of pathfinder society plays by the rules anymore.
I fucking wish, I wish the last 5 groups I've been not followed the rules like it was life or death situations, srly, that would be so much better than "no, you can't because reasons"
Literally had to not play monk, brawler or any unarmed combatant due how fucked their rules are
>>46179244
N-not even Bards? why?
Also not even skill focus and similar feats? no power attack?
>>46179244
wait, I'm confused, doesn't that game run on prestige class installment packs that work off of core?
ToB is quite honestly brilliant and anyone that /hates/ it, or at least, every single person that I've met that has in the past 10 years, has hated it for some nonsensical reason or just flat out "Look, I just do".
I'm not saying the book is perfect (far from it) but I've never actually seen anyone convincingly argue that it's *bad*.
>>46179289
Oh, I should have clarified: No core classes. Feats were allowed.
>>46179292
It's been a while but I don't think anyone was interested in taking prestige classes.
>>46179292
No.
There are plenty of base classes available outside of core.
>>46179300
The only decent argument I heard was "It's gamist as fuck", then I just reply "And vanician casting isn't?" 99% of people starts foaming and die on the spot.
>>46179336
What happens to the other1%?
>>46179190
you really don't see difference between saying what you use in narration/OOC like
>my character uses spell/discipline X
and character himself speaking the name out loud while using?
And the first one was assumption, maybe taken too far but it seems to encourage such behaviour.
Still, the point is, named moves/stances while existing in real swordplay, haven't almost anything in common with those in this book, in method of use, style, essence, and everything else.
Using "look, my fechtbuchs have named moves too" argument as a proof that TOB is not animu is as retarded as saying that fucking fly agaric is a ladybug because it has dots and it's red.
TOB is animu as fuck, if you like it, fine, but don't expect people who don't like weeb stuff to like it too.
>>46179315
Ah, ok...still muh bard.
>>46179352
The ToB is anime inspired, but it's entirely possible to make a completely mundane martial character with it. The only difference between a ToB Warblade with the more understated disciplines and a core fighter is that a Warblade is actually competent. Dismissing an entire book because you dislike a single source element is retarded.
>>46179346
CHIM
>>46179352
What if I claim all those Chinese movies as inspiration instead of Japan?
>>46179161
And to be fair ToB is not the most ludicrous thing I've allowed as I once ran a game that used both DragonstarD&D in spaceand The Immortals Handbook
>>46179380
Those who have a problem with it are unable to tell the difference between Japan and China anyway.
>>46179380
Westaboos can't comprehend that China and Japan are two different countries and will still call it/you weeb
>>46179336
"Vancian is realistic because 3.5 is a realistic system!"
–A faggot I gamed with in college
>>46179352
One could argue that about swordsages and swordsage only disciplies, but the rest have nothing about anime, sure, they have names, but they're nothing than "throw enemy", "grapple enemy", "trip enemy", "ingore DR", etc without spending 1001 feats to accomplish just one of them.
You don't want to use ToB? ok, you're in your right, but players expect parity, so you better at least give martials 10 bonus feats without needing to meet the requirements every 2 levels.
>>46179372
Only 2 out of 9 disciplines have supernatural elements, and even those have (Ex) maneuvers as well. WotC's biggest mistake was giving the Desert Wind discipline (aka "I shoot fire out of my sword") a name that came alphabetically first.
>>46179336
>99% of people starts foaming and die on the spot.
>murder by RPG
JACK CHICK WAS RIGHT
>>46179408
>a system of memorizing spells
>realistic
>when you cast a spell it is gone from memory
>realistic
>magic
>fantasy dragon wizard elfgames
>realistic in any way at all
How do you even find these retards?
>>46179419
This, to be honest. Iron Heart and warblade should have been more prominently displayed as an example of what the book offers.
>Stance gives you +2 to Trip/Grapple/Disarm/Bullrush, etc maneuvers
WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEB
>>46179445
Go read some Jack Vance, faggot.
>>46179480
Calm the fuck down, son. I dislike D&D's "Vancian" magic but I appreciate Jack Vance's works and settings.
>>46179480
>any justification for magic whatsoever
>realistic
>>46179472
Iron Heart Surge is pretty ridiculous, though.
>>46179501
It's PREPARING spells, not memorizing them.
>>46179511
Is pretty needed though, call it a necesary evil.
>>46179511
Isn't it fixed with just a little bit more careful wording?
>>46179511
Because a hero has literally never shrugged off crazy shit through raw willpower, amirite?
Sure, the fucked wording is an issue if you have RAWtard faggots in the group, but it's just fine in normal use.
>>46179472
And this is why Path of War moved most of its supernatural disciplines to the sequel.
>>46179552
I love Path of War. For all Paizo's attempts to ruin it, DSP make Pathfinder actually playable.
>>46179571
Dreamscarred Press is the best thing to happen to Pathfinder. They know game balance better than any of the fucking hacks at Paizo.
>>46179589
Yeah. I really hope their Patreon gathers more supports and that their sales improve again after Paizo torpedoed them with their utterly wank 'official' psionics book.
I'd love to see DSP in a place where they could actually release their own fantasy RPG, too.
>>46179606
>official Pathfinder psionics
OH BOY OH BOY HERE WE FUCKING GO
I can't wait to see how broken and retarded this garbage trash shit is!
>>46179445
3.5 is a hell of a drug. This also happened in 2010, only a few years after 4e hit the shelves so "3.5 MASTER SYSTEM!" was in full swing.
Actually, that's not fair. 3.5 isn't the world's worst system, but because it was *the* well-known system for so long, for a lot of people it's the only game they played, so it's the only thing that exists, so it's the only right way to RPG, and because parts of 3.5 called wore a veneer of plausibility, that means all aspects of it are realistic as well as perfect. It breeds a weird mindset.
That shit's why you don't just play one system forever. I'm a lifelongGURPSfagand will probably play that system forever, but I also read and steal ideas from other systems and occasionally run games in said systems; for example, the last two games I've run were Ryuutama and Broken Worlds. It keeps things fresh and introduces new things I would've missed out on if I only read Official SJGames GURPS Products®.
>>46179606
>I'd love to see DSP in a place where they could actually release their own fantasy RPG, too.
Give it time, they're already making one.
>>46179642
Yeah, but IIRC they're having to dedicate resources to pathfinder supplements to pay the bills?
>>46179626
It's basically Pact Magic fluff + wizard mechanics + spells named after psionic powers.
>>46179606
Don't forget that they released a "PsyTech" supplement during the beta test of DSP's "PsiTech".
>>46179626
Psychic magic, not psionics. It's basically arcane spontaneous casting with no verbal or somatic components, ability to cast in armor, and a new coat of paint. And a slightly different spell lists, of course.
>>46179736
It's just so fucking petty. Paizo know they can't beat them in quality, so they're undermining them with half arsed crap that will still sell better because it's 'official'.
>>46179393
Game lasted about six months until be switched systems to Mutants&Masterminds because fuck if it wasn't easier
I don't think I've seen a thread complaining about ToB in a long time. I think I've seen this one not that long ago though
I personally wouldn't allow it if they don't have the maneuver last handy, and I'd probably talk other melee types into using it if one is. Otherwise I don't give a fuck. Is rather just play 5th ed
>>46177457
>Why the fuck do people have a problem with TOB?
I can't speak for everyone, but my personal issue is threefold. First, it tried to "fix" the caster/martial split by fundamentally turning martials into casters. That is to say, while the martials weren't necessarily casting spells, the subsystem of Weeaboo Fightan Magic is intentionally set up to be very much like a Vancian magic system. Casters and martials are supposed to feel very different, so a proper martial system should likewise have been very different.
Second, it comes at the issue from the wrong angle. The Caster/martial split in 3.X wasn't caused by martials being too weak, it was caused by casters being too strong. When there's a dude who can create his own plane of existence before lunch - and for lunch he's gonna go hang out with a god on another plane of existance - simply being able to swing a sword for +XdX damage isn't going to really bring the issue into balance.
Thirdly, and finally, it attempted to fix the martial problem not by fixing the martial classes, but by outright replacing them. This book doesn't improve the Fighter, Paladin, and Monk - it replaces them with the Warblade, Crusader, and Swordsage. That's kind of a major let-down for those of us who liked the previous classes for one reason or another.
Anyway, those are my issues.
>>46180151
I love ToB but I agree with all of your points. I thought for a long time about what the book does and what it tries to do to the game and I realized that for martials to be competitive with casters, the game would need to have its guts torn out and completely replaced, turning it into an entirely different game.
Which is why I don't play 3.5/PF anymore.
>>46180151
You're wrong in one thing though, martials are too weak, just because some, and I said some, of them deal enough damage doesn't mean they can do other shit or even survive one turn against 99% of the mid-high level threats
>>46180151
Wotc policy, they don't fix, they nerf or replace, see 5e, no beast master or wot4e fixes, just replaces
>>46180151
>That is to say, while the martials weren't necessarily casting spells, the subsystem of Weeaboo Fightan Magic is intentionally set up to be very much like a Vancian magic system. Casters and martials are supposed to feel very different, so a proper martial system should likewise have been very different.
Different feels are achieved through how the systems play, not how they are mechanically work. For a real world example, cars. Sportscars and Trucks handle very differently, but it's all the same mechanics under the hood.
For the rest of your points, the biggest issue is that the problem is so deeply ingrained into the system that the only way to actually fix it is to scrap everything and start over. ToB was a bandaid because that was all it could ever be.
>>46180240
Most of those mid- to high-level threats, are threats because of their spellcasting ability. I've seen Fighter builds that can solo the Tarrasque using nothing more than basic magical arms and armor (excepting the wish/miracle needed to kill it permanently, of course). But they die against any ancient wyrm because the ancient wyrm, in addition to being a really big dragon, is also a fully levelled Sorcerer by default.
>>46180226
5th Edition, sahib. 5th Edition.
5th Edition is the 3rd Edition we WOULD have gotten back in 2000 if Wizards of the Coast had already learned all the lessons of the extant 3rd and 4th editions. It FEELS like AD&D.
>>46177457
The biggest problem I have regarding ToB is its fanbase. It has the most loud, obnoxious, and tasteless advocates of anything in 3.X. If I were ever to run another 3.5 campaign, the first thing I'd say is no ToB. Any players who freak out would be dismissed from the group. Those who seem to be neutral about it get to stay and can actually use ToB if they want. They passed the test.
>>46177947
The problem with this line of reasoning is that it's clearly the wrong way to solve the problem.
There's an expectation in more down to earth fantasy that magic is the thing that breaks the limit of the plausible and natural, and it's often an outside or alien force rather than something that is central to every part of life.
Giving "magic" to fighters and non-mystical classes breaks the expectation of the audience, and most people who read more sword and sorcery than shounen are pretty turned off by doublejumping and supersecret ki force techniques.
The core of the problem is that it's retarded to make playable spellcasters so powerful that they make the rest of the characters obsolote and can magic themselves around many of the obstacles that you'd expect to find.
This doesn't mean that it's retarded to have them IN THE SETTING, in fact it's pretty standard in fantasy, the problem is letting someone play that character, alongside normal soldier and adventurer types, in a game that focuses heavily on combat as a way of differentiating between classes.
If you just limited the playable casters more and made them fairly unremarkable by wizard standards, or magic school dropouts, apprentices etc instead of "I fly and I blow up rooms".
That way the people who want balance get balance, the people who want settings that aren't dumb as shit get settings that aren't dumb as shit, and people who don't actually want medieval fantasy warriors to turn into Son Goku get what they want.
And don't give me any of the usual bullshit mythical warrior hero bullshit, that shit is not what most people picture when they picture fantasy.
Conan or Aragorn never doublejumps or shoots fire with their swords.
>>46180285
>Different feels are achieved through how the systems play, not how they are mechanically work
Truth. But when I played a Warblade, I felt like a caster.
>>46180382
what about those who, instead, decide to just make wizards and say fuck it to martials period?
I mean, "do you allow ToB" is my code for "will you be running a normal campaign, or do you want me to pull out my wizard bullshit"
>>46180425
They also get to stay. This is just a screening device to make sure any whiny weeaboos don't make it past character creation. It has nothing to do with the party's power level.
>>46180240
I think he's talking about weakness/strength in terms of options. Casters aren't powerful just because they can do X better than martials, they've better because they can do that on top of being able to do 132 things that martials can never hope to do. Boosting a martial's damage or adding an effect to their attacks doesn't really do much to bring them in-line with the wizard who can do literally anything.
At the same time, I think if you replaced the unfocused "do everything all the time" casting classes like Wizard with focused thematic classes like Beguiler, you're doing a lot to lessen the gap. A martial that can do really fucking cool things in combat still isn't that much compared to Wizard McGodking, but they are a good match with the Illusion-centered caster because each have their strong points (direct action and misdirection, respectively).
>tl;dr it's not enough to boost Tier 5/6 classes to 3/4, we need to drop 1/2 to 3/4 as well.
>>46180151
>Thirdly, and finally, it attempted to fix the martial problem not by fixing the martial classes, but by outright replacing them. This book doesn't improve the Fighter, Paladin, and Monk - it replaces them with the Warblade, Crusader, and Swordsage. That's kind of a major let-down for those of us who liked the previous classes for one reason or another.
How would you have "fixed" those classes without replacing them, though?
Better feats? Hadn't worked for the past 5 years.
Alternate class features? You're limited to the power level of what you're replacing, which is a problem when those classes don't have much to give in the first place.
Rewrite the classes? Might as well give them a different name. Calling them the same as the old class just results in confusion.
>>46180386
I am actually pretty sure conan did both of those things
I am also pretty certain people who had power rings did those things in LoTR
>>46180386
>Conan or Aragorn never doublejumps or shoots fire with their swords.
Neither do most ToB characters. One class out of the three has access to I Like Fire: the Martial Art, and anyone that halfway knows what they're doing isn't gonna grab it because fire is shit unless you're a caster with the metamagic to bypass resistance/immunity
>>46180455
why would I, a weeaboo, ever choose anything but a refluffed wizard?
>>46180472
Conan did have a sword that spontaneously developed fire powers because he's a special snowflake beloved by Mitra. Gandalf had Narya, the ring of fire, and it did so little that it never even mattered that he had it. He certainly never set Glamdring on fire with it. And neither of them ever double-jumped because that's very specific to video games and things intentionally aping video games.
>>46180397
Anon, that's just called "having options in play." It's a good thing that most character concepts in other systems enjoy.
>>46180386
>Conan [...] never [...] shoots fire with their swords.
Well...I mean, there was the Phoenix on the Sword. And Khemsa's magic belt, and the Heart of Ahriman did some neat stuff. And of course Conan actually once outright cast a spell by D&D standards when he scribed the mark of Jebbel Sag onto a tree to allow him and Balthus to rest safely for a night.
>>46180467
>How would you have "fixed" those classes without replacing them, though?
Adding in features without removing anything, like what Pathfinder did for the Rogue in Pathfinder Unchained. And keeping the class named "Fighter". Names are important.
The goal is only to get the Fighter up to Tier-3. Reducing the power of magic - the other side of the problem - is obviously beyond the scope of Weeaboo Fightan Magic.
>>46180489
>refluffed
That would probably be another red flag.
>>46179550
Even discounting the most illogical RAW uses (like a vampire destroying the Sun by using IHS), it's still badly written, working on some things where it doesn't make much sense (like, being able to willpower away any curse, which RAW also cures every other person with the same curse) yet not working on things that it thematically should (like using you willpower to break away from mind-control).
>>46180563
I don't think you can count that as a red flag since pretty much everyone who's played more than one table top game does that to some extent with their characters.
>>46180537
>Anon, that's just called "having options in play." It's a good thing that most character concepts in other systems enjoy.
See, the thing is that when I played a Jedi in the d20 Star Wars, I didn't feel like a wizard, I felt like a Jedi. When I played a Rogue and did skill tricks and stuff from Complete Scoundrel, I didn't feel like a wizard, I felt like a Rogue.
But when I played a Warblade, I felt like a caster.
>>46178443
Oh look, it's the weaboo apologist squad.
The "manuscripts" were not something that the average soldier or professional fighter ever had any contact with.
It's kind of like how we have names for tons of items and weapons now that were not actually used at the time and that the average person would have called something else.
The guy who's chiefly responsible for all this shit was an italian noble who never served on the frontlines in war and made up a life story about how he traveled the land to defeat different "masters" who wanted his secret techniques or who offended him by being lame at fighting, none of whom ever wounded him in the numerous duels he allegedly fought with sharp weapons.
Basically there's no solid proof for anything before the point he started teaching people (jobs he got based on credentials nobody has been able to verify).
And even if it was true, naming your moves is weaboo as fuck.
>>46180596
[citation needed]
>>46180532
anon, double jumps existed even before video games. Even my pre-videogamesanimehas it.
>>46180558
You just namedropped 3 instances of a warrior using magical items and one where he used a symbol that requires no magic from the user beyond knowing the way to make the symbol. With his finger. In sand.
None of that is remotely the same as "punching enough orcs to be able to transcend human martial limits and do fightan magic" and you're a dick for misrepresenting it to support your argument.
>>46177947
>The problem is that this is the ONLY way to make high level fighters competitive with high level mages in a high fantasy setting.
You could make the spells cost alot of mana, or have huge penalties or whateaver
>>46180386
>Conan or Aragorn never doublejumps or shoots fire with their swords.
And Gandalf never turned invisible, flew all over the place, and killed a room full of orcs with a save-or-die spell before retreating into a pocket dimension to take a nap.
>>46180582
I feel bad for you if you think it's normal to refluff your characters. If you have to completely separate the mechanics you want to use from the things they represent in the game world, it means that A: your character doesn't fit in the game world, and B: your priorities are backwards because you think the game is just a vehicle for its mechanics.
>>46180660
so what you are saying is that fighters should get free magical items as part of class progression.
>>46180621
This is pretty basic knowledge, there are no sources for any of the shit Fiore said he did before he started being mentioned as a fencing teacher, and the only military position he's held, that we have records off, are when they made him something like inspector of city armaments or something like that, a cushy gig he got based on connections and minor celebrity status.
>>46180679
No, but if he HAD, people would have said "well he's a wizard and I guess that makes sense", but everyone would have called bullshit if aragorn did a kamehameha and frodo started shadowstepping.
>>46180680
anon refluffing is so incredibly common I can only draw the conclusion you don't actually play games.
Hell, the games ACTIVELY ENCOURAGE you to refluff any spells you cast to something more personalized. And they also actively encourage you to use nearest-fit stats for unusual weapons and the like.
>>46180680
What if I'm just renaming them?
Like, I call my monk a "Brawler" and rename martial arts "Marquis of Queensbury Rules".
>>46179445
>implying christians believe moving faster than light is possible just because god can do it
>>46180653
Source? Do you think that double-jumping just means jumping twice in a row? There's more to it than that. The second jump has to be off of a non-existent surface in clear defiance of Newtonian mechanics.
>>46180596
Even if that's true, how is it relevant? He was saying the manuscripts and their techniques were European. Italy is part of Europe, yes?
>>46180662
3aboos freaked the fuck out over power-point using psions (which is just mana-using wizards by another name) and true namers showed how skill+penalty casting was borked because 3.5's skill system a shit and WotC can't into balance. There's also the more focused caster classes that no one used.
There were solutions out there for caster supremacy, it's just that no one wanted them because people with an issue with it just left for better systems, people that liked it kept on liking it, and newbies that didn't know better were eventually pulled into one camp or the other (more often the latter one).
>>46180720
>source
Rotoscoped gymnasts.
The double-jump I am talking about is tossing your legs into the air when you jump so as to produce a flinging rotation that gives you a distinct second lifting period.
>>46180476
Anon, please, they never read ToB, they just spit the same memes about it. If you repeat that ToB is DBZ/Naruto enough times everybody will believe it.
>>46180750
On that note, I would like everyone to take a moment to appreciate how fucking insane gymnastic feats are.
>>46180455
>>46180382
And the bait has come
>>46180590
>But when I played a Warblade, I felt like a caster.
I played hundreds of casters and non casters and this never happened to me. Must be me.
>>46180596
>And even if it was true, naming your moves is weaboo as fuck.
This.
Remove spell lists.
>>46179631
>GURPS and Ryuutama
My nigga
>>46180386
The question is, what level are Conan and Aragorn, and what level does the Fighter become more powerful than them and should be expected to do things that Conan and Aragorn couldn't?
D&D doesn't have one set power level, it has many power levels. There's going to be a period where your characters resemble LotR characters or Conan characters, but if you keep levelling up, they will eventually resemble something else. If you try and stick the Fighter to the Conan formula even when the rest of the game is turning into something else, you'll probably end up with a class that can't keep up. It's not a question of "either Conan, or anime" but "when Conan, when anime".
>>46180662
>You could make the spells cost alot of mana, or have huge penalties or whateaver
it wont work, because many d&d players, think that if they are a wizard, they should be wizarding.
So the moment they run out of spells on the day, they, they try to sleep as quicly as possible.
I mean one of the points of wizard is you cant cast spells forever, but they nullfy this problem by expecting the game to stop when they run out of spells
>>46180771
Nope, if my 400lbs fat kentucky butt can't do it is magic and therefore impossible for martials.
>>46180706
>>46180704
Every now and then it may be justified to fill in some gaps in the rules to make something that clearly belongs in the setting. But when players do it instead of the DM, 90% of the time it's some cringeworthy shit like refluffing a wizard to be Cloud Strife or taking the (already false) conceit that Eastern martial arts are just as effective when unarmed and trying to apply it to an even wider context.
>>46179445
>>when you cast a spell it is gone from memory
3e spells are "prepared", not "memorized". You basically spend an hour setting up the spells to fire off when you make very specific gestures and words. It's like loading a series of guns.
>>46180873
Also reserve feats from Complete Mage, where you prepare a spell and get an at-will supernatural ability that's still miles better than anything a martial can pull off. Also +1 CL to a group of spells.
Speaking of martials having their rights respected, does anyone have that homebrew martial class that allowed excess damage to "overflow" onto other enemies 13th Age style? I can't find it on any of the homebrew sites.
>>46180912
You joke about that but see pic related
>>46181015
Is this guy the brother of fatal developer or what?
>wants realism in rpg games
>makes pathfinder
>>46181015
That was the post that made me ban ALL errata from Paizo.
ALL of it.
>>46181015
>Weapon cord is move action
>Retrieving a weapon from ground is move action
Literally for what purpose do you introduce weapon cords if they don't help at all?
>>46181065
I can't think of any non-typo errata for PF that wasn't bad.
Fuck you, it's my table, crane wing works.
Fuck you, it's my table, the magus can take precise strike with flamboyant arcana.
Weapon finesse is free for all creatures with Dex 13.
Swashbuckler gets piranha strike at level one.
Fuck you, it's my table, the paladin can be LN.
>>46181098
If you put it down then it gets dragged around with you, which is redundant as most games I've played have players able to "sheath" a weapon as a free action instead of just dropping it like a moron.
>>46181206
>Cestus description clearly states that monks can use their unarmed monk damage with it
>"Sorry, monks can't use their unarmed damage, it's not a nerf, it was always like that (RAI), if there was a mistake it was you the one who got it all wrong"
I know they treat us like retards, but it's very insulting when they call us retards to our face
>>46177854
What were the things from the playtests that got neutered, out of curiosity?
>>46181231
>If you put it down then it gets dragged around with you
This is not a problem till you have a way to get pounce, martials literally don't move after the first turn.
>>46181306
Fighters. Of course, you might say.
Those maneuvers that the Battlemaster has? More or less at-will for every fighter.
But that would make fighters competent, so it had to go.
>>46181306
>inb4 Martial Dice
The bloat they caused was crap and the maneuvers you could spend it on were usually worse than just attacking.
>>46181306
Fighters had a regenerating pool of superiority dice every round, Dragon Sorceror had a neat mechanic where they gained draconic features as they ran out of spells, etc.
Really, martials are fine in 5e- casters are just too strong, even after all the measures keeping them in check.
>>46181344
You're forgetting about monks, who still got the shotest stick even in the final product.
>b-but quivering palm
Literally only one path gets it and it comes at fuckign 17th level, till then monks are the worst damage dealers, depend entirely on a scarce as fuck resource to even do shit and once they are out are useless
>Muh mobility
Resource
>Muh stun
Resource
>Muh...
Resource
>>46181344
Don't forget how they banned people for pointing out obvious problems with the game. As far as I'm concerned, Paizo is not the developer of Pathfinder. Dreamscarred Press is. I award credit based on competency, and Paizo is lacking in competency, ergo; they did not create it.
>>46181002
Avalanche Knight.
>>46181394
To be fair, Monks are so bad, I had completely forgotten about their existence.
>>46181413
>As far as I'm concerned, Paizo is not the developer of Pathfinder. Dreamscarred Press is
That's a humongous insult to the DSP devs.
>>46181015
If I, a pasty, uncoordinated nerdling can't perform a certain trick with random crap from my office, on the first try, then it's impossible for inhumanly dexterous warriors with years of training to do it with tools specifically built for that purpose!
But making twenty foot fireballs out of bat poop? Nah, that's totally realistic.
>>46181448
You know what, I've seen tons of people say they are overpowered because Martial arts with quarterstaff, no wonder wotc treat us like retards, 99% of the fanbase are just morons with the IQ of a bacteria.
>>46181394
Monks aren't dead weight, at least.
Rangers got fucked, though. They don't scale worth shit.
>>46180590
>when I played a Warblade, I felt like a caster.
Have you tried not taking Martial Study (Shadow Hand)? It gives you out-of-combat flexibility, I know, but it also makes you feel like a caster.
If I'm a warblade, the range of my impact on the world is the range of my weapon. If I'm a rogue, the range of my impact on the world is the range of my tools. If I'm a wizard, the range of my impact in the world is whatever the spells say. This is sufficiently differentiated as far as I'm concerned, and if you don't have any factual basis for why you "felt like a caster" with ToB I don't see why we oughtn't to write you off as an aberration
>>46181508
>Rangers got fucked, though. They don't scale worth shit.
Rangers are pretty useless, sure, they basically are outclassed by a fighter with outlander background. But hunters deal tons of damage and are probably in the top3 of damage dealers in 5e.
Monks are outdamaged even by bards and a rogue can do almost anything a monk does but better, specially the nimble mobile warrior stuff, srly, cunning action only costs a bonus action for rogues but monks have to pay 1 ki point to do half of that shit.
>>46180386
>Conan or Aragorn never doublejumps or shoots fire with their swords.
You know that by D&D standards Conan, Aragorn and the rest are level 10 max, right? This is why E6 exists as a viable solution to make the game fun for everyone.
>>46180662
That would be my solution, to make the game world per se low magic but have certain worldshattering spells (level 9 spells by D&D standards) that can only be cast under very specific circumstances. For example, I'd say the higher level summon spells would need a certain number (5 or more) of casters of at least a certain high level and a specific ritual every one of the casters needs to be familiar with.
So low level spells remain spells, while high level ones become rituals.
>>46177854
I still new caster supremacy was a thing. But it's not nearly as bad, and a martial actually has a decent chance of beating a caster in a white room challenge. When it used to be more like 1%/99%. 40%/60% starts to look really good.
>>46181491
That's an insult to bacteria.
>>46177854
5th edition reduced the gap between martials and castes considerably, as martials are now generally much better at dealing and taking damage and can actually do things other than full attack, while casters lost some of their utility, but at the end of the day casters still have a lot more utility and therefore can solve a lot more problems than martials can, who are still primarily good at hitting things in melee.
At least in 5th edition anybody can gain access to ritual spells very easily, so martials can get some caster abilities as well.
>>46181626
Simple solution.
>"Solving a problem with magic means you don't get experience points unless it was a particularly creative or unorthodox method. Subject to DM discretion."
>>46181491
>1d8+Dex+1d4+Dex
That's overpowered? my rogue deal, at first level, 2d6+Dex+1d6+Dex and nobody bat an eye over that
>>46181766
Crossbow Expert rogue? Yes, that's a pretty good feat.
In that scenario, though, the monk would also have a feat. The monk's damage will also get a pretty decent boost at level 2.
>>46177583
This.
>>46177457
I have to admit to being one of the boneheaded hates way back when it came out. Honestly, 3.PF is shit. It makes a bunch of assumptions about wealth, magic, and how powerful magic should be, and anything that doesn't go along with it is sub-optimal (or just outright shit).
Worse, I think a lot of us who hated TOB were in denial about how weak the Fighter actually was.
Fighter:
>Full BAB
>d10 HD
>Good Fort, Bad Ref, Bad Will
>2+Int skills; Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Ride, Swim
>All simple and martial Weapons, all armor, shields
>Bonus Feats (most basic combat feats require Power Attack, Dodge, or Combat Expertise, necessitating 13 in Str, Dex, or Int minimum)
Warrior:
>Full BAB
>d8 HD
>Good Fort, Bad Ref, Bad Will
>2+Int skills; Climb, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Ride, Swim
>All simple and martial weapons, all armor, and shields
>No other class features
Commoner:
>Half BAB
>d4 HD
>No Good Saves
>2+Int skills; Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Jump, Listen, Profession, Ride, Spot, Swim, Use Rope
>Only proficient with a single simple weapon
>No other class features
Expert:
>3/4 BAB
>d6 HD
>Bad Fort, Bad Ref, Good Will
>6+Int skills; May choose ANY TEN skills to be class skills
>All simple weapons, and light armor
>No other class features
Aristocrat:
>3/4 BAB
>d8 HD
>Bad Fort, Bad Ref, Good Will
>4+Int Skills; Appraise, Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Forgery, Gather Information, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Knowledge (all, taken individually), Listen, Perform, Ride, Sense Motive, Speak Language, Spot, Swim, Survival
>All simple and martial weapons, all armor, shields
>No other class features
Adept:
>Half BAB
>d6 HD
>Bad Fort, Bad Ref, Good Will
>2+Int skills; Concentration, Craft, Handle Animal, Heal, Knowledge (all skills, taken individually), Profession, Spellcraft, Survival
>All simple weapons
>Spells up to 5th level
>Summon Familiar
>>46181829
Not him, but there aren't many feats that do stuff to monks, sure as hell there're zero that increase their damage.
>pretty decent boost at level 2
How? FoB? you can only do that twice very short rest, yeah, it's 1d4+Dex boost, but isn't worth it at low levels, you better use those for Dodge or disengage.
>>46177583
This. Its the same reason that Synthesist summoner is banned in Pathfinder adventure leagues, despite being weaker than a normal summoner, because it has more hit points than any martial at first level and fights better. Then the fools cry OP because its become clear how outclassed they really are.
>>46181906
Funnily enough the Adept is actually a pretty well-balanced casting class. Ditching clerics or druids and having Adepts instead isn't the worst idea in the world, even if it is a bit boring from a class abilities perspective.
>>46181992
Synth is to paizo martials what Barb is to monks.
>>46182226
No disagreements there.
I think that what's most criminal though, is that a properly built Adept can spank a fighter, since Adepts have access to both Cleric and Wizard spells.
It underscores just how bad the Fighter really is, in that it can't compete with an NPC class that should by all rights, be weaker.
>>46177457
Im an exalted player so pcs being able to do impossible sword/fist bullshit is kinda par for the course. 'weebness' can be sort of a fluff thing, IE it depends on how you describe a particular ability, but alot of stuff in there isnt weeb
>>46182226
Adept casting + PF Wizard class features (including access to archetypes) = ?
>>46182510
Weeb nowadays means "do stuff above what fatasses can" so anything is weeb now, specially stuff of legend even if that legend comes from fucking medieval Europe or acient Greek, that's the most weeb you can go.
>what about China and Japan?
That now isn't called weeb, it doesn't have a name, is just accompanied by a seizure and foaming mouth.
>>46181394
Is "resource" the new "dies to removal"?
>>46182510
>"That's Weaboo," said the wizard, before flying away and using magic to make people his friends
>>46182773
Is this the wotc excuse for bad design?
>>46182807
It's the way players dismiss everything wotc does as too weak, even if it's actually overpowered. The best spells in D&D are a limited resource and always have been, just like the best creatures in Magic die to removal. In both cases it doesn't matter.
The monk being able to stunlock boss monsters and make more attacks than the fighter is really good, even though it's based on a limited resource. This is because D&D adventures don't go on for dozens of encounters before each rest. Very often the story will demand only one fight between long rests.
>>46182773
You have "your level" ki points and doing almost anything costs you 1+ ki points, as long as you spend ki you are able to be almost as good as other martials (almost as good as a fighter at making attacks, almost as good as a rogue at being mobile, etc), once you're out you are worse than other martials. Even if speding ki like a madman you're still outdamaged by 75% of the classes (as long as they aren't retards and decide to go unarmed or stab themselves in the eyes).
And lets not even talk about Wot4e monk.
>>46182931
Maybe are just my groups, but the DMG states that the norm should be 6-8 encounters per day and 1-2 short rests, and believe me, on these terms stuff like Warlock and Monks suck gay asses.
>>46183021
The DMG has always stated a lot of things that don't happen in practice. Consider the campaigns that you've actually played. Have you frequently had that many encounters between rests? More likely you've had one or two encounters in total between rests, and you don't have to worry about conserving resources so much as spending them all before they refresh and the ones you didn't use are wasted.
>>46177457
Because it gives melee nice things, and the people who hate it think it's some kind of sacred cow law of the universe that Melee Does Not Get Nice Things.
>>46182984
>>46183021
I think that's because feats and the new cantrips, if you don't allow feats, or don't allow GWM, Sharpshooter and the new melee cantrips, monks aren't that bad.
>>46183070
In my groups is usually 3-4 encounters per rest, and on average 1 rest per day, and yeah, that fucks up warlocks and monks like I said.
>inb4 battlemasters
We had one, and it really didn't affect him much because he didn't need to use his maneuvers a lot to stay relevant
>>46183021
Combat is time consuming and, for many groups, just there to serve the story. Unless you're playing a very combat focused game, for most groups it's quite rare to have more than one or two combats happen over the course of a single day, unless perhaps you're in a dungeon, dealing with a time limit of some sort or approaching the climax of the campaign.
>>46181413
>talking about 5e's playtests
>bring up Pathfinder
>>46183021
Back during the playtest a lot of testers found that characters tended to fight for about 20 rounds between long rests, with I think three or four short rests taken during that time. From what I've heard, a lot of groups actually only go about 15 rounds of combat between long rests with one or two short rests taken during that time. So, this means that characters based around Long Rest abilities have a greater edge in combat than ones based on Short Rest abilities, at least if we assume that 20 rounds and 3-4 short rests was the intended goal. And... even back then, at 20 rounds, martial characters were getting outclassed and outperformed, so it's only been exacerbated.
I think part of the problem with the Martial / Caster power disparity is how Martials rely heavily on Short Rests and Casters rely on Long Rests instead. It means that in very long and extended combat scenarios Martials tend to pull ahead, but Casters excel at shorter adventuring days. This wouldn't be that much of an issue if hit points and attrition weren't already built into the system, such that characters WANT to stop and rest as early as possible because that's how they get back their hit points, possibly one of the most valuable resources and one that EVERy character needs to manage - martials expecially, since they can expect to be taking the brunt of the punishment in battle.
I think the solutions to this problem involve one or more of the following changes:
>Make short rest abilities stronger
>Make long rest abilities weaker
>Extend how long adventuring parties can expect to fight between long rests
>Hand out the benefits of a Long Rest after X number of encounters, like with 13th Age
>Give all classes a mixture of Short and Long Rest abilities, like with 4E
>>46177618
>The design was clunky and didn't mesh particularly well with the rest of the game
Just like everything in 3.PF?
>>46182782
Holy shit sir, you may have captured the very essence of /tg/
Your post if a fucking thing of beauty. Goddamn.
>>46179445
Use spell point rules instead.
>>46180151
This Guy, he gets it.
From what i can gather it got obnoxious to many players and DMs since it was popular and childish with most of these people having no self-awareness at that time.
So people over-reacted.
The inherent problem lies in the fact that the game is class based while most of the settings for it are high magic making being a non-caster obsolete.
In a high magic setting dividing magic from martial stuff is a bad idea because who's to say you can't enhance your own physical strength with it or some basic magic if it's widely spread.
5e has Magic initiate and Ritual caster feats to address this to some degree and with things like Booming blade, Green flame blade and Sword burst you can get all the weaboo fightan magic you want while people somehow don't complain about it.
There's also the battle-master features which i think should be made a feature tied to all the martial classes (barbarians, fighters, paladins, monks and rangers).
In the end i think the streamlined 5e system is good enough for DnD since it can't touch the sacred cow called classes.
>>46178876
use a messer, i remember a story of a GM who said "no you can't use a european katana"
>>46177947
>ToB took a lot of inspiration from anime. And that's a GOOD thing.
no. no its not.
>>46184250
GM's who say this kind of shit with no real understanding of how these weapons were used cause me an undue amount of rage.
>>46182984
Monks are weird because they are designed to be separate from both other martials and casters without being even a proper half or 1/3d caster and having resource hungry features.
They are okay with the exception of the Wot4E monk but there's already decent fixes out there for it and most DMs will gladly let you have those.
I think changing their Hp die to d10 and maybe giving them something like Wis mod bonus to damage during attack action at some accessible level (6 fits with ki enhanced strikes) would be enough to balance them out with other martials.
>>46177807
>He's the one who always renders encounters moot, either with summons, battlefield control spells, Ages
Have you pointed this out to him?
If he really only cares about doing the maximum possible HP damage, have you offered to trade roles?
>>46184056
>u can get all the weaboo fightan magic you want while people somehow don't complain about it
It's semantics in ToB its not called magic it's called stances its not spells its maneuvers
This might not be a great comparison considering every thing in this thread but...
I think it's the same reason people dislike naruto they went in thinking it was about ninja but you end up with wizards throwing crazier and crazier spells at each other
So just replace a few words chakra=magic,ninja=wizard
magic=stance,spell=maneuver
>>46178876
>Cavalry saber
>Weeb
Does he think riding elephants is 'India-exclusive', too?
>>46181548
THIS.
I have beef with that cunning action crap.
Why does it cost monks ki to do that?
Also quite frankly most of the mid game features also suck ass for them.
>>46184330
>undue
No, anon. You are totally due that rage.
>>46181656
>Using your class abilities means you get fucked
You are literally retarded.
>>46184360
>but there's already decent fixes out there for it and most DMs will gladly let you have those.
Please, introduce me to these DMs, because out of the 6 5e GMs I had none wanted to improve wot4e, all of them said it was perfectly fine. 2 of them even banned sun soul monk because it was "flatout better than wot4" and we can't allow that
>>46177457
Best way to play 3.5:
Ban Wizards. Replace Fighters with Warblades and Monks with Swordsages.
>>46184586
>not replacing paladins with crusaders
wut?
>>46184405
Well that's true.
Still spell like abilites already existed before that.
It's probably the asian naming sense that made people cringe at it.
>>46184487
I haven't met a single DM during this year that hasn't accepted the ''Wot4E remastered'' homebrew.
The authors also made sure to argument it properly why it's on pair with shadow monks in ki cost for spells.
>>46184605
I leave it as an option between them.
>>46184586
>Ban Wizards
Dude, Wizard may be iconic of the problem, but nearly all full casters are still the problem. A Sorcerer isn't as good as a wizard but is still far better than a Fighter and notably better than a Warblade.
And if you want the real monster of 3.5 D&D, it's the Druid.
>>46184791
>>46184586
Alternatively, allow them to play those classes but only allow up to 7 levels in them.
>>46184791
I just really hate Wizards. The idea that anyone can learn Magic by studying has always struck me as terrible.
>>46184460
I might be, it's more than they, and their idiocy, are worth.
>>46184927
Well, not anyone. You have to be pretty smart: you can't even attempt to learn a spell unless your Intelligence score is equal to the spell's level +10. So if your Intelligence is 13 then you'll never even be able to attempt to learn more than 3rd-level spells, and *that's* assuming that you even make it to 5th level with an INT that low (for a wizard).
>>46184250
>>46178876
>>46178745
>>46184330
Yes, of course some real Europeans have used gently curved single-edged swords. But it's also true that players who specifically want to use a sword with that kind of curve are most likely trying to get their katana fetish past the radar.
>>46185039
>Katana fetish
Fuck those above average sidearms, I have a messer fetish.
>>46184927
I think this is the core of 3.5's issues: as the only game in town for a long fucking time, people try and treat it like a generic fantasy system. It's not. It doesn't do all fantasy types. If you don't like your setting have people that smart their way into magic, spells being limited to x/day rather than risking backlash or having a direct cost, or don't like spells being locked-in repeatable effects, then D&D will struggle with your setting. If you want to run a gritty mc grimdark game, your campaign will struggle with D&D's HP system amongst other things. If you wan't to run a political machinations game, you will struggle with the social resolution mechanics (or scrap them for system-agnostic freeform) and economic implications.
D&D is not the only way to run a fantasy magic game.
>>46185039
>But it's also true that players who specifically want to use a sword with that kind of curve are most likely trying to get their katana fetish past the radar.
And we can't have people enjoying things you don't like!
Seriously though, if they aren't sperging about HONORABU HEIRROOM NIPPON WEAPON FOLDED TEN GORILLIAN TIMES and call it a messer rather than a katana, why the fuck does the fact they call it a katana in their heads bother you so much? If they're an obnoxious shit, kick 'em, but if they're enjoying themselves with their not!katana and not making the game less enjoyable for anyone else, what's the big deal?
>>46184927
Bear in mind that originally, that wasn't the case. Being a Wizard meant that you could actually use magic, unlike everyone else. It's just that being smarter meant you were better at it, and that spells were essentially mental "machines" that fell apart after using them (hence requiring them to be memorized again and again).
It was based on Jack Vance's novels. Personally, I prefer psionics, but I get the original intentions for the magic system.
Having "anyone" learn magic by studying is a terrible idea, which is what 3.PF implies with its system. In OD&D, B/X, and the Rules Cyclopedia, casting spells is not tied to ability scores.
>>46185228
>Having "anyone" learn magic by studying is a terrible idea
Sorcerer is also a class, which means "anyone" also has draconic blood or whatever the justification is for innate magic just waiting to be tapped. Classes for stuff like that's weird.
>>46185619
It's even funnier when you realize that the Sorcerer was essentially a house rule from 2e that got nerfed and codified for 3.0.
And then they had to add the "dragon blood" angle for no reason at all.
>>46185713
Makes you wonder why there aren't Sorcerer Noble houses bemoaning the dwindling purity of their blood, and the blood of their supporting houses.
>>46185228
Hardly anyone. Only a small portion of people have the potential to acquire PC class.
>>46177807
He's fucking with you. I do this shit all the time and go "wow so much damage! <Martial class> Sure is cool! OP damage!" so that I can keep the rest of the party thinking that they contribute just as much as I do. Its a trick to basically be allowed to play your bullshit as long as possible.
>>46185959
>He's fucking with you
Not really, he gets mad, like really mad, you can't fake mad like that. He even got the GM to retroactively ban GWM.
>>46179352
Gandalf never named any of his own spells. Neither did Merlin. So isn't saying "I cast Magic Missile" also animu, using this logic?
>>46181626
>as martials are now generally much better at dealing and taking damage
You would be wrong. Not just a little wrong, but horribly horribly wrong - once you get into mid levels martials in 3.5 are notorious for being able to blow up higher CR enemies in a single turn, even the equivalent of 5E's equal CR(which would be something like CR+2 or +3 in 3.5), while that will literally never happen in 5E without the DM intentionally picking the squishiest monster for that CR and the martial critting a lot while they use Action Surge ON TOP of the 5E martial being less accurate because bounded accuracy and a -5 penalty to approach that level of damage.
>>46179352
>you really don't see difference between saying what you use in narration/OOC like
>>my character uses spell/discipline X
>and character himself speaking the name out loud while using?
I've done martial arts, if I say I'm going to right leg roundhouse kick someone upside the head, that refers to a very specific technique, action and location. It doesn't mean I'm going to shout 'RIGHT LEG ROUNDHOUSEKICK TO THE HEAD!'
Same thing as half-sword parry into murderstroke aimed at clavicle.
That's exactly how tome of battle works.
Things have names because people need to be able to communicate about them effectively; out of character narration doesn't equal in character action. Telling your DM you'd like to cast a lightning bolt, or initiate [specific manuever] doesn't mean you're screaming "LIGHTNING BOLT HOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH" in character, unless that's an established rule of your setting, in which case your entire gaming group are probably giant faggots.
>>46188035
>>46179352
Also to append on to this, I know all sorts of grappling techniques in martial arts with a wide variety of names, ranging from hip throws and triangle chokes, to suplexes, to powerbombs, to kimura and guillotine chokes, to ankle and leg locks (even ones with very fancy names like figure fours). They may have very exotic names at times, but no one is screaming them at the time of doing it.
>>46177457
Best 3.5 campaign I ever ran was PHB banned, TOB + XPH + MOI only (with some optional/house-ruled stuff from UA, like flaws, and Weapon Group feats for each of the martial disciplines. Also, E6 rules for level adjustments and such.)
That was a fun game. I want to get that group back together.
Some house-rules I'd use if I ever continue this game:
If your Intelligence bonus is less than +0, treat it as +0 for purposes of determining skill points.
Untrained skills cost the same as trained skills, but have a maximum skill rank equal to your level (trained skills still have a maximum skill rank equal to your level +3.)
Anybody can put ranks in alchemy.
Everybody gets +10 hit points at level 1.
Crits confirm automatically on a natural 20.
>>46186165http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10832
Yes.
>>46181556
>Conan
>level 10 max
>>46189208
>psionics
get your sci-fi shit out of my game REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>46189208
>Age 40
>Level 36
You know that puts him in the highest levels of epic, right? The point where he can literally disembowel gods?
>>46188777
Try using Limited Choices Maximum Ranks instead of Skillpoints. It speeds up character creation by a landslide and just plain works better.
>>46189208
That's for a different era of D&D. From 3.5 onwards even getting to level 5 is a pretty major achievement. Everything that Aragorn does in Fellowship of the Ring, for example, can be perfectly replicated by a 5th-level character max.
Even most of Jesus Christ's miracles are replicable by level 10 at most.
>>46177457
>>46177673
ToB does help that narrow that caster diversity. A lot.
Also I'm probably a minority or minority, but i like the snipits of flavour in between chapters talking about the Nine-Swords themselves and how the book scoops of handful of lore from other books to add to itself.
>>46189446
AD&D multiclassing is very different from 3e. You basically have separate XP tracks for each class but are subject to the restrictions of all of them
>>46189517
Give him a start of 20 charisma and the pathfinder paladin, you could probably do it sooner than 10. His biggest feat is raising the dead right? Ultimate Mercy needs 10 uses of LOH to raise the dead.
Oddly, you don't need 10 uses per day to take it even though it's useless without it.
>>46181394
Because you're not playing monks right. In my game, the monk is kicking ass and taking names:
>runs 45 ft/turn, has Mobility to set up advantage for other fighters (war cleric, flighter, barbarian)
>shape the flowing river + decanter of endless water = wall of ice that's battlefield control
>stunning strike
>>46189635
the self-ressurection don't forget that one
>>46179754
the only way they'll change is if everyone stops playing with Paizofags
>>46180364
5E is warmed over shit
though you're right that it does feel like AD&D
which was also warmed over shit
BECMI4lyfe
>>46189447
Good idea, thanks!
It would be a lot of work, but I'm thinking of putting together little booklets for the players to help them out with character creation.
These booklets would contain:
>Campaign/Setting Overview
>Permitted Game Materials Overview
Listing Tome of Battle, Expanded Psionics Handbook Magic of Incarnum, Magic Item Compendium, Sandstorm, Frostburn, and Stormwrack.
>Houserules
Gotta try and keep it to just one page
>Recommended Feats
A list of feats compiled from optimization guides and handbooks for all the available classes, plus some GM picks.
Errata included.
Players can save time in character creation by selecting their feats from this list instead of sifting through all the books.
>Equipment
Shopping takes a long time, especially when players have to share a book.
Should probably just copy all the good stuff into lists printed out for each player.
>Rules Overview
Assorted cheat sheets
Any suggestions for how I might save myself and all my players time and trouble? Tips for organizing everything? Stuff I ought to add for my campaign booklets?
>>46180386
>and most people who read more sword and sorcery than shounen
that's not MOST people anymore, sempai
>>46189662
>playing wot4e
>"kicking ass and taking names"
Pffffhahahahahahaha, sure thing, brah.
>>46189769
5e, you nigglet
>>46189825
>not knowing what wot4e means
And now I have confirmation, you don't even play the game that's why your "monk" player is that good, because he only exists in your imagination.
>>46189890
No, I don't know what it means. And you don't know what a "twist," a "MoM," a "felt," or a "yobannyj pidoras" is.
Because I am intelligent and polite enough to not use slang terminology in conversation with others, fuccboi.
Go on. Tell me when wizards get wall of ice? The monk gets it at level 3.
>>46189955
Wizard doesn't need water for his wall of ice, monk does, also your monk has a magic item that 99% of the groups won't even have because, in 5e, wealth per level and magic items aren't a thing anymore.
So sure, your monk is awesome, and my beast master with 5 legendary items at 3rd level is the best in the group, he also has a T-rex as animal companion because his dog died.
>>46189955
>And the ad hominems beging
I know it's hard to win an argument when you have nothing on your side, but try to be polite.
>>46189662
>shape the flowing river + decanter of endless water
Both take an Action, so he's wasting 2 turns doing meanial shit, well, if he feels uselful doing that
>>46177457
My buddy hates TOB because it's too weaboo and the maneuvers don't lend themselves well to the classical medieval flavor
>>46190216
>D&D 3.PF
>Classical Medieval Flavor
Top Kek
>>46190102
>begin
or
>beginning
You illiterate fuck.
>>46180702
>No, but if he HAD, people would have said "well he's a wizard and I guess that makes sense",
No, they'd have said "Why doesn't he just turn invisible and fly the Ring to Mt Doom?".
>>46190381
:^)
>>46190381
>not begging
Look who is the illiterate
>>46190381
Woah, you really are out of arguments.
>Still playing 3.5 and discussing it 9 years after it went out of print
jesus fucking christ guys
>>46190763
Some people have difficulty moving on, and the autistic find joy in repetitive tasks.
>>46190763
blame pathfinder for keeping it relevant
>>46190763
Group only plays 3.5. I'd rather play other systems like Pathfinder or some other d20 system, but our group is full of poor cunts and I don't want to cough up 70$ per book just so we can attempt to play another system before everybody moans and goes back to 3.5
