Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Symar 08-27-07, 06:08 PM	Alright, so I've got me a shifter Lurk//Warblade in an Eberron game, and I'm planning on taking Bloodclaw Master. Can I take that on the Lurk side, and get both Bloodclaw Master and Warblade maneuvers/stances at the same time, or would the "greater progresion" rule fall in place, or what? Or should I just plop it over on the Warblade side for simplicity? Hope this is the right forum, and thanks!
claypigeons 08-27-07, 06:51 PM	Alright, so I've got me a shifter Lurk//Warblade in an Eberron game, and I'm planning on taking Bloodclaw Master. Can I take that on the Lurk side, and get both Bloodclaw Master and Warblade maneuvers/stances at the same time, or would the "greater progresion" rule fall in place, or what? Or should I just plop it over on the Warblade side for simplicity? Hope this is the right forum, and thanks! I believe this would be just like a Wizard//Rogue gestalt. If you took, say, Master Specialist on the 'rogue side', you wouldn't gain spellcasting from both the wizard and PrC. This would fall under the "better progression" clause, or at least that's how I'd rule it in a game.
Symar 08-27-07, 07:41 PM	Ha, nice Sig, fits right in with my question. Anyway, I thought it might be that way, but had to ask. Anyone have a different opinion?
Saedar 08-27-07, 10:16 PM	This is one of those gray areas that isn't really covered (to the best of my knowledge) by the gestalt rules. Personally, in the gestalt game I run, I don't let CL exceed character level by means of prestige spell progression. Soooo... I would probably keep the same thing with martial progression but, ultimately, this is a Rule Zero situation.
Roog 08-28-07, 08:02 AM	Alright, so I've got me a shifter Lurk//Warblade in an Eberron game, and I'm planning on taking Bloodclaw Master. Can I take that on the Lurk side, and get both Bloodclaw Master and Warblade maneuvers/stances at the same time, or would the "greater progresion" rule fall in place, or what? Or should I just plop it over on the Warblade side for simplicity? I would say that if you take two classes that gain maneuvers/stances at the same time, then you only take the greater progression. However, if you have multiple martial maneuver pools (eg Warblade and Swordsage), since the must be kept separate you could progress both at the same time, i.e. take levels with Warblade//Bloodclaw Master, and progress the Warblade maneuvers with Warblade levels at the same time as progressing Swordsage maneuvers with Bloodclaw Master levels. If you did that you would need to take account of the two Initiator Level progressions.
rampant 08-29-07, 06:29 AM	Ehm I think that sounds off. The way I see it it can work one of two ways. The book (ToB) says that You add one half your Non-Initiator class levels to your Levels in an actual martial adept class to find your Initiator level. So at level 10 Warblade 10 // Lurk 6 - Bloodclaw master 4 You'd have an initiator level of 10 for warblade maneuvers, and 7 for bloodclaw master. On the other hand the PrC is clearly designed to overlay onto a character who already posseses significant martial ability. The best solution I can see is to simply add the maneuvers known, and readied to those granted by the warblade, because they aren't an independant progression, but its stated that they are added to the existing pool of the character. Just use the Warblade's initiator level. This is probably the simplest. Especially when you consider that unless you tie the Bloodclaw master to a martial class it has trouble recovering maneuvers. The other option would be to assume you have reduced Initiator level and recovery ability with bloodclaw and just use them as filler, lower level strikes that aren't normally needed more than once, or just to have enough Tiger frenzy maneuvers so you can trade up the more useful warblade slots for higher level maneuvers. This is a tad more complex, and signifigantly less efficient.