Intelligence based swordsage? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Intelligence based swordsage? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
teshen
03-08-08, 10:59 PM Would it be overpowering to allow a swordsage to take a feat like Carminedine monk or Kung fu genius and power a his wisdom based class features with intelligence rather than wisdom?
Crimson_Concerto
03-09-08, 01:29 AM Probably not... I'd probably allow it...
mplindustries
03-09-08, 01:46 AM Would it be overpowering to allow a swordsage to take a feat like Carminedine monk or Kung fu genius and power a his wisdom based class features with intelligence rather than wisdom?

Personally, I think its fine and would highly encourage it, so the mechanics are not chained to any fluff.

I'd also think it'd be fine from a balance perspective. However, it basically comes down to this:

1) Do you think skill points are more useful than will saves and bonuses to spot/listen checks? This is the question to ask for a single-classed Swordsage

2) Do you think Intelligence based casting is more powerful than wisdom based casting? This is the question to ask for a player looking at Jade Phoenix Mage or Ruby Knight Vindicator.

3) Do you think getting Intelligence to damage from dipping Swashbuckler is more powerful than getting Wisdom to AC from dipping monk? (and yes, monk/swordsage can stack by RAW, though it is a DM's judgement call. It is ambiguous and cust serv keeps giving contradictory answers). This is the question to ask for optimizers who like dipping.

If the answer to any of those questions is "Yes, I think intelligence in this case is more useful than wisdom," then you may want to consider not allowing it.
Crimson_Concerto
03-09-08, 01:58 AM 1) Do you think skill points are more useful than will saves and bonuses to spot/listen checks? This is the question to ask for a single-classed SwordsageWell, I'm not contradicting anything you're saying specifically, but realize that the Swordsage in question DOES need to spend a feat to do this...

2) Do you think Intelligence based casting is more powerful than wisdom based casting? This is the question to ask for a player looking at Jade Phoenix Mage or Ruby Knight Vindicator.

3) Do you think getting Intelligence to damage from dipping Swashbuckler is more powerful than getting Wisdom to AC from dipping monk?In my opinion these are not really all that valid balance concerns to tell you the truth. It's nothing that a Monk with the feat couldn't do, and it's not overpowering.

(and yes, monk/swordsage can stack by RAW, though it is a DM's judgement call. It is ambiguous and cust serv keeps giving contradictory answers).By RAW, they do not stack. It is not ambiguous at all. Monk WIS to AC only applies when wearing no armor. Swordsage WIS to AC only applied when wearing light armor. That is RAW.
If you want to go common sense and say that Swordsage WIS to AC should also apply when unarmored, then you also need to apply the common sense to see that they're the same ability and therefor don't stack with each other anyways and shouldn't.
The only interpretation allowing them to stack is a munchkin one.
mplindustries
03-09-08, 12:32 PM By RAW, they do not stack. It is not ambiguous at all. Monk WIS to AC only applies when wearing no armor. Swordsage WIS to AC only applied when wearing light armor. That is RAW.
If you want to go common sense and say that Swordsage WIS to AC should also apply when unarmored, then you also need to apply the common sense to see that they're the same ability and therefor don't stack with each other anyways and shouldn't.
The only interpretation allowing them to stack is a munchkin one.
This has been pretty extensively talked about in other threads, so I'll ignore this incredibly rude response.

Not only are there ways to count for both even with that wording, it is pretty clearly a typo, as the later "adaptation" section suggests changing the Swordsage to an unarmed version by removing the armor proficiency without mentioning that its AC bonus should apply to wearing no armor. Thus, you are either supposed to lose the AC bonus (with no mention whatsoever) or the bonus was always intended to be when wearing "Light or no armor" or perhaps "no more than light armor."

Not to mention the fact that in addition to the numerous Custserv replies to people saying that they "probably shouldn't stack" because its the same kind of feature, there were also numerous saying that there is no reason they shouldn't stack, because neither says that they don't stack.

So ok, sure, I guess RAW was the wrong phrase to use, but I was loathe to say RAI. Its not really "rules as intended" so much as "rules as it was supposed to be written but bad editing left out a short phrase."

Anyway, as for the original question of unbalanced, I believe I said that I didn't think it was unbalanced, and would allow it. And I also think I proposed those questions as a gauge to see if someone considered it to be so. Obviously, you agree with me, but it was a suprisingly belligerent response to someone you agree with.
Crimson_Concerto
03-10-08, 06:20 PM it is pretty clearly a typoIf you have the good judgment to realize that it was clearly a typo, then you should also have the good judgment to realize it was also clearly a typo to leave out the line they put in the CA Ninja's similar ability. If you're going to use good judgment, then use good judgment. :D Using it selectively when it benefits you is indeed a very large part of the very definition of munchkinism. :P Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying you are necessarely a munchkin. I was saying that your judgment call here comes across as munchkin-like. Also you shouldn't invoke RAW if that isn't what you mean. ;)

But this is getting off topic now, so if you'd like to further discuss, do feel free to PM me. :)

P.S. - You just used the word "belligerent" so now I love you. :inlove:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
teshen 03-08-08, 10:59 PM	Would it be overpowering to allow a swordsage to take a feat like Carminedine monk or Kung fu genius and power a his wisdom based class features with intelligence rather than wisdom?
Crimson_Concerto 03-09-08, 01:29 AM	Probably not... I'd probably allow it...
mplindustries 03-09-08, 01:46 AM	Would it be overpowering to allow a swordsage to take a feat like Carminedine monk or Kung fu genius and power a his wisdom based class features with intelligence rather than wisdom? Personally, I think its fine and would highly encourage it, so the mechanics are not chained to any fluff. I'd also think it'd be fine from a balance perspective. However, it basically comes down to this: 1) Do you think skill points are more useful than will saves and bonuses to spot/listen checks? This is the question to ask for a single-classed Swordsage 2) Do you think Intelligence based casting is more powerful than wisdom based casting? This is the question to ask for a player looking at Jade Phoenix Mage or Ruby Knight Vindicator. 3) Do you think getting Intelligence to damage from dipping Swashbuckler is more powerful than getting Wisdom to AC from dipping monk? (and yes, monk/swordsage can stack by RAW, though it is a DM's judgement call. It is ambiguous and cust serv keeps giving contradictory answers). This is the question to ask for optimizers who like dipping. If the answer to any of those questions is "Yes, I think intelligence in this case is more useful than wisdom," then you may want to consider not allowing it.
Crimson_Concerto 03-09-08, 01:58 AM	1) Do you think skill points are more useful than will saves and bonuses to spot/listen checks? This is the question to ask for a single-classed SwordsageWell, I'm not contradicting anything you're saying specifically, but realize that the Swordsage in question DOES need to spend a feat to do this... 2) Do you think Intelligence based casting is more powerful than wisdom based casting? This is the question to ask for a player looking at Jade Phoenix Mage or Ruby Knight Vindicator. 3) Do you think getting Intelligence to damage from dipping Swashbuckler is more powerful than getting Wisdom to AC from dipping monk?In my opinion these are not really all that valid balance concerns to tell you the truth. It's nothing that a Monk with the feat couldn't do, and it's not overpowering. (and yes, monk/swordsage can stack by RAW, though it is a DM's judgement call. It is ambiguous and cust serv keeps giving contradictory answers).By RAW, they do not stack. It is not ambiguous at all. Monk WIS to AC only applies when wearing no armor. Swordsage WIS to AC only applied when wearing light armor. That is RAW. If you want to go common sense and say that Swordsage WIS to AC should also apply when unarmored, then you also need to apply the common sense to see that they're the same ability and therefor don't stack with each other anyways and shouldn't. The only interpretation allowing them to stack is a munchkin one.
mplindustries 03-09-08, 12:32 PM	By RAW, they do not stack. It is not ambiguous at all. Monk WIS to AC only applies when wearing no armor. Swordsage WIS to AC only applied when wearing light armor. That is RAW. If you want to go common sense and say that Swordsage WIS to AC should also apply when unarmored, then you also need to apply the common sense to see that they're the same ability and therefor don't stack with each other anyways and shouldn't. The only interpretation allowing them to stack is a munchkin one. This has been pretty extensively talked about in other threads, so I'll ignore this incredibly rude response. Not only are there ways to count for both even with that wording, it is pretty clearly a typo, as the later "adaptation" section suggests changing the Swordsage to an unarmed version by removing the armor proficiency without mentioning that its AC bonus should apply to wearing no armor. Thus, you are either supposed to lose the AC bonus (with no mention whatsoever) or the bonus was always intended to be when wearing "Light or no armor" or perhaps "no more than light armor." Not to mention the fact that in addition to the numerous Custserv replies to people saying that they "probably shouldn't stack" because its the same kind of feature, there were also numerous saying that there is no reason they shouldn't stack, because neither says that they don't stack. So ok, sure, I guess RAW was the wrong phrase to use, but I was loathe to say RAI. Its not really "rules as intended" so much as "rules as it was supposed to be written but bad editing left out a short phrase." Anyway, as for the original question of unbalanced, I believe I said that I didn't think it was unbalanced, and would allow it. And I also think I proposed those questions as a gauge to see if someone considered it to be so. Obviously, you agree with me, but it was a suprisingly belligerent response to someone you agree with.
Crimson_Concerto 03-10-08, 06:20 PM	it is pretty clearly a typoIf you have the good judgment to realize that it was clearly a typo, then you should also have the good judgment to realize it was also clearly a typo to leave out the line they put in the CA Ninja's similar ability. If you're going to use good judgment, then use good judgment. :D Using it selectively when it benefits you is indeed a very large part of the very definition of munchkinism. :P Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying you are necessarely a munchkin. I was saying that your judgment call here comes across as munchkin-like. Also you shouldn't invoke RAW if that isn't what you mean. ;) But this is getting off topic now, so if you'd like to further discuss, do feel free to PM me. :) P.S. - You just used the word "belligerent" so now I love you. :inlove: