Post/Author/DateTime	Post
sensestaker 06-09-07, 10:46 PM	In the next couple of weeks I'm going to buy a new book-either CW or ToB. I'm just not sure which I should get. I like playing powerful beatstick char's; which book will help me more? I'm also open to any third options that I may have missed, these are just the biggies that I know about.
StevenO 06-09-07, 10:54 PM	I haven't even seen the ToB but from reading on these boards it sound like there are a few very powerful options available in it.
SokenzanMarauder 06-09-07, 10:55 PM	If you like playing a character that can deal somewhat large amounts of damage (and generally 'look' badass doing it) I recommend ToB. I do warn you however, some DMs will be mortified by the fact that melee fighters no longer suck if you use a class from it. -Gene
Cold Napalm 06-09-07, 11:13 PM	ToB is a better book to make better melee combatants. I like complete warrior better because it has my favorite PrC (spellsword). Yes I like complete warrior for an arcane prestige class :P.
bobothechimp 06-09-07, 11:13 PM	ToB is fun, and allows melee characters a lot more flexibility than charging and full-attackin, but you should make sure your DM allows it, as it is a whole new system, like psionics or incarnum.
sensestaker 06-09-07, 11:26 PM	I'm leaning to ToB, but I hear that the maneuvers can be tricky to encorporate into a more traditional (for lack of a better word) DnD game? Any advice on this facet?
SokenzanMarauder 06-09-07, 11:28 PM	I'm leaning to ToB, but I hear that the maneuvers can be tricky to encorporate into a more traditional (for lack of a better word) DnD game? Any advice on this facet? What do you hear that's tricky to incorporate? If it's flavor, change the flavor text. If it's rules, read them. The book really is no more complex then any other and it's actually less complex than some (for example, I can't for the life of me figure out Magic of Incarnum, this was simple). -Gene
Tempest Stormwind 06-09-07, 11:28 PM	Bah, those who say that will complain about ANY new system. Does your world have melee warriors? Then two of the three classes fit. Does it have fighter/mages or monks? Then the third one fits. Complete Warrior is more of the same. Tome of Battle is a breath of fresh air.
Salla 06-09-07, 11:29 PM	I'm leaning to ToB, but I hear that the maneuvers can be tricky to encorporate into a more traditional (for lack of a better word) DnD game? Any advice on this facet? Only if your DM's view of D&D is 'This is Middle Earth'. If he's willing to accept anything other than Tolkien-oriented gaming, he should have no trouble with the Tome of Battle. Consider this another vote for the Tome of Battle, if you couldn't tell. :)
Tempest Stormwind 06-09-07, 11:34 PM	Only if your DM's view of D&D is 'This is Middle Earth'. If he's willing to accept anything other than Tolkien-oriented gaming, he should have no trouble with the Tome of Battle.Hmm. I don't know. Ever read what Hurin or Turin could do, or Gil-Galad, or to a lesser extent Faenor? Hurin's a decent example. Note that he's a HUMAN, so you can't complain that he's one of Tolkien's magic-using elves or a Maiar like Gandalf.Last of all Hurin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and seized the axe of an orc-captain and wielded it two-handed; and it is sung that the axe smoked in the black blood of the troll guard of Gothmog until it withered, and each time that he slew Hurin cried aloud: 'Aure entuluva! Day shall come again!' Seventy times he uttered that cry; but they took him at last alive, by the command of Morgoth, who thought thus to do to him more evil than by death. Therefore the Orcs grappled Hurin with their hands, which clung to him still, though he hewed off their arms; and ever their numbers were renewed, till he fell buried beneath them. Then Gothmog bound him and dragged him to Angband with mockery...They only took him alive not because they wanted to or because he let them, but because he was buried under the mountain of corpses and couldn't fight any longer. And this decidedly was because of the warrior, NOT because of his pimped out magic sword (he's using an enemy's dropped weapon here) or any form of magic at all (note the lack of any singing or concentration, the two major hallmarks of magic in Tolkien's works). That, right there, is the crusader. (For the record, "Aure entuluva!" means "the day shall come again", but it could also be the rallying cry attached to Strike of Righteous Vitality, and he was likely using Immortal Fortitude as a stance.) An epic level crusader, of course -- it is HURIN, after all -- but crusader nevertheless. There's worse, too, but I like that particular passage.
Archangel62 06-09-07, 11:43 PM	It depends on your style, if you like melee then ToB is probably for you, if you like archery or more range oriented you might find Complete Warrior more to your tastes.
SokenzanMarauder 06-09-07, 11:53 PM	There's worse, too, but I like that particular passage. That's pretty badass. Makes me want to pick up my copy and attempt to read it again. -Gene
Salla 06-10-07, 01:18 AM	Hmm. I don't know. Ever read what Hurin or Turin could do, or Gil-Galad, or to a lesser extent Faenor? I don't recognize a single one of those names. :) If your question involves 'have I (meaning Salla) read' something, and the object isn't a game book, I can pretty much assure you I haven't. :) Tolkien puts me to sleep.
Gonf 06-10-07, 01:31 AM	I love ToB, it is my favorite book for a combat focused character. I haven't played them past level 2; (curse my inconsistent DM's!!) at lower levels they can be scary to DMs as they outperform most units, (like a fighter vs a wizard at level 1) but they are supposed to be well balanced at later levels. In any case; they are purely awesome not merely in levels of firepower; at which they are good (Barbarians can pump out more pure damage then any one of these classes, or so I've heard.) but in variety of attacks and maneuvers plus out of combat abilities. These classes have cool but not overpowered abilities that really spice up combat for fighters and make combat much more interesting. CW has a couple of interesting prestige classes (read 3, only 2 of which are melee) but little else that is interesting, and nothing that is really original. And most of the abilities in CW can be mimicked, or even outperformed by ToB materials. Oh; in case you can't tell. I am voting for ToB. :D BEST BOOK I OWN!!!
Tempest Stormwind 06-10-07, 01:47 AM	I don't recognize a single one of those names. :) If your question involves 'have I (meaning Salla) read' something, and the object isn't a game book, I can pretty much assure you I haven't. :) Tolkien puts me to sleep. Tolkien knocked me unconcious. Or maybe that was the fault of the shooters. The Silmarillion on the whole is a lot more fun as part of a drinking game. (Parts of it are fine, most of it is dull.) Turin is best known as a dragonslayer. Hurin led an army of men against Morgoth (Sauron's big boss), who had an army so vast it held balrogs in reserve. These two were both so badass that if I were to go into more detail, I'd ramble for ages. Partly because they were Men, and in Tolkien's works Men weren't anywhere near as mighty as the Elves in general. These two in particular were exceptions. Gil-Galad was one of the mightiest elven leaders of all time and the original bearer of one of the Three Rings -- if you saw the movies, the sequences with Elrond in the battle on Mt. Doom should have had Gil-Galad instead (Elrond was Gil-Galad's standard-bearer, not a general; while Gil-Galad does indeed appear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gil-galad11.jpg), it's only briefly, and you'd only notice it if you watched the extended commentary. Doesn't do him justice.). Feanor (I typoed earlier) was one of the earliest elven heroes and hands-down the mightiest, with so many diverse talents and achievements he's likely BEYOND epic-level and quadruple-gestalted. He's best-known by non-fanatics as the creator of the Silmarils (the three jewels that are central to the Silmarillion's story; look it up on Wikipedia if you're even the least bit curious as to why this is significant.)
Redclock_the_Untimely 06-10-07, 01:51 AM	First, ask your DM which books are allowed. If both are allowed, then ToB gives melee fighters flexibility, but adds complexity and has almost nothing for ranged, thus Book of Nine Swords. Complete Warrior is better if you don't want to learn a new rule system or have to keep track of readied maneuvers. I prefer ToB, but that may be because I normally play spellcasters, so I don't mind the extra work. It really comes down to how many pages of info do you want to keep track of. Fewer = CW More = Tob
Derren S. 06-10-07, 02:00 AM	1. Ask your DM what book he would allow. It doesn't make sense to buy a book the DM will not allow you to use. 2. If both are allowed you have to decide if you want to play PHB melee fighters like paladins and fighters and want to enchance them (CW) or if you want to replace the PHB melee fighters with completly new classes who use a wizard like memorization system (ToB).
Raiden Drake 06-10-07, 02:09 AM	First, ask your DM which books are allowed. If both are allowed, then ToB gives melee fighters flexibility, but adds complexity and has almost nothing for ranged, thus Book of Nine Swords. Complete Warrior is better if you don't want to learn a new rule system or have to keep track of readied maneuvers. I prefer ToB, but that may be because I normally play spellcasters, so I don't mind the extra work. It really comes down to how many pages of info do you want to keep track of. Fewer = CW More = Tob If u print the cards free to download in the main page it shouldn't be a problem keep track of the maneuvers. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a
Warlawk 06-10-07, 02:12 AM	The "new system" is exceptionally simple, and easily streamlined into play. It will require no more work for your DM aside from reading the book to familiarize himself with it. It adds a bit of zing back into melee types and give them something to do other than full attack and repeatedly trip/aoo or whatever other boring repetative feat chain you've chosen.
Drag0nUL 06-10-07, 02:30 AM	I agree with what most people have said earlier: I think ToB is a better investment than CW. As for integrating the new system into the game, I don't think it poses any significant difficulty.
MagicMouth 06-10-07, 04:46 AM	Tome of Battle is in almost every way the best choice. Without a soubt one of the top five books in my collection. As said before, however, you should check with your DM. If he is intimidated by this new melee ssystem, Iīm quite sure there are several threads proving that the ToB is not overpowered (donīt have the links, though :( ) that you could show him (or her).
DreamerInsane 06-10-07, 04:55 AM	Another vote for the Tome of Battle.
Bob Loblaw 06-10-07, 09:57 AM	I think it should be mentioned that if you use the ToB, you may have to rewrite your character to maximize the benefits of the new system. If you are not going to be allowed to do so, then Complete Warrior will be a better short term investment. If you want a good long term investment, I would suggest ToB. Talk to your DM about being able to redo your character to fit the concept you desired to the ToB mechanics.
Comus 06-10-07, 11:39 AM	I donno Bob - I'd say both require about the same amount of rewriting. Most of Complete Warrior is feats and prestige classes. Now, he might be able to manage a feat or two (eventually) without much trouble, but since he likely doesn't have the prerequisites for whatever prestige class he'd like to use, he'd have to either rebuild to get them or wait however many levels it'd take. On the other hand, ToB characters do get 1/2 their levels in other classes added to their initiator level, so it doesn't punish getting into it halfway through quite as profoundly.
MagickHobo 06-10-07, 05:33 PM	In the next couple of weeks I'm going to buy a new book-either CW or ToB. I'm just not sure which I should get. I like playing powerful beatstick char's; which book will help me more? I'm also open to any third options that I may have missed, these are just the biggies that I know about. 1. Ask your DM what book he would allow. It doesn't make sense to buy a book the DM will not allow you to use. 2. If both are allowed you have to decide if you want to play PHB melee fighters like paladins and fighters and want to enchance them (CW) or if you want to replace the PHB melee fighters with completly new classes who use a wizard like memorization system (ToB). Derren S. is right, CW does enhance the choices presented in the CORE books. CW has some ranged, some mounted, some fighter/mage or "gish", and some fighter/rogue. However, for pure "powerful beat-stick characters" there is really only one thing: the Frenzied Berserker. If you know who Guts (or Gatsu) from teh Berserk Manga series is, thats what the frenzied berserker is. But, ihmo thats about it. The bear warrior can be nifty too i guess, never played it. ToB on the other hand is NOTHING BUT beatstick'n. All melee all the time baby. In the right light and right set of mind, you can fill about any melee oriented archetype with that book. Fencer, Viking, Feral Jungle Warrior, Conan, White Knight, Two-weapon tornado, The supreme Warrior General, Samurai, Martial artist, Beowulf, Weapon Master, Bullet-time using Kungfu guru, that crazy guy that charges in balls to the wall (a berserker, in a frenzy perhaps?), ninja, gish, and even your everyday tavern brawler. The list just goes on and on and on. And, the best part is, the abilities are actually (almost?) on par with what magic can do! yay! (course that's completely subjective, no game is the same yadda yadda) So, if you want alot of non-beatstick'n options (AKA more of the same >_>), Complete warrior. If you want alot of GOOD, VIABLE beatstick'n options (that can be made to work with non-melee stuff too) then get ToB. So get ToB. even if your current DM won't aloow it, a future one might. You might start DMing even, and theres alot of maths scattered around here showing the balance of the classses.
Praesul 06-10-07, 06:11 PM	In my opinion, and that is the opinion of someone who has played primarily melee fighting characters for going on 15 years, the Tome of Battle is one of the best supplements ever released for D&D. I was very disappointed by the Complete Warrior, especially all the extremely focused two-weapon fighting feats in there. Forcing a fighter to waste his or her bonus feats destroys the only advantage that class has, I can't believe someone thought that was a good idea. IMHO, Tome of Battle is the book that the Complete Warrior should have been.
Aktariel 06-10-07, 07:27 PM	Feanor (I typoed earlier) was one of the earliest elven heroes and hands-down the mightiest, with so many diverse talents and achievements he's likely BEYOND epic-level and quadruple-gestalted. He's best-known by non-fanatics as the creator of the Silmarils (the three jewels that are central to the Silmarillion's story; look it up on Wikipedia if you're even the least bit curious as to why this is significant.) The Immortals Handbook? (http://immortalshandbook.com/) But seriously. I finally got a copy of ToB, read it cover to cover, didn't understand it, read it again, am still picking at it, and absolutely love it. I vote ToB.
Eldritch_Lord 06-10-07, 07:46 PM	Here's yet another vote for Tome of Battle. As others have said, there are only two reasons why ToB wouldn't completely surpass CW: 1) You like ranged attacks. There is a PrC that lets you apply (melee) maneuvers to thrown weapons, but it takes a while to get there and it does nothing for bows, etc. 2) Your DM doesn't like other systems. I think it's just as easy to bring in ToB as it is to bring in psionics: a few new mechanics, a few read-thoughs, and you're set. The problem, of course, is that it's like psionics--some DMs hate it irrationally without completely understanding it.
Optimator 06-11-07, 12:06 AM	Tome of Battle is probably my favorite D&D book, and I would reccomend it. Having said that, I still think CW was a great book with a lot of fun options.
drade 06-11-07, 12:34 AM	My limited experience has lead me this one fact, ToB is great if your into doing amazing things with your fighter types, CW is ok if your doing more things all round, though my use of CW is limited also because I do more rogue types myself.
glacialcat 06-11-07, 12:47 AM	Tome of Battle is the second best book ever published by Wizards. If you're serious about melee types, and your DM will allow it, buy it. The first best is the Expanded Psionics Handbook.
rvielman 06-11-07, 12:56 AM	Tolkien knocked me unconcious. Or maybe that was the fault of the shooters. The Silmarillion on the whole is a lot more fun as part of a drinking game. (Parts of it are fine, most of it is dull.) Turin is best known as a dragonslayer. Hurin led an army of men against Morgoth (Sauron's big boss), who had an army so vast it held balrogs in reserve. These two were both so badass that if I were to go into more detail, I'd ramble for ages. Partly because they were Men, and in Tolkien's works Men weren't anywhere near as mighty as the Elves in general. These two in particular were exceptions. Gil-Galad was one of the mightiest elven leaders of all time and the original bearer of one of the Three Rings -- if you saw the movies, the sequences with Elrond in the battle on Mt. Doom should have had Gil-Galad instead (Elrond was Gil-Galad's standard-bearer, not a general; while Gil-Galad does indeed appear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gil-galad11.jpg), it's only briefly, and you'd only notice it if you watched the extended commentary. Doesn't do him justice.). Feanor (I typoed earlier) was one of the earliest elven heroes and hands-down the mightiest, with so many diverse talents and achievements he's likely BEYOND epic-level and quadruple-gestalted. He's best-known by non-fanatics as the creator of the Silmarils (the three jewels that are central to the Silmarillion's story; look it up on Wikipedia if you're even the least bit curious as to why this is significant.) Don't forget Glorfindel. He soloed a Balrog, came back from the halls of Mandos and made the Witch King of Angmar run with his tail between his legs from the mere sight of him. Sure, Gandalf explains why Merry and Pippin should be a part of the Fellowship, but why send Legolas instead of him? BTW, buy ToB. Loads of fun to play, and you can build any melee combat archetype with the three classes, depending on the maneuvers you choose. The system is also very easy to learn.
Tempest Stormwind 06-11-07, 01:35 AM	Don't forget Glorfindel. He soloed a Balrog, came back from the halls of Mandos and made the Witch King of Angmar run with his tail between his legs from the mere sight of him. Sure, Gandalf explains why Merry and Pippin should be a part of the Fellowship, but why send Legolas instead of him?That's odd. I don't recall him being *quite* that epic. (He's definitely mighty, wise, and generally badass, but I've never heard of those particular exploits (well, the Witch-King, yes, but the balrog and the resurrection, no).) I'm not really a huge Tolkien fan, truth be told. I don't mind the story, but his writing kills me. I just have a rather crazy memory for random trivia.
Salla 06-11-07, 01:39 AM	I'm not really a huge Tolkien fan, truth be told. I don't mind the story, but his writing kills me. I just have a rather crazy memory for random trivia. Whew. I thought I was the only person on these boards who didn't care for Tolkien. I actually got up and left halfway through the first movie, I was so bored (Didn't see the others). Well, bored and annoyed. Too many Hobbits survived that movie. But I digress. Yeah, the Bloodstorm Blade looks insanely fun to play sometime. I keep looking at it and wanting to come up with a Captain America build using Shield Sling from the PHBII. :)
drade 06-11-07, 01:55 AM	Tolkien is a hard read and the movies get better as they go, but because of all the background needed in the movies to make them work the way they did it was a bit slower then most movies. Tolkien isn't for everyone. Again I would like to vote ToB, you'll be happy with it.
Tempest Stormwind 06-11-07, 02:39 AM	Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movies and have read the books more times than I'd care to count (including both The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales), and I certainly don't dislike them except for the writing style. They're just not my favorites, nor have I read anything by Christopher Tolkien except for pieces of Children of Hurin. I'm familiar, somewhat, with the overall course of history in Tolkien's world, but I'm by no means a scholar. (One might say I have one rank in the relevant Knowledge skills -- enough to make trained checks but not enough to be competitive, with most of the modifier coming from my natural memory, i.e. my Int mod).
Leo 06-11-07, 07:02 AM	Hmm. I don't know. Ever read what Hurin or Turin could do, or Gil-Galad, or to a lesser extent Faenor? Hurin's a decent example. Note that he's a HUMAN, so you can't complain that he's one of Tolkien's magic-using elves or a Maiar like Gandalf.They only took him alive not because they wanted to or because he let them, but because he was buried under the mountain of corpses and couldn't fight any longer. And this decidedly was because of the warrior, NOT because of his pimped out magic sword (he's using an enemy's dropped weapon here) or any form of magic at all (note the lack of any singing or concentration, the two major hallmarks of magic in Tolkien's works). That, right there, is the crusader. (For the record, "Aure entuluva!" means "the day shall come again", but it could also be the rallying cry attached to Strike of Righteous Vitality, and he was likely using Immortal Fortitude as a stance.) An epic level crusader, of course -- it is HURIN, after all -- but crusader nevertheless. There's worse, too, but I like that particular passage. I can't stand this. Calling Hurin a crusader is one of the biggest insults to Tolkien I ever heard. Where's his autohealing? Where's his variety of attacks? Where's his counteratttacks? He's a figher or barbarian(probably multiclass) with uber magical elven armor who goes down to a serie of grapple critical while full attacking like a madman. Why complicate it? Where's the crusader? Where's the immortal fortitude stance? He takes an axe. He attacks. He cleaves. He roleplays. For seventy rounds. Untill the grapple damage takes him down. He doesn't use anything that minimally resembles maneuvers or stances. Specially because in D&D being buried under enemy corpses is hardly a limitation for your combat ability, so the only explanation why he falls is damage. Not to mention he didn't follow any particular alignment but true neutral, since he fought mainly for his own family, not by any greater cause. His son is the perfect eaxample of it. Oh, and buy Tob if you like flashy stuff. it was created mainly fo the people who think splatering walls of enemies and rocks with single hits of your sword isn't cool enough.
MagicMouth 06-11-07, 07:30 AM	Oh, and buy Tob if you like flashy stuff. it was created mainly fo the people who think splatering walls of enemies and rocks with single hits of your sword isn't cool enough. Actually, we like it because it offers more tactical options in melee. Especially at low levels, you start to get strange feelings of deja vú in longer battles when using the standard warrior classes. As for being flashy... while a Swordsage with Desert Wind could certainly be considered flashy - well, itīs frickinī Desert Wind, what do you expect :P - itīs not much worse than a core PHB Monk. A Warblade with Iron Heart or Diamond Mind maneuvers, on the other hand, would "merely" be a highly skilled and focused warrior who put great physical and mental focus into his attacks.
Tempest Stormwind 06-11-07, 11:01 AM	Obviously, Leo believes that if you roleplay, a single-classed fighter can single-handedly take down seventy Tolkien trolls with a support of Tolkien orcs coming at him all at once, without his personal weapon, and survive. I believe that you can easily roleplay with a crusader, and that his attacks during that sequence were autohealing, counterattacks, and smites, likely made during Immortal Fortitude, which enables him to actually vanquish that many enemies and still remain alive and kicking. Oh, and as for barbarian, if you consider "barbarian" to be more than a mechanical representation of a particular effect, you're insulting Hurin at LEAST as bad as you claim I am. Likewise, I am considering crusader to be a mechanical representation of a particular effect. I'd *love* to see the fighter or barbarian who can manage to solo that many Tolkien orcs and trolls (both of which are arguably stronger than D&D's default "orc" and "troll" monsters) without his favorite weapon and still emerge fighting. And for the record, I'm like MagicMouth. I like it because I can stay mobile and have tactical options as a melee character, which I simply cannot as a PHB warrior-type. I've linked this before, and I'll link it again. This is straight from the man behind the ToB optimization library and untold use of the ToB in other optimization projects, not to mention one of the most brilliant minds on the CO boards -- in other words, he knows his ****.When you get down to it though, here's what ToB ACTUALLY changes: 1. Makes DEX SAD builds soo much easier. 2. Facilitates the creation of AoOs 3. Offers more potent single attack options, such that warrior builds are no longer restrained to focusing on gaining full attacks. This in turn equates to higher mobility. 4. Offers the ability for warrior types to deal more than pure damage, additional effects include: stunning, dazing, instant death, immobilization, ability damage. 5. Grants warrior types the ability to make use of immediate and swift actions on a regular basis. Bottom line: it gives warriors more options. As is to be expected from a supplement for... you guessed it... warriors.That's essentially all it changes mechanically. I just like having the mechanical diversity to try unique and dynamic offensive and defensive moves and still contribute to the party, as opposed to being forced to charge or full attack every time and rely on description (the same description I could use on the ToB, by the way) to make my attacks seem more dynamic.
Raiden Drake 06-11-07, 11:03 AM	I can't stand this. Calling Hurin a crusader is one of the biggest insults to Tolkien I ever heard. Where's his autohealing? Where's his variety of attacks? Where's his counteratttacks? He's a figher or barbarian(probably multiclass) with uber magical elven armor who goes down to a serie of grapple critical while full attacking like a madman. Why complicate it? Where's the crusader? Where's the immortal fortitude stance? He takes an axe. He attacks. He cleaves. He roleplays. For seventy rounds. Untill the grapple damage takes him down. He doesn't use anything that minimally resembles maneuvers or stances. Specially because in D&D being buried under enemy corpses is hardly a limitation for your combat ability, so the only explanation why he falls is damage. Well a fighter or a barbarian wouldn't last that long without healing, besides i see the crusader healing more like ignoring the damage than closing wounds, remember that hit points area an abstract representation of damage. Because he stood there until he was tired/buried in corpses (fail his save) seems a lot like immortal fortitude stance. Not to mention he didn't follow any particular alignment but true neutral, since he fought mainly for his own family, not by any greater cause. His son is the perfect eaxample of it. Really? Fighting for your own family seems awfully neutral good to me; and also seems like the ideal of "fighting for your own family"; and ideal doesn't need to be someting bigger that that. Oh, and buy Tob if you like flashy stuff. it was created mainly fo the people who think splatering walls of enemies and rocks with single hits of your sword isn't cool enough. I don't really like it for the "flashy stuff" as you call it, nothing is the book is flashier that a fireball, a meteor swarm, disintegrate, or the such. What i like about the book is the option of having a lot of different build that are effective in combat as opposed of the same old five figther builds that are effective in combat.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 06-11-07, 11:06 AM	People, stop feeding the troll.
aotrscommander 06-11-07, 11:40 AM	That's odd. I don't recall him being *quite* that epic. (He's definitely mighty, wise, and generally badass, but I've never heard of those particular exploits (well, the Witch-King, yes, but the balrog and the resurrection, no).) If I recall from Rolemaster's Lords of Middle-Earth books, it was mentioned there were two unrelated Glorfindels. I have adopted ToB as Core Rule Book V, and I've barely used it yet. It is one of the very best supplements WotC have released, and contains more or less the highest amount of useable (i.e. non world-specific) material of all of them. There is quite a lot of flavour - enough that before I heard everyone raving about it here, I disreguarded it as a naff flavour book - but it's not tied into the mechanics, so it's trivial to alter it if need be. CW on the other hand has some nice feats - especially tactical feats. All three base classes, though, suffer from CW being the first Complete out and as such are rather underpowered (the designer somewhere has commented on making the Hexblade better, I'm working myself on a Swashbuckler fix *coughshamelessplugcough* (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=861104); the CW Samurai sucks so bad it makes the Healer and Fighter laugh their asses off). Some of the PrC are okay, some are widely considered broken (or at least o dubious utility. The afore-mentioned Frenzied Berserker, for example, who's inclusion in a party requires the party's entire tactics and/or his own gear revolving around preparing for the eventuality he gets stuck in frenzy and TPKs the group (this is the 'disadvantage' for whacking out a +10 Str, quad-return Power Attack rage). (Actually, though, for making a better Fighter - as opposed to an Adept - PHBII has better Fighter-specific options; if you end up deciding against ToB I'd look at that first if you've not got it already.) I highly recommend you check out the index cards of the maneouvers in the link Raiden Drake provided earlier (if you decide ToB you'll want them anyway); that way you can look at the mechanics and decide it's what you/the DM want. Edit: Tempest, what's Children of Hurin like? I've not got round to looking into it yet. I've heard it's better than the Sillmarillion but not as good as LotR.
Tempest Stormwind 06-11-07, 11:52 AM	If I recall from Rolemaster's Lords of Middle-Earth books, it was mentioned there were two unrelated Glorfindels.That would be news to me, although the name seems like one that would eventually be repeated. However, it does seem to contradict Wikipedia, for what it's worth (I don't hold wikipedia as definitive at all).Edit: Tempest, what's Children of Hurin like? I've not got round to looking into it yet. I've heard it's better than the Sillmarillion but not as good as LotR.Essentially it's a subset of parts of the Silmarillion with more details and interesting tidbits, written by Christopher instead of JRR. I haven't read the whole book, just pieces of it, but from what I'd seen it doesn't seem all that bad (DEFINITELY more interesting and easier to read than the Silmarillion). I'd be tempted to pick it up and read it through, although I would not suggest you do this unless you're at least reasonably interested in Tolkien's work.
aotrscommander 06-11-07, 12:00 PM	That would be news to me, although the name seems like one that would eventually be repeated. However, it does seem to contradict Wikipedia, for what it's worth (I don't hold wikipedia as definitive at all). *Shrug* Could be either, then. Different interpretations of the same thing, or something Tolkien altered as he went along (he was doign that quite a bit towards the end). Essentially it's a subset of parts of the Silmarillion with more details and interesting tidbits, written by Christopher instead of JRR. I haven't read the whole book, just pieces of it, but from what I'd seen it doesn't seem all that bad (DEFINITELY more interesting and easier to read than the Silmarillion). I'd be tempted to pick it up and read it through, although I would not suggest you do this unless you're at least reasonably interested in Tolkien's work. You speak to Captain Lord-of-the-Rings-is-my-favourite-book-ever, Tempest. I would think that qualifies...
Thawmus 06-11-07, 02:03 PM	My first time being introduced to ToB was when my friend played a Warblade in my campaign. Even as a DM, the character was a breath of fresh air. I no longer had to worry about the Cleric making a no-show for the session. I no longer had to worry about a lack of spellcasters, and drop my CR a level or two. He can handle it all. But he's not invincible, either. He's just at a level where melee combatants should have always been in this game. Regardless if your DM allows it or not, or how far you are in your current campaign, grab ToB. The worst thing that could happen is you have awesome flavorful ideas for your own campaign, or a new character. Or you grab the Martial Study feat at level 18 and pick up a level 5 maneuver from any school. And believe me, even level 5 maneuvers that you can only use once per day are awesome. Or just finish off your character with a couple levels of one of the three ToB classes. Any of those things would make your character 10 times more fun to play. And although it would increase your abilities considerably, your DM shouldn't be visiting Hate-ville.
Crash169 06-11-07, 02:59 PM	Buy both of them. They are both amazing.
windscar18 06-11-07, 03:05 PM	Well, let's put it this way. If you want to try something new, try ToB. If you want to IMPROVE current Warrior classes, buy Complete Warrior. Of course, this guideline is far from clear, as there are plenty of distinctions. For example, Shadow Blade feat from ToB is so ridiculously useful that it justified normally crappy rolled scores on its own. (Oh, I only got one score? No matter, Shadow Blade + Weapon Finesse).
OneWinged4ngel 06-11-07, 03:47 PM	In the next couple of weeks I'm going to buy a new book-either CW or ToB. I'm just not sure which I should get. I like playing powerful beatstick char's; which book will help me more? I'm also open to any third options that I may have missed, these are just the biggies that I know about. Tome of Battle, no contest. I would place it amongst the top 3 supplements published by WotC.
Sylian 06-11-07, 04:23 PM	Tome of Battle is probably the best supplement Wizards have published. It rocks!
rvielman 06-11-07, 11:21 PM	That's odd. I don't recall him being *quite* that epic. (He's definitely mighty, wise, and generally badass, but I've never heard of those particular exploits (well, the Witch-King, yes, but the balrog and the resurrection, no).) I'm not really a huge Tolkien fan, truth be told. I don't mind the story, but his writing kills me. I just have a rather crazy memory for random trivia. In the Silmarillion during the fall of Gondolin, he fights single handedly against a Balrog, killing it but dying in the process. As he appears in LOTR, Tolkien made it so he leaves the halls of Mandos. Again, I need to emphasize how fun ToB is, and it is worth every penny spent on it.
pmurray@bigpond.com 06-11-07, 11:46 PM	If u print the cards free to download in the main page it shouldn't be a problem keep track of the maneuvers. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a Those cards are invaluable during the game. I printed mine out on card and laminated them. Helps you keep track of prepared and expended maneuvers. During play, when you use a maneuver turn the card face down. When you recover, turn it face up again.
Master_of_Flames 06-12-07, 12:15 AM	Tome of Battle is the second best book ever published by Wizards. If you're serious about melee types, and your DM will allow it, buy it. The first best is the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Amen to that. :D Third is Magic of Incarnum. Those three books together help balance out against the mages.
AAB 06-12-07, 01:52 AM	Amen to that. :D Third is Magic of Incarnum. Those three books together help balance out against the mages. see, i never really liked MoI. i liked the flavor and concept (and the races; currently playing a skarn), but i didn't like the end product.
maharai23 06-12-07, 05:17 AM	ToB is a better book to make better melee combatants. I like complete warrior better because it has my favorite PrC (spellsword). Yes I like complete warrior for an arcane prestige class :P. I like it for a Divine one... Nature's warrior. Heh.
Yadot 06-12-07, 03:19 PM	see, i never really liked MoI. i liked the flavor and concept (and the races; currently playing a skarn), but i didn't like the end product. It’s the same for me too. The flavor is that you are an exemplar of alignment and shaper of souls, but you just turn late Uncle Benny into some spiffy boots. The Totemist was the only class I liked. Personally, Magic of Incarnum would have been better as a section of Tome of Magic (with Pact Magic possibly having its own book).
Archangel62 06-12-07, 04:55 PM	It’s the same for me too. The flavor is that you are an exemplar of alignment and shaper of souls, but you just turn late Uncle Benny into some spiffy boots. The Totemist was the only class I liked. Personally, Magic of Incarnum would have been better as a section of Tome of Magic (with Pact Magic possibly having its own book). :rofl: You deeply amuse me with that. I do like MoI as a concept however I will be the first one to say that it is rather clunky, but then again it was a fairly new concept and I have to say that it is nicely balanced.
SokenzanMarauder 06-12-07, 05:32 PM	... I do like MoI as a concept however I will be the first one to say that it is rather clunky, but then again it was a fairly new concept and I have to say that it is nicely balanced. Took the words right out of my mouth. -Gene
Optimator 06-12-07, 08:01 PM	I can't stand this. Calling Hurin a crusader is one of the biggest insults to Tolkien I ever heard. Where's his autohealing? Where's his variety of attacks? Where's his counteratttacks? He's a figher or barbarian(probably multiclass) with uber magical elven armor who goes down to a serie of grapple critical while full attacking like a madman. Why complicate it? Where's the crusader? Where's the immortal fortitude stance? He takes an axe. He attacks. He cleaves. He roleplays. For seventy rounds. Untill the grapple damage takes him down. He doesn't use anything that minimally resembles maneuvers or stances. Specially because in D&D being buried under enemy corpses is hardly a limitation for your combat ability, so the only explanation why he falls is damage. Not to mention he didn't follow any particular alignment but true neutral, since he fought mainly for his own family, not by any greater cause. His son is the perfect eaxample of it. Oh, and buy Tob if you like flashy stuff. it was created mainly fo the people who think splatering walls of enemies and rocks with single hits of your sword isn't cool enough. :nonono:
Salla 06-12-07, 08:59 PM	It's important to note that Incarnum is 'the stuff of souls', the potential soul energy, not actual souls itself (which go to their respective Outer Planes), thus you are not 'making Uncle Benny into a spiffy pair of boots'. You're shaping primal, nigh cosmic energy, like a Green Lantern. :)
MerlintheTuna 06-12-07, 09:59 PM	Another for Tome of Battle. CWar isn't a bad book, but Tome of Battle is all around a spectacularly done book. And while Tempest has mentioned Tolkein a few times with regards to Tome of Battle's presence in classic fantasy, this caught my eye the other day.Master the Secret Magic of Steel Nine are the disciplines of the Sublime Way -- the path of martial supremacy in which the perfect combination of devotion, lore, and practice allows a warrior to achieve feats of superhuman prowess. Thulsa Doom:There was a time, boy, when I searched for steel, when steel meant more to me than gold or jewels. Conan: The riddle... of steel. Thulsa Doom: Yes! You know what it is, don't you boy? Shall I tell you? It's the least I can do. Steel isn't strong, boy, flesh is stronger! Look around you. There, on the rocks; a beautiful girl. Come to me, my child... Thulsa Doom: [coaxes the girl to jump to her death] Thulsa Doom: That is strength, boy! That is power! What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength in your body, the desire in your heart, I gave you this!
Master_of_Flames 06-12-07, 10:55 PM	That has Diamond Spirit and Iron Heart all over it. But, then again, I guess I'm one of those who prefers using a flashy set of attacks over swinging away at random. :rolleyes:
MagickHobo 06-16-07, 04:10 AM	:bump: Arise thread, ARISE! So, Senestalker, which one did you get?
sensestaker 06-21-07, 02:37 PM	Wow, thanks for all the input! Sorry I took so long responding, I've been out of town and FAAAAR away from any computers. ToB looks like a pretty decisive victor. Looks like it's time to go shopping. :D
Doodle 06-21-07, 02:39 PM	Do you play in a game where you are required to have the book to use feats/classes/etc.? If so I think CW is a better choice than ToB. To me, ToB builds on CW - CW has yhe weapon style feats, the tactical feats, etc. Me.
Tempest Stormwind 06-21-07, 02:46 PM	Do you play in a game where you are required to have the book to use feats/classes/etc.? If so I think CW is a better choice than ToB. To me, ToB builds on CW - CW has yhe weapon style feats, the tactical feats, etc. Me. 1) ToB doesn't use Weapon Style feats. 2) ToB uses tactical feats, but gives all the rules for them there. 3) ToB is completely self-contained and apart from a few feats doesn't synergize well with Complete Warrior.
Pangeon 06-21-07, 03:40 PM	Wow, thanks for all the input! Sorry I took so long responding, I've been out of town and FAAAAR away from any computers. ToB looks like a pretty decisive victor. Looks like it's time to go shopping. :D Yes! Another victory for Tome of Battle! :w00t: