| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1dr_mikeymikeJun 15, 2010 15:13:45 | Hello, everyone! I'll be starting a campaign soon where it looks like I will be playing the one tank for way-too many casters. As I feel as though casters tend to rule the roost at higher levels, I'm not necessarily going towards playing the traditional tank (i.e. someone who is to get hit and primarily soak dmg instead of dish it) though I wouldn't mind doing that to a lesser extent. With all that said, I was thinking about playing a straight Warblade armed with a 2H weapon (greatsword vs. halberd! suggestions?) b/c I really do not want to use feats to go down the twf tree (I was thinking tripping, instead! again, suggestions?). Our campaign is going to involve psionics, but I get the impression the the DM wants to keep it pretty simple, and is not allowing feats/flaws from Unearthed Arcana, Races of Faerun, and a couple of other books that I don't remember. I was pretty set in this path until I read up a bit on the Crusaders, and realized that the Devoted Spirit tree is actually really good. All of this is to say that I am rethinking my build - and am considering a Crusader dip, or simply retooling my PC from the ground up. I would love build suggestions and ideas! Thank you, in advanced. |
| #2phaedrusxyJun 15, 2010 23:33:11 | This is the thread you're looking for. Warblade 6/Crusader 2 gets you Thicket of Blades. Any of the classes that advance initiator levels do so for all of your martial adept classes. So Wb6/Cr2/MoN5 would have a WB IL of 12 and a Crusader IL of 10. You also might want to look at this. |
| #3phoenix00Jun 16, 2010 1:34:17 | Personally I am a fan of Garryl's RKV/Master of Nine build that PhaedrusXY linked to in the general idiot crusader thread. Only thing I would change is making the master of nine happen earlier. You usually play games in mid levels and thus you want to have those 5 master of nine levels occur during the periods of game play you actually play. With partial bab your bab is 18. Finally if you can get your DM to let you pick domains and to ignore the Wee Jas bit the time domain and shadow domain would grant you improved initiative and blindfight respectfully. Unarmed Swordsage would get you Improved Unarmed Strike. Leaving you only Dodge and Adaptive Style Swordsage 2/Warblade 1/Cleric 1/Crusader 1/Ruby Knight Vindicator 10/Master of Nine 5 |
| #4ZireaelJun 16, 2010 4:20:50 | 'Tome of Battle for Dummies' thread was here (WotC forums) too, and still is. Anyone got a link? 'The idiot crusader' build is just great! |
| #5waazraathJun 16, 2010 4:52:51 | 'Tome of Battle for Dummies' thread was here (WotC forums) too, and still is. Anyone got a link? community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758... |
| #6dr_mikeymikeJun 16, 2010 15:13:57 | Thanks for the great responses! Many of the builds you've referenced are pretty awesome! I think I'm going to keep things pretty simple and just stick to Warblade and Crusader (though, it sort of seems that lvls 18 and 19 are pretty dead). A few questions, some most likely silly: Does it matter if I go Warblade 6/Crusader 2 or Crusader 2/Warblade 6? I admit, its really a stupid detail that I don't know much about, but it would make more sense in light of his backstory. Since lvls 18 and 19 are pretty dead, would it be worth dipping into one lvl of fighter for the extra feat? So, essentially a Fighter 1/Crusader 2/Warblade 6? Finally, any thoughts on a greatsword vs. halberd? The extended crit range of the gs seems to be really nice, but reach is something that could be fun to play with! |
| #7aelryinthJun 16, 2010 23:11:08 | Halberd doesn't have reach...I think you want a glaive or longspear. Crusader 1/Warblade6/crusader1 is perfectly fine for getting you the stance. Personally, I'd just go straight warblade and use two feats to get what you want. It's a shame that warblade doesn't really have any truly awesome stances. Also note that if you are going to play, the warblade capstone is two stances at one time...implications to consider yourself. I'm personally a major fan of the Weapon of Aptitude/Unarmed Strike/Superior Unarmed strike progression myself. It's really hard to argue with a 6-36 Superior Greatsword Strike at level 15 for base dmg. ==Aelryinth |
| #8phoenix00Jun 16, 2010 23:17:22 |
??? |
| #9dr_mikeymikeJun 16, 2010 23:30:39 | My bad. I somehow got it in my head that a halberd has reach. But you make a good point about dropping those two feats for the stuff I want (namely thicket of blades). My only concern was that between that and going the tripping route (which I hear is pretty feat intensive), taking a few levels of fighter for the extra feats would be more realistic than going straight warblade. |
| #10phaedrusxyJun 17, 2010 17:12:06 | A few questions, some most likely silly: Yes, it makes a pretty big difference. Delay the crusader levels until you can get better manuevers with them. Warblade 4/Crusader 1 would get you 2nd level crusader manuevers. Then go back to Warblade for a couple of levels, then take the second level of crusader. You could also just go Warblade 6/Crusader 2 and get basically the same thing. You could just get Thicket of Blades from the feats, but I think multiclassing is by far the best way to go, especially if you plan to enter a prestige class. As I said, they progress all martial adept levels equally. So something like Warblade 5/Crusader 2/Master of Nine 5/Eternal Blade 8 (for example, and I'm not sure you can even qualify for this) would have an IL of 19 for Warblade and 17 for Crusader at level 20. So you could have 9th level manuevers for both progressions. |
| #11SenevriJun 18, 2010 2:50:53 |
I disagree with Ael's interpretation of how UAS/SUAS work *edit* with weapon aptitude. And since I'm always right, you should agree with me! Besides, since SUAS has a very specific progression, even the most liberal reading allows only to REPLACE the damage from (weapon X) with the damage stated in SUAS. |
| #12dr_mikeymikeJun 18, 2010 3:29:30 | A few questions, some most likely silly: Thanks for your input, but I am just not really interested in the PrC's. My guy isn't going to be an Elf, so no Eternal Blade (though the abilities are pretty sweet), and Master of Nine has some really silly feat requirements that sort of leave me scratching my head. |
| #13aelryinthJun 18, 2010 18:37:03 | Superior Greatsword Strike makes use of the APtitude Enhancement bonus in Tome of 9 Swords. |
| #14dr_mikeymikeJun 18, 2010 23:05:15 |
Wow, Aelryinth, that is *crazy*. I am glad that you pointed it out. Okay, okay - so I'm becoming more convinced. But here: my last curve ball. Using a human, do you think the prerequisite feats for Master of Nine can be made with a character built to trip? |
| #15SenevriJun 18, 2010 23:18:41 | Hmm... I'm not saying Ael's wrong in that there's a point for fighters automatically increasing the damage they deal with their weapons, but I'm going to have to say he's just wrong about applying weapon aptitude to superior unarmed strike. Of course, if you can convince your DM... *shrug* Now, the FLUFF would fit, as it says you become better at striking vulnerable areas. However the actual benefit from the feat reads: You deal more damage with your unarmed strikes, as shown on the table below. It's not a size increase of any kind. Even if you apply it to a greatsword you deal damage as shown on the table below. Another weapon aptitude limitation is that it can only change the effects of feats that only apply to a single weapon. ( Wait, would improved natural attack be a valid target here, actually? ), so you cannot apply it to feats which work with, for an example, all slashing/piercing/bludgeoning weapons, nor any of the two-weapon styles in CWar. |
| #16dr_mikeymikeJun 18, 2010 23:34:03 | Hmm... I'm not saying Ael's wrong in that there's a point for fighters automatically increasing the damage they deal with their weapons, but I'm going to have to say he's just wrong about applying weapon aptitude to superior unarmed strike. Hm. The more I read the description, the more I doubt the DM would allow it. |
| #17dr_mikeymikeJun 18, 2010 23:34:06 | Hmm... I'm not saying Ael's wrong in that there's a point for fighters automatically increasing the damage they deal with their weapons, but I'm going to have to say he's just wrong about applying weapon aptitude to superior unarmed strike. Hm. The more I read the description, the more I doubt the DM would allow it. |
| #18phaedrusxyJun 19, 2010 14:14:18 | Using a human, do you think the prerequisite feats for Master of Nine can be made with a character built to trip? Yes. Single level dips into cleric and monk can get you most of the prereqs for Master of Nine. The Time and Darkness domains (from cleric) grant Blind Fight and Improved Initiative as bonus feats. The Cobra Strike Monk variant grants Dodge and Improved Unarmed Strike. So you just take Adaptive Style and you're in. You can use the rest of your feats for whatever you want. It will cost you a couple points of BAB if you're not using fractional, or just one if you are. |
| #19aelryinthJun 20, 2010 20:15:46 | I call it a Size Increase because that's the rules it is following...d4 to d6 to d8 to 2d6 is the size increase table for UA dmg...Medium, Large, Huge, Garg. D4 is your BASE dmg. IF you are size L, the starting dmg is d6. If Small, d3. The table adjusts accordingly. It just doesn't start at the higher base dmg because default races are not size L, H or G. Starting dmg for a greatsword is 2-12. Just scale it. By the way the enhancement is wording, it works. it's ATROCIOUS in how it can be abused, but it works (dual wielding H. Crossbows w autofire is one form of abuse...) And really, its no different then Monks using Mighty Blow for +3 sizes of UA dmg. My personal ruling has been that SUS doesn't stack with size increases...it emulates them. This keeps it under control as far as eventual dmg. I'm still out to lunch on Heavy weaponry, however, as such does take a feat. My inclination is it's just another Size substitute, and when you reach 15th it becomes useless and you auto-sub it out for another feat. But, that's me. I really and truly don't have a problem with a 6-36 dmg Greatsword...+14 dmg base is just about where a Melee should be at that level, and it also means that great dmg is NOT based just on Str scores to the moon. Levels mean something! ========= As for feats for Mo9, it all comes down to what you want...BAB, or IL? For the feats, 4 fighter levels will nab you almost all of them. The bonus feats from Warblade take care of the rest. This keeps your BAB and ability to hit things intact. From there, you just need Expertise and IMproved Trip. BUT...you'll be sucking on weapon mastery feats. If manuvers are going to replace them, you are all good. The above example withmulticlassing to feats DESTROYS your BAB. Not Good, even if you are relying on manuvers for dmg. There are Mo9 Builds here on the board, with step by step instructions on how to take them to eventually get all the level 9 manuvers you want...which should be your goal. If you aren't taking weapon mastery, then you need to take the biggest strikes you can get. ==Aelryinth |
| #20phaedrusxyJun 20, 2010 20:50:37 | The above example withmulticlassing to feats DESTROYS your BAB. Not Good, even if you are relying on manuvers for dmg. I'd hardly call two points of lost BAB "destroyed", you drama queen. |
| #21phoenix00Jun 21, 2010 6:51:58 | I call it a Size Increase because that's the rules it is following...d4 to d6 to d8 to 2d6 is the size increase table for UA dmg...Medium, Large, Huge, Garg. D4 is your BASE dmg. But it doesn't state it is a size increase. Sure you may reverse engineer it, to be a size increse but it doesn't state it is a size increase. Better stick with Greater Mighty Wallop, same effect, without twisting the rules and looking at them funny to make it do what you want. |
| #22Maat_MonsJun 22, 2010 20:13:27 | I call it a Size Increase because that's the rules it is following... It doesn't follow the rules for size increases. Size increases go 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6. Superior unarmed strike goes 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6. There are 4 transitions and 2 of them, from 1d8 to 1d10 and from 1d10 to 2d6, go completely against the table for size increases. How can you claim it follows the pattern for size increases when it violates the pattern literally half the time? |
| #23aelryinthJun 23, 2010 22:27:20 | -2 BAB at low levels is a killer. Sure, at level 20 it may not be much, but you want the bonuses to add up early and often. -2 th and 2 levels delay in multiple attacks? Ugh. And he needs them at low levels. Also remember that Master of 9 is 3/4 BAB, and you lose another 2 BAB taking 5 levels of that class...you're basically down to a 3/4 BAB character. -- I really need to get my to9S out of storage 600 miles away. Thanks for that catch! But what you've given ends up at the same spot...it just takes 4 steps instead of 3, but you gain them more often. starting at 2-12, your increase would be 4-7 3-18 8-11 3-24 12-15 3-30 16+ 6-36 (or 3-36, ending up at 3x your starting dmg, as d4=>2-12 The first increase is to 1/2 the final, the second and succeeding increase dmg by the same amount.) Still just virtual size increases operating off the starting base dmg. ==Aelryinth |
| #24Maat_MonsJun 24, 2010 10:12:07 | Size increases for a greatsword are 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6. Even if we were to make up some sort of hypothetical half size increase, the progression would be 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 4d8, 6d6. However, needing to make up entirely new rules concepts to follow through on a premise seems like a fairly clear indication that the premise is wrong. |
| #25aelryinthJun 24, 2010 22:30:13 |
UA size increases are 1-3, 1-4, 1-6, 1-8, 2-12, 3-18, etc...which is followed by neither the monk progression nor SUS. But both Monk and SUS are going to be affected by higher dmg and adjusted accordingly, i.e. by size. Same principle holds. Not breaking any new ground here. ==Aelryinth |
| #26dr_mikeymikeJun 24, 2010 22:56:56 | This is all great, but I am afraid that I am finding myself in need of starting back at square one! This is all a lot to synthesize, but I certainly appreciate everyone's input. However, I am thinking that I need to start a new thread to reflect my new questions and backward-steps! |
| #27tytalusJul 24, 2010 18:02:22 | -2 BAB at low levels is a killer. Sure, at level 20 it may not be much, but you want the bonuses to add up early and often. -2 th and 2 levels delay in multiple attacks? Ugh. And he needs them at low levels. Also remember that Master of 9 is 3/4 BAB, and you lose another 2 BAB taking 5 levels of that class...you're basically down to a 3/4 BAB character. If you really feel it's "killer" at low levels, why don't you wait until the higher levels? You can take those two levels whenever you want, you just need them before Mo9. Also, with fractional BAB the it's merely -1 BAB, or a -2 if you include Mo9. Hardly a big deal for the payoff.
Here's how it actually works when you follow the RAW, without house-ruling: Take Improved Unarmed Strike. YAY, now you have UA dmg. You also used up a feat.
Fact still is, though, that SUS is not a size increase of any kind.
SUS/Aptitude simply doesn't work that way. It's not a bad house-rule to have weapon damage grow with character level, but if you want to do that, it should probably be a (fighter) class feature. |
| #28aelryinthDec 07, 2010 21:03:40 | Ah, he added to it and I didn't see it! fun. Improved Unarmed Strike, your ffist now threatens and does 1d4 dmg based on your size and being UA. Improved Greatsword strike, your weapon threatens and does 2-12 dmg based on its size and being a greatsword. Your UA improves to d6, then d8, then d10, then 2-12. Your Greatsword improves to 3-18, then 4-24, then 5-30, then 6-36. Ratios are Exactly the same...virtual size increases, dmg by level increases, whatever you want to call them. And a Heavy Large Greatsword would have 2 actual size increases, for 12-72, and Enlarge would get you to 16-96, Expansion to 24-144. All it is is subbing in the Greatsword for the weapon and base dmg, exactly like the spec feats (Tytalus' argument comes down to doing UA dmg with greatsword if using the spec feats, too...you're using IUS, after all!). Note that I like his idea of fighters having this built into the class. I don't like the way this works with Adaptive. But it DOES work, RAW. ===Aelryinth |
| #29meyer_william4Dec 08, 2010 12:51:31 | Aelryinth .... Think of it this way .... if a toon has SUS ... and then someone casts Mighty Wallop on him, does his damage increase? If yes (SUS does not in any way/shape/form indicate this is a size increase) then your sword combo does not work. If no (SUS imparts a size increase due to wonkiness), then your sword combo would work. I would bet that the intent behind that feat is to help unarmed people more than armed people -- and since the text of the feat agrees with me, I think you can lay this to rest. (Also -- welcome back me -- yay!!) |
| #30aelryinthDec 08, 2010 17:53:45 | Aelryinth .... Actually, the answer is: Yes, he gets the dmg increase. I call it a virtual Size increase because it almost mirrors a size progression. It's not actually a Size progression, and so Mighty Wallop works fine. It's a damage progression. That's all it is. And it has precedent....the monk, and the fact monk UA dmg changes if you are large/small. In other words, monk UA dmg works off BASE UA dmg. Well, now it's working off base Greatsword dmg. Thus, Greater Wallop could get added to the back end for the actual size increases, affecting the modified dmg...the same as if you cast it on a monk/20 with 2-20 dmg UA. There's no difference. Tytalus is attempting to argue the feat 'sets' the dmg to d4, d6,d8, d10, 2-12 at those levels. No, the damage is PROGRESSING from d4 at those levels. If we have a pixie monk, does getting SUS suddenly set her UA to the exact same dmg level as the fire giant? OF course not. Base dmg is the foundation of the dmg progression. She'll end up with d8 UA from her 1-2 dmg starting point, and the fire giant will end up at 4-24 from his Huge starting point of 1-8. A greatsword's starting point is 2-12. Progression would start there. That's all it has to do. Again, I'm not saying I LIKE this (especially with size stacking). But monks make plain size stacks with these kinds of progression, and Adaptive subs a weapon and its dmg for UA and its dmg. It works, it's logical, it fits. And it breaks pretty damn fast! heh. ANd yes, Welcome back, where have you been? ==Aelryinth |
| #31The_Crimson_DawnDec 08, 2010 18:31:42 | This does not work for several reasons 1) This is not referred to as a size change and this is important. 2) Aptitude allows you to directly apply these feats to new weapons. 3) SUS does not say that it increases anything. It only says that your damage changes to these specific values. Your example of different sized creatures is flawed since even with different sized creatures damage would change. Going by your example if I had a small character using SUS greatsword at level 16 it would deal 1d8. The reason being that the feat says that unarmed strikes deal 2d6 damage (we assume on a medium character though by RAW it does not specify that) since we are small it gets reduced to 1d8. Aptitude lets us apply this feat to the greatsword so we have a 1d8 weapon. Notice this requires no terms like "virtual size improvements" and fits RAW. There is no indication in the feat that anything is a size change or even pretending it is a size change. Even the monk class does not call it a size change it is just a change in the type of dice that you use to roll. Size changes have a similar affect but have a specific mechanical aspect to it and a specified increase. this is one of those all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares as all size increases change type/number of dice but not every change in the type/number of dice is a size change. You want to make this type/number of dice change a size change, but it really is just a change dice type/number. To summarize Aptitude allows me to use SUS with my greatsword directly. SUS says I deal 2d6 points of damage with a medium sized attack (it did not say treat your unarmed attacks as being X times larger in size or deals the damage as if you are gargantuan size). I apply the feat so my greatsword now deals 2d6 damage because the feat says I deal 2d6 damage. If I was small I would deal 1d8. If I was large 3d6. It works. The only question is should the damage be based on your character's size or by weapon size. I think character size, so you could boost this by taking Imp natural attack perhaps. Ael I like you buddy but I think youare operating on RAI (Rules as Inferenced) as you had to infer that these increases in damage are size increases rather than straight replacements. |
| #32meyer_william4Dec 08, 2010 19:35:37 | Crimson : you took the words out of my mouth ... so not gonna repeat it. (on topic part of message) |
| #33The_Crimson_DawnDec 08, 2010 20:08:58 | It's a good idea no to repeat it as I made it too long already. Very wordy and too much repetition it will probably cause glossing over reactions, but thanks for the vote of confidence! |
| #34danduDec 09, 2010 0:11:17 | I too agree that SUS does not give size increases. |
| #35aelryinthDec 10, 2010 18:10:16 | I'm afraid I don't agree, because you're restricting what Adaptive does to one part of the feat, but not the other (Improved Unarmed Strike). Adaptive doesn't sub for a 'size attack'. It subs for Unarmed Strike, which is a weapon. So now you have Improved Greatsword Strike, and Superior Greatsword Strike. Looking at the monk, it's plain that the dmg progression is based off the starting UA dmg, which is then modified by size. A medium creature using UA is doing 1-4. A medium creature using a Greatsword is doing 2-12. You're basically saying this substitution does not happen. Yet it's simply a case of subbing the name and assigning appropriate damage...which is exactly what Adaptive is supposed to do. Otherwise, when you subbed Greatsword for, say, Mace, you'd wind up with a Greatsword doing 1-6 dmg, or something. So, your logic is not consistent. Adaptive has to substitute dmg for UA like it would for any other weapon, or there's no consistency. And once it does that, it follows the progression like UA, adjusting for base dmg like UA would. A character using a Small Greatsword will end up at 4-24, the same as a medium longsword or a large shortsword. ---------------------------------- The gauntlets were basically challenges that fighters could solo encounters. You have to have an argument that they can't to spur interest in them. Likewise, it's hard to make a PC not optimized for one on one encounters where they can nova in these challenges. Besides, I got kinda tired of seeing variant charge builds! I think it would be more fun to see alternate Sorceror spell builds, by level, but I suspect that's way too much work. ==Aelryinth |
| #36The_Crimson_DawnDec 10, 2010 22:11:38 | I am not restricting adaptive I am not using the changes in damage as a size change while you are. I am doing is exactly what adaptive say which apply the feat to the weapon. We both agree on this I think. Next part is different. You see SUS as a size change to your unarmed strike so therefor you apply the size changes to the sword. I however do not see SUS as a size change since it never says a size change. To me the feat just says you will change your unarmed damage to these values at a certin level, but these changes are not size changes. Since these are just changes to the damage dice I adaptive does nothing since at best I can only do as much damage as a greatsword anyway. Notice I am not limiting adaptive I am just not using size changes which are not named as size changes. If SUS had text like this-Your unarmed strike goes up in damage by one size category at 3rd, 2 sizes at 4th, 3 sizes at 8, and 4 sizes at 16. If the text read like this I would 100% agree with you as I now replace US with greatsword so the blade should go up 4 size categories. The actual feat does not say this though it just says "You deal more damage with your unarmed strikes, shown on the table below" and then lists damage dice. Same with monks they do not get size increases they just get a progression of better dice of damage that can be modified by size changes such as imp nat attack (you might be able to make this feat work). Size mods are applied after the damage dice are known SUS only gives you base damage it does not have anything to do with size categories. In order for your idea to work there has to be size categories involved and I see nothing about size categories in the feat at all for adaptive to give to the great sword. Adaptive works with the feat but I disagree on your interpretation of how that feat affects Unarmed strikes in the first place. |
| #42The_Crimson_DawnDec 12, 2010 2:21:11 | SUS is not a progression from a base. It sets the damage of what we assume is medium based damage (the feat does not actually specify it but I do think it is safe to assume that). The feat says your Unarmed strikes deal X amount of damage. By using the literal reading (which we are using for adaptive) we must say that the greatsword must deal the same damage that the feat says. That is how adaptive works. If I had a race that was medium sized but had unarmed strikes that dealt 1d6 damage as a racial ability (and did not say it was a size change or similar) SUS would not help until it goes up to 1d8 because the feat gives you a set progression for medium creatures. If it smaller than the initial damage for a medium creature too bad. Just because your weapon starts with a higher die does not mean this feat has to benefit you. The base damage for an unarmed strike with SUS (that is not a monk) is whatever the feat says it is. At different levels that base changes because that is what the feat does. If you are larger or smaller you use the base damage the feat gives you. So a large creature using SUS deals 3d6 because the base damage is 2d6+1 size category. This is not a base of 1d3 (unarmed damage ie) "virtula size" changed 5 times and boosted by one actual size category. If I substitute greatsword for unarmed strike in the feat description it will say "You deal more damage with your greatsword, as shown on the table. The table then gives values directly and so there is nothing there that says that if your unarmed strike is better than what is given by the feat that the feat will have any benefit, with one exception, the monk. You add a line that would state "if your unarmed strike deals more damage than what is given on the table increase the damage to the next step on the tablt that is better than your initial unarmed strike damage". |
| #43aelryinthDec 12, 2010 9:03:08 | that does not work either, Crimson. What you're saying is "Superior Greatsword Strike sets the damage of a Greatsword to less then the base dmg of a Greatsword." Which is patently against the intent and mechanics of the feat. There's nothing superior about it. Your mechanic would then also say "Tiny Daggers (dmg 1) do as much damage as a Medium UA attack under SUS." Because that logic has to work downwards as well as upwards...and it doesn't work downwards. So that doesn't fly, either. It's like attacking with a metal toothpick is as effective as slamming my fist into them. Greatsword subs for dmg at the base level. SUS is built on IUS, which defaults to a d4 base for a medium creature, and that's the basic table. You're again making the assumption that a pixie and a fire giant with SUS are going to end up at the same place. SUS is not setting dmg, it's showing a damage progression. That progression is going to vary, like that of a monk, by the base dmg of the UA attack, normal varying by size. ==Aelryinth |
| #44The_Crimson_DawnDec 12, 2010 15:02:00 | 1) Yes I am saying the feat does nothing for greatswords. This is not a problem since it was not designed to work for greatswords. You are blatently wrong that the intention of the feat is to boost greatsword damage, the feat was designed to only boost unarmed strike damage. We are using an exploit. Sometimes it will open some new awesome ability and sometimes we will get nothing and this is a case of it not being helpful for a greatsword but great for a small weapon. 2) Tiny daggers would not deal as much as a medium unarmed strike in my example. The base damage of a tiny sized dagger modified by SUS at level 16 is 1D6 (SUS sets medium sized damage of unarmed strike and all weapons with the addaptive property to 2d6 and you go down one size to small for 1d8 and again for 1d6). So a tiny sized dagger would deal less damage than a medium fist or medium dagger for that matter. The logic appears to work fine to me. 3) I do not assume that a pixie and a giant will end up in the same place. They start using the same base damage and then you apply size mods. If I wanted to make a huge creature and use a longsword I take the longswords 1d8 base and add 2 size categories making it 3d6. My pixie (are they tiny I will assume they are tiny) would take a longsword at base 1d8 and make it smaller by two izes giving me 1d4. |
| #45aelryinthDec 12, 2010 22:21:55 | Ah, but there's your rub. They don't start at the same damage. You are applying your rule to the benefit of the tiny dagger, but to the ill of the larger weapon. That is not consistent. The chain of effect is quite simple, and it's why Adaptive can be abused. Keep in mind that I do not like it, but this is how it works. A Medium Person wielding UA deals 1-4 dmg. This damage is set before anything else starts. A Large person wielding UA deals 1-6 dmg. A Tiny person wielding UA deals 1-3 dmg. A Medium Person wielding a Greatsword does 2-12. This damage is set before anything starts. Large, 3-18 Small, 1-10 (or 1-8) SUS starts a damage progression based on the base damage of the UA wielder. SGS starts a damage progression based on the base damage of the Greatsword Wielder. If you're going to progress UA by SUS, you must follow the exact same rules for Greatswords...it's a clean substitution. SUS works off base dmg, NOT off '1-4'. It doesn't care if someone gets damage because they are big, small, or because they are using a sword instead of a fist. Once Greatsword inserts in there, it gets treated with the exact same formula. That formula is double dmg over 3 increases, ending at 4 and x3 dmg. Easy enough to replicate. It doesn't quite follow for Tiny and Small daggers, which end up at 1-10 and 1-8, but it's close enough to work. Your example...doesn't. You are delibrately leaving the Greatsword out of the formula because you believe it to be imbalanced, which makes it a house rule. you are willing to sub in smaller base damages, because that's not as bad, but not higher ones, unless they are justified by 'size'. Which also makes no sense. A gargantuan monk can start at 2-12, but a Greatsword cannot, but you'll let a Dagger follow right along? Doesn't fly. You're being inconsistent. Adaptive is quite powerful, and this is an example of how it can be abused...and, incidentally, of how I believe weapon damage should advance over time (no, I don't have a problem with a level 15 Melee swinging a Greatsword for 6-36). ==Aelryinth |
| #46The_Crimson_DawnDec 12, 2010 23:10:34 | I am being very consistant with the rule. I am treating all weapons the same. Some weapons will get a lot of benefit like unarmed strike but greatswords will not which is fine since the feat was not designed to work with it in the first place. Almost any medium weapon in the game eventually gets a bonus from this feat except the greatsword. There is no indication in the feat that you can sub any damage for the 1d4. The feat does not say increase your inital unarmed damage by one step and then use the rest of the table. It says your unarmed damage is now 1d4. You must sub greatsword in there so yea your greatsword sucks. You keep adding my second sentence in this paragraph to the feat. To me that is inconsistant where my reading no additional rules and holds to the description of adaptive. I am not making a balance arguement, if I was I would probably not be happy with a dagger dealing 2d6 damage. I am fine with a greatsword dealing 6d6 damage if I can legally make it that way. Unfortunately I do not see this working like you say. Heck I am considering making a character using the new 2d6 daggers boosted to 3d6 with imp natural attack. So thank you for bringing up the idea, it is clever but do not insinuate that I am trying to argue balance because I am not. Personally I am not finding your arguement persuasive, but I am sure the feeling is likewise. |
| #47aelryinthDec 13, 2010 11:21:26 | You're right, I don't find it persuasive. The idea that you can sub in a dagger to the feat and get to 2-12 dmg, and sub in a Greatsword to the feat, and get no benefit at all, is not logically consistent. Adaptive is specifically meant to give a weapon all the benefits of another feat. You're 'appointing damage', rather then progressing damage. Adaptive is not detrimental to the weapon it is on, and you're making it work that way, and only benefiting the weapons which will be easiest to control. I find it extremely difficult to justify that Superior Greatsword Strike does the exact same damage at level 15 as Superior Tiny Dagger Strike and Superior Unarmed Strike. That is not logically consistent, and not very defensible. And the table clearly shows a progression of damage, and if we refer to the monk, shows how they handle increased base dmg...the progression table shifts to accomodate. But, we can agree to disagree. ==Aelryinth |
| #48The_Crimson_DawnDec 13, 2010 13:19:04 | I do not find adaptive negative, SUS just does not help. For instance your greatsword could use snap kick to get an extra attack at any time. You could also use roundabout kick to get an extra attack on a critical. Lastly imp nat attack to boost damage. Those feats are potent especially if you increase your crit range. If you somehow had enough feats you could use freezing the lifeblood. For your point that you feel that adaptive should be able to make any feat a benefit I point you to lightning mace. This feat with adaptive can be used well by a dagger wielder but a greatsword wielder gets no benefit unless you can wield a greatsword in each hand. This feat is therefor useless even with adaptive. It happens sometimes, adaptive is supposed you to allow you to use feats that normally can not be used with a weapon but that does not mean it is always benficial. EDIT: Think warblade or swordsage with all of those feats using a kukri or other 18-20 crit range. With imp crit you could be threatning and critting a lot. Even when moving we could use a strike, use raging mongoose, snap kick, and if any of those threaten/crit we get two more attacks in each case (which happens a lot) and if I take a full attack it is worse. Lastly my kukri would be a 3d6 15-20X2 weapon (is that an imp crit 18-20 range get to?). Is that enough power gaming for you to show that I am willing to push the power? I think this would be a fun character to optimize to be honest. |
| #49aelryinthDec 13, 2010 21:30:25 | You just clarified that you are biasing in favor of small weapons and not in favor of large ones. Let me turn that around. Why are you willing to go with 2 x 3-18 dmg Improved Crit kukri's, and not a 6-36 dmg greatsword? So, you're intentionally warping the logic away from the rules as set. It's not a case of you thinking the rules don't work that way, now...you're shifting them with a paradigm that is used nowhere else in the game. So, you're not using RAW...that's a House Interpretation. And BTW, I didn't come up with this whole thing...Char Ops did, a long time ago. I think it was JaronK who busted out the dual wielded heavy crossbows that you cocked with a free action **** hand crossbows.... And yes, you've the correct threat range. ===Aelryinth |
| #50The_Crimson_DawnDec 14, 2010 1:00:56 | It has nothing to do with a bias against large weapons it is how the feat works. I do not see anything that says you can change any number in the progression on the feat. You want it to work because it makes sense to you but that is not a good reason. I have seen nothing to suggest that I can replace the 1d4 at the top of the table. All I know we can replace is "greatsword" for "unarmed strike". Since SUS replaces damage on unarmed strike I must use the same values (since nothing in the feat says they change for any reason and adaptive does not say I can change anything except the weapon name). It just happens in this case that smaller weapons benefit more in this siuation. Frankly I see you using the house interpretation. You are atributing motives I do not have. I do not care about how much damage this ability gives out, I just do not seeing this working as you do and it just happens that it hurts the greatword. |
| #51darth_versityDec 14, 2010 3:11:37 | Now I have been watching this discussion for a while but been unable to post due to my iphones inability to log in. Now im on a proper computer though so let me show how I understand it to work. |
| #52The_Crimson_DawnDec 14, 2010 13:59:25 | Using monkey grip and imp natural attack I can get to 4d6 greatsword so if we can get one size change we can get 6d6 greatswords with no problems. So we probably can get 6d6 greatswords it is just how we get there is different. |
| #53aelryinthDec 14, 2010 21:30:35 | Wellll, I kinda think y'all are ignoring the fact that the monk set precedent for UA damage progressions increasing if the base dmg was higher. Shouldn't be a need for reposting those rules if they already exist, yah? And as you noted, it goes completely against the flavor text of the feat itself. Ergo, I call it a damage progression, not a resetting of damage to a specific number. methinks if they meant blades of grass to do the same damage as fists, that would also have been part of the rules, neh? So without evidence to the contrary, we have to go by prior examples, which is the damage applies and progresses off the base. But, we can agree to disagree. ==Aelryinth |