Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 nebelmond May 08, 2008 23:57:19	Martial Discipline weapons give a bigger bonus when using a maneuver from the discipline. They explicitly make an example of using a stance and a strike together to get the bonus from two enhancements. So obviously Stances are Maneuvers. Wouldn't that allow me to pick up a Stance with a Maneuver slot? And would I have to ready it than with allotment of readied Maneuvers? The Description of Maneuvers known for the classes never mentions any restriction to strikes, boosts and such.
#2 d3f4ult May 09, 2008 0:51:21	Tome of Battle, PG 43 "A stance is not a maneuver, but a special fighting method that you mantain from round to round. *snip* Stances are considered maneuvers for the purpose of fulfilling prerequisites for learning higher-level maneuvers, or qualifying for prestige classes or feats." I think this should be the rule to follow on stances as it appears under the chapter where they rule on the different types of maneuvers and their usage. I feel you should not use an example to derive to a conclusion. There are many cases whereby the examples in the books are misrepresented. Also, perhaps you should check with your DM (or rule it if you are the DM) whether a Stance can be used as a maneuver for purposes of gaining the bonuses given by the Martial Discipline weapons.
#3 runestar May 09, 2008 1:14:59	The example seems to suggest that stances are essentially maneuvers that are 24/7 active. For example, with a ironheart weapon, you get a continuous +3 to-hit so long as you remain in an ironheart stance. At lv20, a warblade with a iron heart, diamond mind weapon gets +6 if he activates both an iron heart and diamond mind stance simultaneously. Thus, a warblade20 in ironheart and white raven stance, activating a desert wind boost such as burning blade and time stands still gets +12 to-hit if his weapon has all 4 relevant martial discipline properties.:D
#4 nebelmond May 09, 2008 6:04:22	Tome of Battle, PG 43 "A stance is not a maneuver, but a special fighting method that you mantain from round to round. *snip* Stances are considered maneuvers for the purpose of fulfilling prerequisites for learning higher-level maneuvers, or qualifying for prestige classes or feats." I think this should be the rule to follow on stances as it appears under the chapter where they rule on the different types of maneuvers and their usage. I feel you should not use an example to derive to a conclusion. There are many cases whereby the examples in the books are misrepresented. Also, perhaps you should check with your DM (or rule it if you are the DM) whether a Stance can be used as a maneuver for purposes of gaining the bonuses given by the Martial Discipline weapons. From my feeling I agree with you there, stances are not maneuvers. My ruling on the case is, that the example is faulty and a stance wouldn't fulfill the requisites for the discipline weapon enchantment. Thank you for the quote though, I had already thought it wasn't defined anywhere.
#5 ander_spectacular May 09, 2008 10:48:38	From my feeling I agree with you there, stances are not maneuvers. My ruling on the case is, that the example is faulty and a stance wouldn't fulfill the requisites for the discipline weapon enchantment. What do you mean? Stances count just fine for using the Martial Discipline weapon enchantment. They just don't count as maneuvers when it comes to selecting new maneuvers and things like that. They are considered a maneuver known when it comes to maneuver prerequisites though. -AS-