Maneuver Musings

[kurashu]

I was thinking about initiators while I was at work today as well as homebrew stuff I've been introducing into my campaign lately (martial hexblade & ranger, some homebrew disciplines). Basically it came down to this: initiators get the short end most of the time.

Maneuvers have prerequisites -- this has been discussed to death, and I fall on the side that says this is a stupid idea to have, may as well require spells to have the same. I just think having a high enough IL should be the only requirement, even if it means someone dips into Master of Nine and cherry picks a few high level maneuvers.

Maneuvers have inconsistent ability modifiers -- I get having Strength modify Stone Dragon and Iron Heart. But a Crusader/Sorcerer who takes levels in Jade Phoenix Mage better have a high wisdom if he takes any Desert Wind maneuvers with a save. How bad would it be to say Crusaders set saves with Charisma, Swordsages with Wisdom and Warblades with Intelligence when it comes to a "mystical" disciplines -- Shadow Hand, Devoted Spirit, et cetera -- and if a discipline is a "physical" discipline -- Stone Dragon, Setting Sun, Iron Heart -- it uses whatever stat it says (usually strength).

For me, this makes it easier to introduce a new discipline to a player without them rejecting it because they don't have a high enough wisdom on their crusader, or a high enough charisma on their warblade. It makes maneuvers function a little bit more like spells, but I think this is a good thing. Otherwise, we might as well say conjuration uses charisma, transmutation uses intelligence, evocation uses charisma, divination uses intelligence, et cetera.

What does everyone think about this?

[Kajhera]

Seems perfectly reasonable. Games I play in, if they use Tome of Battle at all, tend to ignore the whole prerequisite thing anyway.

[RobbyPants]

Yes to both.  I like the physical/mental split on stats.  I hadn't thought of that before.

[PhaedrusXY]

It would be perfectly fine (and even preferable) to just make them all use the same stat to set DCs, based on the class, rather than the discipline. I hadn't considered it before, mostly because the maneuvers I've actually used don't even offer saves. Having them all over the place reminds me of 3.0 psionics, which was a clusterfuck of bad design.

Overall, I think ToB had some fantastic ideas, but the implementation was poorly thought out. I mean... just look at the relative usefulness of manuevers. It has absolutely fucking nothing to do with what level they are. It is just completely random. And I agree wholeheartedly that the prereq thing was also just a terrible idea. 

[RobbyPants]

It would be perfectly fine (and even preferable) to just make them all use the same stat to set DCs, based on the class, rather than the discipline. I hadn't considered it before, mostly because the maneuvers I've actually used don't even offer saves. Having them all over the place reminds me of 3.0 psionics, which was a clusterfuck of bad design.

That makes sense.  I'd set it up like so:

1) Ability modifier:
Reference your class:

• Crusader - Charisma
• Swordsage - Wisdom
• Warblade - Intelligence

2) DC Formula for a given class:
10 + 1/2 Initiator level + ability modifier for class

And yes, that's Initiator level and not class level or maneuver level.  There's no reason these things shouldn't scale.  It's not like you can't swap maneuvers out for higher level ones anyway.

[kurashu]

Setting it at half IL seems reasonable, too, because unlike caster level, it's pretty hard to get it at 230 (even allowing homebrew material, I've seen maybe three things that boost IL).

[JaronK]

Setting it at half IL seems reasonable, too, because unlike caster level, it's pretty hard to get it at 230 (even allowing homebrew material, I've seen maybe three things that boost IL).

Serious Bloodline abuse is the only way to get it really high.  But that has other downsides, so if you REALLY want that IL 40, I say go for it.

JaronK