Author Topic: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept  (Read 152329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #400 on: August 24, 2011, 05:48:57 AM »
Ok, so 2d6 Alchemist's Fire +2d6+12 sneak attack damage deals (3.5*4+12)*1.5 fire damage to a white dragon, which is an average of 39 damage. Assuming you get to throw 3 of them, that's 117 points of damage.

So after the initial assault, the dragon is kinda on fire. Each flask deals 2d6 fire damage on the subsequent round (6d6 total) unless the dragon takes a full round action to extinguish it. Assuming he does not in favor of an attack, he will take 3.5*6*1.5 = 31.5 points of damage, on average.

If he uses a breath weapon, the Swordsage will likely succeed on the reflex save. If he attacks, he will likely only get one attack off due to the distance between the two combatants. His melee attack bonus is enough to hit, though the Smoking weapon does offer concealment. The Child of Shadow stance, if used after the last flask is thrown, provides better concealment.

At this point, I'm kinda out of ideas. I guess engaging in melee or continuing to throw flasks of improved alchemist's fire at it is what comes next?

You could just hide again in you smoking weapon concealment? If you are optimised for it you can bring your hide check to more than +44, then you just have to have 10ft or more between you and the dragon to get a better than average chance of hiding.

@Twilight Wyrm, you calculate damage wrong, the average of 1d6 is 3.5 not 3, and 1d10 is 5.5 not 5. This makes your damage significantly higher.

Quote
If you think about it you actually are, if only slightly. Any steps require incremental raising, running would require restrained flight akin to hovering. I say this, because a running person does not move forward in a static line, such as a person under the effect of the Overland Flight spell presumably would. You are moving up and down, in motions you would need considerable control over your flight to replicate in mid air. This coupled with the other problems you bring up would seem to indicate a very low rate of success for such a tactic.

This requires at least more than 6 int to realise, and a pretty good eyesight to see that your opponents are not running correctly across a bridge in a dimly lit cavern. Also it probably requires a spellcraft check to know that there are things you can pass through while others fly above them. I would say this is a fairly good chance of succeeding, which means it comes down to what "interacting with" means.

Quote
Assuming the dragon is not inexplicably positioning itself to all vitals are out of sneak attack range for someone on the ground. (Since combat has not yet started, and as far as the dragon knows, no one is there (Given the meager 12 Cha available to Mature Adult White Dragons, their spells will be of limited use in this regard)
The dragon has a permanent Spider Climb on all icy surfaces, assuming this white dragon is the standard kind who makes it lair in glaciers or icefilled caverns. It could simply be sleeping on the ceiling (and why wouldn't it).

Apart from that, I like your build and feel it would add as much as a tier 3 should to an adventuring party.

---

I personally prefer the Warblade as a much better Tier 3 character. True his sneaky skills aren't that awesome, and need levels in factotum to really kick off. On the other hand: His offense is better than the swordsage, higher BAB, more focus on strength, and a bunch of maneuvers more suited for direct damage makes the warblade come out ahead. His defense is also better than the swordsage. He has the same substitute Concentration for Saves, but also has Iron Heart Surge, which is just crazy good defense.

---

Since the supercharge, the TWF, and the Debuffing Swordsage has already been covered, I think I'll make one that focuses around Concentration checks and the nice Diamond Mind maneuvers. Coming shortly.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

Lo77o

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
  • Guns dont kill people, apes with guns kills people
    • Email
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #401 on: August 24, 2011, 11:15:43 AM »
For Lo77o and snakeman830: Link for the BoVD FAQ by WotC
The question is whether this applies to the MoI strongheart vest, but since the FAQ dates from the time of the BovD release, years before MoI, probably it can be forgiven that they make no explicit mention of the MoI ability.

- Giacomo

Yep, that is the same one i looked over before. Still don't see anything that wound invalidate reducing the damage. The Adept is neither undead or immune to ability damage. And as far as i can see, those are the only two things that is discussed.

If i am mistaken, please correct me.
"Home is where you can find a decent graveyard and strangers can disappear without awkward questions." - Braids, Cabal Minion

Sir Giacomo

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 259
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #402 on: August 24, 2011, 12:22:36 PM »
1. Defeat dragonCharger tactics: still no details forthcoming here (also how the charger can see the initially hiding dragon to be able to charge, or charge the dragon once its fog cloud is up).
  Very interesting approach. Still my questions are how the swordsage here will be able to a) spot and get near the dragon to use the melee combo and b) how he can hit reliably hit AC 28 or higher (32 with mage armor, for instance). Once the swordsage is close and hits, though, the massive level drains will do the trick, for sure!
2. Find and win trust of the leader of a slave resistance movement in a tyrannical state3. Help a city vs an invading army of orcs (I guess with 1 week preparation time).

Solo

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
  • Solo the Sorcelator, at your service
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #403 on: August 24, 2011, 12:27:07 PM »
Giacomo's list has a sad lack of alchemist's fire based tactics.

"I am the Black Mage! I cast the spells that makes the peoples fall down!"

The Legend RPG, which I worked on and encourage you to read.

Lo77o

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
  • Guns dont kill people, apes with guns kills people
    • Email
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #404 on: August 24, 2011, 01:48:25 PM »

Not trying to be a prick or to nitpick, but the definition that includes yourself as an ally is the PhB one. So if you want to exclude your self as an ally, you would have to find another definition.
"Home is where you can find a decent graveyard and strangers can disappear without awkward questions." - Braids, Cabal Minion

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #405 on: August 24, 2011, 01:58:14 PM »
Giacomo's list has a sad lack of alchemist's fire based tactics.

He's also pretty bad at playing devils advocate.

---

@Giacomo, let me say this again: Being a higher tier doesn't mean every single build made is better at everything than the lower tier classes, it just means that overall and in most options it's better.

Also, most swordsages that have been made are quite sneaky, he could venture into the city, wait for the resistance to do something resistance-y (I guess he'll find where that will happen through a Knowledge Local) check. Then jump into help them from the shadow. Then you could offer to help the resistance, get to talk with the leader (through use of diplomacy) and tell him that you represent a group that supports him from outside town. Then you can leave by hiding again.

Not all adepts can do the wight-pocalypse trick, and others would have to use other tactics. Like using spells to enhance the defenses. Fingerdart bro would have to move into the orc camp and take out opposing orcs. etc. etc.

Swordsages have more options here. And many are even viable, taking out leaders, using an AoO focused build could hold a city gate or other choke point indefinetely after having taken down the enemy artillery etc. etc.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #406 on: August 24, 2011, 02:09:54 PM »

Not trying to be a prick or to nitpick, but the definition that includes yourself as an ally is the PhB one. So if you want to exclude your self as an ally, you would have to find another definition.

I'm not trying to be a prick or to nitpick either but doesn't the PHB definition of ally actually say "A creature friendly to you."  They could just say "You" if they meant you; but they did not.  They mention that "allies" can include yourself but does not automatically include yourself.  Ally /= Allies

The target entry and rules text of White Raven Tactics both use "Ally" not "Allies".

I don't even care which way anyone cares to read it - anything that is even sort of questionable should not be used as part of any argument for a build being stronger than another build IMO.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2011, 02:12:02 PM by Nachofan99 »

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #407 on: August 24, 2011, 02:20:05 PM »

Not trying to be a prick or to nitpick, but the definition that includes yourself as an ally is the PhB one. So if you want to exclude your self as an ally, you would have to find another definition.

I'm not trying to be a prick or to nitpick either but doesn't the PHB definition of ally actually say "A creature friendly to you."  They could just say "You" if they meant you; but they did not.  They mention that "allies" can include yourself but does not automatically include yourself.  Ally /= Allies

The target entry and rules text of White Raven Tactics both use "Ally" not "Allies".

I don't even care which way anyone cares to read it - anything that is even sort of questionable should not be used as part of any argument for a build being stronger than another build IMO.

I'm pretty sure that allies is the correct multiplication of ally and not meaning anything special.

However, White Raven Tactics should never be used on yourself anyway. If so, the Idiot Crusader would have unlimited Actions. And a warblade would only need a little bit of thought to get unlimited attacks.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #408 on: August 24, 2011, 02:31:27 PM »
Even if it's just a "multiplication" problem, "allies" say's you do not always count as your own "ally."  So it just makes it even thornier.

I agree that it is obvious that WRT should not be used on yourself, and as you said, Idiot Crusader has infinite actions.  Crusader for tier 1!

Lo77o

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
  • Guns dont kill people, apes with guns kills people
    • Email
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #409 on: August 24, 2011, 02:42:14 PM »

Not trying to be a prick or to nitpick, but the definition that includes yourself as an ally is the PhB one. So if you want to exclude your self as an ally, you would have to find another definition.

I'm not trying to be a prick or to nitpick either but doesn't the PHB definition of ally actually say "A creature friendly to you."  They could just say "You" if they meant you; but they did not.  They mention that "allies" can include yourself but does not automatically include yourself.  Ally /= Allies

The target entry and rules text of White Raven Tactics both use "Ally" not "Allies".

I don't even care which way anyone cares to read it - anything that is even sort of questionable should not be used as part of any argument for a build being stronger than another build IMO.

Ally and Allies are just singular and plural, and should have no impact on the PhB definition. Otherwise we will have to have different definitions for target and targets, player and players etc. And it is perfectly reasonable to include a note that you cant always target your self as an ally, since several PhB spells has that limitation. WRT on the other hand does not as it is written. You might not like it, you might not allow it in your games and it might not be what was intended. But it is what is written.
"Home is where you can find a decent graveyard and strangers can disappear without awkward questions." - Braids, Cabal Minion

Sir Giacomo

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 259
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #410 on: August 24, 2011, 02:49:43 PM »
@Giacomo, let me say this again: Being a higher tier doesn't mean every single build made is better at everything than the lower tier classes, it just means that overall and in most options it's better.

Maybe you wish to include more adept and swordsage builds then? So far it is two quite well-performing adept builds vs four swordsage builds in combat.
For the other two scenarios, the only thing provided were the methods of the diplomatic/sneaky swordsage vs the minion adept.

All of the builds combined still provide a better performance of the adept in my view. Also, the number of spells the adept gets (=DMG list, Eberron domain list, corrupt list, cyst spells and exalted spells) is more versatile/numerous than the number of maneuvers for the swordsage at first glance imo. So also here, in terms of potential combos and versatility from class alone, the adept appears to be ahead.

But please go on, I keep collecting the ideas. ;)

- Giacomo

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #411 on: August 24, 2011, 02:56:28 PM »
Quote
Ally and Allies are just singular and plural, and should have no impact on the PhB definition. Otherwise we will have to have different definitions for target and targets, player and players etc.

Quoted that snippet.  I can agree that your logic is good, however, the Ally definition *specifically* brings out the "Allies" distinction.  It's a specific exception.

ImperatorK

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #412 on: August 24, 2011, 03:13:08 PM »
"Target" concerns itself with one thing and "targets" with many. That's pretty important distinction if you're keen on RAW. Or are you telling me that a spell which affects a (singular) creature can be used on multiple creatures? (If I remember correctly in spell descriptions it is specificly written "one creature", for example, but you know what I mean.)
« Last Edit: August 24, 2011, 03:16:42 PM by ImperatorK »
"I'm done thinking for today! It's caused me enough trouble!"
"Take less damage to avoid being killed."
"In the arena of logic, I fight unarmed."


[spoiler]
Quote from: Lateral
Or you could just be a cleric of an ideal. Like, physics and say that the domain choices reflect potential and kinetic energy.

 Plus, where other clerics say "For Pelor," "For Nerull," or "For Crom?" You get to say, "FOR SCIENCE!" *fanfare*

About me:
Quote from: dark_samuari
I know your game, you just want a magical Amazon.com to knock off those good ol' honest magic shops run by polite, old wizards!
Use Iron Heart Surge on the sun. That'll teach him to use fluff as RAW.

Damn you! You totally ruined my build that was all about getting epic far shot early and throwing my enemies into the sun!
[/spoiler]

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #413 on: August 24, 2011, 03:24:46 PM »
"Target" concerns itself with one thing and "targets" with many. That's pretty important distinction if you're keen on RAW. Or are you telling me that a spell which affects a (singular) creature can be used on multiple creatures? (If I remember correctly in spell descriptions it is specificly written "one creature", for example, but you know what I mean.)

No.  What I'm saying is that Lo77o has a very good point in saying we would get into a BUNCH of dumb situations if "Target/Targets" and "Player/Players" had different, distinct definitions, instead of saying "Look, targets is just the plural form of target."

I agree with him.

However, when I read the "Target" entry in the PHB, it does not go on to define "Targets" as something slightly different later in the entry.  Ally DOES with "allies".  That is the specific exception.

The_Laughing_Man

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #414 on: August 24, 2011, 03:48:56 PM »

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #415 on: August 24, 2011, 03:53:00 PM »
Haha, we don't want to bring in Sage rulings into anything IMO.  They contradict themselves, rules, FAQ clarifications - everything!   But yeah, I don't even care about WRT.

Doesn't it still look like the Adept is "trouncing" the Swordsage?  I do like the negative levels debuffing Swordsage build quite a bit though.

lans

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 886
    • Email
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #416 on: August 24, 2011, 05:22:10 PM »
I'm not sure if  the adept is really trouncing the SS, but its keeping up in most areas and surpassing it in some areas quite well. I'm starting to think the Domain Adept might actually edge into low tier 3
Skill prodigy from Kingdoms of Kalamar

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #417 on: August 24, 2011, 05:29:39 PM »
The Adept is strong in some areas, but he does have weaknesses.  Undead are amazing in many scenarios, but useless in others, and in a lot of ways he's relying on humanoid enemies to dominate to fill in his weaknesses.  If those aren't available he might have problems.

Other that certain social situations, it's pretty rare that a Swordsage will have trouble in any campaign, really.  Also, I haven't seen anyone make a really solid stealth assassin Swordsage, which I feel is a really solid role for them (though admittedly I'd usually have a two level dip to round them out, usually Rogue 1/Rokugan Ninja 1).

JaronK

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #418 on: August 24, 2011, 05:33:56 PM »
Haha, we don't want to bring in Sage rulings into anything IMO.  They contradict themselves, rules, FAQ clarifications - everything!   But yeah, I don't even care about WRT.

Doesn't it still look like the Adept is "trouncing" the Swordsage?  I do like the negative levels debuffing Swordsage build quite a bit though.

Trouncing? How? The swordsage has multiple ways of dealing with all the situations, while only one or two have been mentioned for the adept.
The adept could at max have like 10 ways of dealing with each encounter, assuming he could use 2-3 spells to succeed in each encounter.

I'm not sure if  the adept is really trouncing the SS, but its keeping up in most areas and surpassing it in some areas quite well. I'm starting to think the Domain Adept might actually edge into low tier 3

Domains are pretty awesome, and so is a familiar. However, the Adept simply can't be tier 3, that puts him in the same tier as Dread Necromancer and Beguiler, to which he is obviously inferior.

I'm still failing to see how the adept is a greater asset to a party than the swordsage in most circumstances.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

zugschef

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 331
Re: Adept vs Unarmed Swordsage 2: Revenge of Monk vs Adept
« Reply #419 on: August 24, 2011, 05:40:20 PM »
in my experience the best swordsages take a single level dip in warblade and crusader each.