PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next 5e does Tome of Battle [PEACH]



Jormengand
2018-06-27, 04:30 PM
I'm neither the greatest 5e fan, nor the greatest Tome of Battle fan, so I have no clue why I did this. Maybe two wrongs can make a right?

Anyway, here (https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LFgmEkbQvvZyJwiMFPj)'s the link. Let me know your thoughts.

Rerem115
2018-06-27, 05:09 PM
When I got to around where you started detailing stances and disciplines, it started overflowing the page. I'm using Chrome, if that's relevant, but that seems to be a common problem with GM Binder.

Yddisac
2018-06-27, 05:26 PM
As a huge fan of 5e and the ToB, I'm always excited to see people trying to make the latter work with the former. The trouble is that while the Tome of Battle is amazingly streamlined by the standards of 3e, it's complex and arbitrary by the standards of 5e, which is a much more elegant system overall. The glaring example here is the Crusader getting its manoeuvres randomly granted to it: that's a horrifying lack of agency for the player. In 3e, the random manoeuvres helped balance the Crusader next to the fussiness of prepared spells. In 5e, though, it makes the manoeuvres restricted in an unprecedented way.

On that note, this adaptation still seems to use 3e's standards of preparation, which is to say you have to prepare the same manoeuvre twice if you want to use it twice. 5e pointedly does not work that way. If they're going to fit in with the rest of 5e, I think the ToB martials will have to be at least as flexible as the Wizard. Simplifying the mechanics to a variation on Warlock spellcasting — know X manoeuvres, prepare Y (or just have ToB martials be 'spontaneous'), cast at highest level available, manoeuvre slots recharge on a short rest — would help these classes fit in much better with 5e's design philosophy. As things are, I think the fact that the base manoeuvre mechanics come from 3e shows.

Some nitpicks on class features to help bring them more in line with 5e philosophy:

Crusader

The math on Steely Resolve is fussier than it has to be, I think. Instead of keying it off of the amount of damage in the pool, why not just say "If you have any delayed damage, you get this bonus to your weapon damage based on your class level?" Saves the effort of division for essentially the same effect. That said, Steely Resolve, while central to the 3e Crusader, is a weird mechanic, and I'm not sure how well it gels with 5e in general. Not that I have an idea of how to address that quandary.
Getting a good save proficiency as a class feature is alarmingly strong.
Why have Smite key off class level when it could key off of manoeuvre level? You're expending a manoeuvre slot anyway, and manoeuvre level scales with class level regardless.
I rather like Die Hard. People who like to kill their PCs might disagree, but I quite like that feature.

Swordsage

Light Armour Specialist is a bit threatening; Unarmoured Defence is probably a better substitute.
Weapon Focus is very 3e, and not in a good way; adding 1 to every attack roll ever is an annoying amount of mental math. A manoeuvre in one of the Swordsage-only schools granting, say, +1d4 to school weapon attack rolls for a minute would be a much more 5e way of getting the same effect (Swordsages focusing on perfecting the art of a single weapon).
Defensive Stance is... interesting. I don't think it's broken in practice, and I'd use it as written without complaint, but using the lower die on a roll with advantage is an interesting mechanic. I think I actually like it.

Warblade

Battle Clarity may want to have its uses limited some, maybe 1/short rest?
The Uncanny Dodge improvements are way too finicky IMO; I'd just come up with something else to grant at levels 2 and 14
I can't see Battle Ardour coming up often enough to be worth it.
I'm not sure what Battle Cunning actually grants... the wording is quite unclear ^^;
I like Battle Skill and Battle Mastery a lot in principle, and I do like that the Intelligence gets some use in that way, but the flat modifiers are a) 3e-like and b) rather situational. A more 5e-like approach would be to simply grant advantage in both cases, and both abilities are situational and high-level enough that I think a boon as potent as advantage is warranted either way.


Don't have time to go over the disciplines atm (I should be planning my campaign right now ^^;;) but I can already tell some of them are pretty great with Distracting Ember conjuring a magmin to spam the Help action. Tying the disciplines into subclasses that spread across the three classes is quuuite interesting, but luckily a lot of the disciplines are unique to a specific class, so that makes it easier to balance than it sounds. I also don't have time to evaluate how the final product looks, but with any luck I can post again in a few days to do that. In the meantime, that's my Evaluation and Honest Critique; hope it helps :)

Jormengand
2018-06-28, 06:22 AM
When I got to around where you started detailing stances and disciplines, it started overflowing the page. I'm using Chrome, if that's relevant, but that seems to be a common problem with GM Binder.

Have you tried not using Google's automated spy network Chrome? I recommend Firefox.


As a huge fan of 5e and the ToB, I'm always excited to see people trying to make the latter work with the former. The trouble is that while the Tome of Battle is amazingly streamlined by the standards of 3e, it's complex and arbitrary by the standards of 5e, which is a much more elegant system overall. The glaring example here is the Crusader getting its manoeuvres randomly granted to it: that's a horrifying lack of agency for the player. In 3e, the random manoeuvres helped balance the Crusader next to the fussiness of prepared spells. In 5e, though, it makes the manoeuvres restricted in an unprecedented way.

The elegance of 5e, on the other hand, comes with a cataclysmic lack of nuance. Many of the more finicky mechanics (take a look at literally any manœuvre which previously assumed that you were charging, or any manœuvre which previously dealt ability damage, or emerald razor, hydra-slaying strike, enervating strike, stone bones, birds of a feather or order forged from chaos (check out the initiation time)) come from the fact that 5e doesn't provide a universal way of doing the kinds of things that had proper rules for them in 3.5.


On that note, this adaptation still seems to use 3e's standards of preparation, which is to say you have to prepare the same manoeuvre twice if you want to use it twice. 5e pointedly does not work that way. If they're going to fit in with the rest of 5e, I think the ToB martials will have to be at least as flexible as the Wizard. Simplifying the mechanics to a variation on Warlock spellcasting — know X manoeuvres, prepare Y (or just have ToB martials be 'spontaneous'), cast at highest level available, manoeuvre slots recharge on a short rest — would help these classes fit in much better with 5e's design philosophy. As things are, I think the fact that the base manoeuvre mechanics come from 3e shows.

Some nitpicks on class features to help bring them more in line with 5e philosophy:
I'll admit that making things more in line with 5e philosophy isn't really a design goal, here.


The math on Steely Resolve is fussier than it has to be, I think. Instead of keying it off of the amount of damage in the pool, why not just say "If you have any delayed damage, you get this bonus to your weapon damage based on your class level?" Saves the effort of division for essentially the same effect. That said, Steely Resolve, while central to the 3e Crusader, is a weird mechanic, and I'm not sure how well it gels with 5e in general. Not that I have an idea of how to address that quandary.
I don't think that dividing by 5 is gonna be too hard; it should be fine. Certainly, I want to see how annoying this is in actual play (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?562441-9-Swords-a-Star-and-a-Silver-Tongue-Homebrew-Playtest) before I do too much in the way of trying to change it.


Getting a good save proficiency as a class feature is alarmingly strong.
This is another one which I'm gonna watch in the playtest, then, but it should be fine - a 10% chance per wisdom save you make of actually doing anything at all doesn't seem too strong, but I can certainly change it if it gets a bit much.


Why have Smite key off class level when it could key off of manoeuvre level? You're expending a manoeuvre slot anyway, and manoeuvre level scales with class level regardless.
Hm, good point. Changed that.


Light Armour Specialist is a bit threatening; Unarmoured Defence is probably a better substitute.
I'm hoping that the fact that a swordsage needs at least three different high ability scores (and if they take exactly three, they can't take both dexterity and wisdom) in order to use all their manœuvres properly should prevent them from stacking up an exceptional AC. I suppose that specialising in Tiger Claw to get Twin Claw Shield, maxing out dex and wis, then sitting in Pearl of Black Doubt stance, spamming setting sun, shadow hand and tiger claw manœuvres until you're blue in the face and using your AC of 24+the number of attacks that have missed you since your last turn could get a bit oppressive, but I'm not sure that it's necessarily the best use of practically your entire build, especially since you have a limited ability to force anyone actually to pay attention to the guy dodging all their attacks rather than Squishy McWizardFace.


Weapon Focus is very 3e, and not in a good way; adding 1 to every attack roll ever is an annoying amount of mental math. A manoeuvre in one of the Swordsage-only schools granting, say, +1d4 to school weapon attack rolls for a minute would be a much more 5e way of getting the same effect (Swordsages focusing on perfecting the art of a single weapon).
I've changed it to:

"Choose one type of weapon. You can treat that weapon as though it had the finesse, light or reach property, or as though it didn't have the heavy, two-handed or loading property." Which I guess means that Nine Arrows swordsage with two light crossbows might be fun? Or tiger claw double whip swordsage!

...mounted double lancer swordsage?


Battle Clarity may want to have its uses limited some, maybe 1/short rest?
The Uncanny Dodge improvements are way too finicky IMO; I'd just come up with something else to grant at levels 2 and 14I can't see Battle Ardour coming up often enough to be worth it.
I've reworked all these significantly.


I'm not sure what Battle Cunning actually grants... the wording is quite unclear ^^;

The idea is that any die where the natural roll is equal to, or less than, your intelligence modifier, you can reroll on your attack or damage roll, but only if your target is sneak-attack-able. I'm going to take out the "you must have advantage or enemy must have someone else within 5 feet and you not have disadvantage) thing because I don't think it's actually necessary and it makes it a little unclear.


I like Battle Skill and Battle Mastery a lot in principle, and I do like that the Intelligence gets some use in that way, but the flat modifiers are a) 3e-like and b) rather situational. A more 5e-like approach would be to simply grant advantage in both cases, and both abilities are situational and high-level enough that I think a boon as potent as advantage is warranted either way.
I've strapped int-to-damage onto battle mastery, but I like keeping the secondary mental stat theme going.


but I can already tell some of them are pretty great with Distracting Ember conjuring a magmin to spam the Help action.

The magmin can't actually take actions, but it's a great flanking buddy for a rogue (or assassin's stance'd swordsage), and also useful for just getting in people's ways... or a white raven specialist crusader has a bunch of ways to give everyone extra attacks/actions/turns, so it's nice if you're buddy-buddy with one of them.

Or you can blow up your own magmin. You monster. :smalltongue:

Thanks for the critiques!

PairO'Dice Lost
2018-06-28, 03:37 PM
The conversion looks pretty good overall, and I'm glad you're not trying to make everything bland and uniform have a more 5e-ish feel. A few comments:

Overview
For the components thing:

All of the manœuvre's components are relaxed. For a verbal component, you must speak the component but no-one actually needs to hear it, so it works if you are silenced but not if you are gagged and can't move your tongue. For a somatic component, you need to be able to move at least one hand more than a little, but you can hold anything in it, such as a weapon or a shield.

- If you're going to relax the restrictions anyway, why even give maneuvers V and M components at all? Maneuvers originally only needed the initiator to be able to move, and giving the new maneuvers only S components declaring that existing spells used as maneuvers went to "Components: S" seems like it would be fairly straightforward.
- Why do warblades use a druidic focus, of all things? If anything, I'd change it to crusaders using holy symbols because they're pseudo-divine, warblades using arcane foci because they're Int-based and practical, and swordsages using their choice of a holy symbol or arcane focus so they can go either the "contemplative monk" route or the "master of mind and body" route flavor-wise.

Devoted Spirit
For Aura of Zeal:
- The Lawful benefit seems a bit strange, since (A) getting advantage tells you something about the DC, which just kinda rubs me the wrong way, and (B) Aura of Perfect Order was mostly used to avoid the possibility of a low roll at the cost of not getting a high roll, not make an already-likely outcome more likely. I'd suggest just making it let you use [passive+1] on unopposed checks as well for simplicity and uniformity.
- For the Neither (Ethical) option, the "1+(1d2*18)" should be "2+(1d2-1)*17" to make the math work out, since the original version gives you results of 19 and 37. But I'd just simplify it to "Instead of rolling a d20 roll, roll 1d2. Treat a 1 on the d2 roll as a 2 on the d20 roll and a 2 on the d2 roll as a 19 on the d20 roll" or similar.

Diamond Mind
For the save-replacers (Onyx Mind/Aquamarine Flow/Opal Armour), since one of the points of using those maneuvers originally was to let you replace a potentially-low save modifier with a probably-high Concentration modifier, I'd suggest having the maneuvers also let you make the save as if you were proficient in that kind of saving throw if you weren't already. Maybe even a no-auto-fail clause, but for a 1/400 chance it's probably not a big deal either way. Alternately, you could have them substitute an Investigation check for the save like you did for Garnet Strike, but I assume you wanted to make them different for a reason.

(Also, Opal Armour and Garnet Strike have a level of "3rst".)

Iron Heart
Purely a flavor thing, but Copper Skin/Silver Stride/Golden Fist doesn't really fit with the metal names of the rest of the maneuvers. Maybe Iron Skin, Steel Stride, and either Adamant Fist or Titanium Fist instead?

Any particular reason not to allow Wall of Blades to deflect attacks with unarmed strikes? Flavor-wise, you can bat away the flat of a sword, the haft of a mace, or whatever with your hand just fine. (Also, it's listed as a "2-level Iron Heart" maneuver.)

Favored Discipline Replacements
I'd move these to either the beginning or end of the disciplines section instead of sorting alphabetically; having them just pop up in the middle like a normal discipline is a bit confusing.

Setting Sun
For Fool's Strike, you might want to allow them to negate crits, since Wall of Blades can potentially negate crits and it's much lower level. Maybe something like having the attack be merely negated on a crit instead of negated and then redirected?

Shadow Hand
For Shadowdancer's Legacy, dimension door at will at 3rd is pretty darn strong, even with the shadow/darkness limitation. I'd either swap it with Ultravision (since Ultravision would probably be more useful if you get it at the same level people start getting darkness anyway), or have Shadowdancer's Legacy be something like teleporting "as if using dimension door" but at a distance that scales by 5 * highest maneuver level squared--so 10 to start, where it's good for getting past locked doors and such but not much beyond that, scaling up to 405 which is a pretty good distance for at-will teleportation.

Death in the Dark looks kinda clunky with the 6 different saves, and 6d6+54 damage doesn't really need to be gated behind that when other maneuvers are doing 9d6 damage with a single save. Cutting it down to, say, Str/Con/Wis saves for 2d6 + 2*HML apiece would help with that, or some other way of slicing it up so you don't need more than 2 or 3 saves.

Stone Dragon
The "run headlong" phrasing on Charging Minotaur is a bit weird. I'd word it more like Mountain Avalanche, e.g. "As part of this dash, you can move through a single enemy's space, and when you do, you get a free shove attempt against that creature."

For Shed the Scales, instead of requiring a minute of searching (which prevents you from using the maneuver when being chased, on a narrow ledge, etc. when other maneuvers have no such restriction), I'd suggest making the duration 1 minute and have the pieces of armor/clothing fly back to the initiator (though not necessarily be re-donned) at the end of the duration.

White Raven
Murder of Crows giving 20 extra turns is pretty darn powerful, considering in the average party it would probably result in 2 9th-level spells and a bunch of melee attacks from fellow PCs alone. I'd either rein in the power level quite a bit (e.g. grant 2 extra turns and recharge on a short rest, so you're still gaining a net of 1 extra turn each time it's used but can do it more often) or more finely restrict what allies can do (e.g. specifically grant "move your speed and take the Attack action" rather than "take an extra turn").

Jormengand
2018-06-28, 04:10 PM
- If you're going to relax the restrictions anyway, why even give maneuvers V and M components at all? Maneuvers originally only needed the initiator to be able to move, and giving the new maneuvers only S components declaring that existing spells used as maneuvers went to "Components: S" seems like it would be fairly straightforward.
- Why do warblades use a druidic focus, of all things? If anything, I'd change it to crusaders using holy symbols because they're pseudo-divine, warblades using arcane foci because they're Int-based and practical, and swordsages using their choice of a holy symbol or arcane focus so they can go either the "contemplative monk" route or the "master of mind and body" route flavor-wise.

Any particular reason not to allow Wall of Blades to deflect attacks with unarmed strikes? Flavor-wise, you can bat away the flat of a sword, the haft of a mace, or whatever with your hand just fine.

Favored Discipline Replacements
I'd move these to either the beginning or end of the disciplines section instead of sorting alphabetically; having them just pop up in the middle like a normal discipline is a bit confusing.

These are the only ones I haven't changed.

The components... ehh, I just prefer the idea of actually using kiai shouts and other vaguely martial-arts-y things.

Mainly, I'll admit, it was so I could have one of each, but I feel like druidic focus fits the warblade's inner strength schtick - the crusader is wielding divine power, the swordsage magical power, and the warblade primal animalistic power.

The reason you can't use your unarmed strike is basically because you're always proficient in it and always have one, so if you're wielding a longbow you're not proficient in you can still kick an enemy's sword out of the way, which seems a little odd.

The favoured not!disciplines are staying where they are partly just because it would be a pain to reformat it because of where Jade Phœnix starts on the page. Also, I like to think it makes a nice break from staring at the standard formats of the disciplines, but maybe that's just me. It is, incidentally, sheer coincidence that all of them fit neatly between Iron Hand and Setting Sun alphabetically.

PairO'Dice Lost
2018-06-28, 05:14 PM
The components... ehh, I just prefer the idea of actually using kiai shouts and other vaguely martial-arts-y things.

Mainly, I'll admit, it was so I could have one of each, but I feel like druidic focus fits the warblade's inner strength schtick - the crusader is wielding divine power, the swordsage magical power, and the warblade primal animalistic power.

Aside from the "glory hound" fluff that gets mostly ignored, the warblade doesn't have much of an association with primal power. He's Int-secondary, gets class features related to niche tactics, and has disciplines revolving around intense focus (DM), high levels of skill (IH), resilience and endurance (SD), and smart teamwork (WR), so there's very little of an "animalistic" association, unless you sort of squint and say the warblade is like the ranger.

How about keeping the V components for the kiai shouts but removing the M components so it feels less like spellcasting and you don't need to decide on foci at all?


The reason you can't use your unarmed strike is basically because you're always proficient in it and always have one, so if you're wielding a longbow you're not proficient in you can still kick an enemy's sword out of the way, which seems a little odd.

I mean, I could see Legolas doing a little "lean back from a blow, kick the sword out of the way, draw an arrow, shoot them point-blank" routine, so it's not all that odd. But perhaps only allow blocking with an unarmed strike if they're completely unarmed, so you avoid that oddness but a monk-like initiator with no manufactured weapons can still make use of the maneuver?


The favoured not!disciplines are staying where they are partly just because it would be a pain to reformat it because of where Jade Phœnix starts on the page. Also, I like to think it makes a nice break from staring at the standard formats of the disciplines, but maybe that's just me. It is, incidentally, sheer coincidence that all of them fit neatly between Iron Hand and Setting Sun alphabetically.

Hmm. Maybe if you could do more to set them off from the other disciplines, like adding a descriptor to the title or putting the note about being nonstandard in a big heading where "Initiating Abilities" would normally go? Since I'm already familiar with ToB (as would be most people reading this, presumably) I started skimming over the flavor paragraph at the start of the discipline sections and when I saw Jade Phoenix I assumed you'd turned a bunch of spells into maneuvers or something; I had to stop and read back up to figure out what was going on.

Jormengand
2018-06-29, 04:29 AM
Aside from the "glory hound" fluff that gets mostly ignored, the warblade doesn't have much of an association with primal power. He's Int-secondary, gets class features related to niche tactics, and has disciplines revolving around intense focus (DM), high levels of skill (IH), resilience and endurance (SD), and smart teamwork (WR), so there's very little of an "animalistic" association, unless you sort of squint and say the warblade is like the ranger.

How about keeping the V components for the kiai shouts but removing the M components so it feels less like spellcasting and you don't need to decide on foci at all?

I mean, initiating basically always was spellcasting with the serial numbers filed off, and for a lot of the initiators, you can get away with losing your focus because a lot of stuff doesn't even have a material component anyway.


I mean, I could see Legolas doing a little "lean back from a blow, kick the sword out of the way, draw an arrow, shoot them point-blank" routine, so it's not all that odd. But perhaps only allow blocking with an unarmed strike if they're completely unarmed, so you avoid that oddness but a monk-like initiator with no manufactured weapons can still make use of the maneuver?

Legolas can block with his bow because his favoured discipline is clearly Nine Arrows. A monk-like initiator can block with his unarmed strike because his favoured discipline is Setting Sun. But Aragorn can't block with his bow, nor can he block with his unarmed strike - he has to use a real melee weapon because he doesn't have proper unarmed combat training or Legolas' exceptional elven archery techniques.


Hmm. Maybe if you could do more to set them off from the other disciplines, like adding a descriptor to the title or putting the note about being nonstandard in a big heading where "Initiating Abilities" would normally go? Since I'm already familiar with ToB (as would be most people reading this, presumably) I started skimming over the flavor paragraph at the start of the discipline sections and when I saw Jade Phoenix I assumed you'd turned a bunch of spells into maneuvers or something; I had to stop and read back up to figure out what was going on.

I've now bolded the text stating that they're not real disciplines, so that should be a little clearer.

PairO'Dice Lost
2018-06-29, 12:05 PM
I mean, initiating basically always was spellcasting with the serial numbers filed off, and for a lot of the initiators, you can get away with losing your focus because a lot of stuff doesn't even have a material component anyway.

It's much closer to Stunning Fist-based monk feats and factotum inspiration for maneuvers and barbarian rage for stances, really, unless you're just looking at the spell and maneuver stat block format. But it's not a huge deal either way; the druidic component is just a somewhat weird quirk, not something that would stop me from using this in a game.


Legolas can block with his bow because his favoured discipline is clearly Nine Arrows. A monk-like initiator can block with his unarmed strike because his favoured discipline is Setting Sun. But Aragorn can't block with his bow, nor can he block with his unarmed strike - he has to use a real melee weapon because he doesn't have proper unarmed combat training or Legolas' exceptional elven archery techniques.

Also mostly a matter of taste, so if you want to leave it as-is I'm fine with that.


I've now bolded the text stating that they're not real disciplines, so that should be a little clearer.

Yep, that's a lot more eye-catching.

Jormengand
2018-06-29, 12:15 PM
using this in a game.

Speaking of, you should come playtest (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?562441-9-Swords-a-Star-and-a-Silver-Tongue-5e-Homebrew-Playtest) with us!

noob
2018-06-29, 12:35 PM
I'm neither the greatest 5e fan, nor the greatest Tome of Battle fan, so I have no clue why I did this. Maybe two wrongs can make a right?

I am not that much a fan of either.(I advocate tob a lot because in fact regular mundanes are bad at their jobs and tob is the easiest stuff to get admitted due to being something wotc made)

BerzerkerUnit
2018-07-03, 10:56 PM
Their are some formatting issues causing text to be shunted off to the right when you get down to Devoted Spirit and Diamond Mind.

Jormengand
2018-07-04, 12:29 AM
Their are some formatting issues causing text to be shunted off to the right when you get down to Devoted Spirit and Diamond Mind.

There aren't any issues for me; it's probably a browser issue.

That said, I'm tempted to just copy the version I see into a bunch of images and post them so people can see it properly.