[3.5] Swordsage Handbook: This one'll walk the whole Way {WIP, PEACH}

[Darrin]

as to the craven debate: I am pretty sure that RAW (and probably RAI, too) assasins stance does not give you sneak attack as a prereq.

Depends on the wording. If the prereq mentions "sneak attack as a class feature", then there may be an argument that it doesn't count. However, if the Swordsage got Assassin's Stance as one of his Swordsage stances (which *is* a class feature), then I would consider that as qualifying for the prereq.

This stance would else easily open up a lot of prestige classes(admittedly many of which are not so hot), and is easily gained by taking two feats.

Not that easy at all, as you still need an IL of 5. This means a non-swordsage generally can't qualify until ECL 10, or more likely, ECL 12 when a feat slot becomes available. That puts Craven at ECL 15, which is a bit of a slog for something that's supposed to be "easy".

[Phaederkiel]

and by the way: a stance gotten via a feat surely is no class feature.

but seemingly, some prestiges are not worded as needing a class feature.
Arcane trickster for example just needs 2d6 sneak. And it is obviously vastly better to gain acces via 2 feats than to lose 3 caster lvls. Even 1 lvl swordsage at lvl 9 could be quite okay. 3 save-improvers, 1 damaging strike, cloak of shadows, a stance. Take a feat for assasins stance, you are good to go.



Still noone daring to throw in a concept for the unarmed variant?

[pHalcyon]

Still noone daring to throw in a concept for the unarmed variant?

Blegh. I guess I could post the one I used myself earlier this year.

The adaptation section only says to give them the Monk's unarmed strike progression and remove their light armor proficiency.

This is silly, and for the purpose of why people suggest it as a dip to qualify for Master of Nine, no better than a straight Swordsage. Not to mention that making a Swordsage pick up Improved Unarmed Strike as a feat when they're one of the most feat-starved classes in the game is just a **** move. So give them IUS as a feat. Or better yet, the Monk's Unarmed Strike ability.

And I got my DM to let the Swordsage qualify as a Monk for the purpose of anything that requires Monk levels.

That's about it, really. Pretty much anything else a Monk could do that you'd like to have can be replicated better with maneuvers or feats that you'd want to be taking anyway. Flurry of Blows? Flashing Sun lets you do that with any weapon (and you can still use weapons), Snap Kick works whenever you make an attack, and the X-ing Mongoose boosts are just plain better.

So, that's..

Lose:
- Light Armor Proficiency

Gain:
- Unarmed Strike ability as a Monk
- Is considered a Monk for any effects that require Monk levels or advance Monk abilities.

Wisdom to AC was FAQd to also work unarmored, but you could make it only work unarmored if you want to be more Monk-like. Or just wear armor without ACP.

[Phaederkiel]

Does "unarmed strike ability as a monk" not mean that he does not get Improved unarmed strike? It sounds as if he'd only get the increasing damage die.

and yes, I am afraid this is the problem: ToB says "monk's unarmed strike progression" and does certainly not say "bonus feats" which Improved unarmed strike is.

So that means that it is obviously not RAW and probably not RAI to get rid of the Mo9s prereq by taking unarmed swordsage.

I think it is better to ask your DM to be lenient and let another feat be prereq to master of nine than to present the cheese and rulemongerie which Unarmed swordsage seems to bring with it. Normally, weapon focus would probably be the feat to go for (nigh useless...), but unfortunately, Swordsages get it as a bonus.

edit: Iron will, lightning reflexes and combat expertise would be quite good (and often used )replacements.

[pHalcyon]

It means you get this:

Unarmed Strike
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

A monk also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown on Table: The Monk. The unarmed damage on Table: The Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage.

It grants IUS as a bonus feat, and if you're told you don't get damage progression, that's covered by the second part in that you're considered as a Monk for things like that. I prefer it because it opens up a few options that IUS doesn't.

That's just what I used, though. People are going to want different things; I just thought it was simple and elegant, and that much more would be clunky. I've seen people who play it as it's spelled out in the book and some who basically made it a gestalt with Monk.

I'm fairly certain any variation from the base class isn't RAW. Adaptation sections are just suggestions that can be used to make the game a bit more fun, or make a character concept a bit easier to realize. What the text says it gives you is RAW, but again, it's just a suggestion. But yeah. PrC prerequsites can be a bit ridiculous, and Mo9's are certainly no exception.

[Draz74]

Does "unarmed strike ability as a monk" not mean that he does not get Improved unarmed strike? It sounds as if he'd only get the increasing damage die.

and yes, I am afraid this is the problem: ToB says "monk's unarmed strike progression" and does certainly not say "bonus feats" which Improved unarmed strike is.

On the contrary, Improved Unarmed Strike has nothing to do with the "Bonus Feats" section of the Monk class writeup. Rather, it is mentioned under his "Unarmed Strike" class feature.

It's rather ambiguous whether "the monk's unarmed strike progression" includes only the damage boost, or the whole "Unarmed Strike" class feature. I think most DMs would rule the latter, just because getting only the increased damage is obviously lame. (Of course, IMO it's likewise obvious to take away, not only armor proficiency, but the ability to add WIS to AC in light armor.)

EDIT: Swordsage'd. Which is appropriate.

[Phaederkiel]

At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat.

and note that there is (at least in the physical players handbook) some fluff between the title "unarmed strike" and the mention of getting the feat. To me, the whole passage sounds like "they are good at fighting, so they get this feat, and this progression of damagedice."

Swordsage on the other hand explicitely states (about the one thing this paragraph states explicitely) that you can interchange "the monk's unarmed strike progression" for his light armor proficiency. And progression means clearly the table for increasing dice, not the feat.

Think about it, giving up light armor proficiency for the progression AND a feat seems somewhat imbalanced. I, as a DM, could probably be talked into giving Imp unarmed in exchange for the weapon focus, but not for a problem which a single lvl in any other class easily removes.

[pHalcyon]

Adaptation isn't the place to look for hard and fast rules; the other option given in the section, the Arcane Swordsage, is a great example of that, being either completely broken or a gimped Sorcerer that can be hardly playable, depending on how you interpret the text. I'm not putting any interpretations of the text against you, I'm just saying what I did. Adapting a class at all edges into house rules territory, and as far as the Unarmed Swordsage goes, what I did seems to be pretty common.

Sure, you can only do what it expressly mentions, but in this case it's a net drawback. You might be able to punch harder than usual, but you can no longer defend yourself as well, you deal non-lethal damage, and every time you try to hit someone, you provoke an AoO. Having to take IUS on an unarmed build that doesn't get bonus feats is a feat tax, and Swordsages already have at least one of those. I'd honestly rather dip Monk, and that's saying something (although I do like two levels of Passive Way Monk). And using weapons is still more effective.

Imbalanced? Nah. It may be better than the vanilla Swordsage a few pages before, but it's really not much. Again, punching things just isn't that good compared to stabbing, cutting, or hitting them with a stick. It's not even that much more base damage unless you put more of your resources into it, and if you do that I'm starting to wonder why you're playing a Swordsage.

If you want to alter the give and take, do it. By all means. You're the DM, and you decide what gets to your table. I feel like you're valuing the first discipline focus a little too highly, though.

[Siosilvar]

Think about it, giving up light armor proficiency for the progression AND a feat seems somewhat imbalanced. I, as a DM, could probably be talked into giving Imp unarmed in exchange for the weapon focus, but not for a problem which a single lvl in any other class easily removes.

Giving up armor for a weapon that is somewhere near par and the ability to use it sounds completely reasonable to me.

[Phaederkiel]

perhaps you are just right. NOT getting IUS is even worse that getting it for free.

(and, to disembowel my earlier argument: dipping one lvl in another class can give you not only the armor proficiency, but on the other hand also IUS, unarmed strike progression and three good saves...)

I think still it would be reasonable to take away the weapon focus. Not because I value it too much, but because both are quite small feats normally used to get into prestige classes.

[Blkmge]

Any suggestions for a build a two-handed focused Swordsage, or is just straight Diamond mind?

[Gharkash]

Any suggestions for a build a two-handed focused Swordsage, or is just straight Diamond mind?

I am currently playing such a character, str based two handed. It depends on what you want to do. I have a general focus on diamond mind for now (lvl 7), and will get some tiger claw later, with the shadow hand teleports etc. Not bad, but my group is mid op with new players in it.

I surely have done many mistakes so i won't go any further into my build, but i guess a Dex>Wis>Str finesse shadowblade two-handed spiked chain swordsage would be halfway decent if you pick some maneuvers that fit.

What do you actually want to do with the two hander?

[Talya]

Any suggestions for a build a two-handed focused Swordsage, or is just straight Diamond mind?

Spiked Chain is a shadow hand weapon.

[eggs]

Any suggestions for a build a two-handed focused Swordsage, or is just straight Diamond mind?

Tiger claw also has quite a few strikes and stances to help with damage output - Pouncing Charge and Dancing/Raging Mongoose are useful for any build trying to crank damage output with maneuvers, and the Soaring/Rabid X strikes' attack bonuses can make power attack more practical.

[Phaederkiel]

I think there is quite some fun to be had with a setting sun tripping build. especially with feats like great throw (which i learned of in this thread), defensive throw, curling wave strike and maneuvers like baffling defense. On top of that, yo can still deal big damage via other maneuvers.

You do not even have to use the bloody chain of cheese. many polearms will do, too.


edit: this is, of course, considering that you play not that high OP. There are better schools than setting sun.

[Blkmge]

I am currently playing such a character, str based two handed. It depends on what you want to do. I have a general focus on diamond mind for now (lvl 7), and will get some tiger claw later, with the shadow hand teleports etc. Not bad, but my group is mid op with new players in it.

I surely have done many mistakes so i won't go any further into my build, but i guess a Dex>Wis>Str finesse shadowblade two-handed spiked chain swordsage would be halfway decent if you pick some maneuvers that fit.

What do you actually want to do with the two hander?

Just every guide/suggestion I've seen has been "Go TWF, Assassin Stance/Shadow Blade" and I'd like to see how to make a character a little less rogue-ish, that's all :)

[Phaederkiel]

well, I for one think that assasins stance is not that good. If you are not able to use it as a way to enter some prestige class, or get craven (which is still very arguable) it deals 7 points of damage more per attack, and only under certain circumstances.

obviously, when you are able to dump a full attack with two weapons on a flatfooted / flanked opponent, it becomes big.
But in my experience, even flanking comes up FAR less than people account for.
(Might be a special thing with my group, though).

I would always rather go for flat damage than sneak d6, since it scales with crits (which is why craven is good, in my opinion).

Obviously again, you have maneuvers which faciliate sneak attacks (cloak of deception as the most prominent), and other maneuvers which faciliate multiple strikes even after a move action. (sudden leap, wolf fang strike, flashing sun, and many more on higher levels).

But I think the true strength of the maneuver based classes comes with maneuverability (could not resist...). Maneuvers are balanced in a way which makes up for not using a full attack. So spring attack and its better brethren ride-by attack and fly-by attack become very valuable.
(The downside which makes spring attack tauted as a trap is that you cannot full attack with it)

you zoom in, hit someone as hard as you can, and zoom out.

Obviously a third, this is only useful when you have room to move, and it is easily foiled by your DM (who can foil all the sneak you can dish out with some uncanny dodging, too, btw. Or undead. Or plants. Or dragons).

So, to make a long story short, I would go dragonborn or raptorean (both give you a glide, thus a fly speed, which is enough to go for fly-by attack). One feat cost instead of the many feat needed for two weapon fighting, which gives you greater flexibility what else to do.

You give away a bit of damage potential but gain flexibility and safety (as in "not being where the enemies swords are").


edit: not that you cannot do the flying thing with two weapons and Dex to damage. But you can be good without two weapons.

Edit2: The outline above is in no way connected to the tripping above. Talk about anti-synergy...

[Talya]

But I think the true strength of the maneuver based classes comes with maneuverability (could not resist...). Maneuvers are balanced in a way which makes up for not using a full attack. So spring attack and its better brethren ride-by attack and fly-by attack become very valuable.
(The downside which makes spring attack tauted as a trap is that you cannot full attack with it)

You can't use a strike with spring attack. Spring attack allows an attack in the middle, not a standard action.

[Telok]

You can't use a strike with spring attack. Spring attack allows an attack in the middle, not a standard action.

Sadly true. But it can work with boosts and stances. I've long wanted to make a SS/spellthief with spring attack and really high movement, attacking from and retreatng to cover to hide every round.

[Dusk Eclipse]

well, I for one think that assasins stance is not that good. If you are not able to use it as a way to enter some prestige class, or get craven (which is still very arguable) it deals 7 points of damage more per attack, and only under certain circumstances.

obviously, when you are able to dump a full attack with two weapons on a flatfooted / flanked opponent, it becomes big.
But in my experience, even flanking comes up FAR less than people account for.
(Might be a special thing with my group, though).

I would always rather go for flat damage than sneak d6, since it scales with crits (which is why craven is good, in my opinion).

Obviously again, you have maneuvers which faciliate sneak attacks (cloak of deception as the most prominent), and other maneuvers which faciliate multiple strikes even after a move action. (sudden leap, wolf fang strike, flashing sun, and many more on higher levels).

But I think the true strength of the maneuver based classes comes with maneuverability (could not resist...). Maneuvers are balanced in a way which makes up for not using a full attack. So spring attack and its better brethren ride-by attack and fly-by attack become very valuable.
(The downside which makes spring attack tauted as a trap is that you cannot full attack with it)

you zoom in, hit someone as hard as you can, and zoom out.

Obviously a third, this is only useful when you have room to move, and it is easily foiled by your DM (who can foil all the sneak you can dish out with some uncanny dodging, too, btw. Or undead. Or plants. Or dragons).

So, to make a long story short, I would go dragonborn or raptorean (both give you a glide, thus a fly speed, which is enough to go for fly-by attack). One feat cost instead of the many feat needed for two weapon fighting, which gives you greater flexibility what else to do.

You give away a bit of damage potential but gain flexibility and safety (as in "not being where the enemies swords are").


edit: not that you cannot do the flying thing with two weapons and Dex to damage. But you can be good without two weapons.

Edit2: The outline above is in no way connected to the tripping above. Talk about anti-synergy...

The reason Assassin's Stance is so valued is that it is the only worthwhile combat stance a Swordsage has access for most of it's career. Blood in the water can potentially have a higher damage; but unless you are using the "Sleeping Raven Blood Frenzy Trick" or somehowget a 2-20 threat range on your weapon it is even more situational than Assassin Stance, Hear the unseen can be useful against invisible enemies; but it is relatively easy to get permanent see invisibility or even blindsight with the Blindfold of true Darkness. the only other good combat stance is Stance of Alacrity and that doesn't comes online until level 15.

[Gildedragon]

Been doing swordsage for a while in my RL campaign. I gotta say AS is good, lots of fun rolling all the extra D6s per attack, but my favorites are Shadow Child and Island of Blades, not getting hit and flanking with greater ease are damned useful; moreso than sneak attack dice, cause so many things are immune to sneaks.

Outside of shadow hand, the Setting Sun ignore difficult terrain stance is a boon to chargers I find

[eggs]

Just every guide/suggestion I've seen has been "Go TWF, Assassin Stance/Shadow Blade" and I'd like to see how to make a character a little less rogue-ish, that's all :)

The thing that makes that tricky is that it's the kind of build the other ToB classes support better - Swordsage can do it, but there does become a question of why not use the other classes.

I mean, you could get a solid brute melee Swordsage build out of:
Swordsage 3/Barbarian 1/Crusader 1/Swordsage 1/Barbarian 1/Crusader 1/Swordsage 12
[Feats directed toward Knockdown and AoOs, with minimal investments in Barbarian-style melee combat]
But it becomes a bit questionable what so much Swordsage is doing there instead of Warblade or more Crusader.

That said, Swordsage definitely has a place in Wis-focused melee builds that aren't dex-focused, even if they wouldn't normally be considered "Swordsage builds" - things like:
Swordsage 2/Paladin 4/Warmind 10/Swordsage 4
Swordsage 2/Paladin of Tyranny 4/Disciple of Thrymm 10/Swordsage 4
Ranger 1/Swordsage 6/Nentyar Hunter 5/Swordsage 8
Ranger 1/Swordsage 6/Dark Hunter 3/Jade Phoenix Mage 9/Swordsage 1

[Dusk Eclipse]

A dip into Shiba Protector makes it very Wis SAD

[Draz74]

Just every guide/suggestion I've seen has been "Go TWF, Assassin Stance/Shadow Blade" and I'd like to see how to make a character a little less rogue-ish, that's all :)

IMO, the reason that it's hard to get an answer to this is that the answer is pretty easy. That is, it's pretty difficult to make a Swordsage that sucks, as long as you understand basic melee tactics and know about the Adaptive Style feat in case your encounters last longer than your Readied Maneuvers.

Yeah, there are literally too many decent Swordsage builds (who fight with sword-n-board or a two-handed martial weapon) for me to even know where to start enumerating them. And they aren't all that different from each other in power. You'll do fine with one who just specializes in all the Diamond Mind strikes. But you'll also do fine if you mix in some Setting Sun strikes, non-TWF-focused Tiger Claw strikes, and even Stone Dragon strikes. It all just depends what you want your character's favorite tactics to be.

well, I for one think that assasins stance is not that good. If you are not able to use it as a way to enter some prestige class, or get craven (which is still very arguable) it deals 7 points of damage more per attack, and only under certain circumstances.

To be fair, it gets a good deal better if you are depending on Sneak Attack anyway (e.g. a 1-level dip in Rogue, plus Craven) or if you have to spend most of your time in a Shadow Hand stance because you don't want your Shadow Blade feat to be wasted.

But yeah, +7 situational damage per attack isn't too amazing, and if I'm playing a Swordsage, I'd rather have a flexible build than a max-DPS build. So I tend to be underwhelmed by Assassin's Stance compared to how many recommendations it receives.

obviously, when you are able to dump a full attack with two weapons on a flatfooted / flanked opponent, it becomes big.
But in my experience, even flanking comes up FAR less than people account for.
(Might be a special thing with my group, though).

Probably. Most groups don't seem to have a hard time generating flanking -- and this should go double for Swordsages, with their mobility or such maneuvers as Distracting Ember. (Or, if their sneak attack damage comes from another source rather than Assassin's Stance, then the Island of Blades stance becomes amazing. And still compatible with Shadow Blade.)

Obviously again, you have maneuvers which faciliate sneak attacks (cloak of deception as the most prominent), and other maneuvers which faciliate multiple strikes even after a move action. (sudden leap, wolf fang strike, flashing sun, and many more on higher levels).

Nitpick: Flashing Sun doesn't work after taking a move action.

(The downside which makes spring attack tauted as a trap is that you cannot full attack with it)

You can't use a strike with spring attack. Spring attack allows an attack in the middle, not a standard action.

Spring Attack is tauted as a trap for many other reasons. Talya's comment here is the major one, but it also has Dodge and Mobility as prerequisites. Probably not worth it, even with Desert Wind Dodge as an option. Unless you're going for Master of Nine and you can get Mobility via magic armor. Then Spring Attack ... still isn't worth taking, thanks to Talya's insight.

Ride-By Attack isn't much better, since it can only be used while charging. IIRC, that makes it incompatible with most Swordsage maneuvers other than Bounding Assault and Pouncing Charge (and the latter brings us back to the full attack context anyway).

Flyby Attack, by contrast, is awesome, especially for ToB characters who pick up a lot of good Standard Action strikes.

Obviously a third, this is only useful when you have room to move, and it is easily foiled by your DM (who can foil all the sneak you can dish out with some uncanny dodging, too, btw. Or undead. Or plants. Or dragons).

Dragons?

So, to make a long story short, I would go dragonborn or raptorean (both give you a glide, thus a fly speed, which is enough to go for fly-by attack). One feat cost instead of the many feat needed for two weapon fighting, which gives you greater flexibility what else to do.

Both good options, although I don't think gliding counts as a Fly speed by RAW, so you'll have to wait until you can actually Fly (Level 5 or 6 depending on race, IIRC) before taking Flyby Attack. Not a big deal, since you don't get an iterative attack until Level 8 anyway.

The reason Assassin's Stance is so valued is that it is the only worthwhile combat stance a Swordsage has access for most of it's career. Blood in the water can potentially have a higher damage; but unless you are using the "Sleeping Raven Blood Frenzy Trick" or somehowget a 2-20 threat range on your weapon it is even more situational than Assassin Stance, Hear the unseen can be useful against invisible enemies; but it is relatively easy to get permanent see invisibility or even blindsight with the Blindfold of true Darkness. the only other good combat stance is Stance of Alacrity and that doesn't comes online until level 15.

Eh. Swordsage stances might all be situational, but Assassin's Stance is no exception. As per above discussion, it's only awesome if (1) you trigger Sneak Attack, (2) you get a full attack, and (3) your target isn't immune to precision damage.

There are lots of Swordsage Stances that can compete with that, especially if you're not confined to Shadow Hand by your feats.

Spoiler

Show

Stance of Clarity is decent in a boss fight, which are the most common "hard" fights for many playgroups. (It's worse than useless in a fight with a bunch of mooks, so don't take it as your first stance if you can help it.)

Hunter's Sense is decent utility. Hearing the Air too, and it's arguably a lower opportunity cost than similar magic items. (Blindfold of True Darkness does come with that horrible "unaware of anything outside 30 feet" restriction. And Hearing the Air does also grant a Listen bonus, which can be very nice.)

Pearl of Black Doubt ... can be awesome or useless, depending what kinds of monsters you fight. Or so I hear.

Step of the Wind is awesome if your DM actually uses difficult terrain in your battle areas.

Shifting Defense is just pure, unmitigated awesome, available at Level 9. Unless your DM is crazy and gives it one of the liberal interpretations that makes it broken-powerful instead of awesome.

Leaping Dragon Stance is decent if you are very Tiger Claw-focused.

Island of Blades is awesome if your party includes a Rogue, or if you have a Rogue dip + Craven. Even without these factors, a +2 bonus from near-automatic flanking can be a nice perk, especially with a reach weapon.

Child of Shadow is good defense if you have a mobile fighting style (e.g. Flyby Attack).

Roots of the Mountain (with a reach weapon) is decent battlefield control. Not as good as Thicket of Blades, but still pretty good.

Crushing Weight of the Mountain ... ok, I have to admit, if you're focused on grappling, I have no idea why you'd be a Swordsage rather than a Warblade. So maybe cross this one off the list.

Flame's Blessing is a good option to have in your pocket when you meet a fire-using monster or NPC.

The thing that makes that tricky is that it's the kind of build the other ToB classes support better - Swordsage can do it, but there does become a question of why not use the other classes.

Not really. The answer is pretty clear: "More skill points, cherry-pick from Setting Sun and Shadow Hand maneuvers." That can be enough to make up for the lower Hit Die and the Medium BAB. Then the inferior recovery mechanic is balanced out by the great flexibility of Knowing and Readying more maneuvers.

[Phaederkiel]

oooos, you are right, neither spring attack nor ride-by work with maneuvers per raw. I'd say that you could probably getting your dm to allow maneuvers with spring attack as in "maneuvers were not invented when this was printed", but ride-by is seemingly off limits. Or can your mount move there and then you can attack? The only character I ever saw using ride-by was a centaur, who did not have the problem.

I have a flying Swordsage in my group and thougt the rest of the modes would work likewise. I´d say you gain a fly speed by gliding, but I am not really sure.
It is not really that good without the ability to really fly anyway. Shadow jaunt upwards can only make you glide that much.

A propos shadow jaunt. I noticed that the long text in the book does not mention how much you can bring with you in a jaunt (most similar spells do), simply stating "you". This can mean anything from you with the piano you are lifting over your head to you without clother or weapons....

say, is shifting defense as guano-crazy as i just read it? To me, it sounds like you do the step BEFORE you are hit...and probably will work against at ranged attacks and ranged touch attacks, too.

Or are there are even worse "liberal" interpretations?
edit2: well, obviously RAI it means you move after any missing attack. But its really sloppy written.


edit: BTW, at least dodge has millions of feats that require it and mobility has elusive target, which is so good that it really offsets two worthless feats.
It is the single best tactical maneuver besides the mighty shock trooper, is it not? Three godly options, all without much preparation. (and if you think cause overreach isn't godly, you haven't seen a single character running through a room tripping 7 opponents. stupid chain, eat your heart)

[Phaederkiel]

In something unrelated to my above post (and since that post is 3 days old by now, so I do not want to edit it any more), the swordsage in my group has just decided to go craven.

So I have a chance to change my opinion on assasins stance based on real play.

I will write in later how that worked out for her.

[Metahuman1]

With Regaurds to your comments about Pouncing Charge Maneuver.

There is also a spell in I believe the spell compendium for druids to get charge, and some wild shape forms also have it. Further, if Memory serves me, there is a Psionic Power that gives it to Psi-warriors, though I'm unsure if other Psionic classes have access to this power, and there is an Incarnum Soul Meld Which gives Totemists Access to Pounce. Don't know if Other Incarnum classes get it automatically or not, but characters who can sink a couple of feats or a dip there can get pounce that way.


And it's weird, I always though Swordsages got Iron Heart. Guess I really will be dipping Warblade when I have to build my martial arts one soon.

Don't suppose sections for unarmed variant are coming terribly soon are they?

[Tokuhara]

As a small not (if you're not above using Dragon Magazine and a small sub-rule), there are two races that are pretty good for a swordsage.

Lesser Axani (from Dragon Magazine) get +2 Intelligence and Wisdom for 0LA, making them a scary-good skillmonkey with a decent AC.

Lesser Asimar are also good at +2 Wisdom and Charisma for the same 0LA, making them good at Diplomancy and with a good AC much like the Axani

[Velikolepni]

Do you think that it would be balanced, if as a houserule one were to modify the desert wind stance fiery assault from "gain +1d6 fire damage" to "half the fire damage you do through desert wind maneuvers is searing and thus not affected by resistance/immunities" (similar to the feat searing spell)?

[bendking]

Hopefuly this guide is still getting updated, I used it to create my current character, and im having a blast.