New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 89101112131415161718
Results 511 to 536 of 536
  1. - Top - End - #511
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCrowing1432 View Post
    Unarmed Strikes are crazy powerful.

    Natural, Light and Sometimes even martial weapons, with a whole bunch of modifiers and stuff you can add to them.
    A bitch and a half to enchant meaningfully, though, and if your primary configuration isn't doing the job, either you're enchanting each striking surface separately, which has its own problems, or you're stuck with either Scorpion Kama if you got MIC access like that (it's a set item, which may have its own baggage, though if you're going monk full-tilt the rest of it can be useful) or begging your DM to either let your Gauntlets adjust to your Unarmed Strike damage (not that much of a stretch, they're explicitly called out as scaling to the non-class version, but still) or let you enchant handwraps or something as weapons. If you got a crafter in your party and your DM's feeling generous, he MAY be able to swap out your enchantments for equal-level ones with minimal cost, but that's iffy on its own right and will still take a significant amount of time. That's assuming that you can enchant Unarmed Strikes in the first place, which may or may not be available, in which case you're stuck with oddball items like the NoNA or the AoMF if you're really desparate and can convince your DM to let it accept better enchantments than just +1 Atk/Dmg.

    EDIT: And really, the only things powerful about it are the difficulty in disarming someone of them (even literally disarming the Unarmed striker won't do the trick, you'll probably kill/neutralize them outright before you pull it off) and their base damage dice. Someone who's truly trying to put a hole in something would be able to do so with a toothpick if they could 2-hand it, the weapon's base damage rarely matters in the slightest as long as it's not directly countered (like a normal whip, for instance, or something that only deals non-lethal damage no matter what). Go look up an Ubercharger, and calculate what percentage of that damage comes from the weapon itself.
    Last edited by aleucard; 2014-09-18 at 05:53 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #512
    Banned
     
    Rubik's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Actually, unarmed strikes are one of the easiest weapons to enhance, to the point where you can hit epic numbers of enhancements (+11 or more) with little to do.

    A monk using a tooth of Leraje (+5 enhancement bonus), stacked weapon crystal of lesser energy assault (acid/cold/electricity/fire/sonic - the equivalent of five +1 weapon enhancements, for cheap) and least fiendslayer (+1 equivalent) and least truedeath (+1 equivalent) and least returning (+1 equivalent), battlefist (+9 in non-enhancement bonus weapon qualities), Item Familiar (Unarmed Strike) (+3 equivalent), Ancestral Relic (Unarmed Strike) (+10 equivalent), Kensai (+10 equivalent), five chronocharms (each with a necklace of natural weapons item ability attached to it) (+45 equivalent), gauntlets of extended range (added to battlefist for the equivalent of the Distance quality, and stacks therewith), bracers of striking (+20 equivalent), and a few others. Such as going warforged, enhancing his slam attack, and using Bestial Strike to add another +9 on there (or FAR more if you use the above to enhance his slam attack, too).

    Granted, those numbers above are the max, and it'll be expensive as all get out to boost ALL of those all the way up to +10 all the way around, and multiple enhancement bonuses don't stack (although +X equivalents do), but there's no x10 epic modifier, so it's a helluvalot cheaper, overall, and you can't do that with anything but a ranged weapon with ammo (but nowhere near that extent).
    Last edited by Rubik; 2014-09-18 at 07:03 PM.

  3. - Top - End - #513
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sunnydale

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by aleucard View Post
    A bitch and a half to enchant meaningfully, though ...
    Actually, trivially easy. Just get a Necklace of Natural Attacks (bottom of the page).

  4. - Top - End - #514
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
    Actually, trivially easy. Just get a Necklace of Natural Attacks (bottom of the page).
    The list of DM's who'd allow an online reference like that is surprisingly limited.

  5. - Top - End - #515
    Banned
     
    Rubik's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by aleucard View Post
    The list of DM's who'd allow an online reference like that is surprisingly limited.
    It's also in Savage Species.

  6. - Top - End - #516
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sunnydale

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by aleucard View Post
    The list of DM's who'd allow an online reference like that is surprisingly limited.
    Really? Why is that? It's an official 3.5 update to an item in a pre-3.5 supplement.

  7. - Top - End - #517
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2014

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by aleucard View Post
    The list of DM's who'd allow an online reference like that is surprisingly limited.
    I haven't met a DM who wouldn't in almost a decade worth of play.

  8. - Top - End - #518
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Jan 2010

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter
    its most ardent supporters claimed that anyone else who was running D&D without it was an of ignorant, incompetent, and/or mean-spirited heretic who didn't know how to run D&D
    Quote Originally Posted by Keledrath View Post
    To be fair, anyone who thinks ToB stuff (ignoring the vagueness of WRT and IHS) is overpowered has clearly never seen a wizard played to its potential, and therefore is ignorant. Ignorance is only a bad thing if you refuse to stop being ignorant

    And the people who insist on being ignorant often are incompetent and/or mean spirited.
    Not quite a textbook example (needs more vitriol) but not bad at all!

  9. - Top - End - #519
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter View Post
    Not quite a textbook example (needs more vitriol) but not bad at all!
    The issue is that some anti-ToB folk actually just don't understand the thing they hate. There are other anti-ToB folk, ones who go into their hatred with full knowledge of the thing they hate. With them I disagree, where I would simply say that those of the first group are wrong. Point is, some who dislike it actually are ignorant, and claiming as such is fair, while claiming that all who dislike it are ignorant is inaccurate and unfair. Keledrath has stated the former, while your example ToB lover was a person who stated the latter.

  10. - Top - End - #520
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Just to Browse's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter View Post
    Not quite a textbook example (needs more vitriol) but not bad at all!
    its most ardent supporters claimed that anyone else who was running D&D without it was an of ignorant, incompetent, and/or mean-spirited heretic who didn't know how to run D&D
    To be fair, anyone who thinks ToB stuff (ignoring the vagueness of WRT and IHS) is overpowered has clearly never seen a wizard played to its potential, and therefore is ignorant. Ignorance is only a bad thing if you refuse to stop being ignorant

    And the people who insist on being ignorant often are incompetent and/or mean spirited.
    This is certainly a textbook example of something. But not what you think it is.
    Last edited by Just to Browse; 2014-09-18 at 09:03 PM.
    All work I do is CC-BY-SA. Copy it wherever you want as long as you credit me.

  11. - Top - End - #521
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Jan 2010

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by eggynack View Post
    The issue is that some anti-ToB folk actually just don't understand the thing they hate. There are other anti-ToB folk, ones who go into their hatred with full knowledge of the thing they hate. With them I disagree, where I would simply say that those of the first group are wrong. Point is, some who dislike it actually are ignorant, and claiming as such is fair, while claiming that all who dislike it are ignorant is inaccurate and unfair. Keledrath has stated the former, while your example ToB lover was a person who stated the latter.
    I get what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of Keledrath's statement. He only mentioned "anyone who things ToB is overpowered . . .is ignorant" without covering any of the other ground you did in your next-to-last sentence. He may not have meant that anyone who disliked ToB thought it was overpowered, but by omitting other cases and just jumping on that one . . . especially as a direct reply to my statement that was *not* restricted to people who think ToB is overpowered . . .well, it conveys the kind of impression I was describing earlier, even if it was not intended. Just too quick to pull the trigger on the "ignorant" label.

    As a side note, I'm not even sure that saying "ToB is overpowered" is always wrong. If you're saying it is overpowered compared to optimized high level magic spells . . . then yeah, you are pretty much wrong. If you're saying its overpowered because its (acknowledged by its supporters) high optimization floor is too much for a low-op table (which doesn't have to be a gaming style borne of ignorance - gentlemens' agreements are a thing), then the statement may actually be correct, even if it is correct only for that (not altogether uncommon) situation and not all situations.

  12. - Top - End - #522
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter View Post
    I get what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of Keledrath's statement. He only mentioned "anyone who things ToB is overpowered . . .is ignorant" without covering any of the other ground you did in your next-to-last sentence. He may not have meant that anyone who disliked ToB thought it was overpowered, but by omitting other cases and just jumping on that one . . . especially as a direct reply to my statement that was *not* restricted to people who think ToB is overpowered . . .well, it conveys the kind of impression I was describing earlier, even if it was not intended. Just too quick to pull the trigger on the "ignorant" label.
    I don't see how providing a particular example in which a ToB-hater is ignorant gives any way over to a blanket claim of ignorance. His argument was that some people who hate ToB actually are ignorant. I don't think there's a real onus on him to make the inverse claim.
    As a side note, I'm not even sure that saying "ToB is overpowered" is always wrong. If you're saying it is overpowered compared to optimized high level magic spells . . . then yeah, you are pretty much wrong. If you're saying its overpowered because its (acknowledged by its supporters) high optimization floor is too much for a low-op table (which doesn't have to be a gaming style borne of ignorance - gentlemens' agreements are a thing), then the statement may actually be correct, even if it is correct only for that (not altogether uncommon) situation and not all situations.
    His stated comparison was explicitly between ToB and a competent wizard,so it seems fair to say that his claimed situation was the first.

  13. - Top - End - #523
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Minnesota
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by eggynack View Post
    I don't see how providing a particular example in which a ToB-hater is ignorant gives any way over to a blanket claim of ignorance.
    It's typical human way of thinking with absolutes/generalizations. "[your/this] reason for hating ToB is ignorant and wrong" gets twisted into "anyone who hates ToB is ignorant and wrong because I love it".
    Last edited by Hiro Protagonest; 2014-09-18 at 09:27 PM.
    Avatar of George the Dragon Slayer, from the upcoming Indivisible!
    My Steam profile
    Warriors and Wuxia, Callos_DeTerran's ToB setting

  14. - Top - End - #524
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Jan 2010

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by eggynack View Post
    His argument was that some people who hate ToB actually are ignorant. I don't think there's a real onus on him to make the inverse claim.
    Yes, but his statement was issued as a direct reply to my own fairly broad statement that ToB defenders often appeared overzealous to condemn. Issuing an immediate reply that is restricted to a specific subset of the anti-ToB crowd to whom the "ignorant" label can be most safely applied without referring even once to the remaining anti-ToB crowd to whom that label cannot be so safely applied . . . well, that does not exactly dispel the perception that the pro-ToB crowd is quick to jump to applying such labels, now does it?

  15. - Top - End - #525
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Vhaidara's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    GMT -5
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by eggynack View Post
    The issue is that some anti-ToB folk actually just don't understand the thing they hate. There are other anti-ToB folk, ones who go into their hatred with full knowledge of the thing they hate. With them I disagree, where I would simply say that those of the first group are wrong. Point is, some who dislike it actually are ignorant, and claiming as such is fair, while claiming that all who dislike it are ignorant is inaccurate and unfair. Keledrath has stated the former, while your example ToB lover was a person who stated the latter.
    Eggy described my point exactly.

    The big point of my post was that little bit following what you quoted. The part about Wizard being a million times more overpowered than anything from ToB (again, excluding abuse of IHS and WRT. And probably not even then). Therefore, if you believe ToB is overpowered, you are ignorant of what a wizard can do. I also went on to say that this ignorance is not a bad thing. The problem is when people go
    TOB OP, AUTO-BAN, BURN THE STUPID BOOK
    without ever actually reading it or getting second opinions.

    There are groups that auto-ban monks for being overpowered. Are they ignorant? Yes. Does that make them bad? No. If they come on here and have it demonstrated (probably by reading some Pickford threads) that monk is garbage compared to wizard and still insist on banning monk for being overpowered (as opposed to banning it for being a trap), that is when they are being incompetent and mean-spirited.
    I follow a general rule: better to ask and be told no than not to ask at all.

    Shadeblight by KennyPyro

  16. - Top - End - #526
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter View Post
    Yes, but his statement was issued as a direct reply to my own fairly broad statement that ToB defenders often appeared overzealous to condemn. Issuing an immediate reply that is restricted to a specific subset of the anti-ToB crowd to whom the "ignorant" label can be most safely applied without referring even once to the remaining anti-ToB crowd to whom that label cannot be so safely applied . . . well, that does not exactly dispel the perception that the pro-ToB crowd is quick to jump to applying such labels, now does it?
    Of course it doesn't dispel that perception. It wasn't meant to. His argument is that people who love ToB absolutely do say that members of the opposition are ignorant, but that it's a completely fair and justified accusation some amount of the time. If you want to make a generalization based on his argument, it would be that such accusations are always predicated on some actual ignorance, but my suspicion is that the truth, and his claim, lie somewhere between the accusation never being justified and it always being justified. The essential challenge, I suppose, would be to find situations in which the accusation is made where it isn't justified, but again, we're really working with theoretical argument constructs here.

  17. - Top - End - #527
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Hiro Protagonest View Post
    It's typical human way of thinking with absolutes/generalizations. "[your/this] reason for hating ToB is ignorant and wrong" gets twisted into "anyone who hates ToB is ignorant and wrong because I love it".
    This is only exacerbated by humanity's tendency to slip into generalization language when speaking about a single case.

    Ex: "To be fair, anyone who thinks ToB stuff (ignoring the vagueness of WRT and IHS) is overpowered has clearly never seen a wizard played to its potential, and therefore is ignorant."

    This statement assumes but does not state that "Balance is defined by Wizards being played properly, rather than being defined by Bards or Barbarians being played properly". The unstated assumption creates a generalization language when we can tell a specific language was intended in order to make the logic valid.

  18. - Top - End - #528
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Vhaidara's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    GMT -5
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Ex: "To be fair, anyone who thinks ToB stuff (ignoring the vagueness of WRT and IHS) is overpowered has clearly never seen a wizard played to its potential, and therefore is ignorant."

    This statement assumes but does not state that "Balance is defined by Wizards being played properly, rather than being defined by Bards or Barbarians being played properly". The unstated assumption creates a generalization language when we can tell a specific language was intended in order to make the logic valid.
    I felt that the implication there was, in fact, that a properly played wizard broke all semblance of balance. And I thought I made it fairly clear. My apologies if it was not.
    I follow a general rule: better to ask and be told no than not to ask at all.

    Shadeblight by KennyPyro

  19. - Top - End - #529
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Jan 2010

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by eggynack View Post
    Of course it doesn't dispel that perception. It wasn't meant to.
    Which is fine . . . except that it was a reply to a statement about that very perception.

  20. - Top - End - #530
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2008

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter View Post
    Yes, but his statement was issued as a direct reply to my own fairly broad statement that ToB defenders often appeared overzealous to condemn. Issuing an immediate reply that is restricted to a specific subset of the anti-ToB crowd to whom the "ignorant" label can be most safely applied without referring even once to the remaining anti-ToB crowd to whom that label cannot be so safely applied . . . well, that does not exactly dispel the perception that the pro-ToB crowd is quick to jump to applying such labels, now does it?
    You know, for someone talking about the woes of jumping to apply labels, you seem awfully determined to assosiate a very human act with the pro-ToB crowd specifically.
    "It doesn't matter how much you struggle or strive,
    You'll never get out of life alive,
    So please kill yourself and save this land,
    And your last mission is to spread my command,"

    Slightly adapted quote from X-Fusion, Please Kill Yourself

  21. - Top - End - #531
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Keledrath View Post
    I felt that the implication there was, in fact, that a properly played wizard broke all semblance of balance. And I thought I made it fairly clear. My apologies if it was not.
    Oh, then it was rightly criticized as being an invalid argument. Given a definition of balance X, showing Y+100>X provides no information about if Y is or is not greater than X. So showing a properly played Wizard is OP gives no evidence to support the claim that ToB is never OP for any definition of balance X. This then makes the conclusion about ignorance, ignorant.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2014-09-18 at 09:51 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #532
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Calimehter View Post
    Which is fine . . . except that it was a reply to a statement about that very perception.
    Well, yeah. It wasn't meant to dispel it, but it was meant to justify the actions that cause it. My statement later was meant to dispel it, as were a few later, because while some folk might act like that in some situations, it's certainly not all folk, and it's certainly not in all situations.

    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Oh, then it was rightly criticized as being an invalid argument. Given a definition of balance X, showing Y+100>X provides no information about if Y is or is not greater than X. So showing a properly played Wizard is OP gives no evidence to support the claim that ToB is never OP for any definition of balance X. This then makes the conclusion about ignorance, ignorant.
    Well, if we're going to go that direction, then I can equally claim that anyone who says that ToB is imbalanced is being ignorant, because they're ignoring the relative nature of balance to reach their conclusion. If the poster's claim does feature an acknowledgement of the relative nature of balance (The warblade is totally overpowered in my rogue/aristocrat/commoner party), then I suspect that Keledrath would feel that a claim of ignorance there would be unjustified.
    Last edited by eggynack; 2014-09-18 at 09:55 PM.

  23. - Top - End - #533
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Vhaidara's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    GMT -5
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    Oh, then it was rightly criticized as being an invalid argument. Given a definition of balance X, showing Y+100>X provides no information about if Y is or is not greater than X. So showing a properly played Wizard is OP gives no evidence to support the claim that ToB is never OP for any definition of balance X. This then makes the conclusion about ignorance, ignorant.
    Except that I am saying the Y is not overpowered compared to Y+100. So if X is Core (Things already existing in the game world) and contains everything from Y+100 (full OP Wizards) to Y-100 (Core only Monks), then no comparison can be made to Y, because Y is everything. I am saying that Y is balanced compared to Y+100, not to X, because X includes Y+100.
    I follow a general rule: better to ask and be told no than not to ask at all.

    Shadeblight by KennyPyro

  24. - Top - End - #534
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Well, this argument has certainly become oddly meta and confusing.

  25. - Top - End - #535
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Jan 2010

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Boci View Post
    You know, for someone talking about the woes of jumping to apply labels, you seem awfully determined to assosiate a very human act with the pro-ToB crowd specifically.
    That's fair to say. Keledrath's initial reply to my statement *was* symptomatic of the problem I was describing, for reasons already described . . . but it was a truthful statement at least, and *far* better than some of the things that have been said by . . . I'm not sure "more actively malignant" is really the right phrase, but I cannot at the moment think of a better one . . . defenders of the ToB that I have very unfond memories of, and I should have done a better job of pointing that out when making my subsequent posts.

  26. - Top - End - #536
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Your opinon on Tome of Battle

    Quote Originally Posted by Keledrath View Post
    Except that I am saying the Y is not overpowered compared to Y+100.
    Then return 2 posts.
    Either
    You were assuming yet not stating the assumption that balance was defined by(aka "compared to") wizards. Aka using generalization language when not intending generalization language.
    OR
    You were trying to conclude Y<X from Y+100>X.
    Sidenote: In my notation, Y+100 was Wizards, Y is ToB. X =/= core since core is not a standard of balance. X could be unrestrained core (aka Wizard) or some other definition within core's balance spectrum.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2014-09-18 at 10:27 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •