Base attack bonus changes: Alright, I can get behind making that more meaningful. I think Legend does something along those lines too in that there's no such thing as a full attack action.
Barbarian: The modular rage is nice. Daily limit on rounds is less so, but with 4 plus your Constitution modifier plus your class level, you've probably got plenty. The rage powers might chew through that duration, though. I'm assuming exiting a rage is a free action as well?
You'll definitely have plenty of daily rounds to go through on just normal applications of Rage. For heavy Rage Power users, there will be the Extra Rage feat which is always handy. In fact, I might go so far as to let the feat treat you as having four more Barbarian levels for the purposes of Improved Rage and for rounds of rage, but that might be going overboard. Rage Powers will come in a variety of effects and start costing 3 rounds, going all the way up to 9 rounds for spectacularly powerful ones.
The fast healing and regeneration values seem very small. Regeneration 1 I can see if all you want is to make the barbarian effectively unkillable by damage unless you do it with acid or negative/positive energy, but as far as fast healing goes, that barely seems like it'd be worth tracking. Is that just a formality so you can say "alright, it's been a few minutes since your last fight, you're all healed up"?
Exactly right, a formality. With Fast Healing, 10 minutes out of combat is 100 points of healing after all.
Fighter: Hey whoa, those are intermediate save progressions. Just being used for the fighter, or are you planning to incorporate these into something else?
Just being used for the Fighter for the time being, though I think I'm going to edit in a Good Reflex save for Barbarians and a Good Will save for Paladins. I may also use Intermediate saves for a few monster classes.
Plethora of feats, weapon aptitudes, specialization, tactical genius, good good good.
It was fairly simple and I rather like how it turned out.
Paladin: Eeesh, codes of conduct. Not my cup of tea, but that's a personal preference. I would tighten it up, though. Right now you've got this weird thing going on where you can't hit someone standing in grease, so you wait politely until they fall down, then beat them senseless.
Yeah, it is something I probably need to work on a little more. She won't attack someone denied their Dexterity bonus though, so after a creature falls prone in Grease is it no longer flat-footed? That would be weird. The disconnect I think we're having is that a prone creature isn't necessarily any less dangerous or ready to defend itself than a creature standing up. A creature that is denied its Dexterity bonus certainly is though.
I think I will merely limit it to the Paladin does not receive circumstance bonuses to her attack rolls against enemies and will not deal lethal damage against enemies that are denied their Dex bonus or that are prone.
It is nice to see them getting 5th level spells, though.
I'm trying to turn them into a Tier 3 Divine Duskblade.
Does Knight's Challenge end if you don't attack the challenged creature every turn, or only on the turn you activate the ability? If it's the former, that won't sit well with Banishing Challenge.
Every turn. Good point. I'll have to amend Banishing Challenge.
New feats: Going to toss in my vote with everyone else that Combat Reflexes probably isn't as potent as all that. Definitely not enough to justify giving it iterative penalties, even if you cap it at a number of extra attacks based on your BAB.
My reason for altering the way Combat Reflexes worked was never because it was too potent, but just that it seems highly strange for any feat to give you more attacks when it isn't your turn than you have when it is
your turn. It may seem like a nerf, but when you can full attack a creature that provokes a single opportunity from you, I think it will feel much more enjoyable, user-friendly, and reasonable.
Deep Impact and Graceful Strike are interesting. It sounds like you're trying to make weapon selection more meaningful.
That wasn't necessarily my intention, but I suppose it comes out that way. I'm planning on using a few weapon keywords and along with the Associated Weapons rule, hopefully, a character's choice of weaponry will become more interesting. Meaningful, I think is more an unintended consequence, but one that certainly is nice.
Style Training is the key way to learn maneuvers, hmm? Definitely makes the fighter more desirable.
Right. Which was the major point. The Fighter was designed to be more bland than the Barbarian or Paladin for this reason. He is meant to fulfill the Warblade niche as "best" or "most-straightforward" maneuver-user.
"To recover maneuvers of the Devoted Spirit fighting style a character must make an attack that reduces a creature of opposing alignment from more than ½ its maximum hit points to ½ or fewer or from more than 0 hit points or to 0 or fewer" should probably be "...or from more than 0 hit points to 0 or fewer."
Yes, good catch.
Does Burning Blade only apply to one weapon, or would it apply to all weapons you touch? Also a question about Searing Blade, I guess.
Hmm... I would think that it should only apply to the weapon you touched upon initiating the boost.
Diamond Mind timeslicing? I approve, very much.
I only worry that Diamond Mind is a bit too powerful, but many of its maneuvers have toned down raw power in exchange for quickness and utility. It may work out, but casters will be attracted to the discipline, even despite the steep cost of entry (which I suppose is decent balance in and of itself).
Flickering Flame works with teleports, I assume? Nice little ability to have.
That was definitely my intention.
Scorching Sirocco is very nice too. You've actually made me like Desert Wind again.
That was actually my primary design goal with Desert Wind. Reimagine it and power it up so that people would actually like it again. I'm very happy to hear you say that. It's not all fire damage, and even when it is fire damage, at least it deals pretty good fire damage with interesting rider effects.
Am I correct in thinking that if you were TWFing, Avalanche of Blades would double those attacks as well?
Yes, because of the way the revised TWFing rules are worded, you can make an attack with one weapon whenever you make an attack with the other. Of course, your attacks will still suffer TWFing penalties as well.
Rising Phoenix's damage is worded oddly to me. Presumably you don't want to deal 10d6 damage per creature to each creature, but rather to choose which creatures take 10d6 damage, yes? Also, you could probably afford to boost your hit point total up a little more after revival - that window of -1 to -9 is narrow enough without worrying that a sneeze will drop you back down there.
I don't want it to be that great of a healing effect, but I did bump it to ½ your BAB. Also, changed the damage dealing portion to just hit all adjacent creatures. None of the other Desert Wind maneuvers spare your allies, so there's no good reason for this one too either.
Inferno Blast should probably specify that you don't damage yourself with it, unless you do.
Good catch. Will edit.
EDIT: Okay, major changes/additions made to the Inferno Blast maneuver. It is basically a small-scale nuclear blast.
Also, I've added the short descriptions on Iron Heart maneuvers, I plan to finish the discipline up either later tonight or sometime tomorrow. Oh, finally, I've added revised rules for the Sunder special attack HERE
. Now there is sundering of manufactured armor as well as all natural attacks! Neato? Let me know what you think.