Monster Book?

ThatGuyThere · Apr 11, 2011

Are there still plans for a Trailblazer-ized monster book?

...are we going to see anything further in the Trailblazer line?

GlassJaw · Apr 12, 2011

ThatGuyThere said:
Are there still plans for a Trailblazer-ized monster book?

There are more than plans - we are trying to finish it up now!

...are we going to see anything further in the Trailblazer line?

Good question.

joela · Apr 13, 2011

GlassJaw said:
Good question.

Trailblazer "Core" book containing everything needed to run a TB campaign without requiring the 3.x PH and DM's guides B-)

Matrix Sorcica · Apr 13, 2011

GlassJaw said:
Good question.

Trailblazer Pathfinder add-on.

joela · Apr 13, 2011

Matrix Sorcica said:
Trailblazer Pathfinder add-on.

What do you mean, Matrix Sorcica?

Matrix Sorcica · Apr 14, 2011

An analysis of the Pathfinder classes, CRs, spells etc. in the way the PHB classes are being analyzed in TB.

In other words, since Pathfinder seems to the future of 3.5 (like it or not), it would make sense to do a version of TB that deals with PF with same way that TB currently deals with 3.5.

Did that make sense at all?

joela · Apr 14, 2011

Matrix Sorcica said:
An analysis of the Pathfinder classes, CRs, spells etc. in the way the PHB classes are being analyzed in TB.

In other words, since Pathfinder seems to the future of 3.5 (like it or not), it would make sense to do a version of TB that deals with PF with same way that TB currently deals with 3.5.

Did that make sense at all?

Yes. Page 12 of the TB book but on PF classes.

Wulf Ratbane · Apr 15, 2011

joela said:
Yes. Page 12 of the TB book but on PF classes.

I think that's unlikely. TB and PF diverged fairly early on in terms of design philosophy and design goals, and moving forward TB is more likely to continue that divergence. TB is primarily a systems-driven approach, and PF is primarily a style-driven approach.

Anyone interested in deconstructing the PF classes should have all the tools necessary to do so, already provided by TB.

joela · Apr 15, 2011

Wulf Ratbane said:
...and moving forward TB is more likely to continue that divergence.

Wait. Moving forward? TB 2.0 in the works?

AdmundfortGeographer · Apr 16, 2011

Wulf Ratbane said:
TB is primarily a systems-driven approach, and PF is primarily a style-driven approach.

Out of curiosity, say you take a bird's eye view of the two systems. What would you say are the signs TB is system-driven in approach, and what are the signs PF is style-driven in approach?