Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Libertad" data-source="post: 9190355" data-attributes="member: 6750502">Side by Side ComparisonNow that I reviewed both Tasslehoff’s Pouches of Everything and the Dragonlance Companion, how do they stack up against each other?First off, in terms of total content Tasslehoff’s is 140 pages, while the Companion is 182. 32 out of 140 pages of Tasslehoff’s are dedicated to an adventure, while 78 out of 182 pages of the Companion are dedicated to encounters and adventures. For their respective bestiaries, Tasslehoff’s is 12 pages but has 19 monsters, while the Companion also has 12 pages but only covers 9 monsters. For what can be deemed player-friendly content (including magic items), Tasslehoff’s has 75 pages of content, while the Companion has 80.When it comes to Races, Tasslehoff’s clearly wins out. The only race the Companion has that Tasslehoff’s doesn’t is the Thanoi, but besides them it has an incomplete Draconian subrace and a Half-Ogre. Tasslehoff’s not only provides new races, it also explains in detail what place existing races have in the world, and to better differentiate them the classic humans/elves/dwarves have their own new subraces. What the Companion has over Tasslehoff’s, however, is using Tasha's alternative of being able to freely assign one’s ability score bonuses. Tasslehoff’s are still locked in to specific abilities which can limit character customization, but that isn’t as big of a problem if the DM allows Tasha’s customization.When it comes to direct comparisons, Tasslehoff’s Draconians are closer in conception to the lore of prior Editions: their death throes are built-in rather than requiring a feat, for one. As for their features, Companion’s require a reaction to negate falling damage for winged draconians, but Tasslehoff’s ignores it as long as they have room to spread their wings. The Bozak subrace in Tasslehoff’s is more overtly offensive early on, and gets a better battlefield control spell via Web rather than Scorching Ray at 5th level. As for the Kapak, Tasslehoff’s one is stronger in that its paralytic poison can last for more than one turn, but the Companion can also produce healing saliva as an alternative. The Sivak’s shapeshifting trait is much more limited in the Companion in having a 1 hour time limit, but Tasslehoff’s can last as long as they desire until they revert or die.As for their Half-Ogres, the Companion wins out in having more broadly useful abilities. For example, compare Tasslehoff’s AC increase that only applies when not wearing armor, vs the Companion who gets a flat +1 AC no matter what.For Subclasses, Tasslehoff’s has 15 while the Companion has 13. When it comes to generalities, Tasslehoff’s wins out in the “authentic Dragonlance” department, having more subclasses that directly tie into the setting in some way or have existed in prior official material. An area that the Companion does win out in is having a better explanation of how to insert Warlocks into Dragonlance within the existing confines of magic by basically having them dedicated to a deity. Tasslehoff’s makes it so that non-gods are capable of granting arcane spellcasting to others, which doesn’t work in the traditional lore. Not even in the Fifth Age, where Primal Sorcery is less of a patron-granted power and more of a “natural feature” of the world.When it comes to overall balance, I found Tasslehoff’s subclasses to swing a lot less between the underpowered/overpowered scale. I didn’t see anything on the scale as a Warlock Deity patron’s insane DPS potential, for instance. Additionally, Tasslehoff’s comes with a lot of nice things for martials and noncasters: the Knight of Solamnia’s Rose abilities, Way of Mantis Monk, and Nightstalker Rogue all get some very nice features. As for the Companion, the Path of the Dragon Barbarian and Tinkerer Rogue are quite good, and the Fewmaster has some nice features, but a lot of that subclasses’ features aren’t congruent with each other.While most subclasses were unique enough, I did see a few that stepped on each other’s toes. Tasslehoff’s Path of the Dragon Totem and the Companion’s Path of the Dragon are both really close in both name and concept. I’d have to go with Companion’s on account of granting flight and immunity to the frightened condition, which help overcome problems with the Barbarian class staying in melee more reliably, as well as a better breath weapon capstone. And while they’re both part of different classes, the Circle of the Elements Druid and Elemental Blade Sorcerer both occupy the “spellcaster with an elemental weapon” niche. The Druid one wins out on being not as squishy as a Sorcerer and the expenditure of its class-based resources (Wild Shape, Sorcery Points) comes with more substantial and longer-lasting benefits.Personally speaking, I’d give this one to Tasslehoff’s.For Backgrounds and Feats, Tasslehoff’s provides us with broader options for both, while the Companion is more closely focused on certain races and archetypes. The Companion hews closer to focusing on making iconic organizations with built-in benefits, much like Shadow of the Dragon Queen did with giving the Knights of Solamnia and Mages of High Sorcery unique backgrounds and bonus feats. And of its non-organization feats, all of those are specific to particular races. Sadly, the Companion is limited in that both of its organizations only exist at certain points in the timeline: Seekers disband shortly after the return of the non-evil true gods and the Knights of Neraka are formed near the end of the Age of Despair. As for Tasslehoff’s, the backgrounds and feats are varied enough for a wide variety of character concepts, even if some are less balanced than others.Another win for Tasslehoff’s.Here’s the first of the big divergences: Tasslehoff’s has Weapons, but the Companion has Spells. Such comparisons are going to be apples to oranges, as different gaming groups are going to be attracted to different material.For the coverage of the Gods, Tasslehoff’s is closer to original lore and doesn’t throw in fanon-feeling things like evil-aligned priestesses of Mishakal or Shinare having an “I hate poor people” Libertarian ethos. The Companion, however, makes serving the gods come with more built-in rules and benefits in the form of Piety and Herald Items.Although I’m not as much a fan of the fanon changes, given their prominence in the stories I like the mechanical rewards for serving the gods, so I’m giving a point to the Companion.For Magic Items, Tasslehoff’s has only 16 magic items, while the Companion has 22. However, the ones covered in the former are much more recognizable and iconic, such as the Blue Crystal Staff and the different types of Dragonlances. A lot more of the ones in the Companion are either original or perhaps from more obscure sourcebooks. It also does a weird thing in making the hoopak weapon a magic item. Frostreaver axes exist in both sourcebooks, but the one in the Companion is much stronger.I’m leaning towards Tasslehoff’s on account that there are a few magic items whose inclusion really tells you that you’re in a Dragonlance campaign, and I don’t just mean Dragonlances. More gaming groups are going to be familiar with something like the Brightblade rather than the Oathkeeper, or find the mechanics of the Staff of Magius more fun than the Spellbook of Magius.For their Bestiaries, Tasslehoff’s is much more tightly focused. While it has double the monsters in terms of stat blocks, around half of those are dragonspawn and draconians, and draconians already exist in Shadow of the Dragon Queen. For the rest of the monsters, they’re a small mixture of animals, a pair of undead, a desert dragon, ogre titan, and the skrit beetle. As for the Companion, it has more diversity, with quite a bit of fiends and undead. The skrit is the only monster that exists in both products, with the major differences in that Tasslehoff’s skrit is more of a death by a thousand cuts type in its slow drain of a target’s maximum hit points. The Companion, conversely, deals a lot of acid damage when biting a paralyzed target. The Companion also has a sidebar for people who want to have a skrit as a mount.I favor the Companion over Tasslehoff’s in this regard, especially given that we already have draconian stat blocks in Shadow of the Dragon Queen. I will note that the adventures in both books give more stat blocks than what’s in the bestiary, albeit Champions of Krynn only has stats for specific NPCs and the monstrous enemies are derived from the existing core rules.For Setting Material, Tasslehoff wins hands down. The Dragonlance Companion is more or less focused on mechanics with a few adventures and encounters in back. Tasslehoff’s paints a more complete picture of Ansalon beyond what is provided in Shadow of the Dragon Queen.When it comes to Adventures, the Dragonlance Companion has more material in general: 2 short encounters and 2 full-length adventures. While I haven’t reviewed it yet, the adventure that comes with Tasslehoff’s is a short adventure for 1st level PCs that involves investigating a goblinoid takeover of a town in Throtl. It’s a lot more cliche and by the numbers in that regard, while the adventures in the Companion are more detailed and original in feel. One point to the Companion.Overall Thoughts: Tallying up the votes, we have 5 for Tasslehoff’s and 3 for the Companion. The places where the Companion wins are the gods, bestiaries, and adventures, which ironically makes Tasslehoff’s the superior option in terms of player-friendly material. This result matches more or less how I felt during my initial readings, although doing a detailed rundown helped me see the Companion’s strengths a bit more. While the Dragonlance Companion has its own strengths, if you had to ask me directly I’d point fans towards Tasslehoff’s Pouches of Everything.</blockquote>

Verification