• COMING SOON! -- The Awfully Cheerful Engine on Kickstarter! An action comedy RPG inspired by cheerful tabletop games of the 80s! With a foreword by Sandy 'Ghostbusters' Petersen, and VTT support!
log in or register to remove this ad

 

Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder / Trailblazer / other "3.75s"

Drowbane

First Post
Has anyone updated any of the non-core base classes to PF or TB specs? For example the Warlock loses alot in TB, since the casters get most of thier spells back after a short rest.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ahnehnois

First Post
The warlock probably does require some rethinking in that case.

As these classes are not open, there isn't and won't be any official published conversion. Unofficial conversions abound, you can check the Pathfinder Database for some similar classes.

There can be official but indirect conversions; for instance the oracle and cavalier (currently available in beta versions) vaguely resemble the favored soul and the knight.

Other than that, you can always convert what you need yourself (and who doesn't modify classes for their own games anyway?). Posting such a conversion here is a good way to get feedback.
 

Wulf Ratbane

Adventurer
Has anyone updated any of the non-core base classes to PF or TB specs? For example the Warlock loses alot in TB, since the casters get most of thier spells back after a short rest.

Unless you're charging the Warlock action points to recover his at will or per day abilities-- as is the case with the spellcasters, if you're using the full TB rules-- then the Warlock should come out ahead on APs compared to the spellcasters.

Spellcasters have an AP cost involved if they want to get the full use out of more frequent/short rests; other classes don't pay this fee and so will have more APs available for other uses.

If the DM puts pressure on the spellcasters to use their APs for defense-- and spellcasters do tend to attract a lot of the wrong kind of attention, right?-- then they'll feel the pinch.
 

Voadam

Legend
Has anyone updated any of the non-core base classes to PF or TB specs? For example the Warlock loses alot in TB, since the casters get most of thier spells back after a short rest.

In TB spellcasters only get their cantrips and single target spells back after a short rest IIRC. They have to spend an action point to get back their multi target ones and spend another one for the big useful ones like teleport, scry, etc.

TB looks to nerf/tone down spellcaster balance by making it expensive to get back most of their big gun spells. Warlocks would bypass that entirely.

It would be possible to focus a spellcaster on single target only spells and have the spellcaster be raring to go all the time though.
 

Drowbane

First Post
Perhaps this question deserves its own thread... How have people done Psionics in Trailblazer?

Should psionicists regain power points with rest as a mage regains (some) spells? Or do you think that psionic versitility keeps the two fairly balanced as is?

The trailblazer campaign I'm in is heavy on the RP and lite on combat, so my Psion rarely is low on power points... but if this changes I might end up finding myself turtling behind my DR and good AC (adamantine body, etc).
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
The same way magic was made a a unified progression, psionics would have to be as well. The power point issue is sticky given the uneven nature of how recovering spells work. No easy answers there.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top