TRAILBLAZER - PDF Release - Discussion/Questions/Errata

[ValhallaGH]

Thank you all for your support.

It's been my pleasure. The last time I got this enjoyment from a 3.x ruleset was Iron Heroes, and this is so much more refined and polished (and presumably more enjoyably playable without the massive house ruling).

Thanks, to both of you, for sharing. May 2010 be a better year than 2009.

 

[firesnakearies]

How well does this work with Pathfinder?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

How well does this work with Pathfinder?

It depends on what you are looking to change with respect to your game.

Many (most?) of the rules changes presented in Trailblazer you can use a la carte: iterative attack changes, combat reactions, new rest mechanic, etc.

Some of the changes would require you to use considerably more content from Trailblazer. For example, if you wanted to use the Unified Spell Progression fix for multiclass spellcaster, I'd recommend you replace all of the Pathfinder classes with the Trailblazer classes. However, since I know that the Pathfinder classes are very evocative and fun, that can be a problem for some folks!

Drop me an email through www.badaxegames.com and I will send you a free copy of the PDF. Then you can judge for yourself.

 

[firesnakearies]

Drop me an email through www.badaxegames.com and I will send you a free copy of the PDF. Then you can judge for yourself.

Thanks for the answer, and wow, that's a really nice offer! I appreciate it. But instead of taking you up on it, I just went and bought the PDF.


$

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Thanks for the answer, and wow, that's a really nice offer! I appreciate it. But instead of taking you up on it, I just went and bought the PDF.

Let me know what you think.

Unless you really don't like it, in which case, by all means, keep it on the down low.

 

[Papa-DRB]

I am running Pathfinder, core only, *except* for the iterative attack change, and I am considering the new rest mechanic since the wizard never wants to adventure once he casts half his spells, and with 4th level characters that keeps the day short (too short imho).

-- david
Papa.DRB

Many (most?) of the rules changes presented in Trailblazer you can use a la carte: iterative attack changes, combat reactions, new rest mechanic, etc.

 

[Abraxas]

I have been very happy with my purchase of the Trailblazer PDF (and am going to purchase the print version - cause I like books). As soon as my Pathfinder campaign is complete I'm going to try a Trailblazer campaign.

Right now I am adopting the Trailblazer iterative attacks fix for my pathfinder game and have a question. Perhaps I've really messed up my math - but doesn't two weapon fighting come out much stronger than both sword & board and two handed weapon fighting?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Perhaps I've really messed up my math - but doesn't two weapon fighting come out much stronger than both sword & board and two handed weapon fighting?

The answer to that depends on a lot more variables than your question includes.

Generally speaking, most folks don't feel the upkeep of TWF is worth it (high DEX, more feats, owning two weapons instead of one, etc.)

It's usually easier to just take Power Attack and use a big honkin' sword.

Comparing sword-and-board is apples to oranges. The S&B fighter isn't about DPS, but rather AC/damage avoidance. Trailblazer makes S&B better in a couple of ways (adding shield bonus to your combat reaction parries, for example). Note that you can also hold an object in your hand while wielding a light shield, and drinking a ready potion is now a move action. That's... noteworthy.

 

[Abraxas]

The answer to that depends on a lot more variables than your question includes.

Generally speaking, most folks don't feel the upkeep of TWF is worth it (high DEX, more feats, owning two weapons instead of one, etc.)

Did/Do you feel that way?

It's usually easier to just take Power Attack and use a big honkin' sword.

I definitely agree that Power Attack and a BHS is easier. I was just running some numbers and (before factoring in power attack) the results I got showed that TWF with two short swords did ~50% more damage against a given AC than using a greatsword. So I'm questioning if I screwed something up.

I am also curious if you did any such comparisons and, if you did, what results you got.

Comparing sword-and-board is apples to oranges. The S&B fighter isn't about DPS, but rather AC/damage avoidance. Trailblazer makes S&B better in a couple of ways (adding shield bonus to your combat reaction parries, for example). Note that you can also hold an object in your hand while wielding a light shield, and drinking a ready potion is now a move action. That's... noteworthy.

Well, in campaigns with both the BHS fighter and the TWF guy I have seen they both try to get an animated shield as soon as possible. However, even without such things - if my numbers were right - a 50% increase in damage per round is pretty attractive. if the monster dies that much sooner the character takes that much less damage - just like not getting hit.

Oh well, just curious.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Did/Do you feel that way?

I like TWF, but then I also play a lot of fighter/rogues and ranger/rogues. In my opinion, TWF excels when you have access to bonus damage dice.

I was just running some numbers and (before factoring in power attack)

That's a problem... but go on. You can search out the counter-arguments on Google.

the results I got showed that TWF with two short swords did ~50% more damage against a given AC than using a greatsword. So I'm questioning if I screwed something up.

Test your math by running it against the SRD TWF figures. It will be instructive. If you come to the end of your process and your numbers look right (a ~50% increase, which sounds right to me) then you need to seek out the counter-arguments that include power attack.

I am also curious if you did any such comparisons and, if you did, what results you got.

On paper, discounting power attack, TWF appears to show an improvement in the 150% range (158%, 147%, etc.) This is for the SRD.

The change in iterative attack bonuses and the gradual reduction of the TWF penalty in TB gives TWF a gradual improvement-- again, on paper, discounting power attack-- that improves to about 175% and eventually to 200%-- perforce, as one might expect when comparing a (0/0) attack sequence to a (0/0/0/0) attack sequence. (You don't need a math degree for that.)

Once you hit that point, most outside considerations go away, including power attack. You're comparing (0/0) to (0/0/0/0) on a level playing field. At that point all you can do is decide if the 21 DEX and 4 feat investment is worth it and "ok" at 16th level. (I reckon so.)

Well, in campaigns with both the BHS fighter and the TWF guy I have seen they both try to get an animated shield as soon as possible.

In my campaigns, the PCs don't "try to get" anything. There's no sense of entitlement just because someone happens to want to try out an uber build. They get what they get.