TRAILBLAZER - PDF Release - Discussion/Questions/Errata

[GlassJaw]

there's little to recommend the 1d6 x2 quarterstaff over a 1d8 x3 w/reach long spear.

We gave the quarterstaff the trip quality.

Awesome pic Mark!

 

[Mark Chance]

We gave the quarterstaff the trip quality.

And the quarterstaff can be used against an adjacent foe, it's a double weapon, and it's cheaper and easier to replace.

Awesome pic Mark!

Danke.

And, in Jet Li's hands, a quarterstaff is also reach weapon.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

We gave the quarterstaff the trip quality.

A very, very late addition courtesy of Glassjaw.

You have him to thank for lots of cool little "improvements" that wouldn't have hit my radar as a problem worth dealing with. (That includes the half-elf and half-orc changes, too.)

EDIT: To answer Jasin, I don't recall the last wuxia-style movie I saw that didn't feature a spear.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I finally finished the PfRPG Core Book so I powered up the eReader and DAGNAMMIT, I forgot to charge it. Page 2 and it powers off ...
...waiting waiting

EDIT: can't wait, plugged it in the USB charger and I am sitting next to my PC

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

I also want to incorporate some sort of "power stunt" feature for combat that would let a PC apply a condition effect or special effect to his attack. For example, he could spend an AP for his attack to stun his target in addition to other effects. Perhaps more significant effects would cost more than one AP. I've toyed with tying this to a narrative requirement in a Feng Shui sort of way.

I'm thinking of simply lifting a number of the Rogue's Talents from Pathfinder:Rogue

Depending on how you plan on setting up/running your game (Pathfinder as the base or Trailblazer), you've got some flexibility. If you're using Pathfinder as a base, you could have a 3 tier system:

Fighter can apply the condition, Rogue applies the condition on a Sneak Attack, everyone else can buy into the Critical Focus feat chain and apply it on a Critical strike.

As far as giving it to the fighters is concerned, you also have a couple of choices.

First is to simply add the Talents to the Fighter class as another class ability. Next is to fold it in under Expert Weapon Proficiency, giving more things for a Fighter to spend their picks on and effectively capping the number of Talents a Fighter can have. Last option is to allow Fighters to spend an AP to apply the condition.

I like the idea of AP being a per session/per adventure asset. Each PC would start with X number of APs, and could earn more APs during play for this or that. I like M&M's system of awarding Hero Points for significant setbacks and for genre-appropriate activity.

I've read about Mouseguard tying rewards to character personality traits and character-specific goals. I'm quite attracted to adapting this for d20 as well.

I'm going to borrow from Fantasy Concepts and use AP as a per-session resource as well, starting with their base and modifying it if needed: 3 + one–quarter your character level, rounded down.

 

[jasin]

A very, very late addition courtesy of Glassjaw.

You have him to thank for lots of cool little "improvements" that wouldn't have hit my radar as a problem worth dealing with. (That includes the half-elf and half-orc changes, too.)

EDIT: To answer Jasin, I don't recall the last wuxia-style movie I saw that didn't feature a spear.

Maybe it wasn't entirely clear in my post, but I have no problem with monks wielding spears (and other weapons; in fact, I've been looking for ways to make a 3E swordsman monk since before I started playing 3E ). What I don't want is monks never wielding quarterstaves, since spears are simply better.

If quarterstaves get a little something to make them more attractive, it all works out. (Well, it still sort of leaves things like the kama or the siangham out in the cold, but I can't recall the last wuxia movie I saw that featured a siangham, so I'm not too worried about that.)

 

[Edheldur]

Don't use that table to do that. Use the full monster templates...

... that I will be working on as my next project.

Ok, I'll bite: can you tell us something more about this? It sounds very intriguing.

 

[jasin]

Re-roll a failed d20 roll. In this case, you spend the action point after the
DM informs you of the outcome of the roll. Spend an action point to roll
again. The second result stands. (You may spend another action point to
improve this second roll.) Note that the average improvement when taking
the better of two d20 rolls is about +3; in most cases, you are better off
using your action point to improve your first roll.

The two bolded sections seem contradictory to me. I'm assuming that the much stronger phrasing means the first one is correct, but to avoid confusion, the wording on the second one should be different, I think.

 

[jasin]

Page 32 lists 7th- and 8th-level bard spells. If the rest of the spell list (0-6th is the same as in 3.5), these lists repeat some spells already found on the bard list at lower levels: greater scrying, mass charm monster, irresistible dance. It's too limited to be an intentional free taste of Heighten Spell, so I'm guessing this is an oversight?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Maybe it wasn't entirely clear in my post, but I have no problem with monks wielding spears (and other weapons; in fact, I've been looking for ways to make a 3E swordsman monk since before I started playing 3E ). What I don't want is monks never wielding quarterstaves, since spears are simply better.

This is not a playstyle I care to design to.

I don't design quarterstaves worrying that someone somewhere is going to work out that the spear is clearly better-- clearly better defined here as 1 point of damage, on average, better.

Frankly I didn't want to touch the half-orc, either.

Play the character that makes you go WAHOO! inside. Play the character that makes you go WAHOO! at the table.

Play what's fun, for 's sake.