What are the differences/similarities between E6, Fantasy Concepts Campaign Resource, FantasyCraft, Iron Heroes, Pathfinder and Trailblazer?

[VelvetViolet]

As far as I know, all of these are either continuations or significant revisions of the 3.5 d20 system. E6 is an expanded house rule that limits characters to 6th level to alter the tone of the game, Fantasy Concepts is an adaptation of the SAGA rules, FantasyCraft is a complete reinvention of the rules that includes dragons and treants as PC races, Iron Heroes focuses on martial techniques and low-magic, Pathfinder is pretty much a straight up continuation, and Trailblazer makes significant balance changes between the classes like nerfing druids.

Is there a more detailed overview of the differences/similarities between them? What are their advantages and disadvantages and can they be mix-and-matched together?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Except for Pathfinder, those are all less popular than D&D, so I doubt you can find anyone who has played all of those.

I'm a bit familiar with Trailblazer. It put a little 4e into 3e. As I mostly DM, I didn't bother to look at the class mechanics, which might be the part you're mainly interested in. (The class changes are bolted onto what's in the SRD rather than being their own thing. That's both a feature and a bug.) Instead, I was interested in monster rules. Trailblazer has "elite" and "solo" templates that are obviously 4e-influenced and look like they work pretty well.

Pathfinder has lots of little changes. The most positive change, IMO, is to low-level wizards and clerics. Most wizard subclasses have spell-like abilities that are more powerful than cantrips but weaker than 1st-level spells, and can be used 3 + Int times per day. Even universalists get something. Alas, they vary wildly in terms of usefulness; more options can mean more bad options. Some, such as the necromancer's ability, aren't really worth the paper they're printed on. I really liked the conjurer and fire wizard spell-like abilities though. Admittedly these abilities lose their luster as the wizard gains levels, but ... you're now a high-level wizard, you don't need more power, you probably should have less

Cleric domains often have spell-like abilities as well. Handy if you're not a "meaty" cleric.

Pathfinder cantrips are also at-will. They're still really weak, of course, but if you don't want your wizard to ever use a bow, you don't have to.

Iron Heroes is starkly different. In hindsight, it has a little 4e in 3e, much like Book of Nine Swords. It has "reserve points" that work kind of like healing surges. (In 4e, the number of hit points a PC has at any one time is pretty limited, but the amount you have over the course of the day is pretty high.) I don't recall there being in-combat healing magic in it at all. The classes tried various methods to make martial combat interesting. There's also a weaker wizard class, a bit like the late 3.5 "weaker" caster classes such as Beguilder, Warlock, Warmage, etc. There were some vague rules (or maybe I just vaguely remember those rules) for weakening monsters that required magic to deal with. I think it had a Bestiary as well, which is probably a better way of handling things.

Is E6 even a house rule? If the DM says they will end the game before 7th-level, that's not really a house rule, that's a campaign reaching its natural conclusion.

 

[TwoSix]

Is E6 even a house rule? If the DM says they will end the game before 7th-level, that's not really a house rule, that's a campaign reaching its natural conclusion.

The main house rule for E6 is that the game continues on at 6th level, and characters earn new feats every 5000 (or some other DM determined number) XP.

Supporting this, the initial E6 document contained a number of feats designed as "capstones" that 6th level characters could aim for, such as the ability to cast certain 4th level spells or use higher level fighter feats.

Over the years, people have put together version of the SRD supporting E6 that contain only the 6-level progression of each class, adding the new capstone feats, and eliminating unobtainable feats, spells, and magical items.
[MENTION=6701124]Cadence[/MENTION] on these boards is currently working on a Pathfinder version of the E6 rules.

Some people have been enamored enough with E6 to put together entirely homebrewed sets of new classes based on a 6th level progression.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Is there a more detailed overview of the differences/similarities between them? What are their advantages and disadvantages and can they be mix-and-matched together?

In general, all those 3e derivatives are similar enough that they can be mixed together.

E6 is just a philosophy that can be applied to any d20 variant. There's even an official P6 conversion. It simply means that characters can only gain 6 levels, and after that, they advance by gaining feats (but not any other benefits). It is very popular in that it reduces the amount of bookkeeping inherent to high level play and keeps the game more grounded and avoids the super.

PF and TB are both 3e rewrites. Both maintain most of the fundamentals. Both can easily be mixed and matched with each other and with 3e. PF is the most similar to 3e, and contains many minor revisions to classes and character abilities but uses the same math. TB incorporates some more structural changes, altering how saves and spellcasting works and rewriting several of the classes, but still has mostly recognizable elements.

To me, TB takes more risks, and thus has more good (and bad ideas).

I don't know enough about the others to say. Given all the available options, I think it's not only possible but a natural and desirable step to check out the whole market and pick and choose as to what meets your individual style.

 

[DMZ2112]

Just a heads up -- you shouldn't all-caps "Saga" when you're talking about the Star Wars RPG Saga Edition -- the SAGA System was something completely different that TSR published in the '90s.

 

[Alzrius]

Just a heads up -- you shouldn't all-caps "Saga" when you're talking about the Star Wars RPG Saga Edition -- the SAGA System was something completely different that TSR published in the '90s.

That's not an idle nitpick either - my first thought when I read that was that was someone trying to make another version of the SAGA system from the Dragonlance Fifth Age game.

 

[DMZ2112]

That's not an idle nitpick either - my first thought when I read that was that was someone trying to make another version of the SAGA system from the Dragonlance Fifth Age game.

Yeah, I was super excited and then super disappointed.