ToB versus PoW

[Oracle_of_Void]

So, I have a question for the playground and it will be pretty subjective in answer. I am interested in those two books but I don't know which one I want. I prefer Pathfinder if that matters. Should I buy Tome of Battle (I'm sure it'll require a tiny bit of work to convert to Pathfinder but correct me if I'm wrong) or should I buy Path of War (no work since it was designed for Pathfinder). Please keep comparisons to pros and cons for each. Please keep it civil because, again, this will be a highly subjective thing. Thanks in advance.

[Extra Anchovies]

oh dear, I sense another edition war incoming.

PoW is written for Pathfinder
ToB is written for D&D
You prefer Pathfinder
∴ You will prefer PoW

PoW also has better editing. The only issue you may find is that PoW has a lot more maneuvers than ToB (twice as many, without counting PoW Expanded).

[Haelfyr]

Although I generally prefer pathfinder, not having thoroughly played with PoW, I like the flavor of ToB. But that is just personal preference. Take it with a grain of salt.

[Doc_Maynot]

Path of War has some odd class mechanics in my opinion, but unlike Tome of battle it actually has ranged support.

[KingSmitty]

ive read some of the maneuvers in PoW and they seem like they'd fit nicely in 3.5 without being too powerful as the norm when you translate pathfinder to 3.5

why not both? I just bought ToB second hand for pretty cheap and it looks like it came off the shelf.

[Troacctid]

Just from a value perspective, Path of War is available for free on the Pathfinder SRD. Tome of Battle is not. So if you bought ToB, you could still use PoW through the SRD; the reverse is not true.

[TheIronGolem]

I'm definitely biased here, because I'm much more familiar with PoW than ToB and I'm a Pathfinder guy anyway. That said:


PoW is already PF-native, so no conversion work is needed.
PoW disciplines strike me as more varied and well-thought-out than ToB's schools, with more out-of-combat utility and movement abilities that fill some of the gaps that martials typically suffer from.
PoW classes generally have more interesting and useful mechanics in my opinion, especially some of the archetypes (okay, admittedly this one is very subjective).
ToB was long ago abandoned as the redheaded stepchild of WotC, whereas PoW is going to be receiving support and new material from Dreamscarred for a while yet. (Legitimate counterpoint: PoW is third-party unlike ToB, so it will be disallowed at some tables on those grounds alone)
PoW's fluff is a good bit more worldly and less wuxia-centric, which sidesteps the "too Asian" objection.
PoW is pretty well-edited to begin with, and can expect to see some revision in the future to clear things up unlike ToB. To my knowledge, PF has no equivalent of the d2 Crusader, "Iron Heart Surge the sun away", etc.
PoW is available online via d20pfsrd, so everyone can use it even if they don't own the books.

[Vhaidara]

Although I generally prefer pathfinder, not having thoroughly played with PoW, I like the flavor of ToB. But that is just personal preference. Take it with a grain of salt.

Okay, first time I've heard that. Not saying you're wrong (I'm neutral on the issue).

Pretty much what most people have said. PoW has the advantage of being PF native, being better edited, and being ACTIVELY edited. If you have a question you can, on this wbesite, PM one of the DSP employees (If I recall correctly, ErrantX, Lord Gareth, and Ssalarn had hands in PoW/PoWE) to get a ruling. It has more maneuvers (a plus in my view), more diverse classes, archetypes, more varied disciplines (support for ranged, sword and board, board and board, and even the lonely einhander), ways to change your class disciplines (martial traditions), better feats (Martial Training line is amazing, Deadly Agility is a godsend).

And despite all of that, I think the biggest pro to PoW is that the classes recover maneuver by doing things you want to. The worst is Stalker, which essentially meditates for a round, getting a big AC boost while they do. Warlord does something risky/crazy, and gets extra bonuses if they succeed. Warder becomes a zone of NOPE. Compared to ToB classes, recovering you maneuvers is a tactical opportunity, instead of just a "and now I doing boring things this round to get back to fun things".

All that said, PoW is no Iron Heart Surge and the hilarity it can cause.

[Extra Anchovies]

Deadly Agility is a godsend

This, this, all of this. DSP made TWF SAD, and for that I am forever grateful.

[Drelua]

This, this, all of this. DSP made TWF SAD, and for that I am forever grateful.

To be fair, Paizo already created a few different ways to get DEX to damage, even outside of mythic. There's agile weapons, slashing fencing grace, and I feel like there's something else I'm missing. Of course, this isn't to say that DSP didn't do it better, just that Paizo has their clumsy ways of doing it too. Plus, WIS-based TWFing was already 2 levels of Soulknife and a blade talent away.

Anyway, one point against ToB is that it's likely to be much more difficult to find. I was lucky enough to pick up a copy at a local gaming store for twenty bucks, but barring that it's pretty expensive on Amazon and hard to find anywhere else.

I'd probably go with PoW just for how much more you seem to get for your money though, not to mention a much higher level of respect for DSP than WotC and Paizo combined. I haven't looked too closely at PoW, but there seems to be far more content than ToB.

[Oracle_of_Void]

Made some good points all around. I'll probably go with Path of War then. I know a lot of the material is on the SRD but I hate learning new classes/mechanics off a website. Besides, gotta support your favorite content creators, ya know? I just wanted some opinions in case people thought that the ToB maneuvers or classes are far superior or something. Feel free to continue the discussion, my mind can still be changed.

[Vhaidara]

Made some good points all around. I'll probably go with Path of War then. I know a lot of the material is on the SRD but I hate learning new classes/mechanics off a website. Besides, gotta support your favorite content creators, ya know? I just wanted some opinions in case people thought that the ToB maneuvers or classes are far superior or something. Feel free to continue the discussion, my mind can still be changed.

Speaking as someone who has used both, PoW classes are generally superior. ToB classes suffer from bad editing in almost every respect. Classic examples are Crusader stances (don't get a 3rd level stance until level 8, never get their 8th level stances), Swordsage skill points (x6 at first level by RAW), and Swordsage AC Bonus (by RAW, it only applies while wearing Light Armor. So not if unarmored).

Additionally, the PoW maneuvers are decidedly stronger. For a direct comparison, Scarlet Throne is basically the redo of Iron Heart. Comparing their 9th level maneuvers, both deal 100 additional damage on a hit. However, the Scarlet Throne one adds on "Fort Save or 1d4 rounds of paralysis".

[Nightraiderx]

Just go with PoW, seriously, not only do the three classes have distinct things for them, they also have effective archetypes that mix it up.
Currently using a soul-hunter Stalker and it's pretty fun, you can effectively mark someone who you damage and can just keep the mark on them until you let
it go or until you kill them. (which is pretty nice for bounty hunter types). Veiled Moon is a very fun and since DSP did play-testing through gitp, many of the manuevers are balanced and make sense level wise.

[Haelfyr]

Okay, first time I've heard that. Not saying you're wrong (I'm neutral on the issue).

Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm by myself in that particular corner. But for some reason I've always thought the crusader was the best when it come to flavor. Compared to the crusader, the warder just seemed to fall a little flat. Again personal opinion. That being said, the warlord does seem way more awesome than the warblade.

[SparksMcGee]

I like both. Each has their strengths.

ToB has better world building. It adds several elements to a game, specially identifies what disciplines are, provides several ways to introduce the maneuver system in an ongoing game and has monsters and magical items. ToB also has better art (and more art, at that - PoW doesn't have illustrations for any of the maneuvers).
PoW has more maneuvers and the classes are more interesting. However, the book is pretty much all crunch. It gives you all those tools, but it doesn't tell you any way to fit those tools into your setting or your ongoing campaign. They are just... there. PoW also has better editing.

All in all, I think PoW is a better book for players, but ToB is a better book for DMs. PoW is a source of cool tricks a character can do, ToB is the foundation of a campaign. Get both if you can.

[Petrocorus]

According to you guys, how easy is it to port PoW and PoWE to non-PF 3.5?

[Vhaidara]

Probably one of the trickier ports for balance reasons. The actual act is pretty simple, just modify the discipline skills to fit (mostly and Acrobatics split, but Solar Wind becomes Spot based).

One of the biggest points of balance is with the Warlord: The Acrobatic Gambit becomes "Make a Tumble check to regain Cha mod maneuvers and +1d6+Cha mod to damage". This sounds like the same as before, until you consider that Tumble is against a set DC (15+2/enemy) while Acrobatics is rolled against the enemy's CMD, aka 10+Str mod+Dex mod+size mod.

[137beth]

As far as maneuvers and stances go, path of war I think is a better book all around.
One thing to keep in mind, though, is that there is a big difference in how much they get in terms of non-maneuver class features. Think about the difference between the 3.5 wizard and pathfinder wizard. Compared to the ToB classes, the PoW classes have similar maneuver progression and similar-quality maneuvers (but with much better editing). However, the PoW classes have a bunch of class features on top of those. That would make them somewhat overpowered in a tier 3 3.5 game. Similarly, it makes the ToB classes rather underpowered in a pathfinder game.

Since you are using pathfinder anyways, you'll probably be better off just getting path of war.

[Extra Anchovies]

To be fair, Paizo already created a few different ways to get DEX to damage, even outside of mythic. There's agile weapons, slashing fencing grace, and I feel like there's something else I'm missing.

Eh. I prefer my Dex to damage abilities to be non-weapon-specific and non-item-dependent. About 3/4 of all of the builds I've assembled since I discovered Deadly Agility have incorporated it :smallconfused:

[Vhaidara]

Eh. I prefer my Dex to damage abilities to be non-weapon-specific and non-item-dependent. About 3/4 of all of the builds I've assembled since I discovered Deadly Agility have incorporated it :smallconfused:

Also, the problem with Slashing Grace is that it gives you Dex to damage with a one handed slashing weapon. There are some problems here.
1. It does not give you Dex to hit
2. You are not going to be dual wielding one handed weapons, since PF lacks an equivalent to Oversized TWF
3. It applies to a specific weapon
4. As a branch off of 1, your Weapon Finesse feat is actually dead, since it does not apply to your one handed slashing weapon.


And, as a side note, the Agile weapon enhancement isn't from Paizo. It's from DSP's Psionics Expanded. So actually the only Dex to damage options are Slashing Grace, which is bad for TWF, and Dervish Dance, which specifically prevents TWF (off hand must be free)

[Extra Anchovies]

And, as a side note, the Agile weapon enhancement isn't from Paizo. It's from DSP's Psionics Expanded. So actually the only Dex to damage options are Slashing Grace, which is bad for TWF, and Dervish Dance, which specifically prevents TWF (off hand must be free)

And Fencing Grace, which is rapier-only. I've never been a fan of using them in RPGs, they don't seem particularly fitting with heroic fantasy (or at least not with the sort of heroic fantasy characters I like to use).

[Elricaltovilla]

If you have a question you can, on this wbesite, PM one of the DSP employees (If I recall correctly, ErrantX, Lord Gareth, and Ssalarn had hands in PoW/PoWE) to get a ruling.

Not to toot my own horn, but I'm one of the writers for PoW:E too, as is Novawurmson here on the forums. I actually got involved in the project because of my participation in the playtesting and editing of the PoW material here on these very forums.:smallbiggrin: Also, since I'm the little guy of the group, I've got more free time to handle PMs

EDIT: In case it wasn't obvious, I'd support you going Path of War, but the main advantage I see in it is that its an ongoing project. The authors involved are actively working on producing new and useful product, and errata won't be ignored in favor of the "next big thing." We've put out great content so far, and we have a lot more coming!

[PraxisVetli]

So, I play 3.5. Never touched Pathfinder.
Except, Pow. See, I LOVED ToB. Thought it was brilliant. So when PoW cam out, I had to investigate. It's great. It really, really is.
But if I had to choose, I'd say PoW, if only because of mass. There's just simply MORE to PoW. More Classes, more Disciplines, more PrC's, more Feats, and it's all good stuff. With PoW, there's a discipline for damn near anything, and with anything, you can build everything.



Though, I must admit, ToB's Diamond Mind is my first love.
PoW's Riven Hourglass was my second.


Also, PoW's Harbinger looks like it's an absolute RIOT to play.

[Drelua]

Eh. I prefer my Dex to damage abilities to be non-weapon-specific and non-item-dependent. About 3/4 of all of the builds I've assembled since I discovered Deadly Agility have incorporated it :smallconfused:


Also, the problem with Slashing Grace is that it gives you Dex to damage with a one handed slashing weapon. There are some problems here.
1. It does not give you Dex to hit
2. You are not going to be dual wielding one handed weapons, since PF lacks an equivalent to Oversized TWF
3. It applies to a specific weapon
4. As a branch off of 1, your Weapon Finesse feat is actually dead, since it does not apply to your one handed slashing weapon.

Oh, I absolutely agree, none of the ways to get DEX to damage in Paizo are nearly as well-designed as Deadly Agility, or ToB's Shadow Blade for that matter. They're all frustratingly specific or difficult to qualify for, except for Agile which just feels wrong to me as a magic item rather than an ability that the character has. I pointed that out purely because it seemed fair to note that PoW isn't the first source of DEX to damage. It is, however, the best option that was written for Pathfinder, in my opinion of course.


And, as a side note, the Agile weapon enhancement isn't from Paizo. It's from DSP's Psionics Expanded. So actually the only Dex to damage options are Slashing Grace, which is bad for TWF, and Dervish Dance, which specifically prevents TWF (off hand must be free)

Well, except for this, that's just not true. Agile isn't from any of the core books, but it is originally from Paizo; the Pathfinder Society Field Guide to be exact. I play a lot of PFS, and I know people that bought that book purely for DEX to damage. Just check the source listed on the PFSRD if you want to make sure.

[EisenKreutzer]

There are pros and cons for both, but for me Path of War wins out.

1. It's designed for Pathfinder, and you like Pathfinder.
2. It has better editing and fewer mistakes.
3. The new classes are IMO more diverse than the fighter/paladin/spellcaster model of the three Tome of Battle classes.
4. It has active support, recieves updates and errata and will have more material released for it than ToB ever had.
5. It does not have the terribly ambigous rules that ToB has, is more balanced and works straight out of the box with no tweaks necessary.

Those are my top 5 reasons for you to pick PoW over ToB. But theyre just one guy on the internets opinion.

[facelessminion]

Personally, I would say PoW all the way. Aside from all the editing stuff mentioned, the classes themselves are far more interesting simply in the way they have their own mechanics.

And then there are the Expanded options. The Harbinger itself is fabulous, taking the concept behind the Hexblade and making the original class go weep in a corner.

[Nightraiderx]

{shameless self-plugging}

How DARE you! :tongue:

I am playing stalker (soul hunter archetype) in a campaign, was it designed once you claim a soul you can indefinately track them from any distance?
does it span across planar travel?

[Elricaltovilla]

How DARE you! :tongue:

I am playing stalker (soul hunter archetype) in a campaign, was it designed once you claim a soul you can indefinately track them from any distance?
does it span across planar travel?

Hey, I also shamelessly plugged for Novawurmson too, he puts in a ton of work as well and his stuff is really top notch.

I think the RAI of the Soul Hunter's ability to know position was meant to be in combat only, hence it says "position" instead of "location" like other tracking abilities do. However, with the difference between the two undefined by RAW, technically you should be able to track them from any distance, probably even planar travel as it doesn't make a specific exception. Talk to your DM to be sure though :smallsmile:.