ToB / PoW Compatibility

[Firechanter]

Hey folks,

what steps would you take to make both ToB and PoW material usable (and mutually balanced) in one game?

The PoW classes seem to have a, by and large, more powerful chassis. More maneuvers and stances known and readied, for starters, and more special abilities.

On the other hand, ToB seems to offer more powerful maneuvers. Like, look at Raging Mongoose -- what PoW maneuver offers 2 extra attacks per weapon as a Swift Action? Or how about 50-foot teleports? Not to mention Time Stands Still?

So, I'm simply not sured if, for instance, Warblade and Warlord would be balanced to each other as they are. Warlord certainly has _more_ options, but Warblade seems to have _better_ ones.

Sure, you could simply upgrade the ToB classes' chassis and progressions to PoW standard, and open up all schools (as thematically fitting) to all classes -- but might that not lead to a "run" on ToB disciplines, neglecting PoW schools?

Anyone got any experience with that?

[Erit]

On the other hand, ToB seems to offer more powerful maneuvers.

Actually...


Like, look at Raging Mongoose -- what PoW maneuver offers 2 extra attacks per weapon as a Swift Action?

Two free attacks per weapon on a swift action? Nothing there. But Thrashing Dragon gives you a full attack with two weapons on a standard with bonus damage all keyed off your highest attack bonus, which is more powerful since you can also stack a boost on top of that.


Or how about 50-foot teleports?

Veiled Moon, Fade Through. Double movespeed, Swift action.


Not to mention Time Stands Still?

Riven Hourglass capstone, but as a counter, not to mention God of the Hourglass stance.

Did you, uh... did you read the PoW disciplines? Because no, you don't get the exact same effects—you get better ones. That's DSP's whole mission statement I'm pretty sure.

[Andor13]

I haven't run a direct comparison, but while base ToB and PoW are probably about even, with PoW expanded DSP got over their fear of giving fighters nice things. Even in base PoW Veiled Moon certainly brings a wealth of teleporting goodness, and Elemental Flux beats Desert Wind hollow. Riven Hourglass gives action economy shenanigans.

And some of the playtest disciplines open up some really interesting options, Radiant Dawn gives you all the healing you could want (well, most of it) and Chimera Soul is not a combat powerhouse, but has some nice utility.

The key point should probably be that even the strongest available initiating class, given a double helping of all the best schools, still isn't going to be a tier 1 character, so why worry in any game where you haven't banned Wizards/Druids/Clerics/Psions/etc... ?

I'm probably too tired to be making sense...

[Firechanter]

Okay gotta admit, right now I just skimmed through the discis natively available to the Warlord.

Overall I'm kinda partial to the Warblade as I like the idea of an intelligent, offensive warrior. I know there's a Warder AT for that and the Harbinger class, but they both are quite different in tone. ^^

[Erit]

The hilarious thing about Path of War is that the native disciplines have very little meaning because of Martial Traditions. Warlords can join the Wayward Path for basically no cost and get access to Veiled Moon instead of one of their other disciplines, or the Stained Glass Champions for Shattered Mirror, so on. It's also not impossible to rebuild Warder as more offensive, just look at Zweihander Sentinel for a start. Warblades were always fluffed more as the brash heroic types than the cunning fencers, contrary to their class abilities, so changing them to scale off Charisma was quite befitting.

[Firechanter]

Yes, I very much like the versatility and wealth of options. ^^

Truth be told, I was kinda hoping for Paizo to take a few steps in this direction with PF2, but now that their playtest goes the exact opposite route, I am weighing my options how to continue after our current game.

My current idea is kind of a martial campaign, revolving around PoW (and possibly ToB) material first and foremost. Might go as far as banning all spellcasting (and psionics, for that matter) classes. Keep the noncore subsystems to a minimum; apart from initiating obviously.

My actual play experience with PoW is very limited (I did play a TWF Warlord once and it was cool), and I have no experience with DSP Psionics whatsoever.
But I do remember a 3.5 game where I played a Warblade and was very happy with it, until one player swapped out his character for a Psion, and from that point on I - and pretty much everybody else in the group - was relegated to the backseat watching him solo the rest of the campaign, so my opinion of the balanced-ness of Psionics is not exactly unfettered.

[Elricaltovilla]

Chances are that your psion friend misunderstood some of the rules regarding power point expenditure, recovery or augmentation costs. I can't tell you how many times I've heard complaints about psionics only to have them dry up once it's pointed out that, no, you cannot burn 20 PP at level 1 on a single power.

As for integrating PoW and ToB, I've done a little with it and we toyed with some Playtesting of it during PoW and PoW:E, but only for fun (as a rule you don't balance your Pathfinder content with 3.5 in mind).

My recommendation would be to fill in any dead levels on the ToB classes with bonus combat feats, give the swordsage a real recovery method, bump anyone with less maneuvers than the Warder up to Warder progression and maybe let each ToB class poach a discipline of their choice for free. That should handle most potential balance issues well enough assuming you're using Pathfinder progression as a base.

With the Rajah and Medic (check my signature for the Playtest documents on the medic) you can quite easily field a party of all initiators and have your bases totally covered.

If you want to expand and open the initiating archetypes for non-initiators, consider giving them Warder maneuver progression and unrestricted access to higher level maneuvers. Exclude the Polymath and Warpath Follower class templates from this since they get both 6th level maneuvers and 6th level casting.

Don't forget to give your badguys maneuvers too though. Especially counters.

[BowStreetRunner]

...I am weighing my options how to continue after our current game.

My current idea is kind of a martial campaign, revolving around PoW (and possibly ToB) material first and foremost...If you really want to know how well things balance between PoW and ToB, what better way than to launch your own 'playtest' campaign?

One of the things I've always found intriguing about Asian martial history is the competition between the different martial schools. You could easily create a campaign centered around this and let your players freely access both sets of options to see who really has the most powerful disciplines.

[Andor13]

Yes, I very much like the versatility and wealth of options. ^^

Truth be told, I was kinda hoping for Paizo to take a few steps in this direction with PF2, but now that their playtest goes the exact opposite route, I am weighing my options how to continue after our current game.

My current idea is kind of a martial campaign, revolving around PoW (and possibly ToB) material first and foremost. Might go as far as banning all spellcasting (and psionics, for that matter) classes. Keep the noncore subsystems to a minimum; apart from initiating obviously.

My actual play experience with PoW is very limited (I did play a TWF Warlord once and it was cool), and I have no experience with DSP Psionics whatsoever.
But I do remember a 3.5 game where I played a Warblade and was very happy with it, until one player swapped out his character for a Psion, and from that point on I - and pretty much everybody else in the group - was relegated to the backseat watching him solo the rest of the campaign, so my opinion of the balanced-ness of Psionics is not exactly unfettered.

The Psion is a T1 caster, expect T1 results.

But Psionics (in particular DSP Psionics) has a lot of other stuff to offer, even, perhaps especially, in a martial oriented campaign. Take a look at the Aegis (which I adore) or the PF version of the Soulblade and you'l find some good stuff. If you want to tone things down you can just ban the Psion/Wilder and let people enjoy the less dominating classes Psiwarrior and Dread.

[Epic Legand]

POW is stronger and more versatile then TOB, but not far off. I fell you could offer some minor perks to TOB and integrate them with a POW campaign. Then you would have 11 classes plus tons of archtypes plus 29 schools? I might be missing a few. You would have to adjust for concentration no longer being a skill. Fix the recovery mechanism on swordsage. Sounds like lots of fun. Add 3 archtypes for each TOB class to further update them to PF standards.
Sadly, it looks like PF2 will not be POW friendly, but who knows.

[Manyasone]

You will have a few overlaps, I'm thinking. Diamond Mind and Iron heart are basically combined in Scarlet Throne, no?

[skaddix]

Yeah Path of War has no shortage of high damage and teleports. Damage Dealing, Tanking and more Supportive Paths can all point to a few maneuvers that will give you teleportation.

Its also pretty easy to mix and match since they don't really lock you into your default options for your chosen class chassis.

I should also note looking at Pathfinder 2E, Dreamscarred probably has a chance to do what Paizo did when WOTC slipped up on D&D 4E. Yeah haters might say they hate Anime {Scrubbed} Fighting Magic but that seems like a sizable and untapped demographic if you ask me.

[Ignimortis]

I should also note looking at Pathfinder 2E, Dreamscarred probably has a chance to do what Paizo did when WOTC slipped up on D&D 4E. Yeah haters might say they hate Anime Weaboo Fighting Magic but that seems like a sizable and untapped demographic if you ask me.

This. I would gladly buy a 3.5/PF1 compatible or similar system which assumes that actual heroes are ToB/PoW classes, and all this "Fighter" business is for NPCs.

[skaddix]

This. I would gladly buy a 3.5/PF1 compatible or similar system which assumes that actual heroes are ToB/PoW classes, and all this "Fighter" business is for NPCs.


Pretty much basically its hard to think of ways of having Fighters closing the gap without some magic or something that is so awesome it might as well be magic.

[Firechanter]

This. I would gladly buy a 3.5/PF1 compatible or similar system which assumes that actual heroes are ToB/PoW classes, and all this "Fighter" business is for NPCs.

Absolutely!
How is it, are the DSP guys reading here?

[skaddix]

Absolutely!
How is it, are the DSP guys reading here?

They appear usually for feedback on a new product.

[Elricaltovilla]

Absolutely!
How is it, are the DSP guys reading here?

Eh, probably not.

[phlidwsn]

Unfortunately, from what I recall pretty much all the DSP folks are doing this as a side gig. It'd be a huge gamble for them to make 3.DSP, and they'd pretty much have to go all-in and make it their full-time jobs.

So, fairly low odds of it happening unless someone happens to have a superlotto sized chunk of cash sitting around to bankroll them.

[Firechanter]

Eh, probably not.

I've never been good with names. ^^

[Elricaltovilla]

I've never been good with names. ^^

No worries. I can't speak for any DSP plans to release a system at this time, but it's definitely been discussed. I probably try and write one of my own about once a year when I come across something in whatever system I'm playing that ticks me off.

[skaddix]

Unfortunately, from what I recall pretty much all the DSP folks are doing this as a side gig. It'd be a huge gamble for them to make 3.DSP, and they'd pretty much have to go all-in and make it their full-time jobs.

So, fairly low odds of it happening unless someone happens to have a superlotto sized chunk of cash sitting around to bankroll them.

Well these days there are ways to get funding as every goddamn youtuber these days has a dozen ways to support from Patreon to Go Fund Me.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

You could probably gestalt any two of the ToB classes and be about on par with a PoW class

[Eldaran]

I did a conversion for using ToB classes and maneuvers with PoW and vice versa (http://www.bpfindley.com/ToB%20Conversion.html). I also made the following changes to ToB classes to buff them enough to compete with PoW classes:

Crusader: Increase HD to d12, move stances to 3, 9, 15. Smite works like Pathfinder Paladin Smite, but without the alignment restrictions, and they gain an additional use at 10 and 14 as well.

Swordsage: Move stance from 14 to 15. Add Quick to Act as dodge bonus to AC as well. Add Dual Boost 1/day at 10, 14, 18, and 20. At 6 gain Discipline Focus(Weapon Focus) for a second discipline. They may recover maneuvers equal to their Wisdom modifier as a full-round action (minimum 2) or half that number as a standard action (minimum 1).

Warblade: Allow any combat/fighter feat for bonus feats. The Warblade may use Martial Flexibility to change their weapon specific feats as a move action at any time instead of 1 hour. At 4th level the Warblade gains Maneuver Flexibility: The Warblade may, as a swift action, exchange one maneuver known and readied for a different maneuver of the same level, which becomes known and readied as if they had selected it when leveling. They must still meet all prerequisites. At 8th level and every 4 levels thereafter they may exchange an additional maneuver at the same time. At 10th level this ability becomes a free action, usable on their turn once per round. There is no other limit on this ability's use.

[Ignimortis]

I am planning to merge ToB/PoW for my next campaign, and I figure that there's no need to have all the disciplines from both. After all, Tiger Claw = Thrashing Dragon+Primal Fury, and Veiled Moon is basically Shadow Hand on steroids, Elemental Flux is the same for Desert Wind, etc.

Warlord and Warblade might mix well enough, with the player actually choosing whether they're a logic-driven fighter or, well, a warlord. Swordsage and Crusader should stay separate from similar PoW classes but get buffs, lots of them, because their recovery mechanics are significantly worse and they don't get class features.

[Andor13]

Warlord and Warblade might mix well enough, with the player actually choosing whether they're a logic-driven fighter or, well, a warlord. Swordsage and Crusader should stay separate from similar PoW classes but get buffs, lots of them, because their recovery mechanics are significantly worse and they don't get class features.

The swordsage needs help, certainly. I'm less certain about the Crusader. The PoW Mystic has the same recovery mechanism on a worse chassis (although with much more in the way of class features.) I agree the Crusader probably needs something, but maybe not all that much.

[Firechanter]

I did a conversion for using ToB classes and maneuvers with PoW and vice versa (http://www.bpfindley.com/ToB%20Conversion.html). I also made the following changes to ToB classes to buff them enough to compete with PoW classes:

Crusader: Increase HD to d12, move stances to 3, 9, 15. Smite works like Pathfinder Paladin Smite, but without the alignment restrictions, and they gain an additional use at 10 and 14 as well.

Swordsage: Move stance from 14 to 15. Add Quick to Act as dodge bonus to AC as well. Add Dual Boost 1/day at 10, 14, 18, and 20. At 6 gain Discipline Focus(Weapon Focus) for a second discipline. They may recover maneuvers equal to their Wisdom modifier as a full-round action (minimum 2) or half that number as a standard action (minimum 1).

Warblade: Allow any combat/fighter feat for bonus feats. The Warblade may use Martial Flexibility to change their weapon specific feats as a move action at any time instead of 1 hour. At 4th level the Warblade gains Maneuver Flexibility: The Warblade may, as a swift action, exchange one maneuver known and readied for a different maneuver of the same level, which becomes known and readied as if they had selected it when leveling. They must still meet all prerequisites. At 8th level and every 4 levels thereafter they may exchange an additional maneuver at the same time. At 10th level this ability becomes a free action, usable on their turn once per round. There is no other limit on this ability's use.


Thanks for the heads-up, this looks very useful! :)

Crusader probably doesn't even need porting -- I suppose a PF Paladin with the Initiating archetype would do just fine.

So, Warblades basically gain a lot of flexibility because they can reassign their entire Maneuver selection within a minute or two?
I'd consider expanding that idea by making all their bonus feats flexible. The idea being, Warblade may have a bit fewer specials than e.g. Warlord, but has more versatility.

Also, iirc the ToB Adepts as printed have pretty rotten Stance progressions; we've always houseruled that to more reasonable progressions (something like levels 1, 5, 10, 15 or so).

[Firechanter]

Little followup question here:


The hilarious thing about Path of War is that the native disciplines have very little meaning because of Martial Traditions.

How many disciplines _can_ you actually exchange?

Right off the bat I see Martial Tradition (swap one) and this Unorthodox Method trait (swap another). That seems to be it. Seeing how there's been quite a bit of powercreep going on between PoW and :E, swapping out more than two disciplines seems desirable. So are there other ways, not counting multiclassing?

[Elricaltovilla]

Little followup question here:



How many disciplines _can_ you actually exchange?

Right off the bat I see Martial Tradition (swap one) and this Unorthodox Method trait (swap another). That seems to be it. Seeing how there's been quite a bit of powercreep going on between PoW and :E, swapping out more than two disciplines seems desirable. So are there other ways, not counting multiclassing?

Several disciplines can be swapped in on certain classes for free, some archetypes will allow you to swap in new disciplines if you grab the archetype.

Technically there is no restriction on joining multiple martial traditions either, but those often possess mutually exclusive roleplaying expectations.

[Firechanter]

Technically there is no restriction on joining multiple martial traditions either, but those often possess mutually exclusive roleplaying expectations.

Oh, that hadn't occurded to me, but of course! The aforementioned Wayward Path luckily is very low-maintenance, so I guess it can be tacked on to pretty much any other MT. Sweet.

Archetype-wise, if I were to play a Warder, I'd try out the Zweihänder Sentinel; but unfortunately on the Warlord path nothing really strikes my fancy.
But well, I suppose swapping out 3 disciplines should be enough. ^^ As suggested in the handbook, I think I'd just pick up that Sleeping Goddess 1 Stance via feat.

[Nifft]

So you know, university Physics D&D 3.5 Optimization is essentially three seven years of this discussion among like-minded enthusiasts. Done with supercomputers, access to the textsplatbook collections of five continents and thirty languages with thousands of classes, prestige classes, feats and spells.
On four hours sleep a night.
With no sex.
You're not going to find the loophole these guys missed.

And when you do, they're going to be angry at you -- and their anger will be running on four hours of sleep a night, with no sex.

[Andor13]

Archetype-wise, if I were to play a Warder, I'd try out the Zweihänder Sentinel; but unfortunately on the Warlord path nothing really strikes my fancy.
But well, I suppose swapping out 3 disciplines should be enough. ^^ As suggested in the handbook, I think I'd just pick up that Sleeping Goddess 1 Stance via feat.

Personally I think the Steelfist Commando Warlord is my favorite take on the Unarmed Warrior style character. I'd love to play one someday.

[Firechanter]

I'm sure it is, I just personally am not a fan of Unarmed combat. I think the gods gave us demihumans opposable thumbs to hold stuff. ;)