I run a blog exclusively about third party products for Pathfinder, which is a big subject but did you know that customers of such products are probably a minority? It makes sense though, with over 30 different classes dozens of hardcover books and plenty of Player Companions, modules and adventure paths, Pathfinder is a pretty expansive game and I can see players not wanting to go much further than the Advanced Players Guide let alone dealing with a ton of new classes, options, alternate systems and settings, but often the reason I see for not allowing or using third party material is dubious balance. There is a general fear that the player that is asking to use third party material is trying to grab some broken spells or feats to make his character more optimized than the game normally allows. Its a sentiment that I understand. I've run across a few players that spend most of the game attempting to break it than playing a role and those kind of experiences, even when rare, really make you want to airtight the rules and trust in-house sensibilities of balance rather than have to deal with third party things that may not be balanced. But the truth of the matter is that the subject of balance is already a dodgy subject before third party materials come into play so to answer whether or not third party material is generally balanced or not becomes complicated. But I think there are some truths to balance in 3pp material that cause a lot of confusion on whether or not its generally more or less balanced than Paizo material. Here are the 'facts' that I think needs to be considered when deciding if things are too unbalanced for you.
Third party martial options are overpowered.
This is a fairly broad statement but more often than not if you compare a martial character or options for martial characters in third party material to Paizo material the third party option is better. And this isn't about not understanding the game or anything like that, its on purpose. In fact its something I actively seek out. Basically there is a sense among players and developers that Paizo is fairly conservative with abilities that have no resources or benefit non-spellcasting classes which makes them less capable of adventuring. In most cases the Wizard is the most capable core class, the Rogue is at the bottom of the barrel and the Bard is a happy middle. In most cases third party martial classes seem to fall into the same field as the Bard in terms of being capable. To make a long story short, if you believe that the Fighter or Rogue classes are perfectly balanced compared to a Bard or Wizard then there are a lot of popular third party materials that just aren't for you because third party spell-less classes and options are outright better. Sure there are more conservative publishers that function on the same paradigm as Paizo but in most cases I've seen the Fighter is outclassed to the point where I actively sought out third party material for the Fighter that actively makes it better or more versatile so that it's not ignored. Technically this means that in the realm of non-magical classes and options 3pp is in fact overpowered and thus unbalanced technically, but for me and my table this is more than acceptable because we didn't believe it to be balanced to begin with and third party material brings those kinds of classes up to a level we find acceptable. If this wasn't the case I wouldn't have started buying third party books in the first place. And I don't think I'm alone there. Dreamscarred Press released Path of War which actively designs martial classes that are NOT balanced according to classes like the Fighter or Rogue. Entire rewrites of the Rogue and Monk exist to corner the problem of those classes being less capable. The same goes for feats and class features. Often things like Rogue Talents and Fighter exclusive feats are seen as traps or just bad. There are a lot of martial feats out there that have to compete for feat slots left over from the long feat chains you have to get just to fight with two weapons or shoot a bow so they are often just better. Again, there are also more conservative publishers that have feats more in line with the average Pathfinder feat but I find myself actively seeking out the opposite. The fact of the matter is that classes like the Alchemist, Bard or Inquisitor is the usual measuring stick for third party classes and the capability of abilities which makes martial classes or classes empowered by third party options way more versatile.
On the other side of the fence it does make spellcasting classes less versatile.
Alternative casting systems are weaker than spellcasting.
There are a lot of reasons for this. Spellcasting has a large chunk of the core rulebook dedicated to it and each book seems to add new spells and much of the game is exclusively accessed by spellcasters. And since spells don't need prerequisites like feats do and none are generally madatory for entire playstyles like feats each new spell is another bit of modularity for spellcasters. Meanwhile third party casting methods generally have limited space to work with, no support outside of the company that made it and generally tend to shoot itself in the foot to make even what you can consider a 'full' caster of it's type as capable as a Bard, as opposed to a Wizard, usually by working around a theme or not being as modular as spellcasting. I have NEVER seen any alternate casting system that was not more capable than a spell list. The closest is Psionics but even then, you're mostly limited to the amount of psionic powers that the book holds and they do nothing as pervasive as spells like creating your own universe. If you have a casting character that does not use spells and you expect it to handle things as well as a well made wizard then you're going to have a bad time. At the most you'll get something along the lines as a Bard in raw power and versatility. This doesn't seem to bother anyone, as again some of the most popular alternate magic systems seem to be applauded for not being as powerful as spellcasting. In some cases players will worry about something being unbalanced despite a Wizard being able to do the exact same thing two levels earlier. And I have to admit that its a selling point because I actually do think casters like the Wizard, Druid and Cleric eventually get too strong compared to the other classes. But like earlier if you think that a Wizard is actually too weak of a class then there's no way you'll like some popular books because the casters that are theoretically as powerful as a Wizard are flat out not as powerful. That isn't to say that they are bad classes, they often have some mechanic that makes things interesting or useful but spellcasting tends to try to balance its limited slots with magic bullet type effects that are situational but extremely capable and third party casting systems do not have that powerful of effects mixed with the versatility spell lists give out.
Every spell added to the game inherently makes casters more powerful.
This one is a bit more subtle. Because there are no real prerequisites for spells each new spell is just adding to versatility. Of course to make the spell actually worth picking it has to be somewhat good, comparing to spells from the core rulebook or in some cases better in the cases of really weak spells. This makes it easier to have bunch of good spells and fewer situational ones for each spell that gets added to the game and new spells come at a much faster rate than new class features and feats making classes that do almost nothing but cast spells get extremely versatile. For my games it is to the point where I just don't allow third party spells unless I hand them over, usually in the form of retraining or spell books. Letting players just pick from a huge selection just causes cherry picking the least situational spells eliminating one of the key limits of spellcasting. Granted this can go both ways, a player like myself will make his caster drastically weaker by cherry picking all of the cold damage touch spells no matter how useless they are because I wanted to make Sub-Zero from Mortal Kombat using an unarmed Magus but it also opens the door to having the spells to silver bullet any given situation.
Sometimes bad things just happen.
As I noted in an earlier post, its actually easy to avoid bad products. As a rule of thumb, if there's some positive chatter about it on the Paizo or Giant in the Playground forums, especially from it's developers, its likely worth getting. The stinkers I've purchased often have no reviews, hype or chatter, and I believe its because good publishers tend to interact with their fan base and are more in touch with what they want. Also when a lot of people like something there's some chatter that gives others a good idea as to what's in it which in turn makes more chatter when they like it. But even then there are always screw ups. A too powerful feat or spell falls through the cracks, some ambiguous or exploitable wording, really weak options, a typo or mislabel. Sometimes developers are just overzealous about how they view balance in the game and go overboard. I see them occur about around the same rate that Paizo makes them and they are often relegated to single products or entire companies unless they have a huge page count. I sometimes see statements that will take a screw up of one product and take it that all third party material offers the same mistakes, disregarding that core Pathfinder material has produced much worse. In one case on the Reddit an example was given about how unbalanced third party material was. It was one feat. From an obscure source that I have not allowed in my games nor felt the need to add to my games based on the product description and lack of vetting of the product. Of course I, unfairly or not, dismissed the argument because in addition it was nowhere near as bad as something Paizo has produced. I actually had to run numbers and make theoretical situations to say that it was too powerful, so it wasn't even outrageously overpowered. If the same standards were held for Paizo we'd never play the game starting from the core rulebook. There is a ton of third party books out there and when you get that much of anything some of it is bound to suck. But if you're patient, pay attention to acclaim and reviews and get what you feel adds to the game it is incredibly easy to get the products that will make you happy.
Later I have more to say in regards to balance and third party Pathfinder products. In some ways I have more to say about the thoughts above. I just hope that this article explains a bit about the landscape I've seen and how 3pp can seem unbalancing and possible try some out. Eventually I'll post a beginner's guide to 3pp to describe how to get in edge-wise and enjoy things without turning your game upside down or adjusting the balance assumptions in the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment