I've never played a game that allowed 3pp content, but my take on it in general would be:
If you are doing it because you have a cool character idea that you can't fit into the Paizo rules, then I'd allow it. If you're doing it because it lets you be a more powerful [X], then no freakin' way. Paizo has been pretty great at making just about any concept buildable (if not viable) though, so it seems like 3pp stuff would rarely be necessary.
|
Considering that it's more powerful than Monastic Legacy and the ninja master trick Unarmed Combat Master, it seems completely overpowered when compared to the rest of the game as it is.
Objectively, it's not that bad as far as power levels is concerned, especially with the existence of the warpriest.
Unarmed strikes suck even with the monk damage boost, because they have no crit multipliers (on top of the issues you mention).
Pretty sure BoNS had a feat that was (quoting from memory here) "your unarmed strikes deal damage as a monk of your level. In case you are a monk, increase this is capped at your level+4", and nobody made a fuss about it.
That would be Superior Unarmed Strike, from Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords.
SUS requires Improved Unarmed Strike and BAB +3, and the actual wording is that if you are not a monk (Or are not treated as one), your unarmed strike damage scales thusly:
3rd: 1d4
4th-7th: 1d6
8th-11th: 1d8
12th-15th: 1d10
16th-20th: 2d6
If you ARE a monk (Or treated as one), your unarmed strike damage from that class is treated as four levels higher.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I use 3PP stuff in my games. For the most part, just "Everything by Dreamscarred Press".
That, and my own homebrew stuff, which is basically the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, you need to know everything your players know so they don't "accidentally" get it wrong. I already have a hard enough time keeping up with all the official products, considering how frequently Paizo has started releasing books lately, so honestly, I have a soft "no 3rd party" rule, just because I don't want to memorize even more stuff.
If a player is super insistent upon it, I'll check it out on a case-by-case basis, but honestly, if I allow one 3pp, I'm opening up a can of worms by setting precedent.
I use lots of 3PP stuff in my games. Lots of it is far better balanced and more interesting than PF's stuff. All of Dreamscarred Press's stuff, a lot of Rogue Genius Games' stuff, bits and pieces from other publishers all good.
You have to take it or leave it on an individual basis, though, just as you must with official PF stuff. The source doesn't matter; if you think it's going to screw up your game, disallow it.
For me it more or less depends on the player's intentions. I think it was said best by RumpinRufus: if you just want the feat so you can optimize better, then I probably won't allow it. That said, there's a distinct difference between "wanting to optimize" and "wanting to be useful". If my player has genuine concerns about being outclassed by the rest of the party, then I'll be more than open to their pitch for a 3pp feat/archetype/class.
As for the feat in question, it's unbalanced as far as a feat goes, but a monk's unarmed strike damage doesn't come close to many other martial classes'. That being said, I'd probably allow it if my player had a good reason for wanting it. Some characters just punch dudes harder than others.
For comparison, there is an ninja "master trick" that does this same thing, but a little bit worse.
Unarmed Combat Mastery: A ninja who selects this trick deals damage with her unarmed strikes as if she were a monk of her ninja level –4. If the ninja has levels in monk, this ability stacks with monk levels to determine how much damage she can do with her unarmed strikes. A ninja must have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat before taking this trick.
Since it is a master trick, it requires you to be at least 10th level, so this is assumedly considered to be a powerful ability.
For me it just depends it just depends on the feat. Nothing gets a free pass just because Paizo wrote it.Some publishers that are not Paizo have good material. DSP is one of my favorites.
I allow most 3pp material but I always have to read it and approve it first. Some companies might not be as balanced as others. Dreamscarred, Raging Swan, Fat Goblin, and Purple Duck are some of my favorite publishers.
Since it is a master trick, it requires you to be at least 10th level, so this is assumedly considered to be a powerful ability.
Or something ninjas are supposed to be bad at. Or the author didn't want to have to figure out what to do with ninjas of 4th level or less.
If you want, you can also use the one from Path of War, the Tome of Battle system update to Pathfinder by Dreamscarred Press.
On topic, I allow the 3PP stuff that I actually have, which consists of Dreamscarred (Ultimate Psionics and Path of War), Pact Magic Unbound, and Deep Magic.
I use material from Rogue Genius in my games, particularly the Talented class line of supplements.
That said, I judge 3rd party material individually, and in this particular case, I don't think that feat is overly powerful. Then again, I house rule that having IUS grants a 1d6 (1d4 for small) unarmed damage, ala Martial Artist feat from Star Wars d20. So, my opinion is based on the power level I expect in my games.
For comparison, there is an ninja "master trick" that does this same thing, but a little bit worse.
Unarmed Combat Mastery: A ninja who selects this trick deals damage with her unarmed strikes as if she were a monk of her ninja level –4. If the ninja has levels in monk, this ability stacks with monk levels to determine how much damage she can do with her unarmed strikes. A ninja must have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat before taking this trick.Since it is a master trick, it requires you to be at least 10th level, so this is assumedly considered to be a powerful ability.
You know what they say about assuming.
Ok. So it doesnt seem like anybody feels like this idea is OP.
I designed and tested it very carefully based on the state of the art in 2009. Unarmed damage just isn't that exciting. I created it as an option, so that unarmed strikes wouldn't become utterly futile by the teen levels if you weren't a monk or a fighter. The benefit is less than what an actual monk receives, and the prerequisites are considerable. It was designed specifically in mind of the Martial Artist class also in that book; classes that aren't Wisdom and Dexterity-based full BAB characters are going to pay a fairly steep price to qualify. I reverse-engineered the prerequisites from Stunning Fist, and I based the effective level on the idea I wouldn't want some particularly snazzy combination replacing the monk entirely. Secondarily, I thought it would be useful for spies and rogues, allowing you to create "ninjas" without a whole new class.
Martial strike predates the official ninja, and the martial artist predates the brawler. This feat is part of a different approach to some of the same goals approached in those classes. As such, I question whether it's a good example for looking at "power level," as I don't believe boosted unarmed damage is powerful. I created the feat to make something vaguely viable that otherwise wasn't. In effect, it's a flavor option. It also worked as a plug-in to make the Martial Artist an unarmed specialist without touching the core monk, which I was reluctant to do at the time.
Later on, I put out my own version of the monk which does address flaws of the monk in a different way. The Talented Monk by RGG also addresses some of those issues, again, using slightly different tools.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
First, I'd like to thank everyone who mentioned Dreamscarred Press. It's extremely high praise that isn't taken for granted.
On the feat itself: I don't see anything wrong with it mechanically. Unarmed damage has issues, and being three levels behind the combat weak monk isn't going to break any games.
You know what they say about assuming.For comparison, there is an ninja "master trick" that does this same thing, but a little bit worse.
Unarmed Combat Mastery: A ninja who selects this trick deals damage with her unarmed strikes as if she were a monk of her ninja level –4. If the ninja has levels in monk, this ability stacks with monk levels to determine how much damage she can do with her unarmed strikes. A ninja must have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat before taking this trick.Since it is a master trick, it requires you to be at least 10th level, so this is assumedly considered to be a powerful ability.
I know that one!
"When you assume, you're making an educated guess based upon evidence presented using rational, deductive reasoning, otherwise known as hypothesizing!" :-D
I typically allow most anything by Dreamscarred Press - both the psionic rules and the Path of War - or Super Genius Games (although not godlings), especially as I draw on a lot of that material to give my PCs opponents. Oh, and I added Pact Magic Unbound to that list lately, because the Occultist is totes cool.
I will also allow other third party material on a case-by-case basis, but only for interesting character ideas, not for powergaming.
As for that feat: It's probably fine. I already allow the Greater Unarmed Strike feat mentioned above from Path of War, and I'd probably use that instead, but it's certainly not going break any games. Monks already aren't breaking any games.
Well, in my house rules in which I basically give all monks pounce at 4th level they actually have come close to dominating a fight. But then the witch shut four monks down with one spell and balance was restored to the universe...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I handle pretty much everything on a case-by-case basis. First-party material from Paizo is generally more likely to end up on my list of stuff that's pre-approved, but it doesn't get a free pass. There's a lot of shady stuff in the appendices of those adventure path.
Martial Strike looks incredibly tame. Unarmed strikes are passable at best even with extensive magic item investment. As a wise halfling once said "Even you, who has spent years studying this, do more damage and hit more often when you're using a big honkin' greatsword. So, what's the point?" If anything, this feat looks like it's on the weak side.
First, I'd like to thank everyone who mentioned Dreamscarred Press. It's extremely high praise that isn't taken for granted.
If you'll permit me to pile more on, I think your stuff is generally more balanced and better put together than a lot of Paizo releases. =)
Here is one 3PP Feat I always wanted to use. But I have not found a GM yet who allows it.
The problem with mythical healer is that it works too well with some kinds of non spell healing. Like fire gods blessing or glorious heat.
|
I still love the chance to play old 3.5 material I rarely or never had the chance to play before do I make it a point to offer such to players when I GM. I also try to use them for NPCs if I have the inclination to convert NPCs.
To avoid getting flooded with too much 3rd party requests, I tell players they are only allowed to present one 3rd party class for review each player per campaign. This will encourage them to judge the power level themselves and think carefully about submitting it before I have to potentially waste my time. I do the same thing when people want to suggest their own god or paladin order of ethics. Then I allow each player to submit one feat, or spell, equipment, ect, but only one rule item per level for review.
I also find it very useful for my own defense as a .GM to tell players I am willing to give their 3rd party item a trial basis with the understanding I may ask them to give it up later. If they cannot handle that after being warned of such up front, that is their failure, not mine.
At first, I did not think much of your proposed feat and would have allowed it. After seeing the weaker feats that go about the same thing, I felt I would want people to take them first and evaluate and observe how they work through actual play. Later I would consider letting the original posted feat act as an upgrade like improved marital strike is over vital strike or if I felt the player was substantiall being outshined, maybe just convert the weak feat into the stronger feat. Plain and simple, weapons work better than unarmed strikes. Giving them a.bunch of free upgrades take away their value of being useful when you are denied your weapons for whatever reason, while doing nothing for those who relie on weapons. Of course the cost of a feat I guess makes that moot.
I generally don't believe every player has to be very closely balanced with others so I doubt I would just allow the free upgrade or useing it from the start. Players need to grow up and stop being jealous that someone next to them does more damage. If you think playing a bare knuckle brawler is cool, you should get your enjoyment out of playi.g that concept, not your numbers. Though there is something to be said about character disparity when one player is just so far behind everyone else, such a case I would be a little more open to throwing them a bone.
I don't like how that healing feat works an unlimited number of times per.day and on any type of healing. I would allow a weaker versionthough. Something like pick which type of ability it works on: spells/spell like/supsrnatual/extraordinary, then only allow limited uses per day, something like your spellcasting stat modifier or a simple 3 times a day.
@Jeremy Smith, Wow I feel a little celebrity struck that you happened across my thread lol. I'm sure that sounds a bit weird, but I love all Dreamscarred Press's works so far. Our group doesnt even consider them to be 3PP. They are first party as far as we are concerned. You all have done really great work on adapting Psionics (my favorite magic type system) while at the same time making it fresh. Hey actually if you do read this, I have a question for you. I'm not looking for an faq or official ruling or anything but just an opinion about a power. Do you believe that the Metamorphosis line of spells choice to give natural attacks was intended to create new limbs on creatures that do not already have appropriate limbs for those attacks, or to just fizzle and do nothing in that case. Most spells of this nature specify that they change hands into claws etc, but Metamorphosis doesn't and this question has come up with one of my players. Getting additional limbs is SUPER rare in PF but I certainly cant see anything in the way that its phrased that specifies one way or the other. It just says you gain those attacks.
Thanks so much! :)
To your question: the goal was not to grant additional limbs which therefore grant additional attacks, but to rather give you the option of making natural attacks.
Which is a roundabout way of saying: if you want to do it as limbs growing from the body, I don't see anything wrong with that, as long as you're not ALSO increasing the number of attacks by doing so.
Cool thread! Loved Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords and had a blast building a Pathfinder class inspired by that book ...
I don't allow 3pp stuff at the table.
I DO allow old 3.5 and 3e stuff after approval in some situations.
I already have waaaay too much stuff to remember with the WotC and PF stuff already, I don't need more tossed into the mix.
I'm always willing to consider not only 3pp stuff, but also homebrew. I tend to err on the side of indulgence too. Unless I think something is obviously broken, I allow players to have it.
I allow some 3rd party stuff, with the understanding that I need to see and approve whatever it is, in advance. I'll sometimes advocate it to the players, because my number one job is to balance the players against the other players.
Martial Strike, in particular, looks fine as long as it's not used for some kind of strange double-counting in conjunction with brawler or sacred fist warpriest.
Most 3rd party stuff unless I see glaring problems with it are allowed on a trial basis. I tend to re-evaluate them periodically to see if it is causing issues or not.
For example, we had a player trying the deductionist class for the last 3 months. Last week we both sat down to discuss it and it has since been banned from the table. Every week, even after rereading the class we were getting parts wrong and found it was more work than it was worth, despite having some cool ideas to it.
Other classes and feats have become a given in my games though, such as a feat that adds dex to damage for any weapon when taken and classes like the swordmaster (from Dreadfox Games) and a ton from Interjection Games which I have yet to hit a balance issue with.
I also homebrew a lot so it's a natural extension to me, especially from developers I trust. I place a high emphasis on players getting to make a character they like and find exciting, so I try be open to options that make that possible.
I treat 3rd party material pretty much the way I treat paizo material, not in the core rulebook, its on a case by case basis. I want to engage in a conversation with my players so I know what they are taking and why. As others have mentioned, its really hard to know EVERYTHING, so having players come to me for a soft approval helps me narrow that down to just what they are actually saying.
That said, stuff from rogue genious games almost always gets a quick approval, as does dreamscarred and kobold press. Others, I review a bit more carefully, mostly because I am less familiar with them, and I trust those companies. To be honest, in many cases they have been better about restraining my or my groups inner munchkin then paizo has. Then again most of the big 3pps write for paizo, so its weird to make the distinction in material based soley on the logo on the cover of the book.
The whole 'official' rules only is sort of rediculous. Paizo itself was a 3rd party company just a few years ago. Heck the main person for rogue genius Games Owen Stephens is now leading Paizo's module department (while still running Rogue Genius). Is he somehow magically better at his job when he has his paizo hat on?
That isnt to say some 3pp stuff isnt problematic, even in the more prominent publishers, but so is some paizo stuff. So I take everything case by case. Hopefully to help allow my players to make a character that fits their vision, both thematically and mechanically. And often the easiest and best way to do that is actually 3rd party material, since they are more willing to delve into 'out there' concepts, then paizo is.
I tend to read and theory craft things before I allow them. So far I haven't had any problems. That said I do buy and allow things that are unbalanced in favor of martial options. The worst that really happens is that goofy concepts become viable and martials get DBZ ish, which I have no problems with. Otherwise I haven't had to abandon too many products due to balance.
As for using 3pc for power, that's not exactly a bad thing. For example, the magus gets few things as good as shocking grasp for touch spells so I have little to do when I want to be a fire Magus. With third party I have option more powerful than what I got but comparable to shocking grasp. The point is that I wanted a weak option to be powerful enough to be viable. Going for third parties for power and going for flavor are not always mutually exclusive.