Situations like this is why I appreciate Spheres of Power. It divides magic more uniformly, which helps both players and gms alike these sort of interactions.
For example, patterns in SoP are not effects from the Illusion sphere, but from the Light sphere. In addition, the interaction between special senses (Blindsight, True seeing, etc) and illusions are explored and defined more in-depth, not to mention handling things like disbelieving and interacting with illusions. The guide to handling illusions can be found on the sphereswiki here.
Regarding shapeshifting and weapons, many forms explicitly state that it gives you arms with hands that can manipulate objects just like a human can. These forms can weild weapons. Of course, you your equipment melds with your new form, so you will need to drop the weapons to the ground (or hand them off to someone else) before the shapeshift.
Shapeshifting does not state that it has any effect on your alignment. For talents like Fiendish Transformation, just because you radiate an evil aura doesn't mean your alignment is evil.
Unless I am mistaken, the Solid Illusions feat is being errata'd to require Illusionary Touch (twice).
Yes, increase speed would be able to with the Solid Illusions feat be able to increase the speed that you move figments.
Yes, magic sink could with the Solid Illusions feat be used to protect your illusions from counterspelling.
With the potential errata however, I am hesitant to say that you can use these talents without Illusionary Touch (twice).
Just spoke to the author of the Illusion sphere handbook. Here are his answers:
1) You need Illusionary Touch x2 to deal extra damage from an Enhanced Illusion. Unless your illusions are already dealing lethal damage (be it through the Shadow Infusion talent or Tactile Illusion feat), all additional damage will be nonlethal damage (nonlethal fire damage, nonlethal bleed damage, etc).
2) Only illusions that are dealing lethal damage (such as with the Shadow Infusion talent or Tactile Illusions feat) may have their attacks poisoned (be it contact or injury).
3) Illusions of objects are not objects, as such, they are not legal targets of such abilities or effects. Objects created with the Shadow Magic feat however are objects, and as such are legal targets for Animate Object (and similar effects), although they will have reduced stats as normal.
Just spoke to the author of the Illusion sphere handbook.
When dealing exclusively with the Shadow Infusion talent, all it is intended to do is allow you to choose to deal lethal or nonlethal damage, and only have a reduced effectiveness on a successful Will save to disbelieve. The part about objects and creatures of the (shadow) descriptor is not meant to apply outside the Shadow Magic feat (decreased hit points with objects from the Creation sphere, companions from the Conjuration sphere, etc. This is because illusions are neither objects nor creatures.
An attempt to standardize some guidelines for disbelieving illusions, from the RAW – please contribute!
Sphères of power/might ! :)
I am going to second the request for Spheres of Power / Spheres of Might support. I am not asking for class sheets, all I want are 2 sheets:- Magic Talents spellbook sheet (including Caster Level, MSB, MSD, Concentration, Tradition (Drawbacks, Boons), CAM, spell points) and then maybe 10 small sections each including the following for each sphere: Sphere name, DC, Duration, Range, Target, Talents; and below this including 5 lines or so lines for various sphere abilities.
- Martial Talents spellbook sheet (including Tradition (drawbacks), PAM) and then 10 small sections each including the following for each sphere: Sphere name, DC, Duration, Range, Target, Talents; and then below this include 5 or so lines for various sphere abilities.
Here is a sample level 1 character that uses Spheres of Power and Spheres of Might, take note of the Magic and Martial sections of the statblock.
I have to say, I am not too enthused about the Ranger preview. When looking at the investment required to even use traps in combat and the area that a trap covers, it just sucks. Also, while I appreciate that options for spell-less rangers are available right off the bat, I prefer my rangers with spells, not without.
I think what Cantriped is trying to say is that Spellcasting PCs who have only a couple of hp remaining (but still have 90% of their spell slots remaining) are more likely to continue the adventure's plot than a Spellcasting PC at full health (but only 1 spell slot remaining).
HP does nothing by itself to advance the plot. HP does let the party fly across the chasm, HP doesn't identify the mcguffin, HP doesn't grant bonuses to necessary skill checks. HP does nothing. Spells on the other hand can do all this and more. So when HP drops, the party is likely to continue, while if spell slots are low, the party immediately drops to a halt until they are recovered.
EDIT: The reason why Spells can equal HP, but HP cannot equal Spells is because Spell slots can be used to restore HP, but HP cannot be traded for additional spell slots. For this reason, if given the choice between more spell slots and higher hp, most people will choose more spell slots.
Varun Creed wrote:
I like all of these fixes, especially the wands, charges, and potion fixes. I would also remove all mention of X/day items and instead make activating them cost extra resonance.
When I first heard of Resonance, I was excited that keeping track of X/day items was going to be a thing of the past. But now it looks like that not only are X/day items still present, but that it is compounded with Resonance. I want to have to keep track of less resource pools, not more.
I also cannot express my unadulterated loathing for Resonance being forced upon consumable items (especially potions). There are so many ways to prevent people from just chugging potion after potion.
I am mostly upset that the archetype and prestige class feats don't have ALL the prerequisites located in a single uniform location. If you don't want players to take a specific archetype feat before a certain level, put in the prerequisite line. Don't sneak it in at the upper right hand corner ambiguously.
Grey Star wrote:
Only one of the 'Feat 6' is for the Pirate archetype, the other one is for the Grey Maiden Prestige Class
I really wish that this was clarified. I can see it as one of two ways:
A): The 'Feat 2' signifies that it is Feat 2 of 6 (the Pirate archetype has 6 different feats).
B): The 'Feat 2' signifies an additional prerequisite, in that it cannot be taken before 2nd level.
Personally, I am really hoping that it is option A (with as niche and specific as the archetype is, there are some Pirate feats that I would probably want sooner than others, and wouldn't want to wait 4 or six levels to gain).
I am really disliking the Alchemist preview. I think it boils down to being forced into a particular playstyle with the class. Maybe I want to play a Jekle/Hyde alchemist, not a grenadier alchemist.
What I would've liked to see instead is the option to choose what "type" or "package" of alchemist you are at 1st level. Do you use Bombs, Extracts, Mutagens, or Poisons? Then at 5th level you have the opportunity to choose a 2nd package. Then at 10th level, you can choose a 3rd package. Finally at 15th level, you can choose a 4th package. (Any time you could choose a package, you may instead choose to focus further into a previous package).
But gating iconic packages at 5th level I feel is unreasonable. I am especially disappointed with the necessity of waiting for 6th level before one can gain Precise Bomb. I just think it is an unnecessary level tax.
Unfortunately, I can see a "floating" proficiency enforcing a 5-minute adventuring day. "Oh, there's a trap or lock?, Better rest to get the skill". "We need to talk to the king?", Better rest to get the skill". Alternatively, depending upon the wording of the ancestry trait, it can get rather weird RP-wise where suddenly a character has no ability to do X or Y (even though they have been doing just fine with it the last 20 times).
I was looking forward to mixing a character's ancestry with heritage feats (Humans raised by Dwarves learning to hold their liquor w/ the Hardy heritage feat; or Gnomes raised by Elves w/ the Keen Hearing heritage feat). I guess that may very well be just one MORE disappointment.
I also am against having the base speed (or stride) of a race be an odd number. It really does muck things up when things like the Hampered or Slowed conditions come up.
1. Archaeologist Bard (Sometimes I just want to play a bard who doesn't perform)
I prefer the 5/talent. It encourages some focus, which is what I like about the sphere systems. It discourages exactly what the proponents for it seem to want, grabbing a group of spheres for max skill ranks, instead of making an actual style.
Except that dipping into other spheres with Spheres of Might is now harsher than dipping into other spheres with Spheres of Power.
For example, we have two characters, a level 1 Conscript (who specialized in the Guardian sphere, but dipped into the Warleader sphere), and a level 1 Incanter (who specialized in the Protection sphere, but dipped into the War sphere). After the first five levels, the Conscript no longer gets any increasing benefit from the Warleader sphere, whereas the Incanter's War sphere abilities continue to have their duration and effects increase (even without any continued investment in the sphere).
Because the most recent nerf to the skill spheres punishes (instead of rewarding) martials for dipping into other spheres, you are more likely to find cookie-cutter builds where martials either stick to their two spheres or else slaps on drawbacks for no reason but to get their free ranks, making them even less likely to use or invest further in the sphere.
Exactly my point. I am very curious as to who exactly complained about the skills, because as far as I can tell the change came suddenly without any warning. It is also disappointing because during the Kickstarter, it was promised that Spheres of Might would include 'Spheres of Excellence' (options for Skillful characters). I personally thought that giving max ranks was a good way of implementing this.
GM Rednal wrote:
Overall, my feeling is that the system is still fairly well-balanced. No, you can't get 20 skill points for the price of one feat anymore - but you probably shouldn't have gotten that much anyway, since normal skill-granting feats like Persuasive cap out at +4 in one ability and +8 in two (and even that much only if you've dumped quite a few points into them). Combat talents give you more skill points in one skill (over time) and a useful ability, rider, or other effect at the same time.
As Dragonborn3 pointed out, Paizo had already published a feat that grants free max ranks in a skill: Cunning. Now obviously, most (not all) of the spheres or talents which granted additional abilities (albeit minor) on-top of the free max ranks, which makes them inherently more powerful than the Cunning feat. However, by locking them behind 5 ranks per talent, SoM is complicating builds and making it significantly weaker than the Cunning feat.
Personally, I would have them stated out as follows:
Twilight - Incanter (focuses in the Divination sphere, but ultimately dips into nearly every sphere).
Robert Jordan wrote:
Yeah I noticed most of the spheres that grant skill ranks were changed to 5 from base sphere then +5 per talent. Not sure I like that change makes things more complex for some of my less skilled players.
I also liked how Spheres of Might (before the errata) promoted the dipping into other spheres for max ranks because it allowed for rounded characters who did not only focus in 1-2 spheres.
Fantastical Creatures and How to Survive Them. Its pretty much a Spheres of Power bestiary.
But I digress. So just as another question: Who wrote that introductory tale for SoM, because I really like this stuff?
Unless I am mistaken, I believe Adam Meyers writes the introductions. I also like the introduction, but I dislike how it constantly switches between narrative and informative texts. I would prefer if they were separated with the narrative story or informative text first, followed by the other.
Still no at-will free power? I get that summoning is not something that should be free, but it's there any kind of little widget that could be given? Seems like a better use of space than a class for playing a free summoned creature.
There are a couple companion archetypes that reduce the spell point cost of your companion. For example, if you have a Familiar companion, your spell point cost to summon is reduced by two. That alone covers the spell point to maintain via concentration, plus the 2nd spell point to maintain without concentration.
DM Papa.DRB wrote:
Collin Acrule is a hedgewitch with the Charlatanism and Spiritualism hedgewitch traditions (this is obvious with his special attacks listing guile pool and spiritualism.
Satyr Musician is possibly a hedgewitch with both the Charlatanism and Academia hedgewitch traditions (I am unsure about Academia). If I am wrong and the Satyr is infact missing the Academia hedgewitch tradition, all that is needed to rectify this is increase the Satyr's spell pool by 3.
Professor Meeda is an Entropic Sage Hedgewitch (an archetype from the Destroyer's Handbook that trades out one hedgewitch tradition for a bunch of monk abilities) with the Spiritualism hedgewitch tradition.
Milo v3 wrote:
I believe what the person meant to say was that they found it on the Spheres of Power wiki, under additional content from Kineticists of Porphyra I-IV, and Legendary Kineticists I-II.
Okay, I have a couple:
Anyone Can Assume All Villians Invade Domestic Economy Through Locating Business And Aquisitions.
There probably is a compromise. For example, you could probably say that what an armorist can summon or bind to themselves is limited by the cost of the item they would otherwise be able to bind. Thus for example a:
Level 1 Armorist: Can only bind or summon equipment which is worth 800gp or less (most masterwork equipment fall into this category)
Level 3 Armorist: Can only bind or summon equipment which is worth 2,800gp or less (most +1 equipment fall into this category)
Level 5 Armorist: Can only bind equipment which is worth 8,800gp or less (most +2 equipment fall into this category). At 6th level, the armorist may also summon equipment of this same worth.
Obviously, arsenal tricks that allow for other special materials or add an additional +1 may either increase the allowed worth, or be granted for free.
Using this compromise, a player wouldn't be able to have a laser torch bound till level 5, or summoned till level 6.
I just wanted to say that regarding the new Troubador:
1st, I appreciate the increased number of available personas (although, I would still love to see an "innocent" persona based around children and how full of hope and aspirations, while also ignorant and naive as to the cruelty of the world. The innocent also builds or creates our views of life, safety, nurture, loyalty, and family. The innocent in it's ignorance gains a wanderlust, and eventually loses it's innocence to the cruelty of the world as it matures and learns these cold facts. While innocent however, they have wild imaginations, and elaborate dreams; All of this together can make for an entire persona and can be labeled as 'The Child', 'The Innocent', or 'The Virgin'.
2nd, While I will miss all the personalization of the new Troubadour, I appreciate that the class overload has been removed. I also realize that 'something' had to give in-order to resolve this issue.
In short, I am overall happy with how Spheres of Might is progressing with this class; While the old Troubador's power level was not over-the-top before, it was overloaded with class abilities (which made it time consuming to build even low-level characters).
I checked up on those examples. I didn't see anything in the Charlatan tradition...
The Charlatan tradition can gain rogue talents with secrets. There is a rogue talent in the Diviner's Handbook called Prescient Dodger.
Again, I personally would prefer if there was an Equipment talent (instead of 3+ classes gaining a class feature w/ get +X to AC). As to whether it was limited to unarmored or allows for light armor, I have the following thoughts:
If only works while unamored and unencumbered, the bonus should scale with level. The AC bonus should not be capped by HD.
If the talent works while unarmored or in light armor, and while unencumbered, the bonus should not scale. The bonus could probably be capped by HD.
Ah. I hadn't checked out either of those very much. One level dip is definitely a small investment for something that might be a +4-+5 and likely scaling higher quickly.
Also note that in the instance of the Hedgewitch, the class is VERY dip friendly. In-fact, some people dip into Hedgewitch for nothing more than the Channel Spirit Allies power of the Spiritualism Tradition.
Dipping a single level into one of the following classes can get you your CAM to AC w/out much sacrifice (because CL is like BAB):- Hedgewitch (either via Entropic Sage archetype or Charlatan tradition)
Thing is, Spheres of Power offers a number of ways for spellcasters to gain their Casting Ability Modifier to AC with almost no investment at-all.
I believe the Dev's have been discussing the prospect of making an Equipment talent that allows you to add your Practioner Ability Modifier (PAB) to AC and CMD; Which I completely support BTW.
So do I think it is too powerful? Not in the slightest.
There was a thread on the Drop Dead Studios Website where it was mentioned that the Dev's were discussing the prospect of doing a complete overhaul on all the spheres, particularly in regard to martial focus and dedication.
I am about to begin a new game where 3+ players will be using Spheres of Might (A scholar, A sentinel, and a troubadour; possibly also including a technician and an investigator archetype using spheres of power or might). Mostly I am curious, should this overhaul take place how long will it take for the changes to be made public, and should will we be expecting a 'Preview: Round 4'?