[Drop Dead Studios] Spheres of Combat Kickstarter


Product Discussion

551 to 600 of 795 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Stack wrote:
It should be noted that rapid assault doesn't come online until 5, and even then it is one attack. If anyone has suggestions for strengthening the 'right weapon' theme I am interested in hearing them though.

Extra attacks are really good, thoug. The armiger essentially gets to full attack (except with full BAB) as long as it keeps hitting and keeps switching weapons. Don't get me wrong - I like some of what this enables. Armigers might be the only class where regularly attacking with a weapon and unarmed in the same round is a viable choice, and that enables some cool concepts. It's mainly at higher levels, where the armiger might constantly be attacking with three or more weapons per round, where it's hard for me to imagine a lot of concepts where that's the default fighting style.

I'm not sure how this would work mechanically, but what about something that encouraged switching more on a round-to-round basis, rather than within rounds?

For making the "right weapon" theme work, what about an archetype that gives Rapid Customization for free early on, and then gradually upgrades it so that eventually the armiger can customize a weapon with a move or swift action (maybe a limited number of times per day)? That plus a beefed-up Enhanced Customization could really make for a character that could always use the right weapon for the job.

An improvised weapon armiger archetype also seems like it could be a cool idea.


Looked a little closer and have really liking what I'm seeing here. I put my thoughts in the spoiler below so the post doesn't get huge unless you click it.

Spoiler:
Headfake: This seems really powerful. Without Combat Reflexes or a similar ability, nothing can take an Attack of Opportunity against you.

Launching Counter: I'm not sure there's much benefit to using this on an enemy until you can get them at least 20ft into the air. The first 10ft of a fall doesn't result in damage. I know they trigger and AoO, but I'm not sure it's worth it. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Power Counter: Very nice, especially if you've been able to figure out what attack roll will be most likely to hit.

Shoulder Roll: I really like abilities like this. Kinda makes me wish Original Crane Wing was still around in the books.

Arcane Armor: Worth a feat for more than a few cases, I'm sure.

Critical Hammer: Awesome way to make these weapons viable choices.

Crossbow Hunter: Lots of nice benefits to this one. Combos well with the 'nothing in your off hand' Equipment talents.

Heavy Arms Training: Does this also treat you as one size category bigger for the size of the weapons and number of hands needed to wield them? As written, it allows a Medium character to wield a Large Longsword without the penalty to attack rolls, but he must still use two hands.

Shortbow Mastery: A reason to use a shortbow besides it being cheaper? Sign me up.

Whip Fiend: I think you could write it a little better at the beginning. Something like “You may deal lethal or nonlethal damage with a whip, and may do so regardless of the target natural armor bonus or armor.”

Mageguard: How/Why are the aware of this ability? Seems strange that a caster can tell a complete stranger can do this.

Steel Hide: Simple and potentially life saving. A thematic and effective ability for a Guardian,

Open Hand Sphere: Does this keep you from using talents, like Balanced Defense, that require you to keep your other hand empty? Pounding is a nice little touch, and the Dedicate ability is pretty cool too.

Axe Kick: This is mean. I like it. Is the extra damage multiplied on critical hits, because if so...

Deadly Hand: ...this makes Axe Kick even better. Add Improved Critical for a 15-20 crit range!

Hammer Palm: Smack someone(or kick them) so hard they go flying for a nice Kung-Fu Movie feel. :)

Snap/Sweeping Kick: Nice and obvious synergy here.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Azten wrote:
Launching Counter: I'm not sure there's much benefit to using this on an enemy until you can get them at least 20ft into the air. The first 10ft of a fall doesn't result in damage. I know they trigger and AoO, but I'm not sure it's worth it. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Launching Counter basically says "Whenever you use Counter Punch against an enemy that cannot fly or use Feather Fall you get an AoO and the enemy may take falling damage." That's pretty good by itself, but there's more - if you take falling damage you fall prone. And standing up from prone usually provokes an AoO, so you're getting two for the price of one talent. Pretty great.

Plus, think about the combo potential. Take Combat Reflexes. Ready a Counter Punch. If the enemy attacks you, you attack them first and they get knocked into the air. As they fall down you get an AoO and they may take fall damage, at which point they fall prone. If they do fall prone they take a -4 to all melee attacks for the rest of their turn, meaning they have a much lower chance to hit you. When the enemy does stand back up they provoke an AoO again... which you spend Martial Focus on to treat as a Counter Punch and launch them again. Better yet, be a Paragon so you can treat one of the AoOs as an Attack action and apply talents to it.


LuniasM wrote:
Azten wrote:
Launching Counter: I'm not sure there's much benefit to using this on an enemy until you can get them at least 20ft into the air. The first 10ft of a fall doesn't result in damage. I know they trigger and AoO, but I'm not sure it's worth it. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Launching Counter basically says "Whenever you use Counter Punch against an enemy that cannot fly or use Feather Fall you get an AoO and the enemy may take falling damage." That's pretty good by itself, but there's more - if you take falling damage you fall prone. And standing up from prone usually provokes an AoO, so you're getting two for the price of one talent. Pretty great.

Plus, think about the combo potential. Take Combat Reflexes. Ready a Counter Punch. If the enemy attacks you, you attack them first and they get knocked into the air. As they fall down you get an AoO and they may take fall damage, at which point they fall prone. If they do fall prone they take a -4 to all melee attacks for the rest of their turn, meaning they have a much lower chance to hit you. When the enemy does stand back up they provoke an AoO again... which you spend Martial Focus on to treat as a Counter Punch and launch them again. Better yet, be a Paragon so you can treat one of the AoOs as an Attack action and apply talents to it.

Since I was planning on building a boxing paragon anyway this is a tactic I may use. Thanks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Im very concerned with the amount of taxing going on with the equipment sphere. Classes not getting proper proficiency as admitted taxes, proficiency still being gated behind tangentially related proficiency (seriously, light armor is in no way related to heavy armor. Just let us pick the proficiency level we want)

I said in the document, but it is gone now with no response: stop putting unnecessary taxes on martials. Heavy armor is not inherently better than light. Tower shields are not inherently better than heavy shields. All playstyles are balanced around each other, so there is no reason a light armor character needs to take no talents for his build, while a full heavy armor tank needs to take as many as 4. (medium armor, heavy armor, shields, tower shields)

The thing that makes spheres of power great is it enables players to build any character concept they want right from level 1. With these proficiency taxes, martials are forced to wait till level 2,3,4 or higher before they can actually start picking fun talents.

Some excuses ive seen that dont cut it:

"A sphere caster without talents is a guy in robes, a martial still can attack"

Yes, but a sphere caster will never not have talents. He will have them from level 1. And he will be much better than that martial, who used up his first few talents enabling his equipment and so can still just attack.

"You cant even afford plate armor at level 1, so you dont need heavy armor yet"

No, but you can afford it before level 3. And honestly, you usually find a set or something before then. Meanwhile since you cant get the proficincy due to talent taxes, youre stuck playing your low dex character (intended to wear heavy armor) in light armor, having lower AC than the rogue. Help you if you wanted to be a tank, cause youre certainly not one until you can finally get your correct proficiency and then the guardian sphere, and probably the shield sphere. Meanwhile caster mcgee has been summoning his personal angel from level 1.

You bundled a bunch of feats together in certain talents to get rid of feat tax. Dont add other taxes to make up for it. Stop taxing martials, just let them play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Baval wrote:
Heavy armor is not inherently better than light.

This is wrong in pathfinder. In addition to reducing MAD, you gain +1 AC each time you upgrade how heavy your armor is (chain shirt 4 Dex + 4 Armor = 8, breastplate 3 Dex + 6 Armor = 9, full plate 1 Dex + 9 Armor = 10).

However, I agree that the equipment tax needs to be kept low. All the classes should be playable without spending talents for proficiency and all of them should want 1-2 talents (but never more than 2) for proficiency.

For actual changes, I think the Blacksmith should be proficient with Shields, and the Paragon should lose heavy armor and gain tower shields.

With the large amount of accuracy and damage buffs the Blacksmith has, they can afford to be a bit MAD, they have Smithing Insights that improve shields, and they don't need 2h power attack to deal acceptable damage.

The Paragon still needs Shield Sphere + Tower Shield Adept before tower shields become superior to heavy shields. Some Paragons may want to use Heavy Armor + a Polearm instead of shields, but that is still only 1 talent away.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Baval wrote:

Im very concerned with the amount of taxing going on with the equipment sphere. Classes not getting proper proficiency as admitted taxes, proficiency still being gated behind tangentially related proficiency (seriously, light armor is in no way related to heavy armor. Just let us pick the proficiency level we want)

I said in the document, but it is gone now with no response: stop putting unnecessary taxes on martials. Heavy armor is not inherently better than light. Tower shields are not inherently better than heavy shields. All playstyles are balanced around each other, so there is no reason a light armor character needs to take no talents for his build, while a full heavy armor tank needs to take as many as 4. (medium armor, heavy armor, shields, tower shields)

The thing that makes spheres of power great is it enables players to build any character concept they want right from level 1. With these proficiency taxes, martials are forced to wait till level 2,3,4 or higher before they can actually start picking fun talents.

Some excuses ive seen that dont cut it:

"A sphere caster without talents is a guy in robes, a martial still can attack"

Yes, but a sphere caster will never not have talents. He will have them from level 1. And he will be much better than that martial, who used up his first few talents enabling his equipment and so can still just attack.

"You cant even afford plate armor at level 1, so you dont need heavy armor yet"

No, but you can afford it before level 3. And honestly, you usually find a set or something before then. Meanwhile since you cant get the proficincy due to talent taxes, youre stuck playing your low dex character (intended to wear heavy armor) in light armor, having lower AC than the rogue. Help you if you wanted to be a tank, cause youre certainly not one until you can finally get your correct proficiency and then the guardian sphere, and probably the shield sphere. Meanwhile caster mcgee has been summoning his personal angel from level 1.

Proficiencies are an issue with which we're still working. Ideas are being thrown around about this, and the reason the convo was deleted was most likely because it was too long to be responded to in any reasonable fashion (one of the few things I dislike about google docs is its response system for comments).

Right now, we're doing our best to make a more reasonable system, which is why we're still in pre-alpha. Ideas are being thrown around, but I'm trying to make less changes in doc to fix this since we're working on a larger sweeping change for everything. But we are aware of the issue, and we are doing our best to fix it.

As far as paragon goes, I think keeping heavy rather than gaining tower shields is more likely how we're going to go here. The reason is that heavy armor is more universal rather than tower shields, which are slightly more niche even with the buffs we've attempted to give to them.

As a whole, we're keeping our eyes on the equipment sphere issue, and we may tweak class proficiences, talents which give proficiencies, or other things to make sure we're giving the most comprehensive package possible. We do actually have some new stuff up for equipment now, as well as the new version of the Sage, which has been changed to be less mystic and more in line with the rest of our classes.


Baval wrote:
Im very concerned with the amount of taxing going on with the equipment sphere.

After thinking about this, I do agree with Baval. The balancing point shouldn't be a few equipment feats, but what the class can do overall over the 20 levels. I'm in particular concerned that the number of talents granted seems low compared to what SoP gives, especially as combat talents may not compare in power to magic talents. I prefer Tier 3 classes (with a high floor optimization-wise) and if the goal is to make martials fun, then they need to be in that tier. If fighters and other core classes need an appropriate power boost, then I don't mind such a boost added via archetypes.

Baval wrote:
I said in the document, but it is gone now with no response:

It is very disappointing that this comment thread was closed from the developers' side without addressing any concerns. True, it is possible that I and the others are wrong regarding our position, but without a discussion you won't convince us. All this leaves is a bad taste in the mouth. :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.
N. Jolly wrote:
the new version of the Sage, which has been changed to be less mystic and more in line with the rest of our classes

As someone who was happy to finally find a monk class which actually looked mystical and could actually function as a "Wise old sage you travel to for mystical guidance and training", I hope there wasn't too much mysticism removed from the class.

Edit: and looking at the new version of the class, it was made far less interesting and seems to now just be "martial artist who misses a lot if he tries to attack rather than use manuevers and can heal you between fights".

Edit2: And now I realise am stuck with a 15th level sage build I cannot even convert because it was based around supporting the team with ranged chi gong healing and ranged crippling... brilliant timing on my part... *facepalm*

edit3: Wait.. why were the sage's skills nerfed? That seems rather odd. (I can sort of understand the saves nerf even if I don't agree with it, and martial master's nerf was combined with an additional benefit so it's not a problem).


Yes, armor classes do net an overall bonus of +1 to AC and lower MAD, im aware, but that also comes with lowered speed and reflex saves, and larger ACP. There is balance in the armor system

Thank you for the response N.Jolly

Paizo Employee Design Manager

EldritchWeaver wrote:
Baval wrote:
Im very concerned with the amount of taxing going on with the equipment sphere.

After thinking about this, I do agree with Baval. The balancing point shouldn't be a few equipment feats, but what the class can do overall over the 20 levels. I'm in particular concerned that the number of talents granted seems low compared to what SoP gives, especially as combat talents may not compare in power to magic talents.

Part of the reason they get fewer talents is simply that balancing martials is different than balancing spellcasters. A spherecaster without a talent is doing nothing, they need that basic talent just to have any capability. A sphere martial on the other hand is building off of an existing system; before he could e.g. swing with a sword, or an axe, or a hammer, and when you add a talent you're building on top of what you could already do rather than adding a capability that didn't exist previously.

If I'm a spherecaster and I want to shoot magical death from my fingertips, first I have to take a talent to learn how to deal magical death. Then I need to take an additional talent to learn each additional damage type I might want to do. If I'm a sphere martial, I started the game able to stab, shoot, or bash people with some proficiency right out of the gate, and if I want to change the type of damage I deal, I grab a different weapon. If I want to cover a larger area with a spherecasting ability, that costs me an additional talent, while I can use a spear as a sphere martial in place of a sword to push out my threatened radius. There are things a spherecaster needs talents for that a sphere martial simply doesn't, which is part of why sphere martials get fewer talents than their caster counterparts.

Quote:


I prefer Tier 3 classes (with a high floor optimization-wise) and if the goal is to make martials fun, then they need to be in that tier. If fighters and other core classes need an appropriate power boost, then I don't mind such a boost added via archetypes.

One of the promises we made was that this system would be compatible with other martial systems, and that it would be great for gritty campaigns and high power fantasy campaigns alike. We're not looking to remake Path of War, that already exists and while we certainly want to support the market of people who enjoy it, we also want to support the market of people who think it's "too wuxia" or OP, or any of the other common complaints that arise from the not insubstantial groups of people who don't like Path of War. One of the ways we're doing this is with Legendary Talents, which still haven't been revealed to the public, but these include things like permanent EX true seeing (at an appropriately high enough level), cutting reality to teleport to another location, walking on air, etc., and these abilities cost you a talent just like any other talent, though they may have some prereqs related to having a base sphere and sufficient BAB. For the higher tier options (significantly upper 3, lower 2), Legendary Talents are where you're going to find the bulk.

The base classes and talents in general are, as we've always promised, options that are generally appropriate in any game, whether that be a gritty Dark Sun / Conan-esque campaign setting or a more "magic everywhere" setting like an Eberron or Forgotten Realms world.

As to core classes, we're creating this system so that it gives them just as much of a boost as our classes, if they want to take that option. A Fighter who trades 1/2 his feats by level for a combat training progression is significantly more versatile and effective than a Fighter who doesn't, but totally aside from that, we're not even using the Fighter as a gauge in most circumstances anyways. Our primary points of comparison are the Barbarian, Investigator, Paladin, Ranger, and Slayer, which are all solid and effective Paizo core line classes that the system is also intended to compliment.

Quote:


Baval wrote:
I said in the document, but it is gone now with no response:
It is very disappointing that this comment thread was closed from the developers' side without addressing any concerns. True, it is possible that I and the others are wrong regarding our position, but without a discussion you won't convince us. All this leaves is a bad taste in the mouth. :(

The comment thread was closed for several reasons:

1) Many of the comments were out of date regarding their comparisons, not including updates and fixes to talents and classes referenced.
2) We just dropped an expanded Equipment sphere with more robust proficiency packages and actual dedications, so feedback pertaining to the original Equipment sphere was no longer as helpful.
3) The comment thread meandered over subject matter quite a bit and it was simply not possible to respond to the commentary there in any meaningful manner any longer.

So it's not accurate to say that it was closed without addressing any concerns (we did), and we're definitely here to have these conversations, there simply wasn't any value in maintaining that particular comment block any longer due it not being firmly on a single topic, there being an overload of commentary (primarily from one or two people) that was simply too much to respond to in that format, and the comments that were there not being up to date on the current version of the discussed items.


I was speaking of my comment requesting to split armor proficiency into 3 separate talents, and shields into two, not the other one. That one had a long discussion.

As I said, saying that casters require a talent to do anything and martials dont is a non issue. While technically true, its rebuffed by two things:

1. The caster needs at most 2 talents to begin doing what he wants to do (such as destruction and the correct element, conjuration and the correct form, alteration and the correct shapes, etc). The martial might require as many as 6 (heaviest armor possible with a whip requires armor proficiency, armor proficiency, shield proficiency, shield proficiency, rogue weapon training, whip fiend. thats not even including that he probably wants to get Polearm mastery and meteor hammer talents to make his whip its best). Im fine with martials requiring proficiency to work, but make it simple: seperate the talents so we dont have to select the same one multiple times at no benefit to get what we really want. Thats the definition of a tax in RPGs

2. Related to above, the caster will never not have the 2 talents he needs, as he automatically starts with 2 bonus talents. The martial does too, but as stated that may not be enough to actually cover what he wants to do. So now it is the caster who is starting at level 1 able to do something, and the martial who is still restricted. This is a far more likely (infinitely in fact) possibility than a sphere caster with no spheres.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Lirya wrote:
Baval wrote:
Heavy armor is not inherently better than light.

This is wrong in pathfinder. In addition to reducing MAD, you gain +1 AC each time you upgrade how heavy your armor is (chain shirt 4 Dex + 4 Armor = 8, breastplate 3 Dex + 6 Armor = 9, full plate 1 Dex + 9 Armor = 10).

However, I agree that the equipment tax needs to be kept low. All the classes should be playable without spending talents for proficiency and all of them should want 1-2 talents (but never more than 2) for proficiency.

I think it would be incorrect to say that any of the current preview classes aren't playable without taking a proficiency package. They all have the basic requirements to fill their niches very well. Blacksmith's have light armor proficiency for several reasons, starting with the fact that the traditional blacksmith trope is almost always a lightly armored individual, we have tons of art with blacksmith characters "doing their thing" shirtless in a leather apron, and because he doesn't need it. A blacksmith can perform very well, and survive very well, at any level of play, and has more versatility and flexible strength than most of the other classes due to his inherent crafting abilities and options to stack massive debuffs onto his attacks.

Quote:


For actual changes, I think the Blacksmith should be proficient with Shields, and the Paragon should lose heavy armor and gain tower shields.

I'm not super against that. Currently, the blacksmith talents that enable shield use also enable him to use his shields, but I could see adding light and heavy shields to his proficiency. The class proficiencies in general ended up swinging higher than I the design team had originally discussed, so the Blacksmith may be a little behind the curve there, but that wasn't something I could address until I knew for certain whether we were raising the bar universaly, or if the other classes needed to be brought down a couple notches. Ultimately I think we're going to settle in the middle there, which means shields would be appropriate for the blacksmith.

Quote:


With the large amount of accuracy and damage buffs the Blacksmith has, they can afford to be a bit MAD, they have Smithing Insights that improve shields, and they don't need 2h power attack to deal acceptable damage.

The Paragon still needs Shield Sphere + Tower Shield Adept before tower shields become superior to heavy shields. Some Paragons may want to use Heavy Armor + a Polearm instead of shields, but that is still only 1 talent away.

All of these things are true.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Baval wrote:
I was speaking of my comment requesting to split armor proficiency into 3 separate talents, and shields into two, not the other one. That one had a long discussion.

I'm not certain then, I don't recall that comment unless it was part of a larger tree.

Quote:


As I said, saying that casters require a talent to do anything and martials dont is a non issue. While technically true, its rebuffed by two things:

1. The caster needs at most 2 talents to begin doing what he wants to do (such as destruction and the correct element, conjuration and the correct form, alteration and the correct shapes, etc). The martial might require as many as 6 (heaviest armor possible with a whip requires armor proficiency, armor proficiency, shield proficiency, shield proficiency, rogue weapon training, whip fiend.

I disagree with you. In fact, you seem to disagree with you, given that you note that the armor system is internally balanced. Heavier armor proficiencies are add-ons, not necessities, and every practitioner class can do their job exceedingly well with the proficiencies they have. A blacksmith who wants to wear a breastplate and fight with whip fiend is looking at three talents (which he gets), and he'll be doing stuff core martials can't for several levels. Most of the proficiency packages also offer multiple exotic weapons now, meaning that each one package opens up a plethora of combat options, articularly when combined with the new Equipment dedications. He's also going to continue to accumulate talents and feats every level thereafter, meaning his combat proficiency and functionality are going to continue to grow outward faster than core martials, until classes like barbarian, paladin, and ranger start playing catch up with their spells, companions, and Su options. If the martial classes were buffed up much more, they'd be better at low levels than some of the strongest early game gish options, like Hunter.

Quote:


Thats not even including that he probably wants to get Polearm mastery and meteor hammer talents to make his whip its best). Im fine with martials requiring proficiency to work, but make it simple: seperate the talents so we dont have to select the same one multiple times at no benefit to get what we really want. Thats the definition of a tax in RPGs.

Taxes and opportunity costs are not the same thing. Wearing heavier armor is an opportunity whose cost we have lowered for you, not a tax we've imposed. You don't need it, but you might want it, and it's now cheaper to buy if you decide you do. Or you can live with light armor and a shield and spend those talents to be really, really good at something in a way other martials can't.

Quote:


2. Related to above, the caster will never not have the 2 talents he needs, as he automatically starts with 2 bonus talents. The martial does too, but as stated that may not be enough to actually cover what he wants to do. So now it is the caster who is starting at level 1 able to do something, and the martial who is still restricted. This is a far more likely (infinitely in fact) possibility than a sphere caster with no spheres.

As I explained earlier, a spherecaster needs spheres just to turn things on. You spend a talent just to gain the basic ability to shoot magic, then you spend a talent to make that damage a different type than you started with, and you probably spend another talent on yet another damage type. It would be like if martials started with no proficiencies at all and had to buy each one piece by piece- a talent for wielding a short sword, now a talent for a club, now a talent for a crossbow, etc.

Martials start with their base abilities already on. If they want to damage something, they shoot, stab, or slice it. If they want to protect themselves from something, they put on armor. If they want to deal a different damage type, they grab a different weapon or ammunition. They don't need talents to do these things, they need talents to enhance these things.
Casters have more taxes, so they get more spheres. They start with nothing and build into something, while martials start with something and build up from that base. Each class has more than sufficient proficiencies to do its job; it's simply incorrect to say that they have to buy any proficiencies. If they do decide to buy them, we've made them far cheaper than they were.

When you talk about "casters without spheres" you're completely missing the point; I'm not saying such a thing exists, I'm saying that it costs more talents to do something with magic than it does to do it with martial means. It costs you at least 3 talents with the Destruction sphere to do what a martial character does with a basic ranged weapon and no talents spent at all. If martials got the same number of talents as casters on a direct comparison basis, there'd be no way to keep the system balanced. A spherecaster will probably spend somewhere around 1/3 of their talents by 20th level on opportunity costs, like taking a sphere in the first place so you can do something, making their attacks deal a damage type that can't be ignored, upgrading their darkness so every orc and goblin doesn't see right through it, expanding the area of their attacks, etc. All of those talents that a spherecaster has to spend are the equivalent of things that every martial does for free. They don't need a talent to hit things, they can already do that. They already have the "hit things" base sphere, now they want to "hit things better" or "hit things over a wider radius" or spend a talent on something that lets them do something that literally wasn't possible before but which still builds off that same supported framework.


The armor system is internally balanced if you optimize for your specific armor class. If your Dex is 20, wearing heavy armor is not optimal. If your dex is 8, wearing light armor is not optimal. Reverse those scenarios and theyre balanced.

If I make a Barbarian and want him to wear heavy armor, im not going to (nor is it possible) to put my dex at 20 so i can wear leather armor then drop it down to 10 so i can wear fullplate when i unlock it. Its going to be 10 from the begining, meaning until i can get the proficiency my AC is 4 points lower than it should be at least.

Offering a bunch of tangentially related weapon proficiency that no one but an armiger is going to use fully is not compensation for a feat tax on armors. You typically use one weapon type your whole career. Often, your build is built around using that one weapon type.

If a character buys into the system, hes either not getting talents every level or hes not getting feats at all. Even if he is getting talents every level, he doesnt get the 2 bonus talents so its going to take him several levels to gain all the proficiency he wants. You can argue he starts with some proficiencies and thats true, but no necesarrily the ones he wants; see my armored barbarian.

What exactly can a martial do with a ranged weapon and not talents/feats that takes 3 talents for a destruction character to do? Because the only thing i know of is doing some damage, which a destruction caster can do with only 1 talent,and better (or the same ranged weapon, since casters usually have simple weapon proficiency too)

A martial cannot however do a lot of the things he wants to do except "do some damage" without talents. He cannot tank, he cannot trip, he cannot use exotic weapons, he cannot debuff. If your argument is a martial can do a small amount of damage without spheres, i counter so can a caster using the exact same means.


Putting this one seperate as ive been editing my last comment a lot

Casters do NOT have more taxes, they have more options. A tax is an ability you dont want but have to get because its required for something they do want. Every single ability a sphere caster chooses is an ability he wants. A martial character has to choose abilities he doesnt want to get ones he wants, especially with armor proficiency. Another example is the fact that the boxing sphere is restricted to only light weapons, and also includes a talent to stop people from lying. If i want that talent, i need to take boxing, even though if i never plan on using a light weapon the sphere is useless to me.

I know that wearing heavy armor is technically something i dont NEED (it is btw, if thats the character im playing. thats like saying if you want to play a necromancer you dont need to raise the dead at level 1, which was Vancian castings method which was changed for SoP). However I neither NEED nor WANT medium armor proficiency if I want to wear heavy armor, so why am i forced to take it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:
I disagree with you. In fact, you seem to disagree with you, given that you note that the armor system is internally balanced. Heavier armor proficiencies are add-ons, not necessities, and every practitioner class can do their job exceedingly well with the proficiencies they have. A blacksmith who wants to wear a breastplate and fight with whip fiend is looking at three talents (which he gets), and he'll be doing stuff core martials can't for several levels. Most of the proficiency packages also offer multiple exotic weapons now, meaning that each one package opens up a plethora of combat options, articularly when combined with the new Equipment dedications. He's also going to continue to accumulate talents and feats every level thereafter, meaning his combat proficiency and functionality are going to continue to grow outward faster than core martials, until classes like barbarian, paladin, and ranger start playing catch up with their spells, companions, and Su options. If the martial classes were buffed up much more, they'd be better at low levels than some of the strongest...

I have to agree that by making 'proficiency taxes' you are still encouraging martial/caster disparity. I also see no problem with having the SoM classes being more "powerful" than core martial classes, they suck anyways.

Take a look at the level 1 blacksmith. If he spends all his talents just to get the armor, weapon, and shield proficiency he wants. What can he 'do' at 1st level?
- Grant +2 damage for 24 hours
- Sunder/Mend equipment.

Compare that to a level 1 armorist. He does not need to spend talents to get proficiency, although he could if he wanted. Instead he can spend his talents to cover the same bases of the Blacksmith, and still coming out on-top.
What can he 'do' at 1st level?
- War sphere: Totem of War (granting +2 bonus to damage)
- Creation sphere: Destroy/Repair object (pretty much sunder/mend equpment)
- Summon Any Weapon
- Bonded weapon of his choice.

I am not ofcourse mentioning feat use, because they both have feats. But as you can see, just giving the blacksmith a couple more proficiencies (shield + medium armor) would allow the Blacksmith to be more on-par with the Armorist.

And you know what is sad? The armorist is arguably the WEAKEST of all SoP casters, which would mean that at 1st level, the Blacksmith is actually weaker than the weakest of SoP casters.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to agree with Milo v3 on the sage. It just looks boring. Nothing really stands out as something fun to use. Bring back the mysticism! :)

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Baval wrote:

The armor system is internally balanced if you optimize for your specific armor class. If your Dex is 20, wearing heavy armor is not optimal. If your dex is 8, wearing light armor is not optimal. Reverse those scenarios and theyre balanced.

If I make a Barbarian and want him to wear heavy armor, im not going to (nor is it possible) to put my dex at 20 so i can wear leather armor then drop it down to 10 so i can wear fullplate when i unlock it. Its going to be 10 from the begining, meaning until i can get the proficiency my AC is 4 points lower than it should be at least.

But it's far cheaper for any practitioner to upgrade their proficiencies than it is for that Barbarian, and they have additional class features on top of that. Blacksmiths are proficient with all hammers; that means a Blacksmith can start play with a lucerne hammer, or dwarven longhammer, spend a talent on the Guardian sphere, and he now controls a battlefield area greater than anything a spellcaster can match. He can even use multiple AoOs each round without any additional feat expenditure to sunder opponents weapons and drop all of their attacks and damage by at least 2 (virtually no weapon during those levels is going to survive a single Thunderous Blows attack), meaning that he's also increased the effective AC of himself and all his party members. At second level he can sling on a shield if he wants without interfering with his hammer (or crossbow, or whatever other weapon you decide to use).

Quote:


What exactly can a martial do with a ranged weapon and not talents/feats that takes 3 talents for a destruction character to do?

Deal a type of damage other than bludgeoning, deal any meaningful damage at all, have a higher crit range, etc.

Quote:


Because the only thing i know of is doing some damage, which a destruction caster can do with only 1 talent (or the same ranged weapon, since casters usually have simple weapon proficiency too)

Casters don't have the BAB, and they don't have the class features to build on their attacks. Their options exist apart from their proficiencies while the sphere martials build off their proficiencies directly. A spherecaster who took the Destruction sphere now has the option to blast for a piddly d6 of bludgeoning damage or fumble around with a simple weapon; a sphere martial could spend 1 talent on the Guardian sphere and now controls a 15 radius of the battlefield with the ability to deal out several times the damage of the Destruction user multiple times a round.

Quote:


A martial cannot however do a lot of the things he wants to do except "do some damage" without talents. He cannot tank, he cannot trip, he cannot use exotic weapons, he cannot debuff. If your argument is a martial can do a small amount of damage without spheres, i counter so can a caster using the exact same means.

A Blacksmith can lay out heavy debuffs or attack directly, often both simultaneously; no combat talents needed for that. An Armiger can swap through 3 different weapons, each pre-customized with a complimentary sphere to make sure the Armiger is getting the absolute most out of whatever weapon best suits the situation. Paragons can simultaneously buff themselves and debuff opponents with their Challenge ability. Core classes have their own sets of features that they can stack on top of their basic functionality. Saying "casters have simple weapons too" ignores the fact that every class is a distinct chassis with strengths and weaknesses that accentuate its core role. It's simply never going to be true that a caster is as good with a weapon as a martial at low levels, with the possible exception of limited use gish options that are built to blend the two. The difference between what a sphere martial gets out of a single talent and what a spherecaster gets out of a single talent are often quite drastically in favor of the sphere martials, for whom a single Equipment proficiency package can be worth two or three casting talents in how it augments the associated ability, and for whom base spheres are often much, much more powerful in how they change basic capabilities. They're often much more streamlined as well; martials with Legendary Talents generally only need to spend two talents (base and the Legendary talent) and be the appropriate level to do a particular thing, like air walking, teleporting, true seeing, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A sorceror can use his bloodline powers, a witch can use hexes, an armorist can summon his weapons etc. If were going to bring class abilities into this, it goes back to a moot point. Lets compare Incanter to Conscript to make it a look at the systems, not the classes that use it.

A martial doesnt have the mental stats to be good at stats, again if were going to bring in ability scores then its not going to be a fair comparison. That said, a caster should certainly have a decent dex to fire a bow or crossbow, and strength wont apply to those until they get a composite bow, which is expensive. If the "you wont have it at level 1" argument applies to full plate, it applies to bows too. BAB is a moot point because a level 1 character has either 0 or 1 BAB

The martial can spend 1 talent in the guardian sphere and control a 15 foot radius of the battlefield....but hes also fumbling around with a simple weapon and doing a piddly 1d6 damage. He also isnt doing "several times the damage of the Destruction user" as he is reliant both on enemies provoking, and AoOs, of which he gains 1 bonus one at level 1.

A caster does meaningful damage at level 1 with destruction. In fact, due to the fact that he likely cant miss (touch attacks being what they are) hes likely doing more dps than the martial in many situations (armor is common in low levels, boosting touch AC not so much)

You keep falling back on "look at all the weapons practitioners can choose from!" Yes i get it. Weapons are fine. Im not required to take longsword proficiency and bastard sword proficiency before im allowed to take elvish curved blade proficinecy. Lets talk about armor shall we? The thing I keep trying to get us back to on every post, and the thing my original comment was about?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Baval wrote:

Putting this one seperate as ive been editing my last comment a lot

Casters do NOT have more taxes, they have more options. A tax is an ability you dont want but have to get because its required for something they do want. Every single ability a sphere caster chooses is an ability he wants. A martial character has to choose abilities he doesnt want to get ones he wants, especially with armor proficiency. Another example is the fact that the boxing sphere is restricted to only light weapons, and also includes a talent to stop people from lying. If i want that talent, i need to take boxing, even though if i never plan on using a light weapon the sphere is useless to me.

I know that wearing heavy armor is technically something i dont NEED (it is btw, if thats the character im playing. thats like saying if you want to play a necromancer you dont need to raise the dead at level 1, which was Vancian castings method which was changed for SoP). However I neither NEED nor WANT medium armor proficiency if I want to wear heavy armor, so why am i forced to take it?

I agree, if the writers of SoM want to keep 'Proficiency' talents, atleast make them less taxy. This can be done by making the Armor Proficiency talent grant Light, Medium, and Heavy Armor proficiency by taking it once; making the Shield Proficiency talent grant Light, Heavy, and Tower shield proficiency by taking it once, etc.

By forcing someone to take a talent multiple times to gain other proficiency, you are inforcing a tax. If someone is intending to use Heavy Armor, than taking the talent twice or three times means that they were taxed one or two talents for proficiency they dont intend to use.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@grovestrider

or just seperate them into three talents. light armor proficincy, medium, and heavy all as seperate talents. Problem solved, no tax.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Grovestrider wrote:


I have to agree that by making 'proficiency taxes' you are still encouraging martial/caster disparity. I also see no problem with having the SoM classes being more "powerful" than core martial classes, they suck anyways.

We promised in our Kickstarter video and advertisement, right up front, that these were going to be balanced options appropriate for any campaign. This isn't "Path of War: DDS Edition" where we're deliberately forcing all existing martials into the trash can as part of our design goal That doesn't mean we're balancing to the bottom of the barrel either though; our general points of comparison are Barbarian, Investigator, Paladin, Ranger, and Slayer, and I think all of those classes are generally welcome in any campaign.

Quote:


Take a look at the level 1 blacksmith. If he spends all his talents just to get the armor, weapon, and shield proficiency he wants. What can he 'do' at 1st level?
- Grant +2 damage for 24 hours
- Sunder/Mend equipment.

That's just making poor choices. Most characters can't even afford heavy armor at level 1, why would you blow a proficiency on it? The game literally states you shouldn't be able to afford full plate until 3rd level. If you want to build a tanky blacksmith, 2 talents nets you a breastplate and the Guardian sphere, and your starting proficiencies give you a selection of reach weapons to choose from, which you can then use to lock down a huge swath of the battlefield and either damage, debuff, or both.

Quote:


Compare that to a level 1 armorist. He does not need to spend talents to get proficiency, although he could if he wanted. Instead he can spend his talents to cover the same bases of the Blacksmith, and still coming out on-top.
What can he 'do' at 1st level?
- War sphere: Totem of War (granting +2 bonus to damage)
- Creation sphere: Destroy/Repair object (pretty...

Blacksmith has shields, and never needed to spend a proficiency talent on them for armor if he didn't want to since he had insights that removed penalties for wearing and using them if he wanted. Frankly, I think most of the things the Blacksmith can do are distinctly better than any of your listed options, and he can do multiple of them effectively he wanted; Armorist is stuck with a narrow number of spheres due to his regressed casting level, where blacksmith uses all spheres at full efficiency. There's this misconception that the spheres classes need better proficiencies to do their jobs; they don't, and you can't afford the gear that goes with many of those proficiencies at 1st level even if they did.

A human blacksmith who wanted to stat diversify could easily take a 14 DEX and 16 Str, grab wear light armor and a shield, and combine the Warleader sphere with a direct combat sphere like Lancer or Sniper to simultaneously area buff and dish out some pain. 2 talents in Sniper and he can use Thundering Blows alongside deadly shot to blow holes in lightly armored foes or destroy their weapons before they even get in combat range, and still have a talent left over so he can go breastplate and buckler, upgrading to breastplate and heavy shield at 2nd level if he wants. At 3rd level he starts getting crafting and wealth multiplication and can either spend a talent on the full plate he can finally afford, or he can ignore full plate and simply enjoy the benefits of being able to wield a two-handed weapon and heavy shield simultaneously and continue building up his other abilities. With an even distribution between Strength and Dex, he could simply never bother with an armor talent at all.


Splint mail costs 200 gold. banded 250. half plate 600. All of these are heavy armors you can easily afford at level 1. Thats assuming your DM doesnt reward you with full plate at level 1 or 2, or that you dont save up to buy full plate at level 2. You are not buying proficiency you cant use. However, when im forced to put proficinecy into medium armor to get heavy armor, I AM buying proficinecy i dont want to use. Thats tax.

You might call spending all your talents on proficiency poor choices, but if thats the character he wants to play thats the choice youre giving him. He HAS to buy those proficiency, so youre presenting him with "do cool stuff or use the gear you want, not both" at level 1. This is unfair.

Another argument you keep making is "well if your build doesnt work in our system, just use a different build! heres an example of one". Thats not the point. We dont want to say "oh well i guess i cant play the character I want to, guess ill just play the one im allowed to"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll need to check out the Sage to see what happened to him. I quite enjoyed what I saw when I built that character a week ago.

As far as the discussion on 'feat taxes' is concerned, I just find it a little funny that the worst example of this has gone from Combat Expertise and its ilk to something that is completely unnecessary for a class to function well, Armor Proficiency feats.

Sure, your idea might not jive without that super heavy armor or heavier shields, but the class will function completely fine without it. Heck, with some ideas that allow shield/armor AC to contribute to Touch AC, those heavy armors/shields become much more attractive.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Baval wrote:
Splint mail costs 200 gold. banded 250. half plate 600. All of these are heavy armors you can easily afford at level 1. Thats assuming your DM doesnt reward you with full plate at level 1 or 2, or that you dont save up to buy full plate at level 2. You are not buying proficiency you cant use. However, when im forced to put proficinecy into medium armor to get heavy armor, I AM buying proficinecy i dont want to use. Thats tax.

I think everyone is fully aware that there's virtually no reason to wear any of those three armors at level 1. That's just asking for trouble.

That being said, I'm not actually against letting you have proficiency in heavy without proficiency in medium, but it's a variation from how the game works normally and I think it's thematically quite wonky. I know how to lumber around in 50 lbs. of steel but throw an agile breastplate on me and I tie myself in a knot? I'll kick it by the team though.

Also, I did a little digging, I think your comment requesting the armor proficiencies be chopped up was removed because we copy/pasted an entire new Equipment sphere into the doc; any comment attached to something that was too different or moved too far from its original position would have been lost at that time.


Actually im not aware that theres no reason to wear those armors at level 1. My dex 10 Blackmsith gets 3 more AC from wearing that over the breastplate you keep trying to put him in.

And yes, while its true that it changes how the game works, how the game works is not realistic. Light armor fighting styles and heavy armor fighting styles actually have little overlap. Light armor proficiency being a requirement for heavy armor proficiency makes as much sense realistically as requiring someone to be proficient in a long sword before they can take firearm proficiency. theyre just not used the same. Its not that you tie yourself in a knot, its just that youre not used to the weight distribution of the lesser armor so its throwing off your balance and coordination.

thanks for clarifying why my comment was removed, appreciate the concern. (this reads like sarcasm but isnt)


Milo v3 wrote:
N. Jolly wrote:
the new version of the Sage, which has been changed to be less mystic and more in line with the rest of our classes

As someone who was happy to finally find a monk class which actually looked mystical and could actually function as a "Wise old sage you travel to for mystical guidance and training", I hope there wasn't too much mysticism removed from the class.

Edit: and looking at the new version of the class, it was made far less interesting and seems to now just be "martial artist who misses a lot if he tries to attack rather than use manuevers and can heal you between fights".

Edit2: And now I realise am stuck with a 15th level sage build I cannot even convert because it was based around supporting the team with ranged chi gong healing and ranged crippling... brilliant timing on my part... *facepalm*

edit3: Wait.. why were the sage's skills nerfed? That seems rather odd. (I can sort of understand the saves nerf even if I don't agree with it, and martial master's nerf was combined with an additional benefit so it's not a problem).

This is actually part of a larger issue that we've been tackling with.

I love the mystic flavor of the sage, but by the time we were done with the first version and his energy shots and ranged healing and other ki powers, I felt like I'd just re-written Spheres of Power; we could have done the same thing in fewer words by just giving him a caster level, some talents, and perhaps an optional 'healing wave' ability.

We're talking about possibly making an archetype to re-add the mystic flavor back to the class, or simply move the whole class to the gish book since we'll have to cut a few classes anyway, but we were afraid that the old sage was straying too far away from being a martial class toward being a magic user under a different name. Does that make sense?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@wraithguard

again, the class can of course function completely well without it. We could cut off entire spheres from SoP or entire schools from Vancian and Wizards will still work, but youre still taking away choices and options and that isnt fun.

If I want to be a heavy armored barbarian or even rogue, let me and enable those choices in a balanced way. Dont say "thats not how i see that class being played, ill allow it but im going to make it hard to do it"

Like ive said several time, the reason SoP is so successful is because it enables options. people are flocking to a system that inherently nerfs their power because it allows them full customization. We as role playing gamers want to make the character we want to play. The sooner we can start playing the character we envisioned, the happier we are. Make SoM feel like were able to play what we want at level 1, or 2 at the most like SoP does and it will be just as big a success.

@adam

I agree with that on the sage, it was feeling really mystical for SoM. I didnt say anything because the monk isnt much better.


Ssalarn wrote:

The comment thread was closed for several reasons:

1) Many of the comments were out of date regarding their comparisons, not including updates and fixes to talents and classes referenced.
2) We just dropped an expanded Equipment sphere with more robust proficiency packages and actual dedications, so feedback pertaining to the original Equipment sphere was no longer as helpful.
3) The comment thread meandered over subject matter quite a bit and it was simply not possible to respond to the commentary there in any meaningful manner any longer.

So it's not accurate to say that it was closed without addressing any concerns (we did), and we're definitely here to have these conversations, there simply wasn't any value in maintaining that particular comment block any longer due it not being firmly on a single topic, there being an overload of commentary (primarily from one or two people) that was simply too much to respond to in that format, and the comments that were there not being up to date on the current version of the discussed items./QUOTE]

I can now understand your reasoning. If you had stated this as a closing comment (assuming if possible during your edits) I wouldn't have raised this issue.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Baval wrote:
Actually im not aware that theres no reason to wear those armors at level 1. My dex 10 Blackmsith gets 3 more AC from wearing that over the breastplate you keep trying to put him in.

And drowns to death at the first river the party has to cross, or gets murdered with a 10 AC because it takes 40 combat rounds to put it back on. I've literally never been in a game where someone who wore splint mail, banded mail, or halfplate during the early levels of the game didn't die as a direct result of it.

Quote:


And yes, while its true that it changes how the game works, how the game works is not realistic. Light armor fighting styles and heavy armor fighting styles actually have little overlap. Light armor proficiency being a requirement for heavy armor proficiency makes as much sense realistically as requiring someone to be proficient in a long sword before they can take firearm proficiency. theyre just not used the same. Its not that you tie yourself in a knot, its just that youre not used to the weight distribution of the lesser armor so its throwing off your balance and coordination.

While I think there is a disconnect between light and heavy, I don't think there is between medium and heavy. My experience, such as it is, with the military, SCA, etc. is typically that they put you in about half of whatever your full load-out looks like until you get accustomed to the weight, and then slowly start adding the rest of the pieces on as you go, which is essentially the same as moving from medium to heavy armor. You start with the chain skirt and breastplate, and start adding on the gauntlets, greaves, etc. as you become accustomed to the movement (in the military it was lots and lots of running with increasing amounts of riot gear on, starting with the bullet resistant vest and then stacking up from there).

Quote:


thanks for clarifying why my comment was removed, appreciate the concern. (this reads like sarcasm but isnt)

Yeah, no worries, I definitely didn't want anyone feeling like they were simply being ignored, so I took your concern seriously and did a little digging and experimenting to see if I couldn't figure out what happened.

Even if someone on the team pushes back on a piece of feedback, it doesn't mean we're ignoring you; it just means we're looking at the picture from a different angle and we want to make a very careful and informed decision about if or what changes need to be made. As Wraithguard pointed out above, we're not talking about mechanics that a class hinges on to work at this point, we're talking about fine cost adjustments and what certain benefits should realistically cost for each character. You all also don't have the ability to see what's outside the preview; what the other spheres really do, what the Legendary Talents do, etc. We've got to keep in mind what you don't see as well as what you do at this point and sometimes that means pushing a little bit now to keep something where it is so we can keep something you can't see at a reasonable functioning point until the full playtest goes live. There are currently a lot of ways to "tank up" in Spheres of Might, and that's something we have to keep in mind. In a system where most character's entire attack routine hinges on their first attack, truly tanky characters who can push their AC to the point that they can simply shut that attack down are a big deal, and the cost of getting there needs to be reflective of that power. For example, in the Equipment sphere, full plate isn't just a +9 to your AC, it's also potentially a +4 to your CMD. If you really, really, tank up, with the right build you can get to a point where you're very rarely getting hit, and even more rarely having the follow-up riders connect. You need to be paying something for that.

Which brings me to the cardinal rule of playtesting- I can't give you something and take it away later without looking like an asshat. It's one of the reasons I waited to add an additional good save to the Blacksmith- early playtesting was indicating that it was a very potent class, and I wanted to gauge everything before adding an option I couldn't back away on later if it proved problematic. I don't think it will, so I added it, but it's much easier to give than to take, so we have to be very careful with these fine adjustments. If I present a class as a full BAB and then decide it needs to be 3/4 BAB, you're going to hate me in a way you wouldn't have if I had started at 3/4 BAB. If I start a class with heavy armor proficiency and then take it away, you're going to be more pissed at me than if it had never had it to begin with. Long story short, it's much easier in the long run to swing a little under and then scale up, then it is to swing high and try to back down. I've done enough playtests to know that this is just the way it is. I honestly have some concerns that we've been a little too reactive to feedback at this point with how incomplete a picture everyone has, but we really value your input and participation, so I don't know that I'd do anything differently up to this point. So for me, I'm going to really poke and prod and dig for the source of your discontent, and try to see if there's a real underlying mechanical issue there or if it's something else, and I'm going to avoid making those changes until I'm totally sure we're all correct about the change needing to be made, particularly right now when you're seeing less than half of what's out there.


I usually wear half plate on my tank character Baval. I take the armor off when i need to cross a river, and while yes getting caught with it off can be a problem thats why i have a party. A single encounter should be completable with one party member not optimized, and i still have my shield.

I understand that not taking my side doesnt mean youre ignoring me, I was a little miffed about being deleted without a response. Even some of my other suggestions which havent been responded to are at least still open. But it was due to a simple mistake, so no worries.

And you are right, if you really tank up you can make it so you cant get hit, and you do have to pay something for that; the talents you chose to get to that point (which can and should include heavy armor proficiency and tower shield proficinecy, but shouldnt include medium armor proficiency and buckler proficiency).

That would be like saying "At level 20 Sphere Casters can summon 4 creatures that have 15 HD, you have to pay SOMETHING for that, so were adding Proficinecy: Summoning Stone and Proficiency: Magic Circles before you can summon properly". Or worse, making Proficiency: Tower Shield required for summoning, something the mage will never use but now suddenly has to take.

I do understand hesitating to give things before adequate playtesting though. Youve already said youre open to the idea, so ill stop arguing my case now.

I do want to clarify one thing though, im not arguing for the existing classes getting better base proficiency, as i like the idea of those classes starting as bare templates you customize, i just want the taxes removed from the customization options.


*Pauses in the midst of making a drink*

One concern I've heard recently is a lack of utility for things outside of combat - many people do feel that martials have far fewer options than they should there, and are looking for things to help with that. Are we likely to see much more of that as things continue being developed?

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Baval wrote:

I usually wear half plate on my tank character Baval. I take the armor off when i need to cross a river, and while yes getting caught with it off can be a problem thats why i have a party. A single encounter should be completable with one party member not optimized, and i still have my shield.

I understand that not taking my side doesnt mean youre ignoring me, I was a little miffed about being deleted without a response. Even some of my other suggestions which havent been responded to are at least still open. But it was due to a simple mistake, so no worries.

And you are right, if you really tank up you can make it so you cant get hit, and you do have to pay something for that; the talents you chose to get to that point (which can and should include heavy armor proficiency and tower shield proficinecy, but shouldnt include medium armor proficiency and buckler proficiency).

That would be like saying "At level 20 Sphere Casters can summon 4 creatures that have 15 HD, you have to pay SOMETHING for that, so were adding Proficinecy: Summoning Stone and Proficiency: Magic Circles before you can summon properly". Or worse, making Proficiency: Tower Shield required for summoning, something the mage will never use but now suddenly has to take.

I see it a little differently; one of my favorite things about spheres of power was that it imposed a certain amount of order and logic on magic. Instead of the raw power fantasy wish fulfillment that is Vancian casting, there's now a logical progression to magic; if you want to learn how to cast delayed blast fireball, you first need to learn how to shoot magical energy as a weapon, then you need to learn how to shape it into fire, then into an exploding ball, then how to set it on a timer.

To me, the Equipment proficiencies are very much in the same vein. If I want to learn how to run around in half my body weight of steel, I need to be able to run around in all the things that are less than half my body weight in steel. I do understand what you're saying though.

Quote:


I do understand hesitating to give things before adequate playtesting though. Youve already said youre open to the idea, so ill stop arguing my case now.

I do want to clarify one thing though, im not arguing for the existing classes getting better base proficiency, as i like the idea of those classes starting as bare templates you customize, i just want the taxes removed from the customization options.

Totally understood, and it's something we're actively discussing as a team.

Rednal wrote:

*Pauses in the midst of making a drink*

One concern I've heard recently is a lack of utility for things outside of combat - many people do feel that martials have far fewer options than they should there, and are looking for things to help with that. Are we likely to see much more of that as things continue being developed?

Something like half the spheres we haven't released yet have in and out of combat facility, and we're keeping an eye on the existing spheres to watch for opportunities to build out where mechanically appropriate.

But of the options we haven't shown, Scout grants Perception and Stealth bonuses and has tons of in and out of combat facility, Fencing includes a lot of Bluff options and some of those are great for out of combat use as well, Equestrian has some good animal related options that are good in and out of combat, I believe Warleader has some options that are more appropriate for social situations than combat ones.... And there's some ongoing discussion about whether we want a "Social Dueling" sphere, or if we want to just apply any talents to that to the spheres they'd be most appropriate for. The general skill related spheres are something like:

Athletics: Acrobatics, Climb, Swim

Equestrian- Handle Animal, Ride

Fencing- Bluff

Gladiator- Intimidate

Scout- Perception, Stealth (some Knowledge overlap here as well, since you can use Perception in place of Knowledge to learn things about your opponents)

Traps- Craft and Disable Device

Scoundrel- Sleight of Hand

Warleader- Diplomacy

Some of those interact more with the associated skills than others, but that's something we're looking at. The focus of this book is very much going to be combat so the talents will most likely be skewed in that direction, but I don't think you can really make non-casters as diverse and interesting as casters without expanding their non-combat capabilities, so we'll continue to do that whenever we can. There's also a thread over on GitP where Adam is feeling out a skill sphere expansion.


I'd definitely suggest including at least one of those in the playtest when it seems right to do so, and maybe an update post addressing that and showing how the system can help people when they're not smashing things. XD


should probably show some more utility focused spheres and talents for the next preview, assuming there is one


Is sniping still in, by the way? It's not in preview 3.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AdamMeyers wrote:

This is actually part of a larger issue that we've been tackling with.

I love the mystic flavor of the sage, but by the time we were done with the first version and his energy shots and ranged healing and other ki powers, I felt like I'd just re-written Spheres of Power; we could have done the same thing in fewer words by just giving him a caster level, some talents, and perhaps an optional 'healing wave' ability.

In my view, there is nothing wrong with a supernatural martial, especially when all of the . Unchained monk shows you can make martials with supernatural ability while having it still just be a "Martial with some minor utility stuff". Also.... spheres of power isn't exactly very good at the whole monk thing considering you'd more be "wizard who wears monk robes and talks about philosophy" rather than "martial artist who can manipulate his ki", can't even be an unarmed warrior with spheres of power unless your concept includes covering your fists in fire or electricity.

Quote:
We're talking about possibly making an archetype to re-add the mystic flavor back to the class, or simply move the whole class to the gish book since we'll have to cut a few classes anyway, but we were afraid that the old sage was straying too far away from being a martial class toward being a magic user under a different name. Does that make sense?

Makes sense, gish book would let you give it supernatural powers without risking feeling like the supernatural aspect is too much. Though I'd hope that being in a gish book doesn't mean it'd be saddled with sphere powers. Though, part of me still feels the "is it a martial" aspect is coming from it's poor ability to attack people unarmed than spirit shot and ranged healing (though I do agree the area effect spirit shot was rather mage-y).


The Sage's rework still leaves me concerned for the biggest issue the class has in my opinion: its low BAB for the purposes of talents and feats. At the moment it seems geared towards having a big numerical advantage on combat maneuvers, but overall less effectiveness when they're used at higher levels (For instance, many Scoundrel talents upgrade at 10 BAB, which isn't until level 20 for the Sage). Personally, I'd rather have the wise old master class be lacking in class features in exchange for more effectiveness on talents, rather than the other way around.


@milo

couldnt you just not take any elemental talents and use the base bludgeoning damage with energy blade and improved energy blade? Then say youre wrapping your fist with your Ki (which unless you took the magical signs drawback, you could totally say was invisible)

then take a bunch of enhancement talents, and the war rallying talents with the Battle Manipulation drawback that makes it so you count as a totem for rally talents but cant place totems.

It could definitely work. Thats what I love about SoP, with just a little refluffing and imagination you can make any concept that involves magical abilities a reality

Verdant Wheel

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dropping in to give my opinion on Spheres of Talent.

(because I don't have a giant in the playground account per kickstarter recommendation)

I think the answer is yes, pending the success of Spheres of Might (which I believe will actualize in a big way with the community) with a caveat:

Because combat is at the center of the Pathfinder game, I don't think it'd just be as straight-forward as releasing a third book with 10 new "rogues" - because, in my experience, with the arguable exception of the Rogue base class, all classes either have Power (spellcasting) and/or Might (big attack bonuses), which constrains the design-space around focusing solely on Talent (skills).

So, I think the smart play it would be to think of a third Sphere system as something that sits atop the base two, which perhaps 2 or 3 new classes based entirely around Talent, and twice or thrice (or more) that many also utilizing Power and Might accordingly.

Short answer: Yes!


agreed, and i thought that was always the intent. I dont want a skill system you have to buy in to, i want a total replacement of the skill system for all classes

Verdant Wheel

Crazy Idea:

What if Sage were an INT class based entirely on Extraordinary abilities?

With a built-in check against using Supernatural abilities, Spell-like abilities, or Spells that were somehow entirely incompatible with his base class abilities.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
rainzax wrote:

Crazy Idea:

What if Sage were an INT class based entirely on Extraordinary abilities?

What you want is the scholar class the dev's have talked about. Also changing a class from "Wise martial artist with chi powers" to "generic smart person" seems like a rather odd shift.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Azten wrote:
Is sniping still in, by the way? It's not in preview 3.

Yeah, just not in this preview because we were tinkering with the archery spheres a bit. Sniping is largely the same though, at least in base function.

rainzax wrote:

Crazy Idea:

What if Sage were an INT class based entirely on Extraordinary abilities?

With a built-in check against using Supernatural abilities, Spell-like abilities, or Spells that were somehow entirely incompatible with his base class abilities.

We kind of already have something like in that in the Scholar.


So I have some questions about the archetypes,both in SoM and in the BoG (Book of Gishes).

Should we expect basic conversion archetypes like the Sphere [Insert Caster Class Here] from SoP and Expanded Options? Or something more detailed like The warp sphere using Armiger that was mentioned earlier in the thread?

Will all classes (From Paizo and SoP) get mighty archetypes, or just the martial ones? If just martial what qualifies as martial, is Bloodrager a martial? A Magus?

Any idea how many classes will be in the BoG?

I realize the SoM base classes and spheres are a priority just wondering if there are any plans yet.

And some thoughts on Sphere Skills (Spheres of Excellence as I think of it).

I'd to have spheres like athletics that focus and develop skills. Or maybe something like the equipment sphere that is a grab bag of skill based power ups like damage buffs from identifying monsters. And more things like Gladiator sphere boosting intimidate. That will make skills more interesting, hopefully without removing reason to invest in skills.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

jedi8187 wrote:

So I have some questions about the archetypes,both in SoM and in the BoG (Book of Gishes).

Should we expect basic conversion archetypes like the Sphere [Insert Caster Class Here] from SoP and Expanded Options? Or something more detailed like The warp sphere using Armiger that was mentioned earlier in the thread?

Yes. You should see both, as appropriate for the particular book. More basic archetypes in SoM, probably more unique archetypes in the gish book.

Quote:


Will all classes (From Paizo and SoP) get mighty archetypes, or just the martial ones? If just martial what qualifies as martial, is Bloodrager a martial? A Magus?

It's really going to depend on how things look as we get clearer numbers for word counts and things like that. I, personally, consider all the 4 level casters "martials" and will be looking at working on including those. Some 6 level casters may be appropriate, but that'll really just be a case by case thing.

Quote:


Any idea how many classes will be in the BoG?

Looks like one or two currently, that could change.

Quote:


I realize the SoM base classes and spheres are a priority just wondering if there are any plans yet.

And some thoughts on Sphere Skills (Spheres of Excellence as I think of it).

I'd to have spheres like athletics that focus and develop skills. Or maybe something like the equipment sphere that is a grab bag of skill based power ups like damage buffs from identifying monsters. And more things like Gladiator sphere boosting intimidate. That will make skills more interesting, hopefully without removing reason to invest in skills.

Noted!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spheres of Excellence seems like a pretty good name IMHO.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
N-D B wrote:
Spheres of Excellence seems like a pretty good name IMHO.

I agree.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LuniasM wrote:
N-D B wrote:
Spheres of Excellence seems like a pretty good name IMHO.
I agree.

Mostly replying to get the 600th post, but yeah, I like it too. Also check out the Striker, it has an update to make it MORE video gamey.

551 to 600 of 795 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / [Drop Dead Studios] Spheres of Combat Kickstarter All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.