Spheres of Power: Life Handbook Open Beta

[EldritchWeaver]

The type of damage used to be explicitly positive energy, but a couple of the other authors felt that it would be inappropriate. Instead we simply left it untyped.

Can't you die by being overloaded by the positive energy plane? So positive energy makes sense then.

[AmberVael]

Can't you die by being overloaded by the positive energy plane? So positive energy makes sense then.

Using that to justify a damage effect is... strange. Positive energy cures, bolsters, and strengthens. Even when it kills you, it never deals damage. It fills you up with energy until you pop like an overfilled water balloon.

[A.J.Gibson]

So it's been about 2 weeks now, and I want to get a bit of feedback on some of the general ideas presented in the book.

1 - Anathema was introduced as a way to have a positive energy blaster. Originally, it was going to work with both the Life sphere and Positive Energy abilities like Channel Energy, but it became too difficult to write and balance that way. Is it viable as is? Is the alignment restriction too much? Should it support negative energy as well?
2 - Is the Scarred Veteran necessary? The original idea was the Life sphere as an at-will ability, invigorating and suppressing conditions as a swift. It's sort of moved away from the Life sphere, and the Worldsoul Incarnate has stolen a lot of its thunder.
3 - The book introduces several ways of 'harming' using the Life sphere; namely the Pharmakon archetype, several monk powers, and a collection of talents: Affliction, Contagion, Disruption, and Sanctify. The basic idea was that a dedicated healer could pick up a talent and be a threat, without having to grab destruction. Is this too much? I think some people have trouble with Contagion?
4 - Has the support-caster roll been adequately developed? I have Taste for Victory, Sustaining Vitality and Lingering Resilience; is this enough, or is there something I missed?
5 - Is invigorate useful now?

[EldritchWeaver]

So it's been about 2 weeks now, and I want to get a bit of feedback on some of the general ideas presented in the book.

1 - Anathema was introduced as a way to have a positive energy blaster. Originally, it was going to work with both the Life sphere and Positive Energy abilities like Channel Energy, but it became too difficult to write and balance that way. Is it viable as is? Is the alignment restriction too much? Should it support negative energy as well?

I haven't had a chance yet to actually use it for my build and in play, but at least a covenant hedgewitch gets class level/2 damage dice, so it's comparable to an unaugmented destructive blast. There is no option to increase the damage dice with spending a spell point, but then the question is, if you want a positive energy blaster on equal footing with a Destruction user. Meaning that all options can be used, just for the blast type positive energy. In that case I'd be missing a rule stating that Divine Anathema is a blast type and opens up Destruction talents. If you want to keep the damage less than a Destruction blaster, I'd still like a change that Divine Anathema counts as the Destruction sphere for blast shape purposes and any feats building of blast shapes. That would remove Shaped Anathema and allow to spend magic talents on this instead.

Alignment restriction: Only Sacred Anathema cares for alignment. It can be loosened/replaced by requesting positive energy usage. But I don't really see a reason why you can't turn it into a feat which doesn't care for the type as well. Using negative energy harms good people instead and would benefit versatile channelers as well.

2 - Is the Scarred Veteran necessary? The original idea was the Life sphere as an at-will ability, invigorating and suppressing conditions as a swift. It's sort of moved away from the Life sphere, and the Worldsoul Incarnate has stolen a lot of its thunder.

I suppose that it doesn't tie in directly into the Life sphere anymore, but the abilities still seem worthwhile. Looks like a candidate for cutting nonetheless. Maybe you find a better place for this.

3 - The book introduces several ways of 'harming' using the Life sphere; namely the Pharmakon archetype, several monk powers, and a collection of talents: Affliction, Contagion, Disruption, and Sanctify. The basic idea was that a dedicated healer could pick up a talent and be a threat, without having to grab destruction. Is this too much? I think some people have trouble with Contagion?

I actually like the idea of having a way to harm people, but IMO the cost for the effects seems to be high. Namely having to pay SPs, which are required for healing as well. I miss a way to debuff enemies without having to pay SPs. Dark, Death and Destruction all provide such an opportunity.

4 - Has the support-caster roll been adequately developed? I have Taste for Victory, Sustaining Vitality and Lingering Resilience; is this enough, or is there something I missed?

Off the top of my mind I can't think of anything, what might be missing, but at least what you already have seems useful.

5 - Is invigorate useful now?

Studied Healing, otherwise a great feat, should affect invigorate as well. Nonetheless, it seems that the best combination is Greater Invigorate + Deeper Invigorate (+ Healthy Invigorate to go over max hp + modified Studied Healing to improve CL) to get overall 2 * (CL + CAM). I'm not sure if people who complained about merely having CL + CAM are satisfied with merely doubling this. Especially as that is the limit. Maybe tying in other talents which increase cure for some additional increase? Or at least allow Deeper Invigorate taken more than once?

[A.J.Gibson]

About time I addressed all this:

I haven't had a chance yet to actually use it for my build and in play, but at least a covenant hedgewitch gets class level/2 damage dice, so it's comparable to an unaugmented destructive blast. There is no option to increase the damage dice with spending a spell point, but then the question is, if you want a positive energy blaster on equal footing with a Destruction user. Meaning that all options can be used, just for the blast type positive energy. In that case I'd be missing a rule stating that Divine Anathema is a blast type and opens up Destruction talents. If you want to keep the damage less than a Destruction blaster, I'd still like a change that Divine Anathema counts as the Destruction sphere for blast shape purposes and any feats building of blast shapes. That would remove Shaped Anathema and allow to spend magic talents on this instead.

Alignment restriction: Only Sacred Anathema cares for alignment. It can be loosened/replaced by requesting positive energy usage. But I don't really see a reason why you can't turn it into a feat which doesn't care for the type as well. Using negative energy harms good people instead and would benefit versatile channelers as well.

I've revised anathema to make it stronger. The way I figure it, it's comparable to destruction, with positives and negatives: it does a less resisted damage type, but it has less range and doesn't work on everything. It also swaps 'spend a point to double damage' for Gather Energy, which I personally think is a trade up. The real purpose of anathema is to give paladin and clerics (and I guess warpriests) an alternative to the destruction sphere. Dedicated blasters will probably still want to take it, however.

I actually like the idea of having a way to harm people, but IMO the cost for the effects seems to be high. Namely having to pay SPs, which are required for healing as well. I miss a way to debuff enemies without having to pay SPs. Dark, Death and Destruction all provide such an opportunity.

I introduced the harm mechanics for reasons similar to anathema (in fact, they were the same mechanic for a while, but I found it too difficult to balance both). Every caster needs a way to do damage at some point, and limiting damage to the destruction sphere is a recipe for homogeneity among casters. That said, I don't know if I want there to be good 'free' harming. Harming is supposed to be a secondary ability of the sphere: if you want to spend every round of combat kicking ass, maybe the Life sphere shouldn't be your first pick.

Studied Healing, otherwise a great feat, should affect invigorate as well. Nonetheless, it seems that the best combination is Greater Invigorate + Deeper Invigorate (+ Healthy Invigorate to go over max hp + modified Studied Healing to improve CL) to get overall 2 * (CL + CAM). I'm not sure if people who complained about merely having CL + CAM are satisfied with merely doubling this. Especially as that is the limit. Maybe tying in other talents which increase cure for some additional increase? Or at least allow Deeper Invigorate taken more than once?

I think Deeper Invigorate should probably do more. The original version was stackable like Greater Healing, but that seemed too strong, so I'll have to do something else. I don't think I want to make Studied Healing affect Invigorate, however. SH addresses the desire of people to play the party healer without being a dedicated healer (like the Folk Healer is). Invigorate isn't essential to a party, it's more of an extra for support casters, who will have full caster level already. Plus, as you said, it's a pretty good feat as it is without another buff.

[EldritchWeaver]

I've revised anathema to make it stronger. The way I figure it, it's comparable to destruction, with positives and negatives: it does a less resisted damage type, but it has less range and doesn't work on everything. It also swaps 'spend a point to double damage' for Gather Energy, which I personally think is a trade up. The real purpose of anathema is to give paladin and clerics (and I guess warpriests) an alternative to the destruction sphere. Dedicated blasters will probably still want to take it, however.

Somehow I forgot about the inbuilt Gather Energy. Still, Divine Anathema has to gateway blastshape talents directly. Otherwise you force people either to use feats for Shaped Anathema which are needed for something else or to take Destruction just to be able to invest magic talents instead. The former limits the number of possible builds. The latter goes against your design goal.

On that note, what is currently the purpose of Sacred Anathema? To allow some kind of selective blast for when you employ e.g. Explosive Orb?

I introduced the harm mechanics for reasons similar to anathema (in fact, they were the same mechanic for a while, but I found it too difficult to balance both). Every caster needs a way to do damage at some point, and limiting damage to the destruction sphere is a recipe for homogeneity among casters. That said, I don't know if I want there to be good 'free' harming. Harming is supposed to be a secondary ability of the sphere: if you want to spend every round of combat kicking ass, maybe the Life sphere shouldn't be your first pick.

Well, the cost of good free harming is quite high, compared to other spheres. Let's assume we build an anathema feat which mimics Affliction. Or says you can use Affliction via anathema. This requires two feats and possible a magic talent to get a single target (ranged) attack. The basic effect you can get cheaper using Death's exhausting strike (no SP necessary) and which is upgradable, too. Unless you're playing a human spending the feats on this, this build requires level 3, by which the duration of exhausting strike has caught up with Affliction. Upgrading the range costs feats, not magic talents. Unless you take my suggestion regarding the blast shapes, increasing the number of targets costs feats instead of magic talents. The other parts seem to have equal costs. So IMO you are disadvantaged enough compared to other builds without paying SPs that giving some debuffs no SP costs is justifyable.

I think Deeper Invigorate should probably do more. The original version was stackable like Greater Healing, but that seemed too strong, so I'll have to do something else. I don't think I want to make Studied Healing affect Invigorate, however. SH addresses the desire of people to play the party healer without being a dedicated healer (like the Folk Healer is). Invigorate isn't essential to a party, it's more of an extra for support casters, who will have full caster level already. Plus, as you said, it's a pretty good feat as it is without another buff.

I can imagine a Low-Caster spending two or three magic talents on Life just to help a primary healer out. For those is Studied Healing valuable. Expanding SH to cover that case isn't overpowered. Instead it can be the push to make people employ invigorate at all.

[A.J.Gibson]

Well, the cost of good free harming is quite high, compared to other spheres. Let's assume we build an anathema feat which mimics Affliction. Or says you can use Affliction via anathema. This requires two feats and possible a magic talent to get a single target (ranged) attack. The basic effect you can get cheaper using Death's exhausting strike (no SP necessary) and which is upgradable, too. Unless you're playing a human spending the feats on this, this build requires level 3, by which the duration of exhausting strike has caught up with Affliction. Upgrading the range costs feats, not magic talents. Unless you take my suggestion regarding the blast shapes, increasing the number of targets costs feats instead of magic talents. The other parts seem to have equal costs. So IMO you are disadvantaged enough compared to other builds without paying SPs that giving some debuffs no SP costs is justifyable.

I'm generally trying to avoid giving Life an at-will attack form, because I feel that should be the limitation of the Life sphere - it can harm, but only when it has to. The various harming effects exist so that dedicated healers can have an option when they get trapped in a corner, but characters that intend to be laying out the pain constantly should probably be looking at another sphere. That being said, I'm going to make contagion free to use, since it has other limitations on how often it can be used, and affliction is much better otherwise.

[A.J.Gibson]

I've been working lately on trying to give more support options for Life mages. The Life sphere suffers from being an 'out of combat' sphere because of the action cost of healing, hence so many abilities to let you combine it with other actions, such as Contagion and Taste of Victory. 4e did the right thing here by making a lot of healing abilities swift/minor actions or by giving healers powers that healed in addition to attacking (although a lot of them were weird from a fluff perspective). For support options, I wanted to give the Life caster abilities that would be good in combat, and at the same time would not compete with the Enhancement or Protection spheres (the kings of out of combat and defensive buffing). So I've taken the idea of the Sustained Vitality talent and expanded it into other talents. Each talent gives a creature a strong buff when the Life caster heals them, but which only lasts until the next time they get damaged or fail a saving throw - giving the Life caster incentive to heal them again. Thoughts?

[EldritchWeaver]

You haven't mentioned why you want to use the Shaped Anathema feat instead of Extra Magical Talent for blast shape talents. Can you please elaborate your decision?

[A.J.Gibson]

You haven't mentioned why you want to use the Shaped Anathema feat instead of Extra Magical Talent for blast shape talents. Can you please elaborate your decision?

It's for people who have positive energy features (and anathema) but are not actual casters. The Warrior of the Holy Light Paladin being a good (and possibly only) example.

[EldritchWeaver]

It's for people who have positive energy features (and anathema) but are not actual casters. The Warrior of the Holy Light Paladin being a good (and possibly only) example.

Checking the prereqs for Extra Magic Talent, I see that problem now. Still, you could keep Shaped Anathema, while still add the note that Divine Anathema counts as Destruction for blast shape purposes.

[Eldaran]

Hi, wanted to give some feedback from playing a Life orientated Incanter at level 15.

Most of the Life handbook talents are great, in particular Sustaining Vitality and similar effects are very good, it's a nice way to handle buffing while keeping unique facets of the Life sphere. The one that grants movespeed seems extremely weak though, maybe because we get Haste from another caster, but +10 speed is nothing compared to +4 AC and saves. Compare Fleet to Dodge, both weak feats, but +4 AC is 4x as good as Dodge (and that's not counting the save bonus) while +10 speed is only 2x as good as Fleet.

Adrenaline Surge seems really fun, though I haven't actually had a chance to use it yet. I think the additional 1 SP cost when used with a Mass spell is good.

My main qualm with the book is Deeper Invigorate. This talent is absurdly powerful. At level 15 I have a CL of 20 (15+4 Staff +1 Ioun Stone) and a 9 Int mod, which means that Invigorate gives 116 temp HP for 1 SP, though usually 2 SP because I use it with Healthy Invigorate (3 SP to hit the whole party). This is only 3 talents invested in Invigorate. This means Invigorate is far more powerful than my Cure ability, even with the Healing Domain and quite a few talents improving it (6d8+60)

Temporary HP is already more powerful than healing to begin with, in particular because you can use it prior to combat. At level 15 this is effectively doubling my max HP and is a 50% increase to the tankiest member of the party. It's the equivalent of getting the Toughness feat more than 7 times, or half the benefit of over +14 Con (no bonus to Fort saves, but all the HP). The difference is even more pronounced at lower levels. At level 5 full caster with CL 6 and 5 Int mod is handing out 44 temps, almost 9 times their level.

This is compounded by Sudden Invigoration allowing you to dispense temp HP as an immediate action. This is better than using Quicken Spell at 1/4 the SP cost. This would be extremely good without Deeper Invigorate, but combined with it you can have your whole party eat tons of AoE damage and undo it in the blink of an eye.

My suggestions to fix this would be either to remove Deeper Invigorate entirely, it already has Greater Invigorate to buff it nicely, and leave Sudden Invigoration alone. Or change Deeper Invigorate to give +50% more temp HP without an SP and 100% more with an SP (half its current values) and change Sudden Invigoration to cost 2 or 3 SP.

These changes would leave Invigorate as a viable option without invalidating all other forms of healing or temp HP.

[EldritchWeaver]

Invigorate notes

Woah, I completely missed those interactions. Even if nerfed those talents seem to be worthwhile for a character of mine. Thanks for inspiring me!

[A.J.Gibson]

Hi, wanted to give some feedback from playing a Life orientated Incanter at level 15.

Most of the Life handbook talents are great, in particular Sustaining Vitality and similar effects are very good, it's a nice way to handle buffing while keeping unique facets of the Life sphere. The one that grants movespeed seems extremely weak though, maybe because we get Haste from another caster, but +10 speed is nothing compared to +4 AC and saves. Compare Fleet to Dodge, both weak feats, but +4 AC is 4x as good as Dodge (and that's not counting the save bonus) while +10 speed is only 2x as good as Fleet.

I haven't done a lot of work on Life lately - real life stuff interfering, and at the current publishing rate it won't be out until next year - but it's pretty close, I think. anathema and the 'vitality' talents are both in flux somewhat, and I suspect Scarred Veteran will get cut.

The vitality talents are a way to let Life have some boosting power, while rewarding using Life during battle (since the buffs will probably get ended during battle) and not impinging on protection or enhancement. The issue is that characters will often get healed after battle, and then they'll receive these benefits until the next time they get damaged - which probably won't be for a while. I'm not certain what I'm going to do: limit the duration, or make the boosts less useful outside of combat.

Adrenaline Surge seems really fun, though I haven't actually had a chance to use it yet. I think the additional 1 SP cost when used with a Mass spell is good.

Thanks. One of my goals is to steal ideas from 4e to make playing support casters more fun.

My main qualm with the book is Deeper Invigorate. This talent is absurdly powerful. At level 15 I have a CL of 20 (15+4 Staff +1 Ioun Stone) and a 9 Int mod, which means that Invigorate gives 116 temp HP for 1 SP, though usually 2 SP because I use it with Healthy Invigorate (3 SP to hit the whole party). This is only 3 talents invested in Invigorate. This means Invigorate is far more powerful than my Cure ability, even with the Healing Domain and quite a few talents improving it (6d8+60)

Temporary HP is already more powerful than healing to begin with, in particular because you can use it prior to combat. At level 15 this is effectively doubling my max HP and is a 50% increase to the tankiest member of the party. It's the equivalent of getting the Toughness feat more than 7 times, or half the benefit of over +14 Con (no bonus to Fort saves, but all the HP). The difference is even more pronounced at lower levels. At level 5 full caster with CL 6 and 5 Int mod is handing out 44 temps, almost 9 times their level.

This is compounded by Sudden Invigoration allowing you to dispense temp HP as an immediate action. This is better than using Quicken Spell at 1/4 the SP cost. This would be extremely good without Deeper Invigorate, but combined with it you can have your whole party eat tons of AoE damage and undo it in the blink of an eye.

My suggestions to fix this would be either to remove Deeper Invigorate entirely, it already has Greater Invigorate to buff it nicely, and leave Sudden Invigoration alone. Or change Deeper Invigorate to give +50% more temp HP without an SP and 100% more with an SP (half its current values) and change Sudden Invigoration to cost 2 or 3 SP.

These changes would leave Invigorate as a viable option without invalidating all other forms of healing or temp HP.

Math. Yum. I've been thinking about Deeper Invigorate as well: maybe I'll drop it to 1 spell point for double temps, and leave it at that. SI is a bit trickier, because there is already an invigorate rally in the war book (which I also wrote), that it has to compete with.

[stack]

My rule of thumb is that if you can drop more THP than a vitalist, something is wrong. That would be character level x5 single target, - 5 per additional target. Since vitalists are amazing dedicated healers and awesome at THP buffing, approaching that level should require noticeable investment.

[A.J.Gibson]

So to summarize:

Basic invigorate:
Temps up to CL, limited by damage taken, 1 hour duration

Greater Invigorate:
Add casting ability modifier to the amount of temps granted, increase duration to 1 hour per caster level.

Healthy Invigorate:
Spend a spell point to go beyond damage taken.

Deeper Invigorate:
Spend a spell point to double temps (CL, + CAM if Greater Invigorate)

Sudden Invigorate:
Invigorate as an immediate action.

I hadn't realized that healthy costs a spell point. I'm thinking now that Deeper might actually be fine without the spell point cost. Compare:
Cure+Greater Healing * 2 = CL*3 hit points gained, limited by damage taken (obviously) for 1 spell point
Invigorate+Greater Invigorate+Deeper Invigorate = CL*2 + CAM*2 temps gains for 1 hour, limited by damage taken

Cure has the advantage that it stacks with itself (being permanent), but invigorate is free, and CAM*2 is probably going to be comparable to CL (at least past level 10).

[Eldaran]

You're still missing two important factors. Healthy Invigorate can be cast before battle, giving it a very powerful action economy advantage. Having the entire party go into battle with a bunch of temporary HP makes them extremely durable.

Second, Sudden Invigorate is immediate action, the most powerful action available. Not only is it effectively Quicken Spell, but it even lets you do it to save an ally taking damage (and you're not spending an SP for Healthy Invigorate at that point). Keep in mind there's nothing stopping Sudden Invigorate from applying to the whole party via Mass Healing or Mass Command. This means the "healing" output of Invigorate is potentially twice that of Cure, though slightly more situational since it won't stack.

[A.J.Gibson]

I've discussed the Deeper Invigorate issue with some of other writers, and opinion varies. I kind of like 1 spell point add +CL and CAM (it gives you a reason to actually take Greater Invigorate), while others prefer +CL with no cost (and only being able to take the talent once, unlike Greater Healing). Of course, the book won't be out for a while (currently we're getting about one book every 3 months, with Dark now in layout, and Mind and Creation next, that puts Life around next February).

I've altered the Vitality talents so they last one minute or until you're harmed. I know the longer time limit was more interesting, but trying to come up with bonuses that were useful in combat while being safe to give all day was too difficult. Energizing Vitality now grants +30ft to speed.

[Eldaran]

Yikes, one book every 3 months, even though a lot of the material is written, and it's being done by multiple authors? Why such long delays? I was really looking forward to more of the Spheres getting expanded.

I think I prefer adding CL once without an SP as well. Adding CAM more than once seems pretty unusual, I can't think of any effects that let you do that currently. The extended duration on Greater Invigorate is already pretty nice, also it can be a lot more competitive with CL on low or mid casters.

I'll see how the new duration on the Vitality talents work, definitely makes them more of an in combat buff, which is not a bad thing.

[EldritchWeaver]

The bottleneck seems to be Adam and his layouter. There was a Kickstarter post for Skybourne about this.

[Mehangel]

I've discussed the Deeper Invigorate issue with some of other writers, and opinion varies. I kind of like 1 spell point add +CL and CAM (it gives you a reason to actually take Greater Invigorate), while others prefer +CL with no cost (and only being able to take the talent once, unlike Greater Healing).

I think I also prefer the +CL with no cost.

[A.J.Gibson]

I've finally decided on a version of anathema I like. The big issue with it until now was that there were so many gateways into it, and balancing them was an issue. My solution is to have a different entry feat depending on what class feature you are using to enter, with a few cookies for the weaker options to balance things.

In addition, I've given anathema some limitations: it doesn't work with the destruction sphere, doesn't work with negative energy, and only affects evil targets. This is supposed to be a way to create a 'holy blaster', and my attempts to make it work with everything was turning it into Destruction Sphere v2. I think these limitations will give the ability focus, and make it interesting for the (now fewer) characters who will find it attractive.

There have also been made changes to the vitality feats, in light of feedback indicating their strength when used together.

With these changes, I think the book is pretty close to done. There was a cleric archetype I was toying with, but I think I'll save it.

[stack]

Making an ability that only works on a single alignment is counter to SoP precedent.

[A.J.Gibson]

Making an ability that only works on a single alignment is counter to SoP precedent.

Can you elaborate?

[stack]

There are no alignment tags in the base book outside of fate, and even there each ability works equally for all alignments. In expanded options the mageknight archetype mimicking paladins is balanced by a similar evil option. Making an option that only effects evil is outside the design paradigm.

[master4sword]

It doesn't seem too outrageous to allow channeled negative energy/negative energy fervor/touch of corruption to grant an attack that works against Good foes.

[EldritchWeaver]

Interestingly, I don't really mind the restriction to Good/Evil flavorwise and mechanicswise. The character I have doesn't want to harm non-evil folk anyway and overall it follows the precedent of Smite Evil/Good as well. Also, allowing anathema to work with Life alone opens an alternative way to build my character. Currently I have the covenant tradition, but maybe I replace it with an archetype. Triple Goddess might work well instead.

It doesn't seem too outrageous to allow channeled negative energy/negative energy fervor/touch of corruption to grant an attack that works against Good foes.

And if someone has versatile channeling, that should allow to switch between both modes.

[A.J.Gibson]

It doesn't seem too outrageous to allow channeled negative energy/negative energy fervor/touch of corruption to grant an attack that works against Good foes.

I might do something like that, where negative energy harms good characters, but negative energy already has so many offensive applications, I'm not certain it's worth it.

[EldritchWeaver]

I might do something like that, where negative energy harms good characters, but negative energy already has so many offensive applications, I'm not certain it's worth it.

Well, the option to use negative energy makes it symmetrical. Even if most builds ignore it, some can benefit and the option isn't a must-have either.

BTW, why doesn't anathema scale in range? Close range and then an upgrade to medium is more consistent with the rest of SoP and isn't that much of an increase of power.

BTW, number two, I only noticed yesterday that Life doesn't provide a way to increase the range from close to medium. Is that deliberate?

[A.J.Gibson]

Well, the option to use negative energy makes it symmetrical. Even if most builds ignore it, some can benefit and the option isn't a must-have either.

BTW, why doesn't anathema scale in range? Close range and then an upgrade to medium is more consistent with the rest of SoP and isn't that much of an increase of power.

BTW, number two, I only noticed yesterday that Life doesn't provide a way to increase the range from close to medium. Is that deliberate?

Symmetry is nice in games, but positive/negative energy isn't really symmetrical to begin with, since living and undead aren't symmetrical in terms of size of population. Negative energy is an attack ability, not a healing ability. I'll have to give it some thought, and maybe get feedback from the group.

The limited range on Life is because support powers generally don't have that great a range (most PF heal spells are range touch, nevermind close). A long-range support character is not something I really want to introduce to the game, though a scry-and-buff might be hilarious - adventure from your home!