[Drop Dead Studios] Spheres of Might Open Playtest

[The Blade Wolf]

I did say I was going to leave a more detailed and thorough response that properly compares Spheres of Power and Spheres of Might. Which Spheres I think we're done well, and which Spheres come across as very lackluster. I was simply pointing out that my post was less direct comparison and more subjective feeling, and that such a post is as valid as more mechanical feedback, if less able to be directly responded to.

[NomGarret]

If I may interject a maybe unpopular opinion. I think it is wrong to add talents to by pass certain immunities. Why? It will rapidly become ridiculous and it also 'punishes' creatures/NPC who may have invested in said immunity. The bleed mechanic being the popular one and i am fan of it, does not translate well. Of course you could create 'bleed spirit' to affect undead or constructs. But it would feel wrong. If i, as a player, would face an enemy that is immune to large part of my build? I'd feel annoyed, yes, but unless all enemies suddenly develop immunities, i'd live with it. After all, there is the rest of the party. You can't do everything to everyone. And for some things you need hammers instead of needles.
Which also reminds me. Ssalarn, will some Spheres become more efficient with certain types of physical damage?

How would you feel if the abilities effectively downgraded immunity to significant resistance? Would that be enough to keep the feeling that you can contribute while also keeping the feeling that this is an opponent you are weak against?

[khadgar567]

How would you feel if the abilities effectively downgraded immunity to significant resistance? Would that be enough to keep the feeling that you can contribute while also keeping the feeling that this is an opponent you are weak against?

I dont know garret but it feels good but i thing every one prefer more solid omph to your idea

[Dracul3S]

I have an issue with the legendary talents: Some of them allow you to do crazy stuff and others are more or less needed to keep up with the expectations of the game. Having both of these in one group is bad. I get the need or wish for both, I just do not want them grouped together, as that feels odd and more importantly can cause conflicts at a table.
I'm also still getting the feeling that SoM compares badly to SoP. And mainly for this reason:
I feel the whole martial-focus-system as of now is terrible. Expend, regain, exploit, get bored to death... Martial focus is not a good spellpoint replacement system (coming from SoP that is what it looks like). Just go with renamed spellpoints if you need a system like that. Do not try to reinvent the wheel. That rarely goes well. Why not let martials have a daily resource to expend? Martial focus as written is more of a problem instead of a solution.

[Ssalarn]

I have an issue with the legendary talents: Some of them allow you to do crazy stuff and others are more or less needed to keep up with the expectations of the game. Having both of these in one group is bad. I get the need or wish for both, I just do not want them grouped together, as that feels odd and more importantly can cause conflicts at a table.
I'm also still getting the feeling that SoM compares badly to SoP. And mainly for this reason:
I feel the whole martial-focus-system as of now is terrible. Expend, regain, exploit, get bored to death... Martial focus is not a good spellpoint replacement system (coming from SoP that is what it looks like). Just go with renamed spellpoints if you need a system like that. Do not try to reinvent the wheel. That rarely goes well. Why not let martials have a daily resource to expend? Martial focus as written is more of a problem instead of a solution.

We really have no desire to do a point-based martial system. It doesn't align with what a lot of our backers want, and it tends to lead to one of two results; either you end up with something that looks too much like "sword magic" for many groups, or you end up with something like Unchained Stamina, which is really just "X nova strikes per encounter". The whole point of Spheres of Might is to "reinvent the wheel" as you said, taking all of the feedback about combat and martial techniques that has accrued and drilling down through that to find what works, what doesn't work, and what's going to appeal to the widest audience. Martial focus does what we want it to do very well; it creates a renewable resource that allows us to gate particularly strong abilities in such a way that they can't be easily stacked, creates natural synergies and limitations between spheres, and promotes diverse, tactical combat.
It also doesn't involve tracking points, often a turn-off for people that prefer martials over casters.

Legendary talents also align with Advanced talents from SoP in that, while not every talent is equally "legendary" or "advanced", they do represent fundamental changes in assumptions of the game world. Spheres of Power was actually written as a GM tool, first and foremost. It allows GMs to make fundamental assumptions about the nature of magic and casting in their game worlds. Spheres of Might similarly advances martial combat while allowing the GM to draw a clear line on exactly what you can and can't do without magic.

[N. Jolly]

I have an issue with the legendary talents: Some of them allow you to do crazy stuff and others are more or less needed to keep up with the expectations of the game. Having both of these in one group is bad. I get the need or wish for both, I just do not want them grouped together, as that feels odd and more importantly can cause conflicts at a table.
I'm also still getting the feeling that SoM compares badly to SoP. And mainly for this reason:
I feel the whole martial-focus-system as of now is terrible. Expend, regain, exploit, get bored to death... Martial focus is not a good spellpoint replacement system (coming from SoP that is what it looks like). Just go with renamed spellpoints if you need a system like that. Do not try to reinvent the wheel. That rarely goes well. Why not let martials have a daily resource to expend? Martial focus as written is more of a problem instead of a solution.

I'm not particularly sure how a limited resource is any less boring than focus myself, as martial focus is something that will hopefully get people to consider their actions more carefully. Giving different ways of doing it for different spheres is meant to help you zone into your playstyle more, which isn't something that a point based system would allow you to do.

[Adam Meyers]

I'm a theory-based guy, so for what it's worth, here are the design points behind our decisions:

A stereotypical SoP user is low-BAB, d6 hp, with 20 talents. A stereotypical SoM user is high-BAB, d10 hp, with 20 talents.

This means that SoP and SoM CANNOT be equal: There are too many parts and aspects of the game that extrapolate from those differences that trying to directly compare both systems is an exercise in futility. Instead, the answer to making them 'equal' is to make each system unique; to celebrate those differences rather than to label them as undesirable and problematic.

There are three questions that we as designers ask ourselves while working on SoM:

1. Is It Fun?
2. Does It Let Martials Shine?
3. Are Both Systems Unique and Balanced Enough that Opinions Differ on Which is Best?

1. Is It Fun?

Yes. Absolutely. From our own test games and the information we have coming in from other test games, the ability to swap tactics, expand the use of combat maneuvers, and everything else we're doing is making combat a lot more fun than the old system.

2. Does it Let Martials Shine?

Yes. The problem with 'spells do it better' is that in most core cases, it literally is better; the magic method of accomplishing any given task is exactly the same as the martial method, but more powerful. Martials run and climb and swim, magic flies and spider climbs and water breathes. With SoM, though, martials are gaining not just diverse options, but unique options; magic flies, martials leap onto the monster's back and stab it repeatedly while riding it like a cowboy. Martials can't and shouldn't answer problems the same way magic does, but instead their method of answering the problem can and should be unique to their own way of doing things.

3. Are Both Systems Unique and Balanced Enough that Opinions Differ on Which is Best?

Having read the conversation in this very thread, I can say with resounding surety that the answer to this question is yes. Arguing that SoP 'feels' more powerful or should use the same point system as SoP shows a clear preference for the SoP system, while other people we know are resoundingly against both of those claims, showing a preference for SoM. This shows that each system is offering a different enough experience that they are appealing to different styles of play. We of course must monitor all of that feedback carefully to make sure that one side of the argument is not clearly winning, but the ideal situation is not to make a SoM the same as SoP, but rather to have the divide between those who prefer each system to be about equal, with both sides having their own set of feelings and arguments to justify why they prefer theirs over the other.

So anyway, while we are and will continue to monitor all feedback closely to detect any changes in trends and very much want to hear any feedback you have from your own test games that might counter our findings, as of right now we don't plan to make any more grand or sweeping changes to the system. Things can always be more fun, more shiny and more unique, but the feedback spectrum indicates that the product is more or less on point, and as designers that makes us very happy to hear.

[The Blade Wolf]

... I have to object to the fact that your using my misgivings towards the current form of Spheres of Might in order to state that you are doing a good job as a developer in making sure Spheres of Might is different from Spheres of Power. I did not compare the two products because I enjoy Spheres of Power more. I compared the two products because I enjoy Spheres of Might more but I feel like there is a significant drawback in power compared to Spheres of Power and the 'each talent must be as powerful as a feat' is a signifcant drawback to the creativity and power of the talents as feats can range tremendously in power.

I mean, isn't there a feat in Pathfinder that basically gives you free Metamagic if you are good at simple maths?

[Milo v3]

'each talent must be as powerful as a feat' is a signifcant drawback to the creativity and power of the talents as feats can range tremendously in power.

Considering there are many talents which give free feats in addition to other effects, I think you should keep in mind that it's not "each talent must be as powerful as a feat" it's "each talent must be as powerful as a good feat".

[The Blade Wolf]

Considering there are many talents which give free feats in addition to other effects, I think you should keep in mind that it's not "each talent must be as powerful as a feat" it's "each talent must be as powerful as a good feat".

That doesn't change the fact that a 'good' feat is a subjective matter entirely and what one person may view as a good view, someone as might view as a weak or overpowered feat.

[N. Jolly]

That doesn't change the fact that a 'good' feat is a subjective matter entirely and what one person may view as a good view, someone as might view as a weak or overpowered feat.

As both a guide writer and a designer, I'd like to think I have a pretty good feel for what is and isn't a good feat, and most talents we wrote would score pretty decently on that metric.

[Mehangel]

As both a guide writer and a designer, I'd like to think I have a pretty good feel for what is and isn't a good feat, and most talents we wrote would score pretty decently on that metric.

Well aren't you a humble soul?

[khadgar567]

Well aren't you a humble soul?

give it a rest will ya jolly knows what he is talking better than you or me can snark for it

[The Blade Wolf]

As both a guide writer and a designer, I'd like to think I have a pretty good feel for what is and isn't a good feat, and most talents we wrote would score pretty decently on that metric.

Whilst on the subject of guides, do you have plans for any other classes or updates to your guides? Quite a significant amount of classes as far as I can tell either have out-of-date guides, or a few limited selection of guides, including the Cavalier, Hunter, Inquisitor and pretty much every alternative, hybrid and occult class. Even some of the earlier classes like the Magus, Paladin and Ranger are very out of date.

Never been confident about stepping forwards and trying my own hand... I've never really been able to grasp the full underlying principles enough to write a guide.

[Mehangel]

give it a rest will ya jolly knows what he is talking better than you or me can snark for it

Oh I know very well that N. Jolly is a very talented designer. Mostly just pointing out that there are several of paizo writers who DO NOT have a good feel for what is and isn't a good feat.

[N. Jolly]

Well aren't you a humble soul?

Humility is for ugly people. #hashtagHERO

Whilst on the subject of guides, do you have plans for any other classes or updates to your guides? Quite a significant amount of classes as far as I can tell either have out-of-date guides, or a few limited selection of guides, including the Cavalier, Hunter, Inquisitor and pretty much every alternative, hybrid and occult class. Even some of the earlier classes like the Magus, Paladin and Ranger are very out of date.

Never been confident about stepping forwards and trying my own hand... I've never really been able to grasp the full underlying principles enough to write a guide.

Right now I don't have any real chance to update my previous guides as I'm busy with design work now (just got added to another KS so that's pretty cool). While I'd like to take some time out to work on some other guides like a vigilante one at some point, I simply don't have the time to do them, or else I'd get on them. I'd like to do a Striker guide once the book comes out proper though, and depending on how my body is doing, I might have a Street Fighter themed one up soon enough.

[The Blade Wolf]

Right now I don't have any real chance to update my previous guides as I'm busy with design work now (just got added to another KS so that's pretty cool). While I'd like to take some time out to work on some other guides like a vigilante one at some point, I simply don't have the time to do them, or else I'd get on them. I'd like to do a Striker guide once the book comes out proper though, and depending on how my body is doing, I might have a Street Fighter themed one up soon enough.

Fair enough that is completely understandable. Guides are more hobbies whilst being an active developer tends to bring the dollars in as well as being more of a hobby. Still I have to admit I very much like the idea of having a proper Vigilante Guide (with perhaps 3rd Party Review), as the other ones tend to throw up their hands and say 'It's so flexible use whatever feats and items you want' instead of trying to give us proper builds and suggestions...

[Elderand]

So I was reading the fencing sphere and I noticed it said that those with the sphere can use their bab instead of their rank in bluff to feint.
Isn't that....very weak? Obviously someone who is dedicated toward feinting would use bluff, probably with the class skill bonus and an ability bonus.

Wouldn't it be better to allow people with the sphere to use their bab + their practitioner modifier?

And how about giving people who take the master of misdirection a bonus as well? Perhaps make it so those for whom bluff isn't a class skill now treat it as a class skill and those for whom bluff was already a class skill can had their practiotionner bonus to their check?

[Ssalarn]

So I was reading the fencing sphere and I noticed it said that those with the sphere can use their bab instead of their rank in bluff to feint.
Isn't that....very weak? Obviously someone who is dedicated toward feinting would use bluff, probably with the class skill bonus and an ability bonus.

Wouldn't it be better to allow people with the sphere to use their bab + their practitioner modifier?

And how about giving people who take the master of misdirection a bonus as well? Perhaps make it so those for whom bluff isn't a class skill now treat it as a class skill and those for whom bluff was already a class skill can had their practiotionner bonus to their check?

You use it in place of your ranks, not in place of your total bonus. All of your other modifiers still apply. Basically the ability autoscales your ranks in Bluff for you for feinting. Your Charisma bonus, any benefits from feats and talents, etc. still apply to your roll.

That being said, on review it is structured differently than the other spheres that give skill ranks, and I'm not sure if that was intentional. Checking with the author and rest of the team now.

[Elderand]

You use it in place of your ranks, not in place of your total bonus. All of your other modifiers still apply. Basically the ability autoscales your ranks in Bluff for you for feinting. Your Charisma bonus, any benefits from feats and talents, etc. still apply to your roll.

That being said, on review it is structured differently than the other spheres that give skill ranks, and I'm not sure if that was intentional. Checking with the author and rest of the team now.

Then I would suggest maybe making the text more clear?

[The Blade Wolf]

Personally, I don't see why they should not just give you ranks in bluff as part of the class feature, you already have other spheres doing the same after all.

[Ssalarn]

Then I would suggest maybe making the text more clear?

The text was pretty clear on how it worked previously (ranks are a specifically defined thing), but after discussion with the group and original author, I've updated Fencing to use the same structure as the other spheres that advance skills, for consistency's sake if nothing else. That will make the base sphere a bit more robust since the ranks will apply to all uses of Bluff, not just feint attempts.

[Mithril Leaf]

Is there still the option to trade some of your feats for a certain amount of SoM progression? I wasn't able to find it in the document but recall it being an option a while ago.

[EldritchWeaver]

Is there still the option to trade some of your feats for a certain amount of SoM progression? I wasn't able to find it in the document but recall it being an option a while ago.

That option was recalled for further tuning and hasn't reappeared yet.

[Manyasone]

I asked before but it probably was lost in the wall of text.
Will some Spheres become more efficient with certain types of physical damage?
It seems not it far fetched concerning mechanics

[stack]

I asked before but it probably was lost in the wall of text.
Will some Spheres become more efficient with certain types of physical damage?
It seems not it far fetched concerning mechanics

We have tried to keep things relatively weapon agnostic where possible, so I wouldn't expect increased differentiation based on damage type.

[Hunter Noventa]

We have tried to keep things relatively weapon agnostic where possible, so I wouldn't expect increased differentiation based on damage type.

Which I think is a good thing. Even if the mental image of Impaling someone on a mace when using the Lancer sphere is pretty hilarious, I wouldn't want it limited like that.

[Manyasone]

Which I think is a good thing. Even if the mental image of Impaling someone on a mace when using the Lancer sphere is pretty hilarious, I wouldn't want it limited like that.

I never said to outright ban effects based on type. But exactly this image is what tickles my funny bone. And not in a good way. Impaling with hammers... Nein
Edit: but maybe something like impaling with a piercing weapon gives a +1 on the check

[Dracul3S]

I'm not particularly sure how a limited resource is any less boring than focus myself, as martial focus is something that will hopefully get people to consider their actions more carefully. Giving different ways of doing it for different spheres is meant to help you zone into your playstyle more, which isn't something that a point based system would allow you to do.

The regaining of focus is the issue. It's not feeling fun or good at all. No one at all three of my tables enjoys the whole martial focus system. You need to use focus for too many things, meanig you will always want to regain it... So it's use ability, use regaining ability use ability, the second step feels bad. As you repeat it literally every turn. Sure you do not have to... You can also not use your interesting and cool abilities...
AND it totally devaluates the whole attack action stuff: instead of using a full round action, I'm now using a standard and a move action, wait something went wrong here right? Very wrong. There is no actual difference here. Ugh... Why bother with the change at all, if in an actual game you just changed...nothing. Just make everything that expends focus a fullround action already and be done, okay?

Focus is really not up to what it promises to be. As I wrote I think it's a problem, not a solution. YMMV.

[khadgar567]

The regaining of focus is the issue. It's not feeling fun or good at all. No one at all three of my tables enjoys the whole martial focus system. You need to use focus for too many things, meanig you will always want to regain it... So it's use ability, use regaining ability use ability, the second step feels bad. As you repeat it literally every turn. Sure you do not have to... You can also not use your interesting and cool abilities...
AND it totally devaluates the whole attack action stuff: instead of using a full round action, I'm now using a standard and a move action, wait something went wrong here right? Very wrong. There is no actual difference here. Ugh... Why bother with the change at all, if in an actual game you just changed...nothing. Just make everything that expends focus a fullround action already and be done, okay?

Focus is really not up to what it promises to be. As I wrote I think it's a problem, not a solution. YMMV.

looks like i found edna "the purse dog" earth seraphs giant account