Spheres of Power: Archetypes of Power Open Beta

[A.J.Gibson]

With 2e approaching, we're trying to wrap up the ongoing SoP projects, so my original hope for multiple small releases of new archetypes has been replaced with a single, large book, here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kQuqNB643nQLMRG9kyUDSbkeuzACV_Y90NVfdL1l3qE/edit?usp=sharing).

Archetypes of Power is a collection of archetypes to help give more SoP support for those Paizo classes that didn't get a lot of support during the run of handbooks, like the Shaman, Bard, and Psychic. I'll be adding more stuff over time (the book is only two thirds full). I'll admit up front that this project has been a bit rushed, so comments and suggestions are very welcome.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

It’s disappointing to hear that Spheres won’t be getting any more support and the remaining handbooks/projects will be rushed from here on, but it’s understandable

[Manyasone]

Understandable? How so? 2e PF so far hasn't proven anything at all. Why should DDS jump on the bandwagon or DSP or anyone for that matter. Paizo has been rather disappointing as of late in comparison with some 3PP. I really don't see a reason for rushing anything especially Spheres material

[khadgar567]

Understandable? How so? 2e PF so far hasn't proven anything at all. Why should DDS jump on the bandwagon or DSP or anyone for that matter. Paizo has been rather disappointing as of late in comparison with some 3PP. I really don't see a reason for rushing anything especially Spheres material
they are not rushing but readying to eventual new content need as this mondays post we know how the spells gonna be in the setting and how powerful they are thus spheres system gona need to update to keep the status quo similar. while dream scared press dont need asap content update since they own the psionics, path of war and akashic stuff they also need to update eventualy to keep going.

[Manyasone]

Pathfinder was created for/by people who preferred 3.5 over 4th or 5th. I don't think 'need' applies here.

[Archiplex]

I notice there are a few classes missing that currently don't have any existing SoP Archetypes, though you've stated the book is only partially done. Will we be seeing any true archetypes for Paladin, Skald, and Inquisitor? I've seen there's already work on classes that have pre-existing archetypes (Not saying it's bad! I personally love almost all of these so far), but I was hoping that support for some poorly-done conversions would finally come.

In the specific case of Paladin, if you're planning to make an archetype for it at all (please!), would you be sticking to the current conversion's "Lowcaster -3" formula, or would you move more towards Geosurveyor and Folk Healer, which are both lowcasting archetypes for Ranger that ignore the '-3 caster level' idea.

I personally feel like the latter is preferred, as casting, in general, is so different from Paizo casters that an additional -3CL stuck onto low casters sort of neuters any potential they have for many spheres. A 9th level caster having a CL of 3 is brutal!

[EldritchWeaver]

I notice there are a few classes missing that currently don't have any existing SoP Archetypes, though you've stated the book is only partially done. Will we be seeing any true archetypes for Paladin, Skald, and Inquisitor? I've seen there's already work on classes that have pre-existing archetypes (Not saying it's bad! I personally love almost all of these so far), but I was hoping that support for some poorly-done conversions would finally come.

In the specific case of Paladin, if you're planning to make an archetype for it at all (please!), would you be sticking to the current conversion's "Lowcaster -3" formula, or would you move more towards Geosurveyor and Folk Healer, which are both lowcasting archetypes for Ranger that ignore the '-3 caster level' idea.

I personally feel like the latter is preferred, as casting, in general, is so different from Paizo casters that an additional -3CL stuck onto low casters sort of neuters any potential they have for many spheres. A 9th level caster having a CL of 3 is brutal!

IIRC, AJ Gibson is of the believe that the -3 to CL should be removed in general.

[A.J.Gibson]

It’s disappointing to hear that Spheres won’t be getting any more support and the remaining handbooks/projects will be rushed from here on, but it’s understandable

Keep in mind that DDS tends to take it's time. War was in playtest for about 8 months and was in pre-editing for about 3 months! Even layout takes a month or so. All this means is that we're being a little more aggressive, and maybe not putting so much on the upcoming schedule.


I notice there are a few classes missing that currently don't have any existing SoP Archetypes, though you've stated the book is only partially done. Will we be seeing any true archetypes for Paladin, Skald, and Inquisitor? I've seen there's already work on classes that have pre-existing archetypes (Not saying it's bad! I personally love almost all of these so far), but I was hoping that support for some poorly-done conversions would finally come.

In the specific case of Paladin, if you're planning to make an archetype for it at all (please!), would you be sticking to the current conversion's "Lowcaster -3" formula, or would you move more towards Geosurveyor and Folk Healer, which are both lowcasting archetypes for Ranger that ignore the '-3 caster level' idea.

I personally feel like the latter is preferred, as casting, in general, is so different from Paizo casters that an additional -3CL stuck onto low casters sort of neuters any potential they have for many spheres. A 9th level caster having a CL of 3 is brutal!

I'm hoping to give support to more of the paizo classes (wouldn't mind hitting a few non-paizo if I had more time), if I can come up with some decent ideas for them beyond a simple sphere conversion.

If people have suggestions for other archetypes, this would be a good place for them. Just remember this is an SoP book.

I don't like the -3 tacked onto paladins and rangers; it's unnecessary with low-casting already penalizing them.

An inquisitor archetype was written for AoP, and it got moved to the Protection book. There is also an Inquisitor in the Fate book, so I think that class is okay. What's wrong with sphere skald?

[Archiplex]

Keep in mind that DDS tends to take it's time. War was in playtest for about 8 months and was in pre-editing for about 3 months! Even layout takes a month or so. All this means is that we're being a little more aggressive, and maybe not putting so much on the upcoming schedule.



I'm hoping to give support to more of the paizo classes (wouldn't mind hitting a few non-paizo if I had more time), if I can come up with some decent ideas for them beyond a simple sphere conversion.

If people have suggestions for other archetypes, this would be a good place for them. Just remember this is an SoP book.

I don't like the -3 tacked onto paladins and rangers; it's unnecessary with low-casting already penalizing them.

An inquisitor archetype was written for AoP, and it got moved to the Protection book. There is also an Inquisitor in the Fate book, so I think that class is okay. What's wrong with sphere skald?

Ah, I haven't fully checked over the playtests so I wasn't aware there's already some Inquisitor archetypes- that's perfect, then! I think Sphere Skald is in an alright space mechanically, I was just thinking more could be done to expand on the topic (I.E mass-applying mind-sphere effects with use of performance as a class ability to those affected by their song, rather than rage necessarily. Perhaps some eliciter crossovers as well.) I do think in general it's a class that doesn't get too much love (Even by paizo), though understandably that's since it's already a rather specific class and hard to expand on.

I feel like the most obvious thing that can be applied to a Paladin is some sort of Life-focused paladin (or Death for antipaladin? A little tougher since there's no death handbook yet though, meaningn less tools to play with.) It could be as simple and weak as some easily crossed-over features, i.e a class feature that allows Lay on Hands to activate as if it were a Life sphere effect, and thus apply Vitality (Technically achieveable through Healing Touch, though that has extra costs and generally different mechanics.) Ultimately, though, I just feel like presenting any option that doesn't have the -3 caster level penalty is important for Paladins.

[digiman619]

Are there any classes who aren't going to get archetypes that you can rule out? I recall hearing that Kinetisists can't be done without turning them into Elementalists (maybe they accept burn to do metamagic?).

[AlienFromBeyond]

I don't think Kineticists really need a SoP archetype, it's not like they use regular casting to be replaced by SoP, they already have their own subsystem with their whole wild talents mechanics.

[ChrisAsmadi]

Are Occultists getting one, ideally with sphere implements? Or is that in one of the other books?

[digiman619]

I don't think Kineticists really need a SoP archetype, it's not like they use regular casting to be replaced by SoP, they already have their own subsystem with their whole wild talents mechanics.

Yeah, but they're really bad and complicated. They have poor damage compared to archers (who *aren't* also dealing Constitution damage to themselves every time they fire their weapon) and are overly complicated (seriously; the write-up for the kenny is 19 pages long! You could fit the all the needed rules to play a Draining Casting Elementalist in half that!).

EDIT: Using the prd (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/occultAdventures/classes/kineticist.html), I determined that the Kenny, in its debut alone and not counting Favored Class Bonuses or archetypes, just the base write up was 16,169 words. In comparison, using the base only version on pfsrd (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/variant-magic-rules/spheres-of-power/), the base write-up of how SoP works, the Elementalist class, how casting traditions work (including all the boons and drawbacks) and the entire base Creation, Destruction and Nature spheres in 12,533.

Just in case you wanted a comparison.

[A.J.Gibson]

Ah, I haven't fully checked over the playtests so I wasn't aware there's already some Inquisitor archetypes- that's perfect, then! I think Sphere Skald is in an alright space mechanically, I was just thinking more could be done to expand on the topic (I.E mass-applying mind-sphere effects with use of performance as a class ability to those affected by their song, rather than rage necessarily. Perhaps some eliciter crossovers as well.) I do think in general it's a class that doesn't get too much love (Even by paizo), though understandably that's since it's already a rather specific class and hard to expand on.

I feel like the most obvious thing that can be applied to a Paladin is some sort of Life-focused paladin (or Death for antipaladin? A little tougher since there's no death handbook yet though, meaningn less tools to play with.) It could be as simple and weak as some easily crossed-over features, i.e a class feature that allows Lay on Hands to activate as if it were a Life sphere effect, and thus apply Vitality (Technically achieveable through Healing Touch, though that has extra costs and generally different mechanics.) Ultimately, though, I just feel like presenting any option that doesn't have the -3 caster level penalty is important for Paladins.

I don't think the best thing for the skald is to bolt on some other classes unique class features. My only real personal complain with the sphere skald is that it doesn't grant full CL with anything, otherwise it's perfectly fine.

As for the paladin, I believe there is one in the fate handbook. I wouldn't mind doing one as well, but I wouldn't want to rip out lay on hands and replace it with Life casting. When a class has a unique mechanic, it's not a good idea to replace it with something any class could get, that just homogenizes the classes. I did have one idea for the paladin when I wrote Life, but it ended up getting cut down into feats (the Anathema feats).


Are there any classes who aren't going to get archetypes that you can rule out? I recall hearing that Kinetisists can't be done without turning them into Elementalists (maybe they accept burn to do metamagic?).

I generally want to stick with paizo casting classes. I did vigilante because it already has several paizo archetypes that gives it casting. I'm not touching the kineticist, and I generally want to avoid the summoner as well (it's a headache).


Are Occultists getting one, ideally with sphere implements? Or is that in one of the other books?

The Cryptomancer in the Protection book is an (unpopular) occultist archetype that changes the implement's focus powers and changes some of the occultists circle powers, but doesn't implement sphere implements. I don't expect there to be a sphere implement version; a few people have tried and the results are pretty terrible.

[AlienFromBeyond]

Yeah, but they're really bad and complicated.
They're really not that complicated in practice, and yes with only 1pp they are bad but with 3pp material (namely the Legendary Kineticist books from Legendary Games and the Kineticists of Porphyra from Purple Duck Games) they can be quite effective. I don't think DDS needs to spend time fixing something that has already been fixed and is kind of orthogonal to the work they've already done.


As for the paladin, I believe there is one in the fate handbook.
There's one in the Time handbook as well.


The Cryptomancer in the Protection book is an (unpopular) occultist archetype
Whaaat, I think it's great!

As for comments more directly related to the document, I really love the Witch archetype, it feels like what a negative energy channeling Soul Weaver with blights was supposed to be.

[Kaouse]

I personally have really been hoping for some type of "Squad Leader" Archetype for the Inquisitor for a long time now.

Get rid of spells to give them Blended training, with a talent at every level.
Get rid of Judgement to give them the War Sphere @ Full CL with the "Squadron Elite" drawback. .
Get rid of Solo Tactics, instead grant them the Warleader Sphere, as well as Combat Sphere Specialization for said sphere.
Replace every instance of Teamwork Feats with Squadron Feats.

If you wanted to avoid the empty levels caused by Judgement increases (Double @ 8, Triple @ 15, Slayer @ 17), you could give the Inquisitor access to some of the Commander's "Enhanced Tactics," similar to how the Sanctified Slayer gets access to Slayer Talents. Of course, you might be stepping on the Commander's toes at that point (just like the Sanctified Slayer steps on the Slayers toes, or the Sacred Huntsmaster steps on the Hunter's toes).

Is there any chance of such an archetype being made?

[Dr_Dinosaur]

I don't think the best thing for the skald is to bolt on some other classes unique class features. My only real personal complain with the sphere skald is that it doesn't grant full CL with anything, otherwise it's perfectly fine.

As for the paladin, I believe there is one in the fate handbook. I wouldn't mind doing one as well, but I wouldn't want to rip out lay on hands and replace it with Life casting. When a class has a unique mechanic, it's not a good idea to replace it with something any class could get, that just homogenizes the classes. I did have one idea for the paladin when I wrote Life, but it ended up getting cut down into feats (the Anathema feats).



I generally want to stick with paizo casting classes. I did vigilante because it already has several paizo archetypes that gives it casting. I'm not touching the kineticist, and I generally want to avoid the summoner as well (it's a headache).



The Cryptomancer in the Protection book is an (unpopular) occultist archetype that changes the implement's focus powers and changes some of the occultists circle powers, but doesn't implement sphere implements. I don't expect there to be a sphere implement version; a few people have tried and the results are pretty terrible.

I just want a better Sphere Summoner tbh. Nothing fancy, just not ripping out their unique mechanic (evolution points) in favor of something Incanter does better

[A.J.Gibson]

Whaaat, I think it's great!

As for comments more directly related to the document, I really love the Witch archetype, it feels like what a negative energy channeling Soul Weaver with blights was supposed to be.

Thanks, I'm glad someone liked it. The witch too - I really wanted to make a witch so people would have a reason to take the class, and I basically had to invent an entire new class almost.


I personally have really been hoping for some type of "Squad Leader" Archetype for the Inquisitor for a long time now.

Get rid of spells to give them Blended training, with a talent at every level.
Get rid of Judgement to give them the War Sphere @ Full CL with the "Squadron Elite" drawback. .
Get rid of Solo Tactics, instead grant them the Warleader Sphere, as well as Combat Sphere Specialization for said sphere.
Replace every instance of Teamwork Feats with Squadron Feats.

If you wanted to avoid the empty levels caused by Judgement increases (Double @ 8, Triple @ 15, Slayer @ 17), you could give the Inquisitor access to some of the Commander's "Enhanced Tactics," similar to how the Sanctified Slayer gets access to Slayer Talents. Of course, you might be stepping on the Commander's toes at that point (just like the Sanctified Slayer steps on the Slayers toes, or the Sacred Huntsmaster steps on the Hunter's toes).

Is there any chance of such an archetype being made?

It's not out of the question, though I don't know if I would do it that way. If you remove judgement and teamwork feats from the inquisitor, you leave very little that's unique to the inquisitor (tracking, domains, bane, stalwart, monster lore). For such large class features, you're better off starting with the essential features and then figuring out the chassis. From your description, this sounds like a Commander archetype, with squadron feats available to it the way the War Hero does for the fighter with totems. Alternatively, take a caster with War sphere and then take a martial tradition.


I just want a better Sphere Summoner tbh. Nothing fancy, just not ripping out their unique mechanic (evolution points) in favor of something Incanter does better

Sorry, but the summoner makes my eyes bleed :)

[Mithril Leaf]

So it's an interesting interaction of the Withering Witch is that Contagion can pass along certain buffs (first the comes to mind is Lenses) between your allies for free. It's pretty neat, but may well be unintended.

[A.J.Gibson]

So it's an interesting interaction of the Withering Witch is that Contagion can pass along certain buffs (first the comes to mind is Lenses) between your allies for free. It's pretty neat, but may well be unintended.

Hmmm...yeah, unintended, but obvious in retrospect. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to say 'you can only have abilities that screw up people's lives work with contagion'.

In unrelated question, how do people feel about the sphere oracle and sphere sorcerer? Do we need alternatives? Any idea what I should do with the arcanist?

[Psyren]

IIRC, AJ Gibson is of the believe that the -3 to CL should be removed in general.

It can be removed with no issues (Bloodrager proved that, if it needed proving), so I would say it should just be stripped across the board, regardless of (sub)system.


Are there any classes who aren't going to get archetypes that you can rule out? I recall hearing that Kinetisists can't be done without turning them into Elementalists (maybe they accept burn to do metamagic?).

It'd be a lot simpler imo to just graft a Burn-style mechanic onto an Elementalist chassis (e.g. as a tradition/drawback) than to try and rebuild Kinny from scratch. Moreover, with P2 on the horizon I doubt Kineticist will be getting much more in the way of official support anyhow.

With P2 featuring 5e-style scaling cantrips though, my hope is that the appetite for an "at-will caster" whose abilities could actually be level-appropriate will grow.

[Kaouse]

It's not out of the question, though I don't know if I would do it that way. If you remove judgement and teamwork feats from the inquisitor, you leave very little that's unique to the inquisitor (tracking, domains, bane, stalwart, monster lore). For such large class features, you're better off starting with the essential features and then figuring out the chassis. From your description, this sounds like a Commander archetype, with squadron feats available to it the way the War Hero does for the fighter with totems. Alternatively, take a caster with War sphere and then take a martial tradition.

I thought that removing Judgement would be the most balanced option, but alternatively I guess we could give them Blended Training with talents every other level instead, like the Martial Mageknight and Armorist. Considering the fact that they're also getting two free Spheres at max effectiveness (i.e. War and Warleader), I think it should still work out.

As for the trading of Teamwork Feats for Squadron Feats, that was actually the main reason why I wanted to make this archetype. Rather than using Solo Tactics in order to use teamwork feats by themselves, Squadron Commander lets them use their Squadron feats to help out their team.

The idea of this "Divine Marshal" archetype is to make the Inquisitor more of a "team player" and less of a "Solo Star." I think it would be a great addition to the Inquistor class, and to Spheres as a whole.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Hmmm...yeah, unintended, but obvious in retrospect. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to say 'you can only have abilities that screw up people's lives work with contagion'.

In unrelated question, how do people feel about the sphere oracle and sphere sorcerer? Do we need alternatives? Any idea what I should do with the arcanist?

I like the bonus spell point features, but honestly beyond that I’m not sure what else you could do for them beyond the option to replace all the garbage “1d6 plus 1 per CL of X damage 3/day” powers or something


It'd be a lot simpler imo to just graft a Burn-style mechanic onto an Elementalist chassis (e.g. as a tradition/drawback) than to try and rebuild Kinny from scratch. Moreover, with P2 on the horizon I doubt Kineticist will be getting much more in the way of official support anyhow.

This is disappointing, considering Kineticist actually has some interesting archetypes that don’t cleanly translate to the Elementalist

[A.J.Gibson]

I thought that removing Judgement would be the most balanced option, but alternatively I guess we could give them Blended Training with talents every other level instead, like the Martial Mageknight and Armorist. Considering the fact that they're also getting two free Spheres at max effectiveness (i.e. War and Warleader), I think it should still work out.

As for the trading of Teamwork Feats for Squadron Feats, that was actually the main reason why I wanted to make this archetype. Rather than using Solo Tactics in order to use teamwork feats by themselves, Squadron Commander lets them use their Squadron feats to help out their team.

The idea of this "Divine Marshal" archetype is to make the Inquisitor more of a "team player" and less of a "Solo Star." I think it would be a great addition to the Inquistor class, and to Spheres as a whole.

Let's figure out what powers we want to give the inquisitor. War sphere with Squadron Commander/Squadron Elite and Full CL. If we want Warleader, we need an SoM conversion, and Warleader sphere at first level. Now there has to be something that makes the archetype worth having. Some sort of ability that lets you use Warleader with War would be appropriate, like saying all squad members are in range of shouts in tactics, or making some totems into Warleader tactics. But those could just be feats made available to everyone (and someone will demand they are). What's really needed is a unique mechanic that can't be easily broken down into feats. Something similar to judgments, like judgments that affect everyone in your squadron.

[Ironsides]

If people have suggestions for other archetypes, this would be a good place for them. Just remember this is an SoP book.

I have some ideas for stuff. :smalltongue:
General Drawback
Magical Signs
Your magic is accompanied by a tell-tale sign; for example, your body glows brightly, the sound of tortured souls shriek as you cast, feelings of a deep chill affect all creatures within 30 ft. All nearby creatures know when you are using magic, as well as the nature of the magic used. If taken a second time, all creatures within Close range (minimum of 60 ft) range notice your signs.

Maybe this would be better with a minimum 40 ft range? I just like the idea that the more powerful you are the more flashy your magic is.

Alteration Drawback
Semi-malleable Form
You can add traits to your blank form from talents but you cannot change your base form.

This is just the reverse of the Beast Soul drawback.

Shifter Archetype
Master of Disguise

Class Skills: The master of disguise loses Handle Animal, Knowledge (geography), and Survival as class skills and gains Bluff, Diplomacy and Knowledge (local) as class skills.
Pretender: At 1st level the master of disguise gains the Alteration sphere and Perfect Imitation talent as bonus magic talents. The master of disguise uses her class level as her caster level for the Alteration sphere. This stacks normally with caster levels gained from other sources. She also gains the Semi-malleable Form drawback, but no bonus talents. If the master of disguise already has the Alteration sphere from another source, she does not gain the Semi-malleable Form drawback. This modifies shapeshifter.
Casting Ability Modifier: The master of disguise uses Charisma as her casting ability modifier.
Shifting Disguise
You gain the Shifting Disguise feat.
This replaces Wild Empathy.
Impersonation: At 2nd level, the master of disguise gains access to the following unique traits which she can add to her shapeshift forms:
Parrot: You may mimic voices as the Mimicry trait from the Vocal Transformation Alteration talent.
Practised Disguise: You gain a bonus equal to 1/2 your master of disguise level to all Disguise checks.
Mimicry: You gain the Mimicry bestial trait.
This replaces Endurance.

[AlienFromBeyond]

It'd be a lot simpler imo to just graft a Burn-style mechanic onto an Elementalist chassis (e.g. as a tradition/drawback)
But Draining Casting drawback is already a thing?

Hmmm...yeah, unintended, but obvious in retrospect. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to say 'you can only have abilities that screw up people's lives work with contagion'.
It's also spending a resource that is more limited than spell points, so that might be okay. If it's a concern you could add "and targets an enemy" to "The withering witch may corrupt a sphere ability or hex that requires a melee touch attack" or some such.


In unrelated question, how do people feel about the sphere oracle and sphere sorcerer? Do we need alternatives? Any idea what I should do with the arcanist?
The main issue with Sphere Sorcerer is that it's such a good dip. One level as a high-caster with an extra spell point for the level, a bonus talent, bloodline Arcana that can be something really strong like Orc for blasting, and +1 caster level that can be stacked with Incanter specialization. I would say some way of tying in the bloodline harder and making it rewarding to stay in the class than just "more spell points" would be needed for a replacement archetype. Maybe something with metamagic, like preventing the cast time increase but not affecting the cost much as they have so much SP to throw around?

Sphere Oracle is mostly fine I think, it still gets the curse/mystery/revelations which are core to the class's identity. How much you like it depends on how much you like the regular Oracle.

I got nothing for Arcanist though, sorry. It feels like it didn't make the transition into SoP well but no idea how you address that.

[Psyren]

But Draining Casting drawback is already a thing?

Right, that's what I was referring to, so my question stands - why not just be an Elementalist with Draining Casting and call it a "Sphere Kineticist?"

[Scowling Dragon]

Please make a better wandslinger. Thats such a cool archetype idea but the execution is so mediocre sadly.

[Kaouse]

Let's figure out what powers we want to give the inquisitor. War sphere with Squadron Commander/Squadron Elite and Full CL. If we want Warleader, we need an SoM conversion, and Warleader sphere at first level. Now there has to be something that makes the archetype worth having. Some sort of ability that lets you use Warleader with War would be appropriate, like saying all squad members are in range of shouts in tactics, or making some totems into Warleader tactics. But those could just be feats made available to everyone (and someone will demand they are). What's really needed is a unique mechanic that can't be easily broken down into feats. Something similar to judgments, like judgments that affect everyone in your squadron.

I like the idea of sharing Judgements with team members. Maybe at half effectiveness to keep it balanced, and without overstepping the mandate feat that allows the Inquisitor to do something similar (only with one member at a time). It might even be a good idea to let the Inquisitor share Bane with their teammates (maybe with the downside of having to spend a Bane use for each and every person they wish to affect).

[Tariyan Draegr]

The only archetype I can think of is to convert occultist to spheres but looking at the psionic Occultist, I'm sure that'll take about all the available page space.

[A.J.Gibson]

I have some ideas for stuff. :smalltongue:
General Drawback
Magical Signs
Your magic is accompanied by a tell-tale sign; for example, your body glows brightly, the sound of tortured souls shriek as you cast, feelings of a deep chill affect all creatures within 30 ft. All nearby creatures know when you are using magic, as well as the nature of the magic used. If taken a second time, all creatures within Close range (minimum of 60 ft) range notice your signs.

Maybe this would be better with a minimum 40 ft range? I just like the idea that the more powerful you are the more flashy your magic is.

Alteration Drawback
Semi-malleable Form
You can add traits to your blank form from talents but you cannot change your base form.

This is just the reverse of the Beast Soul drawback.

Shifter Archetype
Master of Disguise

Class Skills: The master of disguise loses Handle Animal, Knowledge (geography), and Survival as class skills and gains Bluff, Diplomacy and Knowledge (local) as class skills.
Pretender: At 1st level the master of disguise gains the Alteration sphere and Perfect Imitation talent as bonus magic talents. The master of disguise uses her class level as her caster level for the Alteration sphere. This stacks normally with caster levels gained from other sources. She also gains the Semi-malleable Form drawback, but no bonus talents. If the master of disguise already has the Alteration sphere from another source, she does not gain the Semi-malleable Form drawback. This modifies shapeshifter.
Casting Ability Modifier: The master of disguise uses Charisma as her casting ability modifier.
Shifting Disguise
You gain the Shifting Disguise feat.
This replaces Wild Empathy.
Impersonation: At 2nd level, the master of disguise gains access to the following unique traits which she can add to her shapeshift forms:
Parrot: You may mimic voices as the Mimicry trait from the Vocal Transformation Alteration talent.
Practised Disguise: You gain a bonus equal to 1/2 your master of disguise level to all Disguise checks.
Mimicry: You gain the Mimicry bestial trait.
This replaces Endurance.

I'll do this in order:

Magical Signs is already the best drawback, so making it worth even more strikes me as a bad idea. I do like the fluff you've suggested, perhaps a drawback feat instead?

Semi-malleable Form: not certain if this a drawback, you're still getting the traits.

Master of Disguise: You're trading out class features for things you can buy with feats and talents already. Archetypes should offer something unique that isn't easily bought.


It's also spending a resource that is more limited than spell points, so that might be okay. If it's a concern you could add "and targets an enemy" to "The withering witch may corrupt a sphere ability or hex that requires a melee touch attack" or some such.

It's probably fine as is.


The main issue with Sphere Sorcerer is that it's such a good dip. One level as a high-caster with an extra spell point for the level, a bonus talent, bloodline Arcana that can be something really strong like Orc for blasting, and +1 caster level that can be stacked with Incanter specialization. I would say some way of tying in the bloodline harder and making it rewarding to stay in the class than just "more spell points" would be needed for a replacement archetype. Maybe something with metamagic, like preventing the cast time increase but not affecting the cost much as they have so much SP to throw around?

I keep thinking something like the thaumaturge: a class feature that enhances spherecasting but in an unstable way.


Please make a better wandslinger. Thats such a cool archetype idea but the execution is so mediocre sadly.

Stack has said he wants to revisit this archetype, so leave it to him.


I like the idea of sharing Judgements with team members. Maybe at half effectiveness to keep it balanced, and without overstepping the mandate feat that allows the Inquisitor to do something similar (only with one member at a time). It might even be a good idea to let the Inquisitor share Bane with their teammates (maybe with the downside of having to spend a Bane use for each and every person they wish to affect).

I keep coming back the same question: why an inquisitor over a paladin? The paladin is already a 'help people around me' class while the inquisitor is more of a hunter, so the fluff jump is smaller. Is there some feature of the inquisitor, or mid-casting?


The only archetype I can think of is to convert occultist to spheres but looking at the psionic Occultist, I'm sure that'll take about all the available page space.

Pretty much. The occultist is almost like a mini-SoP with 8 spheres and a punch of mental power instead of talents.

[Kaouse]

I keep coming back the same question: why an inquisitor over a paladin? The paladin is already a 'help people around me' class while the inquisitor is more of a hunter, so the fluff jump is smaller. Is there some feature of the inquisitor, or mid-casting?

Well, a lot of creatures that hunt, tend to hunt in packs, right? Maybe we could fluff things accordingly? I doubt Inquisitions in history were undergone as solo missions, so maybe instead of a "Divine Marshal" it might make a lot more sense for this archetype to be more of a "Strike Team Leader." In that case, rather than being the person who takes out a target directly (i.e. the role best for a Full BAB class like Paladin), the Inquisitor becomes the person who coordinates their team's actions so as to eliminate their target in the most effective means possible. For this, an ability to apply Bane on your teammate's weapons would be really useful and thematic.

[Arcueid]

A couple of suggestions.

Maybe revisiting some of the old archetypes like sphere sorcerer to make it more compatible with paizo archetypes.

For example

Change "Sorcerous Blood: The sphere sorcerer gains 1 additional spell point for every sorcerer level gained. This replaces all bloodline spells."
to have a line similar to marital armorist such as
"This archetype may be combined with other archetypes that replace bloodline spells; If the other archetype grants an alternate list of bonus spells (such as crossblooded), you may instead gain the additional spell points in place of the bonus spells as is normal for sorcerous blood. If the feature is not replaced with alternate bonus spells (such as nine tailed heir) you do not gain the additional spell points.
"


Another would be a set of rules that i've seen thrown around but never were officially made about trading traditional casting in for sphere casting (as one of those last ditch efforts if you just can't make an archetype fit).

Some classes or archetypes are not completely compatible with spheres of power due due to the archetypes being incompatible with the spheres alternative, such characters can choose to opt to replace their spellcasting progression with a spheres of power progression. Classes whose maximum spell level would be 4 may exchange their spellcasting for the Low-Caster level progression, classes whose maximum spell level would be 6 may exchange their spellcasting for Mid-Caster level progression, and characters whose maximum spell level would be 9 may exchange their spellcasting for High-Caster level progression. Characters who trade their spellcasting for a spheres caster level progression use whatever ability score affected their spellcasting as their casting ability (for example, a Wizard who trades their spellcasting for a High-caster level progression would use Intelligence as their casting modifier, while a Sorcerer who trades their spellcasting would use Charisma ). No matter your progression you gain 1 magic talent whenever you gain a caster level in that class; these are in addition to the two bonus spell points gained when you first gain the casting class feature and a casting tradition. You also gain a spell pool with a number of points equal to your level plus your casting modifier.


Below is an extra bit that might help with some features that just don't convert well. I used a few class examples, but in some cases their somewhat weaker than the spheres variant, but it seemed like a more balanced approach as it is somewhat going in blind on what its granting; but the idea is its not supposed to replace the spheres archetypes, instead just give a last option for if someone really wants to play a certain archetype but can't make it work with spheres.


This is not a perfect conversion and may leave some class features non-functional without their native casting in place. In certain cases per GM discretion these features may be traded for a different bonus.
Classes who gain a bonus spell added to their spells known, or class spell list may instead gain a bonus magic talent. If the spell is specific, or is chosen from a specific school of magic, the gained magic talent must be from a matching sphere.


Abjuration
Protection


Abjuration (good, evil, lawful, chaotic)
Fate


Conjuration(creation)
Creation


Conjuration(Healing)
life


Conjuration(teleportation)
Warp


Conjuration(calling, summoning)
Conjuration


Divination
Divination


Enchantment
Mind


Evocation
Destruction


Illusion
Illusion


Necromancy
Death


Transmutation
Enhancement


Transmutation(polymorph)
Alteration


Transmutation(earth, air, fire, water)
Nature


Example 1: A sorcerer who gains a bonus spell "resist energy" at 5th level would instead gain a talent for the protection sphere.
Example 2: An arrowsong minstrel bard normally adds a number of sorcerer spells from a specific list and the evocation school equal to their charisma modifier. The arrowsong minstrel who chose fireball would gain a destruction sphere talent.


Edit: Added a few lines to the conversion piece mentioning magic talents/casting tradition/spell points.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

The only archetype I can think of is to convert occultist to spheres but looking at the psionic Occultist, I'm sure that'll take about all the available page space.

Low Caster, counts as high when using implements. Focus Caster drawback baked into class. Implement schools remain, but give a choice between 2-3 spheres to grant talents from (pick one per implement).

[Arcueid]

Low Caster, counts as high when using implements. Focus Caster drawback baked into class. Implement schools remain, but give a choice between 2-3 spheres to grant talents from (pick one per implement).

There's basically a just straight conversion archetype in the protection sphere playtest right now (works with panoplies and everything), mostly just changing a few resonant powers.

[A.J.Gibson]

A couple of suggestions.

Maybe revisiting some of the old archetypes like sphere sorcerer to make it more compatible with paizo archetypes.

For example

Change "Sorcerous Blood: The sphere sorcerer gains 1 additional spell point for every sorcerer level gained. This replaces all bloodline spells."
to have a line similar to marital armorist such as
"This archetype may be combined with other archetypes that replace bloodline spells; If the other archetype grants an alternate list of bonus spells (such as crossblooded), you may instead gain the additional spell points in place of the bonus spells as is normal for sorcerous blood. If the feature is not replaced with alternate bonus spells (such as nine tailed heir) you do not gain the additional spell points.
"


Another would be a set of rules that i've seen thrown around but never were officially made about trading traditional casting in for sphere casting (as one of those last ditch efforts if you just can't make an archetype fit).

Some classes or archetypes are not completely compatible with spheres of power due due to the archetypes being incompatible with the spheres alternative, such characters can choose to opt to replace their spellcasting progression with a spheres of power progression. Classes whose maximum spell level would be 4 may exchange their spellcasting for the Low-Caster level progression, classes whose maximum spell level would be 6 may exchange their spellcasting for Mid-Caster level progression, and characters whose maximum spell level would be 9 may exhcnage their spellcasting for High-Caster level progression. Characters who trade their spellcasting for a spheres caster level progression use whatever ability score affected their spellcasting as their casting ability (for example, a Wizard who trades their spellcasting for a High-caster level progression would use Intelligence as their casting modifier, while a Sorcerer who trades their spellcasting would use Charisma ).


Below is an extra bit that might help with some features that just don't convert well. I used a few class examples, but in some cases their somewhat weaker than the spheres variant, but it seemed like a more balanced approach as it is somewhat going in blind on what its granting; but the idea is its not supposed to replace the spheres archetypes, instead just give a last option for if someone really wants to play a certain archetype but can't make it work with spheres.


This is not a perfect conversion and may leave some class features non-functional without their native casting in place. In certain cases per GM discretion these features may be traded for a different bonus.
Classes who gain a bonus spell added to their spells known, or class spell list may instead gain a bonus magic talent. If the spell is specific, or is chosen from a specific school of magic, the gained magic talent must be from a matching sphere.


Abjuration
Protection


Abjuration (good, evil, lawful, chaotic)
Fate


Conjuration(creation)
Creation


Conjuration(Healing)
life


Conjuration(teleportation)
Warp


Conjuration(calling, summoning)
Conjuration


Divination
Divination


Enchantment
Mind


Evocation
Destruction


Illusion
Illusion


Necromancy
Death


Transmutation
Enhancement


Transmutation(polymorph)
Alteration


Transmutation(earth, air, fire, water)
Nature


Example 1: A sorcerer who gains a bonus spell "resist energy" at 5th level would instead gain a talent for the protection sphere.
Example 2: An arrowsong minstrel bard normally adds a number of sorcerer spells from a specific list and the evocation school equal to their charisma modifier. The arrowsong minstrel who chose fireball would gain a destruction sphere talent.


Arg, forgot to hit 'send'.

Anyways, a couple things.

First, a lot of the sphere conversions don't accurately exchange powers. Sphere sorcerer, for example, exchanges bloodline spells to get a bonus spell point per level. Really, you're exchanging all those extra spell slots from being a sorcerer for that as well. Bloodline spells are not worth much - half a feat each is probably too generous. When we create archetypes, we count the feat values of various features and see if we get the same results for other classes with a similar chassis. It's not precise, but perfect balance isn't achievable. So coming up with a complex set of rules to perfectly translate any archetype is pretty hard, and mostly pointless since most of them just add one or two features. GM's should really figure it out for their selves.

It can be tricky, though. People also really overestimate the value of a lot of things as well. Bloodlines spells? Maybe half a talent. Access to other spell lists? Worth nothing, since it doesn't give you an ability, just the option to buy another ability. Magus fighter training? The same. Wild Empathy? Worth half a feat. Bravery as a whole is worth a feat at most, not one per +1. Same for danger sense. Blended training is also worth nothing, but it just lets you buy a different type of talent.

Also, I'm probably not going to write an archetype just to be a better sphere sorcerer. If I can errata it, I would fix the wording (on a lot of things). If I write a a sorcerer archetype, the extra 2 spell points per level is probably what will get replaced anyways, because I think more spell points is boring. You'll note for the ascendant psion I grant extra talents rather than spell points even though it's a spontaneous class.

Turning specific archetypes that are popular into sphere archetypes might be doable. What sorcerer archetypes do people actually play? Crossblooded?

[Dr_Dinosaur]

For Sphere Sorcerer, why not look to the Wilder/5e Sorcerer for inspiration? When they cast, they can choose to activate some effect that changes their caster level for that turn for better or worse (and maybe any increase can be spent to buy off metamagic time increases?

[Kitsuneymg]

Some random thoughts/desires.

I'd love for an official way to use archetypes that have Diminished Spellcasting in SoP. I've always been partial to counting it as two drawbacks that must be bought off.

Someway of using Eldritch Archer (Magus) without violating the archetype stacking rules. It's not a problem when I play with my local group as we've just decided the base class is actually the class after the sphere casting archetype has been applied, but it'd be handy for roll20 games.

A hedgewitch tradition that either offers Lifelink. Better yet, Lifelink + Lay on Hands, but Covenant offers that already.

A clarification/rule on Warp + the Dimensional Agility line (since DA doesn't change the way warp works at all.) Though maybe this belongs in a Warp book.

I'm sure I'll think of more, but that's my random thoughts for this moment.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

This is a Champion suggestion, but what about an Alchemist archetype based on the Brewkeeper and Drunken Master that specializes in making and drinking magic brews? Could get blended training and Barroom as a free talent at 1st.


I'd love for an official way to use archetypes that have Diminished Spellcasting in SoP. I've always been partial to counting it as two drawbacks that must be bought off.
This would be nice to clear up officially. My usual groups say you get a talent at every whole-number CL increase to ease multiclassing (with certain classes granting more) and all agreed to have it knock casters down a “proficiency level” (high-mid-low) or in the case of low casters just lose their first two talents gained from that class (reflecting how Paladin and Ranger casting used to work)

Some way of using Eldritch Archer (Magus) without violating the archetype stacking rules. It's not a problem when I play with my local group as we've just decided the base class is actually the class after the sphere casting archetype has been applied, but it'd be handy for roll20 games.
Nothing to contribute except to say I’m glad other groups are also doing the “overwrite” houserule!

A hedgewitch tradition that either offers Lifelink. Better yet, Lifelink + Lay on Hands, but Covenant offers that already.
Maybe an archetype that gets a Shaman spirit?

[AmberVael]

A clarification/rule on Warp + the Dimensional Agility line (since DA doesn't change the way warp works at all.) Though maybe this belongs in a Warp book.

As it stands, Dimensional Agility just doesn't work with Warp. Putting aside the fact that Warp doesn't let you meet prerequisites, Dimensional Agility itself only grants half the benefit and the action changing feats later in the change mesh poorly with the action changing Warp talents.

So... its just too janky trying to get them to work nicely together. That said, I'm very aware of interest in the chain, and hope to make similar mechanics available in the Warp Handbook.

[A.J.Gibson]

For Sphere Sorcerer, why not look to the Wilder/5e Sorcerer for inspiration? When they cast, they can choose to activate some effect that changes their caster level for that turn for better or worse (and maybe any increase can be spent to buy off metamagic time increases?

5e Sorcerer get metamagic feats. PF sorcerer already has that access. I have been thinking about some sort of 'use a sphere ability, get an additional effect based on the sphere' similar to the withering witch, only with explosions.


Some random thoughts/desires.

I'd love for an official way to use archetypes that have Diminished Spellcasting in SoP. I've always been partial to counting it as two drawbacks that must be bought off.

Someway of using Eldritch Archer (Magus) without violating the archetype stacking rules. It's not a problem when I play with my local group as we've just decided the base class is actually the class after the sphere casting archetype has been applied, but it'd be handy for roll20 games.

A hedgewitch tradition that either offers Lifelink. Better yet, Lifelink + Lay on Hands, but Covenant offers that already.

A clarification/rule on Warp + the Dimensional Agility line (since DA doesn't change the way warp works at all.) Though maybe this belongs in a Warp book.

I'm sure I'll think of more, but that's my random thoughts for this moment.

My personal take on diminished spellcasting is that you shouldn't gain a spell point on levels you would lose a spell slot on. Diminished spellcasting is uaully worth about 3 feats (in magus archetypes, anyways, except for the bladed scarf dancer who seems to get nothing in return), but such work should probably fall to Adam.

Are there any archetypes that use diminished spellcasting other than the magus archetypes?

I've been thinking about archer magi, and I suspect they might be too strong. As it is, I've opened up the magus to more than one-handed weapons, and I'm not even certain if letting two-handed weapon is a good idea. Archery is the strongest combat style, so letting a class join it with spherecasting might be too much.

If I do an archer magi, I probably won't use magus as the base anyways.


This is a Champion suggestion, but what about an Alchemist archetype based on the Brewkeeper and Drunken Master that specializes in making and drinking magic brews? Could get blended training and Barroom as a free talent at 1st.

This would be nice to clear up officially. My usual groups say you get a talent at every whole-number CL increase to ease multiclassing (with certain classes granting more) and all agreed to have it knock casters down a “proficiency level” (high-mid-low) or in the case of low casters just lose their first two talents gained from that class (reflecting how Paladin and Ranger casting used to work)

Nothing to contribute except to say I’m glad other groups are also doing the “overwrite” houserule!

Maybe an archetype that gets a Shaman spirit?

The essentialist was basically the druggie alchemist. Some sort of feat to join mutagen with drunken fighting my be good, however.

[Arcueid]

It can be tricky, though. People also really overestimate the value of a lot of things as well. Bloodlines spells? Maybe half a talent. Access to other spell lists? Worth nothing, since it doesn't give you an ability, just the option to buy another ability. Magus fighter training? The same. Wild Empathy? Worth half a feat. Bravery as a whole is worth a feat at most, not one per +1. Same for danger sense. Blended training is also worth nothing, but it just lets you buy a different type of talent.


Generally in a lot of the archetypes like witch, cleric, druid, etc... they would get magic talents in place of domain, patron, etc.. stuff. I overestimated it, as looking at a lot it seems every 2 spells = 1 talent.
So the rules could be adjusted for what i suggested at a every 2 spells gained = 1 talent. The main idea was to try and follow the set precedent of existing "Sphere ____" archetypes in terms of what you could get.

Also in response to the other line about diminished spellcasting adding it into this, it would need to mean some sort of staggered talent progression, like "number of talents = to CL -1" maybe? Usually you get 1 talent per CL, and most diminished spellcasting puts you 1 level behind basically. Both crossblooded, and classes with diminished spellcasting have similar penalties because it usually meant the level when you'd normally gain your next level of spell would be delayed by a level because it would reduce it to 0.

Really the main reasoning for this is because in SoM thanks to the feat/proficiency/ect.. trade-out rules, and other such things getting a class/archetype into SoM is still very valid, and even the SoM conversion archetypes do a good job making all the base classes feel unique, so classes like conscript aren't slam dunk champion.
That said in SoP because many archetypes/options aren't valid there's very little reason on the SoP side to play a Sphere Sorcerer over an Incanter, considering they just get more talents, and can still attain the bloodlines (with any stat they want no less).
So the main idea i was attempting to present here was trying to find a way to be similar to SoM where a character can still play a class in SoP without using one of the classes/archetypes presented. Its of course not a 1-1 conversion as SoM mostly just adds things to martials, while SoP changes the underlying system of magic.

[Tariyan Draegr]

There's basically a just straight conversion archetype in the protection sphere playtest right now (works with panoplies and everything), mostly just changing a few resonant powers.
I knew I saw something for it somewhere. Many thanks

[EldritchWeaver]

A hedgewitch tradition that either offers Lifelink. Better yet, Lifelink + Lay on Hands, but Covenant offers that already.

With spending actions, but getting arbitrary healing numbers: Triple Goddess Archetype, Fount of Life, Fount of Mercy, optionally Wellspring of Life and Greater Healing x4.

No spending actions, healing people without getting hurt yourselves, but has limited duration compared to Lifelink: Triple Goddess Archetype, Revitalize x2, optionally Greater Healing x4.

(Note, that with Life Saving Cure you can provide a swift action heal in advance as well. Or go the invigorate route to provide temp hps, which are effectivily unlimited.)

All in all, I don't see the need for such a conversion.

[AlienFromBeyond]

Another would be a set of rules that i've seen thrown around but never were officially made about trading traditional casting in for sphere casting (as one of those last ditch efforts if you just can't make an archetype fit).

Some classes or archetypes are not completely compatible with spheres of power due due to the archetypes being incompatible with the spheres alternative, such characters can choose to opt to replace their spellcasting progression with a spheres of power progression. Classes whose maximum spell level would be 4 may exchange their spellcasting for the Low-Caster level progression, classes whose maximum spell level would be 6 may exchange their spellcasting for Mid-Caster level progression, and characters whose maximum spell level would be 9 may exchange their spellcasting for High-Caster level progression. Characters who trade their spellcasting for a spheres caster level progression use whatever ability score affected their spellcasting as their casting ability (for example, a Wizard who trades their spellcasting for a High-caster level progression would use Intelligence as their casting modifier, while a Sorcerer who trades their spellcasting would use Charisma ). No matter your progression you gain 1 magic talent whenever you gain a caster level in that class; these are in addition to the two bonus spell points gained when you first gain the casting class feature and a casting tradition. You also gain a spell pool with a number of points equal to your level plus your casting modifier.


Below is an extra bit that might help with some features that just don't convert well. I used a few class examples, but in some cases their somewhat weaker than the spheres variant, but it seemed like a more balanced approach as it is somewhat going in blind on what its granting; but the idea is its not supposed to replace the spheres archetypes, instead just give a last option for if someone really wants to play a certain archetype but can't make it work with spheres.


This is not a perfect conversion and may leave some class features non-functional without their native casting in place. In certain cases per GM discretion these features may be traded for a different bonus.
Classes who gain a bonus spell added to their spells known, or class spell list may instead gain a bonus magic talent. If the spell is specific, or is chosen from a specific school of magic, the gained magic talent must be from a matching sphere.


Abjuration
Protection


Abjuration (good, evil, lawful, chaotic)
Fate


Conjuration(creation)
Creation


Conjuration(Healing)
life


Conjuration(teleportation)
Warp


Conjuration(calling, summoning)
Conjuration


Divination
Divination


Enchantment
Mind


Evocation
Destruction


Illusion
Illusion


Necromancy
Death


Transmutation
Enhancement


Transmutation(polymorph)
Alteration


Transmutation(earth, air, fire, water)
Nature


Example 1: A sorcerer who gains a bonus spell "resist energy" at 5th level would instead gain a talent for the protection sphere.
Example 2: An arrowsong minstrel bard normally adds a number of sorcerer spells from a specific list and the evocation school equal to their charisma modifier. The arrowsong minstrel who chose fireball would gain a destruction sphere talent.


Edit: Added a few lines to the conversion piece mentioning magic talents/casting tradition/spell points.
Technically there are rules for an impromptu conversion already, but they're not as clear, precise, or in one location like the nice Spheres of Might conversion section is. As a sort of (potential) last hurrah for PF 1e SoP a general conversion guide feels like it actually would fit well for this book. Letting people know how to take archetypes that give casting to classes that don't normally have it (such as Warlock/Cabalist/Magical Child for the Vigilante) and convert them to SoP casting without having to feel like they need to use a specific SoP archetype when they want say a specific class feature from a different archetype.

[A.J.Gibson]

Technically there are rules for an impromptu conversion already, but they're not as clear, precise, or in one location like the nice Spheres of Might conversion section is. As a sort of (potential) last hurrah for PF 1e SoP a general conversion guide feels like it actually would fit well for this book. Letting people know how to take archetypes that give casting to classes that don't normally have it (such as Warlock/Cabalist/Magical Child for the Vigilante) and convert them to SoP casting without having to feel like they need to use a specific SoP archetype when they want say a specific class feature from a different archetype.

This isn't DDS' last PF1e work. Not even close. I shouldn't have phrased it that way in the first post. I merely meant the pressure is on to get things done. There are still handbooks, Gear of Power, several apocrypha, and who knows what else coming.

As for conversion rules, the simple truth is that it's not easy to summarize. The sphere archetypes try to give you basic functionality, but each archetype can be very different, and a simple step-by-step procedure is probably going to give crappy results. If you want to convert something to spheres, talk to you GM. Hell, post it here and people will probably give you advice. SoM does a better job here because SoM is not a huge departure from the rules the way SoP is.

[A.J.Gibson]

I've decided to try my hand at SoM, and added Champion archetypes for the Ranger and Skald. Also, I shamelessly copied the crossblooded archetype for the sorcerer.

[Arcueid]

Also, I shamelessly copied the crossblooded archetype for the sorcerer.
Don't know what you mean, its called Dual-Blooded, clearly thats an entirely different thing!:smallbiggrin:

[Scowling Dragon]

Also if it's not too late could the Scholar Get some lovin? Something like Martial Study for spellcasting? Could be weaker, maybe only granting a bonus equal to a quarter of the Scholars Class levels to the Sphere or something.

[A.J.Gibson]

Also if it's not too late could the Scholar Get some lovin? Something like Martial Study for spellcasting? Could be weaker, maybe only granting a bonus equal to a quarter of the Scholars Class levels to the Sphere or something.

This book is primarily aimed at supporting the paizo classes, and is also more SoP than SoM. And frankly, I'm not really all that familiar with the SoM classes.

[Scowling Dragon]

This book is primarily aimed at supporting the paizo classes, and is also more SoP than SoM. And frankly, I'm not really all that familiar with the SoM classes.

Then how about a more martial Based Sphere for the Medium? One that uses the SOM abilities?

[Dr_Dinosaur]

5e Sorcerer get metamagic feats. PF sorcerer already has that access. I have been thinking about some sort of 'use a sphere ability, get an additional effect based on the sphere' similar to the withering witch, only with explosions.
The metamagic thing wasn’t the main thrust of my suggestion. It was that their Caster Level fluctuates while casting, potentially increasing the power of their spells at the risk of decreasing it instead. Metamagic time buyoff was a possible extra ability tied into that.
If you really want to go the extra effects route, why not use wild magic instead of explosions (which aren’t as chaotic or universal across bloodlines)? Especially since the wild magic handbook expanded it so much


The essentialist was basically the druggie alchemist. Some sort of feat to join mutagen with drunken fighting my be good, however.
I must have been out of it yesterday for these posts to be so unclear.
I was suggesting a way to marry Barroom’s ability to rapidly drink alcohol with the Alchemist’s potions and extracts. Chugging mutagen/extract, adding alcohol to dilute a potion to make more at the cost of getting allies drunk, that sort of thing.

[Scowling Dragon]

It was that their Caster Level fluctuates while casting, potentially increasing the power of their spells at the risk of decreasing it instead.

Like a Thaumaturge? Its got it covered already.

[AlienFromBeyond]

The metamagic thing wasn’t the main thrust of my suggestion. It was that their Caster Level fluctuates while casting, potentially increasing the power of their spells at the risk of decreasing it instead. Metamagic time buyoff was a possible extra ability tied into that.
If you really want to go the extra effects route, why not use wild magic instead of explosions (which aren’t as chaotic or universal across bloodlines)? Especially since the wild magic handbook expanded it so much.
Isn't this just a Thaumaturge then, maybe with the wild magic archetype like you even point out yourself? I truly do not see the point of this suggestion at all as a sorcerer archetype, it's a theme that can already be handily accomplished within the system.

[A.J.Gibson]

I think the question to ask is: what is it about an existing class people will still want to play in SoP? For sorcerers, I figured some would still want to play with bloodlines. I still don't have any good ideas for oracles, paladins, or arcanists, though.

[Mithril Leaf]

I think the question to ask is: what is it about an existing class people will still want to play in SoP? For sorcerers, I figured some would still want to play with bloodlines. I still don't have any good ideas for oracles, paladins, or arcanists, though.

Honestly the Time Book Paladin covers my personal desires for the Paladin pretty well, and the plain old Sphere Oracle is actually fairly competent. You could maybe toss in a couple sphere focused Revelations if you wanted to, but other than that I've found it's mostly fine. The Arcanist is somewhat difficult though, mostly because it's shtick is basically entirely covered by either the Conjuration Book Thaumaturge or the baseline Troubadour, depending on your switching talents needs.

[Scowling Dragon]

I still don't have any good ideas for oracles, paladins, or arcanists, though.

For Paladin Companion/ Mount Focus. Would be cool to make a simple official focus for a Paladins mount to be more Conjuration Sphere focused and gained at level 1 or so.
Maybe as an alternative a Enchantment focused Paladin for those that instead focus on bonded weapon?
Arcanist is just a crappy class.

For oracle maybe focus on being a child of a god or something? Something with taking elements of shifter on to represent permanent growing divine ascension?

[Arcueid]

I think the question to ask is: what is it about an existing class people will still want to play in SoP? For sorcerers, I figured some would still want to play with bloodlines. I still don't have any good ideas for oracles, paladins, or arcanists, though.

1. Oracles outside of dual cursed or maybe even spirit guide i'm not sure what else to include. Maybe a new curse/mystery? Other than that the fact that incanters/other classes can't 100% recreate the mysteries/curses (outside of specific things granting specific curses) so they still have a level of uniqueness to them.

2. Paladins got a pretty good thing with SoM, because you have the Dirt Spattered angel with the option of either warrior of blind faith or sphere paladin, either are valid. Honestly i don't know of many archetypes that would need to be recreated in spheres for paladin (i admittedly don't play paladin much).
2.b. Maybe tyrant anti-paladin sphere version? I like the tyrant archetype that strips enemies of fear immunity, which i know the villain troubadour allows, but that would be my only argument is having it as an option rather than dipping, but even then its not a big deal considering the gladiator sphere exists.

3. Arcanists are tricky, the whole point in base pathfinder was it could be the in-between of spontaneous and prepared making it a really good option over wizard (and if you didn't care about bloodlines very much sorcerer). With spheres letting you chose/make a casting tradition that's not as much of a thing. Really right now sphere arcanist is extremely powerful considering they can just change out all their talents every day, and incanter otherwise kinda fills the rest of its roles (i think the only thing missing is incanter can't get wizard school focuses like arcanist). From there also the archetypes for arcanist were either about getting spells they didn't usually have (white mage), or focusing harder into bloodlines/wizard schools (making them a different version of wizard/sorcerer).

4. My possible suggestion is a champion version of inquisitor as that class could benefit a lot from having SoM access (beyond getting a martial tradition and/or trading their feats for a combat sphere progression).

[A.J.Gibson]

Honestly the Time Book Paladin covers my personal desires for the Paladin pretty well, and the plain old Sphere Oracle is actually fairly competent. You could maybe toss in a couple sphere focused Revelations if you wanted to, but other than that I've found it's mostly fine. The Arcanist is somewhat difficult though, mostly because it's shtick is basically entirely covered by either the Conjuration Book Thaumaturge or the baseline Troubadour, depending on your switching talents needs.

With the paladin in Fate, it's looking like paladin might be sufficiently covered. All I can think of for Oracle is some sort of bard-ish aura ability.


For Paladin Companion/ Mount Focus. Would be cool to make a simple official focus for a Paladins mount to be more Conjuration Sphere focused and gained at level 1 or so.
Maybe as an alternative a Enchantment focused Paladin for those that instead focus on bonded weapon?
Arcanist is just a crappy class.

For oracle maybe focus on being a child of a god or something? Something with taking elements of shifter on to represent permanent growing divine ascension?

A few people have said this about the ranger's pet as well. If I did this, it would simply be a divine bond option instead of an archetype.

If I did an oracle, I would probably give it wizard BAB, since there is a huge amount of complaining about full casters having medium BAB (hence the shaman). Alternatively, a mid-caster/mid-BAB oracle with a bunch of polymorphing might be fun.


1. Oracles outside of dual cursed or maybe even spirit guide i'm not sure what else to include. Maybe a new curse/mystery? Other than that the fact that incanters/other classes can't 100% recreate the mysteries/curses (outside of specific things granting specific curses) so they still have a level of uniqueness to them.

2. Paladins got a pretty good thing with SoM, because you have the Dirt Spattered angel with the option of either warrior of blind faith or sphere paladin, either are valid. Honestly i don't know of many archetypes that would need to be recreated in spheres for paladin (i admittedly don't play paladin much).
2.b. Maybe tyrant anti-paladin sphere version? I like the tyrant archetype that strips enemies of fear immunity, which i know the villain troubadour allows, but that would be my only argument is having it as an option rather than dipping, but even then its not a big deal considering the gladiator sphere exists.

3. Arcanists are tricky, the whole point in base pathfinder was it could be the in-between of spontaneous and prepared making it a really good option over wizard (and if you didn't care about bloodlines very much sorcerer). With spheres letting you chose/make a casting tradition that's not as much of a thing. Really right now sphere arcanist is extremely powerful considering they can just change out all their talents every day, and incanter otherwise kinda fills the rest of its roles (i think the only thing missing is incanter can't get wizard school focuses like arcanist). From there also the archetypes for arcanist were either about getting spells they didn't usually have (white mage), or focusing harder into bloodlines/wizard schools (making them a different version of wizard/sorcerer).

4. My possible suggestion is a champion version of inquisitor as that class could benefit a lot from having SoM access (beyond getting a martial tradition and/or trading their feats for a combat sphere progression).

The general concensus seems to be that paladins and oracles don't need help, and arcanists aren't worth saving. An SoM inquisitor is doable, if some can suggest a unique mechanic for them that is specific to the inquisitor (maybe something to do with judgments). I've also been thinking about a mechanic where a class gets bonuses in proportion to how many hit points of damage they've taken. They could trade out teamwork feats to get a talent per level with blended training, or to get proficient training separately (do people have a preference for blended training or separate progressions?).

[Mithril Leaf]

With the paladin in Fate, it's looking like paladin might be sufficiently covered. All I can think of for Oracle is some sort of bard-ish aura ability.

Maybe something akin to the 3.5 Marshal or that one weird dragon marshal (Dragonfire Disciple?) would be cool. Pathfinder has a dearth of good aura classes. Even something like sharing some of your revelations or curses with the party. That would be both radically cool and super unique. Half BAB would be fitting in that case.

[Mehangel]

A sphere oracle archetype with buffing or debuffing auras instead of revelations would be kind of interesting.

[Scowling Dragon]

A few people have said this about the ranger's pet as well. If I did this, it would simply be a divine bond option instead of an archetype.

Fine by me.

[Arcueid]

An SoM inquisitor is doable, if some can suggest a unique mechanic for them that is specific to the inquisitor (maybe something to do with judgments). I've also been thinking about a mechanic where a class gets bonuses in proportion to how many hit points of damage they've taken. They could trade out teamwork feats to get a talent per level with blended training, or to get proficient training separately (do people have a preference for blended training or separate progressions?).

The main thing with SoM archetypes it seems you have to trade something out to get the SoM talent progression, unless we take the champion approach, hard to say there.
I feel some scout sphere would be an interesting synergy considering they have spontaneous bane so much of the class is around identifying things to better destroy them. Monster lore kinda fits into this as well.
Not sure what we could do with Judgments because they're not exactly "exciting" features, they're nice X times per day buffs, but its hard to say what you could do with them without just making the feature way stronger than it was originally meant to be.
Solo tactics(along with their bonus teamwork feats) might be available for some synergy with war/warleader spheres. Maybe even just trading this class feature out for a progression, do it like a couple of the non-champion ones where they have two separate progressions for SoM talents and SoP talents.
Then there's also all those swift action litany spells that they'd lose in place of gaining SoP talents. Its one of those things core to how they play, but easy to overlook because its hidden in their spell list and not an explicit class feature.

Its kind of the problem with inquisitor, they have a lot of neat class features, but no real core focus in terms that some classes have a clear type of weapon/playstyle setup they'd excel best with (like rogues with finesse weapons, and barbarians with big 2h weapons) while inquisitor doesn't seem to, so it makes them an interesting blank slate that would mesh well with SoM, but it makes it difficult to really merge any class features with a theme.

[kkplx]

Understandable? How so? 2e PF so far hasn't proven anything at all. Why should DDS jump on the bandwagon or DSP or anyone for that matter. Paizo has been rather disappointing as of late in comparison with some 3PP. I really don't see a reason for rushing anything especially Spheres material

Just dropping in to echo that sentiment.

[exelsisxax]

Just dropping in to echo that sentiment.

It's a nice idea, but the reality is that the release of PF2 will herald the downturn and eventual death of PF1 as a market. Paizo has already put too much into PF2, if it fails the company is likely to collapse, and players will slowly migrate to supported games instead of getting 1/3pp content. If it is a hit, then there will be a much quicker migration from PF1 to PF2, creating a profitable market that 3pp developers have every economic reason to provide for.

A business needs to make money to survive, PF2 is going to be part of that reality one way or another.

[Scowling Dragon]

A business needs to make money to survive, PF2 is going to be part of that reality one way or another.

This is where my general distaste towards Paizo tends into general revulsion. They can afford to be lazy and half-baked because they have the ego and insulation.

[A.J.Gibson]

Then how about a more martial Based Sphere for the Medium? One that uses the SOM abilities?

The medium is such a mess, I'd rather spend my time writing archetypes for classes I understand :)


I must have been out of it yesterday for these posts to be so unclear.
I was suggesting a way to marry Barroom’s ability to rapidly drink alcohol with the Alchemist’s potions and extracts. Chugging mutagen/extract, adding alcohol to dilute a potion to make more at the cost of getting allies drunk, that sort of thing.

There might be a discovery in there somewhere?


Maybe something akin to the 3.5 Marshal or that one weird dragon marshal (Dragonfire Disciple?) would be cool. Pathfinder has a dearth of good aura classes. Even something like sharing some of your revelations or curses with the party. That would be both radically cool and super unique. Half BAB would be fitting in that case.

I kinda covered the aura thing with the War handbook. A bunch of talents, 3 archetypes dedicated to auras (Warmonger, War Hero, and Divine Heretic), feats...


A sphere oracle archetype with buffing or debuffing auras instead of revelations would be kind of interesting.

I wouldn't want to give up revelations - they make the oracle unique.


The main thing with SoM archetypes it seems you have to trade something out to get the SoM talent progression, unless we take the champion approach, hard to say there.
I feel some scout sphere would be an interesting synergy considering they have spontaneous bane so much of the class is around identifying things to better destroy them. Monster lore kinda fits into this as well.
Not sure what we could do with Judgments because they're not exactly "exciting" features, they're nice X times per day buffs, but its hard to say what you could do with them without just making the feature way stronger than it was originally meant to be.
Solo tactics(along with their bonus teamwork feats) might be available for some synergy with war/warleader spheres. Maybe even just trading this class feature out for a progression, do it like a couple of the non-champion ones where they have two separate progressions for SoM talents and SoP talents.
Then there's also all those swift action litany spells that they'd lose in place of gaining SoP talents. Its one of those things core to how they play, but easy to overlook because its hidden in their spell list and not an explicit class feature.

Its kind of the problem with inquisitor, they have a lot of neat class features, but no real core focus in terms that some classes have a clear type of weapon/playstyle setup they'd excel best with (like rogues with finesse weapons, and barbarians with big 2h weapons) while inquisitor doesn't seem to, so it makes them an interesting blank slate that would mesh well with SoM, but it makes it difficult to really merge any class features with a theme.

The inquisitor is kinda like the ranger - no primary mechanic. That, and a lot of it seems to be dedicated to hunting. I already gave scout synergy to the ranger. Inquisitor needs something distinctly not ranger.

One thing I've discovered writing archetypes is that you need a reason for your idea to be an archetype. I've had 5 or 6 full archetypes get broken down into feats because there just wasn't enough for a full archetype. Granted, some archetypes in AoP are just conversion archetypes with a few powers to replace useless stuff (hello, psychomancer).

To repeat an earlier question: do people prefer blended training or separate progressions?

[Tariyan Draegr]

To repeat an earlier question: do people prefer blended training or separate progressions?

Blended training

[Arcueid]

The inquisitor is kinda like the ranger - no primary mechanic. That, and a lot of it seems to be dedicated to hunting. I already gave scout synergy to the ranger. Inquisitor needs something distinctly not ranger.

One thing I've discovered writing archetypes is that you need a reason for your idea to be an archetype. I've had 5 or 6 full archetypes get broken down into feats because there just wasn't enough for a full archetype. Granted, some archetypes in AoP are just conversion archetypes with a few powers to replace useless stuff (hello, psychomancer).

To repeat an earlier question: do people prefer blended training or separate progressions?

It is very ranger-like, except without actually gaining anything like the ranger combat styles, so generally most of your feats/resources go into supporting whatever weapon/style you chose as the class doesn't really contribute anything on that end.
I'll try to think of a theme first then, but maybe the main idea is to have some unique replacements for judgements/teamwork feats similar to the kinslayer archetype for inquisitor.

As for blended/separate this is my opinion.
1. Blended works if the class has a feature like rogue talents, armorist tricks, mystic combats, etc... where they can chose to use those for extra magic/martial talents otherwise without that classes like mageknight for example would feel woefully lacking in talents. Otherwise if the class lacks those i think a small boost to their overall talents feels necessary(kinda like how the mystic magus archetype gets 20 talents over the 15 normal sphere magus gets).
Even then we had some debate in my group if it was just better to trade feats/proficiencies to get a martial tradition and a separate pool of talents and just use the class features that grant extra combat feats to fill in the feat gaps than actually use those archetypes.
2. Having separate talents is just generally more powerful, for example martial hedgewitch at the cost of one tradition (which depending on what you're building isn't much of a loss) to gain proficient(10 talents) on top of their 15 magic talents with the ability to spend hedgewitch secrets to get more (so potentially 20 if you just don't care about secrets that much) Giving hedge-witch anywhere from a combined pool of 25 to 35 martial/magic talents to work with (not actually combined but just showing how much they can have).
Another example is sphere paladin who normally only gets 8 magic talents + another 10 martial with dirt spattered angel. ( can get expert progression if you also trade the casting, but generally having any amount of SoP talents, even as a dip is just really good for most characters.)

So personally i prefer separate talents via just trading away some other class feature (like dirt spattered angel getting 10 talents at the cost of smite evil), just because it feels more powerful to have more choices. Especially also because 2 separate pools means you can have levels gaining both martial/magic both working towards separate goals, as opposed to blended where you may need to put off getting a crucial martial talent in favor of getting all your necessary magic talents.

[khadgar567]

To repeat an earlier question: do people prefer blended training or separate progressions?
seperate progression

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Blended Traiming

[Scowling Dragon]

Blended training.

[AlienFromBeyond]

Depends on the situation with the other abilities, but in a vacuum I prefer Blended Training.

[Khosan]

So, I've got a question. There's these Investigator talents:


Self-Preparation (requires Enhancement sphere)
When you use an Enhancement sphere ability that targets yourself or your equipment exclusively, you may use your class level as your caster level. This stacks with other caster level sources normally. In addition, you may spend a point of inspiration to use the ability as a swift action.

Simple Deduction (requires Divination sphere)
You may use your investigator class level as your caster level with the Divination sphere. This stacks with other caster level sources normally. When you use the base divine ability of the sphere, you may spend an inspiration point to use an alternate divination of your choice (even if you do not possess the sphere it is associated with).

Say I play a non-spherecaster Investigator, but pick up the Basic Magical Training (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/general-feats#toc5) feat. Could I then pick up one of the above talents and use abilities from those spheres using my class level as my caster level?

[A.J.Gibson]

So, I've got a question. There's these Investigator talents:

Say I play a non-spherecaster Investigator, but pick up the Basic Magical Training (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/general-feats#toc5) feat. Could I then pick up one of the above talents and use abilities from those spheres using my class level as my caster level?

Your investigator class level, yes, which is going to be a minimum of low caster (since you have to be a spherecasting investigator). There might be some change at some point to have it read 'you get +5 to you caster, this can not bring you above your class level' or something like that. I'm fine the way it is now, though.

[Arcueid]

Here's a possible archetype suggestion. An archetype for Armorist that mixes in some of Armiger.

The two have interesting mechanics and they seem like fun to potentially do together, but the Armorist is just one of those classes that loses a lot for dipping out or multiclassing past a few levels (unless its whitesmith, then its a little too dippable). There'd probably be a way to do it being that both grant scaling enhancement bonuses, but you'd basically have to re-customize the bound equipment any time you summoned it because if it leaves your hands it would disappear; and even if you didn't have to re-customize it would still be fairly inefficient.

So the idea would be a Armorist that trades out the summoned armor, possibly their armor training as well. What they'd gain is the ability to have summoned "templates". Basically they would work similar to the Armiger's customized equipment granting additional talents based on the weapon currently summoned.

The idea of it being a "template" would be less for bound equipment and more for the summoned equipment as bound equipment already takes work to change what it is, and what it gets making it already similar in effort to modify as the Armiger's customized equipment. The template concept for summoned equipment would limited summoned equipment a bit more, but allow them to also grant talents. You would get a limited number of "templates" which would be a specific weapon or possibly weapon group and anything categorized as such when summoned would have set granted talents.
This would make it so you can't just spontaneously gain any talent you want when summoning equipment. We could just drop the summoned equipment entirely as well and keep it only around bound weapons, but my concern there is we might rip out too much identity from the Armorist if we do that and just have a Armiger who gets free weapon special abilities and less talents(as they both end up with +5 weapons otherwise). Maybe have a archetype specific (or even just built in) ability similar to variable prowess that allows them as a move action a limited number of times per day to change the enhancements or talents on it (getting some of the benefits of summoned equipment in with the bound)
Also maybe adding a free action swap, and/pr a "rapid assault" style feature as well to quickly swap between bound weapons like a Armiger swaps between customized weapons.

So the overall idea would be:

Pros:
Gain additional talents like a Armiger tied to bound/summoned equipment
~Possibly also gain a free swap or rapid assault feature
~Maybe similar to armiger have the ability to summon a pair of weapons like a armiger can have a pair of customized weapons
~Maybe an ability similar to variable prowess from Armiger that allows the enhancements or talents to be redone on a piece of bound equipment a limited number of times a day to replace summoned equipment.

Cons:
Lose bound armor
Have a somewhat more limited form of summoned equipment(to prevent just spontaneously accessing talents)
~Possibly remove summoned equipment entirely and just buff/focus the bound equipment more.
~Possibly also lose armor training

Final notes:
I would possibly keep the talents from bound equipment limited to SoM talents to let The Armiger Antiquarian not be overshadowed.
Being that martial armorist is a thing that stacks with anything we likely don't need blended training or anything as the player can pick that up should they wish.
Maybe do something slightly different with this, but the main idea is i like Armiger's feature of promoting swapping between weapons on the fly mid-combat and mixing that with the summoning mechanic of armorist.

[Domar]

I'd like to see a Champion archetype for the Alchemist.

Trade Extracts for mid casting.
Bomb for a proficient combat progression.
Mutagen for Alchemy as a bonus sphere and a scaling bonus to craft (Alchemy).

[Arcueid]

I'd like to see a Champion archetype for the Alchemist.

Trade Extracts for mid casting.
Bomb for a proficient combat progression.
Mutagen for Alchemy as a bonus sphere and a scaling bonus to craft (Alchemy).

Isn't that basically achievable with a hedgewitch then? The 3 unique class features of alchemist are extracts, bombs, and mutagens.

Hedgewitch can achieve this with herbology for one of their traditions, using martial hedgewitch for the other tradition.
Now you have combat progression, martial tradition, alchemist discoveries, mid-casting, and any other goodies hedgewitch can do. You aren't getting alchemy as a bonus sphere but thats about it.

My main problem with this is this seems like we're trading away the entire identity of a class and boiling it down to a bonus sphere talent.

[A.J.Gibson]

Here's a possible archetype suggestion. An archetype for Armorist that mixes in some of Armiger.

The two have interesting mechanics and they seem like fun to potentially do together, but the Armorist is just one of those classes that loses a lot for dipping out or multiclassing past a few levels (unless its whitesmith, then its a little too dippable). There'd probably be a way to do it being that both grant scaling enhancement bonuses, but you'd basically have to re-customize the bound equipment any time you summoned it because if it leaves your hands it would disappear; and even if you didn't have to re-customize it would still be fairly inefficient.

So the idea would be a Armorist that trades out the summoned armor, possibly their armor training as well. What they'd gain is the ability to have summoned "templates". Basically they would work similar to the Armiger's customized equipment granting additional talents based on the weapon currently summoned.

The idea of it being a "template" would be less for bound equipment and more for the summoned equipment as bound equipment already takes work to change what it is, and what it gets making it already similar in effort to modify as the Armiger's customized equipment. The template concept for summoned equipment would limited summoned equipment a bit more, but allow them to also grant talents. You would get a limited number of "templates" which would be a specific weapon or possibly weapon group and anything categorized as such when summoned would have set granted talents.
This would make it so you can't just spontaneously gain any talent you want when summoning equipment. We could just drop the summoned equipment entirely as well and keep it only around bound weapons, but my concern there is we might rip out too much identity from the Armorist if we do that and just have a Armiger who gets free weapon special abilities and less talents(as they both end up with +5 weapons otherwise). Maybe have a archetype specific (or even just built in) ability similar to variable prowess that allows them as a move action a limited number of times per day to change the enhancements or talents on it (getting some of the benefits of summoned equipment in with the bound)
Also maybe adding a free action swap, and/pr a "rapid assault" style feature as well to quickly swap between bound weapons like a Armiger swaps between customized weapons.

So the overall idea would be:

Pros:
Gain additional talents like a Armiger tied to bound/summoned equipment
~Possibly also gain a free swap or rapid assault feature
~Maybe similar to armiger have the ability to summon a pair of weapons like a armiger can have a pair of customized weapons
~Maybe an ability similar to variable prowess from Armiger that allows the enhancements or talents to be redone on a piece of bound equipment a limited number of times a day to replace summoned equipment.

Cons:
Lose bound armor
Have a somewhat more limited form of summoned equipment(to prevent just spontaneously accessing talents)
~Possibly remove summoned equipment entirely and just buff/focus the bound equipment more.
~Possibly also lose armor training

Final notes:
I would possibly keep the talents from bound equipment limited to SoM talents to let The Armiger Antiquarian not be overshadowed.
Being that martial armorist is a thing that stacks with anything we likely don't need blended training or anything as the player can pick that up should they wish.
Maybe do something slightly different with this, but the main idea is i like Armiger's feature of promoting swapping between weapons on the fly mid-combat and mixing that with the summoning mechanic of armorist.

I was actually thinking of doing this for the Living Weapon in the Protection handbook, but didn't want to do the research :)
The AoP book is mostly SoP + PF classes, but I'm pretty sure there are going to be some SoM handbooks, so this could be a good idea there.

[Arcueid]

I was actually thinking of doing this for the Living Weapon in the Protection handbook, but didn't want to do the research :)
The AoP book is mostly SoP + PF classes, but I'm pretty sure there are going to be some SoM handbooks, so this could be a good idea there.

Thats fair. It seemed like a possible place as it was an archetype for a SoP class (just with some SoM stuff thrown in).

[Dr_Dinosaur]

I was actually thinking of doing this for the Living Weapon in the Protection handbook, but didn't want to do the research :)
The AoP book is mostly SoP + PF classes, but I'm pretty sure there are going to be some SoM handbooks, so this could be a good idea there.

I hope so. Now that 2e is on its way I’m afraid of SoM being left unfinished

[Arcueid]

I hope so. Now that 2e is on its way I’m afraid of SoM being left unfinished

To be fair i think we need an actual complete ruleset to determine if pathfinder players are going to be interested in 2e. As it stands Paizo is being as vague as they can, and what they have released ranges between promising to worrying. With my group there's vague interest but we're also pretty certain its just going to be just a 5e clone which defeats the purpose considering we played pathfinder because we liked the options and complexity of 3.5 rather than the simplified systems of 4th/5th.

Which if it comes to that at least in our group we're pretty ok with just using spheres as supplemental content going forward and ignoring 2e.

[EldritchWeaver]

what they have released ranges between promising to worrying.

I'd like to upvote this 9000 times.


Which if it comes to that at least in our group we're pretty ok with just using spheres as supplemental content going forward and ignoring 2e.

I'll do a playtest run separately to the main group to see if PF2 pans out.

[Quarian Rex]

To repeat an earlier question: do people prefer blended training or separate progressions?


Blended training is usually just a bad idea in general. It is an option that gets thrown on classes that can least afford it (usually martial low-casters) trading magical talents that they can't afford to lose for martial talents that are minimally effective in low doses (they require some investment to really be worth it). This also has the downside that any class that has Blended Training is barred from the Feat to Talent Progression Conversion option (since they technically have a combat talent progression, even if they don't use it) which would otherwise be a superior solution for a character who wanted to gish SoP and SoM. Not to mention that it provides the most martial classes (the low-casters) with the fewest martial options, it is just a poor mechanic in general.

The only time that I've seen this sort of thing be even vaguely usable was with the Blade Magic Talents of the Mystic archetype for the Magus. Same concept but with some wiggle room to make interesting choices, without feeling like you have to cripple yourself to fulfill your role.

Separate progressions would be a much better idea. Then you can at least tailor the progressions to the class as appropriate instead of having everything draw from the same un-adjusted pool of resources.

For those showing support for blended training without elaborating, why do you thing that it is a superior option? It's definitely a simpler conversion but simple =/= the right call. What value do you see in it?





I'd like to see a Champion archetype for the Alchemist.

Trade Extracts for mid casting.
Bomb for a proficient combat progression.
Mutagen for Alchemy as a bonus sphere and a scaling bonus to craft (Alchemy).

Isn't that basically achievable with a hedgewitch then? The 3 unique class features of alchemist are extracts, bombs, and mutagens.

Hedgewitch can achieve this with herbology for one of their traditions, using martial hedgewitch for the other tradition.
Now you have combat progression, martial tradition, alchemist discoveries, mid-casting, and any other goodies hedgewitch can do. You aren't getting alchemy as a bonus sphere but thats about it.

My main problem with this is this seems like we're trading away the entire identity of a class and boiling it down to a bonus sphere talent.


Some of us put more stock in the Discoveries class ability than others, they offer options and abilities that are found nowhere else and supply half the flavor of the class all on its own. I like the Alchemist for the mad scientist niche that it occupies but I (and many others) tend to think that the standard class features of extracts, bombs, and mutagens don't actually add much to that central concept (throwing molotov cocktails doesn't necessarily scream 'Mad Scientist' to a lot of people, nor does a once per day self-buff that can't be shared). Sphere access can fill the thematic niche of all those features in a superior manner (Alteration does a much better Dr. Moreau, and other Spheres using various foci can support all of your Genius (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/) needs) but there is no option that can replace the discoveries and there is no other class or archetype that gives full access to them, other than the Experimenter archetype for the Thaumaturge, but that does so in a very different direction (specifically being a full caster with low caster talent progression among many other things) and only at half the normal rate (every 4 levels instead of every 2 and fighting for space with bonus feats and Sneak Attack damage).

Can the Hedgewitch do some similar things? Sure. Is there room for the Alchemist to have some nice toys as well? Yes there is. Would the Alchemist still be distinctive enough for the archetype to be worth it? Damn straight it would be. I, and others, would bloody love to see something like what Domar (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=23052416&postcount=77) proposed. In fact, I've spent a lot of time trying to make builds with existing resources that mirror this proposal to varying levels of success. Having an actual archetype for it would be phenomenal.

[Aipaca]

Blended training is usually just a bad idea in general. It is an option that gets thrown on classes that can least afford it (usually martial low-casters) trading magical talents that they can't afford to lose for martial talents that are minimally effective in low doses (they require some investment to really be worth it). This also has the downside that any class that has Blended Training is barred from the Feat to Talent Progression Conversion option (since they technically have a combat talent progression, even if they don't use it) which would otherwise be a superior solution for a character who wanted to gish SoP and SoM. Not to mention that it provides the most martial classes (the low-casters) with the fewest martial options, it is just a poor mechanic in general.

The only time that I've seen this sort of thing be even vaguely usable was with the Blade Magic Talents of the Mystic archetype for the Magus. Same concept but with some wiggle room to make interesting choices, without feeling like you have to cripple yourself to fulfill your role.

Separate progressions would be a much better idea. Then you can at least tailor the progressions to the class as appropriate instead of having everything draw from the same un-adjusted pool of resources.

For those showing support for blended training without elaborating, why do you thing that it is a superior option? It's definitely a simpler conversion but simple =/= the right call. What value do you see in it?


I could not agree more, blended training is so incredibly frustrating on - for example - the Empathic Duelist Eliciter. The class wants to spend talents on Mind Sphere stuff, but also wants to get enough Combat Talents to do their combat thing, and 3/4 levels split between the two is just not enough.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

To be fair i think we need an actual complete ruleset to determine if pathfinder players are going to be interested in 2e. As it stands Paizo is being as vague as they can, and what they have released ranges between promising to worrying. With my group there's vague interest but we're also pretty certain its just going to be just a 5e clone which defeats the purpose considering we played pathfinder because we liked the options and complexity of 3.5 rather than the simplified systems of 4th/5th.

Which if it comes to that at least in our group we're pretty ok with just using spheres as supplemental content going forward and ignoring 2e.

I feel the same, but they’ve already said that Spheres is getting “wrapped up” quicker than initially planned because 2e is on the way.

[Kaouse]

I like Blended Training because I 'm the type of player to only take the bare minimum of what I need from a sphere and be fine with it.

Thus, the ability to select from either magic talents or martial talents at will is fairly useful to me, especially if I cannot spare the feats for a conversion. I guess I'm somewhat of a dabbler, in that case.

That said, if separate progressions mean a grand total of more talents, then I'm definitely all for that option.

Also, I really, really want to see an Inquisitor archetype that gets access to both Spheres of Power and Spheres of Might.

I personally like the "Strike Team Leader" idea myself, since it also ties into the "hunter" aspects of an Inquisitor. Sharing Judgement as a totem effect. Sharing Bane as a Shout. Possibly at reduced power, and probably trading out double & triple judgement (and perhaps Greater Bane) to increase said power, but that's just one possibility.

Replacing the Inquisitor's Not-Teamwork Feats with Squadron Team Feats would be cool too, IMHO.

[AlienFromBeyond]

For those showing support for blended training without elaborating, why do you thing that it is a superior option? It's definitely a simpler conversion but simple =/= the right call. What value do you see in it?
Well in the case of Mageknight for instance you have plenty of things to spend SP on that *aren't* magic talents, so you want to be able to keep your spell pool but take combat talents instead. In addition, SoM combat talents don't cover nearly as much as feats do, the feats are just plain more versatile so I value having them more than swapping them out for a SoM talent progression. I see low-casters as the one who are most willing to give up their magic talents for combat talents, as the variety of effects they can pick that are actually useful with their CL is small and generally requires little investment anyways. It gets a little bit iffy with mid-casters though I agree, though my favorite midcaster doesn't need to worry about it because Hedgewitch is awesome.

I will also echo Kaouse's statement, sometimes I want mostly one set of talents and then a very small dip into the other Spheres system, which Blended Training does very well without forcing you into heavy investment.

[Mithril Leaf]

For those showing support for blended training without elaborating, why do you thing that it is a superior option? It's definitely a simpler conversion but simple =/= the right call. What value do you see in it?


Because thus far most of the blended training classes get more talents than they would with separate progressions. If I get more total talents, and can also put all of them exactly where I want them, how could that possibly be worse?

[Arcueid]

The only time that I've seen this sort of thing be even vaguely usable was with the Blade Magic Talents of the Mystic archetype for the Magus. Same concept but with some wiggle room to make interesting choices, without feeling like you have to cripple yourself to fulfill your role.

I agree with this, but i'd make the point that the main reason this form of blended training works is because the magus gained 5 more talents than a mid caster would normally have, having full 20 progression between magic and martial is alot better than 15 to be split.

Thats why i'm not a fan of martial armorist/mageknight because its basically better to trade feats and use mystic combats/armorist tricks to gain martial talents/combat feats because you just don't get more talents; not to mention how silly powerful martial hedgewitch is in comparison because they just get to have to separate progressions.



Some of us put more stock in the Discoveries class ability than others
Yes, there is some stuff missing, but i would make the counter argument that much of what you said is hinged on the fact that nothing else can access that list (minus thaumaturge, which is generally a terrible class at least when you compare it to things like hedgewitch).

So my main argument is
1. You could easily just make an archetype for another class that can access the list in some sort of meaningful way. Really you could make a new hedgewitch tradition considering we already have one that just has access to the whole rogue talent list.
2. Also a good chunk of those discoveries exist to modify extracts, mutagens, and bombs as well, so you're removing alot of the usefulness of that list as well. So rather than removing all the class features that are the identity of the class you could just take all the poison/alchemy focused ones and put them on another class like hedgewitch to let them burn their secrets/tricks/talents/ect...on those because adding those to a class would take less and need to trade away less that whats being suggested to be traded away to gain stuff these other classes already have access to.

I don't disagree with making some sort of alchemist archetype in the theme of champion but maybe we just have archetypes with focuses on features; like a mutagen focused alchemist, a bomb focused, a poison focused one; that way if we're going to argue that the discoveries are important to the identity of the class we keep the features they are meant to work with.

-----

On a side note that i've been wanting to mention; i actually didn't have a huge problem with the alchemist archetype that was in this playtest book originally before it was deleted, it just needed some sort of tweaks considering turning sphere spells into poisons isn't a terrible idea, it just is also very abusable with sticky poison and the double dosage discoveries. So it could've had some balance tweaks like limiting what discoveries work with it, or just having the poison forms of the spells not work at full CL. (because my double dosage sticky poison destructive blast that i'm TWF with might have been a little silly at full CL potency)

[Arcueid]

Because thus far most of the blended training classes get more talents than they would with separate progressions. If I get more total talents, and can also put all of them exactly where I want them, how could that possibly be worse?

But so far they don't Eliciter, Armorist, Mageknight, Shifter, Summoner, Symbiat from the Champion book keep their same talent amount (aka a talent per CL increase); Magus is the only one who upgrades from 15 to 20.

[A.J.Gibson]

Because thus far most of the blended training classes get more talents than they would with separate progressions. If I get more total talents, and can also put all of them exactly where I want them, how could that possibly be worse?

When classes gain an SoM progression, each feat becomes 2 combat talents, while a blended progression gets 1 talent per feat. There are some exceptions in the Time playtest, but I wouldn't count on them to stay that way.


Also, I really, really want to see an Inquisitor archetype that gets access to both Spheres of Power and Spheres of Might.

I personally like the "Strike Team Leader" idea myself, since it also ties into the "hunter" aspects of an Inquisitor. Sharing Judgement as a totem effect. Sharing Bane as a Shout. Possibly at reduced power, and probably trading out double & triple judgement (and perhaps Greater Bane) to increase said power, but that's just one possibility.

Replacing the Inquisitor's Not-Teamwork Feats with Squadron Team Feats would be cool too, IMHO.

A judgement totem is a bit much, there's a reason it's only a mandate. The problem with the team leader idea is that it's very much what a paladin is. Inquisitors are self-buffing monster hunters, with some ability to cooperate with one other person. I could see some sort of of inquisitor that debuffs a target so their allies can kill them; that would work better with their fluff.


I feel the same, but they’ve already said that Spheres is getting “wrapped up” quicker than initially planned because 2e is on the way.

I was the one who said that. I was wrong, it's just everyone was busy, but there is talk of doing more stuff now.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

When classes gain an SoM progression, each feat becomes 2 combat talents, while a blended progression gets 1 talent per feat. There are some exceptions in the Time playtest, but I wouldn't count on them to stay that way.

I was the one who said that. I was wrong, it's just everyone was busy, but there is talk of doing more stuff now.

That’s very heartening to hear! As for Blended vs Split, I think they both have a place.

[Scowling Dragon]

I was the one who said that. I was wrong, it's just everyone was busy, but there is talk of doing more stuff now.

Good. I would be willing to pay more money for Quality P1 work if it meant you lost money on sales for P2 work.

[Mithril Leaf]

When classes gain an SoM progression, each feat becomes 2 combat talents, while a blended progression gets 1 talent per feat. There are some exceptions in the Time playtest, but I wouldn't count on them to stay that way.

Ah, so they're going to become terrible then? Good to know. Having under a talent per level to split between these two systems is just less than fun.

[Tariyan Draegr]

When classes gain an SoM progression, each feat becomes 2 combat talents, while a blended progression gets 1 talent per feat. There are some exceptions in the Time playtest, but I wouldn't count on them to stay that way.



.

Is this an Upcoming change to how the system works because I'm very confused right now.

[Arcueid]

Ah, so they're going to become terrible then? Good to know. Having under a talent per level to split between these two systems is just less than fun.

Is this an Upcoming change to how the system works because I'm very confused right now.

I think this is a reference to how when designing the classes each class feature is weighed in "feats" for how powerful it is, like taking a fighter and replacing their bonus feats with class features how many feats would they need to lose to gain sneak attack for example.

SoM talents are roughly valued 1 talent being worth 2 feats. (as also displayed with the feat trade option letting you trade 5 feats for 10, or 8 feats for 15)
SoP talents are about the same.
Blended training is valued at 1 talent = 1 feat because the feature de-values each talent making it so every martial talent is stealing from your pool of magic talents. But you're still gaining access to both so its still the same value as an overall class feature.

To repeat my previous piece:

So far they don't Eliciter, Armorist, Mageknight, Shifter, Summoner, Symbiat from the Champion book keep their same talent amount (aka a talent per CL increase); Magus is the only one who upgrades from 15 to 20.

So blended training as it currently stands for the majority of archetypes has the advantage that you don't gain more talents, but it doesn't cost you additional class features(feats), thats why most of those archetypes aren't making your trade additional stuff to get it its just granting access to both.
Which is why while it'll mean you'll need to lose something extra the separate pools has the advantage of granting you at least the overall more talents.

[Tariyan Draegr]

I think this is a reference to how when designing the classes each class feature is weighed in "feats" for how powerful it is, like taking a fighter and replacing their bonus feats with class features how many feats would they need to lose to gain sneak attack for example.

SoM talents are roughly valued 1 talent being worth 2 feats. (as also displayed with the feat trade option letting you trade 5 feats for 10, or 8 feats for 15)
SoP talents are about the same.
Blended training is valued at 1 talent = 1 feat because the feature de-values each talent making it so every martial talent is stealing from your pool of magic talents. But you're still gaining access to both so its still the same value as an overall class feature.

To repeat my previous piece:


So blended training as it currently stands for the majority of archetypes has the advantage that you don't gain more talents, but it doesn't cost you additional class features(feats), thats why most of those archetypes aren't making your trade additional stuff to get it its just granting access to both.
Which is why while it'll mean you'll need to lose something extra the separate pools has the advantage of granting you at least the overall more talents.

Ah, ok. That makesx a lot of sense

[A.J.Gibson]

Ah, so they're going to become terrible then? Good to know. Having under a talent per level to split between these two systems is just less than fun.

I'm just pointing out that time book is still in play test, so nothing in it is set in stone.

[A.J.Gibson]

I think this is a reference to how when designing the classes each class feature is weighed in "feats" for how powerful it is, like taking a fighter and replacing their bonus feats with class features how many feats would they need to lose to gain sneak attack for example.

SoM talents are roughly valued 1 talent being worth 2 feats. (as also displayed with the feat trade option letting you trade 5 feats for 10, or 8 feats for 15)
SoP talents are about the same.
Blended training is valued at 1 talent = 1 feat because the feature de-values each talent making it so every martial talent is stealing from your pool of magic talents. But you're still gaining access to both so its still the same value as an overall class feature.

To repeat my previous piece:


So blended training as it currently stands for the majority of archetypes has the advantage that you don't gain more talents, but it doesn't cost you additional class features(feats), thats why most of those archetypes aren't making your trade additional stuff to get it its just granting access to both.
Which is why while it'll mean you'll need to lose something extra the separate pools has the advantage of granting you at least the overall more talents.

Pretty much, though the extra combat talent feat only grants one talent, not two, so I think there are exceptions to the rule.

And yes, blended training can be tacked onto an SoP class for free, since it's just giving you an option on what to buy, and being able to buy things isn't worth anything (like fighter training on the magus isn't worth anything).

[Arcueid]

Not entirely certain it fits in this book. But is there any plan to add or convert some FCB for some of the races? We have a number of alternate racial traits for them but no FCB. Like Dhampir, Irfit, Undine, Sylph, Kitsine, etc... it would be neat to see a few more races added to the base spheres classes like armorist, incanter, etc...

In other cases we have sphere conversion archetypes but certain favored class bonuses aren't really valid in spheres. Like ones that add spells known to sorcerer(human sorcerer, which admittedly could just be like incanter's 1/6 of a bonus magic talent). I assume things like kitsune's 1/4 to the DC of enchantment spells would translate to the mind sphere but not sure if there's hard rules for that.

Just a few ideas.

[Mithril Leaf]

As for conversion rules, the simple truth is that it's not easy to summarize. The sphere archetypes try to give you basic functionality, but each archetype can be very different, and a simple step-by-step procedure is probably going to give crappy results. If you want to convert something to spheres, talk to you GM. Hell, post it here and people will probably give you advice. SoM does a better job here because SoM is not a huge departure from the rules the way SoP is.

So I know it isn't easy to have a simple conversion ruleset, but it seems like the majority of archetypes and such that grant spellcasting provide it using existing class casting. I'd also say that the majority do so via granting the casting of a bard or a magus, often merely swapping out the stat and maybe the list. Providing some sort of actual codified rules for trading out established casting qualities doesn't seem like it would be exceedingly unpleasant. It would also provide support for a lot of material, vigilante archetypes, that one rogue, some racial classes. I would certainly appreciate it.

[A.J.Gibson]

So I just got back from overseas (where the beaches are warm and the internet is crap), and I'm not pushing Protection into final edits, so it'll be a while before I get to make any more changes to AoP (and I still need to go back and fix the Skald, dammit, and I might want to write a few more archetypes). But I'll address this now.


Not entirely certain it fits in this book. But is there any plan to add or convert some FCB for some of the races? We have a number of alternate racial traits for them but no FCB. Like Dhampir, Irfit, Undine, Sylph, Kitsine, etc... it would be neat to see a few more races added to the base spheres classes like armorist, incanter, etc...

In other cases we have sphere conversion archetypes but certain favored class bonuses aren't really valid in spheres. Like ones that add spells known to sorcerer(human sorcerer, which admittedly could just be like incanter's 1/6 of a bonus magic talent). I assume things like kitsune's 1/4 to the DC of enchantment spells would translate to the mind sphere but not sure if there's hard rules for that.

Just a few ideas.

So I'm trying to keep the book focused on SoP in Paizo classes, and this would be a lot of work. If I did something like this, I would introduce some general rules for converting FCB (you pretty much nailed it with your examples).


So I know it isn't easy to have a simple conversion ruleset, but it seems like the majority of archetypes and such that grant spellcasting provide it using existing class casting. I'd also say that the majority do so via granting the casting of a bard or a magus, often merely swapping out the stat and maybe the list. Providing some sort of actual codified rules for trading out established casting qualities doesn't seem like it would be exceedingly unpleasant. It would also provide support for a lot of material, vigilante archetypes, that one rogue, some racial classes. I would certainly appreciate it.

Are there general rules for converting classes somewhere in the wiki? I swear I'm going blind. If there are, they probably can be applied to a class after archetypes; I'm not certain any official changes need to be made.

[Domar]

Official rules for diminished spellcasting would be nice. I think buying it off like a boon would work.

[Arcueid]

Are there general rules for converting classes somewhere in the wiki? I swear I'm going blind. If there are, they probably can be applied to a class after archetypes; I'm not certain any official changes need to be made.

Nope its why i originally brought it up previously to have some rules. I remember finding a forum post about it awhile ago when certain conversion archetypes had yet to exist so people were asking.

But from my searches no printed rules seemed to exist either on the wiki or the original SoP pdf at least.

[AlienFromBeyond]

Ssalarn is on record for saying the vague rules given on page 8-9 of the SoP core book are official conversion rules, which is why the SoM Magus archetype doesn't convert its casting to spherecasting but still has rules for how it interacts with them. Any caster can be "quick-converted" by giving high/mid/low casting to 9/6/4 casters respectively with using the same casting modifier and done.

That said, I noticed the Occultist archetype in the Protection playtest got removed. Will we maybe see a replacement for it in this book as a result? Once all the Protection editing is done and it's released of course.

[Arcueid]

That said, I noticed the Occultist archetype in the Protection playtest got removed. Will we maybe see a replacement for it in this book as a result? Once all the Protection editing is done and it's released of course.

Yeah the occultist archetype had some issues and needed a bit more conversion to fix some basic issues. That said it would be appropriate in this book as it was already basically sphere occultist; but it lost much of the flavor of "here are magic items used to cast spells", and most of the drawbacks associated with using those implements. While the archetype was in the Protection sphere book, it really seems like more of a "Sphere Occultist" general archetype with only the full CL in Protection and the extra Ward use to make it more themed towards the book.

The archetype baseline needed these changes (this is going off of the protection playtest version) to be taken into consideration.

1. Keep some link between implements and casting.

Right now an occultist gets 2 implements at 1st, and one more at 2nd + every 4 levels thereafter. Giving 7 total allowing all but 1 of the schools to be picked up.
Then of course you lose more if you grab one of panoplies.
Each implement could be associated with two or three spheres, as spheres don't perfectly line up with spell schools, and as the Occultist levels up and chooses new implements they would expand the spheres available to them.
Example(not alot of these 100% make sense, but its a way to spread 20 spheres over 8 schools)
Abjuration: Time, Protection
Conjuration: Conjuration, Creation, Warp
Divination: Divination, Fate, Weather
Enchantment: Enhancement, War
Evocation: Destruction, Light, Dark
Illusion: Illusion, Mind
Necromancy: Death, Life
Transmutation: Alteration, Telekinesis, Nature


2. Completely change the focus power system.

The associated focus powers (which are gained at every odd level) for each implement (as the archetype offered replacement resonant powers) could be replaced with granting a bonus talent in one of the associated spheres as long as that implement is held. If we change the base focus power of an implement school also (implements gained at 1, 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 and focus powers gained at 3 and every odd level afterward).

The reason for this is the choices on the focus powers list can be compared to spells on the normal Pathfinder list (in some cases being directly spell like abilities), and could be approximated to magic talents in the SoP lists as well. Because these abilities operate on mental focus points (or as this archetype specifies, can also use Spell Points) it is essentially the same as casing a sphere ability.
It does change a core portion of the class, but it would be mostly a horizontal shift of ability and help prevent any issues left in by having base pathfinder spells/spell like abilities when used alongside spheres of power magic talents.

3. Panoplies and sacred implements.

An Occultist can select a panopoly in place of an implement as long as they have the component shcools already known, giving up one implement (a resonant power, plus options, possibly a magic talent) to pick up this other bonus. The most powerful of these is the one that gives Occultist a full BAB progression (not just a bonus on attacks, but a bonus to BAB) so leaving this in could have potential issues when dealing with the SoM content as occultist has the proficiencies to qualify for a martial tradition, and the archetype had them as a mid-caster meaning the feat tradeout was also valid to gain talent progression.
Sacred implements, are picked up in place of a normal implement at the appropriate levels and give an extra focus power along with a -1 penalty to caster level in the "prohibited school" associated with it, similar Wizard specialization schools. This is difficult to implement in SoM, if we go the route having the Occultist to gain magic talents instead of focus powers then it should be done away with.

So the panoplies/sacred implements may be difficult/cause issues if integrated.

4. Resonant Powers and Mental focus

If we take the above sections into account we do somewhat destroy the reason for mental focus outside of resonant powers.
We could simply remove mental focus and instead grant a few extra spell points beyond what you'd normally gain. As mental focus effectively was used to cast extra spells anyways; and instead grant a temporary buff depending on what implement the user currently has active/holding.
Second option is leaving it in, but reducing how many points we get as without having anything else to spend on you'd have no reason not to max out the resonant powers.

Baseline i think this would be the best way (taking some of the suggestions presented in that comment thread for the archetype) to implement this class as a spheres conversion. It keeps the theme of occultist; which is close to antiquarian but would be much more casting themed.

[Arcueid]

In addition to the Occultist piece above i have a crazy suggestion for another popular archetype to apply to spheres.

Synthesist summoner; now i know what you're thinking, but hear me out here.

We already have it to a degree if you look at the technician archetype. The way the suit pilot and how most of the piloted independent inventions work they're really similar; they're basically the same creature who's physical stats are replaced by the thing he's piloting while he provides the mental stats; the invention is a bit of a wealth by level hog as well though and has alot of limitations on what you're allowed to do with it.

So to save yourself MUCH headache for rewriting rules and such you simply make the archetype reference technician for all its rules; because instead of using conjuration companions as the base we use the independent inventions as the base with some twists.

1. Its already sentient so it would be similar to one with the robot subtype already applied.
2. Instead of improvements you get a number of form talents as you level.
3. You don't get more inventions as you level (likely to balance this you grant more conjuration talents).
4. You can still have gold costs under the guise of "rituals" rather than "improvements"
5. While merged with the companion it uses the suit improvement rules.

Now i think the most difficult thing to implement is the base forms. Inventions come in the flavor of "vehicle, canon, or arm" with the ability to add more later. While conjuration stuff comes in the flavor of "avian, bidped, ooze, orb, quadruped, serpentine, vermin".

This is about the point where the idea gets a bit complicated.

The second option is make an archetype more focused around the puppet archetype conjuration companion but i feel there's going to be much more rules writing involved just inside the archetype itself.

I thought i'd bring it up as i like the base idea of it; and i was disappointed that the conjuration book didn't see that neat puppet merger feat get printed.

[Mithril Leaf]

In addition to the Occultist piece above i have a crazy suggestion for another popular archetype to apply to spheres.

Synthesist summoner; now i know what you're thinking, but hear me out here.

We already have it to a degree if you look at the technician archetype. The way the suit pilot and how most of the piloted independent inventions work they're really similar; they're basically the same creature who's physical stats are replaced by the thing he's piloting while he provides the mental stats; the invention is a bit of a wealth by level hog as well though and has alot of limitations on what you're allowed to do with it.

So to save yourself MUCH headache for rewriting rules and such you simply make the archetype reference technician for all its rules; because instead of using conjuration companions as the base we use the independent inventions as the base with some twists.

1. Its already sentient so it would be similar to one with the robot subtype already applied.
2. Instead of improvements you get a number of form talents as you level.
3. You don't get more inventions as you level (likely to balance this you grant more conjuration talents).
4. You can still have gold costs under the guise of "rituals" rather than "improvements"
5. While merged with the companion it uses the suit improvement rules.

Now i think the most difficult thing to implement is the base forms. Inventions come in the flavor of "vehicle, canon, or arm" with the ability to add more later. While conjuration stuff comes in the flavor of "avian, bidped, ooze, orb, quadruped, serpentine, vermin".

This is about the point where the idea gets a bit complicated.

The second option is make an archetype more focused around the puppet archetype conjuration companion but i feel there's going to be much more rules writing involved just inside the archetype itself.

I thought i'd bring it up as i like the base idea of it; and i was disappointed that the conjuration book didn't see that neat puppet merger feat get printed.

What about that one vigilante archetype in the Conjuration handbook?

[A.J.Gibson]

Ssalarn is on record for saying the vague rules given on page 8-9 of the SoP core book are official conversion rules, which is why the SoM Magus archetype doesn't convert its casting to spherecasting but still has rules for how it interacts with them. Any caster can be "quick-converted" by giving high/mid/low casting to 9/6/4 casters respectively with using the same casting modifier and done.

That said, I noticed the Occultist archetype in the Protection playtest got removed. Will we maybe see a replacement for it in this book as a result? Once all the Protection editing is done and it's released of course.

One thing I don't want to do is restate the rules that if you are a low caster you end up with -3 to CL. Frankly, I don't know see much I would add to the existing rules; something about bloodline spells being compatible with trading in for spheres and rules for diminished spellcasting, but that's it.

Cryptomancer got removed because there was quite a bit of complaining and I didn't have time to deal with it all before Protection goes to print. Moving it to AoP is a possibility, I need to re-examine it.


Yeah the occultist archetype had some issues and needed a bit more conversion to fix some basic issues. That said it would be appropriate in this book as it was already basically sphere occultist; but it lost much of the flavor of "here are magic items used to cast spells", and most of the drawbacks associated with using those implements. While the archetype was in the Protection sphere book, it really seems like more of a "Sphere Occultist" general archetype with only the full CL in Protection and the extra Ward use to make it more themed towards the book.

The archetype baseline needed these changes (this is going off of the protection playtest version) to be taken into consideration.

1. Keep some link between implements and casting.

Right now an occultist gets 2 implements at 1st, and one more at 2nd + every 4 levels thereafter. Giving 7 total allowing all but 1 of the schools to be picked up.
Then of course you lose more if you grab one of panoplies.
Each implement could be associated with two or three spheres, as spheres don't perfectly line up with spell schools, and as the Occultist levels up and chooses new implements they would expand the spheres available to them.
Example(not alot of these 100% make sense, but its a way to spread 20 spheres over 8 schools)
Abjuration: Time, Protection
Conjuration: Conjuration, Creation, Warp
Divination: Divination, Fate, Weather
Enchantment: Enhancement, War
Evocation: Destruction, Light, Dark
Illusion: Illusion, Mind
Necromancy: Death, Life
Transmutation: Alteration, Telekinesis, Nature


2. Completely change the focus power system.

The associated focus powers (which are gained at every odd level) for each implement (as the archetype offered replacement resonant powers) could be replaced with granting a bonus talent in one of the associated spheres as long as that implement is held. If we change the base focus power of an implement school also (implements gained at 1, 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 and focus powers gained at 3 and every odd level afterward).

The reason for this is the choices on the focus powers list can be compared to spells on the normal Pathfinder list (in some cases being directly spell like abilities), and could be approximated to magic talents in the SoP lists as well. Because these abilities operate on mental focus points (or as this archetype specifies, can also use Spell Points) it is essentially the same as casing a sphere ability.
It does change a core portion of the class, but it would be mostly a horizontal shift of ability and help prevent any issues left in by having base pathfinder spells/spell like abilities when used alongside spheres of power magic talents.

3. Panoplies and sacred implements.

An Occultist can select a panopoly in place of an implement as long as they have the component shcools already known, giving up one implement (a resonant power, plus options, possibly a magic talent) to pick up this other bonus. The most powerful of these is the one that gives Occultist a full BAB progression (not just a bonus on attacks, but a bonus to BAB) so leaving this in could have potential issues when dealing with the SoM content as occultist has the proficiencies to qualify for a martial tradition, and the archetype had them as a mid-caster meaning the feat tradeout was also valid to gain talent progression.
Sacred implements, are picked up in place of a normal implement at the appropriate levels and give an extra focus power along with a -1 penalty to caster level in the "prohibited school" associated with it, similar Wizard specialization schools. This is difficult to implement in SoM, if we go the route having the Occultist to gain magic talents instead of focus powers then it should be done away with.

So the panoplies/sacred implements may be difficult/cause issues if integrated.

4. Resonant Powers and Mental focus

If we take the above sections into account we do somewhat destroy the reason for mental focus outside of resonant powers.
We could simply remove mental focus and instead grant a few extra spell points beyond what you'd normally gain. As mental focus effectively was used to cast extra spells anyways; and instead grant a temporary buff depending on what implement the user currently has active/holding.
Second option is leaving it in, but reducing how many points we get as without having anything else to spend on you'd have no reason not to max out the resonant powers.

Baseline i think this would be the best way (taking some of the suggestions presented in that comment thread for the archetype) to implement this class as a spheres conversion. It keeps the theme of occultist; which is close to antiquarian but would be much more casting themed.

First, I wouldn't want to create a sphere occultist and call it that, because the backlash from those who didn't like that specific interpretation would be enormous.

Now to address your number points:

1 - Associating spheres with schools is clunky and unnecessary. It also produces an issue with talents being handed out oddly, since you get half your schools by 5th level. It also forces diversification in a system that generally doesn't want you to. Simply giving the occultist mid-caster gives players greater freedom, while being better balanced and a lot simpler to explain.

2 - If you completely rewrite the focus power system, you might as well just write a new class. Occultist would make a good hedgewitch tradition. Coming up with new focus powers is also quite hard, as any obvious powers are already talents, and if you are just getting talents, why have a separate system?

3 - "You may not take panopolies, sacred implements require you to spend a feat" or something like that.

4 - As I said, removing mental focus pretty much guts the class.

Upon reflection, I think the best way to adapt the Occultist is to make him trade out spells for SoM talents, and convert resonant powers to buffs and whatever. You would be a completely different sort of caster. Alternatively, you could introduce 8 new schools with it's own powers - like maybe each school is a virtue or a type of psychic power - but then you're rewriting the class again.

Have you given any thought to doing the conversion yourself?

[Arcueid]

First, I wouldn't want to create a sphere occultist and call it that, because the backlash from those who didn't like that specific interpretation would be enormous.

Now to address your number points:

1 - Associating spheres with schools is clunky and unnecessary. It also produces an issue with talents being handed out oddly, since you get half your schools by 5th level. It also forces diversification in a system that generally doesn't want you to. Simply giving the occultist mid-caster gives players greater freedom, while being better balanced and a lot simpler to explain.

2 - If you completely rewrite the focus power system, you might as well just write a new class. Occultist would make a good hedgewitch tradition. Coming up with new focus powers is also quite hard, as any obvious powers are already talents, and if you are just getting talents, why have a separate system?

3 - "You may not take panopolies, sacred implements require you to spend a feat" or something like that.

4 - As I said, removing mental focus pretty much guts the class.

Upon reflection, I think the best way to adapt the Occultist is to make him trade out spells for SoM talents, and convert resonant powers to buffs and whatever. You would be a completely different sort of caster. Alternatively, you could introduce 8 new schools with it's own powers - like maybe each school is a virtue or a type of psychic power - but then you're rewriting the class again.

Have you given any thought to doing the conversion yourself?

These were simply some of the suggestions from me and a few others talking about how to handle a conversion. Its not a very well written class and as such it makes conversion difficult due to the nature of many of its class features.

1. Really you just have to apply the the "Focus Magic" drawback to a specific sphere(or set of spheres) for each implement as that's how the implements worked. They where very comparable to a wizard's bonded item but tied to specific spheres of magic instead of all of their casting.
- alternative suggestion is just make you chose a sphere when you gain an implement to associate with that implement. Force the user to focus rather than gaining a bunch of spheres. Worst case you could add in a few extra implements just to allow a couple more spheres to be grabbed if the number seems too low with only 1 sphere per implement.

2. The issue with focus powers is if you look at them you'll find most are just saying you cast "mirror image, enlarge person, telekensis, ect.." or give stuff equivalent to "magic weapon, blur, etc..". It leaves much of base pathfinder spellcasting in the class. As such its probably the biggest part of the class subject to rewrite. Some powers are fine and probably could stay if you didn't want a huge rewrite, but bare minimum a number of powers would need rewrite to keep from mixing in base pathfinder spells.

3. That could work.

4. In my opinion much of the flavor lies in the implements. But if focus powers are to remain it does bring up some problems (see point 2). Obviously there's more than one way to handle this, the talent option seemed like the easiest way to implement changes without needing to revisit every single focus power to see what could stay and what had to go.

Overall we've talked about the possibility of a sphere occultist a lot and generally said it was better off having the implement flavor added elsewhere than converting the class as the problem exists as you've stated that, with the rewrites, nearly the whole class would need changed.
I simply was making suggestions that if down the road a "sphere occultist" was to be pursued as an archetype many things need changes to maintain any balance.

[ICN]

On the Blended Training thing, would it work to make it an option, like Martial Traditions are? e.g. If your class is not a high-caster and does not possess the Combat Training class feature, you may trade the Magic Talents feature for the Blended Training feature, gaining talents at the same rate as the class would've gained magic talents.

[Xararion]

One suggestion partially relating to the occultist class, as it's one my two favourite classes in non-sphere pathfinder (other is magus). You could enforce sphere-occultist to have the "prepared caster" drawback and tell them to divide their spellpoints between their implements, effectively taking out the focus as a separate resource to track, and have any resonant powers and such key from that. To make this bit more smooth and less punishing, maybe give them little extra spellpoints, since they're now bound to separate implements anyway.

Sadly any opinion aside from that from me would lean too far into making your own implements and focus powers, as mentioned the current ones are awkward fit for spheres due to there being 20 spheres for 8 schools and with spheres rarely diversifying to quarter of that on any given caster, and with focus powers largely copying normal spells. If there only was infinite money and time I'd just give my vote of confidence in making sphere specific implements and powers, but well, that's lot of work and wordcount for one class to take.

[A.J.Gibson]

One suggestion partially relating to the occultist class, as it's one my two favourite classes in non-sphere pathfinder (other is magus). You could enforce sphere-occultist to have the "prepared caster" drawback and tell them to divide their spellpoints between their implements, effectively taking out the focus as a separate resource to track, and have any resonant powers and such key from that. To make this bit more smooth and less punishing, maybe give them little extra spellpoints, since they're now bound to separate implements anyway.

Sadly any opinion aside from that from me would lean too far into making your own implements and focus powers, as mentioned the current ones are awkward fit for spheres due to there being 20 spheres for 8 schools and with spheres rarely diversifying to quarter of that on any given caster, and with focus powers largely copying normal spells. If there only was infinite money and time I'd just give my vote of confidence in making sphere specific implements and powers, but well, that's lot of work and wordcount for one class to take.

Generally, we don't let classes dictate the magical tradition of the caster. For one, what happens if they start off as an incanter and then take a level in occultist? I think the best way to do an occultist is not as a class, but as a magical tradition!

[Arcueid]

Generally, we don't let classes dictate the magical tradition of the caster. For one, what happens if they start off as an incanter and then take a level in occultist? I think the best way to do an occultist is not as a class, but as a magical tradition!

Makes sense. I remember Dendrite kinda forces draining casting/fortified casting onto you; but thats basically the only one.

Honestly it seemed a bit harsher than base occultist but it might be simpler if modeled similarly to Antiquarian Armiger where missing your customized weapon with magic talents drops your CL to 0 from your Armiger levels until you get the weapon back.

Though that is the issue where Antiquarian has alot of the feel already, its just more martial focused while Occultist is a stronger caster; but even then you could just have a SoP focused Armiger rather than a hybrid/SoM one and recreate alot of the theme. Kinda like how Thaumaturge has a 100% martial SoM archetype.

Might be the best option, as its kinda why it probably wouldn't work to have a SoP Kineticist considering alot of the feel is just within the Destruction sphere; we already have something similar that can be fine turned with an archetype rather than just doing a conversion.

[A.J.Gibson]

With Protection book in layout I can finally return my attention to this. I wanted to ask a few questions:

First, there has been some recent discussion about whether Imbued Strike and Champion's Strike (sphere versions of Arcane Strike and Blooded Arcane Strike respectively) might be overpower. Thoughts?

Second, I'm still open to suggestions for feats, as long as people remember that it is primarily an SoP book. I know that Mystic Assault proved disappointing to a lot of people, maybe a third level of it?

Third, I've been trying to come up with a Hunter archetype, and was wondering what people might want beyond swapping animal companion for conjuration, and maybe SoM support.

[EldritchWeaver]

Not sure if it fits into this book, but when are speaking of feats, I'd like to have an improved version of Circle Casting which does allow to use the move action for maintaining Circle Casting. Basically the Easy Focus boon for this situation.

[Tariyan Draegr]

I think the arcane strike feats are perfectly fine atm. If I had to ask for something, I'd like a pact based drawback/archetype that gets really into warlock flavor. I know we have some thaumaturge archetypes that function like a warlock but I find myself disappointed in then either because they seem shallow (pactmaker) or don't really carry the weight of selling your soul (pact master). Maybe something that leaves a noticable mark and a drawback to counteract the upside of having your power given to you.

I'd also say that for hunter, maybe an archetype that doubles down on multiple conjuration companions. Only thing I can think of atm.

[Mehangel]

I've been trying to come up with a Hunter archetype, and was wondering what people might want beyond swapping animal companion for conjuration, and maybe SoM support.

Maybe lose Animal Focus and 2nd Animal Focus, instead giving an ability such as the following:

At 1st level, the (insert Hunter archetype name here) gains the Alteration sphere as a bonus talent. Each day when the (insert Hunter archetype name here) regains his spell points he may choose a single (form) talent from the Alteration sphere, which remains temporarily until he regains his spell points the next day. When the (insert Hunter archetype name here) uses blank form on his companion to grant Alteration traits, the shapeshift has its duration changed to permanent—it remains in effect until the (insert Hunter archetype name here) casts another shapeshift on it, or is dispelled. At level 20, whenever the (insert Hunter archetype name here) uses blank form on himself, the shapeshift has its duration changed to permanent—it remains in effect until the (insert Hunter archetype name here) casts another shapeshift on himself, or is dispelled.

[A.J.Gibson]

Not sure if it fits into this book, but when are speaking of feats, I'd like to have an improved version of Circle Casting which does allow to use the move action for maintaining Circle Casting. Basically the Easy Focus boon for this situation.

Anyone else want to weigh in on this?


I think the arcane strike feats are perfectly fine atm. If I had to ask for something, I'd like a pact based drawback/archetype that gets really into warlock flavor. I know we have some thaumaturge archetypes that function like a warlock but I find myself disappointed in then either because they seem shallow (pactmaker) or don't really carry the weight of selling your soul (pact master). Maybe something that leaves a noticable mark and a drawback to counteract the upside of having your power given to you.

I'd also say that for hunter, maybe an archetype that doubles down on multiple conjuration companions. Only thing I can think of atm.

That might be doable. But what exactly comprises warlock flavor? Being limited by your pact? Being able to blast things? General creepiness?


Maybe lose Animal Focus and 2nd Animal Focus, instead giving an ability such as the following:

At 1st level, the (insert Hunter archetype name here) gains the Alteration sphere as a bonus talent. Each day when the (insert Hunter archetype name here) regains his spell points he may choose a single (form) talent from the Alteration sphere, which remains temporarily until he regains his spell points the next day. When the (insert Hunter archetype name here) uses blank form on his companion to grant Alteration traits, the shapeshift has its duration changed to permanent—it remains in effect until the (insert Hunter archetype name here) casts another shapeshift on it, or is dispelled. At level 20, whenever the (insert Hunter archetype name here) uses blank form on himself, the shapeshift has its duration changed to permanent—it remains in effect until the (insert Hunter archetype name here) casts another shapeshift on himself, or is dispelled.

Animal Focus is the hunter's most unique ability - I would hate to take it away to replace it with bonus talents anyone could buy. What the hunter needs is some mechanic that plays up the bond between him and his companion. Maybe if the companion was a conjured companion, and the hunter could somehow benefit from it's form talents? While the companion benefits from something he does?

[ChrisAsmadi]

A small archetype that just broadens the Elementalist's bonus feat choices could be pretty helpful. There's more than a few feats amongst the Champion (eg, Shielded Casting, Spell Attack) and Destruction Sphere-focused (eg, Deadly Targeting, Improved Energy Blade, Melee Blaster, Reach Blade) categories that seem like fitting possible choices that you can't currently take because they're not tagged as Combat feats.

Some of the general base game feats would fit, too, I think - stuff like Combat Casting and Spell Penetration/Greater Spell Penetration, but I'm not sure how you'd include those without it being a specific list.

e: Or perhaps a "Martial Elementalist" that swaps them for a Proficient SoM progression? 1 feat/2 talents is roughly the usual swap rate, right?

[Tariyan Draegr]

That might be doable. But what exactly comprises warlock flavor? Being limited by your pact? Being able to blast things? General creepiness?


I'd say the biggest thing is being limited by your pact. You are paying a price for power that isn't yours and I think it's reflected a bit with the pactmaster archetype since you have to have your pact creature summoned to do anything but that seems unrealistic for a pact. A warlock would have someone waiting in the wings who gives them power but is ready to take it all away or take control of what will eventually become their new slave, not actively fighting on the Frontline with them.

Mechanically I think this means that you'll have a bit higher power than the average caster, but you'll have drawbacks similar to addictive casting where using the power has some influence on how you actually behave the more you use it.

There should also be active abilities that reflect the bargain. Since I'm basing this on thaumaturge, I know that mechanically in dnd, warlocks are pretty much the master of doing things at will which spheres does well enough with just base magic. I think that if we combine this form of addictive casting or influence into these "at will" abilities, you get these neat dynamic where the more you use these more powerful abilities, the more that power gets reflected on you.

Also personally, I like the idea of the witchmarked drawback for a warlock type caster. Some distinguishable sign whether it be an aura or three things that reflects that you've ****ed up somewhere and made what will ultimately be a bad deal. Also creepiness is cool.

[A.J.Gibson]

A small archetype that just broadens the Elementalist's bonus feat choices could be pretty helpful. There's more than a few feats amongst the Champion (eg, Shielded Casting, Spell Attack) and Destruction Sphere-focused (eg, Deadly Targeting, Improved Energy Blade, Melee Blaster, Reach Blade) categories that seem like fitting possible choices that you can't currently take because they're not tagged as Combat feats.

Some of the general base game feats would fit, too, I think - stuff like Combat Casting and Spell Penetration/Greater Spell Penetration, but I'm not sure how you'd include those without it being a specific list.

e: Or perhaps a "Martial Elementalist" that swaps them for a Proficient SoM progression? 1 feat/2 talents is roughly the usual swap rate, right?

I'm trying to avoid doing archetypes for the SoP classes in the book. It would probably be better to errata the class anyways. I mentioned this in the AMA thread: combat feats are weird, but generally they are strictly martial things. Things fighters may want. Baring elementalist errata, a good fix would be two write a combat feat elementalists would actually want, but I'm kinda stumped.


I'd say the biggest thing is being limited by your pact. You are paying a price for power that isn't yours and I think it's reflected a bit with the pactmaster archetype since you have to have your pact creature summoned to do anything but that seems unrealistic for a pact. A warlock would have someone waiting in the wings who gives them power but is ready to take it all away or take control of what will eventually become their new slave, not actively fighting on the Frontline with them.

Mechanically I think this means that you'll have a bit higher power than the average caster, but you'll have drawbacks similar to addictive casting where using the power has some influence on how you actually behave the more you use it.

There should also be active abilities that reflect the bargain. Since I'm basing this on thaumaturge, I know that mechanically in dnd, warlocks are pretty much the master of doing things at will which spheres does well enough with just base magic. I think that if we combine this form of addictive casting or influence into these "at will" abilities, you get these neat dynamic where the more you use these more powerful abilities, the more that power gets reflected on you.

Also personally, I like the idea of the witchmarked drawback for a warlock type caster. Some distinguishable sign whether it be an aura or three things that reflects that you've ****ed up somewhere and made what will ultimately be a bad deal. Also creepiness is cool.

The marked enhancement drawback for the Enhancement sphere does something like this. What you're suggested sounds less like a class and more like a magical tradition. Alternatively, I could see some sort of Oracle where their 'god' is some horrible demon and their curse is having to deal with them.

[Tariyan Draegr]

The marked enhancement drawback for the Enhancement sphere does something like this. What you're suggested sounds less like a class and more like a magical tradition. Alternatively, I could see some sort of Oracle where their 'god' is some horrible demon and their curse is having to deal with them.

This is fantastic idea actually. I'd like to vote +1 on this if there is space or time.

[Mithril Leaf]

Maybe we could finally fix the summoner by actually letting it be as good at it's single shtick as and old Incanter is. My thought is simply let it pick a companion and give them evolutions.

[Arcueid]

With Protection book in layout I can finally return my attention to this. I wanted to ask a few questions:

First, there has been some recent discussion about whether Imbued Strike and Champion's Strike (sphere versions of Arcane Strike and Blooded Arcane Strike respectively) might be overpower. Thoughts?

Second, I'm still open to suggestions for feats, as long as people remember that it is primarily an SoP book. I know that Mystic Assault proved disappointing to a lot of people, maybe a third level of it?

Third, I've been trying to come up with a Hunter archetype, and was wondering what people might want beyond swapping animal companion for conjuration, and maybe SoM support.

For the imbued strike/champion's strike i don't see a huge issue compared to what else can be taken. Improved energy blade already exists, vital strike is a thing; And yes you can stack these with those on something like a mageknight/armorist but we're looking at 3 total feats from vital strike, 1 from energy blade, 3 if you want combat casting+melee blaster+spell attack, and 2 more from these. So thats 9 feats right there. Even with SoM talents you're prettymuch a massive one trick pony who has the potential to obliterate one thing a turn, but likely can't deal with many situations. Which of course if you're an armorist the martial armorist archetype isn't valid for all archetypes (thanks to most armorist archetypes messing with proficiencies) so those builds might have 1/2 their available feats.
Of course one might be tempted to grab the +5 and +2 CL to destruction feats for those low casters as with a trait you can at least reach 19th CL in destruction with a specific blast type group, which is now fighting for slots in that build.

The class that probably benefits the most is mageknight as they have mystic combats for extra talents, champion feats, and have built in so the above bit about feats isn't as taxing for them and easier to pull off. Which honestly is a very good thing because that class needs a little help.

Second for feats I didn't think mystic assault was that bad before but now thanks to SoM, Spell Attack, and the Mystic Magus archetype its been made a little obsolete and only exists for the niche builds that can't fit in SoM stuff; otherwise the 2nd level removing the spell point cost basically just turns it into the magus's spell combat ability, which thanks to how SoP works isn't always that tempting to take in feat form when one could simply dip 1 or 2 levels into magus to get it.
Its hard to say on feats, they're aren't a lot of base pathfinder feats outside of crafting stuff super caster focused and the only real low-caster themed one was arcane strike so there isn't much else in need of conversion as most of the feats still work for casters.
Maybe a feat to activate Fire Wielder from the nature sphere more quickly? At least for the unarmed strike option of it. As its a neat option, though difficult to work in for low casters as the fire size doesn't scale well for them, and the standard action is a bit more limiting.
I'll try to think of anything else.

Finally Hunter; this one is difficult as the class even in base pathfinder falls behind.
Its a ranger who gains mid-casting at the cost of BAB and gains an animal companion who they can share teamwork feats with, grant extra tricks, and get an animal focus thats a bunch of enhancement bonuses that save on headbands/belts, at the cost of bonus combat feats/favored enemy/favored terrain.
The resulting class is a druid with a slightly better animal companion because of the teamwork feats, but overall weaker because they miss out on all the other things a druid gets (full casting being the biggest one).


So this is what i see could be traded while also trying to maybe boost it up to be a bit more competitive in the spheres system.
1. Animal focus could just be traded for some sort of bonus/proficiency with the enhancement sphere giving bonuses to enhancing creatures such as the animal companion/themself.
2. Teamwork feats option is interesting, but if needed, but as SoM seems like a decent option for it, beastmastery being an obvious focus/choice for it, one could swap this for some beastmastery boons. Hunter tactics of course would also be included in this.
3. Extra tricks is really meh and could probably be upgraded to anything else.
4. Precise companion honestly could drop the choice and just give outflank as well as precise shot (which thanks to how SoM works the precise shot can be traded to gain the sniper sphere).
5. Raise animal companion, speak with master, emphatic link could be modified or just outright removed to make way for sphere equivelents.
6. If one swapped the animal companion for a conjuration sphere one i feel the class would just be a summoner then, as there wouldn't be much to separate the two. If one went that way allowing the beastmastery sphere to work with it would be an incredibly unique thing that only the hunter could pull off then.
7. Probably could get away with just having separate progressions of both SoM and SoP talents, maybe 3/4 SoP, 1/2 SoM?

Otherwise i can't think of much else to throw on there, the class is losing some unique spells from the ranger & druid spell lists and they did get to pick from both, so they lose out on lead blades/gravity bow/ect.. but to some degree these can be replicated/done better in spheres.
Main point is the class likely could use a small power boost with an archetype as the main thing against it is the class is supposed to be better at animal companions, but instead barely does anything for it and simply is just a worse druid & ranger.

[Ironsides]

I think you could go another direction with the hunter instead of a straight conversion. Replace the animal companion with a conjuration companion with the animal archetype and 3/4 casting and full caster level with the conjuration sphere. I would also like it if got a martial tradition.

[ICN]

Maybe we could finally fix the summoner by actually letting it be as good at it's single shtick as and old Incanter is. My thought is simply let it pick a companion and give them evolutions.

You mean like what sphere summoners (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/sphere-summoner) already do?
In addition, the sphere summoner must designate one of his companions as his ‘eidolon’. An eidolon is a companion with which the summoner possesses a unique connection, and many of his class features and abilities directly affect this particular companion.

[Mithril Leaf]

You mean like what sphere summoners (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/sphere-summoner) already do?
In addition, the sphere summoner must designate one of his companions as his ‘eidolon’. An eidolon is a companion with which the summoner possesses a unique connection, and many of his class features and abilities directly affect this particular companion.

Technically back in AMA thread 1, it was specified that this means that you don't get evolution points because technically those are part of the eidolon and not a class feature.

[A.J.Gibson]

This is fantastic idea actually. I'd like to vote +1 on this if there is space or time.

So the next question is, how would the relationship manifest? A code of conduct?

Also, we're generally avoiding making 3/4 BAB Full Casters nowadays, so I would probably want to do something to the oracle on par with the Soul with Many Faces Shaman or the Spirit Mender Druid.


Maybe we could finally fix the summoner by actually letting it be as good at it's single shtick as and old Incanter is. My thought is simply let it pick a companion and give them evolutions.

As noted, already done. What exactly about the summoner is worth saving anyways? If you can duplicate it with another class, why do you need the class?



Its hard to say on feats, they're aren't a lot of base pathfinder feats outside of crafting stuff super caster focused and the only real low-caster themed one was arcane strike so there isn't much else in need of conversion as most of the feats still work for casters.
Maybe a feat to activate Fire Wielder from the nature sphere more quickly? At least for the unarmed strike option of it. As its a neat option, though difficult to work in for low casters as the fire size doesn't scale well for them, and the standard action is a bit more limiting.
I'll try to think of anything else.


Any feat that references spheres is probably not a combat feat. Combat feats are generally 'fighter class features other people can take'.



Finally Hunter; this one is difficult as the class even in base pathfinder falls behind.
Its a ranger who gains mid-casting at the cost of BAB and gains an animal companion who they can share teamwork feats with, grant extra tricks, and get an animal focus thats a bunch of enhancement bonuses that save on headbands/belts, at the cost of bonus combat feats/favored enemy/favored terrain.
The resulting class is a druid with a slightly better animal companion because of the teamwork feats, but overall weaker because they miss out on all the other things a druid gets (full casting being the biggest one).


That's pretty much my take. Their only unique feature is animal focus, even their teamwork feat abilities are similar to an inquisitor. I kinda wonder if it's worth bothering to save the class.



So this is what i see could be traded while also trying to maybe boost it up to be a bit more competitive in the spheres system.
1. Animal focus could just be traded for some sort of bonus/proficiency with the enhancement sphere giving bonuses to enhancing creatures such as the animal companion/themself.
2. Teamwork feats option is interesting, but if needed, but as SoM seems like a decent option for it, beastmastery being an obvious focus/choice for it, one could swap this for some beastmastery boons. Hunter tactics of course would also be included in this.
3. Extra tricks is really meh and could probably be upgraded to anything else.
4. Precise companion honestly could drop the choice and just give outflank as well as precise shot (which thanks to how SoM works the precise shot can be traded to gain the sniper sphere).
5. Raise animal companion, speak with master, emphatic link could be modified or just outright removed to make way for sphere equivelents.
6. If one swapped the animal companion for a conjuration sphere one i feel the class would just be a summoner then, as there wouldn't be much to separate the two. If one went that way allowing the beastmastery sphere to work with it would be an incredibly unique thing that only the hunter could pull off then.
7. Probably could get away with just having separate progressions of both SoM and SoP talents, maybe 3/4 SoP, 1/2 SoM?

Otherwise i can't think of much else to throw on there, the class is losing some unique spells from the ranger & druid spell lists and they did get to pick from both, so they lose out on lead blades/gravity bow/ect.. but to some degree these can be replicated/done better in spheres.
Main point is the class likely could use a small power boost with an archetype as the main thing against it is the class is supposed to be better at animal companions, but instead barely does anything for it and simply is just a worse druid & ranger.
[/QUOTE]

I'm currently leaning towards swapping companion for conjuration at full CL, with the ability to share spells with the companion, so when you buff yourself you buff them as well. Maybe give the hunter the ability to share in the abilities granted by the companion's form talents as well. I'd rather keep any unique abilities the hunters have (yes, even the crappy ones), and I think leaving SoM would be better - there should be a base SoM archetype for the hunter at some point, I think. Though if I did include SoM, there might be some interestin applications of the beastmastery sphere there.

[Scowling Dragon]

You know what I would appreciate?

A: Something that wasn't Amatuer Gunslinger for the purposes of rescuing misfired guns. It feels like its a necessity for nearly all gun builds in case of a misfire. Its a good feat it just feels weird being dependant on a specific class for this sort of thing.

B: Some more feats that would allows classes to spend feats to multiclass as other classes. You know stuff like the bloodline sorcerer feats or ironically enough Amatuer Gunslinger, but for SOP/SOM classes.

[Arcueid]

Its hard to say on feats, they're aren't a lot of base pathfinder feats outside of crafting stuff super caster focused and the only real low-caster themed one was arcane strike so there isn't much else in need of conversion as most of the feats still work for casters.
Maybe a feat to activate Fire Wielder from the nature sphere more quickly? At least for the unarmed strike option of it. As its a neat option, though difficult to work in for low casters as the fire size doesn't scale well for them, and the standard action is a bit more limiting.
I'll try to think of anything else.

Any feat that references spheres is probably not a combat feat. Combat feats are generally 'fighter class features other people can take'.


I didn't mention combat feats or sphere feats, so i'm actually very confused right now by this response.

[Mithril Leaf]

As noted, already done. What exactly about the summoner is worth saving anyways? If you can duplicate it with another class, why do you need the class?
As noted, you are still incorrect:

The eidolon feature is overridden by the conjuration sphere, with one companion designated as the 'eidolon' for purposes of later class benefits, so no, the conjuration companion should not gain evolutions. It should be plenty strong as it is anyhow.
Unless you want to fix that, then what I said is still correct. With that being said, a number of the Evolutions are pretty cool and I'd like to be able to have one heavily focused companion that actually gets them.

[Arcueid]

As noted, you are still incorrect:

Unless you want to fix that, then what I said is still correct. With that being said, a number of the Evolutions are pretty cool and I'd like to be able to have one heavily focused companion that actually gets them.

In all fairness the conjuration sphere has most of the evolution options recreated, which effectively means if evolutions were a thing again you'd have a creature with the equivalent of just extra form talents. They still have the unique features like aspect/greater aspect to divert form talents to themselves as well which isn't really something any other class can do.


I will admit incanter is somewhat better at it as summoner gets 15 talents + 10 conjuration only talents (25 total) compared to the 30 incanter gets before bonus feats are calculated in. But a core thing people forget about summoner was they are at D8 hit dice 3/4 BAB class, that could wear light armor as well. While it was possible to play them as solely a caster they were also able to work in melee combat to a degree.
And as they are still designating one companion as the "eidolon" all those class features and summoner only feats are still valid.

If one was to "Fix" summoner to make it better than a incanter you'd need to address these core issues; some of which are just "issues" with how spheres of power works, not to say there's an issue with the system, but due to its nature it does invalidate some core pathfinder classes.

1. Incanter is just an amazing caster. Its meant to be the "build your own full caster" which in itself invalidates wizard/arcanist/sorcerer. Though some are getting back in usefulness with the new archetypes in this book for sorcerer/wizard. But regardless it has a ton of magic talents + specializations.
2. Conjuration sphere is basically just the entire eidolon and form talent class feature. While you can use a single talent to make a generic companion to be summoned to sorta recreate the feel of summon monster, you still played "make a monster" via the form talents that you can add. After the conjuration book came out we also got a bunch of archetypes that further invalidated summoner as well as form talents to recreate a good chunk of remaining evolutions that we were missing like "mount".
3. Muticlassing is a thing so an incanter can dip 1 or more levels into summoner to call their conjuration companion an eidolon and get all the benefits that go with that; and a summoner can dip incanter and gain a +1 bonus to caster level in conjuration as well as some extra magic talents without compromising their conjuration caster level as summoner CL stacks.
4. Summoner wasn't a high caster in base pathfinder which matters more in spheres due to the limited CL and talents they miss out on things like getting 7th level spells in 5th level spell slots. While most were all summoning themed spells and they had a very limited spell list they still had plane shift.

So for summoner this means(number matching with each point above).
1. It can't compete as a full caster, but that simply means its niche is the higher hit dice, higher BAB, and base light armor proficiency. Its spheres so its not hard either to have a casting tradition not limiting their armor for casting, so one could easily end up in full plate if they get the proficiencies.
2. This part is hard to get around, but if you take the above point into consideration you aren't that far behind incanter and can still make a fairly powerful companion. But its still a "eidolon" so all those class features/feats are something unique to them for that specific companion.
3. Summoners can easily dip for SoM stuff to boost their melee side, incanter to make the companion stronger, ect. Its not hard to do both, keep their caster level up, and still perform.
4. Another part thats hard to get around was spheres doesn't define classes by their spell lists anymore, resulting in very blank slate feeling classes, as they're meant to be vaguely themed, but still able to have talent options to define a character, allowing different playstyles out of a single class. The only "FIX" i would put to this is summoner really should've gotten some warp sphere CL as well; they have a ton of teleport based spells in the class that were just as good as the full casters, as opposed to here where they're 5 CL behind the full caster in the warp sphere.

Overall i don't think summoner needs evolutions again, and they still serve a very niche purpose.

[A.J.Gibson]

You know what I would appreciate?

A: Something that wasn't Amatuer Gunslinger for the purposes of rescuing misfired guns. It feels like its a necessity for nearly all gun builds in case of a misfire. Its a good feat it just feels weird being dependant on a specific class for this sort of thing.

B: Some more feats that would allows classes to spend feats to multiclass as other classes. You know stuff like the bloodline sorcerer feats or ironically enough Amatuer Gunslinger, but for SOP/SOM classes.

The gunslinger is a bit out of scope. What classes do you think need multiclass feats?


I didn't mention combat feats or sphere feats, so i'm actually very confused right now by this response.

Sorry, I thought you were suggesting combat feats for the elementalist, not general feats. As for the firefist idea, it sounds cool, and conveniently mehangel is right here to read it :)

[Scowling Dragon]

The gunslinger is a bit out of scope. What classes do you think need multiclass feats?

SOP classes.

[A.J.Gibson]

SOP classes.

But what would you want from an SoP class? To summarize:
Armorist: maybe their ability to enchant weapons
Elementalist: most of their class features can be duplicated by sphere abilities
Eliciter: getting a first level emotion is okay, maybe.
Fey Adept: doesn't get good until 6th level, otherwise it's just a full-caster with a weak utility power
Hedgewitch: given amateur secrets, granting access would be stupidly good
Incanter: doesn't have any actual class features
Mageknight: Resist magic?
Shifter: you want your alterations to last longer?
Soul Weaver: channel energy?
Symbiat: does anyone play this?
Thaumaturge: doesn't get good until 7th level

[Arcueid]

But what would you want from an SoP class? To summarize:
Armorist: maybe their ability to enchant weapons
Elementalist: most of their class features can be duplicated by sphere abilities
Eliciter: getting a first level emotion is okay, maybe.
Fey Adept: doesn't get good until 6th level, otherwise it's just a full-caster with a weak utility power
Hedgewitch: given amateur secrets, granting access would be stupidly good
Incanter: doesn't have any actual class features
Mageknight: Resist magic?
Shifter: you want your alterations to last longer?
Soul Weaver: channel energy?
Symbiat: does anyone play this?
Thaumaturge: doesn't get good until 7th level

Multiclass feats aren't really a common thing as its hard to boil down a class feature into a single feat (or to be worth multiple feats). I think thats why Variant multiclassing became a thing to a degree (though most of those are awful).

SoP makes it even more difficult considering you can multiclass fairly freely in the system without losing much (armorist being the least multiclass freindly).
But here's a few


Armorist: Ability to enchant weapons can be kinda done via 1 dip in whitesmith, or via the drawback feat for focus casting but at least requires you to still be halfway compentent at the enhancement sphere for it to pay off as those don't get to stack with existing bonuses.
I think to make it boiled down in feat form you basically just be giving away the magus's arcane pool at that rate.

I don't know if you can really boil down armorist into a feat as their main class feature revolves around the summoning of weapons from nothing and granting them enhancement bonuses, due to its nature its very tied to class level as well. With their example of sorcerer you could make it like the bloodline feats where its split into multiple feats to get the bonuses, but bloodlines aren't worth that much and in reality make up very little of the sorcerer's actual power, making it easier to put it into feat format; Armorist you run the risk of either making it too weak and useless, or too good and invalidating the class.

Mageknight: Resist magic is weird. Its hard to just get an "across the board" boost to saves; if it doesn't scale its meh, but you saved a dip, if it does scale its must-have.
If you put a higher level requirement on it, maybe a single mystic combat? Treating your level -5 as mageknight level.

Shifter: There's a trait and a talent i believe to make stuff last rounds without concentration, and the transformation feat is a thing. Maybe a single Beastial Trait like the mageknight suggestion? Otherwise not sure.

Soul Weaver: Channel energy as a feat unlocks a ton of things to characters feat-wise; even things that just require you to have it that don't actually use it. Maybe a single bound nexus power like aid dead, lovelorn soul, or siphon health with a staggered progression?

Symbiat: I don't know about play but i see people dip them all the time for the bonus spheres and the int to AC. Maybe a low level psionics ability as a feat? Not sure. The vector archetype isn't horrible, but otherwise its a hard class to justify staying in because its very front loaded with nice stuff, and no real incentive to stay in it.

Thaumaturge: Another 1 dip wonder. Its hard to put anything it does into a feat because all the invocations are based on forbidden lore, and the invocations are already limited hard to only casting ability modifier use per day, so even if you're playing the class the "good" ability from channel punishment/Defensive Invocation are extremely limited.
Hard to put anything into a feat, though i have multiple gripes about the class; too good as a dip, too bad to actually play, Invocations are terrible, abysmal number of talents. Though i assume the main issue was forbidden lore was once amazing and valued so high it took away from the class to have it, and now the system has tons of ways to raise CL.

Variant multiclassings for some of these classes might be interesting but overall not sure how good they'd be translating into feat format.


Might be out of scope but a couple of things that could be interesting would be.

1. Maybe some new prestige classes or maybe conversions of some. SoP and Paizo kinda killed the need for direct prestige classes as the classes stand on their own and multiclassing isn't bad either, unlike 3.5. But i think the one place they still kinda shine are the "multiclass" themed ones. Like Rage Prophet and such (i know rage prophet isn't amazing but still); where it takes 2 classes that maybe don't mesh too well and grants some class features to really make them synergize. Armorist+something else themed one would be interesting.

2. Maybe a few ported racial feats? Mostly the ones that grant spell-likes have sphere equivalent spells maybe? Magical Tails for kitsune would be an interesting one for example.

[Mithril Leaf]

Any further considerations on solidifying the spell caster to sphere caster exchange rules? It's mainly that I can't think of any other book for Spheres that it could go in. Even if it's intended to be the most conservative (cuts all spells entirely, no bonus talents, one talent per caster level), it would still cover a ton of ground.

[EldritchWeaver]

2. Maybe a few ported racial feats? Mostly the ones that grant spell-likes have sphere equivalent spells maybe? Magical Tails for kitsune would be an interesting one for example.

I've been in discussion over this with the Illusion HB author already. Magical Tails as you know it doesn't work out. The feat got several revisions and is currently a drawback, I believe.

[A.J.Gibson]

Any further considerations on solidifying the spell caster to sphere caster exchange rules? It's mainly that I can't think of any other book for Spheres that it could go in. Even if it's intended to be the most conservative (cuts all spells entirely, no bonus talents, one talent per caster level), it would still cover a ton of ground.

The best I can do is write guidelines for the GM. And frankly, Adam should be writing them.

Case in point: compare the Sphere Wizard to the Sphere Cleric. Both are full casters, and yet one has 30 talents while the other has 25, with 5 of them tied to a certain sphere and 10 tied to Life or Death. There is no math equation or set of rules that would produce this result. The sphere conversions were instead built from the ground up as new classes, almost entirely.

[Ironsides]

I have run into the problem of combining a sphere archetype of a class with another non-sphere archetype that gives additional spells. Maybe some guidelines to treat the sphere archetype as the base class (so it stacks with most archetypes) and that when a conflict comes between the new base class some simple rules to deal with it. A clean and non-over powered way to deal with the additional spell problem would be to give spell points instead of magic talents when this happens.

[A.J.Gibson]

I have run into the problem of combining a sphere archetype of a class with another non-sphere archetype that gives additional spells. Maybe some guidelines to treat the sphere archetype as the base class (so it stacks with most archetypes) and that when a conflict comes between the new base class some simple rules to deal with it. A clean and non-over powered way to deal with the additional spell problem would be to give spell points instead of magic talents when this happens.

This is a good example of what I was talking about. The thing is, the value of additional spells is incredibly variable in Pathfinder. A single feat adds one spell to your list of spells known, while a favored class bonus (which normally grants an extra hit point per level, equal to the toughness feat) can give you an extra spell known at every class level. In this case, to determine what the class should be given, I would not just look at what was given, I would look at what is being taken away, and how powerful the class will be as a result.

Let me put it this way. Think of the incanter. It is a full caster chassis, with 11 bonus feats and 10 bonus talents (about equal to feats) over it's life span. Now build the class you want from that, by spending those 21 'feats'. A couple guidelines:
-getting an additional good save is worth about 2 feats
-armor and shield proficiencies are worth a feat each, proficiency with all martial weapons is worth about 2, a group of martial weapons is probably 1 if they are a crappy list, and 1 martial weapon is worth 1 to half a feat
-not certain how to cost class skills, since they give you a bonus but only if you get the skill, I would probably look at the skill in question, if it's a good skill or the player gets to choose, it's worth half a feat to add to your spell list.
-5 feats for cleric BAB, 10 for fighter, though a lot of people object to full caster with better than wizard BAB, or full BAB with better than low casting
-1 feat per hit die size increase
-most abilities cost 1 feat, though some abilities are spread across multiple levels, Bravery and Trapfinding are each worth a feat, despite scaling with level, costing things like Rage and Inspiring Song are much harder
-abilities that give you the ability to buy another ability are worth nothing, so Magus fighter training is worth nothing, and likewise adding spells to your spell list is worth nothing (spells known might be worth something), likewise role-playing things are worth nothing (like aura of good or code of conduct)
-downgrading to mid-caster gives you 5 feats, or 10 to drop to low caster, plus a feat for every talent you give up
-'class level as caster level' is 1 feat for a mid-caster, but shouldn't be done for more than 2 spheres (and even that can be pushing it, depending on the spheres) it's considered inappropriate to give full CL to low casters for anything, but giving a low caster full CL with a sphere under limited circumstances

Of course, one you start doing this, some archetypes are really horrid. The worst offender I can think of is Bladed Scarf Dancer Magus, which actually comes out pretty balanced if you dump Diminished Spellcasting.

[Tariyan Draegr]

So the next question is, how would the relationship manifest? A code of conduct?

Also, we're generally avoiding making 3/4 BAB Full Casters nowadays, so I would probably want to do something to the oracle on par with the Soul with Many Faces Shaman or the Spirit Mender Druid.







The relationship could manifest initially as a small magical sign. maybe a marking that could be hidden. The more they rely on their patron the more distinct the marking becomes. the more evil, demonic, grotesque, etc the oracle becomes. Basically a situation where the power they use segregates the individual form the people they love because they're seen as tainted, meaning they have to go back to their patron. Essentially, the devil/demon/eldritch being gives false freedom of choice.

Mechanically, this could be a disguise penalty, an aura that puts your alignment as your patrons, possibly a penalty to handle animal checks as drawbacks along with the rp side of you just reeking of devil/demon.

As for benefits, full CL to a sphere if we keep the thought of mid casters for mid bab. Possibly some energy resistance or natural resistance to the sphere you specialize in. extra talents can work too but that's a bit boring imo but it works mechanically.

[Arcueid]

This is a good example of what I was talking about. The thing is, the value of additional spells is incredibly variable in Pathfinder. A single feat adds one spell to your list of spells known, while a favored class bonus (which normally grants an extra hit point per level, equal to the toughness feat) can give you an extra spell known at every class level. In this case, to determine what the class should be given, I would not just look at what was given, I would look at what is being taken away, and how powerful the class will be as a result.

Let me put it this way. Think of the incanter. It is a full caster chassis, with 11 bonus feats and 10 bonus talents (about equal to feats) over it's life span. Now build the class you want from that, by spending those 21 'feats'. A couple guidelines:
-getting an additional good save is worth about 2 feats
-armor and shield proficiencies are worth a feat each, proficiency with all martial weapons is worth about 2, a group of martial weapons is probably 1 if they are a crappy list, and 1 martial weapon is worth 1 to half a feat
-not certain how to cost class skills, since they give you a bonus but only if you get the skill, I would probably look at the skill in question, if it's a good skill or the player gets to choose, it's worth half a feat to add to your spell list.
-5 feats for cleric BAB, 10 for fighter, though a lot of people object to full caster with better than wizard BAB, or full BAB with better than low casting
-1 feat per hit die size increase
-most abilities cost 1 feat, though some abilities are spread across multiple levels, Bravery and Trapfinding are each worth a feat, despite scaling with level, costing things like Rage and Inspiring Song are much harder
-abilities that give you the ability to buy another ability are worth nothing, so Magus fighter training is worth nothing, and likewise adding spells to your spell list is worth nothing (spells known might be worth something), likewise role-playing things are worth nothing (like aura of good or code of conduct)
-downgrading to mid-caster gives you 5 feats, or 10 to drop to low caster, plus a feat for every talent you give up
-'class level as caster level' is 1 feat for a mid-caster, but shouldn't be done for more than 2 spheres (and even that can be pushing it, depending on the spheres) it's considered inappropriate to give full CL to low casters for anything, but giving a low caster full CL with a sphere under limited circumstances

Of course, one you start doing this, some archetypes are really horrid. The worst offender I can think of is Bladed Scarf Dancer Magus, which actually comes out pretty balanced if you dump Diminished Spellcasting.

I guess my only real point to this is the average "sphere ____" archetype for mid/full casters seem to generally value "bonus spells" at 2 spells per 1 talent (or 1 spell point for the spontaneous casters). So there is a rough internal consistency there to work with for those types of conversions.
As for diminished spellcasting, it seems for spheres conversions its best to just ignore, most archetypes paizo seemed really keen on slapping that onto (especially magus) didn't really need it; and the whole concept doesn't translate super well to spheres and seems easier to just be ignored than determine their impact on casting.

[A.J.Gibson]

The relationship could manifest initially as a small magical sign. maybe a marking that could be hidden. The more they rely on their patron the more distinct the marking becomes. the more evil, demonic, grotesque, etc the oracle becomes. Basically a situation where the power they use segregates the individual form the people they love because they're seen as tainted, meaning they have to go back to their patron. Essentially, the devil/demon/eldritch being gives false freedom of choice.

Mechanically, this could be a disguise penalty, an aura that puts your alignment as your patrons, possibly a penalty to handle animal checks as drawbacks along with the rp side of you just reeking of devil/demon.

As for benefits, full CL to a sphere if we keep the thought of mid casters for mid bab. Possibly some energy resistance or natural resistance to the sphere you specialize in. extra talents can work too but that's a bit boring imo but it works mechanically.

That still feels like a magical tradition than an archetype. It also feels like a cross between a thaumaturge and the withering witch.


I guess my only real point to this is the average "sphere ____" archetype for mid/full casters seem to generally value "bonus spells" at 2 spells per 1 talent (or 1 spell point for the spontaneous casters). So there is a rough internal consistency there to work with for those types of conversions.
As for diminished spellcasting, it seems for spheres conversions its best to just ignore, most archetypes paizo seemed really keen on slapping that onto (especially magus) didn't really need it; and the whole concept doesn't translate super well to spheres and seems easier to just be ignored than determine their impact on casting.

An archetype feature that adds spells to your spell list (for a prepared caster) is worth nothing. See Hexcrafter magus, for example. It simply gives you the option to buy something else. Put another way, PF uses spell lists as a form of niche protection - magi are arcane and therefore can not heal, for example - and this lets you break out of your niche. But it isn't anymore powerful. Spheres doesn't niche protect this way, so everything is on your spell list (except when using scrolls), so this ability doesn't give you anything you don't already have.

For a spontaneous caster, it's another story. One talent per two spells granted wouldn't be too unreasonable, but I can't find any example archetypes that actually do this. And to make life more complicated, additional spells known are worth less the more spells you know, as they are competing for the same resources, and you're probably taking the best spells first.

[Tariyan Draegr]

That still feels like a magical tradition than an archetype. It also feels like a cross between a thaumaturge and the withering witch.


Unfortunately I feel the same. ANy other ideas on it mostly take inspiration from the medium influence mechanic and not only is that stepping on toes but I personally dislike the influence mechanic as well. Hmmmmm, yeah I've got nothing but maybe that's the headache talking.

[khadgar567]

I think warlock is still can be createad in spheres system as we have pact magic specialist with unique( here is the warlocks bread and buter) blasting power similar to sage but instead of to much aestetic training to do blasting we call our patron daily to shot bolts of magical energy. Then throw few sprinkes of reactive shifter and we have respectable all day blaster can be called warlock

[Scowling Dragon]

Well....Maybe some mythic conversion work or something then if my other suggestions are not up to par? Its not the hardest thing to do but some help would be apreciated.

[Arcueid]

An archetype feature that adds spells to your spell list (for a prepared caster) is worth nothing. See Hexcrafter magus, for example. It simply gives you the option to buy something else. Put another way, PF uses spell lists as a form of niche protection - magi are arcane and therefore can not heal, for example - and this lets you break out of your niche. But it isn't anymore powerful. Spheres doesn't niche protect this way, so everything is on your spell list (except when using scrolls), so this ability doesn't give you anything you don't already have.

For a spontaneous caster, it's another story. One talent per two spells granted wouldn't be too unreasonable, but I can't find any example archetypes that actually do this. And to make life more complicated, additional spells known are worth less the more spells you know, as they are competing for the same resources, and you're probably taking the best spells first.

I'll agree for prepared it isn't that much value being added on, i'm just pointing out things like witch get bonus spells because the sphere witch replaces the patron spells class feature for talents in a specific school every odd level; even though the base class feature is just adding spells to the spell list of a prepared caster.
The logic was clearly to give it the 30 talents from class/caster levels (+2 an additional 2 at base) as many high casters in the system get roughly that many to be competitive with incanter, so i see the baseline there, but it does mean they gained alot of free talents for something that isn't valued very high as a class ability. Druid/Cleric follow similar logic of trading bonus spells from their domains for spells in specific spheres.

For spontaneous its not magic talents it seems to be spell points. Sphere sorcerer loses those bloodline spells for 1 extra spell point per level, sphere oracle loses mystery spells to get a spell point every even level (also gain bonus talents at 4 specific levels but only if they chose one that solely gave spells for a curse).

[A.J.Gibson]

I'll agree for prepared it isn't that much value being added on, i'm just pointing out things like witch get bonus spells because the sphere witch replaces the patron spells class feature for talents in a specific school every odd level; even though the base class feature is just adding spells to the spell list of a prepared caster.
The logic was clearly to give it the 30 talents from class/caster levels (+2 an additional 2 at base) as many high casters in the system get roughly that many to be competitive with incanter, so i see the baseline there, but it does mean they gained alot of free talents for something that isn't valued very high as a class ability. Druid/Cleric follow similar logic of trading bonus spells from their domains for spells in specific spheres.

For spontaneous its not magic talents it seems to be spell points. Sphere sorcerer loses those bloodline spells for 1 extra spell point per level, sphere oracle loses mystery spells to get a spell point every even level (also gain bonus talents at 4 specific levels but only if they chose one that solely gave spells for a curse).

As a creator of several archetypes, I can tell you that the 'this replaces...' line is really just there to tell you what you're losing; abilities are not always exchanged one to one.

And to further illustrate your point, sphere witches get 10 talents for their patron spells, while clerics only get 5 talent for their domain spells.

Spontaneous casters are built the same way as prepared casters, but instead of additional talents above 20, they buy the 'extra spell points' feat a bunch of times, in order to preserve the feel of the class (more slots, less spells). I personally prefer to give extra talents instead (see the Ascendant Mind).

Are there any specific archetypes that are popular that don't translate to SoP well (other than for the magus)? Because if it's just 2 or 3 I can just translate them directly like I did for Crossblooded Sorcerer instead of trying to come up with a rule set.

[AlienFromBeyond]

Are there any specific archetypes that are popular that don't translate to SoP well (other than for the magus)? Because if it's just 2 or 3 I can just translate them directly like I did for Crossblooded Sorcerer instead of trying to come up with a rule set.
Here are the ones that come to mind in no particular order (I may be wrong on how popular some of these are):
Sacred Servant Paladin
Dual-Cursed Oracle
Spirit Guide Oracle
Synthesist Summoner (though there's an argument that the Alter-Ego Vigilante does a lot of the same thing anyways so maybe this isn't necessary)
Crossblooded Rager Bloodrager (maybe just alter the existing archetype you have to allow for crossblooding?)

[Scowling Dragon]

Yo I hope Im not too late but Im working on a Archetype for the Medium, based more on the Thaumaturge maybe once I have it done I could show it off?

[A.J.Gibson]

Here are the ones that come to mind in no particular order (I may be wrong on how popular some of these are):
Sacred Servant Paladin
Dual-Cursed Oracle
Spirit Guide Oracle
Synthesist Summoner (though there's an argument that the Alter-Ego Vigilante does a lot of the same thing anyways so maybe this isn't necessary)
Crossblooded Rager Bloodrager (maybe just alter the existing archetype you have to allow for crossblooding?)

Does sacred servant even need translating? Dual cursed cursed is also just 'more revelations'. Spirit guide is just shaman. Crossblooded may be squeeze-able.

[A.J.Gibson]

Yo I hope Im not too late but Im working on a Archetype for the Medium, based more on the Thaumaturge maybe once I have it done I could show it off?

Well the book is kinda for me to write in :) I'll definitely look, though.

[Scowling Dragon]

Well the book is kinda for me to write in :) I'll definitely look, though.

I dunno stick it somewhere later in some other book (Maybe Death). Whos writing death and how can I contact them?
I would be thrilled, if my idea was good enough though.

The idea is that its a combination of Theurge and Troubadour.
The problem with the medium is that instead of playing a Jack of all Trades character, your playing a character that's going to truly SUCK at everything it does.

Which may go true for some other arguable jacks of all trades (The Bard, for instance, some people find just bleh at everything), but the medium Truly embodies.
Id say that you can have your level 20 ability, and be possessed by all spirits at once and be just about en-par with what a Regular jack of all trades class gets already.

The investigator for instance: Gets a Sneak attack type deal, Medium Spell Progression, a bunch of selectable abilities, and a limited resource pool he can use for bonuses.

The Medium, possesses low spell progression and the OPTION to raise it to medium. Posseses a limited resource mechanic thats tied into everything he does and its a very limited mechanic. Like maximum 5 a day period otherwise you loose control. And if you even start using it you start taking penalties unless you start binding yourself.
Instead of a selectable array of talents they get a few spells they can use a day. Maybe a bit earlier then other classes but not by much. And so he has the option of getting a whole bunch of extra spirits that also at the best of times bring him slightly below par an investigator.

The Troubadour is the Medium done right. And with a bit of re-fluffing can just BE a Medium class.

However I decided to do something special with the medium instead.
Make it like the thaumaturge. In that you can risk for more power.

The idea is that as your possessed by a spirit the power level is slightly lower then that of a Troubador, however if you risk it for more power, you can exceed them for short bursts of time.

[Arcueid]

As a creator of several archetypes, I can tell you that the 'this replaces...' line is really just there to tell you what you're losing; abilities are not always exchanged one to one.

To be fair, sphere witch doesn't really trade anything else. Patron is the only unique class feature swapped. Everything else is just the standard spellcasting swap.


And to further illustrate your point, sphere witches get 10 talents for their patron spells, while clerics only get 5 talent for their domain spells.

Looking these over it seems most follow the standard i brought up, its just Cleric and Druid that seem to lose out. So those conversions seem to be in the minority of how they're handled, but it seems maybe its because they're 3/4 BAB is why thats the way it is though.

Cleric seems all wrong in terms of conversion to be honest. 10 talents gained on even levels that they get choice on, 10 talents on odd level in life or death spheres, 5 talents in specific sphere of domain. So they're 5 behind other full casters in talents.
Druid gets 20 talents, but then gets 5 from domain like cleric, and then 3 talents for alteration sphere to replace wild shape.
An interesting side point but these classes seem to lose alot in the spheres conversion as they don't keep up in talents like normal full casters, and their utility is strongly dependent on how the GM runs casting traditions, as before they could wear armor/shields/ect.. and not care; in spheres depending on how casting traditions are run that advantage goes out the window.



Are there any specific archetypes that are popular that don't translate to SoP well (other than for the magus)? Because if it's just 2 or 3 I can just translate them directly like I did for Crossblooded Sorcerer instead of trying to come up with a rule set.

For full casters two popular ones i can think of.
Witch - Bonded Witch(Half-Elf only archetype) - adds wizard bonded weapon to a witch instead of the familiar basically, but it grants spells based on what type of bonded item you use.
Oracle - Spirit guide - probably the best archetype for next to dual-cursed as it allows for variable spells depending on what spirit is used that day.
Wizard - Spellslinger - i see this is actually an incanter specialization in gear of power as well.

There's some niche concept ones that are cool and i like but its not guaranteed people would agree; but those are the popular ones i can think of that either have spellcasting changes or don't mix with what the sphere archetypes are trading.

[A.J.Gibson]

I dunno stick it somewhere later in some other book (Maybe Death). Whos writing death and how can I contact them?
I would be thrilled, if my idea was good enough though.

The idea is that its a combination of Theurge and Troubadour.
The problem with the medium is that instead of playing a Jack of all Trades character, your playing a character that's going to truly SUCK at everything it does.

Which may go true for some other arguable jacks of all trades (The Bard, for instance, some people find just bleh at everything), but the medium Truly embodies.
Id say that you can have your level 20 ability, and be possessed by all spirits at once and be just about en-par with what a Regular jack of all trades class gets already.

The investigator for instance: Gets a Sneak attack type deal, Medium Spell Progression, a bunch of selectable abilities, and a limited resource pool he can use for bonuses.

The Medium, possesses low spell progression and the OPTION to raise it to medium. Posseses a limited resource mechanic thats tied into everything he does and its a very limited mechanic. Like maximum 5 a day period otherwise you loose control. And if you even start using it you start taking penalties unless you start binding yourself.
Instead of a selectable array of talents they get a few spells they can use a day. Maybe a bit earlier then other classes but not by much. And so he has the option of getting a whole bunch of extra spirits that also at the best of times bring him slightly below par an investigator.

The Troubadour is the Medium done right. And with a bit of re-fluffing can just BE a Medium class.

However I decided to do something special with the medium instead.
Make it like the thaumaturge. In that you can risk for more power.

The idea is that as your possessed by a spirit the power level is slightly lower then that of a Troubador, however if you risk it for more power, you can exceed them for short bursts of time.

The Death handbook is being written by Luke Williams, but before you do anything, you should figure out your archetype. As you said, the Troubadour does the Medium right, so I'm curious why you're making this. Or rather, why you're making this a Medium.


To be fair, sphere witch doesn't really trade anything else. Patron is the only unique class feature swapped. Everything else is just the standard spellcasting swap.

Looking these over it seems most follow the standard i brought up, its just Cleric and Druid that seem to lose out. So those conversions seem to be in the minority of how they're handled, but it seems maybe its because they're 3/4 BAB is why thats the way it is though.

Cleric seems all wrong in terms of conversion to be honest. 10 talents gained on even levels that they get choice on, 10 talents on odd level in life or death spheres, 5 talents in specific sphere of domain. So they're 5 behind other full casters in talents.
Druid gets 20 talents, but then gets 5 from domain like cleric, and then 3 talents for alteration sphere to replace wild shape.
An interesting side point but these classes seem to lose alot in the spheres conversion as they don't keep up in talents like normal full casters, and their utility is strongly dependent on how the GM runs casting traditions, as before they could wear armor/shields/ect.. and not care; in spheres depending on how casting traditions are run that advantage goes out the window.

For full casters two popular ones i can think of.
Witch - Bonded Witch(Half-Elf only archetype) - adds wizard bonded weapon to a witch instead of the familiar basically, but it grants spells based on what type of bonded item you use.
Oracle - Spirit guide - probably the best archetype for next to dual-cursed as it allows for variable spells depending on what spirit is used that day.
Wizard - Spellslinger - i see this is actually an incanter specialization in gear of power as well.

There's some niche concept ones that are cool and i like but its not guaranteed people would agree; but those are the popular ones i can think of that either have spellcasting changes or don't mix with what the sphere archetypes are trading.

Let's play the incanter-as-base game again. Imagine a class with proficiency with all simple weapons and no armor, poor BAB, good Will saves, d6 hit points, 2 skill points per level, and full CL with 1 talent per level. What does each sphere class get on top of this?

Incanter:
-11 bonus feats
-10 addition talents (worth 10 feats)
Total: 21

Sphere Cleric:
-d8 hit points (worth 1 feat)
-light armor, medium armor, and shields (except tower shields) (worth 3 feats)
-weapon of their deity (worth 1 feat)
-Channel Energy (worth 5 feats)
-good Fortitude (worth 2 feats)
-Medium BAB (worth 5 feats)
-5 talents from their domain (worth 5 feats)
-2 domains with 2 powers each (worth 4 feats)
Total: 26
Note that not being able to choose what sphere a talent is from doesn't actually decrease the value of the ability.

Sphere Druid:
-d8 hit points (worth 1 feat)
-Limited Weapons list (worth -1 feat)
-light and medium armor and shields (worth 3 feats)
-no metal armor (worth -1 feat)
-2 additional skill points per level (worth 2 feats)
-nature sense (worth .5 feat)
-wild empathy (worth .5 feat)
-woodland stride (worth .5 feat)
-trackless step (worth .5 feat)
-resist nature's lure (worth .5 feat)
-venom immunity (worth 1 feat)
-a thousand faces (worth .5 feat)
-timeless body (worth nothing)
-good Fortitude (worth 2 feats)
-Medium BAB (worth 5 feats)
-Nature Bond (worth 5 feats)
-Wild Heart (worth 4 feats)
Total: 24
You could make arguments about a value of a few of the smaller things because of how campaign specific they are.

So the cleric comes out ahead, but have much less choice in their feats (10 Life or Death, + 5 related to their Domains), and a slightly inferior skill list compared to Incanter (at first glance). The other sphere conversions are also close to 21 or so.

For existing archetypes, the popular ones all seems to be the ones that 'fix' the class or grant it spells, so converting them to spheres is kinda pointless. The ones that make a class like another class are also suspect, since there are less differences between the classes now. If you want a spirit guide, just play a shaman, for example.

[AlienFromBeyond]

Does sacred servant even need translating? Dual cursed cursed is also just 'more revelations'. Spirit guide is just shaman. Crossblooded may be squeeze-able.
Sacred Servant gets a domain, spell slots for that domain, and the spells that go with the domain, as well as altering the Spells class feature. Theoretically doesn't need a converted archetype if your GM is okay with cross-referencing what Sphere Cleric does for its domains, but it's not automatically okay.

Dual-Cursed Oracle has stuff that alters its mystery bonus spells so in the same boat as Sacred Servant. I figured given the example of Cross-blooded Sorcerer you were looking for popular archetypes that only require a tweak or two to take them from technically need GM intervention/okay to 100% okay like these.

Spirit Guide isn't just Shaman, since it still has the Oracle baggage like Oracle curse, mysteries (there is a much longer list of these than spirits), and revelations. As above, it's mostly compatible except for one quibble that prevents it from being so, "At 4th level, she adds the bonded spirit’s spirit magic spells to her oracle spells known for that day, but only of spell levels she can cast."

That's at least the reasoning I used for my initial post anyways. I don't really play any of these classes in particular so don't put too much weight on what I brought up, this is all secondhand in terms of popularity that I know of. If I'm off base on what type of archetypes you were looking for that's fine, I'm happy enough with the book as it is!

[Scowling Dragon]

The Death handbook is being written by Luke Williams, but before you do anything, you should figure out your archetype. As you said, the Troubadour does the Medium right, so I'm curious why you're making this. Or rather, why you're making this a Medium.

Good point. Probably works better just as an Archetype for the Medium.

[A.J.Gibson]

Sacred Servant gets a domain, spell slots for that domain, and the spells that go with the domain, as well as altering the Spells class feature. Theoretically doesn't need a converted archetype if your GM is okay with cross-referencing what Sphere Cleric does for its domains, but it's not automatically okay.

Dual-Cursed Oracle has stuff that alters its mystery bonus spells so in the same boat as Sacred Servant. I figured given the example of Cross-blooded Sorcerer you were looking for popular archetypes that only require a tweak or two to take them from technically need GM intervention/okay to 100% okay like these.

Spirit Guide isn't just Shaman, since it still has the Oracle baggage like Oracle curse, mysteries (there is a much longer list of these than spirits), and revelations. As above, it's mostly compatible except for one quibble that prevents it from being so, "At 4th level, she adds the bonded spirit’s spirit magic spells to her oracle spells known for that day, but only of spell levels she can cast."

That's at least the reasoning I used for my initial post anyways. I don't really play any of these classes in particular so don't put too much weight on what I brought up, this is all secondhand in terms of popularity that I know of. If I'm off base on what type of archetypes you were looking for that's fine, I'm happy enough with the book as it is!

So I took a crack at writing a few guidelines in for archetype compatibility. I think they should cover a lot of the cases presented, since most of them just fiddle with spell lists. Are there are any archetypes that are still incompatible (other than magus stuff)?

Also, i still need an idea for an Oracle archetype. I could do a dual-mystery oracle, dropping talents gained to thaumaturge progression, but I'd rather have something unique. I thought it might be neat to do an oracle-bard of some sort.

[ChrisAsmadi]

So I took a crack at writing a few guidelines in for archetype compatibility. I think they should cover a lot of the cases presented, since most of them just fiddle with spell lists. Are there are any archetypes that are still incompatible (other than magus stuff)?


Include a guideline as to how to handle Cantrips (or lack thereof, if it's an archetype that removes them), perhaps?

As for Oracles, maybe an archetype that trades out the mystery for a Hedgewitch tradition?

[A.J.Gibson]

Include a guideline as to how to handle Cantrips (or lack thereof, if it's an archetype that removes them), perhaps?

As for Oracles, maybe an archetype that trades out the mystery for a Hedgewitch tradition?

I'd really love to redo cantrips in SoP: give each sphere 1 to 3 cantrips which anyone who has the base talent has, while the cantrip feat would give you access to all cantrips (of maybe let you pick a buch of them from different spheres). But that's for another book.

Giving the oracle a hedgewitch tradition is an interesting idea, but I'd rather give the oracle things more specific to the oracle then give it another class' features. More revelations, for example.

[ICN]

Couple archetype ideas:

Was building a prodigy recently and thought that the whole sequence ability was actually a pretty nice fit for a musical sort of theme. A bard archetype that gets the sequence ability, but generally bent more towards buffing, would be a pretty neat archetype I think. Start a song/sequence, build it note by note to the finale/finisher. Maybe rather than imbued sequences, have bonus types based on perform skill used instead.

Other idea is a vigilante that specializes in impersonating others. Rather than a concrete social identity, they instead count as being in their social identity while impersonating someone else. Could see two separate approaches, one being increasingly perfected duplication ability, starting with the shifting disguise feat, up to the point where they could impersonate anything of any species. The other would be a mind sphere approach, more focused on ripping the information needed for a good disguise (name of childhood friends, secret codeword a group established in case of a shapeshifter) from the mind of their target, and smoothing over bumps and flaws by making people not notice them instead.

Also, not entirely sure this was seen earlier, so bumping it just to be sure.

On the Blended Training thing, would it work to make it an option, like Martial Traditions are? e.g. If your class is not a high-caster and does not possess the Combat Training class feature, you may trade the Magic Talents feature for the Blended Training feature, gaining talents at the same rate as the class would've gained magic talents.

Edit: On an Oracle archetype, I might play into the curse class feature. Give them an ability to augment their spells but take a personal penalty while doing so, possibly themed around their curse.

[A.J.Gibson]

Couple archetype ideas:

Was building a prodigy recently and thought that the whole sequence ability was actually a pretty nice fit for a musical sort of theme. A bard archetype that gets the sequence ability, but generally bent more towards buffing, would be a pretty neat archetype I think. Start a song/sequence, build it note by note to the finale/finisher. Maybe rather than imbued sequences, have bonus types based on perform skill used instead.

Other idea is a vigilante that specializes in impersonating others. Rather than a concrete social identity, they instead count as being in their social identity while impersonating someone else. Could see two separate approaches, one being increasingly perfected duplication ability, starting with the shifting disguise feat, up to the point where they could impersonate anything of any species. The other would be a mind sphere approach, more focused on ripping the information needed for a good disguise (name of childhood friends, secret codeword a group established in case of a shapeshifter) from the mind of their target, and smoothing over bumps and flaws by making people not notice them instead.

Also, not entirely sure this was seen earlier, so bumping it just to be sure.


Edit: On an Oracle archetype, I might play into the curse class feature. Give them an ability to augment their spells but take a personal penalty while doing so, possibly themed around their curse.

The 'building up to a finale' thing the prodigy does (and also the monk in 13th age) is kinda neat. A disguise focused vigilante might be an interesting talent, but I don't think a full archetype is required. The spell augmentation thing is something I'm still looking at for the oracle, but it's tricky to write, and I already kinda did that with the withering witch.

Also: new fighter archetype, everyone.

[Mithril Leaf]

Hey so those Runesinger feats, can they only be taken by the Runesinger? Or can anyone pick up a couple of runes with the Extra Rune feat? Also can you pick up multiple copies of each rune, or is it only one per type?

[A.J.Gibson]

Hey so those Runesinger feats, can they only be taken by the Runesinger? Or can anyone pick up a couple of runes with the Extra Rune feat? Also can you pick up multiple copies of each rune, or is it only one per type?

You have to have the ability runesingers get at first. You could dip rune singer to get 4 runes, but the damage scales with class level.

[A.J.Gibson]

Two things: first, I'm still looking for ideas for druid, oracle, and hunter archetypes. For druid, I'm thinking about dropping talents to one every even level (like thaumaturge), restoring wildshape (since every other archetype uses it), and then granting some powers to make you wildshaped self and animal companion more effective, like built in enhancement bonuses for natural weapons.

Second, I'd like to discuss the way the runesinger is costed compared to the coiled blade. When I write archetypes, I cost things in terms of feats. If something is worth a feat, then its worth a feat, even if no one in their right mind would spend a feat on it (hello, Endurance). Its not perfect, but realistically, power balance tends to be campaign specific anyways (my class campaign was Iron Gods, where Knowledge (Engineering) was a god skill!), and the value of a lot of things decreases when you get more of them.

For fun, let's turn the gunslinger into an archetype of the fighter:

Gunslinger (Fighter Archetype)

Skills
The gunslinger adds Acrobatics (Dex), Bluff (Cha), Heal (Wis), Knowledge (local) (Int), Perception (Wis), and Sleight of Hand (Dex) to his skill list, and removes Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int) from his skill list.
The gunslinger gains 4 skill points per level instead of 2.
This modifies skills.

Proficiencies
The gunslinger loses proficiency with medium and heavy armor, shields and tower shields. He gains proficiency with all firearms.
This modifies proficiencies.

Saving Throws
The gunslinger gains good Reflex saving throws.
This modifies saving throws.

Grit and Deeds
...
This replaces the combat feat gained at first level, armor training, and armor mastery.

Nimble
...
This replaces the combat feats gained at 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th, and 18th level.

Gunsmithing
...
This replaces bravery, I guess.

Gun Training
...
This replaces weapon training and weapon mastery.

True Grit
...
Why don't fighters get a capstone?


So the gunslinger seems to come out ahead, which is why we don't worry about being generous too the fighter.

In SoM, combat talents are worth half a feat when you buy them in bulk, and several crappy combat feats are available as combat talents. This was part of an active attempt to make martials more fun, by making it easier to play the character you actually want to play. (At least, I think it was). Martial Traditions are considered equal in value to proficiency with all martial weapons, or about 2 feats. So the Coiled Blade comes out looking like this:

Coiled Blade
-exchange martial weapons for tradition
-exchange proficiency with medium and heavy armor for a second tradition
-exchange armor training and armor mastery for tension
-exchange shield proficiency, tower shield proficiency, and 6 combat feats for 20 combat talents

So if you assume armor training and tension are equal, then the CB comes out ahead about 2 feats.
Now the runesinger

Runesinger
-exchange martial weapons for tradition
-exchange proficiency with medium for 2 runes (each is worth a combat talent)
-exchange heavy armor proficiency, shield proficiency, tower shield proficiency, armor training and armor mastery for 20 combat talents
If you assume a rune is equal to combat talent, and armor training/mastery is worth 5 feats (1 per level), RS comes out ahead 2 feats.

So I'm comfortable as is, and this set up allows compatibility with the War Hero and Impossible Warrior archetypes I wrote, and a few PF fighter archetypes as well (but not many, since everything seems to trade out armor training: Armiger, Blackjack, Drill Sergeant, Eldritch Guardian, High Guardian, Martial Master, Opportunist Fighter, Savage Warrior, Siegebreaker, and Tower Shield Specialist). I wanted to see if people agree with my math, and also if they think anything else should be added (like good Will saves or more skill points per level).

[Archiplex]

Coiled Blade
-exchange martial weapons for tradition
-exchange proficiency with medium and heavy armor for a second tradition

Runesinger
-exchange martial weapons for tradition
-exchange proficiency with medium for 2 runes (each is worth a combat talent)


Coiled Blade no longer grants a second martial tradition; Thus, a Coiled blade effectively trades their weapon and armor proficiencies for a martial tradition; Which is very similar to what most other archetyped SoM classes do.

[Sam C.]

Coiled Blade no longer grants a second martial tradition; Thus, a Coiled blade effectively trades their weapon and armor proficiencies for a martial tradition; Which is very similar to what most other archetyped SoM classes do.

The Coiled Blade gets a martial tradition on top of their normal proficiencies, provided they don't already have one.

[A.J.Gibson]

Serves me right for trying to work from memory. Let's try this again:

Coiled Blade
-exchange armor training for tension
-exchange 6 combat feats for 20 combat talents and a martial tradition

So if you assume armor training and tension are equal, then the CB comes out ahead about 6 feats.
Now the runesinger

Runesinger
-exchange martial weapons for tradition
-exchange proficiency with medium for 2 runes (each is worth a combat talent)
-exchange heavy armor proficiency, shield proficiency, tower shield proficiency, armor training and armor mastery for 20 combat talents
If you assume a rune is equal to combat talent, and armor training/mastery is worth 5 feats (1 per level), RS comes out ahead 2 feats.

[Scowling Dragon]

Two things: first, I'm still looking for ideas for druid, oracle, and hunter archetypes. For druid, I'm thinking about dropping talents to one every even level (like thaumaturge), restoring wildshape (since every other archetype uses it), and then granting some powers to make you wildshaped self and animal companion more effective, like built in enhancement bonuses for natural weapons.

Buh...Crib from the Shifter?
Every other level get a Shifter thing?

[A.J.Gibson]

Buh...Crib from the Shifter?
Every other level get a Shifter thing?

Well, I don't want to steal it's primary schtick (Alteration sphere and Bestial Traits) and the druid should remain a caster (if you want to play a shifter, play a shifter!). I'm thinking if they had some neat ways of altering those spheres you would associate with nature magic. Like maybe their nature magic just sustains itself naturally, their alteration magic interacts with wildshape, and mind magic does fey thing that screws with people's minds. The real problem is that the whole nature caster has been beat to death by the druid, ranger, hunter, shifter, and crappier shifter.

[Ironsides]

Well, you could make a druid that focuses on the Weather Sphere. I haven’t seen much for that sphere and it deserves some love in my opinion. Maybe some way of reducing the time it takes for the Weather Sphere to ramp up into something useful.

[AlienFromBeyond]

If you assume a rune is equal to combat talent, and armor training/mastery is worth 5 feats (1 per level), RS comes out ahead 2 feats.
That's a really big assumption to make, I think a rune is far better than a combat talent. I consider them worth about two since just the attack or movement part compare favorably with existing combat talents (or even exceed in many cases when it comes to the rune movement abilities). There is an argument for slightly less than two (but definitely still more than one) because you can only use one or the other, except you can feat to fix that, feat to recharge your build defining rune, and can always recharge a rune using your martial focus.

[A.J.Gibson]

Well, you could make a druid that focuses on the Weather Sphere. I haven’t seen much for that sphere and it deserves some love in my opinion. Maybe some way of reducing the time it takes for the Weather Sphere to ramp up into something useful.

Jeff Collins is writing the Weather handbook, and he'll probably do something like that there.


That's a really big assumption to make, I think a rune is far better than a combat talent. I consider them worth about two since just the attack or movement part compare favorably with existing combat talents (or even exceed in many cases when it comes to the rune movement abilities). There is an argument for slightly less than two (but definitely still more than one) because you can only use one or the other, except you can feat to fix that, feat to recharge your build defining rune, and can always recharge a rune using your martial focus.

Yes, but those all require other feats (except recharging with Martial Focus). A rune as an at-will costs a feat, but being able to only use it once per combat is a fairly serious limitation. I've considered making recharge with martial focus a separate feat as well.

[Archiplex]

A rune as an at-will costs a feat, but being able to only use it once per combat is a fairly serious limitation.

I'm not so sure about that. Typical pathfinder encounters really don't last all that long, and although you lowered the initial runecount to 2, I still feel like that's more than sufficient to maintain. The player surely won't be using a rune every turn (Until they get the feat... anyways), and even if they did, 4-5 runes should be enough to last you the typical encounter length, with room to squish that depending on how the player's focus recovery looks like (Lets be real, some of the methods to recover focuses are very easy, and some in particular can be used while ALSO using a rune to move, like Mobile Focus from Barrage). Even compared to some Legendary Talents, the sheer benefit from each rune (Remember, Variability is power, too.) definitely beats out most combat talents. They are very easily on the level of Magical talents.


Also, on the topic of other handbooks... Is the Warp sphere handbook being worked on currently?

[AlienFromBeyond]

being able to only use it once per combat is a fairly serious limitation.
Let's be real, they're as "once per combat" as say Berserker's Brutal Strike. Technically yes, but martial focus is trivial to recover as has been pointed out.

[A.J.Gibson]

I'm not so sure about that. Typical pathfinder encounters really don't last all that long, and although you lowered the initial runecount to 2, I still feel like that's more than sufficient to maintain. The player surely won't be using a rune every turn (Until they get the feat... anyways), and even if they did, 4-5 runes should be enough to last you the typical encounter length, with room to squish that depending on how the player's focus recovery looks like (Lets be real, some of the methods to recover focuses are very easy, and some in particular can be used while ALSO using a rune to move, like Mobile Focus from Barrage). Even compared to some Legendary Talents, the sheer benefit from each rune (Remember, Variability is power, too.) definitely beats out most combat talents. They are very easily on the level of Magical talents.


Also, on the topic of other handbooks... Is the Warp sphere handbook being worked on currently?


I figure that the runesinger will probably use a rune to attack every turn, and a rune to move every other turn.

Amber Underwood has been working on Warp for some time now...she hasn't shown the group her work, but I expect it'll be good.


Let's be real, they're as "once per combat" as say Berserker's Brutal Strike. Technically yes, but martial focus is trivial to recover as has been pointed out.

Both of you commented that martial focus makes it easy to reuse a rune, which makes me think maybe I shouldn't allow it (maybe make it a high level feat). The class is supposed to be doing different things all the time, and I don't like making spamming the optimal course of action. If I remove this option, I take it runes will still be worth 1 feat/2 talents?

[Archiplex]

Both of you commented that martial focus makes it easy to reuse a rune, which makes me think maybe I shouldn't allow it (maybe make it a high level feat). The class is supposed to be doing different things all the time, and I don't like making spamming the optimal course of action. If I remove this option, I take it runes will still be worth 1 feat/2 talents?

I think that removing the possibility overall would definitely reel in the power of the archetype; I was discussing with a friend that I might agree with you overall if selecting a rune ONLY gave either the movement or attack ability (and thus would require 2 runes to get both), but otherwise right now Runes are definitely undervalued.

I think that removing the ability to gain regain rune usage (via any method whatsoever) would definitely reel in the potential power of the class and stick better to the '1/encounter' theme- With any possibility to use them multiple times per encounter, people will spam the optimal rune, it's just too good to pass up. I still, however, don't feel like it lowers the power cost of any rune to below 1 feat, so yes- it would still be worth 2 talents or 1 feat per rune.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

For the Druid, maybe something knowledge-centric to relate back to the historical druids a bit? Bardic Knowledge, Divination instead of Alteration, that kind of thing. Needs fleshing out obviously

[ICN]

Small note: there are no premade casting traditions in SoP that grant the Virtuoso boon. Not sure this book would be the place for it though.

Blade-bound magus is a notable archetype that generally easily converts to spheres. What I'd really like is a feat chain to gain an intelligent item on any class, as it's a fun thing to play with and I dislike that it's limited to two classes in core. I suggested the idea in Gear of Power, but got no response so suggesting it again here.

On the Bard like Oracle idea, maybe a play on the idea of an artist who sacrifices themselves for their work? Bardic performance would deal a point of nonlethal burn type damage each round to keep up, other abilities might sacrifice health, and maybe some bonuses when close to death.

[A.J.Gibson]

For the Druid, maybe something knowledge-centric to relate back to the historical druids a bit? Bardic Knowledge, Divination instead of Alteration, that kind of thing. Needs fleshing out obviously

It's annoying how bards have stolen that aspect of druids. Of course, bards are gong to be occult now, so I have no idea what the hell is going on.

I'm currently thinking about stealing the Hedgewitch Spiritualist bit, with animal companion boosting options, but I still don't have an overall theme, and an archetype made up of stealing other classes features sucks.


Small note: there are no premade casting traditions in SoP that grant the Virtuoso boon. Not sure this book would be the place for it though.

Blade-bound magus is a notable archetype that generally easily converts to spheres. What I'd really like is a feat chain to gain an intelligent item on any class, as it's a fun thing to play with and I dislike that it's limited to two classes in core. I suggested the idea in Gear of Power, but got no response so suggesting it again here.

On the Bard like Oracle idea, maybe a play on the idea of an artist who sacrifices themselves for their work? Bardic performance would deal a point of nonlethal burn type damage each round to keep up, other abilities might sacrifice health, and maybe some bonuses when close to death.

I'm not doing traditions in this book. Actually, I never do them at all: I assume most GM's let players invent their own traditions.

I remember you suggesting the feat chain. Personally, I think an intelligent weapon is too big of a thing to try an wedge into feats well. I actually started writing a hedgewitch tradition that has an intelligent weapon but never got around to finishing it. Apparently no one else has made an attempt either. We're kinda understaffed, so don't take it personally.

If I do an Oracle-bard, it will be less performance oriented and more like the symbiat, only less weird.

[ICN]

I'm not doing traditions in this book. Actually, I never do them at all: I assume most GM's let players invent their own traditions.

I remember you suggesting the feat chain. Personally, I think an intelligent weapon is too big of a thing to try an wedge into feats well. I actually started writing a hedgewitch tradition that has an intelligent weapon but never got around to finishing it. Apparently no one else has made an attempt either. We're kinda understaffed, so don't take it personally.

If I do an Oracle-bard, it will be less performance oriented and more like the symbiat, only less weird.

Fair. I haven't had the same luck, but probably just an unusual run.

No worries, I get it. Intelligent items are a bit tricky, but I'd place them at fair sight less valuable than a familiar, since they're immobile. A weak familiar costs 2 feats (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/familiar-bond/). Using that as a base, I'd make the first feat essentially a wizard's arcane bond: the player can choose one item and improve it as though they possessed the relevant crafting feats, if they'd qualify for them. Weaker than a crafting feat, since it's limited to one item. The next feat would give the intelligent item itself, with a note that GMs should be consulted before taking the feat or applying intelligent item special abilities beyond the baseline. Just a suggestion though, I understand if it's not feasible.

Cool, sounds neat.

[Mithril Leaf]

I have a clarification question:
Does the Transformation feat count as a Sphere Ability for the purpose of the Withering Witch Corruptions? Thus could you improve physical stats by +2 when Transforming if you had a Withering Witch Corrupt it?

[A.J.Gibson]

I have a clarification question:
Does the Transformation feat count as a Sphere Ability for the purpose of the Withering Witch Corruptions? Thus could you improve physical stats by +2 when Transforming if you had a Withering Witch Corrupt it?

By RAW, no, because Transformation is a supernatural ability. If there was an curse that duplicated alteration traits, it would work, however.

[ICN]

An idea for an Inquisitor archetype is one that heavily focuses on the Divination and Mind spheres, blending them together in unique ways that fulfill a role as the black ops of churches. Something like if you use Object Reading and identify one of the previous owners, you can use Mind Spy or Dowsing on them with [appropriate restrictions], or using Dispersion or Amnesia to ensure that church business remains church business, free of outside influence. Could also see an angle with intimidation, such as getting an attempt to demoralize whenever you attempt a Mind sphere effect, or increasingly potent fear effects (shaken, frightened, etc.) allowing increasingly potent Mind or Divination abilities in an interrogatory fashion or something.

[Scowling Dragon]

Also Im probably super late and way past prime but I LOVE this following archetype:

The Warrior whos shtick is using magic items. I know its dependent but I love it as a shtick so much because it has a certain sense of history too it.
A warrior who collects lots of weapons and artifacts over the years and uses them better then anybody else as a collective.
As each item represents a sort of history and story of its own.

[A.J.Gibson]

An idea for an Inquisitor archetype is one that heavily focuses on the Divination and Mind spheres, blending them together in unique ways that fulfill a role as the black ops of churches. Something like if you use Object Reading and identify one of the previous owners, you can use Mind Spy or Dowsing on them with [appropriate restrictions], or using Dispersion or Amnesia to ensure that church business remains church business, free of outside influence. Could also see an angle with intimidation, such as getting an attempt to demoralize whenever you attempt a Mind sphere effect, or increasingly potent fear effects (shaken, frightened, etc.) allowing increasingly potent Mind or Divination abilities in an interrogatory fashion or something.

That's a good character idea, any maybe a feat could be squeezed out of it, but an archetype should have some unique hook that makes it worth taking. The abilities you suggested are already sphere talents (I think).


Also Im probably super late and way past prime but I LOVE this following archetype:

The Warrior whos shtick is using magic items. I know its dependent but I love it as a shtick so much because it has a certain sense of history too it.
A warrior who collects lots of weapons and artifacts over the years and uses them better then anybody else as a collective.
As each item represents a sort of history and story of its own.

Isn't that the Antiquarian Armiger?

[ICN]

An idea for an Inquisitor archetype is one that heavily focuses on the Divination and Mind spheres, blending them together in unique ways that fulfill a role as the black ops of churches. Something like if you use Object Reading and identify one of the previous owners, you can use Mind Spy or Dowsing on them with [appropriate restrictions], or using Dispersion or Amnesia to ensure that church business remains church business, free of outside influence. Could also see an angle with intimidation, such as getting an attempt to demoralize whenever you attempt a Mind sphere effect, or increasingly potent fear effects (shaken, frightened, etc.) allowing increasingly potent Mind or Divination abilities in an interrogatory fashion or something.
That's a good character idea, any maybe a feat could be squeezed out of it, but an archetype should have some unique hook that makes it worth taking. The abilities you suggested are already sphere talents (I think).
Some of them are, but not all, and I'm thinking a bit more in depth. Would it be alright if I threw together a loose template? I know you want to keep this mostly your own thing, so it would all just be more coherent suggestions/examples of the direction I'm thinking of, as well as a tool for me to see if there really is enough to justify an archetype.

[Scowling Dragon]

Isn't that the Antiquarian Armiger?

...Yeah....Yes it is. Well then nevermind!

[A.J.Gibson]

Some of them are, but not all, and I'm thinking a bit more in depth. Would it be alright if I threw together a loose template? I know you want to keep this mostly your own thing, so it would all just be more coherent suggestions/examples of the direction I'm thinking of, as well as a tool for me to see if there really is enough to justify an archetype.

Put together a google doc and I'll have a look.

[ICN]

Put together a google doc and I'll have a look.

Threw something (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FTUtpYvc0a-rLrdYlM4RVPhnqJYEOtugvzLx9qaS7eo/edit?usp=sharing) together. It's not so loose, but I don't mind changes, complete overhauls, or rejections. It was fun writing it and that's what counts.

[A.J.Gibson]

Threw something (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FTUtpYvc0a-rLrdYlM4RVPhnqJYEOtugvzLx9qaS7eo/edit?usp=sharing) together. It's not so loose, but I don't mind changes, complete overhauls, or rejections. It was fun writing it and that's what counts.

Writing is pretty fun; I'm continually stunned by how many people are willing to write pages of notes and comments, but never try to write any actual homebrew. I'll comment on your doc directly.

The doc is view-only, so I'll talk here.

So you've got a decent core theme (really, it's not hard with the inquisitor, I'm still surprised it didn't make core in 2e it has such good flavor), and you have a central theme (demoralization and Mind abilities). I'll address abilities one at a time:

Martial Practitioner - the same trade I make, probably fine, note that if you're trading proficiencies for a martial tradition, you can't trade any of them in for other stuff

Divine Focus - generally speaking, a base talent costs a feat, and full-CL with one sphere for a mid-caster is also a feat, so you have to give up 4 feats for this, 2 of which must be at level 1. To be honest, I'm not a huge fan of this, the archetype already has demoralization and scouting as themes, and this is going to be expensive. I'd probably drop Divination, since you only have two other abilities that references it.

Watchful Eye - Tracking for Scout is no-brainer, but losing Monster Lore for +5 to scout makes little sense. With the inquisitor's knowledge skills, they probably won't be using perception for scout anyways. Instead, let them apply monster lore to their scout check; it probably should anyways.

Fear of God - This is probably fine, but should probably do something unique for the inquisitor, like 'works on evil creatures normally immune to fear'; immunity to fear is something this archetype will have to deal with

Commune - This is interesting, but if you get rid of Divination sphere, you could replace it with some sort of spell-like ability that gives a supernatural sense. You could have it interact with the scout ability to build up that theme, or attach it to monster lore.

Heretic's Bane - This is good, and fairly unique, though I would probably make it require a SUCCESSFUL attack. I would also replace 'Mind Sphere Ability' with 'Mind-Affecting Ability'. A swift action may be an appropriate cost. Losing Bane hurts.

Divine Interrogation - A bonus to use Mind abilities against demoralized targets make sense, but I'm not a fan of 'you gain talent X'. You usually only see it on archetypes that are built around that ability (like energy blade).

Greater Heretic's Bane - The core idea if good, but I'm not sure if it's balanced. It might require a spell point or something.

Internal Affairs - Bonus talents are generally pretty lame as class features; class features should be unique things. Also, I'm not certain how this works with the theme.

As for trades, trading out unique abilities is best avoided, though with the Inquisitor that's hard, since they're all pretty interesting. Instead, aim for abilities that suck. Exploit Weakness and Slayer are good candidates.

[ICN]

Sorry, got sidetracked by other things or would've replied sooner. Thanks for the response!

Writing is pretty fun; I'm continually stunned by how many people are willing to write pages of notes and comments, but never try to write any actual homebrew. I'll comment on your doc directly.

Oh, my bad, first time using google docs. This (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FTUtpYvc0a-rLrdYlM4RVPhnqJYEOtugvzLx9qaS7eo/edit?usp=sharing) should be a link to the new version that also allows commenting.

Think there a few different factors behind why people do that. One is the active versus passive split; many people can be great conversationalists if they're already in a good conversation, but personally I find it much more difficult to be able to start a good conversation in the first place.

The other is expectation. Homebrew gets a bad rap, and it's a rare GM that will allow it at their table. Spheres has a better reputation, so official content for it is much more likely to see play. So people focus on what will actually affect their games.


So you've got a decent core theme (really, it's not hard with the inquisitor, I'm still surprised it didn't make core in 2e it has such good flavor), and you have a central theme (demoralization and Mind abilities). I'll address abilities one at a time:

Really need to read that 2e edition playtest... as I understand how archetypes can work now though (everybody gets a number of class feats, archetypes replace some of those class feats and can be applied to multiple classes), I find having any divine themed class in core strange. Worshiping a deity doesn't carry the same inherent mechanics that other concepts do; wizards use magic, fighters hit stuff, rogues are guileful, worshipers... pray and roleplay on their own time?

Making the divine stuff an archetype works much better than a base class in this situation imo. I think what the core rule set should focus on is being robust and versatile, leaving niche stuff for future content expansions. A versatile archetype enables many more concepts than a base class does. Fighters to paladins, wizards to clerics, rogues to inquisitors, bards to chanters, monks to monks. But if ranger gets to stick around as a base class rather than an archetype, I guess anything is fair game.


Martial Practitioner - the same trade I make, probably fine, note that if you're trading proficiencies for a martial tradition, you can't trade any of them in for other stuff

Divine Focus - generally speaking, a base talent costs a feat, and full-CL with one sphere for a mid-caster is also a feat, so you have to give up 4 feats for this, 2 of which must be at level 1. To be honest, I'm not a huge fan of this, the archetype already has demoralization and scouting as themes, and this is going to be expensive. I'd probably drop Divination, since you only have two other abilities that references it.

You're right, getting too spread out in my focus there. I think a Divination/Mind hybrid archetype could be cool, but it'd be tricky and Inquisitor isn't the best class for it. Some dual-sphere feats might be better on the whole. Focusing just on Mind simplifies things and makes for a more flavorful archetype.

Also, recommendation for a feat: one that allows a 3/4 caster to count as a full caster for one sphere, similar to Combat Sphere Specialization. Spheres encourages customization and specialization, and by this point I think the 3/4 to full thing has been done on enough archetypes that having a general feat for it is fine. It also allows more player freedom, since they can mix and match things more easily without being chained to a single archetype.


Watchful Eye - Tracking for Scout is no-brainer, but losing Monster Lore for +5 to scout makes little sense. With the inquisitor's knowledge skills, they probably won't be using perception for scout anyways. Instead, let them apply monster lore to their scout check; it probably should anyways.

My thinking is that Monster Lore and Scout were both abilities dealing with identifying the weaknesses of monsters, so combining and simplifying them would be a good move. Thinking about it further, a Conscript's enhanced scout is too strong for this trade; it's roughly equivalent to a more combat focused Bardic Knowledge, but keying off of only perception. Your suggestion is a good one, but with an exclusive focus on Mind I think I might make some use of the track feature.


Fear of God - This is probably fine, but should probably do something unique for the inquisitor, like 'works on evil creatures normally immune to fear'; immunity to fear is something this archetype will have to deal with

This does do something unique in allowing demoralization to reach beyond shaken, but without the demoralization tag that would carry from the Gladiator sphere, allowing it to be combined with the Gladiator sphere's ability to demoralize normally immune targets. Think this makes


Commune - This is interesting, but if you get rid of Divination sphere, you could replace it with some sort of spell-like ability that gives a supernatural sense. You could have it interact with the scout ability to build up that theme, or attach it to monster lore.

I think I've got an idea along the lines of a supernatural sort of sense. Ditching Divination allows considerably more freedom with making a cohesive archetype.


Heretic's Bane - This is good, and fairly unique, though I would probably make it require a SUCCESSFUL attack. I would also replace 'Mind Sphere Ability' with 'Mind-Affecting Ability'. A swift action may be an appropriate cost. Losing Bane hurts.

Greater Heretic's Bane - The core idea if good, but I'm not sure if it's balanced. It might require a spell point or something.

This one's tricky. Taking another look at Bane, it is a crazy strong ability. It's pretty much power attack, but usually more damage, and boosts hit chance instead of penalizing it by means of DR bypassing weapon pluses. My thinking was to have this archetype shift Inquisitor to more of a debuffing role over a damaging one, but that's tricky. I don't think the successful attack thing is necessary; wanted to leave the combo of demoralize for the saving throw penalty into a mind sphere ability open. Greater Heretic's Bane I'm still not sure about. Bane is extremely strong, but Gladiator sphere intimidation can potentially make area demoralize considerably more nasty.


Divine Interrogation - A bonus to use Mind abilities against demoralized targets make sense, but I'm not a fan of 'you gain talent X'. You usually only see it on archetypes that are built around that ability (like energy blade).

In this case, it's a bit murky I think. The powerful charm ability of the Read Mind talent is thematic and useful for the archetype I think (can pull the answer to a specific question out of the target's mind). As I see it, the main draw here is the new way to make use of the talent, but that still requires the baseline talent.


Internal Affairs - Bonus talents are generally pretty lame as class features; class features should be unique things. Also, I'm not certain how this works with the theme.

My thinking was that, in this case, the inquisitor is stepping into a role as an ideological warrior. Even if the entire cult perishes in a series of mysterious accidents, if the ideology is out there it isn't truly dead. I do agree with your points though; it's boring and doesn't properly slot in to the rest of the class.


As for trades, trading out unique abilities is best avoided, though with the Inquisitor that's hard, since they're all pretty interesting. Instead, aim for abilities that suck. Exploit Weakness and Slayer are good candidates.

Slayer falls under the judgement class feature, so it can't be traded out if looking to keep archetype compatibility. Exploit Weakness is a good thing to trade out, but generally I take the mindset that whatever abilities make an archetype worth playing need to happen by around level 5 at the latest. Cool stuff can come after that, but since, in my experience, the game is mostly played at levels 1-10 levels after that should be more window dressing than core components. It is a good tip to keep in mind though, thanks.

Thank you again for all the feedback! I think it helped considerably.

[A.J.Gibson]

Also, recommendation for a feat: one that allows a 3/4 caster to count as a full caster for one sphere, similar to Combat Sphere Specialization. Spheres encourages customization and specialization, and by this point I think the 3/4 to full thing has been done on enough archetypes that having a general feat for it is fine. It also allows more player freedom, since they can mix and match things more easily without being chained to a single archetype.


The '+5 to one sphere (can not exceed hit dice)' has been discussed before, and generally, we're trying to avoid it. It's one of those things where you can do it when designing a class, but it becomes overpowered in certain combinations or if you allow general access to it. With spheres, most characters are going to concentrate on a small number of spheres, and not all spheres need a good caster level, so this feat makes it much more optimal to not play a full caster. It gets even worse if you can take the feat multiple times. It's hard for me to explain, to be honest, but my gut tells me its a bad idea. it would be like if you let vancian casters mix and match spells from different spell lists to create their own unique spell lists: too much flexibility makes it easy to build broken builds.

[Mezzaluna]

The '+5 to one sphere (can not exceed hit dice)' has been discussed before, and generally, we're trying to avoid it. It's one of those things where you can do it when designing a class, but it becomes overpowered in certain combinations or if you allow general access to it. With spheres, most characters are going to concentrate on a small number of spheres, and not all spheres need a good caster level, so this feat makes it much more optimal to not play a full caster. It gets even worse if you can take the feat multiple times. It's hard for me to explain, to be honest, but my gut tells me its a bad idea. it would be like if you let vancian casters mix and match spells from different spell lists to create their own unique spell lists: too much flexibility makes it easy to build broken builds.

If not a general feat, what about class or sphere specific ones?

For example, it's always felt strange how the base Symbiat doesn't get full CL with the mind or telekinesis spheres, which both need pretty good caster level to be competitive, or the hedgewitch generally leans towards a flexible caster focus but can only gain full CL with a select few spheres depending on the archetypes written for it.

Would it be out of place to have feats:
"Treat hedgewitch level as CL for one sphere, stacking with other sources"
"Treat symbiat level as CL for telekinesis or mind, stacking with other sources"
Which can each only be taken once?

Or alternately, have some '+5 to one sphere (can not exceed hit dice)' feats that only apply to specific spheres that rely heavily on full CL, like Mind/TK/etc?

[A.J.Gibson]

If not a general feat, what about class or sphere specific ones?

For example, it's always felt strange how the base Symbiat doesn't get full CL with the mind or telekinesis spheres, which both need pretty good caster level to be competitive, or the hedgewitch generally leans towards a flexible caster focus but can only gain full CL with a select few spheres depending on the archetypes written for it.

Would it be out of place to have feats:
"Treat hedgewitch level as CL for one sphere, stacking with other sources"
"Treat symbiat level as CL for telekinesis or mind, stacking with other sources"
Which can each only be taken once?

Or alternately, have some '+5 to one sphere (can not exceed hit dice)' feats that only apply to specific spheres that rely heavily on full CL, like Mind/TK/etc?

I agree the Symbiat is odd in that respect. As for +5 feats, several exist already:
Alteration has Greater Transformation
Destruction has Focused Blast Type Group
Conjuration has....something, I think.
None of them grant a straight forward +5 however, because that would simply be too strong for one talent or feat in a vacuum.

[AlienFromBeyond]

I agree the Symbiat is odd in that respect. As for +5 feats, several exist already:
Conjuration has....something, I think.
Conjuration has it as a talent instead of a feat for some reason actually.

[Tariyan Draegr]

Conjuration has it as a talent instead of a feat for some reason actually.

It only applies to the specific companion it's chosen for. That's the only reason I can think of.

[AlienFromBeyond]

It only applies to the specific companion it's chosen for. That's the only reason I can think of.
Indeed, I think maybe it was to prevent making it easy to spam multiple stronger companions?

[ICN]

The '+5 to one sphere (can not exceed hit dice)' has been discussed before, and generally, we're trying to avoid it. It's one of those things where you can do it when designing a class, but it becomes overpowered in certain combinations or if you allow general access to it. With spheres, most characters are going to concentrate on a small number of spheres, and not all spheres need a good caster level, so this feat makes it much more optimal to not play a full caster. It gets even worse if you can take the feat multiple times. It's hard for me to explain, to be honest, but my gut tells me its a bad idea. it would be like if you let vancian casters mix and match spells from different spell lists to create their own unique spell lists: too much flexibility makes it easy to build broken builds.

Fair points; I'd say that some spheres that already got handbooks could still use some of the limited CL boosting traits though, primarily Divination (divine tag talents) and Enhancement.

Divination I believe is okay for two reasons: the first is that generally any information gained is going to be shared with the party, so who initially acquires it doesn't make much difference. The second is that information is only useful in proportion to the ability of a character to act upon it, and even in the SoP/M system casters generally get the more radically different options. If the character that can potentially walk through walls, teleport, shapeshift, or any number of other things can get the information, I don't see it as being a problem if the person who traded some magical ability to be better at hitting things can get it too. This one I think a feat as strong as Graphomancy would be fine; something like 1/2 ranks of Profession (Fortune Teller) to caster level for Divine tag effects.

Enhancement also has two reasons: one is that I think warrior that uses magic to enhance their warrior skills is a strong thematic link. Rather than anything more flashy, they use their abilities to make themselves harder, better, faster, stronger, in a way somewhat like ki from a fluff perspective. The other reason is a bit like the rogue versus rogue replacements; sure, the wizard can cast greater invisibility on the rogue, but the rogue was eclipsed by those classes that could do it themselves. Overall, I think a feat boosting caster level for the purposes of Enhance effects targetting the self or personal equipment would be fine. I'm not sure what exactly would be good to tie it to however; BAB is one option, but I don't think it's the best one. Characters that aren't a direct match for the brute, but use magic to cheat themselves into being so is a large enough niche that I don't think it should be glossed over.

While ruminating on Enhancement I did have an idea that I believe would make for a decent archetype or feat(s). A tattooed warrior of some type, who tattoos magical channels, diagrams, and spells on themselves as a sort of crib sheet to help with their use of personally focused magic. The base I would see is something a bit like the Combat Engineer (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/combat-engineer) alchemist archetype; a variety of potential bonuses limited by complexity/intricacy. Increasing caster level might be a 1 unit thing, while something like allowing a tattoo to maintain concentration over an effect would be 3 or 4. Could also go for a prepared caster angle, premade tattoo spells/effects that the user expends throughout the day.

[EldritchWeaver]

I've been looking at the book and I noticed the Dualblooded Sorcerer archetype. Which reminded me of this blaster build (https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/9expig/whats_been_your_experience_playing_blaster/e5sqqsi/). So let's see if the Human Crossblooded Sorcerer (Orc/Draconic) can be replicated:



Gains both bloodline arcana (so +2 for each damage die - if using draconic damage type, otherwise just +1)
Blood Havoc (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/bloodlines/bloodline-mutations/blood-havoc/) bloodline mutation: That would grant another +1 for each damage die.
Wizard VMC: That needs a bit of conversion. Allowing it to apply Destruction sphere effects isn't a stretch. But with it you can switch damage types and gives a bit of extra damage (half of CL).


So overall, yes this would work. But the Wizard VMC is a bit ugly. So what can be done?

The first thing to notice is that we could multiclass Incanter with Sorcerer. But how many Sorcerer levels do we need? We need access to Blood Havoc. The original build employs it instead of the 7th level bonus feat, but you could replace your first level bloodline power with it. In fact, we don't need any bloodline powers for the original build. Which means we can just use a Sorcerer level 1 to get both arcanas and Blood Havoc.

If using Incanter with Destruction sphere specialization and Admixture Adept, we get another half of CL bonus damage and the Admixture feat which is very nice. The draconic bloodline encourages otherwise one particular damage type, but with appropriate talents this isn't that problematic. Penetrating Blast reduces applicable energy resistance. Admixture doesn't help with increasing damage die size, but you get at least two rider effects for no costs. Greater Admixture allows to use a d8 damage die, if your favorite blast group contains such a blast, but this costs 1 SP per use. Not sure if that is worth it. But admixturing with other blast types outside the draconic one does prevent the loss of +1 damage for each die. Furthermore, Element Shift or Inspired Surge provide more flexibility in regards to blast types where necessary, but provoke Wild Magic surges.

So overall, switching over to SoP options as much as possible allows to take over the damage increase, although blast types depend more on build choices compared to the VMC wizard.

[A.J.Gibson]

I've been looking at the book and I noticed the Dualblooded Sorcerer archetype. Which reminded me of this blaster build (https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/9expig/whats_been_your_experience_playing_blaster/e5sqqsi/). So let's see if the Human Crossblooded Sorcerer (Orc/Draconic) can be replicated:



Gains both bloodline arcana (so +2 for each damage die - if using draconic damage type, otherwise just +1)
Blood Havoc (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/bloodlines/bloodline-mutations/blood-havoc/) bloodline mutation: That would grant another +1 for each damage die.
Wizard VMC: That needs a bit of conversion. Allowing it to apply Destruction sphere effects isn't a stretch. But with it you can switch damage types and gives a bit of extra damage (half of CL).


So overall, yes this would work. But the Wizard VMC is a bit ugly. So what can be done?

The first thing to notice is that we could multiclass Incanter with Sorcerer. But how many Sorcerer levels do we need? We need access to Blood Havoc. The original build employs it instead of the 7th level bonus feat, but you could replace your first level bloodline power with it. In fact, we don't need any bloodline powers for the original build. Which means we can just use a Sorcerer level 1 to get both arcanas and Blood Havoc.

If using Incanter with Destruction sphere specialization and Admixture Adept, we get another half of CL bonus damage and the Admixture feat which is very nice. The draconic bloodline encourages otherwise one particular damage type, but with appropriate talents this isn't that problematic. Penetrating Blast reduces applicable energy resistance. Admixture doesn't help with increasing damage die size, but you get at least two rider effects for no costs. Greater Admixture allows to use a d8 damage die, if your favorite blast group contains such a blast, but this costs 1 SP per use. Not sure if that is worth it. But admixturing with other blast types outside the draconic one does prevent the loss of +1 damage for each die. Furthermore, Element Shift or Inspired Surge provide more flexibility in regards to blast types where necessary, but provoke Wild Magic surges.

So overall, switching over to SoP options as much as possible allows to take over the damage increase, although blast types depend more on build choices compared to the VMC wizard.

"Bonuses from different bloodline arcanas do not stack with each other."

[EldritchWeaver]

"Bonuses from different bloodline arcanas do not stack with each other."

That only reduces the extra damage by 1. Dropping draconic removes the choice of a favorite damage type, so this reduces finickiness in play. All in all, the build remains viable (although if that build could be improved by dual-blooded with a different bloodline or not is a different question).

[AlienFromBeyond]

I just realized that here may be the best place to address this issue (since AoP has stuff like Bastion of Conviction and Soldier of the Gods), which is that there is no Spheres of Might archetype for the Unchained Monk as Street Fighter is for regular Monk (no cross compatibility in archetypes between the two versions of Monk unlike Barbarian or Rogue). If you decide to create such an archetype, my hope would be for it to not touch the bonus feats so it can have some hope of being used with other archetypes (such as the SoP ones). You could probably exchange Flurry of Blows like Street Fighter does, and give up Style Strikes/Stunning Fist/Unarmed Strike for progression, maybe a couple of Ki Powers if needed to even out the numbers.

Just a thought anyways. I know AoP is getting damn full as it is, and perhaps a SoM Unchained Monk archetype is planned for a SoM handbook down the line or something.

[Mithril Leaf]

I've been looking at the book and I noticed the Dualblooded Sorcerer archetype. Which reminded me of this blaster build (https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/9expig/whats_been_your_experience_playing_blaster/e5sqqsi/). So let's see if the Human Crossblooded Sorcerer (Orc/Draconic) can be replicated:



Gains both bloodline arcana (so +2 for each damage die - if using draconic damage type, otherwise just +1)
Blood Havoc (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/bloodlines/bloodline-mutations/blood-havoc/) bloodline mutation: That would grant another +1 for each damage die.
Wizard VMC: That needs a bit of conversion. Allowing it to apply Destruction sphere effects isn't a stretch. But with it you can switch damage types and gives a bit of extra damage (half of CL).


So overall, yes this would work. But the Wizard VMC is a bit ugly. So what can be done?

The first thing to notice is that we could multiclass Incanter with Sorcerer. But how many Sorcerer levels do we need? We need access to Blood Havoc. The original build employs it instead of the 7th level bonus feat, but you could replace your first level bloodline power with it. In fact, we don't need any bloodline powers for the original build. Which means we can just use a Sorcerer level 1 to get both arcanas and Blood Havoc.

If using Incanter with Destruction sphere specialization and Admixture Adept, we get another half of CL bonus damage and the Admixture feat which is very nice. The draconic bloodline encourages otherwise one particular damage type, but with appropriate talents this isn't that problematic. Penetrating Blast reduces applicable energy resistance. Admixture doesn't help with increasing damage die size, but you get at least two rider effects for no costs. Greater Admixture allows to use a d8 damage die, if your favorite blast group contains such a blast, but this costs 1 SP per use. Not sure if that is worth it. But admixturing with other blast types outside the draconic one does prevent the loss of +1 damage for each die. Furthermore, Element Shift or Inspired Surge provide more flexibility in regards to blast types where necessary, but provoke Wild Magic surges.

So overall, switching over to SoP options as much as possible allows to take over the damage increase, although blast types depend more on build choices compared to the VMC wizard.

How do you actually apply Blood Havoc to your spells though? You don't have bloodline spells or Spell Focus.

[EldritchWeaver]

How do you actually apply Blood Havoc to your spells though? You don't have bloodline spells or Spell Focus.

IIRC, bloodlines can grant magic talents instead of bloodline spells. Spell Focus is replaced by Sphere Focus. I suppose it makes sense to provide a more direct translation of these mutations in the AoP book.

[A.J.Gibson]

I just realized that here may be the best place to address this issue (since AoP has stuff like Bastion of Conviction and Soldier of the Gods), which is that there is no Spheres of Might archetype for the Unchained Monk as Street Fighter is for regular Monk (no cross compatibility in archetypes between the two versions of Monk unlike Barbarian or Rogue). If you decide to create such an archetype, my hope would be for it to not touch the bonus feats so it can have some hope of being used with other archetypes (such as the SoP ones). You could probably exchange Flurry of Blows like Street Fighter does, and give up Style Strikes/Stunning Fist/Unarmed Strike for progression, maybe a couple of Ki Powers if needed to even out the numbers.

Just a thought anyways. I know AoP is getting damn full as it is, and perhaps a SoM Unchained Monk archetype is planned for a SoM handbook down the line or something.

AoP is in layout now, so it's too late. Mostly, I wasn't sure howto handle unchained monk, and then it kinda slipped my mind.

[AlienFromBeyond]

AoP is in layout now, so it's too late. Mostly, I wasn't sure howto handle unchained monk, and then it kinda slipped my mind.
Yeah, I saw it went into layout very soon after I posted, oh well. It had kind of slipped my mind as well, maybe in another book. I could see an Unchained Monk archetype fitting into Warp for example...