Sphere Magus Unbound [Spheres of Power Magus homebrew] [PEACH]

[A.J.Gibson]

Posted here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

[Almarck]

Interesting.

So merging the spell and arcane pool is fine. I like focusing the resources.

How do you handle it with archetypes that modify Arcane pools? I almost always go Boundblade for instance and that modifies Arcane pool quite a bit since the sword you have has a seperate pool than your own.

Not sure if Fullcaster is really "safe" here, but alright. What's the Talent progression like?

Should they take a bonus sphere I wonder?

[A.J.Gibson]

Interesting.

So merging the spell and arcane pool is fine. I like focusing the resources.

How do you handle it with archetypes that modify Arcane pools? I almost always go Boundblade for instance and that modifies Arcane pool quite a bit since the sword you have has a seperate pool than your own.

I have some general rules for archetypes, and I'm writing up a guide for some of the more popular ones:

Converted Archetypes
The sphere magus unbound is compatible with most existing archetypes. If an archetype removes an aspect from the magus that the sphere magus unbound replaces, then the other archetype takes precedence.
If an archetype replaces arcane pool with a similar point resource, then the magus receive a number of points in the resource equal to half their level rounded up, and may use points from that resource interchangeably with spell points.
If an archetype removes knowledge pool, the magus still gains Expanded Knowledge at 13th level. If an archetype removes improved spell recall, they lose their use of expanded Knowledge at 13th level, and have can use the ability one less time when the receive expanded knowledge at 19th level.
If an archetype features diminished spellcasting, the sphere magus unbound does not gain a spell point at 1st, 4th, 7th, 10th, 13th, 16th, and 19th levels.
If an archetype grants an arcane bond, than once per day, the magus may use their bonded object to use a sphere talent they do not have that is not a base sphere. Reduce the spell point cost of this ability by 1 (minimum: 0). The arcane bond does not interfere with the magus’ ability to provide somatic components (if they have the somatic casting drawback), nor must it be the same object as their bonded object if they possess the focus casting drawback (though it can be the same object). Otherwise, the bonded object works as it does for a wizard.
Additional archetype adjustments are noted below:

Bladebound
Arcane Pool
The bladebound only receives a spell point from their arcane pool ability on the 1st, 5th, 9th, 13, and 17th levels.
This modifies arcane pool.

Bladebound is the only archetype I can think of that actually changes the number of arcane points received, the rest may change the pool to something else (Eldritch Scion, Mind Blade), but keep the same number of points.

Not sure if Fullcaster is really "safe" here, but alright. What's the Talent progression like?

Should they take a bonus sphere I wonder?

They use the Thaumaturge progression: full caster level, one talent ever even level for a total of 10 at 20 level. For comparison, most full casters get 20 by 20th level, clerics get 20 + 5 for their domain, and wizards get 30. The alternative was mid-caster: 15 CL and 15 talents at 20, more versatility, less power.

[Almarck]

I have some general rules for archetypes, and I'm writing up a guide for some of the more popular ones:

Converted Archetypes
The sphere magus unbound is compatible with most existing archetypes. If an archetype removes an aspect from the magus that the sphere magus unbound replaces, then the other archetype takes precedence.
If an archetype replaces arcane pool with a similar point resource, then the magus receive a number of points in the resource equal to half their level rounded up, and may use points from that resource interchangeably with spell points.
If an archetype removes knowledge pool, the magus still gains Expanded Knowledge at 13th level. If an archetype removes improved spell recall, they lose their use of expanded Knowledge at 13th level, and have can use the ability one less time when the receive expanded knowledge at 19th level.
If an archetype features diminished spellcasting, the sphere magus unbound does not gain a spell point at 1st, 4th, 7th, 10th, 13th, 16th, and 19th levels.
If an archetype grants an arcane bond, than once per day, the magus may use their bonded object to use a sphere talent they do not have that is not a base sphere. Reduce the spell point cost of this ability by 1 (minimum: 0). The arcane bond does not interfere with the magus’ ability to provide somatic components (if they have the somatic casting drawback), nor must it be the same object as their bonded object if they possess the focus casting drawback (though it can be the same object). Otherwise, the bonded object works as it does for a wizard.
Additional archetype adjustments are noted below:

Bladebound
Arcane Pool
The bladebound only receives a spell point from their arcane pool ability on the 1st, 5th, 9th, 13, and 17th levels.
This modifies arcane pool.

Bladebound is the only archetype I can think of that actually changes the number of arcane points received, the rest may change the pool to something else (Eldritch Scion, Mind Blade), but keep the same number of points.



They use the Thaumaturge progression: full caster level, one talent ever even level for a total of 10 at 20 level. For comparison, most full casters get 20 by 20th level, clerics get 20 + 5 for their domain, and wizards get 30. The alternative was mid-caster: 15 CL and 15 talents at 20, more versatility, less power.

Right. Thematically, I think Magi tend to be mostly combat focused so high caster low progression makes sense.

The changes given do make me feel that the class becomes a whole lot more glass cannon than before, more capable of dishing out and sustaining DPR, because of access to the Destruction school, whilst simultaneously dropping the armor profs reduces their toughness quite a bit.

[A.J.Gibson]

Right. Thematically, I think Magi tend to be mostly combat focused so high caster low progression makes sense.

The changes given do make me feel that the class becomes a whole lot more glass cannon than before, more capable of dishing out and sustaining DPR, because of access to the Destruction school, whilst simultaneously dropping the armor profs reduces their toughness quite a bit.

I can see their damage going up - instead d4 per level shocking grasp they can d6 per level default blast, d8 fire with searing blast and +1 per die with focused blast. I don't see why their defences would get worse though - I replaced the armor profs with combat feats, which can be used to buy armor profs. By doing it this way, they can spend a feat to get medium right away, get heavy at 7, and then whatever at 13 if they want to.

[khadgar567]

Pop one level to convict then choose arcane juggernaut, then learn base creation sphere or feat it know you have heavy armor with no dex and asp chance

[A.J.Gibson]

Pop one level to convict then choose arcane juggernaut, then learn base creation sphere or feat it know you have heavy armor with no dex and asp chance

What is arcane juggernaut?

[khadgar567]

What is arcane juggernaut?

Martial tradition from spheres of might content gives 30% less arcane spell failure chance so its good for thank magus builds

[A.J.Gibson]

Martial tradition from spheres of might content gives 30% less arcane spell failure chance so its good for thank magus builds

Ah. Of course, this is spheres, so you just not take somatic casting and not have ASF. I made the assumption most people wouldn't take somatic casting when designing the archetype.

So now I'm looking at the damage this thing can put out. Does it seem high? I took out the magus' ability to share their crit with a spell (since it leads to all magus builds being the same scimitar-guy), but with Destruction sphere and the ability to pump its damage, it seems the SMU still blows it away. Thoughts?

[khadgar567]

Ah. Of course, this is spheres, so you just not take somatic casting and not have ASF. I made the assumption most people wouldn't take somatic casting when designing the archetype.

So now I'm looking at the damage this thing can put out. Does it seem high? I took out the magus' ability to share their crit with a spell (since it leads to all magus builds being the same scimitar-guy), but with Destruction sphere and the ability to pump its damage, it seems the SMU still blows it away. Thoughts?

Its kinda higher then magus but considering sphere magic its right where it needs it

[A.J.Gibson]

I'll just post the doc here, it's easier:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

[A.J.Gibson]

I've updated the archetype a bit. I decided to make some changes to make it easy for existing archetypes to be compatible with it. I think all the more popular archetypes should be compatible. I also updated True Magus to be a little more interesting.