Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LittleRush" data-source="post: 4373623" data-attributes="member: 73035">Spheres eh....Greetings,First let me say this, I have been playing second edition since 1989, yup year one. while I recognize that there are a lot of whatevers right now the dating of myself is intended to emphasize the following line."I Really Love the Spheres System, and have loved it from the start!"Having said that, one of the reasons that third edition will grate against the Idea of spheres is "Game Balance". Someone somewhere decided at some point along the 3e creation line that things will be balanced.... all domains will grant one ability, and contain 9 thematically linked spells, ect...well the writers of second edition didn't give a damn about game balance, that is why the two editions feel so very different, and why 3e feels so very glossy and soft pseudo-super-heroic for us older players.The sphere system is not balanced.(full stop) trying to balance it will drastically alter the feel that you are going for. My suggestion, forget the balancing.Drop the major,lesser, minor stuff. go back to the beginning to the spheres themselves. Organize the spells. Name the spheres. Don't be afraid that people will ignore the spheres with less spells, their loss. Group the spheres according to portfolio of the deity just like the old days, some get more some get less. Really powerful gods with big portfolios have clerics with more spells and spheres.... (go figure). It is ok that some priests have no access at all to some spells, if they wanted them that bad they could always change faiths....Sorry I ranted a little there.As for the abilities. Spontaneous conversion to healing.... LameTurn / Command undead....some do one, some the other, some do neither and some can do either. Balance be damned, build for role playing opportunities not power(not to imply that you are building for power, you seem quite adept at resisting the s on chest syndrome)</blockquote>

Verification