It is "Daily Readying of Spells", "daily allotment of spells", "A wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. His base daily spell allotment is given on Table: Wizard." and so on at libitum.
For now there is no rule about how much stuff you need to enchant something.
A lot of items require a heat source, something that I wouldn't allow in a rope trick (potions are a possible exception if you have a alcohol cooker or something similar, I think that the heat source should be appropriate to the kind of item worked) but other masters can feel differently.
Same thing for the equipment needed. working on a sword would require a small anvil, an hammer, chisel and similar stuff capable to etch symbols on the blade.
Working on a cloak would require some way to embroider it and so on.
The dev have have give a value to metamagic rods, but there is no sign that that is based on the value of a feat, as metamagic feats are very different from what the rods do.A item giving the feat would allow you to memorize or spontaneously cast an unlimited number of spells as if you had the feat, opaying all the costs of using the feat and with all the limitation of using the feat.
You are trying to discern a pattern with the assumption that the price of the rods is based on the price of a feat, but there is no proof that that assumption has any validity.
You see, gauss, your "guidance" is the problem with option 3.
With you heal primarily you have moved the position of option 3 and opened the need for option 2.5.
The chasm between:
2 Healing in combat is a very bad use of resources and should be a last resort.
3 This option means that you will heal primarily but not exclusively.
is too large.
The guidance for 2.5 could be "this option mean that you try to keep your party members health to level in which a routine attack from the enemy will not down them in one round."
CRB 4th printing PDF wrote:
Fast Movement (Ex): At 3rd level, a monk gains an enhancement bonus to his land speed, as shown on Table 3–10. A monk in armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra speed.
I don't have the 5th printing at hand, but I doubt it is different. So it isn't "base speed" but specifically land speed.
@StreamOfTheSky: AFAIK the base speed of a creature is the speed listed under its entry in the bestiary. The bestiary specify to what for of movement that base speed apply.
To make an example:
Bestiary 2 wrote:
and just to be clear about the burrowing speed:
Bestiary 1 - Monster introduction wrote:
The monsters should play stupid because the don't want to think?What is the next step? They should have 1 hit point because having to hit them more than once is boring?
AFAIK, building a car from its components is more costly that buying a factory made one.
I would compare:
You are always making a car, but the difficulty and cost increase exponentially with each step.
No, the pearl don't give you a new spell slot, it recall a used spell, a specific one that you have used that day.
Quantum Steve wrote:
Only if you are a bard.
Vic Wertz wrote:
The information Sean gave us will help a lot with our posts and FAQ flagging.
Vic, two other things could help us if you can add the to the forum:
1) the ability to un-FAQ a post, i.e. remove our FAQ flag. In some instance I have flagged a post with a FAQ request and later someone has show me that there was a reply in the rules or a developer post that resolved my doubt. Removing some obsolete flag could clear the queue a bit;
2) the ability to see a list of the post that we have FAQed. If 1) can be done it will help us in removing unwanted flags and even if that can't be done it will help us in trying to avoid duplicates.
Thanks to you and Sean for the informations and support.
SKR wielding = using.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Spell Combat doesn't call out requiring a manufactured weapon. Both Unarmed Strikes and Natural Attacks are light weapons.
"Are treated as" [for two weapon combat] isn't the same thing of "are".
Maybe it is meant to work with unarmed combat, surely not with natural attacks.
BTW, if natural attacks are light weapons, this piece of the rules is meaningless:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
Replace "natural" with "light weapon" and see what you get:
Creatures with light weapons attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one light weapons attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available light weapon attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
The crafting feats require more in game time to become powerful than immediately adjust the DC of some of your spells. it is a trade off between an immediate benefit and a long term one (same thing for the choice between weapon focus and a crafting feat).
That said in the long run a crafting feat is more powerful, especially if you allow custom items. Even if they are well balanced in price and power they are still items that are tailored for your character and campaign.
Removing from the components of the spell "a piece of the copied creature" changed Simulacrum a lot.
The spell with a range of self or a target of you lack a Sawing throw line, but with the advent of alchemist it has become possible to make then into infusions and hit a enemy with them.
That mean that even the most powerful enemy, with the best protections against magic can be killed by a successful touch attack and a standard attack using skinsend. If done right the enemy has almost no hope to avoid this fate.
For even more "fun" skinsed will work upon golems, undead and oozes.
Even without a alchemist in the party it would be possible to buy a skinsend infusion from a alchemist and put it in a syringe spear, so almost any group can have this handy combo.
Done the other way you can give your golem plenty of self buffs if you give it a few infusion in the form of oils.
I think that all (or almost all) spells with a target of you or a range of self need a saving throw line like this one:
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
substituting Reflex of Fortitude to will where appropriate.
If you agree please hit the FAQ button.
The shield is teleported in your hand.
- Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm.
so all the shield need to be strapped to your forearm to be usable.
say that you need a movement action to don a shield properly.
So you would teleport a shield to your hand and then you would have to use a movement action to don it.
Ad that the buckler [the only shield in the CRB that allow you to use your hand to fight while donning it] say:
If you really want to do it you can use a quickdraw shield [nuked from orbit in my games] to get the same result in a cheaper way.
As often happen a basically cool idea [being capable to don your shield in a speedy way] was ruined by people that want to exploit it to benefit from fighting with a two handed weapon and getting the AC bonus of a shield at the same time.
James Jacobs wrote:
Pleas, keep a iron fist around the heart of the artist painting her. If her image end like the majority of those on Rule34 or similar sites it will be a big minus on the whole AP for me and I think a few others.
It is in the rules:
Performing a Combat Maneuver: When performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action. Unless otherwise noted, performing a combat maneuver provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of the maneuver. If you are hit by the target, you take the damage normally and apply that amount as a penalty to the attack roll to perform the maneuver. If your target is immobilized, unconscious, or otherwise incapacitated, your maneuver automatically succeeds (treat as if you rolled a natural 20 on the attack roll). If your target is stunned, you receive a +4 bonus on your attack roll to perform a combat maneuver against it.
Do people still think they can get an extra melee attacking using spell combat in conjunction with spellstrike?
People know that when using spellstrike you can exchange the free touch attack that you get casting a spell with a range of touch with a free weapon attack and for short say that you get a free melee attack.
- * -
Frostbite, like all the spell working like chill touch is a bit strange when speaking of held charges.
That said, it will not grant a free attack in the round after the one in which it is cast. On the other hand it can be delivered multiple times in a round if you have multiple iterative attacks.
James Jacobs wrote:
When having a with a succubus you use protection, that is the function of extended Death Ward!:P
Well, you make a point, but the OP’s story seems to be changing a lot as we criticize him. Or maybe ‘clarifying” , but I’d like to hear from the weretiger and DM.
Or maybe you are viewing it through your experience (as we all do) and adding and removing bit and pieces on that basis. I have read the same posts and got to a set of conclusions that are almost diametrically opposites to yours.
From my point of view several of your post glossed over things that the OP has already explained to attack him on what is your perception of the situation. Again from my point of view, you seem to forget the explanations and exaggerate the problems.
I have no doubt that you see the situation from the opposite point of view and think that we are taking the OP explanations without questioning them. Our different experiences at the gaming table color our perceptions of the OP posts. We can only try to be as objective as possible.
It is half a jest and half a real question.
To make and example, we have a guy with 6 strength , 6 constitution but 20 intelligence and 18 in wisdom and charisma that speak telepathically to you.
His mind voice sound will have the wheezing and feeble tone of his physical stats or reflect the strong force of his mind?
"Act naturally but don't try to do me or any of our companions any harm."
Edit: as she don't know who is "me"
"Act naturally but don't try to do any harm to your companions."
So disrupting the other players game is allowed, having your game disrupted isn't? Truly CN, but not a good way to keep a game going.
The weretiger is making the other player actions meaningless, so she is not without blame at all. She is actively disrupting the campaign for her whims, I don't see why, if she is allowed to do that, she feeel that doing that to her isn't allowed.
I still think it will end badly and the best option is to scrap the campaign.
The equalizer wrote:
As previously suggested, perhaps the best thing to do would be to leave her to explre the surrounding area when you're meeting with auhorities or certain influential individuals.
From what Geno said it is a social campaign, so she would be sitting in her chairs, doing noting and fuming for plenty of time, exactly the same situation as being dominated.
She is a square peg in a round hole. The other players should accommodate to her a bit but she need to do most of the work, as she is one and can't pretend that all the other players should follow her whims.
I had a player like that: "I want to play a Cthuluesque campaign with evil characters". Other players and GM "We want to play a campaign were we are mostly heroes and in no way we want clerics that are cultist of outer space horrors or similar things.", "Ok". Within three levels he would convert to be the follower of some outer space horror, use the most inappropriate spells on most party members (dominated, pah, try being entombed in a jade coffin for your safety, or being covered with green slime to protect you from a swarm). After several characters and years of playing we have banned him from our RPGs.
So the recent FAQ cited above has specified that it is possible to bypass the "caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus" rule when enchanting items taking a +5 to the DC of the enchanting check.
Now I have a question about that.
It is a flat +5 independently from how many caster level are missed?, i.e. a 3rd level crafter can make a +5 sword (that would require a level 15 crafter) taking a +5 to the DC?
It is a +5 for missed level?
It is a +5 missed crafting tier?
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Sean question is a very valid one. Someone has to look any one of those flags to decide if they are worth considering or not.Even spending only a minute reading and considering each new FAQed post to flag it internally as "meaningless", "not urgent", "urgent" or "vital" [categories mine, in no way they reflect internal flagging from Paizo] ours supposed rule guy would be spending one or more hours every day simply sorting between the new FAQ flags.
It is a Sisyphean task, with the same question reappearing again and again, even after they have been resolved.
- * -
An important part that people seem to forget is that good FAQ can't be made by a Developer alone. He need to discuss them with other developers and make sure that the resulting FAQ is incorporated in all future products, even those already in the last stages of development.
So, let's try and agree what the top 10 questions are! Just give me a moment to get Shallowsoul, Ashiel, TOZ, Beckett, Piccolo, 3.5 Mentalist and Master Arminas here. I'm sure it will take us 5 minutes to reach full mutual agreement on what the most burning issues are and Sean will profit greatly from the resulting level-headed discussion.
LOL. good point.
It seem you have never written anything that should be read by a lot of people and hopefully comprehended by all of them in the same way.
That page of answer can take days of work, especially if you have do see what are the consequences of your FAQ.
Recent example: in which order you should resolve the attacks when fighting with two weapons?
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Using the FAQ and the basic rules of iterative attacks I had an opinion on how they have to be resolved, using the same data Ssalarn opinion was the exact opposite and Sean reply explain that the correct interpretation is a third one.
So giving FAQs isn't simply at all.
Our modern moral might object to killing peasants and such who do an insurrection. Medieval moral would not have minded killing them.
You aren't speaking of a insurrection, but of a lynching mob.
If a bunch of people were assaulting a prison with the intention of killing the prisoner and any guard trying to protect it:
My modern moral don't see any real problem in using lethal force as a last resort to stop one or more homicides.
Just as an example, if you play through Baldur's Gate I, sleep trivializes most of the encounters for many, many levels. It affected all creatures in the area under the HD limit, and many, many things were 4HD or less (including ogres).
Please, stop using Baldur's Gate as a reference for the AD&D rules. Baldur's Gate is computer game and don't really follow the AD&D rules.
Sleep was capable to affect 2d4 HD of creatures,and a cap at 4+3 HD creatures (4 hit dices +3 np). That is 2 ogres if you roll maximum effect. As 1st and 2nd edition sleep start affection creatures with lower HD first, a typical encounter of 4-5 1 hd orcs and a ogre would see the 5 orcs drop thank to sleep and the ogre totally unaffected.
As combat was faster in AD&D the typical encounters had a lot more enemies than today.
1ed Unearthed Arcana added specialization to the game. A fighter could double specialize for a +3/+3 and a extra half attack/round, a ranger could get single specialization in the bow for a bonus to hit at point blank and a increase in fire rate at level 7 and 13.
2nd edition removed specialization from all classes beside the fighter.
A wizard had to learn his spells, with a 85% chance of success with intelligence 18 (the maximum value you could have without wishes or characteristic increasing tomes) He failed? He couldn't retry until his intelligence increased.
Haste was dangerous, aging a year had the added effect of requiring a system shock check to survive. It was great for martial types as they would double movement and number of attacks, but did almost nothing for spellcaster, as it didn't allow them to cast multiple spells in a round.
And so on and on. A very different game.
Better? No. Worse? No. Different.
Fights were faster and you could have a large number of NPC without slowing down the game.
The computer game derivate from AD&D don't follow all of his rules, so it isn't a good basis to evaluate the tabletop game.
Protection from normal missiles was exactly that, protection from normal missiles. Magic arrow? no protection. Giant boulders, reduction of 1 point of damage for each damage dice. Catapult or balista fire? Same as the giant boulders.
You where it before casting your spell? It was lost.
Memorizing your spells? 10 minutes per spell level. Preparing a fireball required 30 minutes. Full roster of spells for a 9th level wizard? 7 hours. 11°? 10 hours and 10 minutes.
Again a different game with different rules and a different feeling.
Maybe in Germany, but in Italy? Almost all cities had city walls.
They were common in large and small cities and even some village had them. Today they have been mostly demolished and the space used to build ring roads around the oldest part of the cities but you can still see some remnant.
Palmanova is a city that was built as a fortress and you see that perfectly from its layout.
And, just to repeat it: most of the farmed land inside the walls was a property of the monasteries.
- * -
About the cost of the buildings, you must remember that the lords of the nations aren't the owner of the buildings. The BP expenses is the cost of preparing the terrain, inviting people to settle in your land, tax rebate on new owners, subsidies and so on. But a good percentage of the construction costs is paid by the actual owner of the building.
A few images of the Valle map of Padua (Italy), 1781. It was made with real trigonometric measurements and not as a approximate bird view image, so it is very accurate:
The whole city, in tis scale it is hard to see them well, but a large percentage of the area between the medieval walls and the renaissance walls is fields, a lot of them were property of the monasteries.
A section of the city walls, notice the space used up by cultivated fields.
The medieval part of the city, the houses are the dark gray areas, the light gray areas are parks or fields. Even in the heavily builded up old part of the city there are plenty of open spaces.
From where you get the idea that Melf's Minute meteors was immune to magic resistance?
It is an evocation/abjuration spell, so I don't see why you think it isn't subject to MR.
Beside that it fired at most 5 meteors round, each requiring a to hit (vs normal AC as you hadn't a touch AC in 1st-2nd edition) with a +2 tot eh to hit, each meteor did 1d4 fire damage in a 1' radius and could set fire to inflammable objects, missed did 1 point of damage to creatures withing 3' and you had do use the scatter rules for grenade-like attacks to see where the hit landed. Very different form what you say.
James Jacobs wrote:
The term space marine was used used widely in in SF books for almost 50 years before Warhammer 40K. Suing someone for the use of that term is like suing someone for using the term robot.
If it was a miniature game using that term their lawsuit would have had a basis, but against a book? it has no basis.
The basic message is "we have more money than an indie author, so we get to bully him". For those that played at the time it has bad vibes reminiscent of TSR suing GDW for daring to publishing a fantasy game by Gary Gigax.
I am of the opinion that fair for the goose is fair for gander. I don't play the NPC and PC under different rules when I resolve their actions.Apparently you play the other way.
Heroic? Maybe, but plot armor don't make me feel heroic.
"Determine difficulty" is a bad rule of thumb if any difficulty level can be overcome with a natural roll of 20.
"You alway succeed 5% of the time" isn't heroic, is playing in a world where your skill don't matter much.
Maybe when the 400 guys listening to the BEEG speech turn and fire their bows at the bard, scoring 19 hits and 1 critical, the players will stop saying how his it was awesome and start arguing that it should not be possible?
Allowing impossible shots generally help the more numerous group, not the heroic characters.
As I did say, in my games I would change them so that they require a movement action to activate. Not too powerful, not extremely situational. But an houserule.
But as Sean said the RAW of the text is clear.
You asked? :-)
There is the Cellini-like Ayavah of Magnimar, the sculptor of the statuettes and buckles depicting entwined succubi you find in several adventures.
I don't think he is speaking of PC. The problem that that rule generate are the questions:- why rich kingdoms don't have piles of wish granting gems whit unlimited uses if it cost less than 1.5 millions to make them and they can be made by 5th level wizards?
- why the same kingdoms don't have statues of great warriors that enchant the weapons put on the pedestal whit Greater magic weapons, cast at level 20th as a 6th level wizard can make them (again, with unlimited uses in a day)?
- same thing for magical vestment?
and so on.
"The golden guard of the kingdom of Tombar present his weapons and armor to the statues of the great hero Mios to bet them blessed with is might."
The statues can even have the limitation that they work only people of the appropriate alignment for a discount in the crafting price and added security.
Interesting question. I see a few reasons for not wanting to give a awakened tree a constitution score and instead giving it bonus hit point based on its size, but for some effects it seem weird.
Looking the plant type we see that they are already treated like objects but they have a constitution score as they lack this phrase that is present in the traits of the construct type: "No Constitution score. Any DCs or other statistics that rely on a Constitution score treat a construct as having a score of 10 (no bonus or penalty)."
So my conclusion is that they have a constitution score and it is the same that they had prior to being awakened.
Fun note: herbicides don't work in Golarion as the plants are "immune to poison".
As we have a specific rule about dismissing spells, if a spell don't respect that rule it can't be dismissed voluntarily.
You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than your current value, but the modified caster level you have chosen should be sufficent to have access to a spell of that level:
You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.
Bot quotes from the Magic section of the rules.
"olives and wine, which also has a large landowner style of farming"
Maybe in the US. In Italy practically every farmer has a vineyard with 10 or 20 rows of grapevines and working them don't require great numbers of workers.
Olives have a mixed style of cultivation, it is more dependent on the area climate but several of the farmers I know have a small number of olive trees and don't need any particularly big organization to cultivate them.
You should remember that a large percentage of the US has a low level of precipitations when compared to Europe. Apparently the Inner Sea region is more similar to Europe than the US in that regard.
For Celiax an the plantation style cultivations you probably are right even if the nation seem varied enough to allow for some difference depending on the area, and that can apply to Taldor, too. Quadira is an arid land so there is little chance of large plantations, Osirion had a recent change in government, so I don't know if there has been the time to concentrate the land in the hands of a few landholders.
Let's look the other lands:
Looking at the map it seem that this kind of village would appear in locations with a climate and political situation similar to that of France, Germany or Northern Italy, not surprising locations where this kind of village existed during the middle ages and the renaissance on our world.
A typical Chelaxian or Taldoran large estate with annexed village will be different, probably the upper class would be richer and the lower class poorer, with little in between, but Abraham calculation about the total wealth produced by the the area wouldn't be far off. Simply the distribution of that wealth would be different.
Roberta Yang wrote:
Wrong question. The right question is:Who benefit for a free move at level 1 (or any level)?
Wizard wishing to escape
Rogues wishing to get in range to sneak attack
Flanking buddies wanting to help the rogue
Flanked guys wanting to escape
People wishing to pursue the escaping enemy
Melee guys wishing to make a full attack
Melee guys wishing to reach the damned archer and sundering his weapon
Archers wishing to keep distance from the melee guys
Maguses wishing to deliver their spell combat attacks
the list encompass almost any character, that is the problem. As a mean of escape or as a mean to close the range almost all classes will benefit from it and that will make it a must. The standard six items will become the standard seven.
And, as written, the chest slot isn't necessarily under the armor:
Ultimate equipment wrote:
Chest: This slot consists of jackets, mantels, shirts, vests and other items that can be worn around the torso or chest.
Jackets and mantels are generally worn over other garments. Even assuming the shirt is under a full plate, changing it would require 1d4+1 minutes to remove the armor and 4 minute to don it.Not something you will do in combat but something that you can do if you stop a few minutes to heal, rest and get your bearing.
It is a strong item with a extremely low cost. If your GM allow custom crafting you can do it in a mantle or jacket form (still using the chest slot) and with multiple uses in one day.
The only group that will lose from this item are the monsters that can't use it.
But the low level consumables don't net you 1.000 gp/day.
Regardless of the time needed for construction, a caster can create no more than one magic item per day.
That 25 gp scroll that will be sold within 1 month? it will net 1.25 gp with your rules, divided between the creator and the shopkeeper.
Buying 25 gp of fishes from the fishermen I would sell them at 30 gp the same day. And tomorrow I will be capable to buy 30 gp of fishes.
The 750 gp of Remove disease? It is the equivalent of 18 months of disposable income for a expert. He could buy it as a safety measure, but surly he will not use it to cure the flu. Selling 1-2 a month will require a good sized city and they will net 37.5 gp each, again to be split between the shopkeeper and the producer.
A magic shop need a very large stock to keep up sales and that require a big investment. As that big investment is immobilized for long periods the gain from the sales need to be high, or your activity would be unprofitable when compared to opening a different kind of shop.
- * -
The "adventures are rich and skew the economy" argument is overblown.
especially since it is a per day profit.
Very short counter: it a per sale profit.So the sellers either need an order (and those will be rare) or produce items with a high up front cost and long sale time.
I will get more profits selling stockfish.
(though you might waste a lot of money attempting to do so and getting cursed stuff instead).
Let's consider a class with spellcasting as a class skill and a character with 10 intelligence, putting 1 skill level in spellcraft.
At level 3 he has +6 to his skill. He can take 10, so he rutinely get a check result of 16.
In practice he is capable to craft items requiring a spell normally cast by a character 3 levels higher than him.
Every bonus point in intelligence will increase that value by 1.
Note that a guy with master craftsman will use a Craft or a Profession, so his skill will always be a class skill, and he will probably have the appropriate kind of masterwork tools, So he would routinely beat the DC for items requiring spells that could be cast by a character 5 levels above that of the crafter.
So failing the check wile crafting a magic item will require a lot of work on the part of the crafter.
5.) Lastly, MIC makes the fantasy economy under which the game have e even less verisimilitude. If you sell a "used" magic sword to a merchant, you get 50% market price. However, if you craft a "new" magic sword yourself and try to sell it, you get also only 50%? Huh?
The reply for that is the usual one: you can open a shop and sell it for full price in a few months.
Part of the problem is that people see the Law part of Lawful Good as adherence to a land laws, while it has nothing to do with that.
Take Stabbity example of a fail/fail scenario:
The paladin code: "Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."
Respect is not "bow to the wrong request by legitimate authority."
Look the military code of conduct: if you get a doubtful order you can ask to get it in writhing. Every sane commander will pause before that request as it is a clear sign that you feel strongly that its a questionable order. Even after getting a order in writhing you should not obey it if you feel that it violate the laws governing warfare.
Same thing for a paladin.
James Jacobs wrote:
I was relying on you for some unofficial reply (as far as the main rulebooks are concerned) done by very knowledgeable GM and one of the developers of the game, even if not one of those engaged in resolving rules problems. It is sad to see that you would refrain from giving your opinion on some matter.
Much of the blame is on us (myself included) for using personal opinions of Paizo employees as a blunt instrument to win Internet arguments.
The cackle hex say:
Cackle (Su): A witch can cackle madly as a move action. Any creature that is within 30 feet that is under the effects of an agony hex, charm hex, evil eye hex, fortune hex, or misfortune hex caused by the witch has the duration of that hex extended by 1 round.
1) Some people take "cackle madly" literally, so, for them, this ability make the party easy to perceive and is noticeable, other say that it is a supernatural ability and that you can cackle without making any noise and maybe even in a unnoticeable way.
2) "an agony hex, charm hex, evil eye hex, fortune hex, or misfortune hex caused by the witch has the duration of that hex extended by 1 round."
3) Several hexes have the text "Once a creature has benefited from the fortune hex, it cannot benefit from it again for 24 hours." or "a creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day". It should be read as "the target can't be affected by the hex until the next day (so, conceivably you can affect him at 23.59 and again at 00.01) of you can't affect him till 24 hour have elapsed?
Please hit the FAQ button.
And you should be able to do most of this cackling while the other PCs are doing their various local downtime activities, especially if you're camped somewhere: crafting, the assumed studying and practicing, camp chores, cooking, etc.
Who is tending the horses? (they are large animals, it is almost guaranteed that you will get outside the radius to do that)
Being tethered to a 30' leash is terribly limiting.