Cheapy |
Interesting and well-thought out. Not sure I agree with all of it, or even most of it, but then again I've spent only a fraction of the time that you have thinking specifically about this class.
I particularly like the idea for the Slumber hex replacement. I was toying around over lunch a few weeks ago with the idea of having the hex need two successful uses to put an enemy to sleep, where if they fail the first time they get a pretty big hindrance, but not as severe as Slumber.
Originally, the witch's bonus spells were based on her familiar. This was changed to the patron concept that you dislike, so perhaps you could explore the previous design space.
I also recall that the shape changing abilities were specifically left out of the spell list, although I don't recall the reason.
Big Lemon |
If the Witch class wasn't called that, with all the cultural baggage and expectations that go along with it, would you still consider it broken? (Say if it were called the Hexer or Hexcaster or something.)
That's an interesting point. In a way, the only reason the Witch class exists is because of the "cultural baggage" that can't be tacked onto Wizards or Druids.
Personally I love the Witch, though Slumber I will admit is maybe the strongest hex available at low levels. But then, that just depends on how the campaign is built. When I GMed a game with a witch, there were a lot of humanoid enemies, so Slumber was very useful, but when I play a Witch in another game, we were in the sewers where oozes were common, and slumber was utterly useless.
Aunt Tony |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting and well-thought out. Not sure I agree with all of it, or even most of it, but then again I've spent only a fraction of the time that you have thinking specifically about this class.
Thank you, but I won't take credit for all of the work.
I particularly like the idea for the Slumber hex replacement. I was toying around over lunch a few weeks ago with the idea of having the hex need two successful uses to put an enemy to sleep, where if they fail the first time they get a pretty big hindrance, but not as severe as Slumber.
I don't see Slumber as being all that powerful a condition to inflict. My main problem with the Hex is that it monopolizes players' turns, but I think this is more (not entirely) because her other options to spend actions on are just not as good.
Originally, the witch's bonus spells were based on her familiar. This was changed to the patron concept that you dislike, so perhaps you could explore the previous design space.
I do not dislike the idea of Patrons, I dislike their execution. That is, I hate that they are nothing more than tags followed by lists of spells, most of them inconsequential. I think, to the contrary, that it would distance the Witch from the Wizard's Arcane Bond class feature if her Familiar and Patron were decided with the same action.
I also recall that the shape changing abilities were specifically left out of the spell list, although I don't recall the reason.
Because of the Druid.
That's the only and entire reason.
Paizo probably encountered a conversation that went something like this:
"You mean like the Druid does with party support when she's not in Dire Bear form?"
"Yeah"
"Well, nothing I suppose..."
"Wouldn't that render the Druid obsolete finally? Are we ok with that?"
"Our marketing department says we can't delete the Druid."
"Ok then."
"If you want to look at it from the perspective of modern game design, all the spell lists should be collapsed into a common pool which we then re-divide into a few completely new classes so that these new spell casters are each only capable of a specific range of roles within the party dynamic."
"Our marketing department says we can't delete any of the Core Classes."
"Ok then. The game will continue to have the same problems that 3.5 had and we'll only be compounding on them."
The Witch is lucky, though: she is very close to what an ideal d20 spellcaster should be. What she lacks would be pitifully easy to put in, and would largely result in an increase in her power. Maybe I have it all wrong -- maybe the opposition I'm encountering isn't from Witch players, but from Wizard players who feel threatened.
Shame on Paizo, shame! Shame on Paizo for cashing in on the unrequited love of the WotC playerbase instead of doing what is necessary to make the game the best it can possibly be. Paizo only put the money in for the bare minimum of an iteration, not enough for a full evolution. Pathfinder is an improvement over 3.5, there just cannot be any arguing that, but it did not go far enough.
Aunt Tony |
Blight sucks. It just completely sucks. And that's a shame, because it sounds like it should be such an iconic ability of a witch. The limitation of having only one Blight in effect at a time is just silly and arbitrary. Is it really so overpowered for a PC to be able to Blight (over the course of a week, no less!) a 10-200 foot radius? How big is an acre of farmland? Is a 50'-radius circle of blighted crops really so dire? Keeping in mind that a Witch has little motivation to pick this Hex up later in her career, so it will see most of its use, if any, between levels 1 and 5, after which she will have far more effective means at her disposal of putting the stink-eye on those who piss her off. And is it really reasonable if the PCs are fighting plant/animal creatures often enough for the Witch to pick up this Hex that she not be able to use it on every foe she encounters even though she could easily use Slumber on every animal and slit its throat immediately without having to wait for it to slowly rot away? How many points does a Dire Bear have of Constitution? 21 days to kill a Dire Bear with Blight when you could just Slumber and Coup de Grace it?! really?! Remove the one-Blight-at-a-time limitation. Change the Save on plant/animal creatures to Fortitude. Bump the Con damage to 1d6, starting immediately. This Hex would still be worse than Contagion because it can only target animals and plants, but at least a roleplay-focused player might be convinced to pick it up and use it sometimes.
Cackle is unreasonable. The way it works currently leads to absurd situations like PCs spending literally all day Cackling madly in order to maintain Fortune on their allies between combats. It's also awkward to use in combat situations, requiring the Witch be within 30' of an awful lot of people at all times, and she's already pretty vulnerable -- nevermind how she's supposed to stay in that tiny range when she's spending her move actions to Cackle in the first place. The whole party has to bend over backwards and forwards to suit the arbitrary range restrictions of an overpowered Hex that the Witch will complain she is useless unless she can spam. Instead, Cackle should be usable once-per-Hex, and it simply doubles the original duration similar to the Extend Metamagic Feat (of course you can Cackle on Hexes after having used them). No muss, no fuss. Just extend the duration from when the Hex was originally placed. Still costs a Move action, still affects all eligible Hexes in range simultaneously. Fortune and Agony are still plenty good enough even with this change. Charm I will deal with in a little bit. If modified this way, I'm thinking Cackle should be expanded to affect most or all Hexes.
Beast of Ill-Omen is simply awful, and not as good as Evil Eye in any case. It's awkward to use, it places your Familiar in danger for almost no gain, and is generally just there for the childish Halloween image of "seeing a black cat". Less of the kitschy Halloween witches, please. Delete this Hex. Again, no muss no fuss, no more trap option. If you don't favor simply ignoring this Hex, then at the very least, fold it in with Beast Eye.
The way Charm was originally written seems to imply that it would stack with the spell for some reason, but not with the skill -- which makes one wonder why bother using the Hex when you could use the Skill Diplomacy from a much safer distance? Sure you can Hex targets who wouldn't otherwise give you the chance to sweet-talk them, but Charm Person is a level 1 spell on the Witch's spell list, for crying out loud! And you still have to be within 30' and speaking and gesturing to use this Hex as written anyway! And it has a duration of only <Int mod> rounds! This is one of the worst trap options in the game, no bones about it. Instead of the way it's published, the Charm Hex should work exactly as the spell Charm Person, adding Animals to valid target type (just like the published Charm Hex allows), locking the duration to a single hour (two if you Cackle it). In all other ways, it functions just like the level 1 spell. Clean and neat, it's still a (Su)pernatural ability, but now it can actually do something that a mundane skill can't. Limit of once-per-target-per-day just as usual for Hexes.
Child-Scent ... So awful. Dare I say, it stinks. It reeks. It induces vomiting. Instead of being limited to humanoid children and young animals, just remove the targetting restrictions and grant the Witch the Scent ability. For goodness sakes, the vanilla ability has a range of only about 30-60 feet anyway, and if you're worried that the Witch might use her nose to identify where an invisible opponent is, read the description for Scent and then recall that the Witch gets See Invisible on her spell list (as a level 2 spell) anyway. Give a Hex for a regular Scent ability? Still not likely, but I like the flavor of a Ratfolk Witch (though they can gain Scent through alternate racial traits if they want to without spending a Hex... take that into consideration if you think un-limiting this one is just too much). Rename it just "Scent", done.
Coven isn't all that terrible if there's another Witch in your party who can spare the Hex slot, but this still isn't all that amazing, and doesn't really feel rewarding to pick up. Not worse than Scent, though, so... unless we can get some really smashing suggestions in here for this one, may as well leave it alone. Making a note that it needs design work.
With the changes to Cackle above, Mis/Fortune should be adequately nerfed, though perhaps a touch too much. It probably wouldn't be too bad then to scale Mis/Fortune a little faster, granting extra rounds of the effect at level 5 and 10 instead of 8 and 16. The other thought I had was to simply cause the effect to be entirely consumed when used, but having a 24 hour duration and being excluded from Cackle. A bit like how Moment of Prescience ends when you use it. Not quite as fond of this version, though, I admit.
Nails is another one of those really horrid trap options. 1d3 as a secondary attack for a full caster? Please. Just please. If the Witch really shouldn't be given any shapechanging powers because it would infringe on the Druid's territory too much, then just delete this Hex. Tempting to redefine it to give the Witch a Climb Speed, or a bonus to her Grappling or something, but... ehhh... That's what Prehensile Hair is supposedly for.
I previously discussed folding in Poison Steep with Cook People, so I'll mostly skip it. I do want to note that the only reason to take this Hex is to save money on crafting your own poisons, though the prerequisite Cauldron Hex grants you a +4 on your Craft (Alchemy) skill which is a class skill, too. Altogether, this is just not worth a Hex slot on its own, but when combined with an improved Cook People and Cauldron, can turn the Witch into a great, flavorful, little party chef.
The pubic potential of Prehensile Hair alone makes it worth keeping around, though ... there's a spell that does basically this, and an archetype as well. Someone on Paizo's dev team has a hirsute fetish. I think this Hex should be folded in with the archetype or vice versa. Just not really blowing my skirt up on its own as it is. It has been mentioned around that you can use the hair to whip wands and deliver touch spells at a range of 10', but your DM is almost certain to balk at the former unless the description is changed to specify that the hair will allow you to hold and use a wand without using your hands. Even then, there needs to be clarified whether this Hex will allow you to manipulate items without spending your own actions -- in which case, this Hex would leap into the "very very good" range of ratings. For delivering touch spells, there's the spell Spectral Hand or of course your Familiar, so that use is pretty much just redundant fluff. Because the Strength score of her hair is equal to her Intelligence, this Hex remains "not as bad as Child-Scent", though good luck fitting it on a Witch who takes the "real" Hexes.
Swamp Hag sounds nice, but just lacks. There's no gameplay. It's so very passive, but sounds like it should be more. I'm gonna recommend that, at level 5, this Hex also grant the Bayou Hex. That way, characters intent on using the flavor can have at least a little something for it, though it still probably won't be an eyebrow raiser. Bayou isn't horrible, though, at least, and I quite fancy the idea of using Transmute Mud To Rock immediately afterward... pity that spell isn't on the Witch's list.
The Tongues Hex is thoroughly redundant, and pretty weak anyway. Both of the spells it replicates are on the Witch's spell list (at level 1 and 3). Feels like this Hex should have been Prehensile Hair, but the developers were afraid it would interfere with the Witch's spellcasting. Whatever the case, this Hex should be combined with Feral Speech to make one Hex. Recall that Familiars gain the ability to speak with animals of their own kind as they gain levels anyway...
Unnerve Beasts should be added to the effect of Beast Of Ill Omen or else just deleted. It is certainly not worth a Hex slot on its own, and I don't really see another way to make it so.
For a Major Hex, requiring Witch level 10 to acquire, Agony sure is underwhelming. As-written, it is in all ways weaker than just plain Slumber. Either swap Slumber with Agony in their rankings, or, if you use the version of Slumber I posted about at the start of the thread, then remove the save every round from Agony entirely. The greater range than is usual for a Hex, along with targetting Fortitude instead of Will is an interesting quality, and since it uses pre-existing rules (the Nauseated condition) it definitely seems like a more legitimate Major Hex than the poorly defined Ice Tomb. No matter what, Agony is still a weak option for its level since Stinking Cloud is on the Witch's spell list as a level 3 spell... If I had my way, Slumber would be a Major Hex, Agony's range would be 30', and it wouldn't allow a save every round. Remember that it still doesn't affect undead or oozes and the like, and it still doesn't provide a coup de grace. Agony thus modified would be perfectly fine as a regular Hex available at level 1.
Hag Eye should specify that the Witch who created the sensor gets to choose who can share it. The way the Hex is written, hostile Witches can "splice in" to the Eye without the creator even knowing about it, which makes the Coven Hex strictly a penalty for the purposes of this Hex. That's just silly.
The Constitution damage of Hoarfrost should be doubled (to 2), and should apply immediately. It's still quite slow to use in combat, but the save DC is potentially good enough to be reasonably deadly -- the problem is the save frequency. Allowing a save to negate and then a new save every tick to negate is just too easy. I think this Major Hex should require at least two consecutive saves to cure, with a single save simply preventing the ability damage on that tick. Compare this Major Hex against the Poison spell or (Greater) Contagion.
Witch's Brew should be folded in with the Cauldron Hex. Potions are already an awful money sink (Craft Wondrous Item is always a better option -- always!), so even if these two Hexes were combined, there would still be little reason to take it. If Witch's Brew were combined with Cauldron, and if Poison Steep were combined with a much expanded Cook People, then the two resulting Hexes could actually be good. Not great, but at least good. And definitely iconic. Such a Witch would probably be the only PC in the history of the game to be able to Brew Potions... the poor sucker.
Ice Tomb is the reason why Agony shouldn't be a Major Hex. It is better in absolutely every way, and, indeed, is amazingly good for an at-will at level 10, though definitely not Grand Hex good. All it really needs is more clarity. Calculating the thickness of the ice from its hit points is tedious and awkward, just add that little bit of information into the Hex description. 3HP per 1-inch of thickness = 6 and two-thirds inches for a 20 HP Wall of Ice. Most importantly, how long does this ice take to melt if left alone? Should we google the answer, plugging in the environment temperature every time? DM fiat? What? The only really satisfying solution here would be for an authority figure to just make a declaration about how long it would take a trapped creature to break free if left alone.
Gorbacz |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*looks at the Witch class*
*notices that it's a full caster who can cast heal, cure spells, glitterdust, hold monster, teleport, power words, flesh to stone, plane shift, enervation, divination, time stop/miracle, without having to multiclass or UMD*
*looks at the OP*
*reads his SHAME ON YOU PAIZO posts*
*scratches his baggy head*
Aunt Tony |
full caster who can cast heal, cure spells, glitterdust, hold monster, teleport, power words, flesh to stone, plane shift, enervation, divination, time stop/miracle, without having to multiclass or UMD*
Pray tell, what full casters can't do things like that? And why bother playing a full caster who... can't cast useful spells?
Being capable of the bare minimum to not be laughed out of the room doesn't mean the class doesn't need serious design work. Go read the thread again or for the first time.
Gorbacz |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gorbacz wrote:full caster who can cast heal, cure spells, glitterdust, hold monster, teleport, power words, flesh to stone, plane shift, enervation, divination, time stop/miracle, without having to multiclass or UMD*Pray tell, what full casters can't do things like that? And why bother playing a full caster who... can't cast useful spells?
Being capable of the bare minimum to not be laughed out of the room doesn't mean the class doesn't need serious design work. Go read the thread again or for the first time.
Are you remotely serious? The spells I listed are the most powerful and game-altering spells from arcane and divine lists, and Witch gets them all in one spell list, at appropriate spell levels, without having to do awkward things such as Mystic Theurge.
That alone makes the class a winner. Hexes are icing on the cake when one class can both trivialize encounters using SoS/SoD spells AND has all those cleric spells that arcane casters wish they had (heal, divination, remove/neutralize).
Yes, I've read the thread. You're hung up on something that's a secondary class feature and you completely fail to notice how powerful the spell list is.
Also, that high horse you're riding, you might want to consider stepping down. This is a discussion forum, and you can't yell at people to "get out of your thread" just because they don't agree with you.
Bearded Ben |
Paizo probably encountered a conversation that went something like this:
"If you want to look at it from the perspective of modern game design, all the spell lists should be collapsed into a common pool which we then re-divide into a few completely new classes so that these new spell casters are each only capable of a specific range of roles within the party dynamic."
You mean like 4e's Leader, Defender, Striker, and Controller?
Cheapy |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You need to tone down the defensiveness if you want proper feedback. As of right now, you are creating a far too hostile environment for rational discussion to occur, what with the accusations and shaming.
Hostility begets hostility. You have a lot of interesting ideas. Don't let them be lost in a sea of hostility.
Alzrius |
I agree that the witch patrons are much too ill-defined. I go over this more, and talk about some possible solutions, over on my blog.
Beyond that, the only change I've advocated for the witch is that Wisdom should be her casting stat, rather than Intelligence.
Seranov |
idiots, trolls, personal attacks and outright misinformation,
None of those things are in this thread, though. Unless you mistakenly believe that "I don't agree with your statement, and here's why..." is some kind of personal attack, that is.
Rynjin has stated it less eloquently, but if you can't handle people disagreeing with you, the internet is not the place you should be.
Now, for the record, this thread would have gone splendidly if you'd responded to "I don't believe the Witch class requires any serious changes" with "Well, I don't agree with that, but let's discuss why!"
Ross Byers Assistant Software Developer |
666bender |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
well... as aplayer who play a 6 level witch and REALY having fun,
i dont even use slumber (once...)
i found that the witch need understanding, like bards or druids.
if you try to make it things its not - like solo master / blaster or what not - you are doomed to fail.
BUT - i found the power = versitility.
our DM is smart - playing the monsters with tactics. so a 1 shtick pony is doomed to fail.
as a witch i divide my time:
off combat i use diplomacy and intimidate (took trait...) combine with ranks in all knowladeges - i am like a mini sage.
combat it changes: VS non mind effecting immune foes - i rock - misfortune / evil eye and whats not.
Vs mind immune i fortuner friends, useing haste and summoning.
of combat i use my crafted CLW and to assist the cleric bring every 1 to health.
unlike a wizard who is a god until spells run out... i always got things to do.
as for hexes - you are missing some pointers:
tounges: yes, its on your spell list - but you never take it, its a kind of spell that is rarly used but when needed - its NEEDED.
also, unless you can freely buy scrolls (we cant) a witch got few spells known... so, a free 1 is great.
flight: wow, the flight thing is just... a bonus. the permenent feather fall saved my life many many times. not to mentions removing the fear from walking narrow places. of course - i'll grab overland flight ASAP when can .
healing: the party healsing in nice, but the RP is better... enter a war zone and heal 1000000 people a day... thats... WOW .
yes, however, i agree that some hexes are written wrong. like "child scent" or "cooking people" . they SUCK. so... dont take them :) so many options ...
the one thing i agree with you completly is the poor way patrons are made..
they were suppose to be more like domains - mix of power and spells.
the witch is like "anti-bard".
Benly |
People who say Deception, Time, Healing and Shadows are the only worthwhile patrons are skimming the list for a few spells that pop out at them. This is understandable, since the patrons list is honestly a bit boring to read, but if you actually dig through it there are a lot more good patrons than that. Agility, Ancestors, Elements, Trickery and Strength are all good patrons for their given playstyles that give a number of useful spells from offlist. (Plague would be, except that the Gravewalker archetype does the same thing better.) Water and Spirits are both patrons that give you a bunch of offlist spells that do things the normal witch list doesn't do very well, but they're both rather specialized and campaign-dependent.
Honorable mention goes to Winter for early Ice Storm and Enchantment for early Euphoric Tranquility, both of which are excellent spells that those patrons grant a level earlier than usual.
Personally I find Shadows to be something of a disappointing patron, actually; Shadow Conjuration was immensely powerful in 3.5 where just about every effect under the sun found its way into Conjuration eventually, but in PF it's pretty much just "summon monster, pit or wall at a level penalty". A lot of the time you'd be better off just memorizing Summon Monster instead, which is on the witch list already. Some people like it, though.
Buri |
Random thought I had: Would it make witches _too_ strong if ALL the spells Patrons provide were added to the default Witch spell-list, you just get the patron's specific ones for free? It'd definitely give them a lot more nifty spells...
It'd also remove a critical choice point for the player. The same would be true for wizard schools or cleric domains. The witch doesn't lack anything. UMD is a class skill so if you need to cast from a scroll it should be easy enough.
Aunt Tony |
It'd also remove a critical choice point for the player. The same would be true for wizard schools or cleric domains.Right on. Yes, players should be required to make meaningful choices about their characters.
The witch doesn't lack anything. UMD is a class skill so if you need to cast from a scroll it should be easy enough.
The difference in Pathfinder between a "class skill" and a "cross class skill" is a measly 3 points. You can take a Trait for it, if you really want to (and there are no better "Magical Traits" for it to compete against anyway).
Besides, the UMD skill's existence is not an argument in favor of the Witch. The only serious benefit she offers as a class is the combination of an Arcane prepared spellcaster with divine healing -- and magical healing is not of those things that really needs to be cast by a real, live character. Healing spells function perfectly satisfactorily when cast from items (Wands or even Scrolls if you don't want to put up with the expense of a Staff) -- and Wizards are perfectly capable of meeting the UMD DCs for at-level healing. In fact, Wizards almost always will be maxing their UMD anyway because of the Improved Familiar Feat and the action economy, which means they can UMD a Heal spell quite reliably before a Cleric would even be capable of casting the spell themselves! Do the math, do your homework, it's sad but true. If you've been actually casting healing spells while playing divine characters... oh boy. There can be no help for you.
This fact in mind, the Witch literally has nothing to offer over a Wizard except for the "cool" factor of being named "The Witch" and her Hexes, of which 90%, as I've thoroughly shown, are utter crap. The one or three functionally useful Hexes the Witch can bring to the table are not enough to be worth her slot on the party's roster and they do not make her into the Full Spellcaster that she has paid the price to be.
well... as aplayer who play a 6 level witch and REALY having fun,
i dont even use slumber (once...)
i found that the witch need understanding, like bards or druids.
if you try to make it things its not - like solo master / blaster or what not - you are doomed to fail.
BUT - i found the power = versitility.
our DM is smart - playing the monsters with tactics. so a 1 shtick pony is doomed to fail.
as a witch i divide my time:
off combat i use diplomacy and intimidate (took trait...) combine with ranks in all knowladeges - i am like a mini sage.combat it changes: VS non mind effecting immune foes - i rock - misfortune / evil eye and whats not.
Vs mind immune i fortuner friends, useing haste and summoning.
of combat i use my crafted CLW and to assist the cleric bring every 1 to health.
unlike a wizard who is a god until spells run out... i always got things to do.
So... Wizards can't use Diplomacy and Intimidate? Wizards aren't the game's premier Knowledge Monkies? They can't UMD a CLW wand just as early as they are likely to actually get one? You know, the Witch spell list is almost entirely drawn from the Wizard pool, and they are notorious for being "1-schtick ponies". That is, Witches can do "Save or Die" spells and that's literally just about it. They're famous for being weak against a jaw-dropping fraction of the Bestiary.
I do question the value / power of wasting combat rounds on Misfortune and Evil Eye when you could just Slumber the target immediately. Or a Wizard could just cast Sleep or any other SoD spell in his repertoire (a pool which is quite a bit larger than the Witch's).
You don't get Haste as a Witch unless you blow your Patron to get it (Agility or Time are only mediocre Patrons, and they each have only two spells worth pissing on: Haste is one of them), and Haste isn't necessarily all that amazing in any given encounter (hint: it only works when you use the Full Attack action). As for summoning, A Witch is no better off in that regard than any Wizard in combat, and she's a good deal worse off when trying to actually summon and barter with extraplanar forces a la Planar Binding or Gate, which I've discussed in more detail previously in the thread.
When a Witch's spells run out, she's not really all that much more useful than a Wizard because her Hexes can't affect a target more than once per day, and a simple undead skeleton is immune to virtually all of them anyway. A construct or swarm is an overwhelming opponent for even for a fully charged Witch. The theoretically infinite uses per day of her Hexes never see actual play because the rest of the party still wants to rest even if the Witch herself never cast a spell that day. If you stripped the Witch of all spellcasting, you couldn't possibly claim that she would still be a functional, let alone useful, member of the party. But if you did claim this -- that would still be an argument against the Witch because you would be saying that her spellcasting ability is not up-to-par!
So I think, yes, I agree: the Witch needs understanding -- and you don't understand the Witch. The Bard and Druid are child's play, and the Witch is demonstrably, provably, not as powerful as you seem to think she is. Even on that tier list which I hate with every fiber of my being, she's been ranked as "tier 2" since forever. That is, she's been ranked as weaker than the Wizard, Druid and Cleric.
as for hexes - you are missing some pointers:
tounges: yes, its on your spell list - but you never take it, its a kind of spell that is rarly used but when needed - its NEEDED.
also, unless you can freely buy scrolls (we cant) a witch got few spells known... so, a free 1 is great.
What's in tighter supply, spells per day or Feat/Hex slots? Which one is a renewable and flexible resource? Why doesn't your Witch, a prepared spellcaster, have the Scribe Scroll feat already?
flight: wow, the flight thing is just... a bonus. the permenent feather fall saved my life many many times. not to mentions removing the fear from walking narrow places. of course - i'll grab overland flight ASAP when can .
How much is a Ring of Featherfalling? Your mileage may vary with the spell, but if you know your DM enjoys falls, the Ring becomes even more economical. Note that the Ring doesn't even require you to be conscious to benefit from, but you have to actually consciously decide to use the Hex (which takes up your Immediate Action, no less). Why use up a Hex slot when you will be preparing and casting Overland Flight anyway as soon as you can? Aren't there "so many options" to choose from?
healing: the party healsing in nice, but the RP is better... enter a war zone and heal 1000000 people a day... thats... WOW .
Takes a standard action to use the Hex, doesn't it? How often do you find yourself needing to heal a million (!) wounded soldiers after a titanic battle? If the soldiers are alive and not actually bleeding out, why do they need magical healing in the form of a dozen or so HP? How many Standard Actions can you even take during a day... If you're responsible for a million soldiers, why doesn't this army have its own NPC healers? Why is a PC responsible for the chore of casting a minor healing spell on each and every one of them? The hyperbole here does you no favors.
yes, however, i agree that some hexes are written wrong. like "child scent" or "cooking people" . they SUCK. so... dont take them :) so many options ...
Yes, as my point was originally, "so many options" -- that mostly suck just as much. The term is "trap option" or "noob trap". Options that sound nice but are actually just a waste, don't function as written, or simply cannot compete at their opportunity cost against other actually-good options. I've critiqued almost all the Hexes already in the thread, but if you have other specific questions, do ask. I can only say that I've not been as scathing of the Hex class feature as it deserves.
the one thing i agree with you completly is the poor way patrons are made..
they were suppose to be more like domains - mix of power and spells.
It's never been argued that the Patrons as written weren't awful. Everyone knows this fact. I was attempting to provide content for the community to use -- i.e., Patrons that didn't suck in every possible way. If I may be allowed this small conceit.
the witch is like "anti-bard".
No, the Magus is the "anti-bard". The inverse of the Bard's gameplay is not "a debuffing spellcaster". Because the Bard is not just a "buffing spellcaster".
Buri |
Those measly 3 points are most important in early levels. That's basically the first portion of skill focus for free. Not so huge at 20 but at 1 it can separates the men from the boys.
So... Wizards can't use Diplomacy and Intimidate? Wizards aren't the game's premier Knowledge Monkies? They can't UMD a CLW wand just as early as they are likely to actually get one? You know, the Witch spell list is almost entirely drawn from the Wizard pool, and they are notorious for being "1-schtick ponies". That is, Witches can do "Save or Die" spells and that's literally just about it. They're famous for being weak against a jaw-dropping fraction of the Bestiary.
The witch spell list is a good spattering of the other classes as well. I would say anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 is wizard. They're also very adaptable in regards to enemies so I'm unsure why you're claiming that they're weak.
Aunt Tony |
Those measly 3 points are most important in early levels. That's basically the first portion of skill focus for free. Not so huge at 20 but at 1 it can separates the men from the boys.
If you've got the magical items / cash to spare at level 1 so much that you don't mind failing your UMD checks extremely often, that +3 is still not gonna make a huge difference.
It's worth remembering that Diviner (Foresight subschool) Wizards are able to use a Fortune-like effect much more easily than Witches can (since Fortune can't be applied more than once per day). Fortune (and Prescience) are far more influential at level 1 -- and Wizards, as I said, are entirely capable (and encouraged) to just pick up the Dangerously Curious Trait and so they'd be at +1 relative to a Witch (for whom Dangerously Curious is a horrible waste since it's already a class skill).
So you see, even here, Wizards are better than the Witch. They can employ UMD more efficiently, more often and at lower levels than a well-optimized Witch can. The insulting part is that UMD is a class skill for Witches -- but that's actually not a good thing!
Aunt Tony wrote:So... Wizards can't use Diplomacy and Intimidate? Wizards aren't the game's premier Knowledge Monkies? They can't UMD a CLW wand just as early as they are likely to actually get one? You know, the Witch spell list is almost entirely drawn from the Wizard pool, and they are notorious for being "1-schtick ponies". That is, Witches can do "Save or Die" spells and that's literally just about it. They're famous for being weak against a jaw-dropping fraction of the Bestiary.The witch spell list is a good spattering of the other classes as well. I would say anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 is wizard. They're also very adaptable in regards to enemies so I'm unsure why you're claiming that they're weak.
I thought I'd made a fairly in-depth analysis of the Witch spell list already, but if you'd like, I could write up a complete analysis comparing the theoretical capabilities of the Witch's spell list to the Wizard's... I'm prrrrrretty sure it should be obvious already, though, who's spell list is narrower and more specialized.
In case you want a more "experiential" demonstration, tell me how an appropriately-powerful Witch would handle, say, an Adamantine Golem in a way that is clearly unlike the way a Wizard would. That is to say, for example, Summon Monster is irrelevant because a Wizard could do that (and he'd have more feats for things like Augment Summoning and whatnot as well).
What if the Witch were pitted against, say, a Lich? Or any undead, really, for that matter. A Vampire? A Mummy lord?
A simple Ooze? A Swarm?
The purpose of this exercise is to understand very thoroughly that the Wizard outclasses the Witch in every way in brute combat -- and the comparison is even more laughable in non-combat situations. This is not to say that the Witch absolutely cannot overcome these foes. Rather, that she brings nothing to the table relative to a different build that could potentially occupy her slot on the party's roster.
And remember, the name of your character's class levels is meta-game knowledge. If you have in mind a "witch" character that you want to play, you will basically always be better served by taking levels of Wizard instead of Witch. I view this as an injustice, and I believe that Pathfinder would function better (that is, it would be more "fun") if I could be rewarded rather than punished for playing a Witch.
LazarX |
That's an interesting point. In a way, the only reason the Witch class exists is because of the "cultural baggage" that can't be tacked onto Wizards or Druids.
I disagree, I believe the main raison d'être for the class is to provide a base class alternative to the Mystic Theurge class. The witch spell selection straddles the traditional borders between arcane and divine magic, and the various patrons and hexes offer a lot of variety from that base.
Aunt Tony |
I disagree, I believe the main raison d'être for the class is to provide a base class alternative to the Mystic Theurge class. The witch spell selection straddles the traditional borders between arcane and divine magic, and the various patrons and hexes offer a lot of variety from that base.
Oh, can I offer an interjection here, even if I'm not who you responded to?
The main reason I'm personally interested in the Witch (and the Druid) mechanically is that I'm unsatisfied with the Mystic Theurge. There are "hybrid" classes of most of all the roles except between divine and arcane casters. The Druid is in fact such a hybrid, but it isn't the only interpretation possible of such a hybridization -- and the Witch offers another version.
As such, I am very much in favor of designing the Witch to be a Cleric/Wizard hybrid, but I am also convinced that the Witch is not nearly as capable of this role as the Druid is.
I mentioned in a previous post my ideals concerning the deletion of the Wizard and Cleric classes, redistributing their roles, functionality and powers between new classes -- of which I see the Witch as being a representative sample.
Arbane the Terrible |
What if the Witch were pitted against, say, a Lich? Or any undead, really, for that matter. A Vampire? A Mummy lord?
Funny you should mention that - my Witch is in a group fighting an army led by vampires, so I'm getting a lot of experience in how much fighting undead as a witch SUCKS.
Main tactics that have worked so far:
Summon monsters - always a favorite.
Misfortune. That still works.
Black Tentacles, Web, and similar hinderances.
Healing spells/heal hex.
Lightning, for the undead that aren't immune to it.
Fortune on allies.
Ice Tombing mortal mooks while my allies do the staking. Good thing PF is supposed to be a TEAM game.
Right now, I'm saving up for a Threnodic metamagic rod. That should help even things out a bit...
ikarinokami |
I'm trying to take this thread seriously, but witches are one of the most powerful, versitile not to mention flavorful class there is, even moreso if you take a samsaran.
so because all the hexes aren't all 100% super. this post is crazy. at least the monk and rogue threads have a leg to stand on.
furthermore it's hard to take anyone who seriously questions the sumprecy haste( add an extra full attack, bonus ac, bonus to movement, bonus to attack) and calls it circumstanial, i have to question if you actually play the game in pratice, because in 20 years of D&D/pathfinder i have never seen a combat were haste was merely circumstanial. if there is to be labled a must have spell in the game, and if it's not cure light wounds, it's certianly haste, and witches can get both.
Aunt Tony |
Witches not being as powerful as the potentially most powerful class in the game is not exactly something to be ashamed of. Not so long as the Monk exists. :D
Har dee har har, that's already been addressed quite at length earlier in the thread. The Cliff Notes version: We can address the issues with the Monk in a different thread. This thread is about the Witch.
Witch is in a group fighting an army led by vampires, so I'm getting a lot of experience in how much fighting undead as a witch SUCKS
I would hazard a guess that anyone who claims the Witch is perfectly fine and doesn't need any balance work would also be just fine with the way Sneak Attack worked in 3.5 ... That is, they probably don't realize that PF allows you to Sneak Attack undead (and other things) now.
Usually the problem with people resistant to balance and design work on a class they perceive as "powerful enough already" is that they don't actually have much experience with the class, and they don't realize that design and balance work would also include what's colloquially termed "nerfs" as well as "buffs".
Buri |
In case you want a more "experiential" demonstration, tell me how an appropriately-powerful Witch would handle, say, an Adamantine Golem in a way that is clearly unlike the way a Wizard would. That is to say, for example, Summon Monster is irrelevant because a Wizard could do that (and he'd have more feats for things like Augment Summoning and whatnot as well).
What if the Witch were pitted against, say, a Lich? Or any undead, really, for that matter. A Vampire? A Mummy lord?
A simple Ooze? A Swarm?
Summon Spirit hex. Call out whatever you need for the situation. No limit per day on casting either.
Against undead a witch with the thanatopic of threnodic feats could do most anything. If you have the extend spell metamagic feat and the paragon surge spell you can prepare any spell you know with these feats without actually needing those feats themselves so it's very day-to-day friendly.
Against swarms just what AOEs you have. Most swarms are not that powerful HP wise to a single ice storm or two would handle most of them.
Oozes are easy for any caster.
Aunt Tony |
Summon Spirit hex. Call out whatever you need for the situation. No limit per day on casting either.
The Bargain requires at least one round to execute. Can you survive a round with that thing? How about the next several rounds while you're level drained, even if you could show that an 18HD ghost is always gonna win against an Adamantine Golem?
And how are you going to convince your GM that using the Hex doesn't require 10 minutes as the spell Greater Planar Binding does?
And if you can show all of these things -- how is that a better option compared to what the Wizard can do?
Is it reasonable to call the Witch balanced and perfectly designed if she has to wait until level 18, and spend a Grand Hex slot, before she can deal with constructs? What character level should a Witch expect to encounter a CR 17 creature, anyway? I'm willing to bet she'll not have to wait until she's 18.
Against undead a witch with the thanatopic of threnodic feats could do most anything. If you have the extend spell metamagic feat and the paragon surge spell you can prepare any spell you know with these feats without actually needing those feats themselves so it's very day-to-day friendly.
Against swarms just what AOEs you have. Most swarms are not that powerful HP wise to a single ice storm or two would handle most of them.
Here's where I slam my buzzer. If you read carefully, I noted that you would have to make a case for the Witch being capable of something the Wizard isn't. Being able to do something doesn't mean that the Witch is worth playing.
A Monk is just as capable of Jumping or Swimming as any other character -- but does that mean the Monk is just as powerful as, say, the Paladin?
And power alone isn't validation for a class being distinct. Indeed, if a class is overlapped completely by another -- why have that class at all?
Oozes are easy for any caster.
Compelling argument you make there...
Actually, how about you convince me with a few more words. Perhaps with an example of, say, a level 5 Witch against a level-appropriate ooze. I mean, let's be real, we're not saying that Oozes are common challenges for high level characters. Oozes, it should be noted have the following traits:
An ooze possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry).
Mindless: No Intelligence score, and immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects). An ooze with an Intelligence score loses this trait.
Blind (but have the blindsight special quality), with immunity to gaze attacks, visual effects, illusions, and other attack forms that rely on sight.
Immunity to poison, sleep effects, paralysis, polymorph, and stunning.
Some oozes have the ability to deal acid damage to objects. In such a case, the amount of damage is equal to 10 + 1/2 ooze's HD + ooze's Con modifier per full round of contact.
Not subject to critical hits or flanking. Does not take additional damage from precision-based attacks, such as sneak attack.
Proficient with its natural weapons only.
Proficient with no armor.
Oozes eat and breathe, but do not sleep.
Buri |
This isn't a game show. You presented some enemies and I told you how a witch could take care of them. Don't like it? That's not my problem.
Is it well designed that a witch has to wait until level 18 to deal with a CR 19 creature? You bet. That's right. 19. Not 17.
Adamantine Golem CR 19
Your link betrays you! At those levels a single witch potentially doing that is outright amazing. A party of 4 is usually assumed. That's no small difference either. A CR 19 encounter is literally double the experience of a CR 17. If I just hit 18 that's almost half way to 19 by itself. Line 'em up!
Hexes are the witch's niche. If you discount those then ANY debate, no matter how well done, is pointless. Spells are icing on the cake. That cake I might add has several spells, powerful ones, that wizards simply don't get such as storm of vengeance.
But, I don't feel like convincing you of anything. You don't even take their main ability seriously. Given that, why would I waste more of my time with you?
Rynjin |
Usually the problem with people resistant to balance and design work on a class they perceive as "powerful enough already" is that they don't actually have much experience with the class, and they don't realize that design and balance work would also include what's colloquially termed "nerfs" as well as "buffs".
And usually the problem with people who keep pushing to buff an already powerful class are that they are biased and/or don't understand mechanical balance whatsoever.
About your Ooze, a technical reading of the rules shows that Misfortune is not classified as a mind-affecting effect in its description, even though it requires a Will save, so that can already cripple the poor bugger.
There are a few spells that it seems can directly affect the Ooze, such as Pox Pustules (-4 Dex) which if successful can result in the CR 6 Verdurous Ooze to have 0 Dex upon failing the Fort save.
Summon Swarm, Vomit Swarm, and Summon Monster II can also provide a few extra hands on deck to damage the thing. It has AC 5, it's hardly likely they'll miss (the ones that need to roll to-hit anyway).
Lightning Bolt is always a nice option.
While you only get one 4th level spell, Black Tentacles is always nice.
And that's just from a quick glance through of the list of a class not well equipped to fight the creature, not even including possible Patron spells. Even if you have none of these spells prepared, you can still contribute greatly by using your spells to buff your teammates, unless you would like to claim that buffing is not contributing, at which point I would have to laugh at you.
Aunt Tony |
This isn't a game show. You presented some enemies and I told you how a witch could take care of them.
Odd. Because... given the rest of your post, you seem so certain that a level 19 PC couldn't "take care of" the creature... When all I really asked for was a Witch that could even do anything productive during the fight.
Don't like it? That's not my problem.
Your problem is that I don't just accept your baseless assertions.
Is it well designed that a witch has to wait until level 18 to deal with a CR 19 creature? You bet. That's right. 19. Not 17.
Quote:Adamantine Golem CR 19Your link betrays you! At those levels a single witch potentially doing that is outright amazing. A party of 4 is usually assumed.
Yes. So? You've never in all your career encountered a +2 CR encounter? A +1 CR encounter? Single creature encounters meant for a full party of such extremely high level PCs are very commonly +4 CR or often (as is the case with weaker creatures like Constructs) much more, with the action economy being what it is. What about all that bluster about the 18 HD ghost you'd summon? Pray tell, what ghost, specifically, would you summon that could even contribute meaningfully to the fight? What sort of DM is running your cake walks that handwaves all the restrictions of the Greater Planar Binding spell, as you do?
You suddenly discovered some reading comprehension just in time to notice the printed CR of the creature (as if one can't or never does adjust the CR of creatures easily in practice), but still managed to miss every objection to your off-the-cuff retort?
Hexes are the witch's niche. If you discount those then ANY debate, no matter how well done, is pointless. Spells are icing on the cake. That cake I might add has several spells, powerful ones, that wizards simply don't get such as storm of vengeance.
Oh yes. Storm of Vengeance. It's so powerful, that it's the divine spell list, not the arcane, which is known far and wide for nukes... Storm of Vengeance as the basis for having a distinct class. Nukes as the almighty power during level 17+ encounters... Oh lordy. I really can't retain my mirth any longer. I've got to move on before I speculate about the number of sides on the dice you rolled at birth.
Just so you know, Storm of Vengeance isn't even on par for nukes of its level. It generates 16d6 of damage, 10 of which allow a Reflex for half, it requires you to concentrate and the effects take time to happen -- and the last half of the spell is essentially just Solid Fog which hampers your allies as much as your foes.
Compare to Meteor Swarm which can dump 24d6 with a Reflex for half and 8 more d6 which targets Touch. 32 dice. Thirty-two dice. That's twice as many raw dice as Storm of Vengeance. And you don't have to concentrate for three rounds before it starts dealing that damage. You can cast a Quickened Solid Fog in the same round and then move to casting real spells like the big boys during the next round.
But, I don't feel like convincing you of anything. You don't even take their main ability seriously. Given that, why would I waste more of my time with you?
Why did you, then?
It is rather difficult, I confess, to take a class seriously which has -- as a printed, full fledged class ability -- the power to grow long finger nails and smell children at thirty paces.
I've shown very concisely, very solidly, very thoroughly how the Witch's "main ability" is incredibly weak relative to almost every other class in the game. That you can't/won't respond to that criticism is fair proof enough that you're blinded by faith. It's your own time that's wasting as I have invited discourse and new information. Your own fault you can't provide it.
Aunt Tony |
And usually the problem with people who keep pushing to buff an already powerful class are that they are biased and/or don't understand mechanical balance whatsoever.
You aren't showing that this is the case with me, even if you could show that I advocate for a net "buff" of the class rather than merely a comprehensive design pass.
Because, you know, straw man and all that.
About your Ooze, a technical reading of the rules shows that Misfortune is not classified as a mind-affecting effect in its description, even though it requires a Will save, so that can already cripple the poor bugger.
Great. Now you've got a very unfortunate (for as long as you can Cackle madly) Ooze filling the corridor. Thanks for saving the day, Witch. Now let's hope it doesn't use two move actions.
There are a few spells that it seems can directly affect the Ooze, such as Pox Pustules (-4 Dex) which if successful can result in the CR 6 Verdurous Ooze to have 0 Dex upon failing the Fort save.
I suppose it's a good thing that the Witch can say she can at least compare herself with the Druid. It's true, a Wizard can't actually cast the spell Pox Pustules.
Let's pray the BSF brought a non-metal bludgeoning weapon and that no one succumbs to the creature's Sleep Aura while trying to bludgeon it to death from melee range.
This is a very good find, though. Thanks for actually contributing.
Summon Swarm, Vomit Swarm, and Summon Monster II can also provide a few extra hands on deck to damage the thing. It has AC 5, it's hardly likely they'll miss (the ones that need to roll to-hit anyway).
Summon Swarm and Summon Monster II don't count, those are also on the Wizard's list. Vomit Swarm is indeed unique to the Witch and Alchemist, it does suffer from a potential deal-breaker, though: the Verdurous Ooze's Acid ability will almost certainly destroy your swarm of spiders before you can destroy the Ooze.
Lightning Bolt is always a nice option.
How many lightning bolts will it take you to deal 85 damage?
While you only get one 4th level spell, Black Tentacles is always nice.
Fairly sure that a level 5 Witch can't cast level 4 spells.
And that's just from a quick glance through of the list of a class not well equipped to fight the creature, not even including possible Patron spells. Even if you have none of these spells prepared, you can still contribute greatly by using your spells to buff your teammates, unless you would like to claim that buffing is not contributing, at which point I would have to laugh at you.
What buffs does a Witch provide that a Wizard doesn't? And those divine buffs she provides -- which ones can a Wizard not UMD for just as much practical effect? Is this margin great enough to make up for the lack of Haste, Slow, Time Stop, Greater Invisibility, and so on and so forth?
If the Wizard can be so well-rounded, why can't the Witch? If you don't think the Witch should be well-rounded, do you still allow Wizards in play at your table? What if you, like myself, think the Witch should be provided a few minor expansions to her toolkit and some options which don't actually suck?
Rynjin |
At your last comment, to be honest, the Wizard is TOO well rounded. It's somewhat unfair to compare the Wizard to any other class when simply looking at their spell lists. Witch, Oracle, Sorcerer (despite drawing form the same spell list), Druid, etc. are all pretty well balanced with each other, and they have enough power as it is. Unfortunately, Schroedinger's Wizard beats Schroedinger's X every time, except MAYBE Cleric, but I wouldn't bet money on that one.
Now, in practice, a Wizard is only stronger than those classes by a small amount. Wizard is the absolutely best "Most powerful in theory" class you could ever find.
I kinda derped on the level 4 spells thing, I just glanced across the table and forgot to account for the Cantrips.
A Witch can provide at the very least, Fortune which a Wizard can't. Off the top of my head I can't think of any buffs a Witch can cast that a Wizard can't (though I'm sure there are some from the Divine lists the Wizard doesn't have), but I'm not sure what kind of point that's supposed to make, especially when bringing UMD into the equation brings you back to square 1.
"X doesn't count because Y class also has it" is a bit of a silly argument to make, really. "X can do this that Y cannot, while also still having Z in common" is certainly valid, but each class having a few overlaps while still having their own specific stuff is fine.
Aunt Tony |
What buffs does a Witch provide that a Wizard doesn't? And those divine buffs she provides -- which ones can a Wizard not UMD for just as much practical effect? Is this margin great enough to make up for the lack of Haste, Slow, Time Stop, Greater Invisibility, and so on and so forth?
Let me create a separate post to answer my own question because I haven't actually written this down here.
From the Witch's default spell list, Death Ward (at SL4) and Regenerate (at SL7).
That's it. And I was being generous to consider Regenerate a buff rather than just a plain healing spell.
I'm undecided whether the divine buffs offered by Patrons should even be considered, given that you have to select just one Patron. If you have to trade your opportunity cost for a Patron like that, then why not just say that a Wizard (who doesn't even need to actually have the Dangerously Curious trait) is flat out just as good when it comes to divine buffs? I mean, you're both gonna be UMDing the vast majority of them anyway.
Aunt Tony |
At your last comment, to be honest, the Wizard is TOO well rounded. It's somewhat unfair to compare the Wizard to any other class when simply looking at their spell lists. Witch, Oracle, Sorcerer (despite drawing form the same spell list), Druid, etc. are all pretty well balanced with each other, and they have enough power as it is. Unfortunately, Schroedinger's Wizard beats Schroedinger's X every time, except MAYBE Cleric, but I wouldn't bet money on that one.
Now, in practice, a Wizard is only stronger than those classes by a small amount. Wizard is the absolutely best "Most powerful in theory" class you could ever find.
I kinda derped on the level 4 spells thing, I just glanced across the table and forgot to account for the Cantrips.
A Witch can provide at the very least, Fortune which a Wizard can't. Off the top of my head I can't think of any buffs a Witch can cast that a Wizard can't (though I'm sure there are some from the Divine lists the Wizard doesn't have), but I'm not sure what kind of point that's supposed to make, especially when bringing UMD into the equation brings you back to square 1.
"X doesn't count because Y class also has it" is a bit of a silly argument to make, really. "X can do this that Y cannot, while also still having Z in common" is certainly valid, but each class having a few overlaps while still having their own specific stuff is fine.
To reply more directly, I don't think it would be unfair to borrow a small number of extra spells from the parent spell list just to make sure the Witch works better (or at all) as she is described.
I am very well aware that the Wizard's vast spell list is his defining strength.
But, again, I don't think I'm "asking" all that much to notice that a Witch would be more thematically appropriate if she didn't have Summon Monster but instead had Magic Circle and Planar Binding. Or if she gave up Lightning Bolt and Chain Lightning in favor of the Druidic Call Lightning family of spells. Or if she were given some solid anti-undead spells of any kind. Or if she were provided with a few Patron options that weren't 7/9ths crap.
Or if her Hexes were better written to work correctly or rebalanced so that you could have a choice for those slots that wasn't between an obvious trap or obvious power game cheese.
Again -- AGAIN -- I'm not asking for the Witch to be more powerful than the Wizard, I'm not asking for her to be amazingly omigahd so powerful, I just think that it's painfully obvious to anyone who's played both a Wizard and a Witch for a long time that the Witch just does not work well as a witch, small "w".
I think the options for Witches should be redesigned to work, mostly. The focus on her spell list has been an unintended side track that these forums suddenly latched onto. You can find the post where I outlined how I would divide up the spellcasting role between entirely new classes (using the Witch and Druid as more-reasonable guideposts) so that we didn't have this problem of "spell list envy" that leaves everything that isn't a Wizard overlapped so completely by -- the Wizard.
As a minor aside, the Wizard Foresight subschool offers Prescience which is better than Fortune in every other way but that it's self-only.
zergtitan |
Aunt Tony,
I feel that you have a great negativity towards witches because your attempts at playing one failed or had difficulties. the question you should ask yourself is why did I fail or have difficulties playing a witch.
the reason why I am asking you how you are playing your witch is because this class has already gone thru a series of adaptations and screenings.
1.This class was Play tested by players so that Paizo can get an understanding of how well the class plays out. if your tactics aren't working, try a different method as you might not be playing it the way the original players or staff in the play test intended.
2.There are Archetypes available to maximize on the use of different abilities and change abilities to make the class more efficient for you to play. for example the Bonded Witch for those who don't want a familiar and you don't have to be a half-elf to use it. So if you don't like original flavor try a different bag of chips.
3.The witch is not a blasting front line arcanist like the wizard or magus, and if you play that way I suggest you change your choice of class. the witch is a class based on being a support unit, supplying abilities to buff/debuff your allies and control the fight to your advantage. In my opinion this class also does something which the wizard does not, which is to remain true to the original arcanists of our legends and myths who did not wield fireballs and lightning bolts, but enchantments and occult powers alone. Look up the original tale about Merlin, he would fit the Witch class more then the Wizard.
In conclusion, while I know their are a few abilities that don't seem to be given the full package you desire, then alter them to fit within reasonable limits, as long as you keep in mind how this class is meant to be played. And remember that these classes are built around a certain role AND THEME, so while the Witch has many abilities that are evil oriented, its because the class was first established by Hags and dark powers so its powers will be dark. however this doesn't mean you can't use some of these powers for good. for example, the child scent while meant to be used by hags to find their prey, can be used by a good witch to help find missing children and bring them safely home. you may not encounter such a senerio often, but if the rules for playing young adventurers in the upcoming ultimate campaign book happens, then your witch can sniff out these young heroes and make the story more interesting.
Aunt Tony |
I feel that you have a great negativity towards witches because your attempts at playing one failed or had difficulties.This is one of those times when real life is not like Star Wars. Your feelings could not be more incorrect in this matter. I feel disappointment and pity for the Witch and frustration for, right this moment, several forum posters who won't read. In play, my Witch characters have performed extremely well, indeed, better than anyone else in their parties. But the sample size and anecdotal source don't admit this as acceptable "evidence" of anything. The group I play with most commonly can't be used to test anything. Respond to what I've actually said, not just to what you feel, if I can at all inconvenience you with rationality, please.
the question you should ask yourself is why did I fail or have difficulties playing a witch.
Maybe you should ask yourself how it can be possible for someone to have a valid opinion that differs from your own, and how simply making a response does not validate yours, either.
the reason why I am asking you how you are playing your witch is because this class has already gone thru a series of adaptations and screenings.
Which was very clearly not effective enough. Though I'm not even asking it to compare with the development time and effort spent on the far older 3.5 product which the bulk of Paizo's material stands on the shoulders of, to end with a preposition.
1.This class was Play tested by players so that Paizo can get an understanding of how well the class plays out.
Again, the playtest period was clearly not long enough or not effective or more probably both. If I must, I would blame both Paizo and the "playtesters" both.
if your tactics aren't working, try a different method as you might not be playing it the way the original players or staff in the play test intended.
I should think that the mark of a worthy proposed class would be its ability to be played in a variety of ways and still be satisfying. Otherwise, the Witch should be an archetype instead of its own class -- precisely because all of the Core classes are capable of a wild array of play styles.
2.There are Archetypes available to maximize on the use of different abilities and change abilities to make the class more efficient for you to play. for example the Bonded Witch for those who don't want a familiar and you don't have to be a half-elf to use it. So if you don't like original flavor try a different bag of chips.
I think I have a good enough grasp of the available archetypes for the Witch to know what I'm talking about when I refer to them, but I haven't really even spent much time talking about them in this thread yet. The burden would then fall to you to convince me that there exists an archetype which can fix exactly all the problems I have found with the Witch.
And I rather like the familiar as a class feature.
3.The witch is not a blasting front line arcanist like the wizard or magus, and if you play that way I suggest you change your choice of class.
I would suggest you look here and here. If you do, you may be surprised to learn that the spells Cone of Cold, Lightning Bolt, Wail of the Banshee and Chain Lightning are all on the default spell list for the class, and that there are several Patrons which offer raw nuking power (Elements and Winter, namely).
But if you had been reading the thread, especially my own posts, you would know that "blasting" is exactly one of those things I seek to remove from the Witch's portfolio.
the witch is a class based on being a support unit, supplying abilities to buff/debuff your allies and control the fight to your advantage.
Well, it's unfortunate, then, that the Witch is in truth only really capable at doing half of that. A glance down her spell list shows that she really offers extremely extremely few defensive buffs, especially relative to her total potential spell list. Without a Patron (which would only provide two or at most three), she has Death Ward and Fly. Hardly a "buff" class. Fortune, the Hex, has its own limitations and is also not enough to qualify the Witch for the undeserved label of "buffer" which so many plaster all over her without even thinking. Ward is just a joke, and yes, I can and will dismiss it that easily.
In my opinion this class also does something which the wizard does not, which is to remain true to the original arcanists of our legends and myths who did not wield fireballs and lightning bolts, but enchantments and occult powers alone. Look up the original tale about Merlin, he would fit the Witch class more then the Wizard.
Then maybe you would be interested to read one of my posts. Any of them.
Rather than ripping off a reply with a quality of scholarship that would leave you expelled from junior high.
In conclusion, while I know their are a few abilities that don't seem to be given the full package you desire, then alter them to fit within reasonable limits, as long as you keep in mind how this class is meant to be played.I tend to think that if I were to alter the game for my own purposes for use with and by permission from my own private gaming group, I don't need to keep in mind a damn thing, least of all what you think. You have got a nerve!
And remember that these classes are built around a certain role AND THEME, so while the Witch has many abilities that are evil oriented, its because the class was first established by Hags and dark powers so its powers will...
Again, may I direct you to read any of the posts I've made concerning the Witch and not just those posted by angsty trolls who use short words and emptier rhetoric.
wraithstrike |
Aunt Toney in order for us to make suggestion we must see problems. I think the class is fine as is. It is nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. I am not saying its perfect, but its not as mad as your opening most made it seem.
If you want suggestion for your home game phrasing your opening post in that manner would have made things go smoother. I am not blaming you, but the way you word things matters a lot here.
Parka |
I definitely do agree that Patrons are quite downplayed, which is a lot of lost potential for narrative flavor- though it also, thankfully, prevented them from ending up feeling like a narrative variation on the cleric...
To the original posted recommendations, I do like the triumverate and the additional patron. Only thing that really jumps out at me is a few spells on the Maiden that confuse me as to why they are there. That, and I wish there was a more evocative spell for the Crone's capstone than "Energy Drain." It's powerful, effective, and probably the best option, just not quite as out-of-the-box evocative as "Wither Limb" (from 3.5) or the low-level "Cup of Dust."
One question is whether the triumvirate Patrons would change as the witch herself matures, or if she would eventually grow into wizened great-grandmotherhood with "Maiden" as her patron still. My understanding is imperfect, but I thought it was a natural cycle for individuals, too. Eh, meta-game rules interfering with narrativism. Nothing new.
To the original hex recommendations: (Spoilered for length)
I suspect that the analysis would be correct if it were used as a primary in-combat means of healing, but I think any attempt to make it "viable" to use in that fashion would mean needing to put more strict limits on it and take it out of its current utility role, which an overwhelming majority seem to be very happy with.
Blight's crop-ruining ability really ought to be measured in acres or something for it to do its thematic job.
One idea to help in the modification effort may be to create a way to free up old hexes by upgrading them into higher ones. Something like a [Transition] keyword, where you may take a Major/Grand hex that extends on the previous one, and the minor one turns into something else. Instead of having to make a Hex "chain" worth having unofficial prerequisites and tying up so many options, or making senselessly redundant choices, you can make them lower-powered [Transition] hexes, and free up your older, minor choices for greater diversity. So you could have the minor hex Flight while it's useful, then when it starts to lag, you could [Transition] it into one of your Major hex choices for improved abilities, and the old useless Minor hex turns into... Blight, or something. Whatever Minor hex you feel like you mastered in your travels. The new Major Flight could be made exactly as powerful as it "needs" to be, instead of having to justify having tied up a Minor hex that is now useless. Some, like Healing, might theoretically retain some utility in that you can use Minor and Major hex separately, so there may be some ability to have the two either [Transition] or possibly be left alone, as the player desires.
After all of that, I do think that the analysis of some of the hexes seems to be pegged for very, very high expectations, and comes off quite harsh on them. Since I typically play in and run unusual games, though, I can't really offer any objective advice to help this.
Edit: The [Transition] hexes also help prevent Minor hex choices from having to be artificially scaled beyond the importance of Major or Grand hexes to keep up with levels in their function- you just move the choice up as high as you want to take it, and it becomes appropriately powerful for that level. If minor flight is adequate for your character, you don't have to transition it upward and are free to pick other Major hexes. It doesn't auto-scale to overshadow the usefulness of Major hex choices that aren't available as Minor ones, nor does the character get saddled with choices that are now made irrelevant.
Arbane the Terrible |
2.There are Archetypes available to maximize on the use of different abilities and change abilities to make the class more efficient for you to play. for example the Bonded Witch for those who don't want a familiar and you don't have to be a half-elf to use it. So if you don't like original flavor try a different bag of chips.
Some of these don't seem to have been all that well thought-out: The Dimensional Occultist gets Planar Binding _without_ getting the Magic Circle spells. That brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "trap option". O_o
Aunt Tony |
If you want suggestion for your home game phrasing your opening post in that manner would have made things go smoother. I am not blaming you, but the way you word things matters a lot here.
I guess I should somehow be a bit more obvious with the fact that I'm not one of Paizo's employees, a developer, a publisher or anyone, really, who has any say at all about the official rules as published or in future errata...? And you really did blame me even if you say you aren't.
The way you word things matters a lot here.
To the original posted recommendations, I do like the triumverate and the additional patron. Only thing that really jumps out at me is a few spells on the Maiden that confuse me as to why they are there.
Which ones?
That, and I wish there was a more evocative spell for the Crone's capstone than "Energy Drain." It's powerful, effective, and probably the best option, just not quite as out-of-the-box evocative as "Wither Limb" (from 3.5) or the low-level "Cup of Dust."
I could happily go on for months inventing and analyzing new spells by the dozen. But apparently I have difficulty convincing anyone that the Witch even should be looked at for some design work in the first place at all.
What level 9 spell would you say could actually compete with Energy Drain which is still thematically appropriate to the Crone and, without extreme extenuating circumstances, is in Pathfinder?
One question is whether the triumvirate Patrons would change as the witch herself matures, or if she would eventually grow into wizened great-grandmotherhood with "Maiden" as her patron still. My understanding is imperfect, but I thought it was a natural cycle for individuals, too. Eh, meta-game rules interfering with narrativism. Nothing new.
That's a bit beyond the scope of my introduction of the Patrons as it starts to bump into a compounding complexity involving a game mechanic that almost never sees use in actual play. How often do characters 95% of games actually transition between age categories -- in play?
I would personally be perfectly fine with this sort of "cycle of life" transition between the Patrons/goddesses -- but how would you generalize this mechanic to work with other Patrons that already exist or may be homebrewed?
To the original hex recommendations: ** spoiler omitted **
What you must do is compare the general usefulness of the Hex with the Craft Wand feat (or really any other craft item feat because you can exchange Feats for Hexes, which establishes the exchange rate directly). You could craft Wands of a great many spells besides just Cure Light Wounds. The Hex really is just a gold saver: this comparison is not just theoretical stuff. The limitation on uses-per-target per day is there to throttle your output in such a way that the party is still limited by non-spellcasting resources (as well as spells), i.e., hit points. If you were determined and shrewd, though, you could spend a Feat and craft the CLW wand and burn through charges at a far more fearsome rate, yes. But you'd also be able to burn those charges at half-price, and you'd be able to create half-price wands of other spells, not just CLW. The Hex is a ripoff even when compared to such highly-situational feats as Craft Wand. The irony is that, as a spellcaster capable of casting healing spells, the Witch is one of few classes in the game for whom Craft Wand could theoretically be a functional choice, even though it will never be a power gamer's first pick for a feat slot.
And we haven't even mentioned the true horror of Craft Wondrous Items. Ever seen a Wizard create widget of CLW 5/day? Pray your players don't read these forums.
That your players can find enjoyment and usefulness in the Hex almost certainly says more about their current campaign environment than it does about the Hex's use in the wider Pathfinder community.
I think I understand the basic concept of your Transition mechanic for Hexes, but I'm not sure that "trading down" your fewer (and also more powerful, and therefore quadratically more valuable) Major Hex slots to free up Minor Hexes is at all a benefit for the Witch player. Remember they can already trade Feat slots for more Hexes if they really must have more, and this is already seen as an "easy does it" maneuver that newer or less analytically-minded players are well advised to avoid. Or do you mean that Minor Hexes can be [Transitioned] into more powerful versions by simply moving into a Major Hex slot and thereby freeing up the Minor Hex slot? This is only slightly better than trading directly, and it would depend a great deal on having Major versions written and balanced and appealing for every Minor Hex. It's an inelegant, kludge-y hack job, I feel. Awkward to implement, awkward to use, prone to misinterpretation... We're not looking to create ever more poorly-worded and difficult-to-balance mechanics in the Witch class are we?
In general, I think it's fairly difficult to have too-high expectations when it comes to long finger nails and the frightfully politically awkward child-sniffing. When other classes, like the Druid for example, can transform into just about any creature they can imagine on a whim? Or, like the Wizard, gain non-undead immortality and recover their neglected schools? Or Improved Evasion, Immunity to Poisons, transformation into an [Outsider] with damage reduction and whatnot, the Smite ability or Lay Hands and its Mercies, or even just simply the ability to spontaneously cast spells ... Pathfinder is awash with very powerful class abilities, and I think it goes without saying that monsters are certainly in no danger of being overshadowed by the PCs' variety no matter how over the top.
Compare the Witch's Hexes directly with the Oracle's Revelations or the Sorcerer's Bloodline powers. Some of those are simply outrageous in the extreme, and they certainly have a larger pool of viable choices than the Witch does of Hexes which largely just mimic spells she can already cast. And you can see for yourself my summaries of which ones fall short and why.
I don't think I have too-high expectations for the Witch's Hex class feature, given that it is really her only one, and that it is -- this bears repeating -- almost entirely populated by traps or just plain crappy "options".
Wanting to be able to actually Blight things instead of announce to the table for the umpteenth time "I use Slumber and then Cackle to extend the duration of Mis/Fortune on all within range" is something I really would hope isn't "too high" an expectation.
Parka |
On the "transitioning the Patrons" I asked about earlier, they likely wouldn't be needed for other Patrons, just these new ones, since they are so uniquely tied to life cycle. It would mostly be something to remember when crafting NPCs, but it isn't entirely impossible to have PCs change age categories during between-adventure downtime.
On the Maiden, it's mostly Protection from Arrows and Earthquake. Wish, I can kind of see, but it is so open-ended a spell, and part of me keeps wanting to assign it to something more characteristic of experience and power than the Maiden (though the Matron fits well with Resurrection already and the Crone currently has too decrepit a feel).
On Ward, I can't really offer any discussion or help on that portion if you are looking to change that part of the system at the same time.
On the Healing Hex, there is the minor utility of being able to use both Minor and then Major hex on every subject, instead of having it auto-scale as a single application. When comparing to Craft Wands, there is the issue of taking the downtime to gather the materials and then actually do the crafting, and a small gain in utility for having Hexes always be available, regardless of whether you've rested or lost all of your gear.
On the [Transition] idea, it was dependent on making better versions of the Minor hexes. Not all of them, just the ones for which it seemed appropriate (like Flight or Healing). It seemed like you already had plenty of ideas on how to scale the power of many of them up to the level range appropriate for a Major and Grand hex level. It seems like it would be simple to take some of your recommendations and convert them into the appropriate level of Hex.
I'm not likely to respond again, though. You may not have intended to come off as hostile, but I'm not invested enough in the discussion to take collateral flak over it.
Piccolo |
It is true though, there are a lot of ..bland things in the witch class.
Not to mention there's new spells and feats with every single book but no new hexes.
I thought I should mention that for the most part, real world "witches" were basically herbalists who thought they could cast spells via concoctions; almost all of which tended to involve something to do with healing, or some sort of protection. Modern historians theorize that the reason they got such a bad reputation is that universities started providing medical training (even if it was wildly erroneous and harmful at worst, see the SNL skit "Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber" for a good illustration of their abilities). Those newly minted medical doctors fearmongered anyone considered an apothecary, midwife etc as a witch who did deals with the devil, most likely because they wanted to eliminate the competition.
Thus, if we look at it, the Witch shouldn't have any flashy spells. Heck, it could easily be simulated by using a Sorcerer with the Arcane bloodline and not choosing any direct damage spells, then tossing in a few character traits from the APG.
Personally, I wonder why the class exists at all.
zergtitan |
Look, this guy does a good job of making most of the class and getting the best bang for your buck. so follow some of his tips and see if they help. Link.
Also, while i understand your comments to my post above, there is one factor you don't see, and that is even support units need some spells for blasting just like a WW2 Radio soldier carries around a pistol in case things get ugly, so while they have such spells they are mostly meant to be used in case your party is not putting out as much damage as you hope.
zergtitan |
P.S. the way you replied to my response sounds like a "No I'm Right your Wrong Response" and your tone to many of the other people who posts is to shoot them down when they say anything positive about the witch. well if you don't like this class so much then here's what you do.
1.stop posting about how much you hate the class and how it is flawed.
2.make witches illegal in your gaming group.
3.turn all witches into sorcerer's (possible bloodline being Accursed) or wizards.
4.shut down or stop looking at this thread so others can chime in about their positives and productive critiques about this class so that we can all produce answers for our problems because right now all your doing is complaining and not putting out any productive responses to solve the problems you and others are facing.
Rant done. Transmission end.
zergtitan |
Now that I've had time to call my head. I would to withdraw many of the things I've said if aunt tony can list for me at least six good things about the witch class. Then I will be satisfied and withdraw any negative statements I've made earlier.