Witch, Witch, You’re a Remastered Witch

There's also a lot of familiar abilities which can keep them alive. One simple option is flight, which doubles as a useful scouting power. Rage of the Elements added a bunch of new defensive options, too.

For everyone worried about: "But familiars can't survive a fireball"

Resistance -> Elemental (Fire) for a fire elemental familiar that's now immune to fire can help address that.

And overall, it seems the bulk of the power will still be in the Witch's hexes. The familiar is strong enough that you WANT to use it, but not too strong that your party will fall apart if the Witch chooses to back-off their familiar.

For everyone worried about: "But familiars can't survive a fireball"

Resistance -> Elemental (Fire) for a fire elemental familiar that's now immune to fire can help address that.

Good thing the only area attack is a fireball right?

Gortle wrote:

3 Crows Witch wrote:

Yay to my favorite class - really excited about the Hex immunity being lifted

Yes the way you couldn't cackle and hex in the same round was one of the most stuffed up things about the witch.

From the sound of it

Quote:

we felt that having to sustain them and having the limit of 1 hex cantrip per turn (it turns out, your patron doesn't like being pestered for supernatural favors three times in a six-second window) was already enough of a limit for most abilities.

That may still be a thing.

Only the temporary timeout lock is being removed. So you can skip sustaining Evil Eye or Stoke the Heart for a round or two and then reapply it to the same target when you are less pressed for actions.

Depending on how broadly that was removed... Clinging Ice without the immunity period would be pretty crazy.

Still not a super big fan of putting short range, self-centered AoE abilities on a body with full caster AC and 5 hp per level.

If the familiar abilities are sufficient to be a significant impediment to enemies, the familiar becomes a valid target. And nobody EVER wants that.
At least replacing a dead familiar isn't a huge ordeal in PF2, but still kinda sucks having a decent chunk of the class's power budget (and a LOT of the power being added to the class in the Remaster) being bolted onto something that can be killed.
At least Rangers have to opt in to an Animal Companion.

I dunno, maybe I'm just surly. I've been trying to play familiarless witches since the class's inception. Let's go Wyrm Witch and Cartomancer!

Same here, never was a big fan of them focusing more on the Witch being a "pet class" in 2e, and now seems like they're doubling down on that. Really trying to hold out hope that there will be a non-rare patron allowing an inanimate object familiar or something to focus less on the familiar, but am doubtful. (Wyrm Witch is a particularly sad loss in 2e.)

Being forced to send a fragile target into close combat in order to use a class ability sounds terrible to me. Either your pet gets merc'd in an early encounter and you essentially lose the class ability for the rest of the day (including the difficult boss fight where you really want it), you have to deliberately avoid using a class ability to try to keep it safe long enough to use later (& probably just never use it at all), or you have to reserve your focus pool/reactions/etc. in order to constantly babysit your pet to make your class ability function (which sounds like a downgrade). None of which sound particularly appealing to me.

GnollMage wrote:

Would I be hoping for too much, if I said I'm hoping to see Waxen Image return, or even the Cook People major hex make a return in some way? ;w;

Almost certainly, yes. You are hoping for too much for that to be a player-available option.

Abilities like these might be appropriate for NPC enemy antagonists. And those would fall under the Special Abilities section of creating a custom creature.

No no no no -- the option you are looking at is Cook For People. Or is it Cook Forty People? Or is it Cook For Forty People? . . .

breithauptclan wrote:

Gortle wrote:

3 Crows Witch wrote:

Yay to my favorite class - really excited about the Hex immunity being lifted

Yes the way you couldn't cackle and hex in the same round was one of the most stuffed up things about the witch.

From the sound of it

Quote:

we felt that having to sustain them and having the limit of 1 hex cantrip per turn (it turns out, your patron doesn't like being pestered for supernatural favors three times in a six-second window) was already enough of a limit for most abilities.

That may still be a thing.

Only the temporary timeout lock is being removed. So you can skip sustaining Evil Eye or Stoke the Heart for a round or two and then reapply it to the same target when you are less pressed for actions.

Depending on how broadly that was removed... Clinging Ice without the immunity period would be pretty crazy.

Witch could use one or two crazy builds.

I hope some Patrons gain buff auras for familiars, encouraging sending your familiar out, but to hide behind allies and being less of a target.

Also, I just love the idea of witches talking to their familiars to gain understanding of/embody some abstract concept.

Tunu40 wrote:

For everyone worried about: "But familiars can't survive a fireball"

Resistance -> Elemental (Fire) for a fire elemental familiar that's now immune to fire can help address that.

Good thing the only area attack is a fireball right?

I guess we'll see if the survivability of familiars has been enhanced as well to use all those close-range abilities they have, so as to make them actually useful.

I expect a lot of independant, flying, tough familiars with the remaster.

I like everything they've shown on the witch so far. The familiar abilities granted by your patron seem a bit imbalanced (some very strong others highly situational or outright "meh") but at least the new feats and hex upgrades will make the witch significantly better even if you ignore the patron-granted abilities.

I hope many new Familiar abilities (such as counts as flanking) will not break Invisibility.

The shadow remains cast,

Bayonetta reference?

Cant wait to see the whole picture of the new witch!

Being forced to send a fragile target into close combat in order to use a class ability sounds terrible to me.

Well I think players who are expecting Eidolon Lite or some other fully effective combat 'second actor' are going to be disappointed. My read is it's still going to be supplementary with the main Witchy source of offense as spells and hexes. But maybe it's effective defense? You think about moving in on that Witch, you gotta deal with the cat. And there may be a lot of combat rounds where those two things really overlap - a 15' Emanation and at 30' spell range are only 1 move action apart. Easy enough for the Witch to move around to make their emanation more effective or use the threat of a familiar's attack as a sort of area denial. We will have to see!

I expect a lot of independant, flying, tough familiars with the remaster.

I like everything they've shown on the witch so far. The familiar abilities granted by your patron seem a bit imbalanced (some very strong others highly situational or outright "meh") but at least the new feats and hex upgrades will make the witch significantly better even if you ignore the patron-granted abilities.

Yup, independent will definitely be a top tier pick.

Iron Teeth armaments? Is teeth replacing the hair & nails?

breithauptclan wrote:

Gortle wrote:

3 Crows Witch wrote:

Yay to my favorite class - really excited about the Hex immunity being lifted

Yes the way you couldn't cackle and hex in the same round was one of the most stuffed up things about the witch.

From the sound of it

Quote:

we felt that having to sustain them and having the limit of 1 hex cantrip per turn (it turns out, your patron doesn't like being pestered for supernatural favors three times in a six-second window) was already enough of a limit for most abilities.

That may still be a thing.

Only the temporary timeout lock is being removed. So you can skip sustaining Evil Eye or Stoke the Heart for a round or two and then reapply it to the same target when you are less pressed for actions.

Depending on how broadly that was removed... Clinging Ice without the immunity period would be pretty crazy.

Yeah. It would be about as crazy good as Buzzing Bites.

Iron Teeth armaments? Is teeth replacing the hair & nails?

I think the feats have been consolidated into a single "Witch's Armaments" feat where you pick which one you get.

Antonio Jackson D'Angelo wrote:

Relying on squishy pets for benefits is concerning, particularly if there is a spell slot tax just to keep them alive.

Phase Familiar is a focus spell, not a slot, and witches get it for free. Witch familiars also revive at your next daily preparation. If you can get enemies to waste actions and MAP to murder your resurrecting pet instead of your non-resurrecting witch or allies, that may be a win for your group. The only downside is you lose the ability to refocus, and obviously the familiar abilities themselves, until the next morning. How much that matters will depend on the time pressure you're under. (This also assumes nothing else changes about refocusing or reviving. It may very well.)

There's also a lot of familiar abilities which can keep them alive. One simple option is flight, which doubles as a useful scouting power. Rage of the Elements added a bunch of new defensive options, too.

The witch is going to be in an interesting spot that kind of out-wizards the wizard without time pressure. Like a wizard they need to manually add spells to their preparation options. But they also have familiar abilities which can be swapped daily. And depending on your GM's rulings familiars make excellent scouting tools.

It is potentially a bit weird in flavor terms to be sacrificing your familiar frequently, even if it revives the next day. It can potentially make sense for certain character concepts (Homura making Kyubey suffer is funny), but if the familiar and the Witch are actually supposed to be friends it's kind of awkward.

Captain Morgan wrote:

Antonio Jackson D'Angelo wrote:

Relying on squishy pets for benefits is concerning, particularly if there is a spell slot tax just to keep them alive.

Phase Familiar is a focus spell, not a slot, and witches get it for free. Witch familiars also revive at your next daily preparation. If you can get enemies to waste actions and MAP to murder your resurrecting pet instead of your non-resurrecting witch or allies, that may be a win for your group. The only downside is you lose the ability to refocus, and obviously the familiar abilities themselves, until the next morning. How much that matters will depend on the time pressure you're under. (This also assumes nothing else changes about refocusing or reviving. It may very well.)

There's also a lot of familiar abilities which can keep them alive. One simple option is flight, which doubles as a useful scouting power. Rage of the Elements added a bunch of new defensive options, too.

The witch is going to be in an interesting spot that kind of out-wizards the wizard without time pressure. Like a wizard they need to manually add spells to their preparation options. But they also have familiar abilities which can be swapped daily. And depending on your GM's rulings familiars make excellent scouting tools.

It is potentially a bit weird in flavor terms to be sacrificing your familiar frequently, even if it revives the next day. It can potentially make sense for certain character concepts (Homura making Kyubey suffer is funny), but if the familiar and the Witch are actually supposed to be friends it's kind of awkward.

Well, I'm not suggesting you should be casting Final Sacrifice on it. Just that the familiar is clearly meant to have more skin in the game now. I am not sure how much aggro they will actually draw, but I don't see why having it participate in life eor death battles is any worse than a bard or cleric doing so.

One other note about familiars dying: it also lets you swap in specific familiars easier. Now if you're intentionally killing your familiar off for this purpose, THEN you have a roleplay problem.

The things that I find the most sad with the witch is that I had the feeling I couldn't do anything... Everything was mental damage, same debuff. Nothing works together... The only thing I was able to do was intimidating. Pretty sad.

A familiar, especially a witch's familiar, is not a pet.

The things that I find the most sad with the witch is that I had the feeling I couldn't do anything... Everything was mental damage, same debuff. Nothing works together... The only thing I was able to do was intimidating. Pretty sad.

That's a really weird take, especially when the class isn't actually a good candidate for Demoralize.

Ceremonial Knife, which allows a knife or dagger to direct magical energies like a magic wand...

This part has me curious because what they're talking about doesn't sound anything like what Wands as they CURRENTLY exist actually DO. Wands, as they exist now, don't direct magical energies at all, they're just Spells in a Can that can be used once per day or additional times if you're willing to risk throwing the thing in the trash by pushing your luck.

So, the whole thing my interest is piqued thinking that maybe, just MAYBE they are printing a NEW KIND of magic wand (something like what I suggested some time ago) that functions like, well, like how Wands are showcased in a bunch of other media as ways to channel and cast your magic in a directed and focused way and... perhaps, just maybe, even provide the oft demanded +X Item Bonus for Spell Attacks as those have to be aimed and there really isn't a much better way to represent aiming a Spell than through pointing a Wand.

Maybe I missed others discussing this, it was overlooked by others or there is already some "leak" that talks about what changes there will be to Wands that I missed but I wanted to just poke my head in to ask: Thoughts...?

I think they mean wands like Wand of Continuation, Wand of Widening, and Wand of Mercy, which function more like PF1 metamagic rods. Those could arguably be described as "directing magical energy" rather than being a spell in a can, which I agree describes most wands. Often slightly modified spells in a can, but still.

Edit: I could see something like the homebrewed wand you linked getting printed. Probably not, but it definitely feels like something along the lines of already printed wands.

Blog wrote:

Ceremonial Knife, which allows a knife or dagger to direct magical energies like a magic wand...

This part has me curious because what they're talking about doesn't sound anything like what Wands as they CURRENTLY exist actually DO. Wands, as they exist now, don't direct magical energies at all, they're just Spells in a Can that can be used once per day or additional times if you're willing to risk throwing the thing in the trash by pushing your luck.

So, the whole thing my interest is piqued thinking that maybe, just MAYBE they are printing a NEW KIND of magic wand (something like what I suggested some time ago) that functions like, well, like how Wands are showcased in a bunch of other media as ways to channel and cast your magic in a directed and focused way and... perhaps, just maybe, even provide the oft demanded +X Item Bonus for Spell Attacks as those have to be aimed and there really isn't a much better way to represent aiming a Spell than through pointing a Wand.

Maybe I missed others discussing this, it was overlooked by others or there is already some "leak" that talks about what changes there will be to Wands that I missed but I wanted to just poke my head in to ask: Thoughts...?

We've already seen the Ceremonial Knife feat.

It literally is a "wand in a can".

You pick up your knife, and every prep you make it a Wand of X, where X has a maximum spell rank = "your max rank-2"

Given that like a wand, you can overcharge it, it basically is (exluding the cool flavor part ofc, not discrediting that at all, it is very thematic) "2 extra spells of "max rank -2" but you have to be waving your knife for them"

We've already seen the Ceremonial Knife feat.

It literally is a "wand in a can".

You pick up your knife, and every prep you make it a Wand of X, where X has a maximum spell rank = "your max rank-2"

Well there you go then.

Thx shroudb, I dislike the answer but I appreciate the insight!

I'm going to have to do some liberal reskinning and house ruling so that witches in my games can downplay or ignore patrons as part of their story and not be forced to throw their RP companion into the meat grinder every day.

I'll probably just let the familiar project an astral copy of themselves in combat that can be refreshed easily, is immune to AoE, but can only take one direct hit before poofing.

If they still can't get more than one hex cantrip, though, I'll be seriously dismayed.

A familiar, especially a witch's familiar, is not a pet.

Every witch I can think of treats their familiar like a pet. Even the ones that talk. If you have a cat, you are treating it like a cat, even if it whispers dark secrets of occult power to you.

I think a key difference between a pet and a (PF2) Witch's Familiar is that if your cat explodes, it never just shows up again 100% healthy the next morning unlike the PF2 Witch's familiar.

Like if you're concerned about putting your precious buddy in danger, discuss with the GM how you want to interpret

If your familiar dies, your patron replaces it during your next daily preparations. The new familiar might be a duplicate or reincarnation of your former familiar or a new entity altogether, but it knows the same spells your former familiar knew regardless.

Since "it's the exact same creature, saved by your patron and returned to you whole" is a valid interpretation.

Even if it comes back every day I think some people are not going to be a fan of putting your companion in suicidal positions on the regular.

Though I'm also concerned about how those abilities look in practice. From the previews we saw I remember one of them being "your familiar can now flank" which I'm sorry is not going to save the witch.

Did you read the one that extends any condition by one round? There's a range. :b

And there's also more to 'saving the Witch' than just the familiar benefits, there's some simple ways they seem to be taking to make it more appealing beyond the base power of being a caster. Those that like Rune (or The Inscribed One now) can get good use out of the ability in some setups, anyway — flanking is strong but usually requires having two people (who don't automatically revive later) in dangerous positions, and the particulars of a familiar can make them useful stand-ins to enable an offense.

Hopefully the witch will have a good handle on... Practical Magic.

I'm going to have to do some liberal reskinning and house ruling so that witches in my games can downplay or ignore patrons as part of their story and not be forced to throw their RP companion into the meat grinder every day.

I'll probably just let the familiar project an astral copy of themselves in combat that can be refreshed easily, is immune to AoE, but can only take one direct hit before poofing.

If they still can't get more than one hex cantrip, though, I'll be seriously dismayed.

Ever since the Witch playtest, I had the idea for a Witch whose power comes from their obsession with their Patron and they have an unhealthy fixation with a random pet who they think is their familiar. So, whatever happens, surely it's completely only in their head : a figment of their imagination.

...if you're concerned about putting your precious buddy in danger, discuss with the GM how you want to interpret

Quote:

If your familiar dies, your patron replaces it during your next daily preparations...

Since "it's the exact same creature, saved by your patron and returned to you whole" is a valid interpretation.

I'm dressing my familiar up in a red winter coat and calling him "Kenny".

Its a shame that IP prevents a real and true representation and creation of a Headology Witch, be it through an extensive Class Archetype that ditches the Patron and Familiar baggage or something else entirely, playing with expectations and manipulating others into doing what you want in a non-magical way would be just oh so nice.

A Bene Gesserit-like Class would be great. Maybe a Monk with some archetype, like Marshal or something.

If they're going all in on the witch flavor, I want a feat tree centered around doing things with a big ol' witch hat.

Ooh, I love that the Witch's Broom feat works on polearms! It means I can successfully roleplay THIS!!!

Yeah, now my Witch can use her Elven Branch Spear as more than just a perch for her owl.

(Actually, I think she did stab with it once...at around 4th level.)

Ed Reppert wrote:

A familiar, especially a witch's familiar, is not a pet.

Every witch I can think of treats their familiar like a pet. Even the ones that talk. If you have a cat, you are treating it like a cat, even if it whispers dark secrets of occult power to you.

Your players obviously didn't grow up on Slavic fairy tales.

GnollMage wrote:

Would I be hoping for too much, if I said I'm hoping to see Waxen Image return, or even the Cook People major hex make a return in some way? ;w;

Almost certainly, yes. You are hoping for too much for that to be a player-available option.

Abilities like these might be appropriate for NPC enemy antagonists. And those would fall under the Special Abilities section of creating a custom creature.

Who called the fun police?

If an ability feels icky to you doesn't mean it's not great fun for others. Just don't take the abilities you don't prefer; don't go around saying players shouldn't be able to take them.

I want my Gingerbread Witch! With a familiar out of gingerbread, sugar, and other confections that I can eat at the end of the day and bake a new one the next day. And the Tricky Treats Hex!

Who called the fun police?

If an ability feels icky to you doesn't mean it's not great fun for others. Just don't take the abilities you don't prefer; don't go around saying players shouldn't be able to take them.

I don't think they're saying players shouldn't be able to take them, so much as, players shouldn't expect Paizo to publish that type of content for PF2. A lot of the ickier player options were dialed back in PF2, so it's hard to think it wasn't a conscious choice by the devs.

Its a shame that IP prevents a real and true representation and creation of a Headology Witch, be it through an extensive Class Archetype that ditches the Patron and Familiar baggage or something else entirely, playing with expectations and manipulating others into doing what you want in a non-magical way would be just oh so nice.

Somewhat OT, but I found a Thaum with the Regalia implement (witch hat works for that) useful to roleplay this kind of character. Depedning on your DM, the recall knowledge feats also fit. ( houserule that worn implements can follow the guidelines of using a weapon implement while also wielding that same weapon, but use a broomstick if your DM is a stickler).

More than a little disappointing the witch class didn't quite fit, even as an MC, so I'd be please to get something like this still.

Ravingdork wrote:

Who called the fun police?

If an ability feels icky to you doesn't mean it's not great fun for others. Just don't take the abilities you don't prefer; don't go around saying players shouldn't be able to take them.

I don't think they're saying players shouldn't be able to take them, so much as, players shouldn't expect Paizo to publish that type of content for PF2. A lot of the ickier player options were dialed back in PF2, so it's hard to think it wasn't a conscious choice by the devs.

Precicely. Thank you.

You can certainly play how you want to at your own tables. But it is indeed too much to ask for Paizo to make such things official content again.

"Eating people for mechanical benefits" is most of what the ghoul archetype does, so I wouldn't lump it under "Paizo would never". I don't make a habit of expecting any new class feats, especially not specific ones, so I do agree we probably aren't getting something so specific. That said, I'm pretty sure we're getting a gingerbread hag. If do we ever get a set of Witch options based on various hags, we might see some old Gingerbread Witch staples return.

But if cooking folks in particular returns, I'd definitely presume it'd get a rare tag, for much the same reasons as the undead archetypes do.

"Eating people for mechanical benefits" is most of what the ghoul archetype does, so I wouldn't lump it under "Paizo would never". I don't make a habit of expecting any new class feats, especially not specific ones, so I do agree we probably aren't getting something so specific. That said, I'm pretty sure we're getting a gingerbread hag. If do we ever get a set of Witch options based on various hags, we might see some old Gingerbread Witch staples return.

But if cooking folks in particular returns, I'd definitely presume it'd get a rare tag, for much the same reasons as the undead archetypes do.

Eating creatures for the ghoul archetype. Not necessarily people.

"the corpse of a Small or larger creature that died in the last hour"

QuidEst wrote:

"Eating people for mechanical benefits" is most of what the ghoul archetype does, so I wouldn't lump it under "Paizo would never". I don't make a habit of expecting any new class feats, especially not specific ones, so I do agree we probably aren't getting something so specific. That said, I'm pretty sure we're getting a gingerbread hag. If do we ever get a set of Witch options based on various hags, we might see some old Gingerbread Witch staples return.

But if cooking folks in particular returns, I'd definitely presume it'd get a rare tag, for much the same reasons as the undead archetypes do.

Eating creatures for the ghoul archetype. Not necessarily people.

"the corpse of a Small or larger creature that died in the last hour"

Ah, right. Ghoul only favors humanoids non-mechanically, and Zombie was the one with a humanoid-only feat. But yeah, not exactly "most of what it does".

But if cooking folks in particular returns, I'd definitely presume it'd get a rare tag, for much the same reasons as the undead archetypes do.

IMO that's only half true. Ghouls eating people may have contributed to their rarity, but other blatantly evil options like Anti-Paladin were not rare.

What I think pushes the undead archetypes over the top are the same considerations that push strix, automatons, and conrasu into rare. You need to either accept the balance concerns which means your ghoul/robot/tree construct can still be poisoned, or you need to accept you're giving up on some basic balancing principles by letting commonsense intervene. These conversations can be suuuuuper annoying, and which is why I don't recommend allowing rare options unless your players are rule savvy enough to grok it and play along.

Pretty similar to why the Exemplar is rare, really.

Yeah the big thing about undead is that they can change some serious assumptions about the game. Like a handful of premade adventures off the top of my head rely on negative effects via traps and enemies and having playable undead can completely negate some of those obstacles.

Pretty similar to why the Exemplar is rare, really.

Don't really agree with this though. The Exemplar is pretty much just a regular martial. There's not a lot of rules jank in the class that makes it problematic. Someone at Paizo just really wants it to be rare. It's closer to the reason katanas and kobolds are uncommon.

Yeah the big thing about undead is that they can change some serious assumptions about the game. Like a handful of premade adventures off the top of my head rely on negative effects via traps and enemies and having playable undead can completely negate some of those obstacles.

Captain Morgan wrote:

Pretty similar to why the Exemplar is rare, really.

Don't really agree with this though. The Exemplar is pretty much just a regular martial. There's not a lot of rules jank in the class that makes it problematic. Someone at Paizo just really wants it to be rare. It's closer to the reason katanas and kobolds are uncommon.

I’m in agreement. Rinsed of the “bombastic” flavor I don’t see any difference between “magic in my blood/line” (Sorcerers), “bending reality with my mind” (Psychics) or “I need feats to fight well with my free hand” (Fighters). They all break belief, and it just seems like someone really thought it would be neat to a) make a demigod-adjacent class and b) slap the Rare tag on it. I don’t see anything particularly mechanically “rare” to justify the tag, and if flavor is the only reason, it seems a poor one.

I’ll be scrubbing the Rare tag. If someone wants to play an Exemplar or Gunslinger or Inventor (or Fighter) I’ll be happy to accommodate them, within the constraints of my campaign, and I’d be just as happy to let them reflavor the Exemplar class to suit their vision of what they want to do with the given mechanical chassis of the class.

I just don’t think the tag is helpful, and can see where it might be a hindrance more than a benefit.