Witch, Witch, You’re a Remastered Witch

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.

There are some class developer comments somewhere that say they reconfirmed that they wanted to keep the rare tag after play testing. I only vaguely recall why, but I think it had to do with wanting to keep "the bombastic flavor" kinda special.

Though a bunch of Hercs could easily work. Both as a party concept and story-wise. The Brust 'Jhereg prequel' books have a bunch of over the top characters all together. Very much three musketeers feel.

Anywho, look around for the dev's comments. Should be in one of the Paizo announcements. If that's something you're interested in reading.

The rarity tags on classes are just there to make sure a player talks to their GM before the game starts. Since they might be a poor match for certain campaigns (classes without such tags can be assumed to be a reasonable fit for any campaign.)

It's more about flavor than anything else.

The comment was

The exemplar has a pretty bombastic tone drawn from larger-than-life folklore and mythology. This seemed to be a big selling point in favor of the class! A few people noted that this tone means the exemplar might not fit into every campaign, though. This is intentional! We’re aware that tonally and narratively, the exemplar might not be for every single campaign, and therefore it’s pretty likely it will be staying with its current rarity to signal to GMs and players alike that this class would benefit from a brief check-in to see how it fits into the story—whether that's as one PC in a party of other classes, or in an all-exemplar party.

The issue is that mechanically the exemplar doesn't really do anything to justify the rare tag. Pretty much all of its bombast is in its flavor text.

Well, sure. Lore is pretty often why something has that rare or uncommon tag.

The rarity tags on classes are just there to make sure a player talks to their GM before the game starts. Since they might be a poor match for certain campaigns (classes without such tags can be assumed to be a reasonable fit for any campaign.)

It's more about flavor than anything else.

I mean, a wizard in a the Mana Wastes might a poor match for that campaign but it's not a reason to alter the base class rarity. And much the same as a cleric in a Rahadoum campaign. It seems odd that it's saying 'talk your DM for this' but that implies that other things doesn't require DM input... Nothing prevents a player from using the same "bombastic tone" for a Common character as tone isn't gated behind a rarity tag.

You are still effectively playing what amounts to a demigod, and we still don't know the full ramifications of what lore will come as a result of War of the Immortals and what that means for Exemplars - so the tag is still justified, to me. Paizo, too, obviously thinks so.

Yeah Paizo unfortunately makes mistakes sometimes.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

The rarity tags on classes are just there to make sure a player talks to their GM before the game starts. Since they might be a poor match for certain campaigns (classes without such tags can be assumed to be a reasonable fit for any campaign.)

It's more about flavor than anything else.

I mean, a wizard in a the Mana Wastes might a poor match for that campaign but it's not a reason to alter the base class rarity. And much the same as a cleric in a Rahadoum campaign. It seems odd that it's saying 'talk your DM for this' but that implies that other things doesn't require DM input... Nothing prevents a player from using the same "bombastic tone" for a Common character as tone isn't gated behind a rarity tag.

Yup. Some concepts don’t fit some campaigns. Crazy. The Rarity concept for classes should be jettisoned.

To get back to the topic of remaster witches (I know, how dare I?!? :) ), has anyone come up with clever ways to use the new Coven spell feat? The damage version is trivial and will come up often enough, but the spellshape part seems a bit limited by th low number of spellshape feats available to the witch. And there's few archetypes that give you access to more. I have yet to find something that makes it really stand out (other than the already awesome "use a reaction instead of an action" bit, of course).

the spellshape part seems a bit limited by th low number of spellshape feats available to the witch.

*shrug* We have no way of knowing how many the remastered witch has so it's a bit premature to worry about it until we see the new feat list.

You are still effectively playing what amounts to a demigod, and we still don't know the full ramifications of what lore will come as a result of War of the Immortals and what that means for Exemplars - so the tag is still justified, to me. Paizo, too, obviously thinks so.

I am more worried about GMs who equate Rare to Not in my game without checking further.

And availability in PFS too.

Blave wrote:

the spellshape part seems a bit limited by th low number of spellshape feats available to the witch.

*shrug* We have no way of knowing how many the remastered witch has so it's a bit premature to worry about it until we see the new feat list.

We have seen the witch feat list. It has Conceal Spell, Reach spell, Widen Spell and Quickened Spell, with the latter being limited to Witch spells. Also Split Hex, but that's unlikely to be useful for Coven Spell.

There's some new feats on the list but at least from their names I don't think they are spellshape feats.

Very true.

We also know what every feat on the Witch’s Remaster does.

The only not directly named is Patron’s Claim, but that’s most likely the one shared by James Case where the patron reaches out of the familiar, grabs an enemy’s soul and slams enemies around dealing Spirit damage.

Sympathetic Strike’s text was seen even though the name wasn’t. We already know the improvements to Cauldron based on Double, Double. We’ve been told about Witch’s Armaments. Everything else is pretty much the same as Premaster.

Beyond class features and the other hex cantrips/focus spells, we mostly have the complete picture.

Very true.

We also know what every feat on the Witch’s Remaster does.

The only not directly named is Patron’s Claim, but that’s most likely the one shared by James Case where the patron reaches out of the familiar, grabs an enemy’s soul and slams enemies around dealing Spirit damage.

Sympathetic Strike’s text was seen even though the name wasn’t. We already know the improvements to Cauldron based on Double, Double. We’ve been told about Witch’s Armaments. Everything else is pretty much the same as Premaster.

Beyond class features and the other hex cantrips/focus spells, we mostly have the complete picture.

Eh? We have seen a two page spread of mid-level feats, and a list of the fear names and levels, but I don't think we saw saw hard confirmation on anything else. Many of the feats use old names, but we don't know what changes have been made to them. For example, we can pretty safely assume Conceal Spell will function closer to the Animist version than the old witch version, which is a significant upgrade.

GameDesignerDM wrote:

You are still effectively playing what amounts to a demigod, and we still don't know the full ramifications of what lore will come as a result of War of the Immortals and what that means for Exemplars - so the tag is still justified, to me. Paizo, too, obviously thinks so.

I am more worried about GMs who equate Rare to Not in my game without checking further.

And availability in PFS too.

If I were a betting man, I would expect that Exemplar would be available as a boon or cost 160 or 200 AP.

The comment was

Quote:

The exemplar has a pretty bombastic tone drawn from larger-than-life folklore and mythology. This seemed to be a big selling point in favor of the class! A few people noted that this tone means the exemplar might not fit into every campaign, though. This is intentional! We’re aware that tonally and narratively, the exemplar might not be for every single campaign, and therefore it’s pretty likely it will be staying with its current rarity to signal to GMs and players alike that this class would benefit from a brief check-in to see how it fits into the story—whether that's as one PC in a party of other classes, or in an all-exemplar party.

The issue is that mechanically the exemplar doesn't really do anything to justify the rare tag. Pretty much all of its bombast is in its flavor text.

To me, this feels like the rarity is intended to help the GM be able to shut down 'that guy' player.

Which, may or may not be helpful. It is nearly impossible to rein in toxic players with additional rules.

So yeah, I am hoping that GMs don't blanket ban Rare class options just because of the color of the tag. But at the same time, I don't think that having the Rare tag on the class is going to be a problem for the most part.

As for PFS, I don't think that Gunslinger or Inventor have any ACP cost to play. I don't know why Exemplar would either.

GameDesignerDM wrote:

You are still effectively playing what amounts to a demigod, and we still don't know the full ramifications of what lore will come as a result of War of the Immortals and what that means for Exemplars - so the tag is still justified, to me. Paizo, too, obviously thinks so.

I am more worried about GMs who equate Rare to Not in my game without checking further.

And availability in PFS too.

I think it is pretty smart to lean on that heuristic for options that may cause issues if they are not considered further.

This is just a reminder. PFS rarity tags and the Exemplar are off topic discussions in the witch blog. Please move them to their own posts and stay on topic in this thread.

I think many of those posts regarding rarity would also apply to the Rare Witch Patrons such as Baba Yaga and Mosquito Witch. Do we know why those got tagged as Rare? Are there going to continue to be Rare Witch Patron themes after the Remaster? Do GMs regularly preemptively ban Rare Patrons unless the player can successfully argue the case that their character with that Patron fits into the campaign?

I mean, a wizard in a the Mana Wastes might a poor match for that campaign but it's not a reason to alter the base class rarity.

I'm reasonably certain that since 11/23 classes cast spells from slots (including the Witch) the onus on a "Campaign set in the mana wastes" would simply have to set the rules towards "magic works inconsistently" for ease of use rather than "magic works not at all" which might be consistent with the lore, but would be less fun for a campaign.

The point is that classes ought to be able to handle a wide arrange of campaign themes, from "intrigue" to "shipwrecked in uncharted territory survival" to "horror" etc. We can make the rules be whatever we need them to be, but like a "horror" game has to make the PCs feel somewhat vulnerable.

The rare tag (on things including Witch Patrons) that you choose at character generation are just "check with the GM" indicators. Most of the time they'll say "yes". But, like, in a game where the Party is opposing the interests of Baba Yaga it's probably not wise to have a PC who has her as their Witch patron, since best practices for "opposing Baba Yaga" involve "not being noticed by Baba Yaga."

This sounds super cool--I'm very excited for it!

I mean, a wizard in a the Mana Wastes might a poor match for that campaign but it's not a reason to alter the base class rarity. And much the same as a cleric in a Rahadoum campaign. It seems odd that it's saying 'talk your DM for this' but that implies that other things doesn't require DM input... Nothing prevents a player from using the same "bombastic tone" for a Common character as tone isn't gated behind a rarity tag.

That is literally how Paizo recommends people use the rarity tag for campaigns... heck their own players guides adjust rarities for ancestries and classes.

And sure, people can try and create "bombastic" characters. But it feels like you are willfully ignoring that the exemplar has its lore built right into the chasis of the class to a degree that no other class prior has.

The issue is more with:
A) the terminally unable to talk to their GM players, who consider everything uncommon and higher banned by default. And this is a them issue.
B) GMs who are stubborn and choose to ban all of a rarity because it isn't common period without considering whether it would be okay in their campaign.

Like it or not "godspawn" is a more tone impacting class concept than pretty much anything else released. In the same sense that inventor/gunslinger might not be accepted into a game set in the mammoth kingdoms, sure a player could come up with a justification but if it ruins the tone the GM is aiming for it is fair to say no.

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.

You're right, it isn't really the same. Exemplar only has half the equation for undead archetypes. The question of "why isn't my demigod stronger than a fighter" still applies, much like "why does my skeleton need to breath." But it doesn't have an obvious set of switches you can flip if you don't care about balance, like just saying "my skeleton is immune to suffocation, disease, and poison."

I don't think negative/void damage is that big a reason for undead archetypes to be rare, though. It is really useful at times, but was already present in at least dhampirs and the bones oracle.

Rarity concerns involving the Exemplar continue to be off-topic for this thread.

Any further comments about the Exemplar and rarity tags will be removed. If you want to talk about rarity tags in any form and/or the Exemplar put them in their own threads. This can be considered the final warning. Please stop derailing the blog post.

My bad.

I do kind of wish divine witch got a feat to get some more spells on their list outside of lessons like divine sorcerers do, but I get that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to pick a god to get spells from.

I really am excited for the Remaster. All the changes really do improve the quality of the game itself.

The Witch has been my favorite class and was the reason I was introduced to Pathfider 1e. Back in 2009-2010 my friend and GM recommend Pathfinder to me because of the Witch. After that I was hooked. And I just love the Lore and mechanics of the class. And when 2e came out I like the changes but over time felt that the Witch needed a little bit of love. And the Remaster has done that for me.

And all we've seen is just what has been revealed. We haven't seen alm the details yet. And I am so excited to read it and rebuild my main PC.

Thank you to the Paizo Staff.
Luvz & Hugz.

Also I really want to see a preview of the Remastered Hexes.

I just thought of something hilarious (and possibly cruel):

A Goblin Witch…

…with the Inscribed One (Remastered Rune) patron and who has sent the goblin a hybrid horse-dog familiar that has Flowing Scripts (the familiar ability whenever an IO Witch uses their hex).

To get back to the topic of remaster witches (I know, how dare I?!? :) ), has anyone come up with clever ways to use the new Coven spell feat? The damage version is trivial and will come up often enough, but the spellshape part seems a bit limited by th low number of spellshape feats available to the witch. And there's few archetypes that give you access to more. I have yet to find something that makes it really stand out (other than the already awesome "use a reaction instead of an action" bit, of course).

The main advantage I see is being able to add metamagic to those big 3 action and two turn spells. There is possibly something in archetyping for example the elementalist could change allies spells elements to trigger weaknesses and add bonus effects but I don't know how effective that would be in practice.

Hopefully there is also more metamagic available to the witch or a follow up feat which adds more uses to this ability. It seems too high level though, I wonder if it's that high just to avoid archetypes getting it because it would actually be fund for other classes to get so you can have a proper coven of 3 casters without everyone having to be witches.

Hoping the Alchemist is next. I wanna see what the item vendor class is becoming. Hopefully the Bomber at least gets better at hitting with their namesake...

Hoping the Alchemist is next. I wanna see what the item vendor class is becoming. Hopefully the Bomber at least gets better at hitting with their namesake...

Next for what? An Overhaul? We already know it'll get one.

If you mean next for a preview blog, that's not going to happen since the remastered alchemist is not happening before Player Core 2, which is still like 9 months away.

The main advantage I see is being able to add metamagic to those big 3 action and two turn spells.

Oh, that's a good one! Reach spell on Summons sure sounds useful. Too bad Widen doesn't work with area control effects like Black Tentacles.

Dragonborn3 wrote:

Hoping the Alchemist is next. I wanna see what the item vendor class is becoming. Hopefully the Bomber at least gets better at hitting with their namesake...

Next for what? An Overhaul? We already know it'll get one.

If you mean next for a preview blog, that's not going to happen since the remastered alchemist is not happening before Player Core 2, which is still like 9 months away.

Hey, if they gave us a brief "here's what we're thinking about" that would be enough. As it stands I'm mostly just worried a lot of what's coming out will be "should have had a playtest" material, at least where classes are concerned.

Blave wrote:

Dragonborn3 wrote:

Hoping the Alchemist is next. I wanna see what the item vendor class is becoming. Hopefully the Bomber at least gets better at hitting with their namesake...

Next for what? An Overhaul? We already know it'll get one.

If you mean next for a preview blog, that's not going to happen since the remastered alchemist is not happening before Player Core 2, which is still like 9 months away.

Hey, if they gave us a brief "here's what we're thinking about" that would be enough. As it stands I'm mostly just worried a lot of what's coming out will be "should have had a playtest" material, at least where classes are concerned.

This is errata to old classes, not publishing new classes. They also have to move quickly for their own legal protection.

Yea the "playtest" was 3ish years of people talking about the witch they had in their hands and correcting/tweaking from there. The same applies to oracle, alchemist, and champion (though champion will be more for OGL reasons than mechanical reasons). They have more than enough feedback

Yea the "playtest" was 3ish years of people talking about the witch they had in their hands and correcting/tweaking from there. The same applies to oracle, alchemist, and champion (though champion will be more for OGL reasons than mechanical reasons). They have more than enough feedback

Hopefully the swashy and investigator as well.

Also, I'm hoping we get some kind of guidance on what the Baba Yaga and Mosquito witches' passive familiar benefits will be. I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Yea the "playtest" was 3ish years of people talking about the witch they had in their hands and correcting/tweaking from there. The same applies to oracle, alchemist, and champion (though champion will be more for OGL reasons than mechanical reasons). They have more than enough feedback

Hopefully the swashy and investigator as well.

Also, I'm hoping we get some kind of guidance on what the Baba Yaga and Mosquito witches' passive familiar benefits will be. I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

I would be extremely happy and extremely surprised if we got errata covering the non-Core patrons.

I do not expect it though.

A couple folks have mentioned the "Patron's Presence" and think it would be cool to see more patron flavoring with the witch, or in game in general. Mainly a way to commune with their patron, via their familiar as in the feat or other, maybe as a way to gain aid from them and/or do tasks for them. Which, I think would be pretty neat too! I've only had one experience with a patron in any ttrpg and it was very short lived. But I definitely want to do more with that, and I think giving other classes a solid ability to interact with a patron (kind of cleric-y?) would be sweet! Esp as you level up and build your bond with them.

Also, I'm hoping we get some kind of guidance on what the Baba Yaga and Mosquito witches' passive familiar benefits will be. I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

It eats other books?

Perpdepog wrote:

I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

It eats other books?

Witch familiars learn new spells by consuming magical writings.

There are several ways that can be flavored.

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

It eats other books?

Witch familiars learn new spells by consuming magical writings.

There are several ways that can be flavored.

Cover your magical floating rock in ink and roll it back and forth over a scroll. The scroll is ruined, but the words are now imprinted on the rock.

Also, I'm hoping we get some kind of guidance on what the Baba Yaga and Mosquito witches' passive familiar benefits will be. I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

I'm hoping that having an inanimate object familiar becomes something that can be done normally for those who wish it.

Currently the only option is a Rare Patron that the GM can deny access to for no reason, or being a Kitsune Witch with a Star Orb familiar - and again hoping that the GM doesn't shut that idea down by insisting that the two familiars are separate and you have to pick which one to have, rather than combining the traits of both into one hybrid familiar.

Cover your magical floating rock in ink and roll it back and forth over a scroll. The scroll is ruined, but the words are now imprinted on the rock.

Roll your magical floating rock over a scroll without coating it in anything, and it just drinks the ink straight off.

Or, I suppose, do the same thing with your magical floating ferret.

Or, I suppose, do the same thing with your magical floating ferret.

That's how you get animal protective services called on you.

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Or, I suppose, do the same thing with your magical floating ferret.

That's how you get animal protective services called on you.

Sounds like an entertaining story hook to me. Who doesn't like fighting druids?

Roll your magical floating rock over a scroll without coating it in anything, and it just drinks the ink straight off.

Or, I suppose, do the same thing with your magical floating ferret.

Farien, do you suppose that would work?

Hey, if it gets you to stop trying to feed me paper by coating it in peanut butter, what's a bit of static in my fur.

Kids: Ha! Rock beats paper!

Witch w/ Rock Familiar: Oh does it now?

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

I really like that Baba Yaga lets you use an inanimate object as your familiar; I wanna play a witch who has a cannibal book.

It eats other books?

Witch familiars learn new spells by consuming magical writings.

There are several ways that can be flavored.

Oh yes, so, so many ways they can be flavored... A light sprinkling of lemon juice and pepper is my favorite! Not enough to ruin the ink, but enough to make it scream.