AzureKnight's page

AzureKnight wrote:

Does anyone else find it kind of odd that a witch that chooses to go Divine or Primal will not use their Key Ability to "Learn a Spell"?

With Primal and Divine spells needing to be learned via Nature and Religion respectively, it seems a bit odd. No real point here, just a musing on my part.

I mean, zero Sorcerers and Bards use their Key Ability to Learn A Spell. This is not super unusual, really.

Sorcerers and Bards are not prepared casters with a limited spell list. They don't use the "Learn a Spell" action.

So far the only class in the game this applies to is the Witch in certain traditions.

Does anyone else find it kind of odd that a witch that chooses to go Divine or Primal will not use their Key Ability to "Learn a Spell"?

With Primal and Divine spells needing to be learned via Nature and Religion respectively, it seems a bit odd. No real point here, just a musing on my part.

KrispyXIV wrote:

Midnightoker wrote:

If you want any further demonstrations as to why the math works this way, then I implore you to look back through any number of threads that have been discussed on these forums (for over a year mind you) where the general consensus is "+1 is worth 10%".

Its even bigger on spells where you save vs damage i believe, as you're typically affecting 3 results instead of just 2 (its 12.5% I think?).

Correct, this is the fundamental reason that DC spells outperform Spell Attack Roll spells as well.

There's nuances to it (like Trip's CF affects the actor) which is why "10%" is generally accepted. You are right though, it can mean more in certain moments.

____________________________

And Azure, I didn't mean to offend, but just like the Bard situation, we have to agree on baselines for comparison.

For instance, in this case if you don't accept that a +/- 1 is worth 10%, then Evil Eye cannot be valued the same by everyone.

If we are to discuss the power of the Witch further, we need to be able to agree what a +/-1 is worth.

I agree :-) the baseline is indeed important.

AzureKnight wrote:

I still don't see how the numbers add up to +1 being a big deal when taken in context of the action cost and percentages involved in it actually mattering.

If I told you that on a 1, I will give you nothing, on a 2, I will give you nothing, and on a 3 I will give you something, and on a 4 I will give you twice as much of that something.

Then I have on average on a roll of a 1d4 to get .75 things (2*0)+(1*1)+(1*2) = 3 somethings out of 4 possibilities.

If it was "5%" like you stated, then the "4" in this case would still only grant 1 something, but instead it grants 2 somethings (twice as much), and therefore because you are more likely to get both a 3 AND a 4, it is worth more.

If you want any further demonstrations as to why the math works this way, then I implore you to look back through any number of threads that have been discussed on these forums (for over a year mind you) where the general consensus is "+1 is worth 10%".

OK...I don't want to derail the witch thread with this conversation so it is unlikely I will respond again.

The +1 granted in most cases (especially related to the witch) is on a d20, not a d4. Hence the 5% original number quoted.

I understand how the math works. I went to college for aerospace/mechanical engineering (tutored calculus for 4 years in college, yes I was a paid tutor my freshman year as I had already been doing calculus for 2 years at that point). The job market sucked so I switched up to computer programming post college and spent the last 20 years working as a programmer. I do math. I'm not saying that to sound special, I am sure there are a lot of great mathematicians on this forum. Simply to give a bit of context.

I'm also taking the context of the numbers and applying them to the additional numbers related to action economy to formulate my opinion on the topic.

Thank you all for your responses. Perhaps if I care enough I will seek out those threads.

AzureKnight wrote:

If you want to say I lack a fundamental understanding of the game...OK. I disagree.

If you assume that a critical hit = 2 hits (it does for strikes), if a +1 to hit takes you from hitting on 10 and critting on 20 to hitting on 9 and critting on 19-20, a +1 to your roll has added two "hits" to your d20 (one on 9, and one on 19).

Its at least a 10% shift in accuracy/ damage.

OK but if you need 11 to hit, then the natural 20 is already a shift in degree of success.

So it is not "at least" a 10% shift. It is at most a 10% shift.

Any time your chance of success is 11 or higher the top end +1 doesn't come into play. Given multiple attack penalties of -4/-5 are coming into play then you really only see the extra 5% likely to come into effect if you are facing really easy target rolls or only on your primary roll each turn.

That will shift the statistical odds some but not a lot. I could run the numbers, but I honestly don't have the time to right now.

At the end of the day, if a witch spends one action per round to keep a +/-1 out there she is using 33% of her actions to shift 1 tier maybe 2 or 3 times for the fight.

Is that good use of actions, sure...it is OK. I'm not saying it is bad. My original feeling hasn't been shifted, I still don't see how the numbers add up to +1 being a big deal when taken in context of the action cost and percentages involved in it actually mattering.

And not to be rude, but not understanding the fundamental math for tiers of success and making judgements on the balance of a Class (even going as far as saying the Wizard is in better shape) is a bit, idk, bold I guess. Not that any of us are experts, but shows a fundamental gap in understanding of a core concept of the game.

Wow, OK....

For the record, I do understand the fundamental math for tiers of success. I do understand the difference that +/- 1 brings the chance of changing a tier.

That is not something that existed in PF1.

It is still 5% change to the outcome. I do not see that as such a big deal. I fully understand it is a benefit. But it is still something that is only going to occur 1 out of every 20 rolls. So we look at 1-3 rolls per turn and that a fight is typically 5-7 turns. Let's average that to 2 rolls per turn to take an average over 6 turns. That is 12 rolls. If you run the statistics on that you become likely to have that +1 matter one time over the course of the combat. So I can spend 33% of my action resources for the entire fight to gain one or two changes in degree of success. I don't see that as a big deal. Useful, sure, big deal, no.

If you want to say I lack a fundamental understanding of the game...OK. I disagree.

Unless you want to go Metamagic heavy, the Wizard has pretty weak class feats. Depending on the type of familiar the MCD Witch grants, depending on the type of build you want to play I can build a better "witch" with a Wizard. It will take a few levels more but my mid level I will have way more spell slots, the familiar and 3 witch hexes. The only thing I lose is the hex cantrip.

AzureKnight wrote:

- The fact that you only ever get 1 locked into your patron/casting tradition choice is terrible.

Doesn't change the power level, and is only a conceptual limitation.

Yes and no. It is not conceptual if you have a GM that doesn't allow customized Patrons not in the book.

AzureKnight wrote:

Quote:

- The limit of one per round, once per target per minute greatly reduces their usefulness.

They cost one action, all Cantrips are "once per round", so the argument here that for some reason this is "exclusive to Hexes" is ridiculous. Any other 1 action Cantrip (such as Shield) is either redundant or also limited in that regard (Compositions) or they cost 2 actions so you can't do it anyways.

That is true, except for one thing. The single action of a Hex Cantrip is hailed as one of their great benefits. I am saying that to me it isn't as great of a benefit as people say because of those other limitations.

People will say: it is worth losing a spell slot per level to gain these cool Hex Cantrips. Look they are one action so they are awesome and worth it.

I don't feel they are, my opinion.

Please keep in mind, my arguments are not that the Hex Cantrips are bad in any way. I feel they are really well balanced to the game.
My argument has been and will continue to be, that they are not worth the loss of the spell slot.

So let's look at some examples with Clinging Ice (a spell few discuss here):

I can't for example cast Clinging Ice and Elemental Betrayal in the same round to take advantage of that action boost.

I can't cast it twice in one round on 2 different targets. I would still be limited to each target once per fight...but no, we have double limitations of one per round and once per target.

If there are are only one or two targets in the fight I can only use this cantrip one or two times.

Overall the damage of this cantrip is no better than all the other damage cantrips out there.

When I compare to a Buff/Debuff type of Hex Cantrip that requires a sustain. It is very nice that I can cast it for 1 action and then sustain it for one action. That is a nice ability. I can then cast a standard 2x spell or move and try to cast my Hex Cantrip on another target. Those are fair options. As you said, nice variability.

At low levels losing a spell slot for a few of these Hex Cantrips might feel fair to me, at high levels I would never want to lose a collection of higher level spell slots for any of these.

AzureKnight wrote:

Quote:

I feel the action tax on this class is painful. With limited focus points to use, combined with the hex limitations it really almost forces you to sustain and that can be tough if you have to move to keep your squishy caster safe.

It has the highest action variability out of any caster simply because of Sustain, Cackle, and one action Hex Cantrips.

These are all white-room, theorycrafting, assertions that just don't hold up. Some of them are just outright not true

You yourself have stated that Cackle is usually going to be a poor use of resources in many cases.

I feel the limit of only ever having one Hex Cantrip limits the variability you are praising. (For what it is worth I am playing a Winter Witch).

Most of what we discuss here is theorycrafting. Stating that my opinions on the value gained or lost "is not true". Well, it is my opinion on the subjective value of something.

I know that forum/chat discussions are always tough to convey the proper level of intent in a statement. So I'll end with the thought that I like the witch, I like her variability.

The core of my opinion on this subject is that I just don't see how a 6 hp/no armor/low skill/low save (just like the other pure casters) losing the 4th slot is worth the one limited Hex Cantrip they receive.

If a variant witch came out that said, your patron doesn't give you a Hex Cantrip instead you gain the 4th slot, I would take that in an instant and be really happy.

last time I checked -1 in this edition matters a lot. We don't just get to discount it.

I want to start with a disclaimer, Midnightoker this is not directed at you personally, your statement gives me a chance to ask a question about something I genuinely don't understand.

Since jumping into Pathfinder 2 I see this statement or variations of it all the time. +/- 1 is a BIG DEAL in this edition!

So...math is still math. +1 is still a 5% change. What makes that a bigger deal than a 5% bonus/penalty in first edition?

I understand that in PF1 it was much easier to get much bigger bonuses. PF1 power "creep" was more of a power sprint. Is that the only reason everyone says this?

Because there sure are a lot of things that do +/- 1 in this edition, so it sure doesn't feel all that rare.

This was probably brought up earlier in the thread but I dunno where but, why are witches only receiving three spells per spell level? As a 6 HP per level caster who is fairly squishy, like the wizard and sorcerer, shouldn't they be getting four spells per spell level, like the wizard and sorcerer?

Or do their hex cantrips make up for the gap?

If you go back and read you can see that I am in the camp that FIRMLY feels nothing in the witch build makes up for the loss of the slot.

I've broken it all done in other posts cross comparing to the other casting classes in the game. I'll try to keep this one shorter.

My thoughts: the Hex Cantrips are cool but not worth the slot.
- The fact that you only ever get 1 locked into your patron/casting tradition choice is terrible.
- The limit of one per round, once per target per minute greatly reduces their usefulness.
- I feel the action tax on this class is painful. With limited focus points to use, combined with the hex limitations it really almost forces you to sustain and that can be tough if you have to move to keep your squishy caster safe.

Overall I love the theme, I think the abilities are balanced. I don't see anything worth the cost of the 4th slot. The witch loses big on long days where you need those extra slots. Plus as a prepared caster she loses versatility on the option to have other things prepared.

Cauldron is a cool thematic feat.

Mechanically, I agree with most of the posts here, meh.

We discussed Cauldron back a few pages. It is very situational to be useful. The cost in time, to craft at a lower gold cost is stupid high. The designers clearly wanted to prevent players from opening magic item shops to make wealth. (Which we did in Pathfinder 1...franchised out the shops in fact).

So the only benefit to any crafting of potions, magical items, or items of any kind is access (unless you have a long stretch of down time). If you are in a town or a campaign with little access it will help. If you are in major cities and high magic campaigns it is a lot less useful.

Mathematically the numbers only make sense to craft down 4 levels. Otherwise the cost is too high on average for a consumable item.

Taking Cauldron over Craft Magic Item:
It does give you free formulas and let's you craft oils.

It is a very situation feat. My gaming group has coined a term we are using a lot; "The Pathfinder Two Tease". You look at a lot of abilities and the concept is Great, then you break down the mechanics and it is bad to OK. So in the end it just feels like a tease.

This feat fits that, sounds awesome, then you run the numbers and it is OK, sometimes, for the right settings.

Speaking about Witches, I really like Life boost ( Lesson of life ).

- 30 yd ( no need to be close to the target ).

Unless something changed that I am missing range is 30 feet, not 30 yards.

In regards to the overall topic right now, I think an option for a second hex would add nice variety for both mechanical and thematic role playing.

I have been very vocal about how I feel the witch is mechanically underpowered compared to other casters and my reasons why. Something like this would help I think.

...if you have the money.

Which you don't.
You can barely squeeze out the initial costs (ie. half) just out of chargen.

Yes, the cost just doesn't add up at level 1. However when you start to get to level 5-7 you can start to craft level 1 and 2 potions at an affordable rate. Assuming standard wealth by level progress it would be easy to start to make healing potions that are good for out of combat use or utility potions like invisibility.

Does it save you money? No...it is for access reasons. I think it shines more in a low magic setting where you can't easily buy things like potions. For example, the current campaign I am running the players have almost no options to buy magic items.

It isn't a great feat, I don't think it is worth taking at level one unless you are human and just want to take it with the bonus feat.

But it does have some uses.

Yeah as much as I see people saying Cauldron isn't that good, it certainly looks solid for a Level 1 Class Feat.

If you go Human and grab Natural Ambition, I legit think it's a toss up between it and Cackle. If my Hexes were primarily buffs and I didn't feel starved for action economy, and wanted to provide the team benefits instead of myself, I'd probably choose Cauldron.

The only trap with Cauldron is the cost. It is so expensive to craft at level. It will start to pay off and make sense when you can craft down about 4 levels or so.

AzureKnight wrote:

I was thinking about the Witch's Bottle for Life Boost, but the problem is that if you give it to someone, then you can't react as easily to someone else that suddenly needs the healing.

But it certainly could have times where it is super useful. If my party Rogue loved to go off alone for example.

I would argue that you can react better, because you can still cast Life Boost on someone else the same turn it is used by the person who drinks it.

Albeit, that's 2 Focus points for both of those castings, but certainly, if the situation called for it, on the table.

Absolutely. Like so many things in PF2 it is an OK ability that has some uses, without being great.

Great would be if you could recover the Focus point spent to create the bottle, with some limit that you could only ever have 1 bottle created.

Kendaan wrote:

Witch's bottle is alright for a support/buff Witch that already has Cauldron, but it's a bit niche.

The Focus point cost limits it a bit.

It can potentially become better though depending on future Hex.

What about Siphon Power? I find it quite interesting though a bit limited for now, with the current spells you can use it for.

That's pretty dang good actually. It's effectively a free "signature spell" cast per day and it doesn't stipulate when on the turn you have to cast the spell.

That's a lot of variabilities considering it doesn't even have to be prepared.

It is great, it just comes so late in the character build, compared to the Wizard Bonded Item which comes in at level 1 and is in some ways similar. Bonded only works on a spell you prepared, but still 15 levels later is a long time.

I was thinking about the Witch's Bottle for Life Boost, but the problem is that if you give it to someone, then you can't react as easily to someone else that suddenly needs the healing.

But it certainly could have times where it is super useful. If my party Rogue loved to go off alone for example.

If you want to argue the Dirge of Doom thing further, go argue it in the appropriate thread.

This is the Witch discussion right? Can we get back on task?

I'm going to support Midnightoker, I really don't want to sound rude......but if you want to discuss the Bard Compositions can you do it in the proper thread (linked above).

It is really cluttering up trying to discuss this topic...the Witch.

Looks like some didn't notice Nudge Fate has a slightly different lockout than most hexes:

"...changing the outcome appropriately. The spell then ends, and the target is temporarily immune for 1 minute."

The lockout happens when the spell actually accomplishes something, not just because you cast it. That feels a lot better.

Unrelated, but is it clarified anywhere if the witch MCD familiar has one less ability than normal for a familiar (making it 1), or one less than normal for a witch's familiar (which would then be 2)? I would assume it's the former, but it's ambiguous.

This came up a bit ago but didn't really get discussed. It is a huge question. I actually read it the other way.

Dedication Feat
"Choose a patron; you gain a familiar...Your familiar has one less familiar ability than normal."

Witch Familiar:
"Your patron has sent you a familiar.. "

Basic Witchcraft (Archetype Feat):
"Your familiar no longer has one less familiar ability than normal."

The RAW are vague. But if feels like it should be a witch's familiar. The Witch Familiar starts with 3 abilities, the Dedication Feat removes one of those making it a "standard" Familiar. If you invest in Basic Witchcraft you get the bonus witch one back.

Of course it really becomes a bigger question with the familiar coming back to life the next day if it dies and the bonus abilities at levels 6/12/18.

RAW it has to be all or nothing right? Either you get a "Normal" Familiar with 1 ability or you get a "Witch's" Familiar with 2 abilities and the other things (bonus abilities per level/comes back next day).

If it is "Normal" Familiar it could really suck that you lose your spellcasting for a week or more if it dies. A week of DOWN time can be really hard to come by in some campaigns.

If however it is a "Witch's" Familiar, the way I have been leaning, it is one of the best feats in the game. Unless you have other archetype plans, why take the Familiar Feat if you can take the MCD Witch? (Obviously you have to wait for level 4 and have a 14 Int, but it beats the standard Familiar just for the regen)

Anyone have any idea on an official ruling? Opinions? Anything precedent from the playtests?

AzureKnight wrote:

I'd like the Nails more if you only had to spend the focus to deliver the Hex if you actually hit. But that might be too good.

It would require it to work in reverse order instead of being a free attack on the Hex cast:

"If you land a melee strike with your Eldritch Nails, you can spend an additional action to cast a non-cantrip Hex that costs at least two actions to cast and doesn't require a spell attack roll. This special casting still retains all of its original traits and components."

Yes, or at the very least if the Hex "charge" was held in the nails until a strike landed.

By the way, your Dhampir Swashbuckler sounds like an awesomely fun character.

I'd like the Nails more if you only had to spend the focus to deliver the Hex if you actually hit. But that might be too good.

Oh, I'm not necessarily saying that the trade is worth it. I'm leaning towards Witch being a bit weak at the moment, honestly, though I'd need to see them in play to be sure. But the advantage they've gotten in exchange for the spell slots is certainly real, I'm just not positive if it's enough.

Overall I believe we feel the same. Is the class playable? Of course it is. It just feels rather weak to me. I think that feeling will heighten as levels go by.

I agree the Hexes will work best combined with other 2 action spells. It just feels like a bit of a miss that they can't work as well with each other.

I theorize (want to stress that) that in higher levels the Hex Cantrips will be less useful and the loss of the spell slot will be felt more keenly.

Time will tell...not sure what I'm going to play in this campaign. Wizard/Witch, Druid/Witch or just bit the bullet and try a pure Witch.

In any case I really have enjoyed all the opinions and everyone's thoughts and ideas. It is great to have a fun community we can all geek talk together.

The Hex cantrips mostly look like they compare pretty well to other cantrips right up until you realize they're one action rather than two. They look a lot better after that.

Now, I don't now if one good cantrip is really worth the loss of spell slots, but most of them are sincerely better than other available cantrips when their action cost is taken into account.

I have considered that, if you go back a few pages I comment on it. The problem I still see is the one hex per turn, coupled with the fact that most of the cantrips can only target once per minute, pair that all up with the fact that each witch only ever gets one cantrip...

So say I go and cast Elemental Betrayal, I can't use Clinging Ice that same turn...so next turn I cast it to get the bonus damage. But now in round 3...can't...so Ray of Frost? I was better off choosing Acid and using Acid Splash so the persistent damage would double up with my Betrayal....that sucks.

Fighting two monsters, tag one, tag the next one...now what?

I chose that example because really you won't be likely to sustain Clinging Ice. A 5' move penalty on a spell with range 30' isn't that much.

If we choose another cantrip like Evil Eye...sure round 1 is great cast evil and move/other action or Evil Eye + Another spell. But then round 2 I have to sustain it. If something breaks that I can't target that foe again. So I sustain...now I could tag another person with Evil Eye. Do I really want to tie up that many actions to give 2 targets a -1 debuff?

Action for Action when I broke it down none of them really added up to being worth losing the spell slots.

But everyone is free to feel how they want, if some love it, I'm genuinely happy for those players. I just don't see it. I want to see it, that is why I keep coming back to this board...I might ghost for awhile. I'm starting to repeat myself and I don't see a lot of merit in that. I don't want to just endlessly complain :-)

AzureKnight wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

That single cantrip is, as explicitly stated by the devs during the playtest, the reason why Witches have reduced casting. Of course it matters. Do you know how many cool buffs a buffer witch could put into all those missing spell slots?

I wasn't around for the playtest...if I could prove this is true to my DM and he let me drop the Cantrip for the 4th slot I would do it in an instant.

During the playtest there was a question in the surveys that asked something like "Would you prefer to have multiple use hex cantrips (like bard compositions) but have the same number of spells per day as the bard"

Then there was a lot of discussion on the forums and during streams that also implied that that was the trade.

Thanks, it is good to know.

It makes sense the designers went that way.

The cantrips to me feel like very fair and balanced cantrips, but that isn't good enough to justify losing the extra spell slots. They need to be better than standard cantrips.

Plus the fact that the witch can only get one locked behind their patron selection just magnifies it.

Still better than wizard.

What do you mean by this? That the Witch overall is better than the Wizard?

I have several posts in this thread comparing the two and I strongly disagree with you if that is the case...

That single cantrip is, as explicitly stated by the devs during the playtest, the reason why Witches have reduced casting. Of course it matters. Do you know how many cool buffs a buffer witch could put into all those missing spell slots?

I wasn't around for the playtest...if I could prove this is true to my DM and he let me drop the Cantrip for the 4th slot I would do it in an instant.

Draco18s wrote:

"Pretty good multiclass potential" just means the archetype feats are good. It doesn't mean the base kit is good. Sort of like how being an alchemist is terrible, but multiclassing into alchemist is pretty good for free alchemical things.

I think the point was that it's better as an archetype than as a class.

That is the crux of my feelings.

The Class has the poor saves, low hit point, no armor/weapons of a pure caster class. But it lacks the 4th casting slot of the other pure casting classes.

In theory other class features like the Hex Cantrip should make up for it, but IMO they don't (read this thread fully and you will see the reasons I feel this way).

Some of the Hexes are good, but the class as a whole is a bit mechanically weak IMO. When I distilled it all down and compared everything in the class...it just kept coming back to that 4th casting slot.

There are other interesting ways they could have made it better (raise the 3 Focus Pool limit for the Witch or make the Hex Cantrips better, etc)

AzureKnight wrote:

Next encounter you likely have 1 or 2 Focus depending on your Familiar abilities and other Feats. So after the first encounter you can't even do the above.

Uh so you forced them to cackle on turn 4 to use a single action instead of having them drop the Cantrip spell to do that "must use" 3rd action?

This is just bad choices of action economy deliberately.

We do not have the value of context for the turn.

Turn 1 PB
Turn 2 Stoke The Heart
Turn 3 CoD
Turn 4 drop stoke the heart, shift to other melee on turn 5 sustain two hexes, and move
Turn 5 cast, sustain, sustain.

Next combat? Hey look at that, you can do it again because they still have a focus point, they can refocus one.

And they didn't even use the Familiar Ability.

Let alone if we talk Gnome, or MCDs for other abilities (I mentioned Desperate Prayer because it is a level 1 class feat and super cheap).

EDIT: And to your math, it's two feats. Cackle was optional in the above. You want Cackle, go right ahead, but that's not the premise.

I literally used your example......you mentioned they could then Cackle, I was trying to point out the terrible action economy that would result in. So yeah, you are right is it bad action economy and YOU suggested it.

So let's compare what you just did to a Wizard....OK

Wizard turn 1
-Elemental Tempest and Cone of Cold. (1 Focus - 1 spell slot the Witch doesn't get) 12d6 in a 60' cone, 5d6 in a 10' radius, 17d6 to any primary target(s) caught in both.

Wizard Turn 2
- repeat (using Bonded Item recall spell that the Witch Doesn't get)

Wizard Turn 3
Likely out of focus so let's drop a 4d8 Ice Storm that will last a minute without needing to be sustained (granted, it can now be avoided) with one action to spare.

Wizard Turn 4
has now used the same resources as the witch…
still has more resources than the witch with additional spell slots and has done more damage.

If by some crazy chance you build a Wizard/Witch you still have 7 more spell slots than the standard Witch at level 10 and a Focus point left at this point…and a cool Witch Familiar.

Mechanically the witch does not add up...I just don't see it. Your example does not match the numbers just posted and the Wizard still has more left in the tank than the witch.

A Witch on turn 3? Personal Blizzard on a lackie, Stoke the Heart on the Barb, and Curse of Death on the BBEG.

And then if they cackle, they can be casting spells on every turn as well.

OK, a level 10 Witch that has spent 3 of their 5 feats to this point on Hexes.

And in your example above, they can Cackle for 1 turn.

Turn 1: Personal Blizzard (1 focus gone) (2 other actions)
Turn 2: Stoke the Heart (Cantrip) (1 other action) assuming this is the one cantrip you got.
Turn 3: Curse of Death (1 focus gone) (0 other actions)

Turn 4: Cackle and one action...(1 focus gone) (1 other action)
Turn 5: Sustain (0 actions)

The action cost per damage / buff done is just terrible on this class. This class does not mechanically stack up.

==========================================================

Next encounter you likely have 1 or 2 Focus depending on your Familiar abilities and other Feats. So after the first encounter you can't even do the above.

WatersLethe wrote:

If buffing witches are meant to suck, then that's a trap option and antithetical to the game's principles.

Do they suck, or do they only suck by comparison to the Bard?

I know the thread of the conversation has twisted towards Witch vs Bard, but if you look at a lot of the earlier posts (some by myself) there are breakdowns mechanically comparing the Witch to the Druid, Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer.

I'm working on building a witch (power gaming number cruncher here). So far I have built this character 10 different ways with various classes and Class/MultiClass options.

The Witch is inferior to every build I have done. I don't want to repeat myself too badly.

Druid: knows every spell, doesn't waste wealth learning spells, armor access, shield access, hit points, better focus spells.

Wizard: Bonded Item, Thesis, 1 spell slot of every level over the witch. The witch will have more focus spells and the Hex Cantrip.

Let's talk familiar...there are long conversations about the familiar in this thread but at the end of the day the Witch Familiar can get 2 more abilities over other Familiars in the game and that takes a lot of feats to get there. So unless you want to do a massive familiar build it doesn't matter. The one big shining star...the familiar comes back to life in a day. That is better.

Sorcerer comparison: pretty much the same as the Wizard IMO.

For the record I consider 1 spell slot per level a huge price to pay.

Where does the Witch Shine? As a multiclass.

If a spellcaster wants a Familiar they can spend one Feat to grab the Witch Dedication and gain a Witch Familiar that is as good as their Familiar would be and comes back to life the next day AND comes with a free Cantrip....

I can build a Druid/Witch or a Wizard/Witch that takes a couple levels more to progress but once it does it will have as many hexes, a great familiar, more spell slots per day than the Witch.

If I go Druid I get more hit points and armor, if I go Wizard I get more spell slots.

What do I lose? A Hex Cantrip....really? Wow....

So the best mechanical witch builds I can make are not witches....

For the record, I'm not comparing to Bards because I just don't like roleplaing Bards...so I haven't dug into the class that closely.

If you want details I have spreadsheets....

My biggest issue with Cackle is the cost vs reward. Most hexes have some sort of sustain associated with them. So if I want to use Cackle to sustain one of those hexes you are reducing your opportunity to actually use one of those hexes.

Combine that with the fact that almost every Hex targets only one creature.

So let's run with your example where it is easy to have 2 Focus points.
If I am in a fight against multiple enemies, I target one of them with a Hex. I am now down 1 focus point. Now is the choice, if I Cackle I get to save 1 action. Is that useful? Of course. Is it worth not being able to Hex anyone else? It doesn't seem like it is going to be.

I admit, I haven't played it yet, I am theorizing, that is why I asked for WWHsmackdown to let us know how it actually plays for them.

I don't see giving up 1 free sustain being worth potentially 10 rounds of a Hex on a different target. The only example that has looked worth it to me is if you Summon Spell and then use the Cackle free sustain to be able to get a second Summons out.

Combine that with the fact that it costs you a Feat to get Cackle. Yes I know you get another Focus Point. But the Witch is likely to get a lot of those and I hate the fact that you are capped at 3. That would have been another way they could have let the Witch stand out, remove the 3 Focus Point cap for her.

I'm fairly excited to make a human damphir curse witch with cackle and effortless concentration. Evil Eye, Malicious shadows, and curse of death (plus focus regeneration feats) with an archetype like beast master sounds really cool. Also, with cackle as a built in sustain on top of the other two spooky focus powers I finally found the chassis Im going to play a necromancer on. Occult has animate dead so I'm good to go. Bard may be a strictly stronger base but it wouldn't feel nearly as thematic mechanic wise and I wouldn't have a buff familiar to boot. Overall, more hex cantrip choices, more lessons, and a feat to snatch another patrons cantrip would definitely fix the only lingering issues I have with the class.

Please post later and let us know how Cackle works out for you. I just don't see it as very useful since it costs a Focus Point. If you have two focus and cast any other non-Cantrip hex you can now Cackle once...just feels very weak to me.

Draco18s wrote:

*Draws a line in the sand and writes "bard" on it, starts walking, drawing several other lines and marking them with class names along the way.*

I'll let you know when I get to the witch.

Ha!

But again, i don't think Witch is a bad class, it's just that it directly compares to bard in some aspects and that, well, sucks since bard is indeed King in some of them.

If anything I like Witch more than Wizard or Sorc, the early 1 action hexes give her a bit more engaging playstyle that fits me more.

For me, if they just put a decent "heighten" on them i would be more than happy with the class.

But over the long haul the loss of the spell slot per level compared to Wizard and Sorcerer just nerfs the Witch in a painful way to me.

Personally to me, you have to look at the whole package together.

As a unit, the hex cantrips + focus hexes + Familiar variability + Patronlist make for a very "full" class. The combination of these together is what makes it good.

If there are some missing ingredients in the recipe above, then all that's missing is printed options it's not really a fundamental "miss" in terms of design.

And given this class has nearly a built in "build your own recipe" in the Patron section, I find that an okay pill to swallow.

I'm sorry, I have a tendency to write long threads:

TLDR: Your opinion the witch is fine, my opinion she is under-powered, we both have reasons :-)

TLDR: My Reasons:
- The loss of the 4th spell slot is not made up for by other class abilities.
- The locking of the Patron theme/casting tradition/hex cantrip sucks without house rules to allow other custom patrons. My gaming table doesn't allow house rules lightly.

=========================================================================== ==================================================================

If you read through many of the comments I have made in this thread you will see that I AM looking at the class as a whole. For the upcoming character I am looking to play I have now skeletoned out a Witch, a Sorcerer, a Wizard, a Bard (working on a Cleric now) out to level 14.

In my opinion the Witch falls far short of all of the other classes I have compared in terms of power and ability. Furthermore, I feel that the mechanical build also restricts Role Playing aspects as well.

I'm not here to poop on the class. As I have stated before, I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY want to like the witch. I was super excited to hear she was coming. I'm in this thread to find out if I am wrong about her power level (nothing has yet convinced me otherwise).

As stated earlier, I play with a group of power gamers, being left in the dust is not fun. Do I think the witch is going to be left in the dust...probably not completely no. But from everything I can see she certainly is going to be running behind the curve.

From a Role Playing perspective I find it sad that the hex cantrip and casting traditions are tied to the patron. At my table we largely play by the books. So your statement that there is a "build your own recipe" for Patrons is NOT true for everyone. Great, your table does it. Mine doesn't. Why? Because it is a table full of power gamers and as soon as we open that door there is a flood of "little" requests that start to fly in.

The Witch's Familiar is the best potential familiar in the game. That is pretty blatant at this point, just due to the daily recreation. That is a nice notch for the Witch.

My biggest complaint?
She is a primary casting class with low hit points, no armor access, limited weapon access. - Fine
But, she lacks the 4th casting slot granted to all of the other primary casters - OK...so as you stated, total package what does she get instead?

Without investing Feats that sacrifice other class abilities, she gets Hexs and the Familiar reincarnate.

In my opinion the Witch's Level 1+ Hexs are fine; they feel really on par with other class Focus spells. We can break down the numbers if you want...I'd be more than happy to. The witch has a lot of options for Focus spells, more than some of the other classes, but at the end of the day she is still locked into a pool of 3 focus points. This hinders her ability to leverage those extra hexes. Really feels like an even split with other classes to me.

So that leaves the Hex Cantrips, which in theory are supposed to make up for the lack of the spell slot. Here I have several reasons why I feel they don't. You can't pick your cantrip to fit your build. If you want a certain tradition or theme for your witch, then your cantrip is selected for you. If you are making a certain type of build, Blaster, Buffer, Healer, etc. Your cantrip (which should be a core part of your character) cannot be selected. You state that is "easily" overcome by a custom patron. But "custom" patrons are not RAW, they are house rules.

Even if you do get the perfect cantrip for your build. They are not great. Shall we break them down?

- Clinging Ice: 1d4 damage and chance for speed debuff. However it can only target each target once per minute (10 rounds most fights are over on our table...not sure how this is for everyone else). So a range 30' spell, the average speed in the game is 25'. So, if you get to perfect range and get the debuff on you could potentially keep the foe from reaching you in one move. But my guess is that the speed debuff usually won't matter. If I could slow you from 100' away that would be a lot better. Overall, this cantrip is mechanically weaker than all the other attack cantrips out there in terms of damage. It gets a good boost from being one action but that in turn is limited to once per target. And if you do score a debuff that you want, then you are now losing that action economy gain by having to sustain. No other cantrips require a sustain. Overall...it feels like a well balanced cantrip that could live on any cantrip list.

- Discern Secrets: Recall Knowledge, Seek, Sense Motive. This to me feels split between combat and non-combat. It is one action that can grant another player a Recall Knowledge, this trades one of your actions for another player's if you cast it on someone else in combat...OK. Maybe good if they need that action more than you do? Then it grants a +1 buff. Sure, that feels on par with a standard cantrip.

- Evil Eye: -1 (-2 if you are lucky) debuff. OK, that feels on par with a cantrip. As the others, the once per fight per target sucks, but the single action is cool. But, the sustain cost does away with that. I cast a 2 action spell and Evil Eye round one. Round two if I cast another standard spell I cannot evil eye again, I have to sustain. It is good...but again, IMO right on par with standard cantrips.

I could continue down the list, if you reply and want my thoughts...I will. But in the end they all end up looking this way to me. The Hex Cantrips are really well balance Cantrips IMO.

So...why is that a problem? Because it appears to me that the loss of the extra spell slot per day was done because of the Hex Cantrips and when I look at this class as a WHOLE, it just doesn't add up.

Please, show me specifically where I am wrong, show me the build that is mechanically as good as other casting classes. I am here, literally begging to be wrong - and because I love rule discussions with other gaming geeks :-)

My dream for the Witch Class:
- Separate the Patron Theme from the Magic Tradition and Hex Cantrip. Allow the player to choose a role playing theme and then choose a tradition and cantrip. I really don't see how that would break the class in any way.
- Give them the 4th casting slot like the Wizard and Sorcerer.

To anyone that read my ramblings this far...thanks for listening.

PS: Multiclassing into a Witch is a really good build if you want a Familiar.

Even compared to a wizard the wizard only really stays competitive with the amount of stuff their familiar can get if they decide to go the familiar master archetype otherwise they get enhanced familiar as the only real upgrade on top of the stuff they get from bonded familiar.

At level 4 witches can take an option that makes specific familiars take less options which gives you a good package of utility stuff cheap so you can add on more skills and then they get incredible witch to add more.

As for lore master if a familar is worth a dedication feat + at least one other feat so you could take another dedication than clearly thats a handy ability.

At least if my math holds up at max level a witch can have 12 familiar abilities where a wizard would have I think 8 if they don't take familiar master.

I'm coming to 10, must be missing one...

Either way, yes, if the witch spends 2 extra class feats her Familiar is indeed better than the Wizard. But at the cost of two feats the Wizard can use for other abilities, so that seems fair to me.

The other fun option is for the Wizard to multiclass into Witch instead to get the Witch Familiar, spend the same two feats the Witch does to get the extra familiar abilities and still have one more spell slot per level....granted it would take them more levels to get there.

One of the better uses for the skill is lore and language stuff but even with other skills having potentially legendary level chance of success on untrained stuff is still really useful. It gives the witch wide range of stuff that they can have done at a good level of competence. Very jack of all trades type stuff. Given how freaking specific lore stuff is having a "party member" who can afford to take super dialed in specific lore skills in multiple things that they can change from day to day is really handy.

Sure, but anyone with a familiar can do this.

A witch that heavily invests in Familiar Abilities can get 2 more than anyone else via Incredible Witch. Outside of that she has as many abilities on her familiar as a Familiar Thesis Wizard. Compared to other familiars she does have 1-4 more abilities, which is nice. But again, not worth the 4th spell slot to me.

That is the core of my issue, the better familiar is nice. But it isn't INCREDIBLE. Also, to me thematically this shouldn't be a pet class first, it should be a patron / hex class (again to me).

Overall I am really enjoying this discussion with everyone, I have a lot fun talking about our opinions on this and getting to see how others see things in case I am way off base :-)

She gets a good familiar, but so can others...and the class still feels very weak.

AzureKnight wrote:

Mellored wrote:

But if you get past the name of the class and make use of the familiar, like being able to pick up any lore skill, remotely disarm traps, fly up the wall and tie a rope to climb, scout out the enemy location, etc...
.
.
.
.
witch effectively gets 3-4 familiar feats for free (assuming daily respawn is worth a feat).

So compare a wizard / familiar master. To a witch / wizard (extra slots).

You are really losing me here: I posted one question above that you might not have seen, how are you getting the Trained skills on this familiar?

Also, by 3-4 familiar feats? Do you mean the bonus familiar abilities (at levels 1,6,12,18)? If so, the Wizard can get that too with the Improved Familiar Attunement Thesis.

Skilled (Advanced Player's Guide pg. 146): Choose a skill other than Acrobatics or Stealth. Your familiar's modifier for that skill is equal to your level plus your key spellcasting ability modifier, rather than just your level. You can select this ability repeatedly, choosing a different skill each time.

The question as written I am not sure that actually works like a trained skill though but the dice roll modifier makes you really likely to succeed at it. Not good for stuff that requires actual expert+higher to do but great for stuff like lore and language stuff to give you access to some broad information gathering stuff you can change day to day. At high level witches who really work on their familiar can have around 12 familiar abilities. This opens up a LOT of options for utility skill stuff so you don't have to bother.

OK, but that doesn't make them Trained. They cannot take half of the actions. The thievery action Disable Device or Pick Lock are both Trained actions. The familiar may have a better number but can't even attempt those actions.

Also, several of the listed actions would require other abilities to accomplish. For example, as a DM I don't think I would allow a familiar to take the Steal action without Manual Dexterity.

So the investment gets a little higher...

Still, witch has daily respawn. Which lets you use the familiar with a lot less caution

Yup and I stated initially, that is awesome. But just not worth the weak hex cantrips and loss of the 4th spell slot.

But if you get past the name of the class and make use of the familiar, like being able to pick up any lore skill, remotely disarm traps, fly up the wall and tie a rope to climb, scout out the enemy location, etc...
.
.
.
.
witch effectively gets 3-4 familiar feats for free (assuming daily respawn is worth a feat).

So compare a wizard / familiar master. To a witch / wizard (extra slots).

You are really losing me here: I posted one question above that you might not have seen, how are you getting the Trained skills on this familiar?

Also, by 3-4 familiar feats? Do you mean the bonus familiar abilities (at levels 1,6,12,18)? If so, the Wizard can get that too with the Improved Familiar Attunement Thesis.

Second, the familiar. Read it as "at the start of the day choose 3 skills, you are trained in them for the day".

Can you tell me where you are getting this from? Are you talking about investing in the "Skilled" familiar ability three times?

If so, they are not Trained in those skills. They simply have a better modifier. This would mean they cannot attempt any Trained Skill checks so even if you choose Thievery it could not attempt to pick a lock or disable a device. Furthermore, if the skill attempt has any Trained/Expert/etc qualifier they can't attempt it. Additionally, they would need to invest other abilities to communicate with you any information gathered, manual dexterity to use thieves tools, etc.

Am I missing something? Are you talking about some other ability?

I'm of the same opinion as many of you.

TLDR version: I think witches are just sadly underpowered.

Let's start with a confession: My group is comprised of all heavy power gamers. Three out of five of us are computer programmers so we love to crunch numbers.

Some of the prior posts are perfect IMO. The witch has the hit points, weapons, and armor of a pure caster but lacks the 4th spell slot per level of the pure casters.

The counter of course is that the hexes are going to make up for that. But they just don't IMO.

Hex Cantrips:
I keep seeing the argument that these are really good because they are 1 action. That is great. But you only get 1 hex cantrip and you really can't even pick which one. If you thematically want to play a certain type of witch, or you are choosing based on the casting type you want to play (divine, primal, etc) then you are forced into a cantrip choice. Even if you get the "best" hex cantrip, I don't see any of them being worth 1 spell slot per level.

I'd ask this of all the players out there talking about the witch, if they gave you a choice of the 4th spell slot or the cantrip which would you choose?

Other Hexes:
Some are better than others, for the most part they feel on par to me with the other class focus spells.

Other Class Feats:
Some are better than others, for the most part they feel on par to me with the other class feats. Paizo really has put a lot of the class feats on rails.

Familiar:
The familiar is nice in that it comes back to life right away and the Familiar's Eyes ability. Pretty much everything else about it can be gained by other classes.

Thematically though I feel a witch should be about the patron and the hexes, not the pet. I'm going to speculate here, I could be wrong, but I don't believe Paizo granted the familiar the ability to come back the next day because the familiar is such a powerful theme of being a witch. It was a mechanical move that needed to happen or the witch would be broken. Just my opinion, I'm sure some may disagree.

Other Class Comparison (I'll partially repeat and add to what others mentioned above:):
- divine witch is inferior to a cleric that has better armor, weapons, hit point and more spells (Divine Font)

- witch of any casting type is inferior to a sorcerer of the same type; the flexibility of spontaneous casting and more spell slots.

- arcane witch is inferior to wizard due to the spell slots/bonded item.

- occult witch vs bard....kinda can't comment, haven't dug deep enough into the bard.

- primal witch is inferior to the druid (mostly). The spell slots are on par, but as mentioned above the druid has hit point, weapon, and armor access over the witch. In addition IMO the Animal, Leaf, and Wild druid abilities are far above the witch's hexes. The exception is the Storm Druid which IMO is kind of on the same level as the witch (if the Storm Druid stays pure and avoids crossing into another order...)

I REALLY, REALLY want to play a witch in our upcoming campaign but I just don't think I can bring myself to. My Role Player is just losing out to my Roll Player. I will happily sacrifice power gaming for theme, but this threshold is just too much for me to swallow.

I'll likely end up a Wizard multiclass Witch...

Some of the posts brought up the idea of "fixing" the witch. I think the easiest solution is to grant the 4th spell slot. Another option might be to remove the hex cantrip from the patron and let the witch choose 2 hex cantrips to prepare each day. Let her start with a couple and learn more like other spells or something. If the cantrips are supposed to balance the lack of the 4th spell slot it needs more flexibility.

But honestly, when I look over the classes, if the Witch had the 4th spell slot she feels even with the others. Nothing about her would suddenly have me saying...Witch is better than everyone else and is a no brainer to take. Sadly I don't see Paizo changing such a core part of a class.

This has been a fun discussion :-) Have fun gaming eveyone!

Personally I don't think it is worth it. Focus points are just too limited of a resource. If this was a class feature I might use it once in awhile, but it doesn't feel worth a feat to me.

The one tactic I saw posted here that makes it valuable is if you want to play a summoning caster. Summon spells are 3 actions, this would allow you to cast a summon, next turn use Cackle as a free action to sustain the first summons keeping three actions to cast another summons.

Then you would have to pay 2 actions a turn to keep sustaining both of them but it is a way to get multiple summons out at low levels.

AzureKnight wrote:

Unicore wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

I'd rather use a focus point to heal myself. Or fly.

Not pay for a sustain.

It sounds like it is a good thing they made this a feat and not a class feature then. I really don't understand the point of arguing that other people who value what cackle does shouldn't be allowed to pick it as a feat.

It is a class feature...it is a Witch Feat...unless I have a fundamental misunderstanding of the rules...

I meant that you don't have to take it if it isn't going to help your build.

That makes complete sense!

I can say from my point of view...what sent me here reading this thread is that I was really looking forward to playing a witch.

But I belong to a group of power gamers (and I have a bit of it myself).

It seems like the Witch is a very under powered class compared to a Wizard or Sorcerer. I am finding many of the feats and hexes to be underwhelming. I like options and it feels like half of them are removed as soon as I read them.

So I'm starting to venture online to see if I am just not being creative enough when reviewing them.

Martialmasters wrote:

I'd rather use a focus point to heal myself. Or fly.

Not pay for a sustain.

It sounds like it is a good thing they made this a feat and not a class feature then. I really don't understand the point of arguing that other people who value what cackle does shouldn't be allowed to pick it as a feat.

It is a class feature...it is a Witch Feat...unless I have a fundamental misunderstanding of the rules...

AzureKnight wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

I'd rather use a focus point to heal myself. Or fly.

Not pay for a sustain.

I'm missing something....how are you using a focus point to fly?

Draconic Sorcerer Focus 5 or Elemental (Fire/Air) Sorcerer Focus 3 spells. Angelic, too, I think.

Sure....but this thread is about Cackle...which I suppose you could attempt to archetype into Cackle if you really wanted too.

I was hoping for some option I missed that would allow a witch to fly with focus points :-)

I'd rather use a focus point to heal myself. Or fly.

Not pay for a sustain.

I'm missing something....how are you using a focus point to fly?

I could never get enough people willing to play Star Frontiers!

I love that SilverHawks and Thundarr are on this list!

I've searched this thread and the forum at large and found only divided opinions (and not many of them as I'm guessing not a lot of people are playing Mythic prepared spellcasters at any given time).

Perfect Preparation (Archmage Mythic Ability):

Does the caster still have to learn new spells? Pay to scribe them into their brain?

- or -

Does this grant the prepared arcane caster full access to all arcane spells much like a cleric?

Opinions welcome, official word even better!

Thanks,
-AK

I wanted to post to give this one a bump, our group is trying to answer this very question right now and opinions are divided.

One group says that the wizard is the spellbook, they still have to pay to learn and "scribe" the spell into their brain.

The other group says that this allows a wizard to function like a cleric.

I'd love some more opinions on which is right or even opinions on which is better. Official word for RAI would be really great!

Bump, anyone know of anything? I'm guessing the silence means no...

Only catch here is that we are talking about wizards not spontaneous casters. If you cast it in an opposed element, what other slot would you use? Some random other spell? That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I've scanned the boards, if anyone has posted on this already I couldn't find it.

I've been looking over the Elemental School options for Wizards. What spells are banned? I would assume that if I choose Fire then I would have all the spells specifically listed on the Water list as my opposed school spells correct?

Now this may sound a bit rules lawyer here...but that is often how my group goes. If you look at second level spells in those lists (fire and water) they contain a lot of overlap.

For example at second level you will find Elemental Speech, Elemental Touch, Resist Energy and Summon Monster II all on both lists. RAW would tell me that I need to expend two slot to memorize any of those spells.

But that seems dumb, that spells that are in my school are also opposed? Its not like you can memorize Elemental Touch (Fire) or Elemental Touch (Cold), unless I really missed something somewhere.

Also, if the Wizard does have full access to all these "opposed" spells...then doesn't this make Elemental Schools by far the best in terms of spell access? You only choose one opposition school instead of the normal two and half the opposed spells aren't really opposed? That seems head and shoulder's above all the standard schools.

What am I missing?