rknop wrote: If you're a PFS player, I *think* that they'll be handling walk-up registrations and pick-up afternoon games at HQ. Also, sometimes people fail to show for their PFS games, so if you show up at muster time (show up say 15 minutes before the PFS game is scheduled to start), you might find a spot. Thank you for the advice. Yes, I have PFS characters or can play a pre-gen. Will show up early! :-)
Cort Odekirk wrote:
Thank you for fixing it. I didn't get into it. :-( But I will try to trade with someone else. And who knows who will really show at 8 am on Monday morning!
I signed up for a Monday morning game with my buddy that had room for 1 more person. Yay! -- EXCEPT... while it says by the game "On your schedule", it doesn't actually appear on my schedule, no matter refreshing or remove/re-add...? How can I find out if it's really on my schedule? (Also, when I register, the number of players stays at 11 rather than moving to 12). PS. There's no schedule conflicts. Help me Obiwan!
Howdy folks!
Twice over the years I got to run a PC in a pact magic campaign using Secrets of Pact Magic and Villains of Pact Magic. The first PC was a warbinder (1st to 6th level) and the second PC was a pact warrior (13th to 16th level). Besides the unbound witch, these were my two favorite classes. It's ironic that these two classes were the ones that didn't quite make it into the Unbound series for Pathfinder. The warbinder (SoPM, pages 58-61) is modeled after the marshall class from 3.5. It offers half BAB, good Fort and Will, binding up to 6th level spirits, and abilities flavored for someone who wishes to aid allies and deploy minions. The warbinder offers a spirit aura, similar to the marshall's aura but you can extend a bound ability instead. And starting at 5th level he gets summon warband, which summons a few least vivilors. Vivilors (described on page 61) are the elementals of the Outer Darkness (aka Dark Beyond). They come in 4 tiers:
The reason I used names: rather than model directly after the typical elemental, I used whales as the inspiration and they have a certain hierarchical or ecological relationship to each other. In RPGs, I usually play leader, detective, and tactical/strategist roles. Needless to say, sharing some bound abilities with allies, and summoning creatures with the right spirit for the situation, really fit my style :-). I often felt really useful and solving difficult situations, such as extending Lady Jarah's alter appearance ability to my allies so we could sneak into an orc complex, or summoning vivilors with Aza'zati's acid gout to attack a nasty shambling mound from the air. As for the pact warrior, the appeal for me was playing a binder gish. It really was enjoyable to bring in magical effects at just the right moment. In particular, the battle trance options were fun. At 13th level, I could combine a supernatural attack with a weapon attack 6/day, using battle trance 3/day (only one trance needed to fit the spirit I had bound), and I had some great fear and death resistance stuff. In high level campaigns, with a GM who loves Grimtooth's Traps, having abilities like warrior's mettle, death ward, and undying grace, were essential. Finally, I liked the pact warrior because of the names of the trance options (page 47). The day I wrote that column, I felt more inspired than usual. Looking back, I think that SoPM and VoPM were *slightly* darker than the Unbound series, with emphasis on the word slightly. After all, the unbound witch doesn't just have mutations. I love the picture of her as a troglodyte eating a beating heart... ;-) Regarding anima, Alex and I left them out for several reasons. My main reason was that they could be used in broken combinations. I made a couple of mistakes in crafting a few of them, though of course those mistakes could be fixed. But overall, it was something to leave for later. At some point, perhaps for a single adventure, I had a PC with the devil binder prestige class. It was definitely fun. However, I did a sort of cheat by condensing the entire set of 12 binding options into a single 1-page table. Same for binding angels and demons. I think we can do a little better than that next time. Ultimately, there were tons of things from our campaigns that got into SoPm and VoPM like priest eaters, flame ghouls, the ironheart ghost, living nightmares, pact rajah, the gnostic vault (hello Isaac Asimov), and restoring spirits to life (SoPM pages 304-305). Many of these options reflect a database of science fiction ideas ported into an occult fantasy setting or places where the mechanics suggested an option (e.g. troglodytes, rakshasas, and hobgoblins as high Con folks who would be good at binding). Alex has in mind an occult bestiary as a separate product. And I agree there is enough potential, and a lot of pages of flavor already written, to appear separately from what will already be a 300+ page grimoire.
As the second author, it'll add my second cent: Electrotech can fit well into the Iron Gods AP and Golarion. Despite the ancient technology being very high level, electrotech is a simpler version that natives of Golarion might have been able to reverse engineer. The Technic League has figured out some of the principles, etc, possibly using magic like Commune to do that. It's a way to get some tech into the hands of PCs without giving them super-powerful stuff (well, the Maxim is pretty nice, as is the Nucleonic Rifle).
mikeawmids wrote: Thanks for the comment, you've written a bloody good system which I love to pieces. Unfortunately, selling it to my group has been an uphill struggle (they are all devout Pathfinder players and miss their AC something terrible). :p Much appreciated! If it's a consolation, Radiance RPG is meant to ease the GM's work even more than simplify for players, what with all the townies and such. Also, great work on your part encouraging the flavor elements such as romance and horror, which are ultimately very much in the spirit of the Pathfinder adventures.
I don't normally post, but why not, as I taught university social science for 7 years. Meatrace asked, where the cultural marxists? Where is their play-book? I was 12 years teaching: 5 in physical science and 7 in social science (anthropology) in the USA at a top-name university. As graduate students told me, and as I encountered among my peers, there were fair number of faculty -- mostly middle-age, well-to-do, highly-educated white women -- who orbited around the topic in question, cultural marxism. I use the word "orbit" to avoid getting bogged down (or is that caught up?) in semantics. Then there are their textbooks and lecture notes, which can double as play-books. Some of them really do have startling ideas, like saying physical/biological science "knowledge" needs to be radically adjusted in order to better conform to their worldview, or that physical/biological science departments need a racial quota system to balance their enrollment. Of course, these gentile faculty members can do email, but I wouldn't want to press them to design a working bridge, accurately measure the speed of a photon, or model insulin production. Their lives are rather easy in my opinion, which affords mental laziness and verbal diarrhea (aka critical discourse). They came of age in the 1960s and are still wagging that half-century-old cultural war, with its various actors and assumptions. Some other thoughts... In the vain of complexity theory, conspiracy-like phenomena don't actually require secret groups of people meeting and organizing. All it takes is a fair number of people, each acting toward their own ends with some awareness and adjusting to surrounding society, to cause the emergence of widespread changes. Have humans always panicked about collapse? That's misleading. Societies have risen and fallen, in practical terms. Romans citizens in 475 were rightly concerned, and there were a lot of policy mistakes that lead up to that. Of course, those mistakes had different names, costumes, etc. The USA today is, objectively, in a bad way in financially, at least on paper, and many hold a general impression that a surprising number of folks are intensively engaged in expensive, non-productive activities. The country has been in such spots before, and there are a number of good reasons to think we'll recover from the stumble, but as the peoples of many a prior civilization have encountered, such is hardly assured. So I'm okay with the hysteria (oops, I'm not supposed to use that word). Perhaps we forget that the set of human civil rights we enjoy today is a blip in history. I can easily imagine multiple routes to totalitarian futures. I like many of Sissyl's posts in this thread, but I believe there is some confusing of quantity with quality of educational content. There are a lot of misinformed students. For example, just prior to the 2008 election, I gave a general anonymous survey to my largest course, which is filled with university juniors and seniors from all different disciplines. It had questions like, who are you likely voting for, what news source do you access most, how much do you follow the election, how many senators are there, and so forth. They also had a pie chart to complete. On the objective portion of the survey, with those civics questions and pie chart and such, all 116 students failed. One had a pie chart that added to 175%. Many thought military spending constituted 75% of Gross Domestic Product (and yes, I defined GDP for them). There was generally a lack of common sense, as Asphere described. And no, I don't distain my students. I wouldn't have won 2 teaching awards if I had. The students are actually quite bright with a lot of potential, but innumeracy and lack of deductive skills are obstacles. Moreover, the more they followed the election, the worse they did. A sizable segment of them scored well below statistical chance. They had various qualities in common like watching the same news source--and no, not FOX, one of the other ones. Their heads were filled with other stuff, some of it quite relevant to today's society and some it just plain wrong factually. Eventually I left social science and now do first-hand neuroscience lab research. Recently, I encountered an interesting article about "femens". Naturally, the discussion turned to feminism. There were a lot of concerning posts, from a neuroscience point of view. For example, many posters were confusing social conformity with modesty, two qualities that are mediated by very different parts of the brain, for whatever reason. After a while, I wondered if the majority of dialog and thought for the past century or two is basically garbage, even if it's well thought out garbage, because it doesn't take even the basics of human physiology or neuroscience into account. I wondered, perhaps in the 22nd century, people will look back on the thousands of books, articles, shows created today and think of those the same way we now think of medieval bestiaries. Time to get back to work...
Thanks Liz! As for Kevin's question: The lower level purifiers are evil (as in, any evil) and the higher level purifiers are specifically neutral evil. The exception in that chapter is the oracle, which is neutral, because it's not a purifier per see. And among purifiers, the spinster is specifically neutral evil even though it's medium level because it is sent on missions to act independently, requiring a certain amount of trust from its superiors. The notion might be slightly unfamiliar. This was a 3.5 product from 2008, not a Pathfinder RPG product, though it has an experimental layout for monster stats that looks a lot like a PF product -- great minds think alike? maybe! maybe? ;-).
Regarding Syan Stormtamer's comments, there will likely be space in the final version to add some additional restrictions to the soul weaver. The challenge is that, fundamentally, its versatile affords exploitation by power gamers. Ideally, there is a measure that automatically places some kind of ceiling on the benefits. The comparison to a magic item is a good one. I'll take a little bit of thought. And then there is always rule 0, or rule X, which says, yes you can do it, but for a terrible price!
Biblical_Payload wrote: just found this on here and if I'm not to late I'd like to be a part of your play testers. I've always enjoyed the concept of pact magic and i have a new campaign starting in a little over a week and i would love to give one of your occultists a shot. There is still time. :-) The document will be undergoing editing over the next month and we'll surely be able to incorporate some last minute comments.
As Alexander alluded to, the reason we're cutting feedback a wee bit earlier than would normally be needed for a July pub date is because I'm off to Europe for 3 weeks (50% work, 50% touring). If anyone of you happen to be in Paris, Copenhagen, Warsaw or London.... Any Londoners? I will make an effort to visit Chess and Bridge (on Baker St) and perhaps some other game shops while I'm there, as I have two days off.
As Alexander mentioned, we hope to offer folks the original legends in a separate book. Toward that end, I transposed the legends from both Secrets of Pact Magic and Villains of Pact Magic into a 6" x 9" book format. All in all, 66 legends take up 160 pages. Now I wonder:
Thoughts? On another note, I'm oddly inspired to turn the top 20 stories into full-blown illustrated kids mini-books. I'm not being facetious. The original Grimm tales were dark. I can just image a little girl reading (or being read) the story of Mare Loviatha, which is an excellent reminder to be a good unselfish girl, lest she turn into an ugly black unicorn!
Regarding the term "Matrix"... I used that term once in Secrets of Pact Magic, albeit right at the start, when describing the many ways people view the spirit realm. I hoped GMs would pick one (of the nine ideas) or make up their own. Spirit Realm, Gray Realm, After Realm, the Waste... terms like these are a little more my personal preference in my own settings with regard to the spirits' lonely existence. But those are just mine. I imagine different groups would view the place differently. The benefit of a term like Spirit Realm is that it's general and allows a GM to fit the material to a setting. Likely, many GMs will be using Golarion or something close, so my tendency to go with a neutral term.
Alexander Augunas wrote: Blah. I might have to do a blog now! Maybe I'll see if I can't get Dario to give me a soapbox on his pactmagic.com site to stand on or something. I'm planning to launch a site using tools from Ning.com. It's really secure and looks pretty. It will be for the whole publishing company though, with several forums for the relevant topics. Alas, I spent much of the day preparing for my gaming group tomorrow! And I still need to read up about submarines and underwater explosives....
Alzrius wrote:
Thanks for congrats on Radiance RPG. I haven't quite officially launched her yet, advertising wise. Still need to really set up a nice website and forum and... well, you all can imagine. It acts as sort of a gift for my spouse to consider acting as a GM. Maybe maybe! I also wanted to do something philanthropic. That's why the entire players guide PDF is free. From the old Forum, some of those spirits are available in a PDF form here:
Specifically, the downloads include the rookblade class, malebolge devil, a new spirit and epic spirit, a prestige class, new feats, the vatic stirge (um, stirges are awesome Con killers, so why not give them supernatural pact magic!) and ... Look under "Anima of the Outer Darkness" for 6 anima and a description of "Lilith’s Midnight Travelogue: A Guide to All That’s Left Behind". I had to take down the forum due to constant assault by Turkish hackers who claimed they were against the use of magic. Really? Y'all turkeys know it's a game, right? :-p
Banatine wrote:
Yes. I have a tendency to be overly complete. I suppose my students don't mind it, as I cover everything that's going to end up on the test, for example. But it can mean too many options! In practice, a GM might introduce different supplements as a binder PC "unlocks" them during the course of a campaign.
Zaister wrote: I own the original books, and a player for my upcoming "Way of the Wicked" campaign is interesting in playing a pact magic user, so we would love to playtest the new version! The new material still makes room for the old material if you like. For example, the new book heavily emphasizes archetypes over base classes. Some of the old classes aren't quite up to snuff power wise or list the right skills, etc. But others like the unbound witch are probably still quite playable if for some reason one prefers that. Perhaps closer to my heart, the original books have the legends in their original length. The new book simply couldn't keep to a 64-page supplement and include all those legends, from Azazati to Prince Oszen and Vandrea. I really want to put the better stories into an anthology, a kind of binders companion book that also happens to be accessible to non-gamer friends and loved-ones.
Kvantum wrote: As I am without an active group at this point, there's not a lot of playtesting I can do right now, but if you want some theorycraft-work, hook me up. Loved the books, and if you ever want to hear about what a 60 HD Savrok Cyclopes can do to a group of Epic level PCs, let me know. Ah, the Savrok construct, with 4 brains for 4 standard actions per round, with 13 disintegration eye rays and 13 ghost touch tentacles, fast healing and immunity to magic, and a 9th-level bound spirit to boot. Yes, she's a beaut. He he he. Now, advance that from 26th level to 60 HD. Gosh. I left they were crying and gnashing their teeth over that one. :-)
John Benbo wrote: Sorry, this a little off topic, but I was checking your website out for RPG stuff. I was bit surprised to find that you had also written the Meyers-Brigg book with Linda Berens that I studied in one of my graduate courses last semester. Good stuff. It's true! Besides a dozen of those books, I do workshops around neuroscience of personality. It all pays the bills to make the extra-fun stuff possible. Glad you enjoyed them :-).
Howdy binder apprentices! :-) Creating "Secrets of Pact Magic" etc. has been one of the creative highlights of my life. Alas, it was a d20 System product born at the transition to Pathfinder RPG. Though SoPM didn't need much conversion, the fact is Paizo and its fans have taken the system in new directions. After much pestering by certain persons (who may not remain nameless!), now is the time :-). Alexander has done an incredible job spearheading this project. I've been extra-impressed and am delighted to stand by him now. This brand spanking new baby will be just as illustrated, professional, and orthogonal as the originals (I don't take credit for the orthogonal part; pact making from the real world is just that way). Naturally, a 64-page circumscription presented a challenge. Alexander mainly translated the favorites. A second supplement can add a lot more :-). I'll be making an effort to pop in every day to read and respond. Thank you! And happy gaming :-).
Amethal pretty much posted what I would have. I'd add that Tome of Magic presents 8 levels of vestiges (spirits) over 20 class levels, while Secrets of Pact Magic presents 9 levels of spirits over 20 levels. So technically, there is a slight power differential that makes the two books incompatible. Personally, I think it's minor and OK because some folks have complained that the higher level vestiges in ToM are surprisingly weak. In Secrets of Pact Magic (and the later Villains book), each spirit has a constellation, favored allies and enemies, tactical bonuses, etc. Features of some of the classes like Pact Warrior and Foe Hunter rely on these characteristics. A GM would need to improvise when using the Tome of Magic vestiges. Oh, the constellations are fantasy not real-world. SoPM also presents anima spirits, which differ from both vestiges and the constellation-based spirits. So there is room in a campaign settling for multiple approaches to binding. I could not include anything in the original book about compatibility with Tome of Magic because that would violate "d20 System" rules. Oh, how quaint that sounds now. But the free FAQ on the website's download page covers the topic.
Yes, there is lots of Pact Magic out there along with a 2-page conversion guide to Pathfinder RPG. Want to know more? Hear the podcast!
Watch the video!
Read reviews!
Download free goodies!
See the books!
Right here in the PAIZO Store...
At PaizoCon I and II I had the pleasure of running a game; PaizoCon III will be a great opportunity to page through hard copies in person. And to answer a question above, pact magic as presented in Tome of Magic was adapted largely from real world stuff presented at sites like http://www.deliriumsrealm.com/delirium/demon_goetia.asp.
Frogboy wrote:
Okay, yes, I sort of missed this before. On the one hand I like the flexibility it gives; on the other hand, it feels more tactical than I imagine the witch to be. I bet we could create a sorcerer bloodline or something similar that works off of fate points. Edit: On 2nd thought, I think a Fateweaver PrC along these lines would be perfect, especially if it had relatively low-level entry. As for the brew potion feats, I agree that in order to brew powerful potions on a regular basis, several feats are needed. Really and truly. I'm sorry everyone I haven't commented more today. I've been working on my next iPhone app and enjoying some of the beautiful weather in So Cal today.
Andre Caceres wrote:
Great ideas. Wow, "hit me and you might be dazed!" Also, psions have some powers like danger sense, demoralize, and ectoplastic form that provide interesting defenses.
Witch Armor Class... Looking at various instances of the witch, I see that witches tend to have poor armor class. I mean really poor with some exceptions. Here's what the other classes have.
One option is to give witches the cleric defensive spells or something similar. Maybe give them sanctuary plus a protective amulet spell that grants a bonus to AC similar in progression to shield of faith. This might be the more reasonable choice. Another option is to give them no armor defense spells but give them a bonus to AC equal to their Charisma bonus, sort of like the monk. This option sounds sexy (metaphorically speaking) but might be unbalanced. A third option is to give them nothing--after all, they need some weakness in light of their benefits. I don't like this option so much. Thoughts?
My hope is that the witch class sees print in the next 2 months as a Pathfinder RPG compatible product. I have a lot of spells that seem to go well with a witch, and I love the hexblade and feel he needs an upgrade too. I bring the project to the boards because feedback really adds a lot. I hope for folks to actually like the class and feel that it fits with Pathfinder. When I finalize things, if I see a place where I feel I would be using someone else's intellectual properly, they'll hear from me. As for the class itself... sorry but this is mostly me thinking aloud and might be sort of tedious... We could approach the witch from an in-game sociological perspective. A witch could be from any class and result from marginalization, unusual training, or so forth. That's great, it breaths depth in a campaign world, and it largely works with Pathfinder as-is, though some extra sorcerer bloodlines could be quite helpful. On the other hand, I suspect that someone who comes to Pathfinder (do we say D&D anymore?) knows better than we do what a witch is. We here all sort of suffer from the connoisseur effect. A newbie likely thinks that witches have pointy hats and black cats and flying brooms and cauldrons and spells. They think of Bewitched or Harry Potter or what not. I think that's a fair way to approach the class so long as it's not silly or heedlessly disrespectful to folks who know actual witch traditions. A nice idea, in my opinion, is the witch as progenitor spell caster (as mentioned above). In this scenario, all other spell casting traditions hail from her. True witches know they are the root of everything. They rediscover the old ways, getting to the core of magic, and practice it to the best of their abilities. Along with this, I also like the idea that witch magic works from a sense of connectedness--everything links to everything else. From this perspective, a wizard's approach of collecting and learning spells as objective entities is relatively impersonal, disconnected, and industrial (a textbook of spells, learnable by all who study hard!). Merlin casts THE fireball spell, while Morgan casts HER fireball spell. Someone mentioned this idea above. It could explain why witch magic is best practiced with other people, why she has a patron or some similar meaningful connections, why she casts spells from all other classes, and why she tends to be subtle and less flashy and nature-oriented (nature epitomizes a systems mindset). This is what may help define the class in a deep way. As for expanding spell lists as new products come out... a feature of the witch is that she can dabble across artificial prescribed boundaries. How about a feat, or small set of feats, that grants a witch wider access to another class's spell list? Not so much to be unbalancing. Maybe she can pick two spells to add to her book (or whatever) and maybe she casts them at somewhat lower level, but this would allow growth over the years. OK, time for bed for me!
Andre Caceres wrote:
A sort of tangential thought... Sometimes GMs are not comfortable with new, 3rd-party spells even if they like a class design. Maybe there isn't one witch spell list. Instead, there are different books--like the spell books presented in Dragon Magazine over the years, each one containing spells belonging to a particular (in)famous caster or a focused theme. The main book contains only spells from the Pathfinder Core Rulebook. Other books contain new spells, and a GM may make some available while excluding others. The differences aren't formalized by school or anything, just thematic and more easily tailored to particular campaign worlds.
I like the idea of spell DCs modified by the witch's relationship to the subject. It highlights the unusual nature of her magic. It's very witchy. Intimate Insight (Ex): A witch's magic is personal and is most potent when applied to those she knows best. Whenever one of the witch's spell targets a creature and allows saving throw, modify the spell's DC according to the chart below. Modifiers stack to a maximum benefit of +1 per 4 witch levels (minimum 1).
This places the witch at a slight disadvantage in the standard dungeon delve and most minions, but makes her more potent on urban adventures or against the BBEG.
I'm thinking of adding Knowledge (geography) to the witch's list of class skills and allowing the witch to make skill checks to locate lay lines that can enhance some of her abilities. To modify the cauldron potion feature: Before using this ability, a witch may attempt a DC 15 Knowledge (Geography) check to find the nearest invisible "lay line" to boost the ceremony. On a successful check, the witch learns an ideal location within 1d10 miles, and if she conducts the ceremony there, she gains one additional level of spell for the purpose of selecting which spells are delivered by the potion. Lay lines shift, sometimes greatly, requiring a new check each day.
Okay, a stab at a more generic fate (curse/charm) ability: Dweomer of Fate (Su):
Spoiler:
Dweomer of Fate (Su): A witch gains a pool of fate points equal to one-half her level (minimum 1). Beginning at 1st level, she can expend one fate point to target a creature as a free action. If the witch's patron grants her access to cure spells, then she may deliver a charming boon to the creature. Otherwise, she may deliver a hideous curse. She my deliver the fate by uttering a profanity, blowing a kiss, giving the evil eye, or making no discernible gesture at all. When delivering a curse, the target must be within 60 feet and line of sight. On a failed Will save, the target suffers a -2 penalty on all dice rolls for 1 hour; or if it makes its save, for 1 round. This is a curse effect. Penalties from multiple applications of this ability do not stack. However, curses (from spells and magic items) do stack. When delivering a boon, the target must be within 30 feet and line of sight. The target enjoys a +1 bonus on all dice rolls for 10 minutes. Moreover, the witch may keep one ally at a time with whom she is on intimate terms; this ally is referred to as her beloved. Intimacy refers to romantic relations or a blood pact. Initiating the beloved takes 1 hour and the choice cannot be changed unless the beloved dies. The beloved enjoys a +2 bonus (instead of +1) from the boon. A boon is an enchantment effect. Benefits from multiple boons do not stack. At higher levels, a witch can deliver more potent curses and boons and activate abilities that require two or more fate points. Greater Dweomer of Fate (Su): At 7th level, a witch can more readily twist fate. When delivering a curse, she can expend 2 fate points such that the target suffer a -4 penalty on dice rolls or is frightened (as the witch desires); and even if a target saves, it still suffers a -2 penalty on dice rolls for 2 minutes. Conversely, when delivering a charm, the witch can expend 2 fate points such that the targeted ally enjoys a +2 bonus on dice rolls for 10 minutes (or a +4 bonus if the ally is her beloved). Dire Dweomer of Fate (Su): At 19th level, a witch can truly twist fate to her will. When delivering a curse, she can expend 3 fate points such that the target suffer a -6 penalty on dice rolls or is panicked (as the witch desires) or suffers a bestow curse effect, as the spell. Even if a target saves, it still suffers a -4 penalty on dice rolls for 2 minutes. Conversely, when delivering a charm, the witch can expend 3 fate points such that the targeted ally enjoys a +3 bonus on die rolls for 10 minutes (or a +6 bonus if the ally is her beloved).
A slight revision to Supernatural Patron:
Spoiler:
Supernatural Patron: At 1st level, a witch selects an otherwordly patron. The patron is usually an outsider type creature, immortal and powerful but not divine. A typical patron is a demon lord, fey monarch, or solar, although less powerful patrons are possible. It is not unusual for evil or chaotic creatures (perhaps even the patron's minions) to falsely represent themselves. The patron is a focus for admiration, homage, and guidance. A high level witch might view herself as the patron's lover, and sometimes this is true. The witch's reason for selecting her patron varies with her background. The patron may have visited her once, or sent a vision or messenger, or worked through other witches. In the event the witch's patron is slain or otherwise gone, the witch may select a new patron. A witch's choice of patron affects the spells she can access. A non-evil witch with a non-evil patron may select access to cure spells; otherwise, the witch may select access to inflict spells. The choice, once made, cannot be changed except if the witch's patron changes. I have to admit, I'm not sold on alignment-based options. Arcane magic is inherently agnostic, and while the mechanics make sense (the patron whispers the spell knowledge, so-to-speak, and thus limits what the witch learns), I'd like to think I can make a chaotic good witch who curses evil foes, or a neutral evil witch who gives a lucky charm to her lover but only curses for everyone else. An option is that a curse costs 2 fate points for a good witch and a charm costs 2 fate points to an evil witch?! This approach eliminate the need for the witch's circle feature.
CuttinCurt wrote:
I like the idea of continuing the potion brewing theme at a higher level. The feature below combines multiple feats but is only usable 1/month. If a witch wants to do this kind of brewing more often, she would take the requisite feats. Cauldron Potion (Su): Once per month under a full or new moon, a witch can conduct a special ceremony using a masterwork cauldron to brew a potent potion. This works like the Brew Potion feat, except the brewing costs nothing, takes only 1 hour, can deliver effects of multiple spells, and can deliver spells up to 6th level. Also, the witch may apply meta-magic effects to the spells. The total spell levels must be equal to or lower than the highest level witch spell that the witch can cast. For example, a 12th-level witch has access to 6th-level spells and could brew a potion that combines contagion and poison (both 3rd-level spells for a witch). The witch prepares and casts the spells as usual, and she must possess any relevant meta-magic feats except for Heighten Spell, which she gains temporary access to for the duration of the ceremony.
Frogboy wrote:
I was in a hurry and missed the overall idea.. I agree that the Fate concept can be applied to the class, with curse or bless (called by another name), which both more Pathfinder and more flexible. I also like the mass baleful polymorph concept. It was trying to work it in with curse of the land feature, but that's ended up being fairly complicated. I can see trackless step as a witch feature, but in the limited economy of class features, I wouldn't put priority on animal empathy, unless there's an either/or option somewhere.
yellowdingo wrote:
Sounds interesting, tell me more... [gosh I'm not getting work done at all!!! this is more fun!]
Goblin Witchlord wrote:
Yeah, I wish a little more was done with the NPC classes in Pathfinder to keep them subpar and easy, yet a little more flavorful, particularly in the way you suggest. Even one unusual bonus spell that's outside the norm can make a big difference flavor wise.
Steven Tindall wrote:
Steven, Thank you for the input.I've returned the witch to arcane casting. Just too many things like a familiar point to arcane. I'm not too familiar with Forgotten Realms. Could you say a little more about the circle magic feats and powers from Rasheman and Halruua? 2nd edition. I still some of those books around... let me dig them out! Interesting idea about the shape change. Your suggestion fits the witch archetype a little bit better. The Pathfinder rules for wild shape (and beast shape, etc spells) don't help out in the hit point department, meaning the witch would be very unwise to wade into combat as a bear. I'm not totally sure how to reconcile arcane spellcasting with good witch / bad witch except in spell descriptors and the witch's choice of patron. Hmm... I could expand on the patron part a wee bit, such that the patron grants alignment-based access to certain spells. If you pick a good patron, you get access to cure spells; if you pick an evil patron you get access to inflict spells; or if neutral patron, then select one or the other as a one-time choice.
Frogboy wrote:
I only have a moment's break, but this is what I wrote yesterday about the cooperative spellcasting and witch's circle. As you'll see, the cooperative one is done in a way that a PC witch would find useful and it doesn't rely on NPCs (unless she wants to). And the witch's circle is an in-combat aura effect. Cooperative Magic:
Cooperative Magic (Su): Beginning at 8th level, a witch can conduct a 10-minute ritual once per day in order to boost one of her spells. At least two allies must join her in the ceremony. These allies must have at least half the witch's Hit Dice, and the witch's familiar does not count as an ally for the ritual. The witch can select a spell she prepared earlier in the day or a spell from her book of shadows. In the latter case, the selected spell automatically replaces a previously prepared spell of the same level. The ceremony consumes 10 gp worth of materials per spell level. At the conclusion of a successful ceremony, the witch augments the spell. Select one augmentation from the list below. -- Increase by 2 the DC to resist the spell. -- Increase by 4 the witch's check to overcome a target's spell resistance for the spell. -- One target (of the witch's choice) that is affected by the spell is also targeted with one of the following spells: bestow curse, confusion, contagion, deep slumber, dimensional anchor, dismissal, fear, hold person, poison, or suggestion (as selected by the witch while conducting the ceremony). The selected bonus spell effect must be in the witch's book of shadows but she does not need to have prepared it and the spell effect is added without subtracting from her spell reserve for the day. -- The spell automatically succeeds on checks to effect incorporeal opponents. -- The spell gains an alignment descriptor (chaotic, evil, good, or lawful). -- The spell effects mindless creatures as if they were not mindless. -- Add 2 to the spell's effective caster level. -- The spell can be cast as a move action while making a Perform check, and the spell's DC equals the Perform result. -- As a free action just before casting the spell, the witch becomes invisible and remains invisible (as if affected by greater invisibility) until the end of her next turn. -- For 3 rounds after casting the spell, the witch enjoys a +2 bonus on her saving throws. When a cooperative magic ritual is performed at midnight with 5 or more allies and 10x the usual cost of materials, the witch can select two augmentations rather than one. As usual, allies must have at least half the witch's Hit Dice, and the witch's familiar does not count as an ally for the ritual. Witch's Circle:
Witch's Circle (Su): Beginning at 14th level, a witch can forfeit one of her daily uses of the curse ability to aid allies and hamper foes. The witch projects a 40-foot-radius supernatural aura. All allies within the aura enjoy a +1 luck bonus on dice rolls and an additional +4 luck bonus to resist curse and compulsion effects; at the same time, all opponents within the area suffer a -1 penalty on their dice rolls and an additional -4 penalty to resist curse and compulsion effects. I feel the luck feature you mention is useful, but has mechanical impact rather than flavor flavor impact, and my preference is to go for anything that creates "big moments." The perfect flight ability is neat. I'll look into where I could put that.
KnightErrantJR wrote:
What you're saying makes a lot of sense to me. I understand a desire to have some of the witch's mystique reflected in the class's mechanics. I'm just not sure how to implement it. Here are some options: A witch can keep a book of shadows, and that book is NOT usable by wizards (nor are wizard spell books usable by witches). A witch's book is written in a way that is intuitive, metaphorical, holistic, and personal. It might not even be magical. Another method is the witch learns spells and prepares them, but there is no spell book at all. All the spells are in her head. Or maybe each spell is represented in a different way (amulet for one spell, tiara for another, on bones for several others, on a tooth for yet another, etc). A witch might be like a shaman or shahir (from Dragon Magazine's update of the al-Qadim campaign setting) or a combination of both. Perhaps the witch selects spells each day through her familiar, who makes a request to the witch's patron (on another plane of existence) for any particular spell she names from the witch spell list. But the witch is not assured of getting that spell in a timely fashion. We could do a hybrid of prepared and spontaneous casting. A witch can prepare spells from a book of shadows, and she also knows a few spells that she can use spontaneously (sort of like a cleric's ability to cast cure/inflict spells spontaneously.) What else.... In later 3.5, new methods were introduced. The warmage and dread necromancer and beguiler had closed spell lists from which they could cast spontaneously. I played a dread necromancer for 13 levels and found this method was pretty balanced. Sometimes Cal was amazing, and sometimes he was totally lame, but there was no question that he was always a necromancer. I'm prone to stay within the style of Pathfinder rather than branch back to 3.5's later years. The 3.5 warlock is pretty unique for 3.5, and fairly reminiscent now of 4th Edition. And the binder: well, I have a lot to say about that class, but that's a different project. Perhaps a witch should have multiple methods of doing spells, all sort of messed up and seemingly inefficient, yet granting her access to multiple spell lists in a way that other casts can only dream of.
|