JWhiteyGames's page

That's probably the coolest description/explanation of the Ancestral Memories focus spell I've seen.

Definitely should be errata’d though. Once per round means you can’t Hex and Phase Familiar outside your turn. Which I know is absolutely not intended.

As a side note, I still think Phase Familiar should be a reaction hex cantrip and Cackle/Patron’s Puppet should be the two focus spell options. Then replace the Cackle feat with a feat to grab the one you didn’t initially choose.

Oh, absolutely it will be. There's no way it's intended, not by design or precedent.

I would have agreed with you prior to the focus point and familiar reworks. Now that you can get them all back without feats, it doesn't feel bad to cast Phase Familiar like it did before. It's a matter of balance now. Giving your familiar 5+ resistance every turn (as a reaction no less) would be quite strong, especially since they are actually going to be viable targets now. It is much more impactful and balanced as a reaction and a resource to have the FP limit attached.

I would have loved to see a repeatable feat ala Witch's Armaments that would allow you to choose between Cackle and whichever one you didn't choose at level 1 though.

So I noticed in the description of the Witches Hex cantrips it states that on page 182: "Hex cantrips are special hexes that don’t cost Focus Points, so you can cast them as often as you like, though you can still use only one hex each round."

It states each round where in Key term bar and in the description for hexes on the same page it says per turn.

The "round" verbage on 182 is going to be a simple flavor oopsie. Like you said, in the sidebar/definition of key terms it uses "turn". Mechanical verbage uses turn in other places the restrictions on hexes are mentioned, such as earlier on page 182 as well as in the 20th level Witch feat "Hex Master" on page 191.

JWhiteyGames wrote:

Ed Reppert wrote:

It is not clear that this situation is Paizo’s fault. It may be the distributors doing this without Paizo’s knowledge.

Maybe. This tactic would definitely be in a distributor's wheelhouse, but the silence on the issue is definitely also speaking a lot here. Even if it wasn't Paizo's decision, it's not cool. Without their knowledge is also a hard sell. Without their permission would be much more likely.

Considering I see different ratios reported... sounds like a distribution thing to me... >_>

I truly hope that is the case and that Paizo will release some kind of statement clarifying the issue... or at least blink twice if they are gagged/bound. It's just so unlike what I've come to expect from them.

It is not clear that this situation is Paizo’s fault. It may be the distributors doing this without Paizo’s knowledge.

Maybe. This tactic would definitely be in a distributor's wheelhouse, but the silence on the issue is definitely also speaking a lot here. Even if it wasn't Paizo's decision, it's not cool. Without their knowledge is also a hard sell. Without their permission would be much more likely.

Our local group was also just informed that every FLGS must purchase TWO SETS of the regular books in order to be able to order ONE SET of the sketch covers. That's really gross (and honestly some Wizards of the Coast behavior), especially when it was pitched that, and I quote:

"these special editions are intended to support our local game store partners who have been such a big part of Pathfinder’s success since the very beginning. We urge you to communicate your interest in these special books to your local store, so that they can be sure to stock appropriately."

How is forcing small/local game stores to overstock on the regular covers when you encouraged customers to buy the sketch cover supporting them? Now instead of selling a set of books, they have to eat the cost of four books. Like I said, WotC behavior that I did not expect from Paizo.

Instead of encouraging people to flood FLGS with requests for the sketch covers without knowing what they were asking, a simple: "As an incentive and celebration of the remaster, for every two sets of regular covers purchased, FLGS alone will be eligible to purchase one set of the sketch covers."

That would have cleared everything up. Customers would know what they were asking, burden on FLGS would be lessened, and you would have been in the fiscal/moral clear instead of looking shady.

edit: formatting