Lyz Liddell's page

Ok but the real question: who's gonna give us the first fan art for Dr. Yessssssss?

Is this Lyz's first Author credit for an AP chapter? Excited to see it!

Yep, this is my first Pathfinder Adventure Path cover credit! I also wrote Huskworld (Starfinder Adventure Path #21) last year.

All the really cool, weird ideas happen in book 6. Everybody knows this.

Yes, yes they do. I hope you have fun with them!

This is a game where every +1 means a lot, given the degrees of success.

Exactly right. Small number, pretty significant effect.

Thanks for reading and contributing to the conversation! I've gotten so much wonderful feedback and great ideas from everyone. Now to put them all into the hopper and see what comes out. :D

This thread is getting heated again, in the same way that the last thread on this topic did. Please mind your tone and avoid getting personal; I don't want to have to lock this thread, too.

It makes me really happy to see y'all holding up Chris Jackson's work as a model—I've read a ton of his work (including the Pathfinder Tales) and I agree, he's done a wonderful job of portraying the details of our world.

One of the challenges we're having in the move to the second edition of the game is that we can't bring forward 100% of what existed in the first edition, since we just literally don't have space for 10 years of class options (ok, 8 for the oracle) in one book. So we're making calls about what to bring forward in this book, knowing that others will come in later books, and knowing that the second edition will support some options that weren't possible in the first edition. Not everything people loved will make it forward in this book, as much as we wish it could, and since the playtest is testing core mechanics more than specific options, you're seeing an even smaller subset. We've heard lots of your input about what options you're wanting to see in the final class, and that's being incorporated.

Thanks for the detailed feedback! I hope you had fun with the scenario. :D

Lyz Liddell wrote:

And while we want there to be some incentive for you to not do ridiculous things with your familiar, we don't want it to be crippling, so we're working on some solutions here.

And I do realize that you likely mean "ridiculous things" like "purposefully throwing the thing in front of a Fire Elemental and it surviving" level of ridiculous, but there should be incentive still for Witch familiars to do *great* things, at least at higher levels.

Agreed! But a familiar is distinct from an animal companion or another combat-focused creature, so we want to avoid conflating those roles for the witch (again, as far as the core class is concerned).

What about allowing a tattoo familiar on the witch's body? That way it is always with the witch and doesn't take separate damage from a fireball. The witch can animate the Tattoo and allow it to form an ectoplasmic body for 1 minute per witch level per day if she wants to send it scouting or deliver spells. If it's ectoplasmic form is destroyed, it reappears on the...

Given the prominence of tattoos among Varisians and other cultural groups, I'd be surprised if this doesn't show up as an option at some point.

... I'm also glad Lyz as dropped in a few times and acknowledged that some things are genuinely screwy, and we all aren't just making a mountain out of a molehill that may or may not even be intentional in the first place

We're definitely seeing the issues you all have raised! It's been very useful feedback. I've read every post in the witch (and oracle) forums, and I just don't have the time to respond as often as I'd like. But I'm hearing you, and I appreciate the input you all have written up!

This is a super helpful thread - thank you for starting it!

The intent here is that you can put runes on your nails, and your hands gain those benefits, but they wouldn't apply to e.g. a lizardfolk tail unarmed attack or a goblin's unarmed bite attack, or any special unarmed attacks from a barbarian. It's letting you use runes without having to invest in handwraps of mighty blows, but with the downside that you dont' get the full benefits the handwraps would convey.

I'm digging these suggestions! There's a design space here that's aligning really well with mechanically weighted patrons that still allows lots of space for home-group players and GMs to create something unique, without making that aspect of the class unusable for Pathfinder Society and less experienced players.

Am I the only one that's really hoping that the Familiar straight up works for the Patron, almost like a liaison of power to the Witch?

Like I actually sort of want the Familiar, in a way, to be more powerful than the Witch they serve or at least, not entirely subservient or without independence.

It might justify juicing them up a bit if they have a little autonomy of their own (though I'd like it to be rigidly codified so GM's can't just hijack a witch).

Idk that aspect of Witch to Familiar relationship having more than just "do as I say small cat!" is a really fun aspect that I haven't seen explored.

This is totally my personal vision of what's happening here, and so whatever happens with the final version of the class, I intend for this still to be an option.

As for the larger question of squishy spellbooks, I'm hearing you that your familiar being a required class feature but a separate creature causes certain problems, even if you're not taking unreasonable risks. We're having a similar conversation here in the office about how to address that. We think the familiar is heavily central to the witch class, so it's not going anywhere (and some of the variants like object familiars are probably going to appear in archetypes rather than the core class - check out the Magaambyan attendant archetype Mask Familiar feat in Lost Omens Character Guide for one example of what this might look like). And while we want there to be some incentive for you to not do ridiculous things with your familiar, we don't want it to be crippling, so we're working on some solutions here.

Delay Affliction should really get swapped with something else anyways.

It's too niche of a spell for how recyclable focus spells are, especially for Oracles who are designed to be cycling around pretty frequently.

In a playtest one shot our Oracle would just cast delay affliction twice on a random person for no benefit in order to get into his moderate curse so he could boost his healing.

I'm definitely hearing this - it's not the right spell for that role. We're working on it!

MadMars wrote:

Maybe overdoing it on the curse could kill the oracle, and then the mechanical reward is getting to roll up a divine sorcerer?

I can’t figure out who that jab is aimed at, or if it even is a jab in the first place.

I think it's a jab at me. >.>

Just popping in to observe that this thread is awfully similar in theme to the thread that I just had to lock, so please keep the discussion civil, respectful, and focused on the game. If you feel like you're getting heated, step away and cool off before posting. I love seeing the perspectives y'all have on this topic, but I don't want to have to keep moderating.

Hi, everyone! This thread has gotten heated to the point where it's gotten personal, so I've locked the thread and removed several posts. I appreciate the perspective you all have on the witch's spellcasting traditions, and those perspectives are being taken into account for the final version of the class.

I'm still listening!

Thank you for sharing!

*crosses fingers for Vindictive Bastard reemergence*

This was one of my first published design pieces, and it's still one of my favorite things.

There should be an ability allowing to select spells from different domains/mysteries.

There are a few that do this, but admittedly they're a bit higher in level. (See Mysterious Repertoire and Diverse Mystery feats.) There might be some room to pull those down a bit.

Good catch - enchantment it is!

Thanks for the detailed feedback on your session! If you haven't already, please make sure you head over to the surveys and get that feedback in there before Dec 2 so we can make sure it gets included in the quantitative dataset.

Class Survey
Open Response

Side note, Dimension Door says the spell automatically fails if it would bring another creature with you (even in an extradimensional container). It would be nice for familiars to be exempt from this restriction.

Noted. :)

The way this discussion is going, I just really hope the end implementation isn't too restrictive.

We also don't want something that's overly restrictive. It doesn't really fit with the concept of witch that we have within Golarion, and it would block a lot of play styles. You can always set additional restrictions on yourself if you want something more controlled, and ideally the design team can figure out a way to support that mechanically without forcing everyone into that narrower window.

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Nothing I see in the curses presented in this playtest look remotely helpful, and have in fact started to push any future character ideas I have towards Divine Sorcerer despite the fact that the ancestry of the iconic is one I've been hoping for.

This makes me a bit sad.

Maybe that's a deliberate design choice? I'm guessing the developers want people to play the new oracle class, but they also don't want people to stop playing divine sorcerers.

Divine sorcerers will be primarily used by people who don't like the curse penalties, and the oracle will be played by those people who think the curse enhances play.

To be completely transparent, you've hit the nail on the head. In Second Edition, a player who wants all the benefits of a divine spontaneous caster without having to maneuver around a curse mechanic has everything they want in a divine-tradition sorcerer. The oracle in Second Edition is aimed at the player who dig the "power at a cost," balancing risks and rewards, and similar options. There's absolutely nothing stopping a player from creating a fantastic narrative of a devil bloodline sorcerer whose infernal ancestor likes to meddle in the character's affairs and make their life more "interesting" (read: difficult). But there isn't a good way in the core rules to model the "power with a price" concept that you could get with the First Edition oracle - and that's the need we're looking to meet with this class.

(But I'm sorry that makes you sad, Wei Ji.)

It's also the case that we still have the data from the overall playtest last year that will guide us in balance decisions once we nail down the specific concept designs. Those concepts are where we need your feedback the most (and we've been hearing you!) but to a large degree the next steps are just implementation.

To make a totally ridiculous comparison, it's like saying "we're gonna make a dessert" and then the playtest is trying to figure out whether y'all want chocolate or lemon flavors, cake or pie or mousse, and rich vs. sweet. Once we figure that out, we know how much flour and eggs to use because we've done that part before.

To the question of schedule, though, the Advanced Player's Guide will be coming out at Gen Con 2020 (July 30, to be precise). So we do have a publishing schedule we need to meet, but we have time to incorporate what we're hearing now into the final versions of the class.

Hi, everyone! Thanks for stepping back from the heated back-and-forth there and letting it cool down. Y'all are so passionate about this topic, and there are some really interesting perspectives coming to the table. I'm seeing that and we'll be considering them for the final class.

Y'all are making some good points in here. Our team is looking at ways to address this!

We looked at several options for what happens when you push your curse too far. We really feel that it's more interesting to have this last-ditch desperate option (the "Hail Mary" as we've been calling it in-office) than a hard cap on what you can do, as it really speaks to the unorthodox nature of the oracle's power as double-edged sword. Getting knocked to 0 HP (and thus accruing wounded condition) was an option we talked about, as well as things like doomed or drained. (Admittedly, a block on [focus] spells entirely wasn't something we had considered, and that's also an interesting idea.)

We don't have a final mechanic for this, but it's clear that the unconscious option isn't working, so it's right out! Our design conversations are ongoing about what mechanic we want to put in its place.

And while I totally get what you are going for here, respectfully I feel like this is actually an area where the freeform nature of the lessons without any mechanical structure for the patrons actually works to their deficit. The lessons have no real reason to actually be connected to the Patron in question.

Sure, I can carefully craft a specific set of lessons to represent my vision of whatever patron I want, theoretically at least. But there is nothing that makes that Patron actually unique with any mechanical structure.

I'm hearing this. And while I was really surprised to see the demand for mechanical weight to patrons (especially given how very little they originally had in First Edition), it seems like the lore around witches, combined with some of the options introduced later in the game's lifecycle, has really given them a function that y'all want to see borne out in the Second Edition rules set. So that's 100% something we'll be working on for the final class.

Thanks for these thoughts, folks! This will help us figure out the best way for this feat to exist.

ikarinokami wrote:

The big problem with the current system is that you can go from level 1 to level 20 and not ever have to deal with the curse. the fact you could play the class for 1000 days and never once have to deal with the curse is fundamental design flaw.

Personally, I consider this a major boon over the P1E Oracle, but then, I think we already have everything good the P1E Oracle had (spontaneous spellcasting with the divine spell list) in the P2E Divine Sorcerer. The curse was only ever a burden to be mitigated ASAP (my preference was Legalistic), so I think it's a shame any design space is being committed to it here.

Tectorman, I've been thinking about this since I read it yesterday, and I'd love to better understand where you're coming from. Are you saying you feel a divine bloodline sorcerer meets the function that a First Edition oracle had and therefore there's no need for a Second Edition oracle at all? Or do you think there's value in a Second Edition oracle, but that a curse function isn't the direction you'd take it? (Brief edit: both are totally valid positions - I just want to make sure I understand your perspective as well as I can.)

What if Hexes were feats?

*trim*

Actually, lots of the things First Edition witches could do as hexes are now feats, because they really functioned in the role feats hold in Second Edition. We've tried a few of them here—prehensile hair and claws, wortwitch, swamp witch, witch's bottle, and so forth—to see how that pans out in this edition. (Even more, after first level, your other hexes are also effectively feats, as you gain them via class feats.)

Well by that logic why did Sorcerer get divine spells? I mean they were Arcane caster with the Wizard/Sorcerer spell list.

Witch spells and themes at least fitted with primal, arcane, and occult.

* Also thanks for responding to comments and talking to us about the process.

I'm happy to do so as much as I can! I wish I had more time to respond more often, but I'm reading everything y'all have to say. (And the discussion has basically already addressed the question here, but let me know if you want me to peel that back more.)

*trim*

That's fine. I mean if we wont to give feed back on the patrons, Would help to know the in game lore on what a patron is.

We want it to be pretty broad, so that it can suit as many stories as possible. Could Baba Yaga be a patron? Heck yes. How about Mephistopheles? Sure! What about a fey queen? Sure! How about a powerful spirit, like one of the former Taldan emperors explored in War for the Crown? Sure! Empyreal lord? Heck yeah! A powerful hag? I could see it. An ancient dragon? Not out of the realm of possibility. A medusa who found an ancient artifact of great power? That could work, too.

So, could your buddy witch of the same level also be your patron? It's not at all impossible—but it raises great story questions of what's happening such that they have this power to provide to you. Are they themselves (knowingly or not) at the service of a much more powerful patron using them to get to you? Or is something else going on there?

Our hope is that players and GMs will work together to build the thematic or even specific patrons using the flexibility of lessons and patrons, and we want you to have the freedom to do that. But maybe we need to provide more guidance and examples, or establish some known themes/specific patrons to show how that would work.

Just popping in to say I'm keeping up with this thread and hearing what you're all saying. Lots of really neat ideas flying around!

That's a thing we'll take a look at!

Take a look at the intersection of magical traditions and essences (Core Rulebook 299-300). The witch in P1 was an arcane caster, so that suggests witches are tapping into primarily mind and matter. They can then access any tradition that uses one of those two essences: arcane, occult, and primal—but not divine.

Now, that's how we got where we are. If that's not where it seems like we should go, we can absolutely revisit that, and I've seen some really interesting suggestions as to why we might want to. But as far as "why was this decided?", there you go.

I removed DubiousScholar's duplicate post, but while I'm here, I want to remind everyone that we're all here to make this class better. We might have different perspectives about how to make that happen, and we're all coming from different levels of experience, but we're all working toward that same goal, so let's try to stay supportive and collaborative.

shroudb wrote:

That's not how it works.

[...] at level 11 when you get fusilade, your spell level is 6. [...]

I am actually somewhat confused by this. I do see that Flaming Fussilade is a level 6 focus spell, meaning it would be available at level 11, but, the Greater Revelation is a level 10 feat, am I wrong in assuming that Flaming Fussilade is a Greater Revelation, and that you actually learn it at level 10 (even though it is a 6th level focus spell)?

This got called out in another thread; I've put an update about it in the main announcement thread here. TLDR just treat it as a 12th-level feat for now, and we'll fix it in the final version.

The Greater Revelation feat accidentally got dropped in at the wrong level - it's currently a level 10 feat, but you can't start casting 6th-level revelations spells until 11th level. We will fix this in the final version. For now, you'll probably just want to treat it as a 12th-level feat (though you could take it at 10th so you can start slinging at 11th level).

It's not an ideal set of feats at that level, to be sure. That's something we'll reassess for the final version.

I'm seeing this, and we'll give it a look for the final!

Hi, everyone! I'm seeing this discussion and a similar discussion in another thread, and I want to let you all know that Cackle is something we looked at a lot while building the class, and it's something we're very open to tweaking further based on your feedback. We want to make it a fun ability that works well with the class, and it's clear that we haven't quite hit that mark yet, so we'll definitely be making some changes.

They most likely will release similar feats for other environs.

Some of the most iconic Witchs are from Irrisen (frozen wastes).

This is definitely something we're thinking about. They might end up being the kinds of feats that turn up in an Adventure Path or a Lost Omens product rather than the core class, but this is kind of a "test balloon" to see whether there's interest or utility to it.

Oops. We shifted levels of the various focus spells around about one million times, and I think this feat didn't get updated to match the most recent scale. For now, you'd probably just want to wait until 12th level to take the feat (or take it at 10th so you can start slinging at 11th level?) - not ideal, but not intentional and we'll get it fixed.

It would be interesting to hear from the developers on why they didn't include divine witches in the play test, and why they included arcane witches.

In First Edition, witches were arcane casters and had access to a number of the spells that are now on the arcane list. They're Int-based casters who use study and logic and rationality to manipulate their power. Arcane doesn't seem out of line for that. (Now maybe we'll see in the feedback and playtest data that it's not speaking to anyone - that's part of why we do this.)

The thought on excluding the divine tradition is that if a patron entity is directly granting you divine spellcasting power, you're basically a cleric. If you have a deific or otherwise divine patron, it's because they're playing it under the table (Why? That's between you and your GM). Now that doesnt' mean that we might introduce some funky lessons down the road that might let you tap into the divine list (a patron who has themselves managed to tap into divine power and is passing it out to pose as a deity?), but that's an exception to the broader witch concept, and for this playtest and this book, we need to nail down the broad basics first.

I hope that helps you see where we're coming from!

The stupefied condition does come with a risk of spell failure, as you're pushing yourself so hard into the combat mindset that casting spells becomes difficult (sort of along the same lines as barbarians not being able to concentrate while Raging). Is that the right balance? That's what we're trying to find out through the playtest, so if you're able to run a higher-level battle oracle through a few encounters and let us know how it works out, we'd love to hear about it!

It's in First Lesson on page 36, but it's helpful to know that it's being overlooked because that means we need to make it clearer in the final document.

Lyz Liddell wrote:

Hello! Typo in the class feature - the table is correct!

Can you add that to the locked thread please?

Done, thanks!

Typo in the spellcasting class feature - the number of spells per day on the table is correct!