Supercollider's page

Both of these are tough calls, and everyone here has made valid points. Personally, I see why Int makes sense for a Witch, but Wis or Cha would, I imagine, be equally logical.

I don't really see Charisma for the Summoner making as much sense, but it depends on the character--does he have a natural connection to this extraplanar creature, or is it something he studied and researched? Probably could be either, but my knee-jerk reaction is the latter, so maybe the Summoner should be Int.

This is related and has been touched on, but never explicitly discussed, so I'm going to go there--I don't see, off the top of my head, why the Summoner should even be a spontaneous caster. Their main magic focus is their Eidolon, and the process of summoning, augmenting, and controlling this extraplanar creature seems more "wizard" than "sorceror" to me. It seems logical to make them prepare their spells in advance like a wizard, without hearing some justification for why a Summoner should cast like a sorceror or bard. At least at my gaming table, being a spontaneous caster has always been considered a huge boon, and I'm more concerned with everyone and their brother not preparing spells than I am with how many classes are or aren't sharing the same prime requisite (pragmatically speaking, what difference does that really make anyway?).

Oddly enough, given my previous paragraph, there's a case to be made that a witch shouldn't have to prepare her spells, though the FamiliarBook gives an explanation for why it is the way it is. It may be a case of balance, since the witch has a pretty impressive spell list overall, without even counting the spares from the familiar.

I love it, overall. I agree that there should be a nega-blight, but not just to stop other witches' blighting. I like customizable classes, and I like that there could be a lot of different sorts of witches (in the same way that there are lots of different kinds of rogues, fighters, wizards, bards, etc.), and the opposite of blight would be great for a good-aligned witch who focuses on nature, alchemy, healing, and the like.

In a similar vein, I'd like to see more Grand Hexes, perhaps something in a less violent direction for those like I just mentioned?

Okay, I've really enjoyed reading this thread, because debating alignment is, and has always been, a favorite d&d/PF sideshow for me. Although the alignment system is not perfect (as we saw here, as we've had several reasonable interpretations of the same thing), its a good general guideline to describe characters, and I like it for that reason.

I do think some classes really imply certain alignments... barbarian is the most obvious one, cause I've always understood law v. chaos to not ONLY be "following laws." Isn't it more of a general statement on worldview? ie someone who is traditionally minded and does what society indicates he/she should is lawful, whereas a person who isn't concerned with ceremony or what others think is more chaotic, and there doesn't necessarily have to be law-breaking involved. Thus, a barbarian isn't lawful by his or her very nature. Monks are the exact opposite.

Regarding Cavaliers... I don't like putting full-on restrictions on players unless there is a compelling reason to do so. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the overwhelming majority of Cavaliers would be nonchaotic. But since there is no contradiction in terms (at least not in the way a lawful barbarian or a chaotic monk is a contradiction in terms), I don't think it should be said that one *cannot* be a chaotic Cavalier. Perhaps just a dash of flavor text would be sufficient--"The majority of Cavaliers are lawful, or at least not chaotic."

You know, its possible I'm just misinterpreting the Oracle, but I imagined them, what with the curses and all, as crazy old testament prophet types. Their abilities are are kind of a blessing and a curse... a character doesn't wake up one day and say, "I'm going to be an Oracle when I grow up" in the same way that a character would decide to be a fighter, or even a cleric. It's like your focus chose you, rather than the reverse.

Generally speaking, although I'm really happy that Pathfinder makes dipping less of a viable choice, I'm all for multiclassing the right character. But this entire issue presented here isn't a huge concern for me, because it seems, purely as a character concept, an Oracle really isn't an easy multiclass to justify in-game/in-character.

I can see how the OP would want a purely spontaneous Mystic Theurge, as that would be bad ass. But I don't see an Oracle multiclassing into an arcane caster, and I don't see another character becoming an Oracle... its not the kind of thing you can pick up if you don't already have it.