thegarrettcall's page

All good points. In the end, this archetypes seems too vaguely written –considering that the RAW wording of the class leaves it open to allow TWO PATRONS to the witch (though my logic would assert that this couldn't be the case).

Also, the Blood Transcription spell exists, and is free for Witches (because there is no cost for copying spells for a Witch)....

I've always been a fan of Blood Transcription, but my GM is a stickler for spells with alignment –ruling 2-3 intentional castings of an [evil] spell will change a PC's alignment. I personally think it lame that the spell is considered evil, you're not drinking a live person's blood. If anything, the evil act is the killing of the person before the spell is even cast. Evil seems circumstantial for this spell, personally. In any case, my GM pretty much bans this spell due to a long list of reasonable points.

The process removes the spells from the book, so you can't even loan someone's....

Back to the Wyrmwitch, that's a good point about the spells being removed from the spellbook. Makes me lean toward the opinions stated above considering the length of time required to absorb spells.

Nevertheless, I would suggest that a tweak to the rules might make things a bit more interesting. Perhaps the Spellcraft DC could increase incrementally as more spells are absorbed in a single day? Some nuance might be needed, however, because losing spells upon absorption could be unnecessarily punitive –like one attempt per day for a spell; or all the checks are lumped into one and the DC is adjusted based on the number of spells. The latter could help higher level sessions from devolving every time the party rests into one player rolling checks with the GM for 15 minutes, while the rest of the players wait until they're done. I personally find one pivotal check more engaging that several for party involvement.

Hello! Looking at witch archetypes for a future campaign as a player. Haven't played a witch before, so I didn't want to play an archetype that changes the class too much from vanilla.

Wyrmwitch: Archives of Nethys

Recently came across the wyrmwitch archetype, and it seems like a fun flavor change from the core class without too much change. The little bit of reading I've done on various forums indicates much from the Legacy of Dragons book is notoriously difficult to interpret. My questions has to do with learning spells from the treasure hoard.

From text: "Also, a witch can add a spell to his hoard from a wizard’s spellbook, if the spellbook is kept in the hoard and the spell is on the witch’s class spell list. The wyrmwitch must sleep on the spellbook in his hoard for a number of days equal to the spell’s level, after which he must succeed at a Spellcraft check (DC = 15 + spell level) to learn the spell. No matter the result, the spell is erased from the spellbook."

Question: Does this mean that a wyrmwitch can only learn one spell at a time from a spellbook, or more than one be at a time?

Neither option sound perfect to me.

To compare, one spell level per day could be the worse rate of spell learning present in 1E, and would become worthless mid-to-late campaign (i.e., five 6th level spells taking a month). But in the opposite respect, many spells at a time seems like WAY too much (i.e., five 9th level spells takes nine days).

So by the first method, nine 1st level spells takes nine days while nine 9th level spells takes nine days. Seems like a crazy difference, neither which is good. Useless vs. broken.

Any help interpreting/understanding would be greatly appreciated!

Hmm, I'd say a standard (magical) party binding contract that ensures anyone that willingly breaks faith with the contract to attack another party member is smitten with a curse that renders them relatively helpless. That way, the party can trust each other and those pesky alignment issues (PvP) don't crop up. Standard stuff in my games.

Or, you could just not allow the chaotic stupid or stupid evil alignments in the game to enable this sort of behavior, but hey, it's your game.

Sorry I never replied. This worked like a charm, thanks.

Greetings to all who read this.

I'll soon be GMing a 3-4 PC play-through of the Emerald Spire, but two of the players threw me a bit off a pre-game curve ball. I'll refer to them as P1 and P2 hereon.

P1 wants to align with the Hellknights, playing as a half-orc armiger working his way up the ladder. He is Lawful Evil, same as his leadership. He chose to lower one of his INT score make the character more fun.

P2 wants to be aligned with the Seven Foxes, playing as a human ranger subverting the efforts of the Hellknights in Fort Inevitable. He's Chaotic Good. Essentially wants to play a Ranger as if he were a Vigilante.

I've come up with a scenario that gets the players moving as a party toward the Spire, but I haven't figured out a way to prevent P1 and P2 from trying to kill each other when the opportunity arrises.

I've considered simply telling them this dynamic won't fly -as I don't want them suspicious of party betrayal all the time- but I don't want to shoehorn PC creation.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Players:

P1 is an edge-lord that often plays "bad guy" PCs. However, he is a great role-player that makes interesting PCs that inevitably support the party well. He's played tabletops for awhile now and often "thinks before he leaps" in a given scenario. Doesn't really care what happen to his PC as long as it's cool for the story.

P2 is a longtime WOW player that hasn't quite differentiated Pathfinder classes from their WOW counterparts, though he's gotten better about that recently. His characters are fun, but he is much newer to tabletops and his personality is sometimes a "jump before you look" approach. He wants his PCs to be heroic, much like a high fantasy hero.

Taking a guess, it's probable that P2 will attack P1; P1 will retaliate and maybe kill P2; then P2 will likely get butt-hurt. If P1 dies, however, he'll just think it's good role-playing.

I'm curious to let this dynamic play out, but I'm concerned P2 will get too invested and lose taste for the scenario if he loses. It might be a good lesson for him if he does, but I suspect the lesson won't go beyond getting butt-hurt.

Thanks for taking time to read this.
All the best to you.

Thank you both. This helps a ton!

Hello all who read beyond this, and thank you.

Currently playing through an AP with a party of three: a paladin, a druid, and myself as an arcanist. Because we're a pretty squishy party, I've been looking for any advantage I can find for us.

Some weeks ago I came across items that can be used as reference for a circumstance bonus on skill checks. One of the items was a sheet which I recall being one which gives a +2 bonus to either knowledge arcana or spellcraft, I apologize that I can't remember which though my memory leans toward knowledge. Sadly, I forgot to save the item anywhere and searching for it since then has been fruitless.

Here is my request: Did I imagine this item? If I fabricated it, I apologize for the waste of your time. If not, what is it called?