|
D&D Int scores are meaningless, though. IRL, a dog is vastly more intelligent than a gerbil, and neither one comes close to an ape (which has near-human intelligence -- they taught Koko sign language!). But all of those animals get an Intelligence score of 2 because of the artificial "animal" type designation constraints.
So true. The 'Int 0 Vermin' thing still gets my goat, since insects can be trained, and, in the cases of spiders, wasps, ants, etc. even have craft skills (and can modify their webs, nests, tunnels, situationally as a result of weather, etc., making it more than just 'mindless instinct'), which is patently impossible if they have a nonability in Int. Even worse, in D&D itself, vermin are regularly trained by Drow (or Duergar with their Steeders), which leads to 'patch' rules such as Feats or class abilities that allow one to train vermin, just to get around that stupid rule.
I would have preferred a Wisdom-based Witch, but it does seem like we have a plethora of Wisdom (and now Charisma) based characters, and only the one Intelligence0based caster, so perhaps there was a decision at some point to make at least one of the new casters Int-based, and the Witch drew the short straw...
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
For my 2 cents, I see Int OK for the witch. IMO, more than the Divine vs. Arcane or Spontaneous vs. Prepare, what seems to be the key factor is classes which collect and learn spells vs. classes who don't (because they either get to know a selection of spells automatically, like Sorcerer; or because they have access to the whole spell list, like Cleric).
In this sense, we have 2 PF classes which may learn and add spells to their repertoire, Wizard and Witch; the former to the spellbook, the latter to the familiar. Both may do this with scrolls and with "copying" (spellbook to spellbook or familiar to familiar).In non-PF 3.5, the Archivist falls in the same category. That his spells are Divine is irrelevant, he does have a book and uses Int because his/her approach to magic is an intellectual one.
If the criterion is "you may pick and add spells to your repertoire = Int", the Witch is consequent with the other d20 classes.
On a different note, problem is that "witch" is a charged word. Many of our archetype witches from fairy tales, mythology, and real world anthropology could be better defined, in PF terms, as Sorcerers or even Druids (or multiclass combinations of Sorcerer, Druid and/or Witch, consider how the Witch rules let you stack levels of other classes for your familiar stats).
Sorcerer covers the "charismatic witch" who may charm people with a smile, a well-established cliche. Also the "born" witch who develops spontaneous powers (thing Charmed or Buffyverse witches)
Druid does treat pretty well the "wise woman" of rural communities. Many of her powers are community-connected (healing, vegetation, poisoning) and since 3.00 the multiple alignments available to Druids have made the class more flexible beyond the original "priest of balance and nature" cliché.
Witch does cover in a pretty neutral way the "lore witch". He/she seeks for knowledge and in the process establishes pacts with some obscure power. And it is also a clich'e that witches have vast amounts of knowledge (cf. Iggwill) characters want to refer to. And high Int is basic for good Knowledge skills. Although the class works for the European witch of Inquisition fame (at least the vision inquisitors had of witches), it can also fit other niches, being in a way similar to the 3.5 (or 4e for that matter) Warlock. That is, in a fantasy world we can have covens of urban witches, with neat and civilized familiars à la Phillip Pullman's daimones.On this line, it is funny how the witch's spell list looks pretty similar to the Elf Mage one from GAZ7 for basic D&D, if anyone remembers. That list was created to personalized elven magicians which focused in the paths of the Tree of Life (the power to commune with) and yielded a similar blend of healing, nature and arcane elemental stuff.
Most Excellent points, I agree completely.
In non-PF 3.5, the Archivist falls in the same category. That his spells are Divine is irrelevant, he does have a book and uses Int because his/her approach to magic is an intellectual one.
If the criterion is "you may pick and add spells to your repertoire = Int", the Witch is consequent with the other d20 classes.
I'm not arguing that each perspective doesn't have it's merits, and highly Intelligent Witches certainly could 'work' as well. (WIS as casting stat doesn't preclude that as A role, of course)
But as to spell preparation, I don't see Witches' approach corresponding to how you describe INT-based memorization. The fluff describes them 'communing' with their Familiar, in other words passive absorption more akin to praying to a god or communing with Nature - The fact they likely have a smaller selection of spells immediately available than Clerics seems tangential to that. Beyond the familiar, their source of power in general seems more passive, 'aligning with mysterious forces they may not understand', than like Wizards' application of intellectual arcane formulas. The fluff also suggests that although SOME Witches may be inquisitive and seek out knowledge, many have no such inclination.
I don't believe it's been mentioned yet, but switching the casting stat to WIS would probably justify changing the skill ranks to 4/level, akin to Druids.
As written, I don't really see the witch as a "new" class -- it's just a specialist wizard with a variant class ability to get hexes instead of bonus spells.
Shifting the casting stat to Wisdom and assigning 4 skill points would make a weird druid-wizard hybrid thing that would somehow seem more like a new class, instead of a minor variant of an existing one.
Then again, I thought the cavalier could be as easily represented by a few new feats, so what do I know.
|
|
As written, I don't really see the witch as a "new" class -- it's just a specialist wizard with a variant class ability to get hexes instead of bonus spells.
Kind of the impression I got as well. The Witch just isn't 'different enough' IMO to warrant a new base class.
Then again, I didn't really think the Oracle was all that special either, swapping Domains and Channel Energy for Revelations and a Curse.
I'm not that conversant with the Cavalier, but, of the casters, the Summoner is the first one that feels like it's moved past 'alternate class feature / feat chain' territory.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Yeah, this is true, and I'm sure that many people have played these classes as "witches" in the past.However, the point remains that the witch basically functions exactly like the wizard. The shift toward wisdom as the primary ability score would ensure a very different feeling character class. Without changing the primary score to wisdom, a similar effect would require the extensive rewrite of what is already a well thought out and balanced class.
Would it though?
Changing the casting stat doesn't change how spells are prepared, doesn't change the class' spell list, doesn't change how that character acquires spells, and for the most part it doesn't change the role the character plays in the party.
What it does is change the skills the class might use, in this case shifting the focus away from Knowledge and Spellcraft to Sense Motive and Perception.
If you feel the Witch is just a Wizard with Hexes instead of a Specialist School, at the table it's still going to play like a Wizard with Hexes instead of Specialist School, only now with Sense Motive as a class skill.
But as to spell preparation, I don't see Witches' approach corresponding to how you describe INT-based memorization. The fluff describes them 'communing' with their Familiar, in other words passive absorption more akin to praying to a god or communing with Nature
But a Witch may use scrolls to add her spell repertoire. The way I understand the fluff, the Familiar works as a conduit and repository of arcane knowledge the witch has acquired. Acquisition of lore goes into the Int territory.
Divine prayer and communing is very different: having the whole spell list indicates that, if you're in good standing with the divine/nature power you spouse, you can hope for your prayers to be answered, hence the whole array of magic (proportional to your level) is automatically accessible.Wis in divine caster represents attunement with those divine powers (as in the intuition and will = faith aspect of Wis); Int represents capacity to aprehend the arcane aspect of the world, it's "secret workings". Whereas a wizard takes a mostly scholarly approach, a Witch follows a mediated path, via familiars and arcane "forces."
But a witch does not "worship" those forces necessarily. Wis seems to express worship or reverence (according to each religion's specs); a Witch may as well be a pragmatist, bargaining for power from arcane entities, even from ones which are not close to her ethos.
Think of RW Middle ages and Renaissance magic grimoires, Most of those sorcerous formulae were based on the coercion and at times bargaining with 1) angels 2) demons or devils 3) elemental forces. Those powers are opposed to each other (in RW belief), but the magician /witch / warlock would not really care. the text present the practice as the ultimate in pragmatics.
But a Witch may use scrolls to add her spell repertoire. The way I understand the fluff, the Familiar works as a conduit and repository of arcane knowledge the witch has acquired. Acquisition of lore goes into the Int territory.
But aren't the scrolls adding to the FAMILIAR's spell repertoire?
Anyhow, I don't see this debate concluding anything final as to this matter... :-)
Memorizing a hundred different herbs, what they're for, when they're picked for best potency, and what charms you say when you toss them in the cauldron? This is an Intelligence test, not a Wisdom test.
A witch does not have to hang out in a library to learn this stuff. The idea of Intelligence equaling Books is an outgrowth of Wizards. A witch probably keeps a Book of Shadow or Formulary with her various potion recipes, but this is like a cook keeping a cookbook and trading recipes--useful but not necessary.
I really like the idea of clever witches rather than priestesses calling themselves witches, which is where wisdom-based witches inevitably lead.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
But a Witch may use scrolls to add her spell repertoire. The way I understand the fluff, the Familiar works as a conduit and repository of arcane knowledge the witch has acquired. Acquisition of lore goes into the Int territory.But aren't the scrolls adding to the FAMILIAR's spell repertoire?
Anyhow, I don't see this debate concluding anything final as to this matter... :-)
The playtest document is a little contradictory in this regard. Yes, it does talk about the Familiar being the one learning spells, but in other places it talks about the Witch knowing spells.
The question is: Can the Familiar cast Spells? No, the Witch casts spells. Can the Familiar activate spell completion items? No, but the Witch can.
It sounds like all the actual spellwork is done on the Witch's end. They might get spells and lore from an outside source, but they don't absorb or channel that stuff passively, they memorize it.
I really like the idea of clever witches rather than priestesses calling themselves witches, which is where wisdom-based witches inevitably lead.
+1
But a Witch may use scrolls to add her spell repertoire. The way I understand the fluff, the Familiar works as a conduit and repository of arcane knowledge the witch has acquired. Acquisition of lore goes into the Int territory.
Divine prayer and communing is very different: having the whole spell list indicates that, if you're in good standing with the divine/nature power you spouse, you can hope for your prayers to be answered, hence the whole array of magic (proportional to your level) is automatically accessible.
i don't understand it this way at all. I understand it as the familiar learning the lore and passing it to the witch through a weird meditative communion thing. In which case, it sounds more like will or manipulation than it does raw IQ
This argument breaks down because the entire D&D mental stat thing breaks down if you try to take it to it's logical conclusion. If Wisdom is "Will", why isn't it used for Intimidate? Likewise, there seems to be a fixation that ALL Knowledge skills MUST use INT, when Know: Nature could really be consolidated (given PRPG) with Survival under WIS, and Know: Local could easily use CHA (given you are assumed to learn this kind of info from talking with actual people, not books, so having people like you would facilitate learning this stuff - Know(Humanoid Traits) aspect excepted, generally).
I get the strong impression SOME sort of Wizard/Druid hybrid was intended for the Witch: that would leave INT and WIS equally viable. I guess I'd personally rather see high INT Witches be a specific niche for players who want their Witches highly knowledgeable, with many languages and lots of skills - not necessarily every Witch. The essentially ignorant hedge eccentric who nonetheless is powerful in her own domain seems an equally viable option that should be available. IMHO.
...If Jason chimes in, everybody will just instantly stop all the incessant debating, right? ;-)
If you want to stop debating, you could always just agree with me :D
But yeah, if Jason chimes in, I'm sure all of us will. I just hope he sticks to his guns on making the Witch an INT class.
Yeah just like everyone always stops just because he comes in and lays down the law... no one ever tries to argue with him, or flat out says he is wrong...
If he chimes in and says "this isn't even worth discussing, we aren't changing" then yes, probably. We don't want this to turn into another oracle.
That being said, he hasn't, so I feel like it's up for discussion,. I hope he's open enough to criticism to consider changing, personally.
If he chimes in and says "this isn't even worth discussing, we aren't changing" then yes, probably. We don't want this to turn into another oracle.
That being said, he hasn't, so I feel like it's up for discussion, and there's nothing wrong with giving feedback that was asked for. I hope he's open enough to criticism to consider changing, personally.
As long as you just had to bring it up...
...I still hate that name for the class.
:-D
One drawback of making the Witch Wisdom based is the multi-class Druid-Witch/Mystic Theurge.
You only need one stat at 20 to twink out that one.
I prefer the Witch to the Oracle, but only just. I feel, so far, on all of these classes that Paizo is trying to make the D&D template move towards a style of play it's not optimized for.
I'm not very concerned about that. Dual casters aren't very good as is. Especially dual casters that come from two classes with so/so spell lists and a lot of class features. If anything, they deserve to get some SAD for play such a subpar multiclass combination.
i don't understand it this way at all. I understand it as the familiar learning the lore and passing it to the witch through a weird meditative communion thing. In which case, it sounds more like will or manipulation than it does raw IQ
I see the familiar as an alternative spellbook. In a way, it's similar to the 3.5 Blackmoor Spellcrystal focuses, which can substitute a Wizard's spellbook. The witch has to access the info, aprehend it, understand the formulae, herbs, sigils, gestures, secret names to be called, whatever. The familiar just supplies the information.
If that feels weird, it's not that different from your average wizard's spellbook. In d20, Wizards do learn spells (as opposed to divine casters, who receive them from their Powers), but the process of Vancean magic kinda surpasses reason in this regard. The wizard needs to re-study, or "commune with his book" everyday, as the casting drains the knowledge of the spell.
In this regard, a familiar is akin to an animated spellbook. It provides lore, the witch "studies" it daily by chatting with the little critter whisperer of secrets, then it gets forgotten as it is cast. Back to start. it only feels (and can be described as "communing") because the spell repository is a living being.
Thinking of another RPG paradigm, it's like in Call of Cthulhu, when a character may learn a spell by contacting a deity or by getting some Mythos creature into teaching it (besides the book method). The processes are still based in INT (not in POW): communion gives the character access to arcane lore, the character needs to be smart enough to assimilate it.
Divine spellcasters may be idiots, but if they have faith, gods will turn sand into water. Quite a different process.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I see the familiar as an alternative spellbook. In a way, it's similar to the 3.5 Blackmoor Spellcrystal focuses, which can substitute a Wizard's spellbook. The witch has to access the info, aprehend it, understand the formulae, herbs, sigils, gestures, secret names to be called, whatever. The familiar just supplies the information.
If that feels weird, it's not that different from your average wizard's spellbook. In d20, Wizards do learn spells (as opposed to divine casters, who receive them from their Powers), but the process of Vancean magic kinda surpasses reason in this regard. The wizard needs to re-study, or "commune with his book" everyday, as the casting drains the knowledge of the spell.
In this regard, a familiar is akin to an animated spellbook. It provides lore, the witch "studies" it daily by chatting with the little critter whisperer of secrets, then it gets forgotten as it is cast. Back to start. it only feels (and can be described as "communing") because the spell repository is a living being.
Thinking of another RPG paradigm, it's like in Call of Cthulhu, when a character may learn a spell by contacting a deity or by getting some Mythos creature into teaching it (besides the book method). The processes are still based in INT (not in POW): communion gives the character access to arcane lore, the character needs to be smart enough to assimilate it.
Divine spellcasters may be idiots, but if they have faith, gods will turn sand into water. Quite a different process.
Same here, although I think of the familiar as being more like a radio the Witch uses to contact the true source of knowledge, sort of a spellbook in outer space, the whole process coming out to something like that School of the Air they got down in Australia.
Just throwing in my two cents. I think Int as primary stat is perfectly acceptable. We still have the option to throw points in Wis or Cha depending on the kind of character we want to play.
Now the witch gets her abilities generally from an unknown source. Her familiar works as a spell book and in order to maintain her spells she needs to commune with her animal. This, to me, is study. In order to maintain her abilities she needs to study and this is a very Int connected situation. The unknown origins of their powers, I assume, could also foster an interest in finding out where their abilities come from. What they are should facilitate an interest in knowlege. Int still seems very appropriate to me.
A witch can play so many roles. I'm an anthropology student so I'm going to refer to standard tribal culture views with this class. If you take a look at a shaman they don't need charisma or wisdom in order to do their job. A shaman does not pick their position, it is chosen for them by an unknown force. Same as this character. The shaman is revered and feared. They tip the spiritual and social scale, but they do this with knowledge. As healers they need to know a great deal about herbs and the body. You could consider this a Knowledge Nature in the game. If dealing with legal situations and called upon as an additional judge they need to know local customs, societal expectations... Knowledge Local perhaps? Or even History? If there are no explanations for a situation and it's an assumed curse or spirit, the shaman knows psychologically the sort of routine or cure the people will be convinced of in order to end the drama. Knowledge Religion or Planes?
Even if the witch is a charlatan and is creating a curse for someone, they know how to play McGuiver to create a desired result. Although deceptive, there is always a way around a bluff check if the character is smart enough to figure it out.
Now look at the standard witch ideal. The witch is usually a feared and respected person. In societies where the witch does not need to be "cleansed" or punished they are often one of the most intelligent people in the community, they play the spiritual savant, however many know the unnatural ruse but don't believe in it. They know others believe in it, and they know how to use it to their advantage. They are going to be outcastes as well on top of it.
Let's take an example of how a problem can be solved. They are often going to see the "evil spirit" causing infertility in females as result of "too many women chewing tonka beans," to calm themselves after work. The witch would know this is poisonous is larger doses, and they would know it causes miscarriages. If the witch suggested that the women stop, the common people wouldn't do it just because they were told. This tonka chewing activity is a socially common practice. A coffee drinker is not going to be told at 6am they can't have their cup because it's bad for them. Same would go for a smoker. Their physically well being is not as much of a concern. They understand their own bodies after all, right? Being generally less intelligent and with a specific world view they may be told that spirits are cursing tonka beans that women looking to conceive eat. This is because the spirits are no living an jealous of women with seed in their womb. This is an unnatural and spiritual occurrence common people can't control or understand. They are more likely to believe and listen to the advice. The people have their "world view appropriate" answer from a person who knew how to address the issue.
What if the witch is in a society that would condemn or even kill her for what she is? She had better be smart enough to hide her secret and keep herself alive.
My character is excellent with Int. She plays herself as a wizard to avoid persecution, or more persecution than necessary. She's also an archaeologist by trade. Intelligence is a great thing. Now, one thing I had wanted for her, which is normally a Wis based thing, was Sense Motive. Our campaign allows two Character Traits so I used Survivor and Suspicious. BAM! Now it's a class skill and I get a +2 bonus from the two. I don't really need much Wis to help with it. If there is something Wis based you want, there is always a way to get it. However, she's going to be a walking, talking encyclopedia and alert system. Hail Int!
Look at history: Knowledge is power, knowledge is also dangerous. Being smart has gotten many people in trouble in history. Common view is you believe in a world view without question, namely in our history it would be religion. Then you take a more scientific stance. You want proof of these beliefs or world views, you research and use your intelligence. Smart people get themselves into trouble. And many smart women and men have been claimed as witches and warlocks for using their brains to question world views. Just like witches are revered and feared, intelligence is revered and feared.
I vote to keep Int!
in order to maintain her spells she needs to commune with her animal. This, to me, is study.
Isn't Handle Animal Cha-based? Wild Empathy certainly is! But certainly I don't consider "commune" and "study" to be synonymous.
If there are no explanations for a situation and it's an assumed curse or spirit, the shaman knows psychologically the sort of routine or cure the people will be convinced of in order to end the drama. Knowledge Religion or Planes?
Or Bluff and Diplomacy, more likely, insofar as you're skilled at telling people what they want to hear?
They are more likely to believe and listen to the advice. The people have their "world view appropriate" answer from a person who knew how to address the issue.
Again, sounds like more social skills than actual knowledge.
Overall, I think you make a solid argument for the witch to be Cha-based; Int-based still comes off as a stretch to me.
in order to maintain her spells she needs to commune with her animal. This, to me, is study.Isn't Handle Animal Cha-based? Wild Empathy certainly is! But certainly I don't consider "commune" and "study" to be synonymous.
They are not, but they may be part of a process. "Commune" establishes contact to access information; intellectual activity lets you understand and assimilate the information.
E.G., think of a diviner. He goes into trance and has a vision or hears an otherworldly voice. Thing is, the message is, as it usually happens with oracles, in the form of ambiguous symbols, riddles and word-games. The character has "communed" (contacted the source) but needs to apply Int to understand the contents.If there are no explanations for a situation and it's an assumed curse or spirit, the shaman knows psychologically the sort of routine or cure the people will be convinced of in order to end the drama. Knowledge Religion or Planes?Or Bluff and Diplomacy, more likely, insofar as you're skilled at telling people what they want to hear?
Your proposal (Bluff and Diplomacy) assumes that the magic practitioner just wants to please and comfort his "customer". That is the case in some RW practices, but here we are assuming a setting where magic works. Knowledge applies to this kind of situation inasmuch a shaman or witch would play upon his folk's expectations about the supernatural (the paradigm) in order to provide a solution, Knowing your paradigm is part of Int skills.
They are more likely to believe and listen to the advice. The people have their "world view appropriate" answer from a person who knew how to address the issue.Again, sounds like more social skills than actual knowledge.
See above. Knowing a "world view" is quite something more than having social skills. You can comfort and put people at ease with extraordinary social skills, like a Rogue could do by making up stuff on the fly, but it would not necessarily make the listener satisfied about their metaphysical angsts. Those are in a great percentage culture-based, and you need Knowledge to play into those cultural factors.
Another important anthropological point is that actually, accusations levelled against RW witches were in many cases connected to the appropriation of "secret lore" via teachings imparted by familiar spirits as intermediaries of some demonic entity. According to inquisitors, those teachings could be also gotten directly from the demonic entity in quasi-human form or by witch-to-witch exchanges.
Stress here is that the witch was seen as a recipient of "forbidden knowledge", not exactly as a "priestess of the Evil One". Witchcraft recipes seemed to go in the same line, they were measurable objectifiable (e.g., in game terms, put it in a scroll) pieces of information, not articles of faith.
Ideological developments like the Black Mass and witchcraft as "reverse christianity" seemed to have taken some time to develop in the anti-witchcraft paradigm, and, I would propose, were affected by issues on other non-witch related forms of perceived heresy. Not too weird that the big anti-witchcraft scourge in the Western World ran parallel to the split of Christianity into a long array of groups following the Reformation.
Being wiccan myself, I know that the origin of the word means wise woman and or wise rual person. So there. Wisdom is the right choice!
Isn't Handle Animal Cha-based? Wild Empathy certainly is! But certainly I don't consider "commune" and "study" to be synonymous.
You begin with an empathetic link to the familiar. You don't know how to communicate past emotions. I would assume that communing the the animal would be a behavioral study. You need to participate and observe to understand the animal, at least until you level and can communicate in another way. But isn't this familiar above average animal intelligence? Would you still need Handle Animal? I'm not sure you need to handle an animal that's already your familiar anyhow.
Or Bluff and Diplomacy, more likely, insofar as you're skilled at telling people what they want to hear?.
Bluff and diplomacy surely if you are trying to convince someone of something they don't believe or won't believe. But if a group has a pre-decided expectation to solve an issue, and then you know that's what you need to do, you are not trying to convince them of anything. no need for bluff or diplomacy.
Overall, I think you make a solid argument for the witch to be Cha-based; Int-based still comes off as a stretch to me.
I don't think your wrong, but if a character is intelligent enough they can always find a loop hole to make general social stats a moot point. Or as a player I'm ungodly deceptive myself to get away with those tactics. :p
@JF: Quite - And it's not like switching a casting Stat is a huge change in the Class.
It's more that a change in the Casting Stat GOES ALONG with a change to the class to be MORE than a variant Wizard, and retaining INT as the Casting Stat seems to GO ALONG with the Witch BEING a variant specialist Wizard.
The Summoner really seems to have gotten the lions share of feed-back so far, but it really seems that the consensus is that the Witch can easily be "brought up a notch". It also seems that people don't really have a problem with the current smaller arcane spell list AS SUCH, just that the other aspects of the class should all be working a bit harder to justify it and make the Class more viable all-around.
I even see a case for CHA, but for reasons already mentioned by everybody, WIS seems "just right" to me.
|
I have no doubt in my mind that INT could be justified as the primary score, the question is should it be justified?
I think that is a little bit unfair, I think regardless of the stat that was picked the same statement could be made 'WIS could be justified...' 'CHA could be justified...' There are enough arch-types of the witch that really fit into any of those 'justifications' but that just makes the discussion interesting :)
This whole debate comes down to how different of a class you want the witch to be from the wizard. If you want a weird, specialized wizard, then the current class works. If you want something that will function markedly different from any existing class, then the primary stat should change to wisdom.
I think if we worry about INT/WIS/CHA being the defining characteristic for a spell casting class we might be in trouble. Spell casting is spell casting, and all the stats mechanically works the same way. What distinguishes say the summoner from the bard, and the witch from the wizard are the non-casting abilities. Wizards with there hyper-focus in schools and witches hexes, but very different progression and mechanics. Bards all the stuff they get with their music, and summoners... well summoning that big old beast of theirs.
The stat has more to do with character roleplaying then actual mechanic.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I think if we worry about INT/WIS/CHA being the defining characteristic for a spell casting class we might be in trouble. Spell casting is spell casting, and all the stats mechanically works the same way. What distinguishes say the summoner from the bard, and the witch from the wizard are the non-casting abilities. Wizards with there hyper-focus in schools and witches hexes, but very different progression and mechanics. Bards all the stuff they get with their music, and summoners... well summoning that big old beast of theirs.
The stat has more to do with character roleplaying then actual mechanic.
EXACTLY!
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
There is more than spellcasting mechanics at stake here.Wisdom makes a very large impact on the skill strengths of the witch. With intelligence, the witch would do exactly what the wizard does, and, with wisdom, the witch would be strong in fun areas like perception and sense motive. This shift alone would make an enormous difference in party role.
I think Spell Lists and Class Features like Hexes have a much larger effect on the role a Witch plays in the party than skills do.
And besides, the Witch and Wizard skill lists aren't really all that similar. Yeah, maybe if all the witch does is take Knowledge skills, but with tempting and flavorful choices like Intimidate and Heal on the list, I find that unlikely.
If its that much of an issue, why not just add Sense Motive and Perception?
I get the strong impression SOME sort of Wizard/Druid hybrid was intended for the Witch: that would leave INT and WIS equally viable. I guess I'd personally rather see high INT Witches be a specific niche for players who want their Witches highly knowledgeable, with many languages and lots of skills - not necessarily every Witch. The essentially ignorant hedge eccentric who nonetheless is powerful in her own domain seems an equally viable option that should be available. IMHO.
But a high INT witch doesn't have to invest their skill ranks in knowledges. They could just as easily invest those skills into survival or other "hedge eccentric" skills, and be just fine with them.
Personally, I don't really see how the sheer volume of hexes that a witch amasses amount to the less than a handful of special abilities that a wizard gets.
Honestly, I think it's high time for a different approach to the INT based arcane caster, and I think the witch does do it rather well. If your beef with the witch is that it feels too much like the wizard (even with its hexes and different spell list and what-not), then changing the casting stat to WIS isn't going to make the class feel any less like the wizard. He'll be a know-it-all when making survival checks rather than knowledge (nature) checks, but he won't be any different just because of a primary casting stat change.
Hey LadyRabbit, I may not agree with all of your post, but it was well thought out and well presented. Please ignore certain jerks who can't post without trying to degrade you.
There are people who, when presented with someone who doesn't agree with them, feel horribly threatened. This has to do with them having a very harsh and minimal self image, so they lash out with anger and sarcasm, trying to tear down anyone that they perceive as trying to minimize them in any way. The problem is they cannot handle someone who disagrees with them, because they see this as further proof of their lack of worth.
Fortunately there aren't many of them around here, so just ignore the ones you come across and welcome to the boards.
It would be breaking the mold because they are breaking a D&D mold, not a trope mold. Name another class in core D&D that does what he suggests.
.
Regarding the Stat Focus of the Witch:
I feel that there's enough argument to warrant having a Witch be a Wisdom based arcane caster. The descriptions feel close enough to "intuition" and "awareness", rather than "informational knowledge" and "reasoning/deduction".
While there's the argument that having to commune with the familiar means they might need to reason out the symbols and feelings, etc... the game text doesn't mention that at all. They commune, they have the magical power. That's it. Taken to it's simplest form, they have to "soak in" the power from their familiar, and that's Wisdom.
To extrapolate more action than that is to go beyond the description of the class to support a viewpoint, which doesn't hold water when trying to prove it to others who aren't using that extra bit of action (ie "MY witch doesn't do that, so Int doesn't fit!").
Most other arguments against the Witch as a Wisdom caster fall flat when faced by the Cleric:
- Memorize spells? So does a Cleric -> Wis based caster. Hey, they commune with their god! This is almost a case FOR Wisdom, not against.
- Scroll usage? So does a Cleric (and literally ANY other caster) -> ANY casting stat really... call it a scroll, a prayer sheaf, sheet music, whatever.
- Party Roles? The spell list isn't changing, and skill list becoming Wisdom based doesn't break the fluff of the Witch. For the most part, it sounds like a class that is traveling, healing, or being a seer (advice giver/fortune teller, etc).
This can be better covered by Survival, Heal, and Perception/Sense Motive.
Granted, there's room for Diplomacy, Intimidate and Bluff, but that just gives a case for Cha, not Int.
About the only Role fluff that fits Intelligence is the "adventure to seek greater knowledge", however the verbiage used smacks of "learning through experience" (ie gaining levels), rather than a class skill of Knowledge ("witch stuff" or arcane). YMMV of course, but when faced with over half a dozen non-Int skill pushes, I'd rather go with the alternative (and dare I say more logical) slant to the one Int skill push.
.
Ultimately, if I were sitting at the drawing board (designing board? PDF editing toolset?), I'd go with the following changes:
1. Change the casting stat to Wisdom. No other changes (still arcane spells, still commune for 1 hour, still memorize the spells, etc).
2. Change the skills accordingly. Remove most Knowledge skills. Add the option of adding one Knowledge based on the "rough" idea of where their powers are coming from, or if unknown simply choose arcane.
Add the skills Handle Animal, Sense Motive, and Survival (maybe Perception if I'm feeling the class needs that "oomph").
Increase skills to 4 (or 6) + Int, depending on the final "power feel" of the class (it feels a little underpowered at the moment, depending on the change to Hexes).
3. Change in the Hex mechanic. Since Hexes are about forcing an effect on someone else, have it based on Charisma.
At the same time, remove the touch requirement from most Hexes (let them be ranged unless the Hex itself feels more like a touch in concept), and never have them provoke an AoO.
A scary, spooky witch giving you an evil look, cackling, and reaching their hand towards you should be something a victim fears as much as a Shocking Grasp.
This powers the Hexes up into a combat useable ability, while at the same time being dependent on a secondary stat (depowering it a little, like channeling with Clerics).
.
Overall, I think this change would make the Witch feel more unique. It would have an Arcane spell list, so it can be played with more utility and blasting than the typical divine caster, however it's Wisdom and skill list implies that it's more worldly than the typical scholar (less knowledge roles, and more travel/healing/perceptiveness).
Secondly, it's "stats vs abilities" playability will feel like a Cleric's (secondary abilities based on a secondary stat, inward spell knowledge with outward influence on the special). In other words, a valid build would be a lean towards utility and buff spells and heavy use of Hexes, requiring an equal push for Wisdom and Charisma, instead of the typical Wizardly "OMFG GIVE ME TEH INTS, I HAS ONLY 50!!1! *frothing mouth*".
.
Now as for another Knowledge heavy caster... I can see a real push towards the Summoner being changed to an Int-based Spontaneous caster. But I won't get into that in this thread. Suffice it to say that there's no real fluff that pushes Charming an otherwordly force over chaining an otherwordly force, and the sheer min-max involved with evolution redistributing depending on the current demands just feels "reasoning"-ish to me.
It also gives an alternative to the now tired "Cha = spontaneous" thing too.
.
*Edit* Changed Hex = useful to Hex = combat useable, since Hexes were already useful, just hard to pull off in combat.
Personally, I wish Paizo would completely break the mold on the witch and do the following :
Choose a subclass : Maiden, Mother, Crone
That's the oldest witch trope in the book... how would that be "breaking the mold"? It's also rather culturally restricted in that it's a very specific cultural example of witch. Eastern concepts of witches have none of that 3 faces in one deal.
Paizo is looking to eliminate all race-based classes by making them general access, making a class gender-based would kind of go against thier grain.
It would break the mold because there is not, and to my knowledge, never has been, a spellcasting class in D&D that is allowed to choose it's spellcasting stat at 1st level.
I don't mind people critisizing a suggestion I make, but please, if you're going to critisize it, at least read it through and try to understand it?
Jury's still out on Koko. She might be more of a Clever Hans phonomenon (look it up!)
No need to look it up, Mr. Chomsky; I'm familiar with the phenomenon (and with the results differences in "Nim Chimpsky" methodology, as opposed to fosetering). But the point stands independently of Koko, as Washoe is more of a slam dunk -- you don't teach sign language to your babies independently if you're only signing to please a trainer who's present. You might read up on Kanzi the bonobo as well, who communicates in typed lexographs, makes stone knives, and plays Pac-Man.
|
|
To add into it, Witches are generally given a rather bad connotation. A witch is often the villain of a story meant to teach your kids to listen to their parents so they aren't taken. Because of this, anyone who becomes a witch would obviously need to be smart enough to out think a village. Especially if said witch was going to terrorize it for personal gain.
Some could attribute that to wisdom, but intelligence could also apply with traps and ways of hiding your lair where you're going to be doing this work.
In other words, arguments for all three casting stats could be made, so I'm in support of the one put forth. If you don't like it, there is always rule 0 but I highly doubt this is going to be change something that integral.
I removed a post. We have the 'don't be a jerk' rule for a reason.
Edit: I also removed replies to said post.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Well my previous reply to Kaisoku got removed as a "reply to said post" (I did briefly mention the offending post before addressing Kaisoku's points, so fair enough).
I'll reply again, sans offending reference.
- Memorize spells? So does a Cleric -> Wis based caster. Hey, they commune with their god! This is almost a case FOR Wisdom, not against.- Scroll usage? So does a Cleric (and literally ANY other caster) -> ANY casting stat really... call it a scroll, a prayer sheaf, sheet music, whatever.
- Party Roles? The spell list isn't changing, and skill list becoming Wisdom based doesn't break the fluff of the Witch. For the most part, it sounds like a class that is traveling, healing, or being a seer (advice giver/fortune teller, etc).
This can be better covered by Survival, Heal, and Perception/Sense Motive.
Granted, there's room for Diplomacy, Intimidate and Bluff, but that just gives a case for Cha, not Int.
About the only Role fluff that fits Intelligence is the "adventure to seek greater knowledge", however the verbiage used smacks of "learning through experience" (ie gaining levels), rather than a class skill of Knowledge ("witch stuff" or arcane). YMMV of course, but when faced with over half a dozen non-Int skill pushes, I'd rather go with the alternative (and dare I say more logical) slant to the one Int skill push.
I think you've misinterpreted these arguments, I'll try to rephrase them.
Memorize Spells and Party Role did not come up as arguments for Intelligence. They were brought up to address other people's claim that changing the casting stat to Wisdom would make the class feel less like a Variant Wizard.
The rebuttal was that Hit Dice, Armor/Weapon Proficiencies, Spell List, Spell Acquisition, and Class Features all have a much larger effect on the 'feel' of a class than do Casting Stat or Skills. Changing the Stat to Wisdom would thus not solve the hypothetical problem of the class feeling like a Variant Wizard.
There was however some mention that the way the Witch Acquires Spells was an argument for Intelligence, as the Witch must learn new spells, as opposed to having instant access to the full spell list like the rest of the Wisdom based casters. The idea being, not having a limit on the number of spells you can know, but needing to seek out and learn these spells is the trademark of an Intelligence caster, whereas instant acquisition of one's entire spell list is the trademark of a Wisdom based one.
Scroll Usage was put forward as an argument that the Witch is actually learning their spells, as opposed to passively receiving/soaking them up. The Witch can use spell completion items like scrolls, the familiar cannot, thus the Witch is the one who knows how to cast the spell.
Further, if a Cleric is cut off from their deity, they lose all spellcasting, thus losing the ability to use scrolls. When a Witch is cut off from their 'otherworldly source' (ie through Familiar Death), they still know their spells and can continue to use scrolls.
Thus: the mechanics bear out the idea that the Witch does not receive spells like a cleric, asking some far off source for them and being entirely dependent on outside forces to act through her. The Witch is receiving knowledge of spellcasting, which she is fully capable of putting to use by herself (via her hexes and scrolls).
Personally, I think the Witch should stay Int for two reasons:
1. I think it works as is. I don't think Int clashes with the flavor at all, so if it aint broke, don't fix it.
2. I just plain like Intelligence better for flavor reasons. Kevin Andrew Murphy had a good point earlier:
I really like the idea of clever witches rather than priestesses calling themselves witches, which is where wisdom-based witches inevitably lead.