Witch hunters are warriors who have trained themselves to recognize, oppose, and sometimes even undo the effects of magic, especially witchcraft. Much of their power comes from an unshakeable conviction that magic powers cannot overcome the willpower of someone trained to confront such forces without fear or hesitation. A witch hunter is powered by devotion to the idea that free will and normal mortal existence are as powerful and precious as the mystic powers of mages and priests.
Role: Like rangers and paladins, a witch hunter is a solid combatant who does best when facing specific situations and types of foes. A well-equipped witch hunter can slice through slavers, kick down the doors of the giant’s hall, and chop through brigands as well as any other sword-swinger can, filling the role of primary combatant in parties without members of other fighting classes. But when facing cultists of the frog god, ferreting out succubi, and opposing hag covens, the witch hunter has advantages over less specialized fighters and barbarians. The witch hunter’s tremendous devotion allows him to land blows that otherwise would miss, clearly identify mystic threats, and even overcome magic through pure force of will. Witch hunters are most effective when dealing with practitioners of witchcraft, but have an edge over other warriors when facing any type of spellcaster.
And here's a link to the cover:
As always, this new base class will be available first on Paizo, then on DriveThru, for the low, low price of $1.99.
Hyrum.
Witch hunters are warriors who have trained themselves to recognize, oppose, and sometimes even undo the effects of magic, especially witchcraft. Much of their power comes from an unshakeable conviction that magic powers cannot overcome the willpower of someone trained to confront such forces without fear or hesitation. A witch hunter is powered by devotion to the idea that free will and normal mortal existence are as powerful and precious as the mystic powers of mages and priests.
Role: Like rangers and paladins, a witch hunter is a solid combatant who does best when facing specific situations and types of foes. A well-equipped witch hunter can slice through slavers, kick down the doors of the giant’s hall, and chop through brigands as well as any other sword-swinger can, filling the role of primary combatant in parties without members of other fighting classes. But when facing cultists of the frog god, ferreting out succubi, and opposing hag covens, the witch hunter has advantages over less specialized fighters and barbarians. The witch hunter’s tremendous devotion allows him to land blows that otherwise would miss, clearly identify mystic threats, and even overcome magic through pure force of will. Witch hunters are most effective when dealing with practitioners of witchcraft, but have an edge over other warriors when facing any type of spellcaster.
And here's a link to the cover:
As always, this new base class will be available first on Paizo, then on DriveThru, for the low, low price of $1.99.
Hyrum.
Once again..whoever does your covers is amazing. This one is just..creepy
I look forward to seeing it. If its anything like your previous classes I and likely at least one of my players will love it.
Really looking forward to this one.
PS: No preview on the yahoo groups? ;)
The Yahoo Group is getting the first couple of pages in just a few minutes. :)
Hyrum.
Ok... who is going to defend me from this fanatic?
Really looking forward to this one.
PS: No preview on the yahoo groups? ;)
The Yahoo Group is getting the first couple of pages in just a few minutes. :)
Hyrum.
Dont see anything in the group yet about the witchhunter. Damn you and your teasing ways!
Dont see anything in the group yet about the witchhunter. Damn you and your teasing ways!
Check your email. :)
Dont see anything in the group yet about the witchhunter. Damn you and your teasing ways!Check your email. :)
Damn you, i cant do that untill i get home. I still look forward to it, you are just evil is all.
What about those of us that are religiously prohibited from participating in anything yahoo-ish? Google is such a harsh mistress...
We'll have a preview up on DR tomorrow morning, it'll be the first 3 pages as well. :D
Hyrum.
And it's live! Check the product section for the link, I'm posting this from my phone.
Hyrum.
Awesome class, i think its very interesting. I am strongly considering it for a upcoming Victorian era campaign, where magic and witchcraft are looked on as evils by society. Could be fun to play this kind of character.
Couple of points:
Looks like you have a copy and paste error in the description for perplexing blow:
Perplexing Blow* (Ex): A witch hunter
with this ability can deliver blows that
bewilder and confound his targets. A target
struck with a dumbfounding blow takes 2
points of Intelligence damage in addition to
the attack’s normal damage.
Second, I am assuming but am not certain, is devoted strike supposed to work along side vital strike? Will it work with cleave? The whole standard action to attack thing always leaves me a little unsure as to what works with what.
Third, in the spellbane ability, does that mean you only expend a use of the ability if you successfully touch the enemy, so if you have 6 per day, and you try and miss you still have six left?
|
Awesome class, i think its very interesting. I am strongly considering it for a upcoming Victorian era campaign, where magic and witchcraft are looked on as evils by society. Could be fun to play this kind of character.
Glad you like it!
Couple of points:
Looks like you have a copy and paste error in the description for perplexing blow:
Yep, that's my fault., The power still works properly, but it shouldn't refer to dumbfounding blow. I'll send in a correction.
Second, I am assuming but am not certain, is devoted strike supposed to work along side vital strike? Will it work with cleave? The whole standard action to attack thing always leaves me a little unsure as to what works with what.
Any time you take a standard action to make one attack, you can use devoted blow. That includes uses of vital strike, and the first attack in a Cleave (which specifies you start a Cleave by making a single attack as a standard action). The second attack of a cleave cannot be a devoted blow, and does not receive the devoted blow benefits.
Third, in the spellbane ability, does that mean you only expend a use of the ability if you successfully touch the enemy, so if you have 6 per day, and you try and miss you still have six left?
Yes.
Very cool, seems a very good match for the setting we are gonna do. Its set in the victorian era where things like magic, wherewolves, vampires and mummies all exist, but are not thought to be real by the general populace. I look forward to laying down the wrath on all the heathens and blasphemers (witches) as I believe my character will be an agent of the church.
|
So far I'm loving this class - but I can see where you walk a thin line calling it a witch hunter and then laying out what constitutes a witch. Wouldn't all fairly charismatic gnomes be considered witches? I can see this going both ways since some people may be somewhat nervous about the First World leaking so much influence into our reality...
Anyway, this is a great class, thanks!
Wouldn't all fairly charismatic gnomes be considered witches? I can see this going both ways since some people may be somewhat nervous about the First World leaking so much influence into our reality...
Anyway, this is a great class, thanks!
I could totally see a Lawful Neutral witch hunter, or even Lawful Evil witch hunter on a crusade against the First World.
I know the sorcerer in my game will probably be getting a visit from one next time we play. :)
Hyrum.
Wouldn't all fairly charismatic gnomes be considered witches? I can see this going both ways since some people may be somewhat nervous about the First World leaking so much influence into our reality...
Anyway, this is a great class, thanks!
I could totally see a Lawful Neutral witch hunter, or even Lawful Evil witch hunter on a crusade against the First World.
I know the sorcerer in my game will probably be getting a visit from one next time we play. :)
Hyrum.
All depends on the world and the character. I could see something like the Operative from serenity. Cool, cold, and efficiently eliminating the Gnomish threats to his world.
I have always taken my inspiration for role play from my class choice which is why I often really enjoy your classes, they give me a whole new set of ideas on what to play and how to play it.
Edit:
By the way, if a necromancer wizard is in the 'witch' list, shouldnt a death mage? I mean i realize you wouldnt call out non-ogl examples like the 3.5 Dread Necromancer, but certainly the Death Mage is free game for your own content right? And if a Necromancy Specialist Wizard is a witch I think a Death Mage should be.
|
|
Wouldn't all fairly charismatic gnomes be considered witches? I can see this going both ways since some people may be somewhat nervous about the First World leaking so much influence into our reality...
As written, -all- gnomes are witches, since they can cast speak with animals, which I forgot was a 1st level spell. Myself, I'd give them a pass, but you make an interesting argument to hold them to it.
I have always taken my inspiration for role play from my class choice which is why I often really enjoy your classes, they give me a whole new set of ideas on what to play and how to play it.
Hi praise indeed!
By the way, if a necromancer wizard is in the 'witch' list, shouldnt a death mage? I mean i realize you wouldnt call out non-ogl examples like the 3.5 Dread Necromancer, but certainly the Death Mage is free game for your own content right? And if a Necromancy Specialist Wizard is a witch I think a Death Mage should be.
Death mage is our own content, and heck yeah they're witches. But while I do try to make our content work with itself, I never want anyone to feel like they *have* to buy all of our products to use any of them. For the most part, combining all of our stuff is easy, but in this one case I trust GMs to make judgement calls (like you just did) when combining our 3pp with itself.
By the way, if a necromancer wizard is in the 'witch' list, shouldnt a death mage? I mean i realize you wouldnt call out non-ogl examples like the 3.5 Dread Necromancer, but certainly the Death Mage is free game for your own content right? And if a Necromancy Specialist Wizard is a witch I think a Death Mage should be.Death mage is our own content, and heck yeah they're witches. But while I do try to make our content work with itself, I never want anyone to feel like they *have* to buy all of our products to use any of them. For the most part, combining all of our stuff is easy, but in this one case I trust GMs to make judgement calls (like you just did) when combining our 3pp with itself.
I think this is a trap that alot of game designers/writers fall for. They are so worried about making players feel like they HAVE to buy other material that they act as if it doesnt exist in future products. That is WAY more frustrating, particularly for those who actually have bought the previous product. No one would feel pressured to buy the death mage if you mention it in the witch section of the witch hunter. People feel pressured to buy the product if say, the witch hunter got a feat as a class feature from one of your feat products and you didnt reprint it in the witchhunter product (something like see feats of battle for the details). Mentioning another product doesnt put people off, its when they have to go looking at that other product for rules.
It can get particularly infuriating when people use custom spell lists for classes, which you guys do. If in a future magic product you include a spell that would fit the archon or the death mage, you should include it in the spell's description. I think I speak for many people when they say that they'd like the products they buy supported by future ones far more then they are concerned with being pressured to buy other products.
I understand that DM's can make judgement calls, and I do all the time with my game, but there are lots of dms (some of whom i play with) that go the strict adherance route. Mostly because they dont feel they have a knack for making the right calls regarding rules and mechanics. It would make everyone's life easier if these small details are included. It may seem like it wont matter, and the dm can handle it but alot of times it can lead to unneccessary headaches.
|
I think this is a trap that alot of game designers/writers fall for. They are so worried about making players feel like they HAVE to buy other material that they act as if it doesnt exist in future products. That is WAY more frustrating, particularly for those who actually have bought the previous product. No one would feel pressured to buy the death mage if you mention it in the witch section of the witch hunter. People feel pressured to buy the product if say, the witch hunter got a feat as a class feature from one of your feat products and you didnt reprint it in the witchhunter product (something like see feats of battle for the details). Mentioning another product doesnt put people off, its when they have to go looking at that other product for rules.
It can get particularly infuriating when people use custom spell lists for classes, which you guys do. If in a future magic product you include a spell that would fit the archon or the death mage, you should include it in the spell's description. I think I speak for many people when they say that they'd like the products they buy supported by future ones far more then they are concerned with being pressured to buy other products.
I agree with this over all. It is typically one of my biggest complaints about 3pp products is no follow up support often. I also agree about the spells and mentioning of classes should be in future classes. The only time I feel that is bad, as as Kolo mentioned, about the feat, class ability. Yeah it's a fine line but I think a line worth walking for a publisher.
|
|
Your feedback is noted!
Of course with the Death Mage we carefully included a section on what kinds of spells you may want to add from other sources (because even if we mention it with a new spell, other 3pp won't), based on feedback we received about the Archon. (Also one reason why the Magus was written so no specific spell information was ever needed again.)
And we're already looking to make sure we re-integrate everything in the Adventure's Handbook, our print compilation of some of our best stuff.
Expansions referencing expansions is always a problem, even for core publishers. It'll be interesting to see what support exists for witches after the APG, for example.
All that said, I'll certainly look at being more inter-Genius linked when designing our material in the future, possible in the form of sidebars (so people who don't have whatever product we're talking about can easily ignore it).
|
|
True major publishers are often as bad or worse than 3pp about not having follow up support. I am hoping Paizo ends up being the exception to the rule.
So when you going to do the Shadowmancer ala Shadow Magic from Tome of Magic by WotC? Though while I loved their Shadow Magic I didn't care for the mechanics to much. I would have much preferred if they had worked like regular specialty wizards, like how you did Ice Magic.
Your feedback is noted!
Of course with the Death Mage we carefully included a section on what kinds of spells you may want to add from other sources (because even if we mention it with a new spell, other 3pp won't), based on feedback we received about the Archon. (Also one reason why the Magus was written so no specific spell information was ever needed again.)
And we're already looking to make sure we re-integrate everything in the Adventure's Handbook, our print compilation of some of our best stuff.
Expansions referencing expansions is always a problem, even for core publishers. It'll be interesting to see what support exists for witches after the APG, for example.
All that said, I'll certainly look at being more inter-Genius linked when designing our material in the future, possible in the form of sidebars (so people who don't have whatever product we're talking about can easily ignore it).
Side bars are perfectly fine with me, that is more then enough. After all each of your products would require most dms specific approval for each one. Not my game, your stuff is pretty much blanket in so far, but who knows that may change. But sidebars works. Supposedly we were promised such sidebars for spell selection in the new apg classes that have unique spell lists, so hopefully paizo follows through with that and doesnt dump it for lack of space or something.
if your PC group has a Witch from the APG in it, this may be a real fun antagonist, no?
if your PC group has a Witch from the APG in it, this may be a real fun antagonist, no?
Pretty much ideal i think. Especially if he isnt particularly evil, just hates/is obligated to eliminate witches.
I'll post this, as I haven't seen anyone else mention it, but the Witch Hunter has a d10 hit dice and medium progression. I'm wondering if this was a mistake, especially considering all of the references to Witch Hunters being similar to Paladins and Rangers in their combat competency, and because a medium progression would match up with a d8 according to the "norms" of Pathfinder RPG.
|
|
I'll post this, as I haven't seen anyone else mention it, but the Witch Hunter has a d10 hit dice and medium progression. I'm wondering if this was a mistake, especially considering all of the references to Witch Hunters being similar to Paladins and Rangers in their combat competency, and because a medium progression would match up with a d8 according to the "norms" of Pathfinder RPG.
On my copy it shows a 20th level witch hunter has a +20 base attack progression. It also goes +20/+15/+10, which means the 4th iterative attack (+5) got cut off by the table layout, but that's a typo not a brand-new weird medium progression.
The witch hunter should have full attack progression. Does anyone have a version where the attack bonus isn't +20 at 20th level?
On my copy it shows a 20th level witch hunter has a +20 base attack progression. It also goes +20/+15/+10, which means the 4th iterative attack (+5) got cut off by the table layout, but that's a typo not a brand-new weird medium progression.
The witch hunter should have full attack progression. Does anyone have a version where the attack bonus isn't +20 at 20th level?
Oops, you are correct. I just saw three iterative attacks at 20th and my brain made the "medium progression" leap.
Oops, you are correct. I just saw three iterative attacks at 20th and my brain made the "medium progression" leap.On my copy it shows a 20th level witch hunter has a +20 base attack progression. It also goes +20/+15/+10, which means the 4th iterative attack (+5) got cut off by the table layout, but that's a typo not a brand-new weird medium progression.
The witch hunter should have full attack progression. Does anyone have a version where the attack bonus isn't +20 at 20th level?
Funny i did the reverse, mine too cuts off the 4th iterative attack I just didnt notice, I saw +1 at each level and ignoried what the iteratives said