The witch's Scar hex has absolutely no mechanical benefit for the witch nor any mechanical drawback for the victim. It is literally an attack that curses the target with "flavor." It doesn't even apply a Charisma penalty!
Why would anyone EVER take this? At least Child-scent works SOME of the time (such as hunting down young kidnap victims).
The witch's Scar hex has absolutely no mechanical benefit for the witch nor any mechanical drawback for the victim. It is literally an attack that curses the target with "flavor." It doesn't even apply a Charisma penalty!
Why would anyone EVER take this? At least Child-scent works SOME of the time (such as hunting down young kidnap victims).
I could see the "flavor" giving circumstance bonuses/penalties to a lot of skill checks. Also a way of marking someone as a way of being certain it is the same person later or of attempting to mark someone to verify they are as they appear.
I don't know. Perhaps, because this is still called a roleplaying game, as opposed to a tabletop wargame? Gets a bit lost here around sometimes.
People also don't like spending resources for flavor because it makes no sense. If you use a resource it is only logical to expect a return. Now the GM could make a ruling, but that might create consistency issues, which is why a lot of people like the game to be codified so that no matter where they play the character works the same way.
RD you might need to provide us with the text. I don't have a copy of it yet.
PS:There is no need to be rude, and the game is combat based so expecting a combat ability to do something is not really unrealistic.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
So?
Having a horrible scar on your face might give you a circumstance penalty to Diplomacy rolls in some situations (chatting up the queen, frinstance), while giving a bonus in others (rough and tumble bandits, sailors, and the like might respect a man with scars).
A foppish nobleman might consider being horribly scarred a fate worse than death, in which case hexing him up might give you a circumstance bonus on Intimidate checks.
You might want to scar the face or hand of a criminal as a warning to others, or to help the local constabulary identify him. Or for that matter, use the scar on yourself as part of a disguise either before or after committing a crime, so as to avoid capture.
Scar yourself up and pretend to have fought in a great battle, or claim you were viciously assaulted by someone (circumstance bonus to Bluff check).
Just because it doesn't have an explicit mechanical benefit tied to it, doesn't mean it's useless. Yeah, a lot of these benefits are contingent upon GM rulings. That's why you only take scar if you're playing in a game where the GM rewards creativity. It's a cool Hex, IMO.
Compare with the spell brand, does something very similar, except that it actually deals a point of damage to the target when you hit them with it, and includes rules for trying to cut the thing off of you. The brand itself doesn't actually do anything though.
P S- Whoever said Hexes were 'combat' abilities? A lot are, but some are firmly in the 'utility' camp.
Well I don't know, you've marked the target. Make it a facial scar, now he's easily identifiable. Defeat the not-really-evil-enough-to-kill bad guy? Mark his face that way, let him go. Spread the word that the man with the X scar on his face is a liar, cheat and thief.
Place it elsewhere, now you can identify somebody at a later time if you need. There are many RP purposes for this, some more powerful than any penalty to Charisma. And hell yes, as a GM I am already plotting uses for this hex.
So?
Having a horrible scar on your face might give you a circumstance penalty to Diplomacy rolls in some situations (chatting up the queen, frinstance), while giving a bonus in others (rough and tumble bandits, sailors, and the like might respect a man with scars).
A foppish nobleman might consider being horribly scarred a fate worse than death, in which case hexing him up might give you a circumstance bonus on Intimidate checks.
You might want to scar the face or hand of a criminal as a warning to others, or to help the local constabulary identify him. Or for that matter, use the scar on yourself as part of a disguise either before or after committing a crime, so as to avoid capture.
Scar yourself up and pretend to have fought in a great battle, or claim you were viciously assaulted by someone (circumstance bonus to Bluff check).
Just because it doesn't have an explicit mechanical benefit tied to it, doesn't mean it's useless. Yeah, a lot of these benefits are contingent upon GM rulings. That's why you only take scar if you're playing in a game where the GM rewards creativity. It's a cool Hex, IMO.
Compare with the spell brand, does something very similar, except that it actually deals a point of damage to the target when you hit them with it, and includes rules for trying to cut the thing off of you. The brand itself doesn't actually do anything though.
P S- Whoever said Hexes were 'combat' abilities? A lot are, but some are firmly in the 'utility' camp.
Even utility has definite uses. It does not matter if it is combat or not really. I just made the combat reference because the rude poster tried to pretend like the game was not heavy on combat.
It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.
Even utility has definite uses. It does not matter if it is combat or not really. I just made the combat reference because the rude poster tried to pretend like the game was not heavy on combat.It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.
No the game is heavy on spells.
From the d20pfsrd
Scar (Su): This hex curses a single target with horrible scars of the witch’s choosing, whether something as simple as a single letter on the target’s forehead or blotchy, burnlike scars on his body. The target may make a Will save to resist this hex. These scars do not hinder the target’s actions or abilities in any way. The witch can withdraw this hex from a target as a move action at any range. The number of supernatural scars the witch can maintain at once is equal to her Intelligence bonus; once she reaches this limit, she must remove the scar from a current victim in order to mark another. Effects that remove curses can remove the scar.
How can it be useless by RAW? Oh you mean actual people have to make a judgement on what happens instead of relying upon a numerical modifier or 'rule'.
Sad, sad days we roleplayers live in now.
It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.
I think you're overstating the RAW uselessness. It has no specific RAW numerical effect. The idea of circumstance bonuses, however, are also RAW - and it can very easily qualify for circumstance bonuses. Also, the idea of marking for identification purposes is RAW useful, even though it applies to a non-numerically driven part of the game.
|
RD is right in how it is written. All it does is make a horrible scar on the person. They get a will save to resist it. The witch can only have so many at any time put on people. Now it does say it is a horrible scare from as simple as a single letter on their forhead to burnlike scares on the body.
I do agree it would have been nice to have a mechanical benefit to it, but there are still uses. From the fact you can make letters with it and it implies it can be a lot or a little and very specific scars. So I can see uses for this hex. It is not one of the better ones, but I can see uses for it.
|
He made the point in a rude way, yes, but his point was that the use/utility of Scar is entirely from a non-combat perspective, and that it still has value as such; that combat utility in and of itself does not wholly determine the value of the Hex or, presumably, anything else.
The GM weaves non-combat interactions out of whole cloth, barring specific examples such as Diplomacy. This is going to fit into that big, broad category known to many as "roleplaying" and known to many others as "GM fiat".
It's not an invalid or unreasonable point, but it's an argument that's been hashed and rehashed many, many times here.
I'm going to add one more vote for "It's really cool and full of RP goodness. And I WILL take it for my witch when I get my next Hex"
Even utility has definite uses. It does not matter if it is combat or not really. I just made the combat reference because the rude poster tried to pretend like the game was not heavy on combat.It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.
No the game is heavy on spells.
From the d20pfsrd
Scar (Su): This hex curses a single target with horrible scars of the witch’s choosing, whether something as simple as a single letter on the target’s forehead or blotchy, burnlike scars on his body. The target may make a Will save to resist this hex. These scars do not hinder the target’s actions or abilities in any way. The witch can withdraw this hex from a target as a move action at any range. The number of supernatural scars the witch can maintain at once is equal to her Intelligence bonus; once she reaches this limit, she must remove the scar from a current victim in order to mark another. Effects that remove curses can remove the scar.How can it be useless by RAW? Oh you mean actual people have to make a judgement on what happens instead of relying upon a numerical modifier or 'rule'.
Sad, sad days we roleplayers live in now.
The game's rules revolve around combat not spells. It is a tactical fighting game with RP'ing. It is not a spellcasting based game with RP'ing
I already explained my stance on individual GM applying their own rules. It has nothing to do with RP'ing.
I see you were too busy being to read it though so I will restate it.
If my character can do something in one game I don't want the ability taken away in another game. In other words it is about consistency.
That is all it is for me. I don't even care if the ability sucks.
It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.I think you're overstating the RAW uselessness. It has no specific RAW numerical effect. The idea of circumstance bonuses, however, are also RAW - and it can very easily qualify for circumstance bonuses. Also, the idea of marking for identification purposes is RAW useful, even though it applies to a non-numerically driven part of the game.
Circumstances are a GM area not a RAW area in this case, and a disguise check or a disguise based spell such as alter self can take care of it.
The witch's Scar hex has absolutely no mechanical benefit for the witch nor any mechanical drawback for the victim. It is literally an attack that curses the target with "flavor." It doesn't even apply a Charisma penalty!
Why would anyone EVER take this? At least Child-scent works SOME of the time (such as hunting down young kidnap victims).
For players? I suspect none.
For DMs creating NPCs? All the time.
(It's not "all about the player". Thank goodness.)
Even utility has definite uses. It does not matter if it is combat or not really. I just made the combat reference because the rude poster tried to pretend like the game was not heavy on combat.It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.
No the game is heavy on spells.
From the d20pfsrd
Scar (Su): This hex curses a single target with horrible scars of the witch’s choosing, whether something as simple as a single letter on the target’s forehead or blotchy, burnlike scars on his body. The target may make a Will save to resist this hex. These scars do not hinder the target’s actions or abilities in any way. The witch can withdraw this hex from a target as a move action at any range. The number of supernatural scars the witch can maintain at once is equal to her Intelligence bonus; once she reaches this limit, she must remove the scar from a current victim in order to mark another. Effects that remove curses can remove the scar.How can it be useless by RAW? Oh you mean actual people have to make a judgement on what happens instead of relying upon a numerical modifier or 'rule'.
Sad, sad days we roleplayers live in now.
how can it be useless by raw?
These scars do not hinder the target’s actions or abilities in any way
That is RAW right there. The scars don't hinder anything and applying a penalty to the targets actions/abilities would in fact be hindering them.
So by RAW, the man you put a X shape scar on his face, could easily put on a wig and roll for disguise. And now no one knows who he is.
You could scar "Traitor of the Queen" and he can continue to talk to the queen as if nothing happened.
That's the problem.
Mechanically poor options should not be excused by roleplaying potential. Well designed options should both have good flavor and allow for the player to interact with the world in terms of the rules.
Adding some sort of mechanical advantage to picking this hex shouldn't be too hard.
Even utility has definite uses. It does not matter if it is combat or not really. I just made the combat reference because the rude poster tried to pretend like the game was not heavy on combat.It is useless by RAW, assuming RD's description was correct. "The GM can fix it" can be applied to any situation.
No the game is heavy on spells.
From the d20pfsrd
Scar (Su): This hex curses a single target with horrible scars of the witch’s choosing, whether something as simple as a single letter on the target’s forehead or blotchy, burnlike scars on his body. The target may make a Will save to resist this hex. These scars do not hinder the target’s actions or abilities in any way . The witch can withdraw this hex from a target as a move action at any range. The number of supernatural scars the witch can maintain at once is equal to her Intelligence bonus; once she reaches this limit, she must remove the scar from a current victim in order to mark another. Effects that remove curses can remove the scar.How can it be useless by RAW? Oh you mean actual people have to make a judgement on what happens instead of relying upon a numerical modifier or 'rule'.
Sad, sad days we roleplayers live in now.
RAW it doesnt do anything. It cant hinder your abilites or action. It doesnt give you a negitive modifier to checks or bonus' to anything. All it does is give you a scar that has no effect on your character or the game at all. At most it might make finding some one again easier.
Creative Director
|
Yeah; it's basically a more flavorful version of the spell arcane mark. It lets the witch mess with appearances and mark certain creatures for whatever reason she wants. It might be something she uses as a sort of badge of honor for favorite minions. It might be something she uses to vex and annoy vain enemies.
Try it on a PC who is particularly fond of their character's appearance. Even if it has NO game effect other than disfiguring, that effect is going to disturb and frighten and annoy players who take the time to come up with more than just numbers for their characters.
Whether or not it's an actual useful hex for PC witches depends on how willing the GM is to give his NPCs personalities that look beyond the numbers and react to in-game events without metagame knowledge. Having someone be able to put a hideous scar on you, even if that scar doesn't actually hurt you or otherwise disable you, would be a pretty harrowing and scary thing to have happen, after all!
Its a great ability for dealing with shape shifters and Illusion magic. You can mark every one in the party and its good friend/foe recognition.
Yeah; it's basically a more flavorful version of the spell arcane mark. It lets the witch mess with appearances and mark certain creatures for whatever reason she wants. It might be something she uses as a sort of badge of honor for favorite minions. It might be something she uses to vex and annoy vain enemies.
Try it on a PC who is particularly fond of their character's appearance. Even if it has NO game effect other than disfiguring, that effect is going to disturb and frighten and annoy players who take the time to come up with more than just numbers for their characters.
Whether or not it's an actual useful hex for PC witches depends on how willing the GM is to give his NPCs personalities that look beyond the numbers and react to in-game events without metagame knowledge. Having someone be able to put a hideous scar on you, even if that scar doesn't actually hurt you or otherwise disable you, would be a pretty harrowing and scary thing to have happen, after all!
The trouble with that is that [I]Arcane Mark[I] is a cantrip (already on the Witch spell list, by the by), which are intended to be 'mundane utility' spells, short on power, but high on roleplaying potential or really basic work, and as a prepared caster, the witch can know as many cantrips as she likes, so having Arcane Mark in her repertoire costs her virtually nothing.
Hexes, on the other hand, are a starkly limited resource. You wouldn't print a feat that has no mechanical benefit, and you shouldn't print hexes that don't either. A player should not have to significantly sacrifice their character's effectiveness to have flavor.
I'd take Scar as a cantrip any day for precisely that flavor which you laud. When it's a Hex? I'll take one of the many equally flavorful Hexes with an actual benefit and get out a knife if I want to scar somebody.
oh and you can make a fortune on it I'n the cosmetics business applying beauty marks.
really though I think it has ALOT of rp thematics ALOT of the new witch stuff excited me for that.
Yeah; it's basically a more flavorful version of the spell arcane mark. It lets the witch mess with appearances and mark certain creatures for whatever reason she wants. It might be something she uses as a sort of badge of honor for favorite minions. It might be something she uses to vex and annoy vain enemies.
Try it on a PC who is particularly fond of their character's appearance. Even if it has NO game effect other than disfiguring, that effect is going to disturb and frighten and annoy players who take the time to come up with more than just numbers for their characters.
Whether or not it's an actual useful hex for PC witches depends on how willing the GM is to give his NPCs personalities that look beyond the numbers and react to in-game events without metagame knowledge. Having someone be able to put a hideous scar on you, even if that scar doesn't actually hurt you or otherwise disable you, would be a pretty harrowing and scary thing to have happen, after all!
I'd have to agree with Revan.
If the scar actually did something quantifiable beyond "Haha, I screwed with your characters looks" Then there might actually be something there for use of what is roughly equivalent to a feat. Being able to say, apply both a disguise bonus and negative.. intimidate check bonuses or negitives, bluff, diplomacy.. etc.
Then we would have something that would be a good hex.
i really wish i had played a witch and had this hex in our Curse of the Crimson Throne so i coulda threw a big ugly nasty scar on the queens face.
IMO, the witch as a classs f*%&s with people.
this is just another way to do just that.
The scars don't hinder anything and applying a penalty to the targets actions/abilities would in fact be hindering them.
So by RAW, the man you put a X shape scar on his face, could easily put on a wig and roll for disguise. And now no one knows who he is.
You could scar "Traitor of the Queen" and he can continue to talk to the queen as if nothing happened.
That's the problem.
That's the gist of my problem, right there. Having a horrible scar on your face should have some sort of quantifiable disadvantage. By RAW no one is able to care that you're hideously disfigured.
So even snide remarks about how sad it is to play RPGs with rules in them, it would make sense for this hex to have some sort of effect. Even if it was just a minor circumstance penalty in certain social situations.
Though I would prefer some mechanical effect in addition to what it is now (if only for consistency between gaming groups) there are a lot of good ideas posted above.
Let's turn this thread around and try and come up with ways to make such an ability useful. Some that have already been mentioned are as follows:
- Disguises for yourself or others ("How could I have committed the crime? Look at my eyes! I'm clearly blind.")
- Easy friend/foe recognition
- Making criminals easily identifiable to the public (nothing screams rapist like having "rapist" carved into your forehead)
- Marking favored servants as a reward
- Money making schemes (beauty marks for rent)
- Punishment/Revenge (ruining a vane individual's good looks for example)
- Scaring peasants into subservience ("I will curse you with ugliness if you don't do my bidding!")
Some new ones I've come up with:
- Communication potential (scarring an animal with a secret message UNDER its fur to get information past guards/enemy spies)
- Framing someone (file a report with the city guard that you were attacked by someone, but you fended them off, scarring their face in the process)
Share some of your own ideas.
Make no mistake, I still think there should be a CONSISTENT mechanical effect tied to the ability.
I like the direction RD is taking this, but I wanted to respond to the idea that "(t)hese scars do not hinder the target’s actions or abilities in any way" means there cannot be a mechanical effect. Without hindering MY actions or abilities, having a major scar on my face might very well influence how someone reacts to me. In game terms, if I'm dealing with a tribe of Barbarians who ritually scarify their faces as a rite of manhood, it SHOULD matter to them whether or not I have scars on my face. My Diplomacy/Intimidate ranks don't change and neither does my roll - my actions and abilities aren't hindered in any way. But the DC I'm rolling against should be higher or lower based on whether or not I am scarred. I would expect my GM to consider a factor like that during social encounters.
- Making criminals easily identifiable to the public (nothing screams rapist like having "rapist" carved into your forehead)
why stop at the face, since you have no limit to how big and the ammount of scarring, why not put it on every minute part of his body?
I mean, a forehead scar's pretty easy to hide (grow long hair, wear a hat, put on some coverup, etc) but when it's repeated everywhere (like your fingers, eyelids, lips, etc) there's not really much you can do to hide it unless you want to look like someone trying to hide something.
or you're pretending to be a Coat-Rack.
other uses: remembering things. just scar the word onto your palm or something, no need to pen and ink anymore (plus it's just a move action to get rid of) "remember to get milk and eggs for the baby-cake."
Though I would prefer some mechanical effect in addition to what it is now (if only for consistency between gaming groups) there are a lot of good ideas posted above.
Let's turn this thread around and try and come up with ways to make such an ability useful. Some that have already been mentioned are as follows:
- Disguises for yourself or others ("How could I have committed the crime? Look at my eyes! I'm clearly blind.")
- Easy friend/foe recognition
- Making criminals easily identifiable to the public (nothing screams rapist like having "rapist" carved into your forehead)
- Marking favored servants as a reward
- Money making schemes (beauty marks for rent)
- Punishment/Revenge (ruining a vane individual's good looks for example)
- Scaring peasants into subservience ("I will curse you with ugliness if you don't do my bidding!")Some new ones I've come up with:
- Communication potential (scarring an animal with a secret message UNDER its fur to get information past guards/enemy spies)
- Framing someone (file a report with the city guard that you were attacked by someone, but you fended them off, scarring their face in the process)Share some of your own ideas.
Make no mistake, I still think there should be a CONSISTENT mechanical effect tied to the ability.
Wdone. And I agree that nevertheless a guideline for GMs could be nice ("as an example, a penalty to relevant social skill of -2, with an additional -2 every..").
I don't know. Perhaps, because this is still called a roleplaying game, as opposed to a tabletop wargame? Gets a bit lost here around sometimes.
I'm amazed at how many people get lost in d20 on the way to ACTUAL role-playing systems.
Sad, sad days we roleplayers live in now.
Psst, there was no role-playing hayday for d20, it came from a war game.
Moreover, even in role-playing HEAVY systems, there are rules provided outlining or at least giving examples of what and how to reward players for role-playing.The ONLY time role-players ever really role-played for the giggles was when they were kids playing make-believe. Is it just me, or does it seem a number of "true role-players" are really theater geeks with stage fright.
I don't know. Perhaps, because this is still called a roleplaying game, as opposed to a tabletop wargame? Gets a bit lost here around sometimes.I'm amazed at how many people get lost in d20 on the way to ACTUAL role-playing systems.
This is not the point IMHO. I RP a lot with pathfinder (whole sessions without a combat in a row), but that does not mean that I don't want good crunch.
Moreover, I stuck with 3.5 and then PF because I want a decent connection between rules and fluff.
I think there is a very good reason why they did not put the mechanical effects of scars on somebody....
How many people have played characters with scars? So now because of your fluff choice you are recieving a mechanical penalty?
It is better to leave this up to the group in my opinion.
@RD: Your list of possible effects are awesome...why do we need the game designers giving it to us? I mean I love being creative....PF encourages it. That is why I play it and not the other brand.
OTH: I do agree some guideline from the designers would be helpful. But it should be noted as guidelines not RULES...
Psst, there was no role-playing hayday for d20, it came from a war game.
Moreover, even in role-playing HEAVY systems, there are rules provided outlining or at least giving examples of what and how to reward players for role-playing.The ONLY time role-players ever really role-played for the giggles was when they were kids playing make-believe. Is it just me, or does it seem a number of "true role-players" are really theater geeks with stage fright.
Pssst...D20 has no connection to wargaming....that was OD&D...it has move on and evoled since than.
I think it could've been better as a Witch-only cantrip
|
Creative Director
|
Also: one of the reasons we created more hexes than any one witch could ever learn is so that folks COULD have options if they didn't like one. Don't like the scar hex? No problem. There's plenty of other choices to pick.
Not every option in a system built to offer options can be the best choice.
I think it could've been better as a Witch-only cantrip
A-yup.
Psst, there was no role-playing hayday for d20, it came from a war game.
Moreover, even in role-playing HEAVY systems, there are rules provided outlining or at least giving examples of what and how to reward players for role-playing.The ONLY time role-players ever really role-played for the giggles was when they were kids playing make-believe. Is it just me, or does it seem a number of "true role-players" are really theater geeks with stage fright.
Pssst...D20 has no connection to wargaming....that was OD&D...it has move on and evoled since than.
You're correct. D&D, therefore Pathfinder and d20, came from wargames. So at what point in the evolution was D&D the mythical role-playing game?
You're correct. D&D, therefore Pathfinder and d20, came from wargames. So at what point in the evolution was D&D the mythical role-playing game?
Actualy at all points. RPG are what you make them.
I think it could've been better as a Witch-only cantrip
Great a another useless cantrip that will never work past 10th level...just what the games needs.
Also: one of the reasons we created more hexes than any one witch could ever learn is so that folks COULD have options if they didn't like one. Don't like the scar hex? No problem. There's plenty of other choices to pick.
Not every option in a system built to offer options can be the best choice.
And
I disagree. There's not "good drawbacks" for regeneration, or damage reduction, or energy immunity. Saying SR needs a good drawback is, in my opinion, kinda going against the philosophy that defenses should be things people want.
It's better for SR to be something that you get at higher level for the most part (special low-level monsters notwithstanding, since they're not intentionally designed as PC options), and NOT have elements that make characters not want it.Put another way, if something is supposedly as powerful as SR has a fair amount of players turning it down because its disadvantage is too much... then it's not balanced and not well-designed with an eye toward use in play by players.
I see a disjunct between these two ideas. On one hand you suggest that no one has to take the option if they don't want to (it's optional). On the other hand, you suggest that if an option isn't being chosen, it wasn't well-designed.
I don't mean to make this a personal affront to you at all, but you're the (Creative Director), I kinda expected more consistency concerning game design. You criticize the way Spell Resistance works because it's funky and prohibitive, (I assume?). But then support this option, despite the use of resources to allow role-playing (why can't I just use arcane marks instead, and call them scars?)
Or maybe I'm way off the mark. Maybe you guys have found through market research that more people have more fun with the game if these options are thrown in. I can't say I'm one of them.
I think it could've been better as a Witch-only cantripGreat a another useless cantrip that will never work past 10th level...just what the games needs.
If it's useless as a cantrip, what makes it useful as a HEX? Why are there useless things AT ALL? They are USELESS.
I personally do not believe that the Scar Hex should be entirely discluded as an ability in the game. I likely would not have thought of using scars to mark things in this way as a witch, and am glad to have the idea. I just don't get how it's worth the hex slot.
Of course, if you sit down with your GM, you could hash out some secondary effect and ignore the fact that the Hex says it does not hinder or benefit any ability, but why put in options that NEED to be house-ruled for MOST people to consider taking it?
I could understand if the designers were interested in presenting more options, and in the same breath encouraged GMs and players to get creative with the usage. But what about new players, or new GMs?
Part of me doesn't want the books to be stripped down to the bare bones with all of the meat supplied by the players. Another part of me doesn't want to have ambiguously legitimate options clogging up the works. I don't know where the balance lies, but I'd have to guess that, for me, it's a bit closer to the latter.
I think it could've been better as a Witch-only cantripGreat a another useless cantrip that will never work past 10th level...just what the games needs.
To clarify - good as hex, bad as cantrip.
Yeah, this makes sense.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I think it could've been better as a Witch-only cantripGreat a another useless cantrip that will never work past 10th level...just what the games needs.To clarify - good as hex, bad as cantrip.
Yeah, this makes sense.
I think the point is, as a hex its DC remains competitive as you level. As a cantrip, it's DC is pretty much set, meaning you'd only ever be able use it on low CR creatures.