| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
With around 9 months of playtesting, I've revisited the Warlock archetype for the Witch class for some minor changes. Overall, it seemed to work out pretty well. A primary issue noticed almost immediately during play was the "hex" tax for the modifications to a character's "witchfire". Too many of the standard witch hexes were too important to pass up, and though the "witchfire blast" was used, it was primarily used at the base level (i.e. unmodified).
I decided to just drop the "essences" as they were (partly due to warlock not being OGL which Kitsune Knight pointed out ages ago and partly due to the immense amount of space it took) and pulled the mechanic from the antipaladin's "touch of corruption" to allow for modifications to the witchfire with a couple minor additions (primarily changing the blast to certain elements). The "Witchfire Malediction" hex now covers most of the secondary effects possible for a warlock and allows a player to acquire more diverse abilities, though still limited.
At the moment, I still have the "Pattern" hexes as individual hexes and added a few new patterns to the mix. I've been giving some consideration to rolling them, as well, into a "Witchfire Patterns" hex and allowing the player to select around 2-3 patterns per purchase of the hex or use a similar rate to acquire them as the Malediction version, all in the name of diversity.
I added an additional component to the base witchfire, as well, allowing the player to decide whether they wished to make a melee or ranged touch attack.
The current version with the changes can be found here: Witch Archetype: Warlock.
I thought about it a lot last night, and decided to make another change. The "hex-tax" is still too much for the archetype. I rolled the witchfire maledictions entry into a class feature and will leave the patterns as individual hexes. The maledictions on their own are not so powerful as to warrant an individual hex for each one and a single hex is just too clunky looking. However, each pattern can be a powerful tool and for the time being I'm going to leave them as individual hexes. I'm giving some considerating to making these pattern hexes scale, however, so that a warlock might be able to accomplish greater effects as they level, which follows the design of some of the standard hexes. I also did some minor cleaning of the language (typos and whatnot) and added in two feats at the end to cover the "extra witchfire malediction" (1 witchfire malediction per feat) and "extra witchfire" (2 uses per feat).
I'm still working on the exact costs that should be associated with each pattern. While the witchfire pool using just maledictions allows you to attack and debuff/control for an extended period of time, the limiting factor of it being single target keeps the maledictions in line. When it comes down to pattern hexes, however, the overall versatility and power increases significantly and an appropriate cost should be applied. I want to clean up and condense the language of the patterns - as it stands they are far too wordy.
Hm... I think missing a hex at fourth level for maladictions would be fine. Also I think adding a maladiction at 8th level that allows for the full effect of the witchfire to be applied to incorporeals might not be a bad idea.
One comment I have is, why the sorcerer bloodline? I feel the patron is a good enough flavor to match the Warlock than Eldritch Heritage.
Hm... I think missing a hex at fourth level for maladictions would be fine. Also I think adding a maladiction at 8th level that allows for the full effect of the witchfire to be applied to incorporeals might not be a bad idea.
Excellent points, on both counts. Both changes/suggestions are completed. Thanks!
One comment I have is, why the sorcerer bloodline? I feel the patron is a good enough flavor to match the Warlock than Eldritch Heritage.
When this was first put together, the idea was the try and find a pre-existing mechanic to "safely" reflect the resistances and other abilities granted by the original 3.5 warlock class features (such as the elemental resistance, damage reduction/cold iron, and so on. The problem was, depending on which "pact" or "patron" the character had, these mechanics would be drastically different in flavor. A warlock who received his powers from a pact with the fey would not have the same benefits as one who's powers stemmed from association with demons, for example. My initial presentation of it limited the bloodline choices significantly (fey, demon, devil, and I think that was it). It was expanded with the "GM approval" clause.
Additionally, the witch patrons did not seem to add to the feel of the warlock - it's a series of bonus spells, many of which a witch (haha) already has access to. We noticed with comparisons that some of the witch patrons were clearly superior to others from a mechanical point of view (the same can be said of many things, however).
Ultimately, it allows each warlock to have a different and very obvious flavor, with the option to improve the "bloodline" through feats or not, if they so choose. The 2 bonus feats the warlock acquires gives them a "taste" of the bloodline power, with the requirement of an additional investment of 2 more feats "out of their own pocket" to realize the full potential (i.e. get the prerequisites for the level 15 power), though they'll never get the capstone.
Don't get me wrong, I've actually had one player request the patron spells over the bloodline abilities and I allowed that to fly in-game. Her reasons were purely fluff/roleplay and I had no problem with it.
Edit: Thought of this after the post, but if you or someone else was to use this archetype or something similar, and had a preference for the patron spells over the eldritch heritage bonus feats, you can just delete the entry in your copy of it. I honestly do not believe it will affect anyone's enjoyment (mechanically or otherwise) of it in either fashion. It's really a matter of GM/player preference. My group really enjoyed the feats vs the patrons, but it may not be the case for every group.
Very interesting, Da'ath. My own take on the warlock went in a slightly different direction, a base class and not an archtype. But you have some very good things in there. I'm just not sure though about the 9th level spellcasting for a warlock.
MA
I like it. It adds much of the flavor of the 3E warlock without adding a new class.
My only concerns are with some of the maledictions like Diseased inflicting damage as well as the effect of a spell, in this case Contagion. The fact that it costs a hex and can only be done a limited number of times helps to balance things out a bit, though.
Thanks! My group has enjoyed it, minus the problems I mentioned in my intial post.
You have a good point. I just got done reviewing the antipaladin's cruelties, where the idea for the maledictions originated, and the limiting factors for it are a. single target only and b. range of melee touch. If I limit it in those fashions, i.e. preventing these from becoming area effects through the patterns, would it then be more reasonable or should it still be removed?
Very interesting, Da'ath. My own take on the warlock went in a slightly different direction, a base class and not an archtype. But you have some very good things in there. I'm just not sure though about the 9th level spellcasting for a warlock.
MA
You know, I could have sworn I borrowed the idea for the eldritch heritage/pact bit from you, but I didn't see any reference to it in your final version. Did you remove it from a previous version or did I just get the idea from some(one/place) else?
As it turned out, prior to me getting the idea for the archetype in Dec 2011 and testing it, Paizo had released the [url=http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/archetypes/paizo---wizard-archetypes/arcane-bomber]Arcane Bomber[/u] as an archetype for Wizards, which functions on a similar level, though with a less narrow focus. The average damage per round of the "witchfire" ability is also a limiting factor (especially when combined with the diminished spellcasting feature and the normal bab, saves, armor restrictions, and what not of the witch). While the feature gives the more blasting capability and captures the flavor of the warlock class, the damage is in no way comprable to a sorceror or wizard - the sorceror and wizard really shine in output.
Example: At 5th level, a warlock can deal, on average with his witchfire, around 10.5 damage+/- (3d6 + modifier) to one target, while a wiz/sorc can deal 17.5 average damage to multiple targets (5d6 fireball).
I can't get the idea of a Warlock multi-classed Magus out of my head now. The mental image of projecting your witchfire onto your blade is entertaining, even though I'm pretty sure that isn't quite kosher.
Perhaps coming up with an alternative Hexcrafter archetype would be a good plan for this. I may play with that idea a bit.
Either way, good stuff.
It's actually pretty funny you mention that, as I've had a similar idea running through my head since last year. I made a modified version of a "witchblade" magus archetype, which combined the bladebound and hexcrafter archetypes to capture the feel of the Witchblade Comic Book to a certain degree for an elite warden-style sect of elves in my campaign setting, which has absolutely nothing to do with the "witchfire" idea. I had to add a limited "transformative" feature to the black blade so that it could change between the guantlet form and the sword-guantlet requiring at least 1 arcane point in the pool to do so.
I'd also courted the idea of converting the Soulknife class to a "Witchblade" previously, by simply changing the fluff. Only minor mechanical changes would need made - the fluff would have to be completely changed, however. Any references to "psionic focus" would probably be better applied to Spellcraft in this case, with a special entry in the converted class' mechanics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Hubris - I know your pain. Generally speaking, I don't actually play anymore as a player, but as a GM; I find I enjoy GMing far more.=)
The following hex (original post here) was something I'd come up with based on the flavor of the warlock, as well as the movie, "Warlock" starring Julian Sands sometime ago. It was intended to compliment the flavor of the warlock, but is available to all witches. It appears I had never placed the updated version up like I said I would, so here it is (also added to the warlock archetype):
Grand Hex
Curse of Ages (Su) The witch curses the target so he is doomed to die of rapid aging (Will negates). As long as the curse persists, the target's age category increases by one each day at midnight, suffering the penalties of aging, but gaining none of the benefits provided by their new age category. A venerable target under the effects of this curse must make a successful Fortitude save each day the curse persists or die instantly. A target can only have one curse of ages upon him at a time. Slaying the witch that hexed the creature ends the effect, but any aging effects remain and can only be reversed by a miracle or wish spell. Whether or not the saves are successful, a creature cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day. Creatures that do not age or use the standard age categories (such as dragons) are unaffected. This is a curse effect.
Many thanks to Set, who had the solution to make the hex relevant.
Several questions.
1) Why no greater Greater Eldritch Heritage in the Pact?
2) Their are several instances in the hexes where it mentions points of Witchfire. I assume that this means uses per day, but some clarification would be nice.
3) Also, the bit about a Warlock being able to apply his Intelligence modifier to Witchfire should probably be added to the Witchfire ability itself. Not stated in a paragraph at the bottom of the Maledictions. I mention it cause I only saw it on about my 3rd read through.
So, all in all very good design aside from a few small things. I'll take it to my group and see what they say about playing it.
Edit: Also, I don't know about stacking Extra Witchfire. It seems like you would just take that feat a couple of times (along with the extra hex feat) and end up being far more powerful than normal. I'll probably just delete the line about it being taken multiple times for my games, but it is something for you to think about.
Several questions.
1) Why no greater Greater Eldritch Heritage in the Pact?
2) Their are several instances in the hexes where it mentions points of Witchfire. I assume that this means uses per day, but some clarification would be nice.
3) Also, the bit about a Warlock being able to apply his Intelligence modifier to Witchfire should probably be added to the Witchfire ability itself. Not stated in a paragraph at the bottom of the Maledictions. I mention it cause I only saw it on about my 3rd read through.
So, all in all very good design aside from a few small things. I'll take it to my group and see what they say about playing it.
Edit: Also, I don't know about stacking Extra Witchfire. It seems like you would just take that feat a couple of times (along with the extra hex feat) and end up being far more powerful than normal. I'll probably just delete the line about it being taken multiple times for my games, but it is something for you to think about.
Good questions & points. I'll address each in order:
1. I really wish I hadn't deleted the really (really) early rough draft of the archetype, as I believe it actually contained a progression for eldritch heritage (1st level ability) at 3rd level, improved eldritch heritage (3rd level ability) at 9th level, improved eldritch heritage (9th level ability) at 15th level, and greater eldritch heritage (15th level ability) at 20th level.
While I was writing this, I actually found the original progression for the Pact class feature. Instead of granting the feats, I had just given the warlock the "bloodline abilities" at a level the sorceror would normally receive them at and changed it later to be just that, but with the exception of the capstone (i.e. gained the abilities as a sorceror with your warlock level -5). It was suggested I use the eldritch heritage feats and I apparently just stopped at 2 for some reason (not sure if I forgot or was lazy or just didn't think about it), which isn't very equitable when compared against some of the patron spells available. The question becomes:
Is the progression of Eldritch Heritage at 3rd/Improved at 9/2nd Improved 15th/and greater at 20th the way to go?
I think the following language should work, if this is found to be acceptable:
Pact Each warlock has made a pact with beings of power. Regardless of the source, this influence manifests as the warlock gains levels. At 3rd level, a warlock gains eldritch heritage as a bonus feat. At 9th and 15th level, a warlock gains improved eldritch heritage as a bonus feat. At 20th level, a warlock gains greater eldritch heritage as a bonus feat.
A warlock need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them. The warlock uses his Intelligence modifier to determine uses per day, save DCs, and other applicable effects. The bloodline chosen is subject to GM approval.
This ability replaces patron spells.
2. I think I have that clarified, now. Thanks!
3. That should be fixed now. I've been trying to go back and rewrite/condense a lot of the material (it was way too wordy before and still is, in some respects), as the original version was primarily cut & paste in many respects, which is a mistake we see with some Pathfinder products - I should have learned from that, but I'm apparently a slow learner.=)
I also clarified that the warlock should use his Intelligence modifier in place of Charisma for the purposes of the Eldritch Heritage feats.
Several questions.
1) Why no greater Greater Eldritch Heritage in the Pact?
2) Their are several instances in the hexes where it mentions points of Witchfire. I assume that this means uses per day, but some clarification would be nice.
3) Also, the bit about a Warlock being able to apply his Intelligence modifier to Witchfire should probably be added to the Witchfire ability itself. Not stated in a paragraph at the bottom of the Maledictions. I mention it cause I only saw it on about my 3rd read through.
So, all in all very good design aside from a few small things. I'll take it to my group and see what they say about playing it.
Edit: Also, I don't know about stacking Extra Witchfire. It seems like you would just take that feat a couple of times (along with the extra hex feat) and end up being far more powerful than normal. I'll probably just delete the line about it being taken multiple times for my games, but it is something for you to think about.
Good questions & points. I'll address each in order:
1. I really wish I hadn't deleted the really (really) early rough draft of the archetype, as I believe it actually contained a progression for eldritch heritage (1st level ability) at 3rd level, improved eldritch heritage (3rd level ability) at 9th level, improved eldritch heritage (9th level ability) at 15th level, and greater eldritch heritage (15th level ability) at 20th level.
While I was writing this, I actually found the original progression for the Pact class feature. Instead of granting the feats, I had just given the warlock the "bloodline abilities" at a level the sorceror would normally receive them at and changed it later to be just that, but with the exception of the capstone (i.e. gained the abilities as a sorceror with your warlock level -5). It was suggested I use the eldritch heritage feats and I apparently just stopped at 2 for some reason (not sure if...
I think all that should work out well. Adds in the archetype getting its own special capstone with the Greater Eldritch Heritage and should bring it close to what it looses as well. I think it would be nice to see an ability/hex that allows for a more workable melee based character as well (to take advantage of the orc bloodlines). Maybe a hex that lets you trade out the bonus damage die for a bonus to attack and damage?
Maybe a hex that lets you trade out the bonus damage die for a bonus to attack and damage?
That could be interesting, but would have to be spelled out explicitly so as to avoid it being used with the witch spells that are attack roll-based.
That sort of thing would be really neat for a "Witchfire Magus" archetype, as well, which I've been considering more seriously after Hubris commented on it.
Tempted to go with the following after I can do some math (tomorrow, I'm tired at this point, lol):
Drop heavy armor & the 3 bonus feats to put in the eldritch heritage feats; hexcrafter archetype for the hexes; add in diminished spellcasting; remove the arcane pool entirely (1/2 level + int) and add in the witchfire entry/progression allowing the magus to power his pool-related abilities from the same pool as his witchfire.
Alternatively, the pool could remain the same, add the witchfire entries, and the magus would have a diminished pool to pull from (the arcane pool) instead of the larger caster-based witchfire pool.
Blah. I'm going to slap the outline together now.
You know, I could have sworn I borrowed the idea for the eldritch heritage/pact bit from you, but I didn't see any reference to it in your final version. Did you remove it from a previous version or did I just get the idea from some(one/place) else?
Nope, none of mine ever had the eldritch heritage or pacts, although there was a discussion about pacts on the first thread (linked to in the one I linked here). But those weren't my ideas.
MA
I can't get the idea of a Warlock multi-classed Magus out of my head now. The mental image of projecting your witchfire onto your blade is entertaining, even though I'm pretty sure that isn't quite kosher.
Perhaps coming up with an alternative Hexcrafter archetype would be a good plan for this. I may play with that idea a bit.
Either way, good stuff.
It's actually pretty funny you mention that, as I've had a similar idea running through my head since last year. I made a modified version of a "witchblade" magus archetype, which combined the bladebound and hexcrafter archetypes to capture the feel of the Witchblade Comic Book to a certain degree for an elite warden-style sect of elves in my campaign setting, which has absolutely nothing to do with the "witchfire" idea. I had to add a limited "transformative" feature to the black blade so that it could change between the guantlet form and the sword-guantlet requiring at least 1 arcane point in the pool to do so.
I'd also courted the idea of converting the Soulknife class to a "Witchblade" previously, by simply changing the fluff. Only minor mechanical changes would need made - the fluff would have to be completely changed, however. Any references to "psionic focus" would probably be better applied to Spellcraft in this case, with a special entry in the converted class' mechanics.
Sounds good. Never read Witchblade, but then, comics aren't particularly easy to find here (Half an hour to the nearest store that would carry them).
The Soulknife might be good too, I'm just not as sure about it. I imagine it shouldn't be too hard though: just replace some of the talents with new stuff to do with witchfire.
... Too many character ideas, not enough time to play them all.
Ahem. Master Arminas's Witchblade, a Pathfinder Hexblade, you might find this interesting. :)
MA
I think that would be an excellent limiting factor.
But perhaps at high level that limitation could be overcome by some option that involves using more witchfire points. It could well bring the warlock up to par with other classes then.
Added in the restriction. I have to do some comparisons to see what the minimum level should be for lifting said restrictions.=)
I added in a "witchfire shield" pattern, based off an idea in the 3.5 Dungeonscape supplement. I think the mechanic is fine, but any feed back is appreciated.
Archetype: Warlock.
With some more testing, a lot of the extra baggage from previous versions was removed - overall, the archetype was trimmed down a good bit. Several of the speculated issues mentioned by previous posters surfaced and were corrected for. Additionally, the witchfire mechanic was overhauled.
It's been almost a year, so I figured a reposting with the latest version was in order: Witch Archetype: Warlock.
As far as the Eldritch Pact goes, as presented, the limited choices of pacts are particular to my setting. A GM can open them up to whatever they feel comfortable with.
The only real issue I'm concerned with is making the warlock a dual attribute dependency with my use of Charisma for many of these abilities.
Restored the splash damage effect to witchfire, which I somehow managed to leave out when copying to the google doc; also clarified that only the primary target suffers the effects of witchfire modified by a malediction (if any).
Interesting.
I have to admit, I would have paired the 3.5 warlock with alchemist, and just crossed out the word bombs to write in eldritch blast.
Could these witch fire abilities be discoveries instead?
You could certainly reskin the alchemist class as a warlock with mostly fluff alterations; I'm pretty certain the alchemist was Paizo's attempt at giving their players a warlock-like system. Pairing it with the witch is really more of a personal preference and took far less rewriting of fluff for me.
As far as making the witchfire abilities more like discoveries, the original attempt at the class did just that, which Cartmanbeck posted here.
During gameplay, my group found the cost versus benefits too high (loss of hexes, loss of feats, etc). With that in mind, I made a series of revisions, which can be found at the end of the current google doc under the heading "Old Version" at the bottom of the doc.
Ultimately, it still didn't play as well as we'd like, and still had gameplay problems and was a little bit too versatile for what we wanted, as a group. These current revisions have worked rather well in play, mostly due to junking a lot of legacy "ideas" from the original warlock and using existing mechanics in Pathfinder. It still needs some minor tweaks, and I'd appreciate any questions, comments, or suggestions.
Huh. I liked the witchfire patterns of the older legacy version. I could even see gaining them for free (and gained at the rates posted inthe older version) as part of a suite rolled into Witchfire. I can see that it would greatly increase versatility, which your group found to be problematic. I still like them!!! ;)
Looking good Da'ath, and nice to see the design path and the elisions made along the way.
Huh. I liked the witchfire patterns of the older legacy version. I could even see gaining them for free (and gained at the rates posted inthe older version) as part of a suite rolled into Witchfire. I can see that it would greatly increase versatility, which your group found to be problematic. I still like them!!! ;)
Looking good Da'ath, and nice to see the design path and the elisions made along the way.
I added them back in as optional rules for those who liked the patterns. Even though I had originally removed them, I really liked them too and thanks!