Nerfing Witch's Fortune


Advice

1 to 50 of 52 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Last week I played one session in a group of 6 as a level 2 Witch. I'd built as party support with Soothsayer, Fortune and Cackle hexes. I was able to keep Fortune going through a series of encounters by continuously cackling. Afterwards, both the DM and myself agreed that the impact of long lasting fortune was too great. He is reluctant to impose a nerf, but I don't want him to feel that he needs to add in zones of silence or other 'tricks' to overcome cackle every session.

With that in mind I came up with the following proposed changes to Fortune:

Fortune (Su)
Old Description

Spoiler:
Effect: The witch can grant a creature within 30 feet a bit of good luck for 1 round. The target can call upon this good luck once per round, allowing him to reroll any ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check, taking the better result. He must decide to use this ability before the first roll is made. At 8th level and 16th level, the duration of this hex is extended by 1 round. Once a creature has benefited from the fortune hex, it cannot benefit from it again for 24 hours.

New Description
Spoiler:
Effect: The witch can grant all allies within 30 feet, including the witch, a bit of good luck for 1 round. The targets can call upon this good luck once per round, allowing them to reroll any ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check, taking the better result. They must decide to use this ability before the first roll is made. A creature can benefit from this hex each day for a maximum number of rounds equal to 5 plus half the witches level, although these rounds do not need to occur consecutively.

Effectively this would mean that the Fortune could affect 1-2 encounters at low level, 2-3 at mid level, then 3-4 at high level, depending on the sort of enounter. Also changed it to daily to avoid the complication of exact 24 hour time measurements and as a slight counterweight to its reduction in power. Soothsayer would also be removed from the game, so it would take a standard action in combat to cast it.

Any thoughts on this?


Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.

No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.


Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.

Yeah, it just doesn't make sense.

Can you imagine a witch bursting out laughing every 6 seconds with no apparent reason?
That's kinda the same. Logically, fortune hex only lasts for one combat and that's it. Just imagine that if you search a room for 10 minutes, you have to cackle 100 times.
That's a bit ridiculous, don't you think?


That is the problem, you are cackling every round in between combats. Yeah No.. first the dm should have the people around you get huge negatives to any diplomacy your party is apart of. Plus you need to be within 30 feet of all your party members all the time. Meaning you all have to have bathroom breaks at the same time same place.
Also, yoour travel is slowed down to your reduced movement. Travelling by horse unnerves the animals so constant handle animal checks has to be made.

The hex doesn't need to be nerfed...you need to be nerfed.


Isn't this a buff as it affects ALL allies within 30 feet now instead of just 1? Its still 5-15 re-rolls for each ally per day


I can see your points, and I'm aware how ridiculous it is, but in a way there was no reason for me to not cackle in between combats. No diplomacy checks, no riding, no stealth checks, just walking down corridors.


Apraham Lincoln wrote:
Isn't this a buff as it affects ALL allies within 30 feet now instead of just 1? Its still 5-15 re-rolls for each ally per day

Before I could use soothsayer to buff them all up before combat, then cackle once combat started to keep it applied.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Redrazors wrote:

I can see your points, and I'm aware how ridiculous it is, but in a way there was no reason for me to not cackle in between combats. No diplomacy checks, no riding, no stealth checks, just walking down corridors.

Sure, you've got a mechanically advantageous reason and ability to keep cackling, but that's not really the same as having no reason to stop. From an in-character perspective, having a constantly cackling person slow-walking the dungeon with me would be irritating as hell. From a metagame perspective, realizing that the problem you are encountering derives from how you are using the cackle hex and not the fortune hex is another.


Redrazors wrote:

I can see your points, and I'm aware how ridiculous it is, but in a way there was no reason for me to not cackle in between combats. No diplomacy checks, no riding, no stealth checks, just walking down corridors.

Were the enemies you encountered all aware of your approach as you cackled madly the entire way?

Also, how was your throat feeling afterwards?


OK so the solution lies with not cackling beyond one combat. I'll just do that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.

I would never ever allow someone to maintain a constant cackle, any more than I would allow someone to maintain a combat action 24/7.


LazarX wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.
I would never ever allow someone to maintain a constant cackle, any more than I would allow someone to maintain a combat action 24/7.

I would let someone try, but it would become evident that it is a bad idea.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.
I would never ever allow someone to maintain a constant cackle, any more than I would allow someone to maintain a combat action 24/7.
I would let someone try, but it would become evident that it is a bad idea.

I should note that none of your suggestions stop a witch from keeping Fortune up for 10 minutes as the party clears a building/dungeon. It hinders infini-cackle, but that is only the most extreme case of cackle usage.


Snowblind wrote:


I should note that none of your suggestions stop a witch from keeping Fortune up for 10 minutes as the party clears a building/dungeon. It hinders infini-cackle, but that is only the most extreme case of cackle usage.

This is essentially the situation I was in. Overall, not a really long period of in-game time: thirty seconds or so per encounter, a minute or two in between.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
That is the problem, you are cackling every round in between combats. Yeah No.. first the dm should have the people around you get huge negatives to any diplomacy your party is apart of. Plus you need to be within 30 feet of all your party members all the time. Meaning you all have to have bathroom breaks at the same time same place.

And? There are plenty of scenarios where the fighting takes place more or less continuously in one day.

Scenarios:
Mists of Mwangi, Rise of the Goblin Guild, and Icebound Outpost immediately spring to mind

If you skip searching and aren't forced to wait out any effects you could clear out such a scenario in 5-10 minutes of real time (i.e. 50-100 rounds). I know plenty of people who can talk continuously for 10 minutes without a long pause.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Following the rules as they were originally written pretty much eliminates the problems you created for your game.


I would make the player cackle along with the witch they're playing, then not so subtly remind the others they can handle in-game if they want, betcha it doesn't happen more then once:-D


Snowblind wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.
I would never ever allow someone to maintain a constant cackle, any more than I would allow someone to maintain a combat action 24/7.
I would let someone try, but it would become evident that it is a bad idea.

I should note that none of your suggestions stop a witch from keeping Fortune up for 10 minutes as the party clears a building/dungeon. It hinders infini-cackle, but that is only the most extreme case of cackle usage.

That is true, however when the party becomes constantly ambushed, I think the tactics would change.


LazarX wrote:
Following the rules as they were originally written pretty much eliminates the problems you created for your game.

I get the idea of limiting cackle to one combat for all the roleplay/skill check/alerting reasons given above, they make sense. Can you elaborate on the rules as written stopping extended cackling?


Redrazors wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Following the rules as they were originally written pretty much eliminates the problems you created for your game.
I get the idea of limiting cackle to one combat for all the roleplay/skill check/alerting reasons given above, they make sense. Can you elaborate on the rules as written stopping extended cackling?

If by extended cackling meaning out of combat cackling, all day long. You can do it. In fact you can cackle twice in a round, and then run so yu don't burden the group with yur slow speed. Would make the feat that allows you to run better to be useful.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
In fact you can cackle twice in a round,

I think this, at least, did get prevented by an errata ruling: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9qoy


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.
I would never ever allow someone to maintain a constant cackle, any more than I would allow someone to maintain a combat action 24/7.
I would let someone try, but it would become evident that it is a bad idea.

I should note that none of your suggestions stop a witch from keeping Fortune up for 10 minutes as the party clears a building/dungeon. It hinders infini-cackle, but that is only the most extreme case of cackle usage.

That is true, however when the party becomes constantly ambushed, I think the tactics would change.

If they are bouncing around encounters in a short window, stealth has long since been left at the wayside. The ambushers would be able to do the exact same thing anyway unless the party decided to slow down, which won't happen if they are buffing a lot and would probably be a mistake anyway since it will give defenders more time to prepare.


Snowblind wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Yeah, not really a nerf. You removed her need to cackle. Your gm can find ways to negate the cackle, or remove you from 30 feet. Also. Yu just made it multi use per day. Originally its good for a single encounter. Which the dm could throw multiple ones at you.
No I'd still need to cackle to extend the duration. I don't see how it is good for a single encounter originally as you can continue cackling between encounters.
I would never ever allow someone to maintain a constant cackle, any more than I would allow someone to maintain a combat action 24/7.
I would let someone try, but it would become evident that it is a bad idea.

I should note that none of your suggestions stop a witch from keeping Fortune up for 10 minutes as the party clears a building/dungeon. It hinders infini-cackle, but that is only the most extreme case of cackle usage.

.

That is true, however when the party becomes constantly ambushed, I think the tactics would change.

If they are bouncing around encounters in a short window, stealth has long since been left at the wayside. The ambushers would be able to do the exact same thing anyway unless the party decided to slow down, which won't happen if they are buffing a lot and would probably be a mistake anyway since it will give defenders more time to prepare.

However they would know that a witch was about and either cast silence, or just mass target the witch in the suprise round.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Redrazors wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Following the rules as they were originally written pretty much eliminates the problems you created for your game.
I get the idea of limiting cackle to one combat for all the roleplay/skill check/alerting reasons given above, they make sense. Can you elaborate on the rules as written stopping extended cackling?

That's where GM discretion comes into play. You use the same common sense fatigue limitations that prevent people from being combat mode non-stop, the same reasons you can't maintain readied actions for long periods of time.

I follow a basic rule, you can't maintain actions outside of initiative that you normally do IN initative, such as cackle, or anything else of that nature. The rule as written I'm citing is Rule Zero. It's the GM's job to fill the holes that by necessity, RAW will always have.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

...

If they are bouncing around encounters in a short window, stealth has long since been left at the wayside. The ambushers would be able to do the exact same thing anyway unless the party decided to slow down, which won't happen if they are buffing a lot and would probably be a mistake anyway since it will give defenders more time to prepare.
However they would know that a witch was about and either cast silence, or just mass target the witch in the suprise round.

Both are pretty terrible options.

The witch will be behind the frontliners. In typical structures, the frontliners charge through the entrance and the witch follows. If hostiles are next to the entrance, the frontliners stay by the entrance(probably blocking it or at least making an AoO corridor) and the witch stays outside. Unless you start designing your dungeon/building layout to make the witch fair game, this isn't exactly a great option.

Silence is a 1 round casting time spell with a 1 round per level effect. A caster could pop it as they hear the party approach, but if the caster can hear the witch, the party can hear the caster speaking the verbal component (both of which would be DC0 perception checks). The party can just wait the 5ish rounds for the duration to run out. If the caster attempts to do so in combat, they have a good chance of getting disrupted (by a slumber hex, for example), and the witch either gets a will save (and you might as well have SoLed her with Hideous laughter or something), or the witch can just move away from the target. Besides, this all reeks of warping the campaign world to negate a single tactic by a player. If this is actually necessary, houseruling the problem away is a far better option.

EDIT:

LazarX wrote:

...

That's where GM discretion comes into play. You use the same common sense fatigue limitations that prevent people from being combat mode non-stop, the same reasons you can't maintain readied actions for long periods of time.

I follow a basic rule, you can't maintain actions outside of initiative that you normally do IN initative, such as cackle, or anything else of that nature. The rule as written I'm citing is Rule Zero. It's the GM's job to fill the holes that by necessity, RAW will always have.

Don't pay much attention to LazarX. He has a hard time understanding the difference between "the Rules As Written say feel free to deviate from the Rules As Written or patch up gaps and use other rules" and "the rules say feel free to deviate from the Rules as Written or patch up gaps and use other rules so the Rules As Written are whatever I feel like making them".


Having the ability to set up an ambush, can negate the advantage of cackling, whether by a sience spell, or some other means. It could mean that the opposition pules back, and what would be several encounters is now a single encounter.

Its not warping a campaign when intelligent adversaries are played intelligently.

Edited for my own piece of mind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rogar Stonebow wrote:


Having the ability to set up an ambush, can negate the advantage of cackling, whether by a sience spell, or some other means. It could mean that the opposition pules back, and what would be several encounters is now a single encounter.

Its not warping a campaign when intelligent adversaries are played intelligently.

Edited for my own piece of mind.

Outside of Silence (a spell that should come up very rarely UNLESS you are warping the campaign to counter a specific player), cackle is a move action ability that doesn't provoke and has a 30ft range. It is pretty difficult to stop. In point of fact, it is substantially harder to stop than casting spells with a short range. And those are not easy to stop.

If the other players aren't attempting to be stealthy, cackle is going to be about as difficult to hear as inter-PC communications (laughing loudly vs talking loudly). The witch doesn't make the slightest damn difference most of the time, because the hostiles will hear the party coming anyway. The encounters would in all likelihood combine regardless of whether the witch cackled. Unless the GM is combining the encounters and adding other tactical disadvantages only because they don't like cackle spam, not because of in-game reasons (aka warping the campaign around the witch).

I should also point out that enemies hearing laughter around the corner and going "OH GOD IT'S A CACKLE WITCH BREAK OUT THE SILENCE" is pretty damn metagamey.

The solutions you have suggested are once in a blue moon things, but this is a consistent problem for the OP. Once in a blue moon counters just don't cut it. If the solution can't be applied in the majority of encounter without creating really stupid verisimilitude issues, ridiculously restraining the possible scope of the campaign or making a player feel unfairly targeted (with good cause) then it isn't a solution.


There is a difference between a party moving stealthily down a corridor and one who's witch is cackling. It is not focused on one character when the party is benefitting so much.

If the party is being loud then the adversaries would react in the same manner. Regardless of witch.


The idea that the adversaries do not use proprer tactics and prepare accordingly when they know in advance what is coming, makes absolutely no sense. If the adversaries has a caster who can identify the witch whose cackling, then yes they will use sillence or quickened sillence if they can if it makes sense. If they hear a lot rough shod warriors coming down the corridor then they might prepare to cast a pit spell. This idea that players who use lousy tactics shouldn't suffer consequences is astounding to me.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
The idea that the adversaries do not use proprer tactics and prepare accordingly when they know in advance what is coming, makes absolutely no sense. If the adversaries has a caster who can identify the witch whose cackling, then yes they will use sillence or quickened sillence if they can if it makes sense. If they hear a lot rough shod warriors coming down the corridor then they might prepare to cast a pit spell. This idea that players who use lousy tactics shouldn't suffer consequences is astounding to me.

And if a party is bounding through encounters then the witch is not going to be the only one that is noisy - closely packed fights and stealth do not mix well. Thus it probably won't really make a difference if the hostiles hear the witch Cackling. And that's IF they actually realize that the laughter they hear is a witch Cackling. Which again sounds pretty damn metagamey. Also, do all your NPC casters walk around with silence prepped all the time? Because if they don't then how are they casting it now? Either you have to adjust the encounter on the fly to screw over the witch, or you build the encounters in advance to screw over the witch. Or you use it in the rare opportunity when the caster has the opportunity to be warned in advance of the incoming PCs AND the caster actually has the not-particularly-great spell prepped...which doesn't solve the OPs problem, since once in a blue moon encounters aren't what he is looking for.


If no one makes the knowledge check to recognize a witches cackle then they do not react appropriately. I do not build encounters to break a tactic.

As far as silence goes. My pc casters always has one mmemorized by level 8 or so. Some of them specialize in quicken silence and silent spells.


Witch doesn't need 30 feet with cackle. That's what scar is for.

In fact with Ward and healing hex, she could tell when someone's been hit and heal him all without leaving the entrance.

But let's not pretend silence isn't a thing that should be common. Every casting class and skald witch and bard abilities get shut down with it. Silence is great. Golden even.


Does cackle work with scar? I thought scar only worked with targeted hexes.

I think it's totally fair game to disallow cackling throughout an eight hour mounted journey. But when you're smashing through a building in five minutes a constant cackle certainly seems physically possible and is no less "unstealthy" than all of the combat going on.

If there's a surprise round that the witch doesn't get to participate in, would that terminate a one round hex like fortune? That might work to stop the fortune effect, although it seems like a bit of a technicality exploit itself.


Redrazors the problem with your solution is that you are manipulating fortune hex to try to solve a problem you are really having with the cackle hex.

You should try modifying the cackle hex by adding a total number of consecutive round usage. Perhaps based on primary ability modifier. After which they have to rest their vocal cords for a round before cackling again.

Doesn't stop Cackle from doing what it does and being awesome. Keeps Fortune to one combat/encounter per day more or less. Problem solved?

As a related, and I hope humorous, although unhelpful anecdote I will say that I almost had this problem in a game I was running and didn't have to implement a solution such as above because after three encounters a party member informed the witch that he would kill (the witch) if he didn't shut the hell up. I have since come to find out that because the witch was performing an action that seemed in combat, I was keeping them on initiative (I usually go off of it in between encounters and use a "marching order" system) and that was frustrating the other player who wanted to do mundane things like search much faster so they could get back into combat.


Of all the suggestions, I really like the idea of making the player cackle when their character does. I imagine you'll get one of those "Shut up or I'll kill you!" responses from another character pretty quickly. =P

Tactically, I think a witch cackling 30 feet away from the party would definitely be more destructive to stealth than fights that are simply closely-spaced. Unless the PCs are barging in and yelling constantly, even a single round of moving into position could potentially throw off the defenders/ambushers plans if they lose track of the PCs.

Thematically, that makes a lot more sense to me. Though a part of me likes the idea of a raiding party going through and terrorizing the occupants with a madly cackling witch at their side!

Liberty's Edge

And this is why I avoid certain alignments with my characters. If I have to listen to someone laughing every six seconds between encounter, my fighter is likely turning around and starting some PvP


If you are just house ruling anyway, then just limit cackle to a maximum extension time of 1 minute per witch level. The Hex grows weary of your sense of humor.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Some good solutions here from Errant Epoch and Melkiador. I've pretty much decided to rebuild and ditch Fortune though. Problem solved.


Redrazors wrote:
Some good solutions here from Errant Epoch and Melkiador. I've pretty much decided to rebuild and ditch Fortune though. Problem solved.

I like misfortune better than fortune personally. Unless you're fighting the same person in multiple encounters, you do not have too worry about cackling being a problem.

Plus negating criticals is awesome.


Redrazors wrote:
OK so the solution lies with not cackling beyond one combat. I'll just do that.

Or your DM could, you know, do his job and stop you? You're running around shouting and laughing in his dungeon none-stop, how can he allow this?

It's not the abilities, it's the DM who doesn't do anything.


Rub-Eta wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
OK so the solution lies with not cackling beyond one combat. I'll just do that.

Or your DM could, you know, do his job and stop you? You're running around shouting and laughing in his dungeon none-stop, how can he allow this?

It's not the abilities, it's the DM who doesn't do anything.

He has already changed what he is doing, problem solved!


Rub-Eta wrote:
Redrazors wrote:
OK so the solution lies with not cackling beyond one combat. I'll just do that.

Or your DM could, you know, do his job and stop you? You're running around shouting and laughing in his dungeon none-stop, how can he allow this?

It's not the abilities, it's the DM who doesn't do anything.

To be honest, I don't think the half-orc fighter or dwarven barbarian next to me are that quiet either. Quite a lot of roaring and shouting going on there.

Anyway, my DM did spring an ambush on us (I think planned anyway, rather than responding to the cackling, but the effect is the same). The extra fortune skill roll on perception was the one that helped us spot it, and the extra climb skill roll was the one that let the fighter climb out of the pit and let loose on the kobolds, making good use of the extra attack rerolls. My witch had good reason to laugh, really. All just a bit too much.


I think I'd just rule 'benefited from this hex' to be actually re-rolling a die, so A) one benefit per day, and B) missing the window to benefit or failing to Cackle so the Fortune lapses is not so much of a loss, just Fortune again.

I expect folk can point me to why I'm wrong, but I think this approach will play more smoothly.


Make it only work in one encounter, that's what I do. Either that or have him restrict it so that you are incapable of talking while cackling.


Cackling is a strenuous activity.

Doing it for a long time will cause the Witch to be exhausted.


I'd say put a limit on cackle to ten consecutive rounds after which the witch has to rest her vocal chords for say two minutes before being able to cackle again.

It's really the ability to cackle constantly throughout the day that's the problem and this will stuff that.


You recognize the problem and see the need for a solution. That's most of the work right there. I'd say the metasolution of just not extending the cackle is the best one. Don't worry too much about an actual mechanical fix if you don't need one.


IDK about you guys but if I was a powerful witch I'd cackle every chance I got just to cackle because a good cackle makes you feel good.

However, much like DMing, it takes a lot out of you to be continiously talking...and you can't cackle and drink some water at the same time...probably.

Though more importantly, constant cackling causes curious creatures. AKA: Monsters can hear you coming forever.


It occurs to me that a lot of focus here is on the strain that continuous cackling will put on the witch. The shaman class can achieve the same through chanting, and people can chant for a very long time.

I think the other PCs getting annoyed and punching the Shaman in the face point still stands though.

1 to 50 of 52 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Nerfing Witch's Fortune All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.