I'm making a 1st-level witch, and I've chosen the Cartomancer archetype primarily for flavor reasons. However, the Cartomancer seems like a bad deal to me.
You trade an animal familiar for a harrow deck. By third level you get to deliver touch spells as a ranged touch attack (nice), or you can throw cards as a very weak (but flavorful) damaging attack.
But you lose everything that a familiar would provide: a skill bonus, the alertness feat, scouting capabilities, a wand wielder, etc.
Getting a ranged touch attack is nice, but a familiar can deliver a touch attack anyway (albeit at a risk of damage to it).
I guess the harrow deck is less likely to "die," so that's a good thing.
It seems to be a bad trade . . . PLUS you lose a hex to get the feats for the weak attack.
Am I missing something?
I'm considering a house rule that lets the Cartomancer have the Alertness feat and a +3 to sleight of hand to balance it out a bit.
Thoughts?
Honestly range with touch spells is probably cooler than a familiar. Most familiars are going to provoke delivering offensive spells, and for a witch they are to precious to be risking like that.
Biggest downside to me is loosing a hex for two feats for a thrown weapon attack, which isn't going to be all that useful on a 1/2 bab class that probably won't have a good str or a great dex. That is indeed a weakness in choosing that archetype.
Still, a familiar that can't die is pretty awesome for a witch, and as I said so is range on all your touch spells. I wouldn't give them a free feat for sure. +3 to sleight of hand isn't a big deal either way, but I probably wouldn't bother since I'd rather leave the archetype alone if it isn't going to make a serious difference.
Remember, if you like a familiar that much you can get one for 3 feats, and that familiar won't remove your spell casting if it dies.
Losing a hex and a familiar to be able to do ranged touch spells feels worth to me, especially considering that the witch's familiar is more of a liability than a blessing. Unlike other archetypes, the cartomancer only replaces your 2nd hex, which means you can take Extra Hex at 1st or 3rd level. Most archetypes replace your 1st level hex, which totally screws you because you can't take Extra Hex until you receive your first hex.
I don't think any houserule is necessary. It's a pretty solid and cool archetype.
Thanks for the responses. You've given me a lot to consider.
So what I'm hearing is that losing the familiar itself is a benefit that I may not be valuing enough because familiars are fragile, and they are your spellbook.
It's funny, but this is so different from what I'm usually reading on these boards. Most say that familiars are awesome. Interesting that the decision to make the witch's familiar into it's spellbook turns that all on its head.
Normally I would think that any DM who would destroy a wizard's spellbook is being a bit of a jerk. However, I guess that if the familiar is delivering touch spells then killing it is fair game.
Maybe the rule that merits review is the one that says that killing a witch's familiar also means the destruction of her spellbook. A wizard doesn't lose much to get a replacement familiar; for a witch it's catastrophic. Strange that the witch's familiar is supposed to be a central part of the character, yet that fact also renders is less useful because the witch cannot afford to lose it.
It doesn't have to be that way. A witch really gets her spells from the patron, not the familiar--it's just a conduit. No reason why the replacement familiar couldn't come with all the old spells.
And it's not like the witch is more powerful than the wizard such that it needs such a significant disadvantage.