Ok, Ultimate Wilderness introduced the new archetype Season Witch (pg 90). Season Witch gets the ability Season of the Witch (Su), with wording as follows.
Does a first level Season Witch start with 2 hexes, 1 normal hex and one bonus hex, or do they only have one hex, the bonus hex?... At first level a season witch chooses the season that defines her abilities as her patron; this choice also provides her certain benefits.
... The save DC's of her spells that deal (insert elemental descriptor here) increase by 1. At first level, she gains either (insert choice of hexes here) as a bonus hex.
...
This alters patron and the and the hex gained at first level.
Based on the text you cited, you would get two Hexes. The 1st level Hex is altered, not replaced. That means that any elements not explicitly eliminated will still exist.
Man, with that title, I thought it would have something to do with the Cook People hex.
/cevah
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It looks to me (and it should be) that it's the only hex you get, based on the alteration of the 1st level hex (it isn't otherwise altered or affected in any way) and my own time working on the archetype chapter and developing this archetype. It would be clearer to not say it is was a bonus hex, but sometimes the wording gets weird along the way. Possibly it said something more like the 1st-level feat is chosen from among those two and was changed for copyfit. You can generally figure this out based on other factors at the same level; if there's not a significant exchange at 1st, it's not going to add extra hexes at 1st (archetypes never pay for an ability with a later trade), but it also gains DC boosters at 1st.
|
Looking through the other Witch archetypes, all the ones that actually replace hexes uses the word replace. Archetypes that use the word alter tend be ones that add more options, like granting access to Shaman hexes.
Given this, my conclusion is that the bonus hex granted by Season Witch is in fact a bonus in addition to the normal 1st level hex.
So... Extra hex, or replace the level 1 hex ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think as written it’s a bonus but this wasn’t intended it seems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me, this feel like an errata issue more than a rules issue. Since "bonus" should indicate that "you get something more than you already would" (e.g. a fighter archetype that says you get x as a bonus feat at a level should not replace that feat at that level).
But from a design issue, it probably should be a forced choice and not an extra hex, because otherwise the Season Witch gets a bonus hex and a DC increase at no cost and there's no reason for anybody interested in taking one of the season Patrons not to take the archetype (other than "it doesn't stack with any archetype that alters the first level hex" I guess.) An archetype that grants something (in this case something that's roughly equivalent to a feat, since "extra hex" exists) should have to give up something more than "opportunity cost."
I agree, but it wouldn't be the first time archetypes have been released with no real downside *cough* primalist *cough*
its still strictly an upgrade from no archetype. The seasons witch isn’t even with the bonus hex because the seasons patrons aren’t that good.
Scroll up the thread Mark Sifter is a Designer. His page on the Pathfinder Wiki lists him as currently being a Design Manager for Paizo Inc.
The RAW, and I think actually really sensible and balanced reading, is to take a third option and apply both. Yes, you get an additional hex, because that's what the word "bonus" means; but the archetype is also considered altering the 1st level hex, meaning you can't stack it with other archetypes that alter or replace the first hex, e.g. Invoker.
Scroll up the thread Mark Sifter is a Designer. His page on the Pathfinder Wiki lists him as currently being a Design Manager for Paizo Inc.
And yet he didn't make an FAQ for it. "It looks to me" is also not how you start a definitive answer that should definitely be used. Furthermore, his reasonign is faulty, because there are plenty of archetypes that have indirect trades, i.e. where a gained class feature is paid for by limitations/reductions to another class feature. Like every archetype with Diminished Spellcasting. In this case, the limitation is that you have to select a poor patron, and thus pay for the extra hex and the DC bonus on a mere handful of spells with not being able to grab e.g. Haste. In short, there is a "significant exchange at 1st".
as written - it's a bonus feat.
i have a feeling the sentence:
"This alters patron and the hex gained at 1st level."
is missing a word and should have been :
"This alters patron and replace the hex gained at 1st level.
but to be honest, giving an extra hex for forcing a patron on the witch is also a fair trade.
i have a feeling the sentence: "This alters patron and the hex gained at 1st level." is missing a word and should have been: "This alters patron and replace the hex gained at 1st level.
No, this makes no sense. If the word "bonus" is in there, something must be added. Also, the text says "this choice also provides her certain benefits", and a forced selection is a penalty, not a benefit. Furthermore, the individual season entries say "At 1st level, she gains either the X hex or Y hex", and limiting choices is not something "gained". With all that, I think it's very clear that a forced selection was not what the original author intended.
Making the hex a forced selection rather than a bonus hex would require extensive rewording, as all of the above would need to be changed.
but to be honest, giving an extra hex for forcing a patron on the witch is also a fair trade.
There should be some other cost, otherwise the archetype is an absolute no-questions-asked must-take for anyone who wants to select any of those patrons. Which is why I like the "alters the hex gained at 1st level" part.
my favorite seasoning for witches is henbane. For earth kineticists it's terra-gone.
|
|
but to be honest, giving an extra hex for forcing a patron on the witch is also a fair trade.
A specific selection of patrons isn't a limitation, as you aren't forced to take the archetype. It is supposed that you take the archetype because you like at least one of the patrons that go with it.
It is like saying "because I have to use a spear or a polearm as a phalanx soldier I should get an extra feat".
Edit: yes, "forcing" triggered something in me. But my opinion is that having a limited selection of patrons isn't really a cost, as taking the archetype is a free choice.
Probably because I had a player that asked for extra stuff for a cloistered cleric as he was giving up physical fighting. Like he wasn't giving up physical fighting with all his characters.