Witch and Oracle are sort of inversed


Advanced Player’s Guide Playtest General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I was looking at the threads and the classes when I realized that Oracle Mystery functions as a more detailed patron with a downside, while Witch Hexes functions as a severely less detailed mystery having only revelations.

Oracle PF1 mystery grants: a theme, theme related spells, a theme related choice of 1/day (or 1/level) powers.
Oracle PF2 mystery grants: a theme, theme related spells, a theme related power, and (even if I think it should be seperate) a theme related penalty.

Witch PF1 patron grants: a theme, theme related spells.
Witch PF2 patron grants: a choice of 1/day powers that migh as well be random.

There is also the similarity in terms with PF1 oracles granting "revelations" based on your mystery.
While PF2 witches grant "lessons" based on your patron.

The biggest difference being the PF2 witch "lessons" have 0 mechanical connection to the patron unlike PF1 "revelations" with mysteries.

***********
What do you all think? Am I just seeing things or was this meant to be a thing?

Because honestly I would really dislike it if Witches and Oracle where to be mix like this. As it just gets rid of all the flavor and diversity they once had.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly I can't even tell what point you're trying to make. It seems like just complaining for the sake of it.

As far as flavor goes. Oracle Mysteries are incredibly flavorful and Lessons have a lot more thematic weight to them than PF1 patrons do.


I wasn't complaining, until the end where I expressed my opinion that making them more similar goes against class diversity.

My point was that Witch lessons and by extension patrons (which can currently be removed without affecting anything) are structured as worse PF1 Oracle revelations.

And Oracle mysteries which as a very flavorful and very customizable things (at least regarding the order of choices) has fallen down to simply granting a few spells like Witch patrons used to do.

* But yes as far as flavor goes they both have a lot more. Even if Witch lessons have absolutely no relation to patrons what so ever as it stands.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
Even if Witch lessons have absolutely no relation to patrons what so ever as it stands.

I don't see how. The lessons come directly from your Patron. They're related inextricably.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It says they are related, but there is no actual connection. As it currently works, unless you force yourself to pick related lessons, you can have a cold themed patron and pick only fire themed lessons with a flaming familiar (if those are a thing).


You can, but why would you?


Or you could have an elemental patron and picks all elemental related lessons... I would rather the player being able to pick his patron than locked to one from the start.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Grankless wrote:
You can, but why would you?

you act like the witch knows who their patron is...

like you don't know who your patron is, so determining if the spell traditions match is just another thing to keep guessing about.


Temperans wrote:
It says they are related, but there is no actual connection. As it currently works, unless you force yourself to pick related lessons, you can have a cold themed patron and pick only fire themed lessons with a flaming familiar (if those are a thing).

Your witch doesn't know their patron (at least not normally), and all the patron details in the current text make it explicit the GM has as much control of the patron as you do (if not more) . So I guess you could tell the GM OoC "my patron is ice themed" and then pick fire lessons, but if that's the case the GM is likely to question it or just say "you thought you knew your patron was ice themed, but you were wrong".

Edit for relevant text: "Of course, you can also simply choose the lessons you most prefer and let the GM tailor the identity of your patron accordingly."

You can pick your patron, or all your lessons, but not both without some GM feedback.


Mechanically, you pick whatever you want and there isn't any theme at
all. First lesson matters because it gives the spell list, but if you want snow-fate-shadow-renewal, rather than life-protection-element-ice, it isn't noticeably significant.

The patron is 'mysterious and distant' and it doesn't really matter if you know anything about it or not.


BellyBeard wrote:
Temperans wrote:
It says they are related, but there is no actual connection. As it currently works, unless you force yourself to pick related lessons, you can have a cold themed patron and pick only fire themed lessons with a flaming familiar (if those are a thing).

Your witch doesn't know their patron (at least not normally), and all the patron details in the current text make it explicit the GM has as much control of the patron as you do (if not more) . So I guess you could tell the GM OoC "my patron is ice themed" and then pick fire lessons, but if that's the case the GM is likely to question it or just say "you thought you knew your patron was ice themed, but you were wrong".

Edit for relevant text: "Of course, you can also simply choose the lessons you most prefer and let the GM tailor the identity of your patron accordingly."

You can pick your patron, or all your lessons, but not both without some GM feedback.

My only issue with the patron system as it is would be that a witch player really has to understand the GM in question to know if its even worth it to try to make a witch. If the GM does not want to bother much with the patron then you are just going to select what lessons you want which seems weird. If the GM is really strict you may not get to pick any lesson so your character develops how the GM wants you to and not how the player wants to develop their character. I think at least a more specific listed guidelines for this would be helpful for both GM's and Players so the player has a better understanding of what their options likely will be so they can judge if witch is for them.


I feel like the fluid lessons make Patrons have a wider portfolio than, say, a deity. Deities have 4 domains that they always give, you cannot get any powers that aren't one of those 4, and what domains a deity have are also somewhat limited because certain domains never mix (death and undeath; fire and water; healing and pain), vs. lesson which are far more freeform, mix n' match, and you can have the same being hand out different lessons to different witches, I feel like they're weirder clerics, not worse 1E Oracles.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The witch feels to me as the "take whatever you want" spellcaster. I like how the sorcerer has a different tradition tied to his bloodline, and how all his powers are thematically related to them. But the witch has no limitations regarding her patron - at least not thematically tied in the rules.

You can now say that Iomedae granted powers over undeads to a witch so that she could infiltrate a cult of necromancers... That's a good, yet odd opportunity to create strange agendas to once restricted entities of limitless power.


The Gold Sovereign wrote:

You can now say that Iomedae granted powers over undeads to a witch so that she could infiltrate a cult of necromancers... That's a good, yet odd opportunity to create strange agendas to once restricted entities of limitless power.

Yes, this is what I think the new system accomplishes that a system with a more hands-off GM couldn't accomplish. You can pick the normal lessons for a given Patron, or you can pick weird ones as long as you have a good reason and discuss it with the GM. What it doesn't let you do is say "Iomedae's servitor is secretly giving me powers over undead creatures" without you having a really good reason why that patron would operate counter to their nature like that. It allows for those weird choices which might make narrative sense, but also reigns in the player so they actually have to think about why they have those lessons rather than picking a Patron they like and then picking whatever lessons they want without thinking about the connection between the two.

Or, if you only care about the lessons and not the actual patron, you can pick those and have the GM handle the patron (or not, if they don't care to incorporate it). This way leaves the most options open as far as player and GM agency over the patron.


Temperans wrote:
It says they are related, but there is no actual connection. As it currently works, unless you force yourself to pick related lessons, you can have a cold themed patron and pick only fire themed lessons with a flaming familiar (if those are a thing).

How do you think your icy patron stays chilly? Has to bleed that body heat off sonehow, might as well be through you.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
sherlock1701 wrote:
Temperans wrote:
It says they are related, but there is no actual connection. As it currently works, unless you force yourself to pick related lessons, you can have a cold themed patron and pick only fire themed lessons with a flaming familiar (if those are a thing).
How do you think your icy patron stays chilly? Has to bleed that body heat off sonehow, might as well be through you.

and this is why i prefer it to stay open.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Advanced Player’s Guide Playtest / General Discussion / Witch and Oracle are sort of inversed All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.