| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey all,
Enjoying the playtest discussion, figured I'd throw my two cents in.
For a variety of reasons the witch having access to the arcane tradition just doesn't sit well with me. To me the 'logic and rationality' of arcane doesn't really fit with gaining powers through the gift of a mysterious patron. Heck, arcane magic doesn't really deal with the 'spirit' or the 'soul' which are very 'witchy' things to me. Considering the 'patron' it makes far more sense for a witch to have a divine patron rather then have access to the energies a book learned wizard does. Occult and Primal though FULLY fit, with Occult leaning into the Halloween Witch while Primal emphases the fae, hedge magic, Wiccan side of the fantasy.
That leads me to my suggestion. Drop arcane, keep occult and primal. And make the choice of occult and primal more compelling by putting some extra mechanics heft to it.
Duality is such a strong part of the witch myth. The 'Good' and 'Wicked' witch of The Wizard of Oz, subverted in later takes of the story (such as Wicked the musical). There's also the best witches in fiction to my mind. Discworld. Granny Weatherwax in fact really really embodies The Dark vs Light.
The reason why the bard being an occult caster really compelled me is that it made complete sense for a the bard to fight Occult horrors the way champions face off against divine monsters.
Heroic Witches should do that better.
She glanced up at the tall, silent figure beside her.GOOD EVENING.
“Oh … you again.”
ANOTHER CHOICE, ESMERELDA WEATHERWAX.
“Light and dark? It’s never as simple as that, you know, even for you.”
Death sighed. NOT EVEN FOR ME.
Granny tried to line up her thoughts.
Which light and which dark? She hadn’t been prepared for this. This didn’t feel right. This wasn’t the fight she had expected. Whose light? Whose mind was this?
Silly question. She was always her.
Never lose your grip on that …
So … light behind her, darkness in front …
She’d always said witches stood between the light and the dark.
[…]
Death reached down and took a handful of sand. He held it up, and let it slip between his fingers.
CHOOSE, he said. YOU ARE GOOD AT CHOOSING, I BELIEVE.
“Is there any advice you could be givin’ me?” said Granny.
CHOOSE RIGHT.
Granny turned to face the sheer white brilliance, and closed her eyes.
And stepped backward.
So anyway duality is enforced by having two spell lists and primal and occult are for more relevant to the creepy and/or Wiccan theme of the witch than arcane is.
The Lesson of Protection can easily be an Occult one, while Lesson of Deceit can easily by Primal (cause fae flavour).
Perhaps, to really make the witch familiar the best familiar in the game, the occult familiar should get a unique familiar ability, and same for the primal familiar?
All of this is IMO of course.
Edit: If I have offended any Wiccans with my post then please accept my apologies, it was not my intention.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Hey all,
Enjoying the playtest discussion, figured I'd throw my two cents in.
For a variety of reasons the witch having access to the arcane tradition just doesn't sit well with me. To me the 'logic and rationality' of arcane doesn't really fit with gaining powers through the gift of a mysterious patron. Heck, arcane magic doesn't really deal with the 'spirit' or the 'soul' which are very 'witchy' things to me. Considering the 'patron' it makes far more sense for a witch to have a divine patron rather then have access to the energies a book learned wizard does. Occult and Primal though FULLY fit, with Occult leaning into the Halloween Witch while Primal emphases the fae, hedge magic, Wiccan side of the fantasy.
That leads me to my suggestion. Drop arcane, keep occult and primal. And make the choice of occult and primal more compelling by putting some extra mechanics heft to it.
Duality is such a strong part of the witch myth. The 'Good' and 'Wicked' witch of The Wizard of Oz, subverted in later takes of the story (such as Wicked the musical). There's also the best witches in fiction to my mind. Discworld. Granny Weatherwax in fact really really embodies The Dark vs Light.
The reason why the bard being an occult caster really compelled me is that it made complete sense for a the bard to fight Occult horrors the way champions face off against divine monsters.
Heroic Witches should do that better.
** spoiler omitted **
I really agree, there are some cool spells on the arcane spell list for Witches, but really it feels like Primal and Occult would present a much better fit and could be used to shape a more compelling narrative about Witches in universe, and it matches up so beautifully with the Changeling bestiary entry about Changelings who deny their Hag calling being mainly into Druidism.
It also offers some additional niche protection to the Wizard (especially since Witches use a pseudo spellbook feature) and strengthens the flavor divisions between the traditions themselves.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree on Witch familiars getting extra unique powers, but I don't see a reason to remove Arcane tradition from options for the Witch.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i brought this up in another thread, but arcane has the ability to let you do baleful polymorph and dominate on the same list.
having strong transmutation and enchantment options i think should be something a witch should be capable of having at the same time.
I mean look up the actual definition of arcane, "understood by few; mysterious or secret." seems to me to be something easily taught by a patron if need be.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I have to disagree completely. Arcane is a good list with a lot of thematically appropriate spells on it. Occult has a lot of thematic value too, but we don't need to invalidate Arcane witches to play cool Occult witches.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that arcane witches do not work well thematically, and they are very close in terms of their overall 'shtick' to wizards with a advanced familiar arcane thesis.
Primal + Occult really covers most of what you want in a witch. You have primal for polymorphs, nature magic, winter witchiness (necessary because of Narnia), and you have occult for creepy witches, witches with dark fey or outer dark dwelling patrons, and psychic witches.
The one thematic witch that is not covered by Primal + Occult is the witch with the demon or devil familiar. For that you would need divine witches, if only so that the witch can summon devils and demons. I suppose that demonic and diabolic sorcerer bloodlines could take the place there (those beings might be called witches, but they are really an old family of sorcerers). That would be something for a special diabolic supplement, or the like, and hopefully that supplement would allow these 'not witches' to have imps as familiars.
It would be interesting to hear from the developers on why they didn't include divine witches in the play test, and why they included arcane witches.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’m actually completely on the other side and hope divine was omitted simply to allow the Oracle to shine as the divine this play test.
Arcane is a common part of witch tropes and while primal and occult both have strong backings as well, I would argue witches like malificent and Morgana la fey could be argued as arcane (or primal, morgana means there I think).
I don’t think it’s hard to believe a patron could lean arcane, that’s pretty reasonable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the idea of the witch being somewhere between occult and primal. I was thinking about the same thing while reading the playtest dokument. The witch having access to arcane magic doesn't really make sense in the new context. I feel like they left it in the 2nd edition to not anger players who are very familiar with the first edition and are used to the idea of a witch being an arcane caster. But same as with the bard, it doesn't make much sense anymore in 2nd edition. Also there are few compelling resons to play a witch instead of a familiar centered wizard. While giving the option to players is certainly not a bad thing, the class concept in general would be much stronger with the witch being based on primal/occult duality.
Also there are few compelling resons to play a witch instead of a familiar centered wizard.
??????
Why would you want to hamper yourself on purpose? If I wanted to play a familiar centered Wizard, Witch is way better mechanically.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also there are few compelling resons to play a witch instead of a familiar centered wizard.
Uh...more flexible spell preparation (four not restricted by school) and vastly better focus spells and focus mechanics (can get lots more, three points, and three per rest recharge, which the wizard can't get). Arcane Bond isn't worth the Witch's superior spellcasting chassis. The only reason to play a Wizard over a Witch is flavor, you want a non-familiar thesis, and/or you want some of the Wizard class feats that enhance their spellcasting.
Also, the wizard has an strongly academic flavor that having an arcane witch gives a nice opposition to.
This is an excellent point. If I were to draw to a real life comparison of a self taught/apprentices individual to a classically Trained (or even just a more formal apprenticeship like scholastic internship or training program).
Still respectable ways to learn how to do something, but often result in total oppositions of certain implementations
“They don’t teach you this at the academy...”
“They had limits, I can’t say I care for such a primitive summoning pattern. They always come in all aggravated and out of sorts.”
“That’s the idea.”
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right there with you. Maleficent is almost certainly arcane. And I feel like if anything, Divine is the one that doesn't fit thematically. I also don't think everything devil related has to be divine just because the sorcerer bloodline happens to be divine.
Magic that deals with devils and demons (and most outsiders) is divine in the 2e magic system. The divine list is the only one that gets summon fiend as a spell, for example.
Also, note that a person could argue that Morgan Le Fey from Marion Zimmer Bradly was a divine witch (or maybe she was just a priestess). Myself, I can't see arguing that Morgan Le Fey was not either primal or occult, given that she is literally 'Morgan of the fey'. And Maleficient is also strongly connected to the fey (she is some sort of dark fey herself, isn't she?) but she does not seem to be a pathfinder witch-- she has no familiar that gives her powers. Her powers are innate and come from her connection to the few, so she is more like a sorcerer, in my opinion.
@Bandw2
I'd say that in Golarion, it is occult that takes the space of "understood by few; mysterious or secret." while arcane is almost scientific. The Wizard flavour in Pf2 especially makes arcane basically more an equivalent to nuclear physics or rocket science in our world than anything mysterious or secret.
@Rysky
I agree it’s perfectly logical and rational to GET powers from a mysterious patron. What I'm saying though is that the powers themselves aren't.
|
Magic that deals with devils and demons (and most outsiders) is divine in the 2e magic system. The divine list is the only one that gets summon fiend as a spell, for example.
Not really. Summoning them as disposable minions is Divine, as is Planar Ally, but Planar Binding is either Arcane or Occult (the latter are both also Rituals, and thus can be performed by anyone, but use Skills as indicated).
Planar Binding is by far the most 'make a deal' of those spells.
@Bandw2
I'd say that in Golarion, it is occult that takes the space of "understood by few; mysterious or secret." while arcane is almost scientific. The Wizard flavour in Pf2 especially makes arcane basically more an equivalent to nuclear physics or rocket science in our world than anything mysterious or secret.
I disagree. Besides, no one has yet to respond to the fact the arcane spell list has many good witch spells, you can't polymorph people with occult, and you can't do strong enchantment spells with primal.
And well, what if you want to do both?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
What about this:
Arcane - The Maiden represents enchantment, inception, expansion, the promise of new beginnings, birth, youth and youthful enthusiasm, represented by the waxing moon;
Primal - The Mother represents ripeness, fertility, sexuality, fulfilment, stability, power and life represented by the full moon;
Occult - The Crone represents wisdom, repose, death, and endings represented by the waning moon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magic that deals with devils and demons (and most outsiders) is divine in the 2e magic system. The divine list is the only one that gets summon fiend as a spell, for example.Not really. Summoning them as disposable minions is Divine, as is Planar Ally, but Planar Binding is either Arcane or Occult (the latter are both also Rituals, and thus can be performed by anyone, but use Skills as indicated).
Planar Binding is by far the most 'make a deal' of those spells.
Pretty sure in this instance he meant “deals” as in “concerns/related to” rather than “makes deals”.
Edit: I find it an interesting touch that arcane and occult deal with entities directly, while divine casters speak directly with management.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty sure in this instance he meant “deals” as in “concerns/related to” rather than “makes deals”.
Edit: I find it an interesting touch that arcane and occult deal with entities directly, while divine casters speak directly with management.
Sure, but we're talking about Witches, who are more deal-based with their Patrons than any other Class is with their source of power. I was referencing that, not the wording.
Not sure where duality would be coming from in respect to this class (or the PF1) version. Neither Halloween or Wicca are particularly relevant (and its weird to see them together, let alone juxtaposed with a D&D-clone class that has jack to do with either).
The problem with the PF2 witch as presented is that it doesn't have flavor, not that choosing one of three spells lists at character creation somehow alters it.
It's weird to me to place limits to the variety of the class options. If you don't like arcane witches, that is fine. The other choices are still there. But why do you want to take the arcane witch from someone else?
Then why not alow arcane, occult, and primal cleric? Why not allow divine druids? The tradition of magic wielded by a class is part of what defines that class.
I think that works for some witches, bit not all. It wouldn't work for either that I have played, nor for the one I want to play next.Arcane - The Maiden
Primal - The Mother
Occult - The Crone
The whole maiden/mother/crone trinity seems occult to me.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's weird to me to place limits to the variety of the class options. If you don't like arcane witches, that is fine. The other choices are still there. But why do you want to take the arcane witch from someone else?Then why not alow arcane, occult, and primal cleric? Why not allow divine druids? The tradition of magic wielded by a class is part of what defines that class.
Because Clerics get their powers from a deity and Druids from nature.
Witches are inspired and choose their own path.
Designer
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would be interesting to hear from the developers on why they didn't include divine witches in the play test, and why they included arcane witches.
In First Edition, witches were arcane casters and had access to a number of the spells that are now on the arcane list. They're Int-based casters who use study and logic and rationality to manipulate their power. Arcane doesn't seem out of line for that. (Now maybe we'll see in the feedback and playtest data that it's not speaking to anyone - that's part of why we do this.)
The thought on excluding the divine tradition is that if a patron entity is directly granting you divine spellcasting power, you're basically a cleric. If you have a deific or otherwise divine patron, it's because they're playing it under the table (Why? That's between you and your GM). Now that doesnt' mean that we might introduce some funky lessons down the road that might let you tap into the divine list (a patron who has themselves managed to tap into divine power and is passing it out to pose as a deity?), but that's an exception to the broader witch concept, and for this playtest and this book, we need to nail down the broad basics first.
I hope that helps you see where we're coming from!
Nuclear physics probably qualifies as arcane by definition tbh, I don't think most people fully understand nuclear physics beyond the very basic.
Sure, but it's possible for someone with the right kind of brain to spend 10 years of post secondary education to master nuclear physics. Just like Golarion Wizards do with arcane magic.
Occult should be the kind of knowledge that resists even that kind of rigorous academic training and study.
@Bandw2: As Corwin pointed out, you could get access to both polymorph and domination spells through Lessons.
@WatersLethe: I do actually quite like the maiden,mother,crone flavour. It's very thematic. It does leave male witches a bit out in the cold though so it's better as one patron idea.
I think maybe that's the thing. Right now the playtest witch doesn't seem to have a very defined theme either mechnaically or flavour wise.
For me the PF1 witch was defined by Hexes and a very unique creepy spell list that also including healing. The patron was very much waaayy in the background and the familiar was more a worry than anything else. Thankfully none of my GM's targeted my familiar so it was like a spellbook with a personality.
Not having a unique spell list and hexes becoming once per encounter kind of powers rather than once per round kind of powers kinda means the pf2 witch does not have the combat flavour that pf1 witches had. Hex cantrips would resolve the hex issue for me, but not having a custom spell list is actually fairly damaging.
The Lessons are a good way of taking care of the spell list issue, allowing Witches to access thematic spells from outside their main list.
The thought on excluding the divine tradition is that if a patron entity is directly granting you divine spellcasting power, you're basically a cleric.
I don't really see how this metric applies to Witches and then subsequently Oracles get a pass on multiple deities granting power.
Surely we can't assume that all gods have direct and omnipotent knowledge of every single aligned planar entity under their control?
Then demons would never be able to conspire against demon lords by that extension.
What's to say Witch's can't have high level Oracles as their patrons, which inherently answer to no God in specific?
I agree that arcane witches do not work well thematically, and they are very close in terms of their overall 'shtick' to wizards with a advanced familiar arcane thesis.
Primal + Occult really covers most of what you want in a witch. You have primal for polymorphs, nature magic, winter witchiness (necessary because of Narnia), and you have occult for creepy witches, witches with dark fey or outer dark dwelling patrons, and psychic witches.
The one thematic witch that is not covered by Primal + Occult is the witch with the demon or devil familiar. For that you would need divine witches, if only so that the witch can summon devils and demons. I suppose that demonic and diabolic sorcerer bloodlines could take the place there (those beings might be called witches, but they are really an old family of sorcerers). That would be something for a special diabolic supplement, or the like, and hopefully that supplement would allow these 'not witches' to have imps as familiars.
It would be interesting to hear from the developers on why they didn't include divine witches in the play test, and why they included arcane witches.
The way familiars work this go round you can have a demonic or devilish familiar if that is what you want. Familiars can look like pretty much whatever you want them to and just equip them with the abilities that make sense for what you have chosen. So if you want a cat you have a cat if you want an imp you have an imp if you want a tiny genie kin you have a tiny genie kin.
Also there are few compelling resons to play a witch instead of a familiar centered wizard.Uh...more flexible spell preparation (four not restricted by school) and vastly better focus spells and focus mechanics (can get lots more, three points, and three per rest recharge, which the wizard can't get). Arcane Bond isn't worth the Witch's superior spellcasting chassis. The only reason to play a Wizard over a Witch is flavor, you want a non-familiar thesis, and/or you want some of the Wizard class feats that enhance their spellcasting.
Or you could just play a universalist and not be restricted in spells in any way and have the ability to spontaniously recast your spells. And as a wizard you have access to better class feats.
If you go with a school wizard, I think you do it for style points anyway.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or you could just play a universalist and not be restricted in spells in any way
Er, the fact that your extra spells have to be duplicates of spells you've already cast is a restriction tho.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way familiars work this go round you can have a demonic or devilish familiar if that is what you want. Familiars can look like pretty much whatever you want them to and just equip them with the abilities that make sense for what you have chosen. So if you want a cat you have a cat if you want an imp you have an imp if you want a tiny genie kin you have a tiny genie kin.
The one thematic witch that is not covered by Primal + Occult is the witch with the demon or devil familiar. For that you would need divine witches, if only so that the witch can summon devils and demons. I suppose that demonic and diabolic sorcerer bloodlines could take the place there (those beings might be called witches, but they are really an old family of sorcerers). That would be something for a special diabolic supplement, or the like, and hopefully that supplement would allow these 'not witches' to have imps as familiars.
Its not the mechanics of the familiar that are the problem, its that there is a stereotype of witches where they get their powers from the devil. This dates back to the middle ages. In the 2e magic system, if your magic comes from a diabolic or demonic source, its supposed to be divine. That's why summon fiend is a divine spell, for example. So, if one's patron is a devil, it would follow that they grant divine spells.
The way familiars work this go round you can have a demonic or devilish familiar if that is what you want. Familiars can look like pretty much whatever you want them to and just equip them with the abilities that make sense for what you have chosen. So if you want a cat you have a cat if you want an imp you have an imp if you want a tiny genie kin you have a tiny genie kin.
Not exactly true. The rules for familiars tell you to pick a tiny animal, but that certain abilities, like the druid's leshy familiar, can be something else.
So you can't actually have an imp, even though familiars have no innate stats and therefore it shouldn't matter. I'm not even sure if the iconic witch's nine-tailed fox is legal.
So, if one's patron is a devil, it would follow that they grant divine spells.
I mean not necessarily. Granting divine spells is generally the purview of gods and godlike forces. It makes just as much, if not more, sense that a demon could or would teach their acolytes arcane or occult magic.
Not sure where duality would be coming from in respect to this class (or the PF1) version. Neither Halloween or Wicca are particularly relevant (and its weird to see them together, let alone juxtaposed with a D&D-clone class that has jack to do with either).Well the cackling definitely calls the Halloween witch, as does the cauldron feat. A Primal witch can sort of be considered to reference wicca, if only because wicca has been heavily conflated with eclectic neopaganism.
What flavor do you want the witch to be if not those though? I'm fine with it encompassing both of those as well as other things we would call a witch so long as it doesn't step on the toes of other classes too much.
Pathfinder flavored. It doesn't need to be themed toward Wicca (and primal is a real stretch there, Wicca doesn't involve changing into animals or throwing energy blasts around), and certainly not commercialized modern holidays.
The witch needs to fit into the game and the setting, not candy scavenging or what have you.
The 1e version of the witch was a well-developed class with its own take on prepared spellcasting. This playtest version dumps all that, and is just yet another spellcaster with no particular theme or background (except Keep the Rat Alive at all costs, because the familiar is an extreme vulnerability other classes aren't saddled with)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This playtest version dumps all that
I mean, not really. The PF1 witch has hexes and bonus spells and a familiar and the PF2 witch has hexes and bonus spells and a familiar.
There's definitely a power shift, in that the PF2 witch no longer has a terrible spell list and hideously balanced hexes and your bonus spells and hexes are now tied together via lessons, but to suggest there's some dramatic thematic departure for the class is hyperbolic.
@Bandw2: As Corwin pointed out, you could get access to both polymorph and domination spells through Lessons.
besides gods, which give you a few off list level 1-3 spells, i don't think i can get a comprehensive list like just being an arcane caster.(and yes i realize i entirely throw this sentence in the trash in the next few paragraphs)
also, i feel like anyone can spend 10 years of education learning how to do any of the forms of magic, i don't think arcane is either forced to be learned from a very academic framing nor are any of the other prohibited.
like look at the Halcyon casting which says that the differentiation is perspective and lets you combine primal and arcane spell lists, you get to decide when casting your spells whether they count as primal or arcane, even if you're base wizard, you can cast only primal spells with the archetype.
in fact i think the Magaambya teach primal casting academically
okay now i really want to play a an arcane spell list witch with Magaambya attendant archetype. like seriously a mask familiar? f&+% yeah
The way familiars work this go round you can have a demonic or devilish familiar if that is what you want. Familiars can look like pretty much whatever you want them to and just equip them with the abilities that make sense for what you have chosen. So if you want a cat you have a cat if you want an imp you have an imp if you want a tiny genie kin you have a tiny genie kin.
The one thematic witch that is not covered by Primal + Occult is the witch with the demon or devil familiar. For that you would need divine witches, if only so that the witch can summon devils and demons. I suppose that demonic and diabolic sorcerer bloodlines could take the place there (those beings might be called witches, but they are really an old family of sorcerers). That would be something for a special diabolic supplement, or the like, and hopefully that supplement would allow these 'not witches' to have imps as familiars.
Its not the mechanics of the familiar that are the problem, its that there is a stereotype of witches where they get their powers from the devil. This dates back to the middle ages. In the 2e magic system, if your magic comes from a diabolic or demonic source, its supposed to be divine. That's why summon fiend is a divine spell, for example. So, if one's patron is a devil, it would follow that they grant divine spells.
why though? as an intelligent being they could know the secrets to other lists and teach them to mortals to be unwitting servents.
Witch is to Wizard as how Druid is to Cleric, that's how I always understood PF1's prep caster dynamics (mechanics-wise)... Hence, Occult is my preferred answer if Witches have to settle in a single tradition, with stuff like Fireball and the likes coming from the new Lessons feature, I guess.
OTOH, while not related, the old Psychic casting can use any chosen tradition just with swapping spell components, as usual (pyrokinetics and telepathy are treated as separate powers, with only the strongest psychics portrayed as having multiple abilities, anyways).