You can use a cackling hag's blouse to cackle twice per day as a swift action, possibly allowing you to maintain cackling while having to move. Also you could change your standard action into a move action in order to move. You wouldn't be able to cast or hex that round then but you could keep cackling.
Furthermore the Protective Luck hex increases duration by one round at 8th and 16th level which also could give you a bit more wiggling room. The combo is actually pretty powerful and it works perfectly per RAW. Good find!
The problem with comparing it to Fortune is that Fortune isn't very good. On paper Fortune and Misfortune are roughly equal, but as you rightly point out Fortune can only really buff the party once, while Misfortune can debuff enemies as often as you find enemies.
When you compare Protective Luck to Misfortune it looks more even. Yes you can use Soothsayer to pre-buff before fights, but even then it's forcing less rolls than Misfortune most fights (it only affects attack rolls, not skill checks, ability checks or saves).
It also can't be used to protect the witch herself, meaning enemies are incentivised to attack the squishiest member of the party.
Finally, we're comparing one hex (Misfortune) to two hexes (Protective Luck and Soothsayer). Neither one is especially good without the other (well Soothsayer works with a few hexes), so you'd hope they do something decent if you're investing in both of them.
In my mind this hex was Paizo's unofficial fix for Fortune - it's the counterpoint to Misfortune, but because of how it can be used to pre-buff they made it less powerful to balance it out.
Not particularly OP but itself, but definitely good. The benefit of protective luck is the enemy doesn't get a save, unlike misfortune...
I'd still agree evil eye + misfortune is an overall better combo.
Soothsayer (Su)
The witch’s predictions become self-fulfilling prophecies.Benefit(s): When the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex, she can choose to delay the effect. If she does so, the hex takes effect the next time the target makes a roll that could be affected by the hex (such as an ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check) or is affected by an action that could be modified by the hex (such as being attacked when the hex would affect the target’s AC), whichever comes first (ignoring actions that are not in combat and actions that have no penalty for failure). The duration of the hex begins on the same round as the action that causes it to take effect.
The hex is wasted if it is not triggered within 24 hours.
is this too powerful a combination?
With protective luck + soothsayer you can pre-protect your whole party before any fight.
Add in cackle and they are protected the whole fight, every fight.
I disagree with Dairfaron in that I don't think Soothsayer works the way you want it to.
The hex reads- " When the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex, she can choose to delay the effect. If she does so, the hex takes effect the next time the target makes a roll that could be affected by the hex ..."
You have to delay the hex when you use it, not later.
Soothsayer makes it much easier and more convenient to get each party member buffed with protective luck, fortune or both as you can do it before combat starts. Then you can cackle, but once you stop the hex/s will be over. Powerful and useful but not overly so imho.
The reason it's more powerful than Fortune is that Protective Luck can be used on the same party member more than once in a day - it doesn't have the 1/day/target clause that a lot of hexes have.
The reason Protective Luck works with Soothsayer is that Protective Luck says it works with any hex that affects Fortune (and Soothsayer says it affects Fortune).
I am not 100% convinced that the people commenting saying this isn’t OP have run a game with protective luck
I have . It is straight up broken. It pretty much utterly negates an opponents chances of a critical hit. And it tends to make any enemy that isn’t at least a couple of CRs higher than an average PC suddenly useless (almost unable to hit)
The no save really rubs me the wrong way as it seems to run counter a pretty fundamental game play principle (yes I know there are some no save spells but they are often limited ).
Perhaps I have a weird game but I cannot see how anyone doesn’t think this hex is super overpowered and incredibly poorly written / edited. Combined with Soothsayer and it is just worse.
But at least I now know of this combo so I can ensure it is banned in my home game
I run Protective Luck + Soothsayer + Cackle
It is not doubt a very strong combination but, it is in no way broken and worthy of banning. It's strength comes from the action economy, and in this case, the bigger your party, the bigger the benefit. What would once take you 5 turns to put the hex onto everyone is eliminated.
What people seem to forget is that Cackle only works within 30ft, and the Witch is likely going to have to put themselves in harms way for it to benefit everyone. Protective Luck also doesn't affect the Witch themselves, so you have to ask, why isn't the DM (With smart enemies) targeting the Witch?
If you want to target the party, hit them with AoE, and save or suck spells. It will only seem broken if the DM is hitting himself in the head against a brick wall
A note on the Cackle Blouse, I have found you should save those swift action cackles for when you want to cast a full round spell
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It pretty much utterly negates an opponents chances of a critical hit. And it tends to make any enemy that isn’t at least a couple of CRs higher than an average PC suddenly useless (almost unable to hit)
Rolling twice and taking the best result is great for reducing crits, but the average roll is actually higher with this than it is with Evil Eye post level 8 (which is a -4 to hit).
The problem people have here isn't Protective Luck, it's Protective Luck + Soothsayer + Cackle. That's 3 hexes combined to only give 1 debuff, and it's roughly the same debuff you'd get from Misfortune or Evil Eye.
Is it a strong combination? Sure, but it's 3 hexes, so it should be strong. I don't think this even compares to Slumber or Ice Tomb.
I do agree with you MrCharisma but I would be careful saying
The problem people have here isn't Protective Luck, it's Protective Luck + Soothsayer + Cackle. That's 3 hexes combined to only give 1 debuff, and it's roughly the same debuff you'd get from Misfortune or Evil Eye.
Is it a strong combination? Sure, but it's 3 hexes, so it should be strong. I don't think this even compares to Slumber or Ice Tomb.
Because it is not as simple as 1 debuff, it is 1n where n is the number of people in your party
I guess it's really 1n where n is the number of enemies, so it depends who you're fighting.
If you're fighting 10 enemies it's 10 debuffs, but if you're fighting 1 enemy it's a crappy version of Misfortune.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We can compromise it is 1ne Where n is the number of party members x e the amount of melee enemies (inc. range)
It is an exponential combination
My apologies for not reading the text of Soothsayer corretly.
I thought it worked the same as many similar hexes, and maybe it should.
I do agree with you MrCharisma but I would be careful saying
Because it is not as simple as 1 debuff, it is 1n where n is the number of people in your party
The problem people have here isn't Protective Luck, it's Protective Luck + Soothsayer + Cackle. That's 3 hexes combined to only give 1 debuff, and it's roughly the same debuff you'd get from Misfortune or Evil Eye.
Is it a strong combination? Sure, but it's 3 hexes, so it should be strong. I don't think this even compares to Slumber or Ice Tomb.
Another question- is it really Protective Luck + Soothsayer + Cackle?
Most witches have cackle, or a cackler's blouse, anyway, so it is not really an issue.So it is 2 hexes for the effect. And even there, you can use Soothsayer to make other hexes more effective.
It is unusual. Cackle does nothing by itself. And soothsayer does nothing w/o cackle and at least one "cacklable" hex.
If you have or are going to take cackle and soothsayer you should take as many "cacklable" hexes as possible.
What people seem to forget is that Cackle only works within 30ft, and the Witch is likely going to have to put themselves in harms way for it to benefit everyone. Protective Luck also doesn't affect the Witch themselves, so you have to ask, why isn't the DM (With smart enemies) targeting the Witch?
Valid points.
I suggest checking out the Ashtifah archetype, which gives you-
"Ghostwalk (Su): Starting at 2nd level, as a move action after using a hex, an ashiftah can become invisible as per vanishAPG and can then take a 5-foot step. Using ghostwalk doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity.
This ability replaces the hex gained at 2nd level.
Fog of War (Sp): At 6th level, as a standard action, an ashiftah can blanket a 20-foot-radius area of the battlefield in a clammy mist that functions as per barrow hazeACG, allowing her to treat any area within the mist as within 30 feet for purposes of her hexes, as long as some part of that area is within 30 feet of her.
This replaces the hex gained at 6th level."
2 features of the archetype which help out with the problems you mention. Fog of war is nice, but ghostwalk is just brilliant generally.
The way I'd probably use Fortune is to buff one party member per combat and use Cackle to keep them buffed till the combat is over. That way you're getting a little boost for a longer period of time and you still have actions left to cast spells or use other hexes. This also makes it a little more tactical choosing who to buff depending on the enemies and battlefield setup.
Protective Luck Is really more useful with Soothsayer. Even without Cackle you give your party a round or three to buff up and get into position with a little more protection than usual, and since it doesn't cost you actions you can spend those first few rounds putting up buff/debuff/controll spells/hexes. Alternatively if you have one or two party members who do all the tanking it's a bit of a no-brainer to "cast" on them.
I actually see them as quite different and think they're both useful, but the lack of daily use limitations on Pritective Luck make it a more viable group buff.
The way I'd probably use Fortune is to buff one party member per combat and use Cackle to keep them buffed till the combat is over. That way you're getting a little boost for a longer period of time and you still have actions left to cast spells or use other hexes. This also makes it a little more tactical choosing who to buff depending on the enemies and battlefield setup.
While my current Witch is not at the level I plan to pick up Fortune yet, I do believe that once I do, I have a good use for it. That is because I am playing a summoning focused Witch. I can put Fortune on my summon as I can the next summon. And therefore I can save a mass group Fortune+Soothsayer for the final boss
Too OP? Yes.
I’m running into this same problem now. Party is 11th level, playing Iron Gods AP. The witch gives everyone Protective Luck. Everyone hides behind the two high AC martial characters who are now virtually unhittable and absolutely un-critable. The other three non-martial characters can easily survive a round or two to escape to cover while the martials deal with a problem.
Yes, area effects can still affect the party, but because they have zero fear of melee, the rest of the party focuses on the miscellany. I guess it’s good party design, but it all hinges on that one two-hex combo that makes them basically immune to physical combat.
Combined with the party’s Investigator crushing every skill check, they are mowing through the AP fairly effortlessly.
It’s a bit frustrating, and almost unfun. Almost.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but Soothsayer does not work with Protective Luck.
The witch can cause fate to twist so that it benefits a creature within 30 feet for 1 round. Whenever that creature is targeted by an effect that requires an attack roll, including weapon attacks, the attacker must roll twice and take the worse result. At 8th level and 16th level, the duration of this hex is extended by 1 round. A witch cannot use this ability on herself. Hexes that affect the fortune hex, such as cackle, also affect protective luck.
The witch’s predictions become self-fulfilling prophecies. When the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex, she can choose to delay the effect. If she does so, the hex takes effect the next time the target makes a roll that could be affected by the hex (such as an ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check) or is affected by an action that could be modified by the hex (such as being attacked when the hex would affect the target’s AC), whichever comes first (ignoring actions that are not in combat and actions that have no penalty for failure). The duration of the hex begins on the same round as the action that causes it to take effect. The hex is wasted if it is not triggered within 24 hours.
Soothsayer does not affect other hexes, it only adds additional options on how to use the mentioned hexes (evil eye, fortune, misfortune, or retribution). It's a passive ability, not an active one that affects other hexes.
Edit: Damn, I fell for a necro. Where's that Thread Necromancer dude when you need him?!
Also you don't seem to understand the word affect.
It definitely works.
Also you don't seem to understand the word affect.
It definitely works.
Go check your dictionary. It doesn't work.
A Potion Glutton, who can use potions as a swift action, isn't affecting the potions either.
Soothsayer merely changes the way in which a few specific hexes can be used - like applying a Quicken metamagic - but it does not affect these hexes themselves.
Soothsayer merely changes the way in which a few specific hexes can be used - like applying a Quicken metamagic - but it does not affect these hexes themselves.
Wat?? 0_o
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Soothsayer merely changes the way in which a few specific hexes can be used - like applying a Quicken metamagic - but it does not affect these hexes themselves.Wat?? 0_o
Sh!! No one is supposed to know you can apply metamagic to hexes...
Applying Quicken metamagic to a spell changes the way the spell is used -- as a Swift Action -- but it does not affect the spell effect itself. A quickened Fireball has absolutely the same effect as an ordinary Fireball. Nothing was affected.
Wearing a Cackling Hag's Blouse similarly does not affect the Cackle hex either, it just allows it to be used differently, namely as a Swift Action instead of a Move Action.
In order to affect something, you need a proper target -- like a creature, an area, or a supernatural effect -- and you have no target for the Soothsayer hex because there is no hex effect anywhere. The Soothsayer hex does only what it says it does: It allows you to use "the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex" in another way, but it does not affect any targets (i.e. supernatural effects).
Consider this feat, called "Homer Simpson maneuver":
When the witch uses the Sword of Springfield, she can choose to shove it up her nose. If she does so, the Sword deals 2 INT damage to the witch.
Then this feat did not affect the Sword of Springfield, it merely allowed it to be used differently.
For the Soothsayer hex to affect the Fortune hex it would have to be written different:
Original Text:
The witch’s predictions become self-fulfilling prophecies.
When the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex, she can choose to delay the effect. If she does so, the hex takes effect the next time the target makes a roll that could be affected by the hex (such as an ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check) or is affected by an action that could be modified by the hex (such as being attacked when the hex would affect the target’s AC), whichever comes first (ignoring actions that are not in combat and actions that have no penalty for failure). The duration of the hex begins on the same round as the action that causes it to take effect. The hex is wasted if it is not triggered within 24 hours.
Different Text
The witch’s predictions become self-fulfilling prophecies.
Immediately after the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex on a target, she can as a free action use the Soothsayer hex on the same target in order to delay the effect of the original hex. If she does so, the original hex takes effect the next time the target makes a roll that could be affected by that hex (such as an ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check) or is affected by an action that could be modified by that hex (such as being attacked when that hex would affect the target’s AC), whichever comes first (ignoring actions that are not in combat and actions that have no penalty for failure). The duration of that hex begins on the same round as the action that causes it to take effect. The original hex is wasted if it is not triggered within 24 hours.
That would work, because in that case you would use the Soothsayer hex to affect a proper target, namely the supernatural effect of the original hex. But the way it is written now does not affect any of these hexes, because abilities are not proper targets.
Just like you can dispel a wizard's Fireball (a spell effect is a valid target), but you cannot dispel the ability to cast a Fireball from a wizard's head.The original text of the Protective Luck hex even gives you a proper example:
Hexes that affect the fortune hex, such as cackle, also affect protective luck.
A witch can cackle madly as a move action. Any creature that is within 30 feet that is under the effects of an agony hex, charm hex, evil eye hex, fortune hex, or misfortune hex caused by the witch has the duration of that hex extended by 1 round.
Cackle targets supernatural effects of the named hexes within 30 feet of the witch; it does not target the ability to use those hexes inside the witch's brain.
Have none of you ever carefully read the rules on special abilities and what affect means?
----
p.s.: Not all hexes are supernatural abilities -- marked by (Su) after the name -- but some are spell-like abilities, for example Disguise, Poison Steep, Swamp Hag, Hidden Home, Speak in Dreams, Abominate, Lay to Rest, or Summon Spirit. And spell-like abilities can be quickened with the Quicken Spell-Like Ability feat, like applying the Quicken metamagic. News to you?
Applying Quicken metamagic to a spell changes the way the spell is used -- as a Swift Action -- but it does not affect the spell effect itself. A quickened Fireball has absolutely the same effect as an ordinary Fireball. Nothing was affected.Except, you know, the casting time.
Which is not part of the spell effect, but you knew that. Got any other of them useless comments?
Have none of you ever carefully read the rules on special abilities and what affect means?
Nope.
I see.
I like the way you assume which question Cavall was answering "nope" to, excellent discussion technique.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the way you assume which question Cavall was answering "nope" to, excellent discussion technique.
I like how little effort people put into properly answering questions. Is it that hard to hit the reply button and use a quote?
Politeness goes both ways, so don't expect me to be polite after you dumped on my post.Yet, no matter how much noise you intend to make with these mere one-liners & ad-hominem attacks over style, it cannot drown out the deafening silence that is the lack of substantive contributions capable of refuting my arguments. Therefore I consider this matter concluded.
You had your chance to bring substance, so now feel free to relish in the continued expression of your feelings -- whether it's wailing like a dryad over her burned tree or a barbarian's unbridled rage -- Protective Luck did nothing to ward you against my critical hits. :)
Go check your dictionary. It doesn't work.
affect1
/əˈfɛkt/
verb
have an effect on; make a difference to.
"the dampness began to affect my health"
Soothsayer merely changes the way in which a few specific hexes can be used - like applying a Quicken metamagic - but it does not affect these hexes themselves.
I think you're confusing Affect and Effect.
Quicken spell doesn't change the effect of the spell, but it does change the casting time of the spell. This means it is still changing the spell. Changing something means you have affected it ... literally that's what the word means.
Likewise Soothsayer doesn't change the effect of Fortune, but it does change the onset time - which is a part of the Hex. By changing the onset time it has affected the Hex.
... so now feel free to relish in the continued expression of your feelings -- whether it's wailing like a dryad over her burned tree or a barbarian's unbridled rage -- Protective Luck did nothing to ward you against my critical hits. :)
That's actually quite good.
Soothsayer merely changes the way in which a few specific hexes can be used - like applying a Quicken metamagic - but it does not affect these hexes themselves.Wat?? 0_oSeconded.
That makes zero sense.
Thirded
Quicken Metamagic does affect spells but it does not effect the spells effect
Soothsayer does not effect how the Fortune hex works but it does affect how it is used. Therefore the same applies to Protective Luck
As this is not in the rules forum, the pedantry around Affect or Effect which Pathfinder uses pretty interchangeably is unimportant.
OP asked "Is this too powerful?" To which I would respond "Yes, it's about as strong as Evil Eye/Slumber or Evil Eye/Misfortune then Cackle."
The offensive options don't feel as egregious as defensive ones do. Such as when Crane Wing got nerf slammed into orbit.
OP asked "Is this too powerful?" To which I would respond "YesNo, it's about as strong as Evil Eye/Slumber or Evil Eye/Misfortune then Cackle."
This is about how I see it. As you can see Scavion and I agree with where it stands power-wise, but I disagree that this is a problem.
Protective Luck + Soothsayer + Cackle effectively negates 99% of crits coming in from enemies, and should negate ~30% of hits (depending on the party).
At low levels it's incredibly powerful. You could potentially have this combo up at level 1 as a Human Witch. However at low levels it's super un-fun to lose characters to lucky enemy crits, and there isn't much yiu can do about it, so ... I'm totally fine with it.
At high levels there are plenty of other ways to reduce incoming damage, and there are a lot more effects that don't rely on attack rolls. It'll still negate most crits and ~30% of the hits against you, but it doesn't help at all against anything that doesn't use to-hit rolls. If you stack a 50% miss-chance, high AC, Mirror Image and Protective Luck you'll probably never get hit ... you're also wasting resources on overkill that you could spend on increasing your saves, mobility, etc.
This costs 3 hexes and the Witch's move action, and your party all have to be within 30 feet of the Witch or their protection runs out. A single Fireball should be enough to encourage the party change tactics.
Is it good? Yes.
Is it OP compared to things like the Slumber Hex? Absolutely not.
Non-interactable features are kinda awful. Power-wise/RAW there's nothing stopping a Witch from pre-buffing her whole party for 30 minutes with cackle and then ripping through the dungeon in an hour with protective luck and fortune up.
This is more a problem with the Witch in general but that ship has sailed. A reroll take the worst effect is essentially a -5 to attack rolls and immunity to crits for folks with a decent AC which can spice an encounter up or create tension. Yes, it's weaker as you get higher levels(Maybe even not completely overpowered at 10+), but it's still absurd value for 2 or 3 hexes.
Soothsayer is basically just the nice version where you're doing it because you got ambushed or whatever.
Slumber on the other hand is just a save or die that scales and if the target succeeds you can't try again(Or two tries with a feat). It also straight up doesn't work on a good portion of the bestiary. It does have counterplay in that the target can be awoken.
I like the way you assume which question Cavall was answering "nope" to, excellent discussion technique.I like how little effort people put into properly answering questions. Is it that hard to hit the reply button and use a quote?
Politeness goes both ways, so don't expect me to be polite after you dumped on my post.Yet, no matter how much noise you intend to make with these mere one-liners & ad-hominem attacks over style, it cannot drown out the deafening silence that is the lack of substantive contributions capable of refuting my arguments. Therefore I consider this matter concluded.
You had your chance to bring substance, so now feel free to relish in the continued expression of your feelings -- whether it's wailing like a dryad over her burned tree or a barbarian's unbridled rage -- Protective Luck did nothing to ward you against my critical hits. :)
Are you just not picking up on how absurd your argument and interpretation of the rules is?
I mean, if that's for you choose to houserule, that's fine I guess - but that's neither intent or how the vast majority plays.
As for the rudeness, I think it's as much disbelief as unkindness.
Conclude all you like. I rather doubt you'll find many in agreement.
This is more a problem with the Witch in general but that ship has sailed. A reroll take the worst effect is essentially a -5 to attack rolls and immunity to crits for folks with a decent AC which can spice an encounter up or create tension. Yes, it's weaker as you get higher levels(Maybe even not completely overpowered at 10+), but it's still absurd value for 2 or 3 hexes.
Just to clarify, Protective luck gives an average of -3.325 to every attack roll, which is slightly less powerful than Evil Eye at level 8+. It does all-but-negate crits, and approximately doubles the chance of a Natural 1 (which does make it more powerful than Evil Eye), but the average numeric modifier for most attacks isn't that big a deal.
Slumber on the other hand is just a save or die that scales and if the target succeeds you can't try again(Or two tries with a feat). It also straight up doesn't work on a good portion of the bestiary. It does have counterplay in that the target can be awoken.
Slumber is a save-or-die that can be taken at level 1. It doesn't cost spell-slots (so it can be cast on everything) and it has a scaling DC that will always be on par with your highest level spells. Yes there is a counter, and yes there are enemies who are immune, but in terms of breaking adventures it's much more powerful than a -4 to enemy attack rolls. It's also only 1 Hex.
I have a Hexcrafter/Justkin-Artificer Magus planned for a backup character in one of my games. I plan for her to take Protective Luck, Soothsayer and Misfortune as her staple Hexes. She'll prebuff the party with Protective Luck. Then when combat starts she'll cast a control spell or two and wade in with spell-combat and Hex-Strike to land Misfortune on an appropriate enemy before hitting them with Bestow-Curse or something. I won't be taking Cackle because Magi need their full-round-actions. Will this be an effective way to protect a party with no other front-liner? I sure hope so, but between Protective Luck and Misfortune she's only getting 4 rounds of disadvantage on the enemy rolls.
The problem people have is with Cackle. Without Cackle this combo isn't a problem, it's just a nice start to every combat. With Cackle you don't need Protective Luck or Soothsayer, you just need Misfortune - and most people look at that combo and say it's a bad version of Slumber.
Again, I think it's a good combo, but Overpowered?
As this is not in the rules forum, the pedantry around Affect or Effect which Pathfinder uses pretty interchangeably is unimportant.Pathfinder hardly ever uses these interchangeably. "Effect" is pretty much always used as a noun, whereas "affect" is used as a verb; example Threnodic Spell metamagic:
A threnodic spell affects undead creatures (even mindless undead) as if they weren’t immune to mind-affecting effects, but has no effect on living creatures.Even the Soothsayer hex itself:
When the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex, she can choose to delay the effect. If she does so, the hex takes effect the next time the target makes a roll that could be affected by the hex (such as an ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check) or is affected by an action that could be modified by the hex (such as being attacked when the hex would affect the target’s AC), whichever comes first (ignoring actions that are not in combat and actions that have no penalty for failure). The duration of the hex begins on the same round as the action that causes it to take effect.
So this "affect/effect" thingy is a non-issue sideshow and has nothing to do with anything.
An actual issue sideshow is Soothsayer's RAW impossibility of use, but I let that slide because it would render the entire hex moot. But if you're interested: Soothsayer does not define what kind of action it is, and therefore the general rule for hexes would take precedence: Soothsayer requires a standard action to use. But when you use Fortune/etc. you've already used your standard action to cast those hexes, which leaves you with no possible standard action left to apply Soothsayer. As I said, I think this is asinine -- although it would be RAW and any GM can use it to shut it down as rule-violation.
Aside from the sideshows, what is important here is to properly understand targeting mechanisms, because it's the targets that are affected by things.
When you read the way I had re-written the Soothsayer hex, you'd see that I changed the target of the hex itself.
My re-written form turned Soothsayer into an active hex, that targets the Fortune/etc hex effect just as Cackle does -- it affects the hex, not the witch.
But right now, Soothsayer is a passive ability that does not target any hex (effect) at all, it merely targets the witch and changes her ability to use something, like a Weapon Proficiency or Item Creation feat: it affects the witch.
You wouldn't go around and claim that the Cauldron hex (= Brew Potion bonus feat) affects a potion, just because you used it to create the potion. Neither does a Weapon Proficiency (Longsword) affect a longsword, it affects the wielder. The Pierce the Veil hex does not affect everything you see in the dark, just because it gives you Darkvision. The things you see are not the targets of the hex, the user of the hex is the affected target.
Protective Luck's language indicates (RAI) that the hex is meant to be affected by hexes like Cackle & Chant, but not by abilities like Soothsayer.
It's kinda obvious: Any new book, that came out after the APG and introduced extendable hexes, used a specific line in their hex descriptions to mark such a hex as extendable by Cackle. The editors used this language because the original "extender hexes" (Cackle; shaman's Chant with ACG) could obviously not mention these hexes before they were released. Worse, bad language on hex descriptions like the Discord or Sink hexes prohibited shaman's from using the Chant hex to extend these.
Cackle & Chant:
A witch can cackle madly as a move action. Any creature that is within 30 feet that is under the effects of an agony hex, charm hex, evil eye hex, fortune hex, or misfortune hex caused by the witch has the duration of that hex extended by 1 round.
A shaman can chant as a move action. Any creature that is within 30 feet that is under the effects of the shaman’s charm, evil eye, fortune, fury, or misfortune hex has that effect’s duration extended by 1 round. A shaman cannot select both this hex and the witch’s cackle hex.
Soothsayer:
... When the witch uses the evil eye hex, fortune hex, misfortune hex, or retribution major hex, she can choose to delay the effect...
Now the hexes, that were released after the APG, ordered by book:
... The duration can be extended with the cackle hex. ...
... The duration of this hex can be extended with the cackle hex. ...
... The cackle hex extends the duration of this hex by 1 round. ...
... Hexes that affect the misfortune hex, such as cackle, also affect distraction.
... Hexes that affect the fortune hex, such as cackle, also affect protective luck.
Every extendable hex contained such a line. This was never meant to be read as "use Soothsayer on it too!".
As outlined above, Soothsayer does not work on Protective luck from a RAW and RAI point of view. Since FAQ aren't coming anymore for PF1, you can try to find an author/editor of the Soothsayer hex and ask them their opinion on RAI.
Not necessary, though, because unless you're at the table nobody rules it that way :)
Brew Potion is a bad analogy, your metamagic analogy earlier was better. Brew Potion is the equivalent of the Hex class feature in this analogy, not the equivalent of another Hex.
Anyway if you don't think that Quicken Spell affects the spell then you clearly don't understand the word "affect". I'm not saying this to be rude, but you can't learn if you think you already know the answer. Since you clearly don't value our opinions, go ask someone qualified (an English Teacher or University Professor maybe?) and come back to us.
RAW there's nothing stopping a Witch from pre-buffing her whole party for 30 minutes with cackle and then ripping through the dungeon in an hour with protective luck and fortune up.
Actually, there is. There're workarounds if going by RAW (e.g. a dip into Stargazer to grab Chant), of course.
The problem people have is with Cackle. Without Cackle this combo isn't a problem, it's just a nice start to every combat. With Cackle you don't need Protective Luck or Soothsayer, you just need Misfortune - and most people look at that combo and say it's a bad version of Slumber.
I have to strongly disagree here. Soothsayer+Protective Luck doesn't take any action in combat, and effectively affects all enemies, without a save. Misfortune takes a standard action to affect a single target that is allowed a saving throw. Soothsayer+Protective Luck has the advantage in range (the Witch doesn't need to be within 30ft of the target), reliablity (no save), and action economy (no action needed). Soothsayer+Protective Luck is much stronger than Cackle+Protective Luck or Cackle+Misfortune (or Cakle+Evil Eye on attack rolls). Misfortune is seen as a bad version of Slumber because you could use Slumber with that standard action, but with SS+PL, you can do both!
Of course, to be overpowered, it needs to be stronger than other stuff, and the Save-or-suck hexes (Slumber, Swine, Ice Tomb, Restless Slumber) and Greater Gift of Consumption also have, as Scavion put it, "absurd value".
@Theaitetos: Absolutely no one agrees with your "changing how the hex works doesn't affect it" argumentation. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it. It doesn't matter in how many lines of post you try to hide in that you're just repeating your statement. You haven't said anything that gives any credibility to your argument that increasing the duration of a hex affects it but altering the starting time doesn't. It looks like you confused affect with effect (or believe that the former can only refer to the latter), and now you're desperately grasping at straws so that you don't have to admit that you were wrong. Even going so far as to insulting people who shut down your arguments and statements, like calling a post that rightfully points out that not changing the effect doesn't bar it from being 'affected' as "useless", or mocking people for not "knowing" that one can use metamagic on hexes, when your statement was indeed wrong because Quicken Spell-Like Ability isn't actually metamagic.
The problem people have is with Cackle. Without Cackle this combo isn't a problem, it's just a nice start to every combat. With Cackle you don't need Protective Luck or Soothsayer, you just need Misfortune - and most people look at that combo and say it's a bad version of Slumber.I have to strongly disagree here. Soothsayer+Protective Luck doesn't take any action in combat, and effectively affects all enemies, without a save.
You're right. That's why I took these on my Magus backup character. I also took Hex Strike because I can use it as a Swift Action while using Spell Combat, thus leaving all my in-combat actions for things other than Hexes. This costs me 3 hexes and 2 feats (although one Hex and one Feat come from archetypes). I do think this is a strong combo that helps the party by giving them time to buff in relative safety.
Of course, to be overpowered, it needs to be stronger than other stuff, and the Save-or-suck hexes (Slumber, Swine, Ice Tomb, Restless Slumber) and Greater Gift of Consumption also have, as Scavion put it, "absurd value".
And this is the crux of it. There are other options that have greater effects on the combat. I do agree that it's a powerful combo, but choose 3 other Hexes and I'm sure you can find more powerful combinations fairly easily.
when your statement was indeed wrong because Quicken Spell-Like Ability isn't actually metamagic.
The rules sure use the word metamagic a lot for something you call "not actually metamagic":
Some monster feats allow a creature to apply metamagic feat-like effects to its spell-like abilities. You can select a spell-like ability duplicating a spell with a level less than or equal to 1/2 the monster's caster level (round down) – 1 or 2, depending on the ability.
Table 3–1: Metamagic Spell-Like Abilities summarizes these feats and what spell-like abilities they can affect by caster level.
I think if the rules call it like that, I should be able to do so too.
Absolutely no one agrees with your "changing how the hex works doesn't affect it" argumentation.
How does agreement matter when you're not wrong?
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it. It doesn't matter in how many lines of post you try to hide in that you're just repeating your statement.
Then why are so many people repeating the mere fact that they disagree? You know, like you do.
Besides, I don't see how my "many lines of posts" about the Rules As Intended is just a repetition of the argument. Or the fact that Soothsayer requires a standard action to use, which I never mentioned before.
Are you just trying to give a false impression instead of an actual argument in order not to have to address the issue?
You haven't said anything that gives any credibility to your argument that increasing the duration of a hex affects it but altering the starting time doesn't.
Just wrong: I said nothing about the duration at all.
It looks like you confused affect with effect (or believe that the former can only refer to the latter)
That matter has been addressed. If you think I made a confusion between the two, explain where & how exactly instead of just repeating old sideshow non-issues.
who shut down your arguments and statements, like calling a post that rightfully points out that not changing the effect doesn't bar it from being 'affected'
Explain that. Which effect did I call as not being affected? If you had spend as much effort reading my posts as you do exploring my feelings -- "and now you're desperately grasping at straws so that you don't have to admit that you were wrong" -- you would see that I have repeatedly addressed the TARGETING issue. Soothsayer does not target any hex, it targets the witch, and I have given plenty of analogies (weapon proficiencies, item creation feats, ...).
mocking people for not "knowing" that one can use metamagic on hexes
You mean after I was mocked for mentioning the ability to Quicken instead of having the issue addressed? Shocking how that works, that I would reply in kind instead of taking mockery like a bully's victim.
Address the issue:
Does a weapon feat, that allows you to use a weapon differently, affect the weapon or the wielder?
Oh, and does Soothsayer require a standard action to use? I mean if you want to go there, let's do it.