> A witch's patron** is a mysterious entity**,** rarely** known or understood even by the witch in that patron's service. The nature of the relationship between a witch and their patron can serve as details for character development and storytelling. When playing a witch, work with your GM to determine the nature of your patron and how much of that nature you know, both as a player and a character. There are countless ways to handle a witch's patron; the following are just a few approaches you might take.
I get that the “typical” witch patron is stuff similair to Cthulhu or other things but not all patrons have to be that
I was gonna make a fervor witch who made a pact with Apsu but apparently I can’t cause Apsu isn’t mysterious
Why limit flavor? Why make it to where all our witch patrons have to be mysterious? Why limit creativity and story like this?
Witch patrons shouldn’t all have to be a Mysterious Cosmic Horror, especially with the themes you guys created such as fervor
To compare to dnd, warlocks don’t have to have mysterious patrons. An Archfey warlock can make a pact with a not mysterious Archfey god.
Also
> A patron might be a deity or demigod, a coven of powerful hags, a fey lord, an archdevil, or a similarly powerful entity, or perhaps multiple such figures working in tandem. As you gain more of your patron's power, you might learn more about who or what they are—certain combinations of themes and lessons suggest particular patrons or agendas—but patrons empower witches for their **own secretive reasons**, which they rarely reveal in full.
We aren’t allowed to have patrons make a pact with a clearly defined reason.
If I had it be that apsu made a pact with my character on the basis they use their power for good
Well, that isn’t a secretive Reason. It’s clear Apsu is making a pact to promote the greater good
| 26 people marked this as a favorite. |
This... seems like taking something that is handled between player and GM and trying to turn it into a mechanical problem.
There are no hard definitive statements there in what you quoted, but general trends and principles. Talk to your GM about your specific concept and how it fits in the campaign and there is no issue.
If you're looking at Westmeath campaigns or PFS or the like where you can't talk to your GM, then you're also looking at a campaign that isn't going to be making big plots around what your patron is and where hyperfocusing on whether patrons are usually unknown isn't really going to be an issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The time for complaining about patrons was probably during the Witch playtest.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The time for complaining about patrons was probably during the Witch playtest.
OP has no posts older than Jan 2023 which suggests the OP wasn't around for the playtest.
Yeah, this feels like someone reading the 'You Might...' and 'Others Probably...' entries in an ancestry and thinking that those are mechanical rules requirements.
I'm hoping that this is someone that is simply not used to having flavor and lore in the same book pages with game mechanics. Otherwise this entire thread is probably baiting.
Creative Director
|
| 23 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the reasons for this, narratively speaking, is to have two versions of the character who receives their power from elsewhere. The one who knows who that power is is represented by the cleric class. The one who doesn't know for sure is represented by the witch class. Obviously, the two classes have a lot of other differences as well, but that's one of the primary reasons why the witch patron works the way it does—it allows for players to pursue the trope of someone who worships a mysterious entity who may or may not be what they think it is, to add a bit of spooky mystery or strangeness to their character's story. Also allows us to tell those stories in the setting.
There's a somewhat popular trope of the character who believes they worship one thing but in fact are granted power by something else entirely. That trope doesn't work well with the cleric class, both thematically and mechanically, and because the way the cleric is built if the GM tells the player their deity has been lying to them, that breaks implicit trust between the player and GM and the rules and the narrative in a way that undermines what's valuable about the cleric class. This is reversed for the witch, a class where that sort of unexpected twist is built directly into the rules so if that does come about in play, the player shouldn't feel betrayed by the GM or the rules.
Of course, mechanically speaking, a witch who knows who their patron is would function identically to one who doesn't, but that's a deviation from the implied flavor of the class and blurs the lines a bit between the witch and the cleric in my opinion.
I don't see this as "limiting" flavor at all, but rather, justifying why we have a witch, a cleric, and honestly also orcales and sorcerers in the game, all different flavors of divine casters that, without the various flavor differences between them, kinda don't need to all exist in the same game.
If you want to play a divine spellcaster whose source of magic isn't mysterious, there are other options—cleric being the obvious one, but if you want to tinker a bit more with spell traditions, go with a sorcerer. Or any spellcasting class, frankly; they can all be religious and believe their magic is granted by a specific deific source, even if the rules say otherwise.
Yeah, this feels like someone reading the 'You Might...' and 'Others Probably...' entries in an ancestry and thinking that those are mechanical rules requirements.
I'm hoping that this is someone that is simply not used to having flavor and lore in the same book pages with game mechanics. Otherwise this entire thread is probably baiting.
Wait the people who were telling me patrons have to be mysterious or have mysterious goals didn’t mention anything about it being part of “you might…” or “others probably…” part of the class
They quoted the text but didn’t include those might or probably words
Is that actually where the text quoted comes from?
People on the pathfinder discord were telling me I can’t play a witch whose patron isn’t mysterious
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wait the people who were telling me patrons have to be mysterious or have mysterious goals didn’t mention anything about it being part of “you might…” or “others probably…” part of the class
It's not. It is part of an Ancestry entry like the Gnome Ancestry.
You Might...
Embrace learning and hop from one area of study to another without warning.
Rush into action before fully taking stock of the entire situation.
Speak, think, and move quickly, and lose patience with those who can’t keep up.Others Probably...
Appreciate your enthusiasm and the energy with which you approach new situations.
Struggle to understand your motivations or adapt to your rapid changes of direction.
See you as unpredictable, flighty, unreliable, or even reckless.
I'm using that as an example of another place where official lore for a character concept is presented as an example - for those who want to follow it.
People on the pathfinder discord were telling me I can’t play a witch whose patron isn’t mysterious
But there is no mechanical reason that you are 'forced' to follow such things like playing a Gnome that is always reckless and rushes into battle unprepared, or a Witch that doesn't know which deity their patron is.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
People on the pathfinder discord were telling me I can’t play a witch whose patron isn’t mysterious
If you are running into random people on the internet trying to play your character for you, you can simply ignore them.
If it is someone in your gaming group - especially the GM, then that is a bigger problem.
-----
This is the full text for Witch Patron:
You weren't born with the power to cast spells, nor have you spent years in devotion to tomes, deities, or mystical secrets. Your power comes through a potent being that has chosen you as their vessel to carry forth some agenda in the world. This entity is typically mysterious and distant, revealing little of their identity and motivations, and they grant you spells and other magical powers through a familiar, which serves as a conduit for their power.
A patron might be a deity or demigod, a coven of powerful hags, a fey lord, an archdevil, or a similarly powerful entity, or perhaps multiple such figures working in tandem. As you gain more of your patron's power, you might learn more about who or what they are—certain combinations of themes and lessons suggest particular patrons or agendas—but patrons empower witches for their own secretive reasons, which they rarely reveal in full.
At 1st level, choose your patron's theme, which determines your spellcasting tradition, a skill, a special cantrip you gain, and a spell added to your familiar.
Look at all of those qualifying words. None of that sounds like hard and fast rules that limit your character options for lore and concept.
|
Creative Director
|
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
A witch can absolutely know who her patron is, to be clear.
It's a bit against the expected flavor of the class, and if the player doesn't want the GM to do a "In fact all this time you've been granted power by someone else" switcharoo they should probably work that out with their GM when they make the character, just to be on the safe side.
Also, unlike clerics, witch patrons don't HAVE to be deities, which gives you even more room to choose from.
OP: You're reading flavor text as if it was rules.
In legal analysis there is something called 'dicta' - which is a dubious claim there but fitting here.
The notion being that "this section is just the ramblings of the writer to set the stage and context for the actual ruling. It's not the actual rules, nor how to use the rules, nor why the rules exist.
It's just flavoring.
Don't read too much into it.
Well...to some extent patrons are supposed to be mysterious. Your character isn't supposed to know too much about them. Merely that you made a bargain with them for power. The could be a biblical devil as easily as a cthonian/primeval dead god. The flavor isn't necessarily "cosmic horror". Think more '80's witchcraft horror films.
Ehhh… that’s what a “typical” witch is but it shouldn’t be all witches
Fervor witch gives divine spell list
Not to mention there is “lesson of life” and “lesson of protection”. How do those fit “80s witchcraft horror films”?
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ehhh… that’s what a “typical” witch is but it shouldn’t be all witches
Fortunately you won the lottery. Your question actually has an answer from James Jacob, one of the primary game developers - and he agrees with you.
So go post the link to this thread in your Discord server and bask in your notoriety.
A witch can absolutely know who her patron is, to be clear.
It's a bit against the expected flavor of the class, and if the player doesn't want the GM to do a "In fact all this time you've been granted power by someone else" switcharoo they should probably work that out with their GM when they make the character, just to be on the safe side.
Also, unlike clerics, witch patrons don't HAVE to be deities, which gives you even more room to choose from.
Hmmm how can I rabble rabble about this
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the reasons for this, narratively speaking, is to have two versions of the character who receives their power from elsewhere. The one who knows who that power is is represented by the cleric class. The one who doesn't know for sure is represented by the witch class. Obviously, the two classes have a lot of other differences as well, but that's one of the primary reasons why the witch patron works the way it does—it allows for players to pursue the trope of someone who worships a mysterious entity who may or may not be what they think it is, to add a bit of spooky mystery or strangeness to their character's story. Also allows us to tell those stories in the setting.
There's a somewhat popular trope of the character who believes they worship one thing but in fact are granted power by something else entirely. That trope doesn't work well with the cleric class, both thematically and mechanically, and because the way the cleric is built if the GM tells the player their deity has been lying to them, that breaks implicit trust between the player and GM and the rules and the narrative in a way that undermines what's valuable about the cleric class. This is reversed for the witch, a class where that sort of unexpected twist is built directly into the rules so if that does come about in play, the player shouldn't feel betrayed by the GM or the rules.
Of course, mechanically speaking, a witch who knows who their patron is would function identically to one who doesn't, but that's a deviation from the implied flavor of the class and blurs the lines a bit between the witch and the cleric in my opinion.
I don't see this as "limiting" flavor at all, but rather, justifying why we have a witch, a cleric, and honestly also orcales and sorcerers in the game, all different flavors of divine casters that, without the various flavor differences between them, kinda don't need to all exist in the same game.
If you want to play a divine spellcaster whose source of magic isn't mysterious, there are other...
Honestly a couple of the reasons im making a witch is:
To have a “holy trinity” of adopted siblings for PFS
One is an orc paladin of Apsu (The little brother)
The other is a tiefling warpriest (she is the middle child)
Then a kobold fervor witch of Apsu (older sister)
They were all orphans who were adopted by a silver dragon
And also, whereas her siblings relationship to Apsu’s is more akin to worship, her relationship is more like a business deal
Apsu grants her power so she can use it to help in her pursuit of knowledge in dangerous places, and in return she uses said power for good and to promote good. And also… making a pact with a dragon god is badass
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ehhh… that’s what a “typical” witch is but it shouldn’t be all witchesFortunately you won the lottery. Your question actually has an answer from James Jacob, one of the primary game developers - and he agrees with you.
So go post the link to this thread in your Discord server and bask in your notoriety.
To be clear on my role here... I'm the Narrative Creative Director. I had no direct role in the design or the writing of the witch class; I chatted with the design team a fair amount about how their roles might fit into stories in the game, and did help a bit with figuring out how to present patrons in 2nd edition rather than be super vague like we were in 1st edition, but my response shouldn't be taken as me stepping in for the design team. It's just my take, over on the Narrative team.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Close enough.
And see, CaptainRelyk. I've been on here for years and rarely had anyone from the company talking to me directly. And when one does, it is usually to tell me that I am wrong ;P
Good to see the response in this case though. I think it is definitely warranted.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I remember seeing you on discord, and everyone in the discord said you write it how you want, just that in society play it probably won't come up. The first sentence of the paragraph goes "this is typically how it usually is" ('rarely' doesn't mean 'never') and then the rest of the paragraph is literally "Talk with your GM on what the relationship actually is". I didn't think the one person (I assume one person) thinking it was forced overwrote what everyone else said (did they have more authority or something?) enough for you to come here and blame Paizo for adding permissive text.
Design Manager
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
> A witch's patron** is a mysterious entity**,** rarely** known or understood even by the witch in that patron's service. The nature of the relationship between a witch and their patron can serve as details for character development and storytelling. When playing a witch, work with your GM to determine the nature of your patron and how much of that nature you know, both as a player and a character. There are countless ways to handle a witch's patron; the following are just a few approaches you might take.
I get that the “typical” witch patron is stuff similair to Cthulhu or other things but not all patrons have to be that
I was gonna make a fervor witch who made a pact with Apsu but apparently I can’t cause Apsu isn’t mysterious
Why limit flavor?
Generally, it helps a lot to look at a quote in its entirety instead of snipping a piece of a single section out and trying to draw all of your conclusions from just that. For example, the entirety of the sidebar you're quoting is-
In Service to the UnknownA witch's patron is a mysterious entity, rarely known or understood even by the witch in that patron's service. The nature of the relationship between a witch and their patron can serve as details for character development and storytelling. When playing a witch, work with your GM to determine the nature of your patron and how much of that nature you know, both as a player and a character. There are countless ways to handle a witch's patron; the following are just a few approaches you might take.
For a character who truly doesn't know their patron, you might have your GM choose your patron's theme and which lessons your witch learns, as the patron determines what powers to bestow upon you as their emissary—and these can provide clues to your patron's nature. You could instead give your GM a list of lessons you'd like for your character and let the GM choose between them, representing a negotiation between your witch and the patron. In this case, you might choose your patron's theme to indicate which aspect of the patron relates to your character, or let your GM choose the theme. If you want to be fully in control of your abilities, you can choose the lessons you most prefer and let the GM tailor the identity of your patron accordingly.
Another approach is for you to craft the details of your witch's patron yourself. You can then provide those details to the GM to incorporate into a larger narrative or to provide additional flavor and roleplaying context for your character. Your character might still remain ignorant of that patron's identity, even if you as a player know it. Perhaps your character knows the nature of their patron but is cursed to never reveal it to others. You might have willingly sworn a pact to your patron but fear the repercussions should others learn of that pact. Or perhaps you and your patron are entirely forthcoming about your relationship.
Every witch is different, and no story is wrong so long as it's fun and engaging for everyone involved!
So to answer your questions-
Why limit flavor?
We didn't, that's literally the opposite of what that sidebar says.
Why make it to where all our witch patrons have to be mysterious?
We didn't, there's no such mechanical limitation in the game.
Why limit creativity and story like this?
We didn't, the sidebar you're quoting literally says "There are countless ways to handle a witch's patron; the following are just a few approaches you might take.[...] Every witch is different, and no story is wrong so long as it's fun and engaging for everyone involved!"
> A patron might be a deity or demigod, a coven of powerful hags, a fey lord, an archdevil, or a similarly powerful entity, or perhaps multiple such figures working in tandem. As you gain more of your patron's power, you might learn more about who or what they are—certain combinations of themes and lessons suggest particular patrons or agendas—but patrons empower witches for their **own secretive reasons**, which they rarely reveal in full.
We aren’t allowed to have patrons make a pact with a clearly defined reason.
Your quote doesn't match your conclusion. Rarely is not never, and that same block of text both doesn't do more than it says it does, and exists in context with the fully quoted sidebar above and the rest of the class in its totality. Mechanically, there is nothing stopping you from playing a witch who believes their patron is Apsu and that the only known conditions of their pact are that they use the power for good. Anything else is between you, the GM, and the story to decide; given that you've said this is specifically for PFS, it's probably unlikely to come up.
|
I remember seeing you on discord, and everyone in the discord said you write it how you want, just that in society play it probably won't come up. The first sentence of the paragraph goes "this is typically how it usually is" ('rarely' doesn't mean 'never') and then the rest of the paragraph is literally "Talk with your GM on what the relationship actually is". I didn't think the one person (I assume one person) thinking it was forced overwrote what everyone else said (did they have more authority or something?) enough for you to come here and blame Paizo for adding permissive text.
Overwrote it enough for them to make this thread after posting their lament in a different thread and got told there it was wrong as well -_-
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
> A witch's patron** is a mysterious entity**,** rarely** known or understood even by the witch in that patron's service. The nature of the relationship between a witch and their patron can serve as details for character development and storytelling. When playing a witch, work with your GM to determine the nature of your patron and how much of that nature you know, both as a player and a character. There are countless ways to handle a witch's patron; the following are just a few approaches you might take.
I get that the “typical” witch patron is stuff similair to Cthulhu or other things but not all patrons have to be that
I was gonna make a fervor witch who made a pact with Apsu but apparently I can’t cause Apsu isn’t mysterious
Why limit flavor?
Generally, it helps a lot to look at a quote in its entirety instead of snipping a piece of a single section out and trying to draw all of your conclusions from just that. For example, the entirety of the sidebar you're quoting is-
...
In Service to the UnknownA witch's patron is a mysterious entity, rarely known or understood even by the witch in that patron's service. The nature of the relationship between a witch and their patron can serve as details for character development and storytelling. When playing a witch, work with your GM to determine the nature of your patron and how much of that nature you know, both as a player and a character. There are countless ways to handle a witch's patron; the following are just a few approaches you might take.
For a character who truly doesn't know their patron, you might have your GM choose your patron's theme and which lessons your witch learns, as the patron determines what powers to bestow upon you as their emissary—and these can provide clues to your patron's nature. You could instead give your GM a list of lessons you'd like for your character and let the GM choose between them, representing a negotiation between your witch and
I’m glad limiting patron isn’t a thing in the rules, but you could see how it would be confusing when the very first line is “A witch's patron is a mysterious entity”
Thanks for taking the time to answer by the way
The specific identity of your patron mattering or not is something that should be decided by the GM on a game to game basis. It's possible "the exact nature of your patron" will matter a lot in the campaign, and it's possible it wouldn't matter at all. Games should be able to go either way depending on what the people involved want them to be.
Though based on Mr. Jacobs' comments, I wonder if it would be possible to get "power from elsewhere, and I know exactly where" options for primal, occult, or even arcane traditions if the witch is supposed to be the "unknown" variety."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The specific identity of your patron mattering or not is something that should be decided by the GM on a game to game basis. It's possible "the exact nature of your patron" will matter a lot in the campaign, and it's possible it wouldn't matter at all. Games should be able to go either way depending on what the people involved want them to be.
I almost think the first general rule needs errata. There are things that the GM shouldn't have the final - and certainly not the only - say on.
I play a Witch. My Witch character in fact does not know who or what their patron is. My familiar does, but won't say. And I presented my ideas to the GM for approval along with my ancestry, background, feat, and equipment choices made so that I am not surprising the GM with things, and so that the GM has the opportunity to negotiate choices with me if needed. But...
I am the one that made all of those decisions about my character. I chose who the patron for my character is. I decided what that patron relationship is. I am the one that decides if, when, and how that information gets revealed in-game.
Because I am the one playing this character. It is my character - not the GM's. The GM controls the plot of the campaign, makes final rulings on the game mechanics, creates and controls the NPCs, and can restrict options from player access.
But the GM does not control the other Player's characters.
Though based on Mr. Jacobs' comments, I wonder if it would be possible to get "power from elsewhere, and I know exactly where" options for primal, occult, or even arcane traditions if the witch is supposed to be the "unknown" variety."
Maybe go read through Mr. Sayre's then. It seems pretty clear, to me at least, that the general rules for Witch Patron in the Witch class text and the sidebar are Patron Theme choice agnostic. So the freedom for the character to know many or all of the details of their patron is available for any of the Patron Themes.
could a gm make my witch character lose powers like a cleric, druid or paladin? just asking because personally i don't feel comfortable playing a class that can lose its superpowers at any moment so might avoid the class if its the case
Well, see my previous post about how much control a GM should have over your character.
But no, there is no formal mechanic for losing powers for the Witch class like there is for Cleric, Druid, and Champion.
You could temporarily lose some of your abilities if your familiar dies - most notably the ability to refocus. But it will be restored during your next morning preparations. So you will be able to prepare your spell slots again at that time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Edicts and Anathema in Society Play cover most of these concerns about "losing powers."
I've always thought "The GM has the final say" is about rules adjudication — not how you flavor your PC. In Org Play the campaign dictates most of this: it's not the GM's campaign, it's Paizo's.
If you ever have an issue with a GM abusing Rule 1, there is a venture officer system to protect you. In fact "attempting to override or dictate other players’ actions" is already covered in the VO handbook as a Moderate Infraction, which have their own set of protocols.
In cases where there may be a conflict of interest (for example the GM behaving poorly is also the VO), you can run it up the chain, talk to an outside VO, email Alex, etc.
If you are concerned about these things, please read the VO handbook. We wrote and published it in a publicly accessible and transparent format for just this kind of conversation.
I can tell you the volunteers really do care and want to see people build cool things in an empowering environment.
|
This... seems like taking something that is handled between player and GM and trying to turn it into a mechanical problem.
There are no hard definitive statements there in what you quoted, but general trends and principles. Talk to your GM about your specific concept and how it fits in the campaign and there is no issue.
If you're looking at Westmeath campaigns or PFS or the like where you can't talk to your GM, then you're also looking at a campaign that isn't going to be making big plots around what your patron is and where hyperfocusing on whether patrons are usually unknown isn't really going to be an issue.
That’s this guys MO.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the reasons for this, narratively speaking...
Excellent post. I love hearing from the Paizo team like this. You all should participate more often. Thank you.
Though based on Mr. Jacobs' comments, I wonder if it would be possible to get "power from elsewhere, and I know exactly where" options for primal, occult, or even arcane traditions if the witch is supposed to be the "unknown" variety."
Honestly, it feels like this is part of the Witch's MO (that should have been better supported by rules). Personally, I'd view Oracle as already covering a divine caster that isn't fully sure exactly where power is from and Bards with an Enigma Muse similarly cover the mystery niche for Occult.
I mean, it's different class chassis.
I would prefer that any spell caster chassis have the option to have an option to have their power source be known or unknown, so that the main mechanics of the class are divorced from the themes and narrative aspects of it.
You should be able to have a cleric class character so that you have access to divine spells and healing/harm font with the potentially thematically to not know who your deity really is. Your character probably has something they call them, and has an idea of what they've been asked to do for this unknown entity, and some edicts, but no guarantee that your deity is who they say they are, that the anathema you have is consistent with their other followers, etc.
But you can really handle that with basically every class without needing to alter the existing mechanics very much. But it is something to discuss with a GM/player before going down that road.
Like it would make senses that potentially any deity level power entity who likes lying (trickery domain) would potentially enjoy screwing with a mortal by pretending to be someone else.
Though based on Mr. Jacobs' comments, I wonder if it would be possible to get "power from elsewhere, and I know exactly where" options for primal, occult, or even arcane traditions if the witch is supposed to be the "unknown" variety."Honestly, it feels like this is part of the Witch's MO (that should have been better supported by rules). Personally, I'd view Oracle as already covering a divine caster that isn't fully sure exactly where power is from and Bards with an Enigma Muse similarly cover the mystery niche for Occult.
Not really the concept differs specially because how you have such power.
This makes that of the 3, witches have the most flexibility in how they handle their patrons, when compared to clerics, who practically serve the gods, or oracles who are burdened by the divine.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My character calls her patron 'Daddy'.
Other Pathfinders find it a little uncomfortable...