|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
...requiring certain action conditions to be met and therefore not being usable every turn isn't bad design either. That's part of what being a tactical game entails.
I disagree, that's what makes the entire Swashbuckler Class nigh unplayable and unfun unless you're simply only ever facing -3 to -1 PL enemies.
If something is central to the theme and idea of an entire Class it NEEDS to have a 60% or greater success rate with multiple ways to improve your odds based on tactical decisions, anything less than that feels awful at the table, especially if you're simply locked out of being able to do your thing at all due simply to dice roll luck versus tactical decision making.
Y'all are acting like the familiar abilities are the only thing that witch has going for it. Even if the familiar abilities are situational, the witch is more than a familiar. A witch's primary contribution is going to be their spells. Most of the hexes provide additional chip damage (either through buffing allies, debugging enemies, or just straight adding damage) or a third action to use in conjunction. A Swashbuckler's janky action economy and multiple failure points isn't comparable.
What is comparable is a bard's composition cantrips. Bards don't always have a third action to use their. They have some flexibility with Lingering Composition but witches have cackle. If the witch hex + familiar ability together can have a similar impact to Dirge of Doom or Inspire Courage, witches will be in a good place. And providing flanking is a bigger to hit shift than either of those compositions. It is easier to achieve flatfooted than a the status bonus or status penalty through other means, but there is still the actual hex to consider. If those get some buffs too, especially to make up for their single target nature, we will be in a good place.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Y'all are acting like the familiar abilities are the only thing that witch has going for it. Even if the familiar abilities are situational, the witch is more than a familiar. A witch's primary contribution is going to be their spells. Most of the hexes provide additional chip damage (either through buffing allies, debugging enemies, or just straight adding damage) or a third action to use in conjunction. A Swashbuckler's janky action economy and multiple failure points isn't comparable.
What is comparable is a bard's composition cantrips. Bards don't always have a third action to use their. They have some flexibility with Lingering Composition but witches have cackle. If the witch hex + familiar ability together can have a similar impact to Dirge of Doom or Inspire Courage, witches will be in a good place. And providing flanking is a bigger to hit shift than either of those compositions. It is easier to achieve flatfooted than a the status bonus or status penalty through other means, but there is still the actual hex to consider. If those get some buffs too, especially to make up for their single target nature, we will be in a good place.
The Witch is meant to be the Familiar class, not the "3 slot caster" class, and the Patron only really determines their tradition as well as their starting Hex cantrip; it doesn't poach from other spell lists like it used to, adding new niches the Witch can fulfill based on their choice. If you're wanting to play a class that emphasizes their spells and spell slots, there are other classes that do this better than the Witch currently does now. So, as it stands, the Witch either needs more spell slots (in which case it's just a Familiar Master Wizard at that point), or needs something besides their meager spell slot chassis to make them both stand apart from other spellcasters as well as provide a unique look/perspective at their role.
Unfortunately, the developers genuinely believe that the Familiar can fulfill this role by adding in unique mechanics that no other Familiar can possess. Even with whatever changes they have in store for them, I disagree wholeheartedly with that decision. It might not have been bad if they made Familiars' baseline better, and/or made their specializations more impactful to those who actually want to invest in them, but I don't think even the Remaster will go so far as to make those required changes, because it betrays other significant design elements; most notably, Animal Companions being the "combat-oriented" ones, and not the Familiars.
Now, Hexes could have easily fulfilled this niche, and is mostly what the player base would have preferred, myself included. Of course, suggesting that whatever changes they are getting currently (or whatever changes might have been instead if Familiars weren't part of the class budget) will be enough is purely speculation.
As it stands, though, it seems we are getting some weird "Hexes combo with Familiars" niche based on the Rune Witch spoiler, which isn't exactly good class design, for a couple reasons. The first is action economy: Odds are, you need to Command your Familiar with an Action to either position it and/or do something to set it up with your Patron ability, and then perform a 1 or 2 action Hex spell/cantrip, or sustain an active one, to trigger it. Granted, this means a Witch isn't casting from spell slots every round, which is helpful given they are only 3 slot casters, but depending on durations of things, this means that this might be a round-per-round mandatory, predictable playstyle. There is always the whole Cackle thing, giving you a chance to cast a spell from Spell Slots, but relegating Focus Spells to sustaining them until you get to 16th level and take Effortless Concentration isn't exactly fun if you want to use your Focus Spells for other things (such as, you know, Hexes). The second is with how fragile and weak Familiars are currently, with no apparent means to increase this viability (even in-class, because let's face it, Phase Familiar is terrible). Even with abilities that attempt to shore up those weaknesses, because all it takes is either a targeted Strike (or two) or an AoE and that Familiar is obliterated, never to come back again until the next rest period. And sure, we can say "Strikes/abilities targeting the Familiar equals Strikes/abilities not targeting PCs, so it's a net gain in action economy!" But the same can be done with a summoned creature, in which case why are we throwing the Familiar in a paper shredder when summoned creatures do this without any risk of losing defining combat features?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And requiring certain action conditions to be met and therefore not being usable every turn isn't bad design either. That's part of what being a tactical game entails.
This is true, as long as there are meaningful alternatives that you also have access to.
It's why people complain about Wilding Word. There's nothing inherently wrong with a niche spell designed to have a specific effect in a specific scenario... but it really sucks when that's the only witch cantrip you'll ever have.
Under those circumstances, it's no longer a tactical choice, and simply a matter of not having a class feature under certain (many in this case) circumstances.
This is something Paizo really missed with the APG Witch: tactical choices mean you need to have an actual choice to make. You can see how they kind of corrected this with the Psychic (which by level 7 can have as many as 5 amps to choose from, along with multiple psyche actions).
We can only hope that whatever they do with the Witch they keep that lesson in mind and give the class an interesting toolkit, and not just a single niche option that might not even change how the class feels most of the time.
To be honest, I sort of wonder if that's why some of their choices with the Witch feel odd, because the Psychic is the fix to the witch people wanted, and now they're afraid to retread that design space.
I'm just going to respond to Squiggit at this point because I have had a long day and can't be arsed with Darksoul from the airport.
And requiring certain action conditions to be met and therefore not being usable every turn isn't bad design either. That's part of what being a tactical game entails.This is true, as long as there are meaningful alternatives that you also have access to.
It's why people complain about Wilding Word. There's nothing inherently wrong with a niche spell designed to have a specific effect in a specific scenario... but it really sucks when that's the only witch cantrip you'll ever have.
Under those circumstances, it's no longer a tactical choice, and simply a matter of not having a class feature under certain (many in this case) circumstances.
This is something Paizo really missed with the APG Witch: tactical choices mean you need to have an actual choice to make. You can see how they kind of corrected this with the Psychic (which by level 7 can have as many as 5 amps to choose from, along with multiple psyche actions).
We can only hope that whatever they do with the Witch they keep that lesson in mind and give the class an interesting toolkit, and not just a single niche option that might not even change how the class feels most of the time.
To be honest, I sort of wonder if that's why some of their choices with the Witch feel odd, because the Psychic is the fix to the witch people wanted, and now they're afraid to retread that design space.
You're right that only getting the one hex cantrip hurts. It doesn't help that all the other hexes burn a focus point, require an action every round to sustain, and require multiple rounds to get your money's worth. So if you suddenly find you need to move, you've basically wasted your focus point... Unless you use Cackle, which requires spending ANOTHER focus point.
However, we know they are retreading some of the psychic's design space in a way that does help this problem: the new refocus rules. All of the focus spells become more attractive and flexible to use if you can always restock them to 3. (And 4 if you can spare the familiar ability, which many people can.)
Sustainability could remain a problem, though. One action hexes really call for being paired with a 2 action spell slot, where a druid casting Sudden Bolt usually isn't chewing through a slot in the same round. Multiclassing into the psychic dedication does remain an option for occult witches, at least. Wizard getting a buff to their focus spell options would help too. But hopefully the witch can get a variety of options in class.
Y'all are acting like the familiar abilities are the only thing that witch has going for it. Even if the familiar abilities are situational, the witch is more than a familiar. A witch's primary contribution is going to be their spells. Most of the hexes provide additional chip damage (either through buffing allies, debugging enemies, or just straight adding damage) or a third action to use in conjunction. A Swashbuckler's janky action economy and multiple failure points isn't comparable.
What is comparable is a bard's composition cantrips. Bards don't always have a third action to use their. They have some flexibility with Lingering Composition but witches have cackle. If the witch hex + familiar ability together can have a similar impact to Dirge of Doom or Inspire Courage, witches will be in a good place. And providing flanking is a bigger to hit shift than either of those compositions. It is easier to achieve flatfooted than a the status bonus or status penalty through other means, but there is still the actual hex to consider. If those get some buffs too, especially to make up for their single target nature, we will be in a good place.
giving a single enemy a Save to do what bard does without a save against all enemies, AND with a better action economy on top (cackle being +1 action vs lingering being +2 actions), is not at all being equalized if you add flat-footed.
i would agree if Hexes didn't have saves and simply worked, you know like Bard's compositions, they would be much closer.. but still, the aoe nature of the bard compositions would still be much better (when comparing cantrip hexes vs cantrip compostions).
i've listed in a previous post enhancements required to hexes to become comparable, things like them actually scaling up to frighten 3 and status +3 instead of being straight up "very bad compositions".
I generally agree, and noted myself that hexes need a buff too on top of those familiar abilities. Dirge of Doom is one of the strongest abilities in the game, and is definitely better if you're fighting a lot of enemies and have a Dread Striker rogue. It's not actually stronger if you are fighting a solo boss (which is what people tend to obsesses over, especially fof caster struggles) and only have one melee party member. -2 to AC alone is pretty comparable value to frightened 1, and a chance to further debuff with Evil Eye (or a comparable enhancement, like a solid boost to damage) you're doing well.
Again, I still think hexes need buffs and witches need more cantrips, but people turning their nose up to a free action flanker that could conceivably draw aggro if your melee bud darts in and out of reach strikes me as weird. That's a nice little option. My Strength of Thousands Rune Witch would love to get this power; we only have one front liner and kite the hell out of enemies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm excited for the nails and hair to be combined into one feat, but I hope it does a little more than just mush those together and nothing else. I want some sort of scaling with int or more interplay with hexes and natural attacks; attacking someone with nails and afflicting them with a hex sounds awesome, but in practice it's a derpier version of Spellstrike.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does Witch need at least a slight buff ? Yes.
Will it get a buff in Remastered ? Very likely.
Will it go back to the level of power people enjoyed in the PF1 Witch ? No.
The real question is, "will it be on par with a Bard?" The answer to that question is up in the air, and I am personally calling it for no.
(It would be great if I am wrong)
Alternatively, the bard might get slight nerfs while the witch gets comparatively substantial buffs. That's the route I expect
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like a witch's choice of patron to give them a cantrip, a basic lesson, and some extra thing (like a bard's muse does). For example, a vengence witch might get a +1 circumstance bonus to curse DCs against a target that has ever attacked her.
I'd like the witch cantrips to all be reworked. They need to be a little bit better. Make them in line with the psychic cantrips (unamped).
I'd like cackle to be usuable in a manner similar to a psi cantrip. If used without a focus point, it requires an action. Cackle also sustains all the witch's spells.
|
|
Alternatively, the bard might get slight nerfs while the witch gets comparatively substantial buffs. That's the route I expect
Truthfully, I think that the Bard at least needs slight nerfs no matter what even IF the baseline power/functionality of everything else is still given minor buffs to bridge the gap because that gap is, at least in terms of difference between PCs of the same level for PF2, enormous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather the witch be effective and fun to play. The bard is effective, but kind of boring. I'd take a witch that is better than a bard since a bard is really good at buffing others.
I want a witch that is highly effective doing witch things. Not a witch that's like a bard.
This whole idea the bard is super powerful is a false one. They are good at making others better and people love that. But the bard itself isn't a combat monster or even a great caster. They have a very niche place as the uber buffer and debuffer.
I'd even be happy if the witch was a better debuffer than the bard. Hexes are supposed to put the big whammy on enemies. That would be cool if the witch became the inverse of the bard's buffing ability.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather the witch be effective and fun to play. The bard is effective, but kind of boring. I'd take a witch that is better than a bard since a bard is really good at buffing others.
I want a witch that is highly effective doing witch things. Not a witch that's like a bard.
This whole idea the bard is super powerful is a false one. They are good at making others better and people love that. But the bard itself isn't a combat monster or even a great caster. They have a very niche place as the uber buffer and debuffer.
I'd even be happy if the witch was a better debuffer than the bard. Hexes are supposed to put the big whammy on enemies. That would be cool if the witch became the inverse of the bard's buffing ability.
A bard is only boring if you don't play it right. Given that they can buff themselves to equal unbuffed martials, and they have D8/Light armor proficiencies (AKA same as a Rogue), going a martial dedication isn't a bad idea. Our Bard took a reach weapon with Power Attack and contributed quite well in both melee as well as at range with spells.
Also, saying they are aren't a good caster when they have penultimate focus spells and access to the best spell list isn't correct either. Yes, it's not 3 slots per spell level, but it's not like they have to cast those spell slots every turn either since they have permanent focus spells.
Just as well, given that this is a team game, a class that makes the entire team better by simply doing what it does and is unique at doing so, is precisely why the Bard is so good. And the fact that it can do this all by itself to make it equal to unbuffed martials is pretty much as good and versatile as it gets.
While I would agree that the Witch should be a solid debuffer, I don't think that will come to pass. Too much stock put into its Familiar feature interacting with their Hexes to make that happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This whole idea the bard is super powerful is a false one
One might say that "super powerful" means different things to different people.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
They have a very niche place as the uber buffer and debuffer.
Being the best buffer and debuffer in a game where buffs and debuffs are king doesn't really strike me as niche.
I'd rather the witch be effective and fun to play. The bard is effective, but kind of boring. I'd take a witch that is better than a bard since a bard is really good at buffing others.
I want a witch that is highly effective doing witch things. Not a witch that's like a bard.
This whole idea the bard is super powerful is a false one. They are good at making others better and people love that. But the bard itself isn't a combat monster or even a great caster. They have a very niche place as the uber buffer and debuffer.
I'd even be happy if the witch was a better debuffer than the bard. Hexes are supposed to put the big whammy on enemies. That would be cool if the witch became the inverse of the bard's buffing ability.
A bard is only boring if you don't play it right. Given that they can buff themselves to equal unbuffed martials, and they have D8/Light armor proficiencies (AKA same as a Rogue), going a martial dedication isn't a bad idea. Our Bard took a reach weapon with Power Attack and contributed quite well in both melee as well as at range with spells.
Also, saying they are aren't a good caster when they have penultimate focus spells and access to the best spell list isn't correct either. Yes, it's not 3 slots per spell level, but it's not like they have to cast those spell slots every turn either since they have permanent focus spells.
Just as well, given that this is a team game, a class that makes the entire team better by simply doing what it does and is unique at doing so, is precisely why the Bard is so good. And the fact that it can do this all by itself to make it equal to unbuffed martials is pretty much as good and versatile as it gets.
While I would agree that the Witch should be a solid debuffer, I don't think that will come to pass. Too much stock put into its Familiar feature interacting with their Hexes to make that happen.
There isn't any playing it "right."
I've played a bard. Sure, you can do other things like every other character in the game. But your power is in cantrips. Unique cantrips and focus spells a bard gets to buff and debuff.
You have the Occult list which has the synesthesia spell which every occult caster or sorcerer who poaches it has.
I know how to build characters. Bards are not optimal combat monsters no matter how you try to build them. They are buff monsters. When you use something like Harmonize with Inspire Courage and Dirge of Doom combined, the party loves you. Or if you synesthesia and true strike with a Lingering Song Inspire courage or Dirge of Doom, you can turn an encounter trivial because you boost the rest of the party's ability to do their thing.
Other than that the bard is a regular caster who can drop spells lots of casters can cast to do damage and use weapons as well as most casters use weapons. Nothing special and nothing super powerful.
I know from play experience the druid is more powerful as far as versatile damage and roles go than the bard. I've seen well built and played druids in operation and they are brutal. Top level damage dealers with healing and good damaging focus spells. They can rip stuff up.
As a person that has played the bard to level 18 or so, their main power is making others better. The bard doesn't compete with other casters for damage casting or overall power character. You using your actions for offense the majority of the time is suboptimal play when you can set up some person who does more damage than you for the big hits.
The bard is not overpowered. It's pretty boring if you try to go offense or do anything else but what it's designed for. I find the sorcerer and druid to be far more powerful casters if you want to do damage or other types of offense, control, or being effective on the battlefield as a caster. Druids and some bloodlines have way better focus spells for bringing the hammer on enemies.
They have a very niche place as the uber buffer and debuffer.Being the best buffer and debuffer in a game where buffs and debuffs are king doesn't really strike me as niche.
It is a niche style of play that certain people like and others do not. I do not enjoy the bard playstyle. I know they are incredibly powerful when boosting groups or setting up the killing blow on a boss with their buffs and debuffs.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
IDK, I think that Witch should be at least as good at Debuffing as Bard is at Buffing but it's not even close, the Bard is better at that as well as buffing too, while simultaneously, the Witch is worse in every measurable way at literally everything else with the sole exception being *[checks notes]* ... having a familiar...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IDK, I think that Witch should be at least as good at Debuffing as Bard is at Buffing but it's not even close, the Bard is better at that as well as buffing too, while simultaneously, the Witch is worse in every measurable way at literally everything else with the sole exception being *[checks notes]* ... having a familiar...
What I find impressive is despite being just a single feat and nothing much more than that, the Muses are are far more impactful than Patrons. Sure, the Muse flavor is scarce and barely non-existent, but so are Patrons. The key difference is that there are several feats that expand upon them, Bards have a good base chassis and lots of interesting feat directions to explore with or without Muses being prominent class features.
Patrons just feel... Generic. You get lessons that don't have any ties. Their flavor actually don't even match that well, unless you're doing a Cold-related Witch for some reason, which should've been a Witch Class Archetype, if anything. Irrisen-type Witches could have a well defined niche of their own.
I said it back during the playtest and I will say it again: Focusing too much on Familiars and too little on Patrons was a major mistake.
I'm glad that more people see and agree with it now.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Random tangent: I hope Paizo realize that variable casting spell list should have "mechanical budget value" of ZERO. It's meaningless beyond character creation, thus it's merely a flavor direction players can choose, rather than a power influence. It's like considering the Wizard's Spell list when designing Clerics. It makes no damn sense.
Unless Witches gain the ability of heavily cross-pick choices from other spellcasting flavors (multiple feats or being able to access more than one), then it should be entirely disregarded as a class "feature".
There isn't any playing it "right."
I've played a bard. Sure, you can do other things like every other character in the game. But your power is in cantrips. Unique cantrips and focus spells a bard gets to buff and debuff.
You have the Occult list which has the synesthesia spell which every occult caster or sorcerer who poaches it has.
I know how to build characters. Bards are not optimal combat monsters no matter how you try to build them. They are buff monsters. When you use something like Harmonize with Inspire Courage and Dirge of Doom combined, the party loves you. Or if you synesthesia and true strike with a Lingering Song Inspire courage or Dirge of Doom, you can turn an encounter trivial because you boost the rest of the party's ability to do their thing.
Other than that the bard is a regular caster who can drop spells lots of casters can cast to do damage and use weapons as well as most casters use weapons. Nothing special and nothing super powerful.
I know from play experience the druid is more powerful as far as versatile damage and roles go than the bard. I've seen well built and played druids in operation and they are brutal. Top level damage dealers with healing and good damaging focus spells. They can rip stuff up.
As a person that has played the bard to level 18 or so, their main power is making others better. The bard doesn't compete with other casters for damage casting or overall power character. You using your actions for offense the majority of the time is suboptimal play when you can set up some person who does more damage than you for the big hits.
The bard is not overpowered. It's pretty boring if you try to go offense or do anything else but what it's designed for. I find the sorcerer and druid to be far more powerful casters if you want to do damage or other types of offense, control, or being effective on the battlefield as a caster. Druids and some bloodlines have way better focus spells for bringing the hammer on enemies.
I suppose, since you can play a Bard just about any way you want and it won't ever be bad. Their chassis is just that good and flexible. They aren't ever really at a detriment.
As for Druid being more powerful, I'm not convinced. Sure, they have a strong focus spell, but so can Sorcerer and Oracle, and honestly, those focus spells aren't as strong as Bard's. Druid has comparable proficiencies, sure, but they lack the ability to buff their numbers to a level that Bard can on their own. I would say at-best, a Druid can blast better (due to poaching Arcane spells), heal better (due to Heal spell), and maybe do unarmed combat better (if they specialized in Wild Shape). Otherwise, numbers suggest Bard is superior to them in other respects, such as buffs/debuffs, skill utility, and of course, focus spells and spell list, and those are the ones they need to be better at to be the better class.
Bards don't need to be combat monsters to be overpowered in combat. All I said was that their buffs put them on par with unbuffed martials, which is, again, hardly optimal, but also a standard the game is set to, and their debuffs make standard encounters trivial and difficult encounters manageable. And them not being the best blasters is fine, because blasting in this game is just fodder clearing, which can basically be resolved via theatre-of-mind. The fact that nobody can do a lot of the things a Bard can (even with dedications) should be indication enough of how powerful they really are.
I...There isn't any playing it "right."
I've played a bard. Sure, you can do other things like every other character in the game. But your power is in cantrips. Unique cantrips and focus spells a bard gets to buff and debuff.
You have the Occult list which has the synesthesia spell which every occult caster or sorcerer who poaches it has.
I know how to build characters. Bards are not optimal combat monsters no matter how you try to build them. They are buff monsters. When you use something like Harmonize with Inspire Courage and Dirge of Doom combined, the party loves you. Or if you synesthesia and true strike with a Lingering Song Inspire courage or Dirge of Doom, you can turn an encounter trivial because you boost the rest of the party's ability to do their thing.
Other than that the bard is a regular caster who can drop spells lots of casters can cast to do damage and use weapons as well as most casters use weapons. Nothing special and nothing super powerful.
I know from play experience the druid is more powerful as far as versatile damage and roles go than the bard. I've seen well built and played druids in operation and they are brutal. Top level damage dealers with healing and good damaging focus spells. They can rip stuff up.
As a person that has played the bard to level 18 or so, their main power is making others better. The bard doesn't compete with other casters for damage casting or overall power character. You using your actions for offense the majority of the time is suboptimal play when you can set up some person who does more damage than you for the big hits.
The bard is not overpowered. It's pretty boring if you try to go offense or do anything else but what it's designed for. I find the sorcerer and druid to be far more powerful casters if you want to do damage or other types of offense, control, or being effective on the battlefield as a caster. Druids and some bloodlines have way better focus spells for bringing the hammer on enemies.
Powerful is a general term. There are things that each class is more powerful using, some of them you listed the druid is better at.
Druid:
1. Proficiencies about the same with better armor getting even better when they can use metal armor.
2. Great focus spells with lots of upgrades to them.
3. Primal is good for blasting, healing, battleforms, and summoning.
4. Can focus on four stats: Str, Dex, Con, Wis.
5. Casting stat adds to Will Save and Perception as well as Medicine.
6. Wild Shape is extremely versatile in use for scouting, mobility, moving groups, energy damage, exploiting weaknesses, reach.
7. Great class feats.
Druid is excellent in a lot of roles from blaster to martial damage in battle forms to medic using medicine and healing spells. Druid is an immensely versatile casting class I have way more fun playing over a bard.
I find this idea of the "overpowered" bard an odd one. If you took their buffing way, no one would care about them other than for reasons of personal style. They would even be underpowered in my opinion because the buffing is the main thing you want them around for whereas a druid can fill in in nearly ever role in a party.
I don't think the bard is OP.
I think the Bard, Druid, Sorcerer, and Cleric are all about equal with different specializations.
Even on this thread it is clear what the bard does: buffs people and some debuffing, primarily Dirge of Doom. It you like that playstyle, then cool. If you don't, bard isn't for you.
Do they blast better? Nope. Do a better job of partial martial? Nope. Heal? Nope. Battlefield control? Nope. More spell slots? Nope.
That's what I'd like to see for the witch and wizard. Put them on par with the other caster classes.
I'd say the bard or any occult caster against a single boss mob is amazing. If you can cast synesthesia, you're awesome against a boss mob.
If I'm fighting a group of mooks with maybe a mini-boss, I'd take a cleric, druid, and some sorcerers over a bard. Druid for more blasting, healing, and damage than the bard can do. Cleric for healing. A primal or arcane sorcerer for mook blasting and debuffing.
Do they blast better? Nope. Do a better job of partial martial? Nope. Heal? Nope. Battlefield control? Nope. More spell slots? Nope.
Might I remind you that they get the occult list which still has incredible control spells. They're just as good at battlefield control as any other occult or arcane caster
A bard ... Also, saying they are aren't a good caster when they have penultimate focus spells and access to the best spell list isn't correct either. Yes, it's not 3 slots per spell level, but it's not like they have to cast those spell slots every turn either since they have permanent focus spells.I just have to mention that they ARE 3 slots per spell level. Just in case.
My bad, meant to say 4, not 3. Either way, they don't necessarily need all that many slots.
Do they blast better? Nope. Do a better job of partial martial? Nope. Heal? Nope. Battlefield control? Nope. More spell slots? Nope.Might I remind you that they get the occult list which still has incredible control spells. They're just as good at battlefield control as any other occult or arcane caster
All four lists have some good battlefield control spells. Bards don't do it better.
The one thing the bard does demonstrably better than other classes is buff groups. Their composition cantrips and focus spells are the best group buffs for action and resource cost in the game. Dirge of Doom is an excellent debuff aura, but fear is pretty easy to land on enemies not immune to it.
The rest of their chassis is pretty standard caster chassis for an 8 hit point caster.
To move back to the point, witch needs to be as interesting to build and run as a bard or druid or psychic or sorcerer. That means better class feats and hexes that match the power of those focus cantrips or spells. Maybe even a little stronger on the focus cantrips or spells given the witch has only 6 hit points a level along with the caster defenses. They need some pop from their focus hex cantrips and focus spells that make you want to play them as much as you'd want to play an 8 hit point caster.
If you have to be the soft target, then be the true glass cannon. Not the glass pea shooter wondering why you're not playing an 8 hit point caster with just about everything better.
All four lists have some good battlefield control spells. Bards don't do it better.Do they blast better? Nope. Do a better job of partial martial? Nope. Heal? Nope. Battlefield control? Nope. More spell slots? Nope.Might I remind you that they get the occult list which still has incredible control spells. They're just as good at battlefield control as any other occult or arcane caster
Which is kinda my point, though iirc occult and arcane are definitely better than primal and most especially divine in this regard and most arcane battlefield control spells are on the occult list anyways. Bard is just as good as anyone else when it comes to battlefield control because of this and also gets all the other stuff you mentioned. That's the problem. Being great at debuffing also inherently makes you better at battlefield control. Dirge of Doom is a one action set up to a devastating 2 action control spell
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I dislike about the Witch is that it doesn't feel like Paizo has necessarly acknowledged its chassis.
It's a 3-slot caster with essentially wizard level proficiencies and a wizard's spellcasting mechanic, but it doesn't really feel like their kit gets anything on the other end because of it.
Obviously it's hard to really quantify how much 2 hp per level or chassis progression is actually worth, but it feels kind of bad to look at the witch and then look at a cleric or druid and see yourself being noticeably squishier and with more than ten times fewer spells known for free.
What does the witch have in exchange for having to pay to learn common spells, or getting perception expertise 8 levels later than the druid? An extra familiar ability? Is that a good trade?
I'm not saying the witch should be tanky per se, just that it's hard not to notice these small, bonus downsides the class just seems to get for free.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not even sure you need 6 hit point casters any more unless you're going to give them something extra for being 6 hit point casters.
I'm guessing the 4 slots per level were what was given to the sorcerer to make up for the hit points.
The wizard received Arcane Bond for two less hit points?
Did the designers think the familiar progression was sufficient for 6 hit points? If the familiar were better for combat, then the witch would be in a good place. But unless playing with Ravingdork's GM or as GM, familiars are not great in combat. Don't do much to help either. Every single player I've had play a witch with a familiar ends up forgetting about them as they level because they are so bad. They'll try to use them a few times, then just flat out forget about them for five or six levels.
Not sure what feedback Paizo received on familiars, but they are forgettable from what I've seen. Barely worth remembering tacked on elements of the witch that if you never think about them, you won't even notice.
No one ever takes them on any other class than the witch. Familiars are not good or worth investing in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. We have had lots of fun roleplaying familiars, but mechnanically they do very little and end up forgotten 9 times out of 10.
familiars are not great in combat. Every single player I've had play a witch with a familiar ends up forgetting about them as they level because they are so bad. They'll try to use them a few times, then just flat out forget about them for five or six levels.
Hey now. That's ... actually pretty accurate.
I can be a mobile light source. Cast Light cantrip on my collar. Mobile like dancing lights, but doesn't need sustained.
No one ever takes them on any other class than the witch. Familiars are not good or worth investing in.
Unless you talk to Graystone - at which point it is the single best 1st level ancestry or class feat in the game. Mostly because of the battery powers like Familiar Focus and Spellcasting. Or maybe the skill improving reaction feats. I don't remember which. Maybe both.
Funnily enough, for that reason one of my players is annoyed at Paizo's decision to emphasize familiars in PF2r. The familiar was so forgettable and so ancillary to everything the class does they had forgotten they even had one and don't like the idea of familiars becoming the centerpiece of the class.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like paizo consistently overvalues familiars and PF2 turning the theming of the Witch into "the familiar class" is a huge part of what made them so lackluster. Trying to remain hopeful that they at least somewhat realize this for the remaster, otherwise any hope I have of enjoying the class will be killed if they end up doubling down on the familiar aspect being the major selling point of the class.
Personally, there's maybe three things I really want out of a familiar to feel "witchy."
1) The ability for a familiar to talk / be intelligent enough to banter with PCs.
2) The ability for a familiar to fly/float.
3) The ability for a familiar to be some type of mystical object rather than only an animal (i.e. clouded mirror the whispers secrets, flaming skull on a stick, floating book which writes messages to the Witch, etc.)
The first two are easily accomplished via familiar abilities at level 1 for any familiar, including ancestry feat familiars. The third is currently locked behind a rare patron compared to PF1 which had a number of archetypes doing this sort of replacement with the familiar (or even removing it entirely!) Overall, I have a hard time seeing how forcing extra familiar abilities really supported the Witch theme - especially when the Enhanced Familiar feat and Familiar Master archetype already allow anyone to invest more into a familiar if they really want to.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like paizo consistently overvalues familiars and PF2 turning the theming of the Witch into "the familiar class" is a huge part of what made them so lackluster.
The only point I'd disagree on is that I wouldn't really call the existing PF2 Witch "the familiar class" in the first place. It's not a very mechanically important feature, outside the fact that you use it as a spellbook (but we don't really call wizards the spellbook class or ask or expect spellbook facing mechanics and spellbook feats, it's more just background noise like the familiar).
The first two are easily accomplished via familiar abilities at level 1 for any familiar, including ancestry feat familiars.
While that's true. If I want like, an owl that can talk to me, it means I've burnt nearly all of my familiar abilities just meeting the basic RP fantasy of my character, which further contributes to diminishing the value of the feature since I barely have room in my budget to pick up some of the more mechanically beneficial abilities.
Obviously witches with all their extra abilities suffer from this problem less than other characters, but it still feels kind of bad.
... Agree that object familiars should not be a super esoteric option, though.
I tried the familiar to use it to do rituals, but even the best rituals are too costly to invest too heavily in. So I gave up on that idea.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(But I can understand a lot of folks are just tired at trying to make the Witch and familiar *work* that they’re sorta over it).
Heh. We need a "Witch Revulsion Speculation" thread - how many people aren't going to be happy with the Witch no matter what the revised mechanics look like?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless you talk to Graystone - at which point it is the single best 1st level ancestry or class feat in the game. Mostly because of the battery powers like Familiar Focus and Spellcasting. Or maybe the skill improving reaction feats. I don't remember which. Maybe both.
That's not been my stance: all I've said is they aren't useless. They have several abilities that are quite solid for a 1st level feat, especially when you factor in the ability to swap abilities [and some even get better as you level]. That's it though: it's not a bad 1st level feat...
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
TBH, viewed purely as a first level feat, familiars are kind of great. You get two of your choice of a decent swath of unique abilities, some of which are nearly feat equivalent by themselves, and you get to swap between them on a daily basis.
Compared to some other first level spellcasting feats or ancestry feats, there's genuinely a lot of value there.
But there's no scalability to it. It's never going to be 'your thing' which is fine except when people try to push it as such or want to leverage it for flavor reasons.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the witch had good focus spells, the focus battery aspect of the familiar might get used. The witch focus spells are not very attractive.