I think I was the one who brought up bells when someone else brought up the example of a witch that was in a pact with a tinkerbell-like fairy.
You might have, but I was referring to:
I like to reflavor cackle to be ringing a bell like the bell maidens in Bloodborne
And they are eerie bells.
On a more general note; while I do feel specific keyword traits should be observed on the assumption that they establish fair gameplay, being overly literal about appearances or descriptions does not help anyone. Fantasy is by its very nature diverse and imaginative. The highest calling of the GM is to enable and support the shared fantasies that each group works to create. Which is to say, if a Witch can meet the Verbal requirement and has a free action to spend a focus point on a Hex, does it really matter what it sounds like?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the concept of ringing a bell but that might be my bias talking. Still good to see a fellow Bloodborne enjoyer out in the wild.If I could post emojis I would be putting the flexing arm emoji as a response to thisᕦ(ò_óˇ)
Can't emoji, but can ascii art.
Some emoji actually do work. Enough for map diagrams even.
Example Use Case:
Demonstrating the use of Emoji to explain flanking and cover.
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛⭕⬜
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜⬜⭕⬜⚫⬛⬛⬛
⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⭕⬜⭕⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛
⬜⬜⬜⬜⭕⬜⬜⬛⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛⬜⬜
⬜ = Empty space
⬛ = Solid wall
⭕ = NPC
Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️ = Me (enlarged)
⚫ = Allied PC
Here are some area diagram templates using forum-functional emoji, courtesy of Gisher.
I think I was the one who brought up bells when someone else brought up the example of a witch that was in a pact with a tinkerbell-like fairy.You might have, but I was referring to:
I like to reflavor cackle to be ringing a bell like the bell maidens in BloodborneAnd they are eerie bells.
On a more general note; while I do feel specific keyword traits should be observed on the assumption that they establish fair gameplay, being overly literal about appearances or descriptions does not help anyone. Fantasy is by its very nature diverse and imaginative. The highest calling of the GM is to enable and support the shared fantasies that each group works to create. Which is to say, if a Witch can meet the Verbal requirement and has a free action to spend a focus point on a Hex, does it really matter what it sounds like?
Yeah. It should honestly just let us make whatever sound. Not all witches are like the Wizard of Oz ones. Witches are varied, from the ugly hag witch (Wicked Witch of The West) to the edgy witch (Blair witch) to the goofy aunt like witch (Eda from owl house) to the young and bright cheerful witch (Luz from owl house) to other types of witches (like the ones in Harry Potter, though they are more like wizards but still)
A grin can be Cackle.Cackle has the Verbal trait. Grinning might be the only suggestion that does not work. But wait, it does not have the Auditory trait. This is getting weird. Is grinning sufficiently verbal? Thus far the only strict requirement seems to be that the Witch is able to speak and it is difficult to conceal as a spell. Nothing about the affected creature being able to hear or understand.I did get a bit too excited and haven't re-read the spell. But the main point still stands: you already can reflavour it in any way you like if you aren't breaking mechanics. And if you and your GM can abstract yourselves even further, you can even use flavour which seemingly contradicts mechanics, while still playing by the actual rules.
And anyway: if you add a short verbal spell to your grin, it would be even RAW and obviously applicable.
But the question remains, would it be allowed in PFS?
In 1e, it was stated you had to cackle and not any other sound so that same rule might have carried over
They almost universally don't, it can be hard to know when this is the case but I'd recommend against believing everything people say 'happens' in Pathfinder Society, sometimes you'll find they've never actually even played Society at all! In the 10 years or so of Society I have played I can't think of a single GM who demanded a Witch character had to cackle, simple thematic changes that involve zero mechanical, or drastic alteration are absolutely fine in Society (yes, your tiefling can even be whatever colour you like!). I've seen witches cackle, laugh joyously, chant softly, call out prayers, and on and on. What I've never seen is some hypothetical GM call out all the demands that some people seem to think they do.Hear, hear!
Furthermore, I have seen Prestidigitation used to throw sparkles in the air in a PF2 Society game, and no one said 'Boo' about it. I am really tired of the Urban Legend that Society is filled with joyless and rigid Players and GMs who insist on RAW. I've seen all kinds of gentle reflavoring in Society games to make fun character concepts happen.
Hmm
Heads up
I’ve been talking to Jon, who is the Paizo Community and Social Media Specialist, in email and I sent him the following message:
“Hello,
Thanks for reaching out.
I do have a question
While I am sure reasonable GMs will let your character do things like create sparkles, illusionary rain in a 5x5 space while your character performs a sad song, glowing eyes or create floral scents, the concern is with PFS, GMs who are very strict and only allow “RAW”, and WM/Living Worlds. Those three things are why I feel prestidigitation needs to allow for fun flavorful magic tricks like the ones I listed.”
Here is his response:
“Hi Captainrelyk,
Thanks for the reply. I can understand why you would want something like that with more flavor. Unfortunately, PFS needs to run with a much wider eye to things like game balance, and while you may use such a power for purely roleplay reasons, someone else might use it to break the game or create a shortcut somehow that causes issues for the GM running the game. PFS needs to be balanced at a much higher level than a regular game of Pathfinder, as may players are competitive about playing the game.”
So… according to Jon at least, those players creating sparkles are in the wrong and are breaking the rules
What's surprising, in my opinion, is reading that PFS game masters expect players considering feats flavor text ( for example cackle ) as additional rule, ending up forcing them into something that is not even required ( leaving apart from a moment that every table might add/remove/tweak what they dislike)They almost universally don't, it can be hard to know when this is the case but I'd recommend against believing everything people say 'happens' in Pathfinder Society, sometimes you'll find they've never actually even played Society at all! In the 10 years or so of Society I have played I can't think of a single GM who demanded a Witch character had to cackle, simple thematic changes that involve zero mechanical, or drastic alteration are absolutely fine in Society (yes, your tiefling can even be whatever colour you like!). I've seen witches cackle, laugh joyously, chant softly, call out prayers, and on and on. What I've never seen is some hypothetical GM call out all the demands that some people seem to think they do.
However, it turns out Richard was right here. According to this same Jon when I asked about Cackle reflavoring:
“Hi Captainrelyk,
According to our OP Coordinator, reskinning spell effects like that fine as long as it doesnt fundamentally change the effects of an ability.
Jon
Paizo Community and Social Media Specialist”
So while we can’t create sparkles or illusionary rain in a 5x5 space or make floral scents or glowing eyes in PFS (which I feel is a little stupid, cause come on let us have our magical flavor!), reflavoring cackle to angelic singing or humming or any verbal sound is completely fine
I still think it should not be made into a base class ability or at least be changed to not be “cackle” and be flavor neutral, like “Witch’s Tone” or something
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
They almost universally don't, it can be hard to know when this is the case but I'd recommend against believing everything people say 'happens' in Pathfinder Society, sometimes you'll find they've never actually even played Society at all! In the 10 years or so of Society I have played I can't think of a single GM who demanded a Witch character had to cackle, simple thematic changes that involve zero mechanical, or drastic alteration are absolutely fine in Society (yes, your tiefling can even be whatever colour you like!). I've seen witches cackle, laugh joyously, chant softly, call out prayers, and on and on. What I've never seen is some hypothetical GM call out all the demands that some people seem to think they do.Hear, hear!
Furthermore, I have seen Prestidigitation used to throw sparkles in the air in a PF2 Society game, and no one said 'Boo' about it. I am really tired of the Urban Legend that Society is filled with joyless and rigid Players and GMs who insist on RAW. I've seen all kinds of gentle reflavoring in Society games to make fun character concepts happen.
Hmm
Heads up
I’ve been talking to Jon, who is the Paizo Community and Social Media Specialist, in email and I sent him the following message:
“Hello,
Thanks for reaching out.
I do have a question
While I am sure reasonable GMs will let your character do things like create sparkles, illusionary rain in a 5x5 space while your character performs a sad song, glowing eyes or create floral scents, the concern is with PFS, GMs who are very strict and only allow “RAW”, and WM/Living Worlds. Those three things are why I feel prestidigitation needs to allow for fun flavorful magic tricks like the ones I listed.”
Here is his response:
“Hi Captainrelyk,
Thanks for the reply. I can understand why you would want something like that with more flavor. Unfortunately, PFS needs to run with a much wider eye to things like game balance, and while...
And once again, as people have constantly told you, even in society play every GM is different. There is a baseline expectation to play RAW, but I'm willing to bet most would not bat an eyelash at you using prestidigitation the way you want. Also Jon isn't necessarily the be all and end all for answering questions about society play. There is staff that is literally in charge of that.
I think I was the one who brought up bells when someone else brought up the example of a witch that was in a pact with a tinkerbell-like fairy.You might have, but I was referring to:
I like to reflavor cackle to be ringing a bell like the bell maidens in BloodborneAnd they are eerie bells.
And on this I never thought about using bells in the context of the fae. I guess the bell maidens almost more so have a chime of sorts. It's a spooky sound. I imagine when you ring the bell, even if the enemy can't hear it, they feel the vibration in their soul and the fear they are feeling longer(evil eye hex). Actually, if it is going to cost a focus point, would be cool if cackle could increase the frightened condition applied by evil eye!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A grin can be Cackle.Cackle has the Verbal trait. Grinning might be the only suggestion that does not work. But wait, it does not have the Auditory trait. This is getting weird. Is grinning sufficiently verbal? Thus far the only strict requirement seems to be that the Witch is able to speak and it is difficult to conceal as a spell. Nothing about the affected creature being able to hear or understand.I did get a bit too excited and haven't re-read the spell. But the main point still stands: you already can reflavour it in any way you like if you aren't breaking mechanics. And if you and your GM can abstract yourselves even further, you can even use flavour which seemingly contradicts mechanics, while still playing by the actual rules.
And anyway: if you add a short verbal spell to your grin, it would be even RAW and obviously applicable.
I think you might be confused about the meaning of the word. A grin is just a smile; a facial expression. There is no sound associated with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you might be confused about the meaning of the word. A grin is just a smile; a facial expression. There is no sound associated with it.A grin can be Cackle.Cackle has the Verbal trait. Grinning might be the only suggestion that does not work. But wait, it does not have the Auditory trait. This is getting weird. Is grinning sufficiently verbal? Thus far the only strict requirement seems to be that the Witch is able to speak and it is difficult to conceal as a spell. Nothing about the affected creature being able to hear or understand.I did get a bit too excited and haven't re-read the spell. But the main point still stands: you already can reflavour it in any way you like if you aren't breaking mechanics. And if you and your GM can abstract yourselves even further, you can even use flavour which seemingly contradicts mechanics, while still playing by the actual rules.
And anyway: if you add a short verbal spell to your grin, it would be even RAW and obviously applicable.
Yeah I don’t think a grin does or should count. We should be allowed to make any audible sound with our mouths but a grin ain’t audible
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I don’t think a grin does or should count. We should be allowed to make any audible sound with our mouths but a grin ain’t audible
Technically speaking the way spell components work it can be interpreted that you speak a word of power and then the spell effect happens which involves you cackling, or in this case grinning, and this would meet the spell requirements. It just seems where, but is 100% in keeping with RAW as far as I can tell. Verbal components to spells exist as a balancing factor, they're spells that don't let you secretly cast spells