So did Paizo just ignore everyone's Witch complaints and let games get ruined?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 67 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I do think it's deeply funny that OP took a break from their troll posts about 1e being the best game ever made and 2e being a cruel sin to the loyal, massive 1e player base to also post about how 1e is a bad game. Truly covering all bases.

Paizo Employee Community and Social Media Specialist

Removed some harassment


Grankless wrote:
I do think it's deeply funny that OP took a break from their troll posts about 1e being the best game ever made and 2e being a cruel sin to the loyal, massive 1e player base to also post about how 1e is a bad game. Truly covering all bases.

I mean the sense in which Paizo did not ignore "witch too strong" complaints is that in the next edition of the game the witch is demonstrably not "too strong."

I'm not sure what else would make the OP feel listened to.


Grankless wrote:
I do think it's deeply funny that OP took a break from their troll posts about 1e being the best game ever made and 2e being a cruel sin to the loyal, massive 1e player base to also post about how 1e is a bad game. Truly covering all bases.

Not troll posts, I just simply don't prefer to reply to actual troll posts like yours.


Java Man wrote:
As a GM I also see a big difference between something like protective luck/cackle/soothsayer and evil eye, slumber, scythe. Assume both combos are "unbalanced" and "trivializing encounters" at the table. In the first case the other players are being allowed to take down the enemy with impunity. In the second case the other players are being allowed to protect the witch and clean up the leftovers. Any guesses which one is more fun for the other players?

That's pretty much the list right there. Makes having BBEGs tough since they can be wiped out quick with a Witch buffing and debuffing like that very quickly. Protective Luck is the worst. I agree there's editing oversight and it's SUPPOSED to be only effective once per 24 hours on a target. The designer is crazy thinking it should be used unlimited. Seeing my PCs blow everything over with Protective Luck on is devastating.


If protective luck is causing so many problems in your opinion just create a house rule that it can only be used 1/day for each target.

As far as other hexes are concerned I don't think they are unbalanced at all.

Nearly all hexes have short range, usually 30', only work once/day and to keep them up you have to cackle, which you have to do each round and has a range of 30'.

I know I play witches a lot, so I am probably biased, but you have to be very careful not to let hexes lapse. You have to go Hex/ Cackle each round, which only leaves you with a swift action. To set up the sort of thing you are complaining about takes many rounds.

I suspect if you properly police hex ranges and what the witch is doing the balance problems will go away, maybe with a house rule about protective luck.


People seriously underestimate the range limitations.

Also, cackling makes noise, and if you protective luck everyone, while cackling and then kick in the door you give the enemy time to prep and takes party members * rounds turns to do so, and is reasonably loud.

So, if you properly police time, and have enemies react, for example by retreating a bit and casting their buff spells and reading actions etc, things get less effective too.

The BBEG can jsut have some mooks who have stones that have silence cast on them, and throw them close to the cackling witch. No more cackling.


Mightypion wrote:

People seriously underestimate the range limitations.

Also, cackling makes noise, and if you protective luck everyone, while cackling and then kick in the door you give the enemy time to prep and takes party members * rounds turns to do so, and is reasonably loud.

So, if you properly police time, and have enemies react, for example by retreating a bit and casting their buff spells and reading actions etc, things get less effective too.

The BBEG can jsut have some mooks who have stones that have silence cast on them, and throw them close to the cackling witch. No more cackling.

with soothsayer that’s not an issue, you set up potentially hours in advance and don’t need to cackle until combat is underway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mightypion- That is just the kind of thing I was saying.

And as to soothsayer, yes, but that costs you another hex.


I am playing a Shaman, keeping my merry band of murder hobos within chant range is nigh impossible.


Mightypion wrote:
I am playing a Shaman, keeping my merry band of murder hobos within chant range is nigh impossible.

This is why most/all of my Shamans have been half-elf. It's because of the favored class options available to them. Specifically, the elven one: "Add 5 feet to the range of a chosen shaman hex. Multiple bonuses from this ability can apply to the same hex, to a maximum of an additional 30 feet for any single hex." My chants have quite the range.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah, if having disadvantage on attack rolls against the party is a problem, target the witch or make the party save against attacks instead. Not that big a deal. I never took it on my witch for just that reason, I'd only use it on mindless enemies that I knew would keep attacking the hexed ally.


DeathlessOne wrote:
Mightypion wrote:
I am playing a Shaman, keeping my merry band of murder hobos within chant range is nigh impossible.
This is why most/all of my Shamans have been half-elf. It's because of the favored class options available to them. Specifically, the elven one: "Add 5 feet to the range of a chosen shaman hex. Multiple bonuses from this ability can apply to the same hex, to a maximum of an additional 30 feet for any single hex." My chants have quite the range.

I opted for human for the blasting (and other) options from the cleric spell list.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Yeah, if having disadvantage on attack rolls against the party is a problem, target the witch or make the party save against attacks instead. Not that big a deal.

I've never been happy with arguments along the line of: if (character ability) is a problem, just (alter every encounter in the campaign to counter this ability).

I would rather ban (character ability), every time.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ah, so like Swashbuckler's Parry was for me then, until I got over it.


Mightypion wrote:
I opted for human for the blasting (and other) options from the cleric spell list.

Half-Elves get the same options as humans, and have access to the elf favored class options too. Only real reason to go human is if you want that extra feat, or if you really want to play a human. Even the half-elf can get an alternate racial trait to appear nearly 100% human.

Liberty's Edge

The only problem I see with the Witch is that the hexes are SU, and SU abilities were never ruled adequately for extended use by players.

51 to 67 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / So did Paizo just ignore everyone's Witch complaints and let games get ruined? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.