Witch Rework: Wilding Steward Needs a Serious Rework


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 168 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

8 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:
Well, if you ever find me a GM who forces all minion users to spend their Exploration Activities handling their minion, I'd like to know about it. It has always been handwaved around the tables I've been around as following its master is the obvious action a minion will perform when not told otherwise.
I have and they do: some DM actually want to follow the rules as presented. As one said 'if I allow them to act, it takes something away from the summoners act together allowing it.

That's not following the rules as presented. Familiars are minions and the action rules for minions are quite clear: "If given no commands, minions use no actions except to defend themselves or to escape obvious harm. If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute, mindless minions usually don't act, animals follow their instincts, and sapient minions act how they please. A minion can't control other creatures."

So a familiar given no commands during an exploration scene or outside of combat play, being a sapient minion, acts as they please.

Which probably does not mean standing still in a forest letting it's witch hike further and further away. Or other "I refuse to do anything except stand here, unless ordered" silliness. Unless there's some in-game reason to play the familiar as hostile to the witch, the most rational way to use the "acts as it pleases" WRITTEN RULE is to have the familiar act as the witch's friendly companion. I.e. tag along with the witch helping in inconsequential ways.

And to pick a nit with SuperBidi's description, having the familiar tag along (without the witch needing to spend actions) is not "handwaving" the rules either. It's following the rules. If the witch doesn't spend actions telling it's familiar what to do, the familiar acts how it pleases. In the 99% of cases where witches and their familiars are friends and boon companions, the most rational way for the GM and player to interpret 'act how it pleases' is to have the familiar tag along.


@Graystone: I don't know exactly where you want to go. I consider this ability as absolutely excellent due to its range and the type of senses it brings. It seems that you don't, which is fine. But it looks like you are opposing rules to its functioning. It's always possible, there is one rule the GM can use to prevent the Familiar from detecting anything which is to consider that creatures in the dungeon are never moving. But besides that, it roughly works: The Familiar will detect the creatures on the ground as long as you use a Hex periodically (which is covered by Exploration Activities). There's not much to add.

It can be used in combat, even if I doubt it'll be extremely useful considering that the Familiar can just pinpoint an enemy who's Hidden (and only if the enemy has a scent or is moving). It's rather niche and not helping much as you still suffer from the 50% miss chance.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Familiars are not animals and given they have no stats (they use your skills) they are hardly sapient.

As written familiars just stand around because the rules are that badly written. Saying "oh but that makes no sense, so let them do X" is meaningless as it is putely a homebrew fix for how badly those rules are made.


Easl wrote:
So a familiar given no commands during an exploration scene or outside of combat play, being a sapient minion, acts as they please.

As presented in the rules, they are never described as sapient nor do they have a quantifiable intelligence as they have NO score [or bonus now]. I mean Crawling Hands use the same base rules for familiars and they are -4 int and have a "crude sentience".

Easl wrote:
Which probably does not mean standing still in a forest letting it's witch hike further and further away. Or other "I refuse to do anything except stand here, unless ordered" silliness. Unless there's some in-game reason to play the familiar as hostile to the witch, the most rational way to use the "acts as it pleases" WRITTEN RULE is to have the familiar act as the witch's friendly companion. I.e. tag along with the witch helping in inconsequential ways.

What's reasonable varies from person to person. A cat familiar might take a nap if you can't be bothered to command it, a dog might go chase a squirrel, an imp might just tell you off and find some mischief, ect.. Base familiars ARE animals after all and the rules say "animals follow their instincts". NOTHING in the rules states that by default familiars [or AC's] follow you when not commanded: an individual DM might allow it to do so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think in the Remaster, they’re codifying the Animal trait as the base trait onto familiars. And the WITCH’s familiar is absolutely sapient and beyond regular familiars.

We haven’t seen the familiar rules yet, but familiars are absolutely Animals based on the Rage of Elements book.

The Elemental Familiar feat from Kineticist removes the Animal trait and gives it the appropriate traits and Elemental familiar ability.

The Elemental familiar ability states it can only be taken by a familiar with the Resistance familiar ability and has the Animal trait. Wortwitch was removed so likely Leshy (or a plant trait) familiar ability will be added that the Leaf Order Druid gets automatically and the Witch can pick up with their extra familiar ability.

It became more obvious that was the intent as they released more ancestries that could get familiars, but the CRB never got updated. It definitely should now.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Temperans wrote:
...given they have no stats (they use your skills) they are hardly sapient.

The two are not really connected.


SuperBidi wrote:
@Graystone: I don't know exactly where you want to go. I consider this ability as absolutely excellent due to its range and the type of senses it brings. It seems that you don't, which is fine.

It's a great ability tied to a familiar and it's the familiar part that I have issue with: I find the juggling required for use onerous.

SuperBidi wrote:
It's rather niche and not helping much as you still suffer from the 50% miss chance.

You can use something like Glitterdust to move invisibility to concealed for instance. For myself, if I run into 1 invisible enemy, I'll run into a lot more of them.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

We know for a fact they are not mindless since they lack said trait.

Having "undefined" Int is vastly different than saying that they have 0. In fact they CAN'T have int of 0 by RAW.

As for RAI, even in the streams for the reveal of pf2, the creators of the game played them as fully sapient btw.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
As presented in the rules, they are never described as sapient nor do they have a quantifiable intelligence as they have NO score [or bonus now]. I mean Crawling Hands use the same base rules for familiars and they are -4 int and have a "crude sentience".

I must disagree with you. The rules for the witches familiar describe a being that teaches you and that communes with you. Rocks don't do that. Regular cats don't do that. See for yourself:

**

"Your patron has sent you a familiar, a mystical creature that teaches you and facilitates your spells. This familiar follows the rules here, though as it's a direct conduit between you and your patron, it's more powerful than other familiars. Your familiar gains an extra familiar ability, and gains another extra ability at 6th, 12th, and 18th levels.

Your familiar is the source and repository of the spells your patron has bestowed upon you, and you must commune with your familiar to prepare your spells each day using your witch spellcasting."

**
Also later (not quoted), the rules state that the patron teaches the familiar spells. Again, that pretty much rules out mindless. Or regular cat.

This is exactly why the designers dislike the word "fluff". Because too many people look at a stat block and stop there. The descriptions are as much a part of the rules as the stat blocks. If the only bit of rule your GM is using to determine the familiar's behavior and sentience is that no INT score appears the stat block, and your GM isn't actually taking into account the description of the Witch's familiar, the problem is not the rules. It's the GM.

Quote:
Base familiars ARE animals after all and the rules say "animals follow their instincts". NOTHING in the rules states that by default familiars [or AC's] follow you when not commanded: an individual DM might allow it to do so.

You might want to reread the quote I provided. I've even bolded the bit that covers this: a witch's familiar is not a base familiar.

Now I am all for campaign flexibility. There are tons of great sub-plots that can be explored by having the witch's familiar not get along with it's witch (though that is not the implied default, as there's a familiar feat which covers this exact situation). There are other awesome plots to be had with 'dumb henchman' familiar, or even a 'so alien I can't understand it' familair. I have absolutely no problem if a play group wants to go to any of these places. But IMO a GM who *imposes* a "zero action unless directly ordered" relationship on a witch-familiar couple - by treating this agent of a higher power which teaches the witch spells, as if it is a robot that does nothing unless ordered - is IMO not reading the rules description of witch familiars for comprehension.


graystone wrote:
breithauptclan wrote:
graystone wrote:
As one said 'if I allow them to act, it takes something away from the summoners act together allowing it.

No, it doesn't. It very literally doesn't. The Summoner/Eidolon is still able to do absolutely everything that they could do before.

Allowing a Familiar to also escape from the rising water that is flooding the sunken temple, rather than standing around drowning because the Witch is having to make a run for it, is not harming the Summoner at all.

It's allowing the witch to get a free action that the summoner is required to pay for: the witch gets to Command it's Minion without cost in that situation while a summoner has to escape from the rising water that is flooding the sunken temple without his Eidolon as hey don' have the actions to get it to run or unmanifest it.

But with act together, the summoner does get that free action. Plus, the eidolon disappears if you get more than 100 feet away from it if you are really stretched for actions, and while the eidolon can't willingly go more than 100 feet away from you, I'm not seeing anything stopping you from going more than 100 feet away from it. And if you are that stretched for actions where all three of your actions must be used to stride, then that should probably be covered in a skill check TBH.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:
We know for a fact they are not mindless since they lack said trait.

False equivalency. no one said they are mindless, just ha hey had no intelligence.

shroud wrote:
As for RAI, even in the streams for the reveal of pf2, the creators of the game played them as fully sapient btw.

*shrug* they have not followed their own rules before in streams so I'm not sure his proves anything.

Easl wrote:
I must disagree with you. The rules for the witches familiar describe a being that teaches you and that communes with you. Rocks don't do that. Regular cats don't do that.

inanimate objects can teach you things: you can learn things from a book and a familiar is a fancy spellbook with legs. Your quote works just fine as you learning from your patron through your familiar. Try his substitution with an inanimate object:

"Your patron has sent you a familiar, a mystical creature that computer teaches you and facilitates your spells. This familiar computer follows the rules here, though as it's a direct conduit between you and your patron, it's more powerful than other familiars. Your familiar gains an extra familiar ability, and gains another extra ability at 6th, 12th, and 18th levels.

Your familiar computer is the source and repository of the spells your patron has bestowed upon you, and you must commune with your familiar use your computer to prepare your spells each day using your witch spellcasting."

Does this mean the computer is sapient?

Easl wrote:
You might want to reread the quote I provided. I've even bolded the bit that covers this: a witch's familiar is not a base familiar.

You MAY wan o reread your own quote hen: where does it say it's NOT an animal? It's "it's more powerful than other familiars" is covered by the extra familiar/master ability: unless noted otherwise, it follows the basic rules for familiars and nothing in the actual rules gives them any extra intelligence over other familiars.

Easl wrote:
But IMO a GM who *imposes* a "zero action unless directly ordered" relationship on a witch-familiar couple - by treating this agent of a higher power which teaches the witch spells, as if it is a robot that does nothing unless ordered - is IMO not reading the rules description of witch familiars for comprehension.

I mean, how dare a DM actually follow the rules... for shame! :P

PS: I'm ending the familiar sidetrack here. #1 it's not directly what the threads about and #2 the remaster might make all this moot. #3 we're saring to go in circles as has happened before and I don't foresee getting any traction on changing viewpoints here.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
PS: I'm ending the familiar sidetrack here. #1 it's not directly what the threads about and #2 the remaster might make all this moot. #3 we're saring to go in circles as has happened before and I don't foresee getting any traction on changing viewpoints here.

Your ruling is not only affecting Familiars but also Animal Companions and any kind of minions. You roughly consider than any pet user (but the Summoner) loses the ability to use an Exploration Activity because they need to constantly Command their minion.

Dogs follow their master without constant supervision. So you'd need a bit more than an implication to justify such an extreme and illogical ruling. A reading that would allow dogs to follow their master is certainly way closer to RAI.


Onto more stuff about Keen Senses. I’m trying to convince myself it’s not as subpar/niche/situational.

I guess, looking at the whole package, it’s actually not bad for a Primal Witch to act as an artillery class and have the familiar be a spotter. It’s like a legal soft-map hack I guess. It’s just that…that was never truly an issue with the familiar in the first place. Having it tied to Cast/Sustain a hex just sounds clunky.

Since Primal has a LOT of AoE abilities, it ignores the Hidden check, and can help with Hide/Sneak (if that’s even an issue). The problem to me is that Point Out isn’t really as much of a free action for the Witch because you still have to Sustain/Cast a hex.

Find an Undetected enemy (or enemies hiding behind a rock), familiar points out a direction, and then you bombard them with more Fireballs than a Thursday club night.

Edit: I guess since Primal is great due to having both blasting spells and healing spells, making Winter/Wild’s familiar ability more tactical makes sense. Wilding Steward is looking to me as the blaster Witch if you just want to slot as many Fireballs (or other AoEs) as possible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperBidi wrote:
graystone wrote:
PS: I'm ending the familiar sidetrack here. #1 it's not directly what the threads about and #2 the remaster might make all this moot. #3 we're saring to go in circles as has happened before and I don't foresee getting any traction on changing viewpoints here.

Your ruling is not only affecting Familiars but also Animal Companions and any kind of minions. You roughly consider than any pet user (but the Summoner) loses the ability to use an Exploration Activity because they need to constantly Command their minion.

Dogs follow their master without constant supervision. So you'd need a bit more than an implication to justify such an extreme and illogical ruling. A reading that would allow dogs to follow their master is certainly way closer to RAI.

Idk if you have noticed but dogs tend to run away a lot. This is why you put them on leash or a pet case.

Also not all familiars are dogs.


Tunu40 wrote:

Onto more stuff about Keen Senses. I’m trying to convince myself it’s not as subpar/niche/situational.

I guess, looking at the whole package, it’s actually not bad for a Primal Witch to act as an artillery class and have the familiar be a spotter. It’s like a legal soft-map hack I guess. It’s just that…that was never truly an issue with the familiar in the first place. Having it tied to Cast/Sustain a hex just sounds clunky.

Since Primal has a LOT of AoE abilities, it ignores the Hidden check, and can help with Hide/Sneak (if that’s even an issue). The problem to me is that Point Out isn’t really as much of a free action for the Witch because you still have to Sustain/Cast a hex.

Find an Undetected enemy (or enemies hiding behind a rock), familiar points out a direction, and then you bombard them with more Fireballs than a Thursday club night.

Yeah my concern is that this wasn't really an issue before. "Familiar spots enemies from the air" or whatnot is already possible, and I'm not certain how much the special senses add. It may, depending on table, but it certainly seems weaker than the other options once you get into combat.

Also, sending in your familiar to scout sometimes results in them getting gunned down/eaten by monsters/setting off nasty traps. Which isn't fun.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Temperans wrote:
Idk if you have noticed but dogs tend to run away a lot. This is why you put them on leash or a pet case.

Man, it must be hard for all those shepherds running alongside their sheepdogs with leashes.


Temperans wrote:
Idk if you have noticed but dogs tend to run away a lot.

Dogs do run away and if that's what you want to play that's fine. But dogs also follow their master and the GM should not step in and say you can't play that because they want all dogs to run away.

The whole thing is that you choose your relationship with your Familiar/Animal Companion. If the relationship you choose makes sense, there's no reason for the GM to forbid it unless the rules strictly say so. And the rules are not strict in that case, they are quite loose actually.


SuperBidi wrote:
Your ruling is not only affecting Familiars but also Animal Companions and any kind of minions. You roughly consider than any pet user (but the Summoner) loses the ability to use an Exploration Activity because they need to constantly Command their minion.

There is no explicit 'command a minion' exploration activity, so his GM would have to make up the skill check and movement cost for it. And if the movement cost is non-zero, that means no character with a familiar or animal companion can move at full speed. According to this interrpretation.

All that to avoid saying that a familiar who is an agent of Baba Yaga - who is taught spells by Baba Yaga and in turn teaches those spells to it's witch master - falls under the "If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute...sapient minions act how they please" rule.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm just finding it amusing that people are posting these arguments about familiars and action economy as though graystone and I haven't gone over every possibility of the current rules three times already.


WatersLethe wrote:
Temperans wrote:
Idk if you have noticed but dogs tend to run away a lot. This is why you put them on leash or a pet case.
Man, it must be hard for all those shepherds running alongside their sheepdogs with leashes.

I was just saying you cannot make sweeping generalization on things like that.

Not to mention such a shepherd is impossible in PF2 because they would need to be constantly commanding the dog to guide the sheep. But that can't be done if the dog goes too far away.

(As I said badly written rule)


Calliope5431 wrote:
Dubious Scholar wrote:

Ahaha. Murksight is still incredibly bad for a level 8 feat, it's entirely unchanged

Seriously, why?

Yeah it's already being printed. I suggest not playing it if you don't like it. I do that a lot. For instance, with half the cleric domains in the game. Or any ancestry besides human. Or the entire investigator class.

But yes, murksight is garbage.

I'll never understand Paizo's hard on for keeping these kinds of sight-based feats locked behind a "natural" clause. These abilities would've been far more attractive (including Storm Druid's) if they either enabled seeing through spell effects or granted a benefit against them on top of their current benefits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lightning Raven wrote:
Calliope5431 wrote:
Dubious Scholar wrote:

Ahaha. Murksight is still incredibly bad for a level 8 feat, it's entirely unchanged

Seriously, why?

Yeah it's already being printed. I suggest not playing it if you don't like it. I do that a lot. For instance, with half the cleric domains in the game. Or any ancestry besides human. Or the entire investigator class.

But yes, murksight is garbage.

I'll never understand Paizo's hard on for keeping these kinds of sight-based feats locked behind a "natural" clause. These abilities would've been far more attractive (including Storm Druid's) if they either enabled seeing through spell effects or granted a benefit against them on top of their current benefits.

Storm born works on spells. Same with ancestral options, like Cloud gazer. Its just Murksight that's weird and bad.


graystone wrote:
False equivalency. no one said they are mindless, just ha hey had no intelligence.

That's just wordplay.

No intelligence literally translates to mindless.

By RAW we know that this is false.

So by RAW we know they are intelligent.

How much? "undefined"

Which again, by definition, is =/= 0

---

So,my RAW proves my point.

I wait from you to quote where it says that familiars have no intelligence.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pronate11 wrote:
Lightning Raven wrote:
Calliope5431 wrote:
Dubious Scholar wrote:

Ahaha. Murksight is still incredibly bad for a level 8 feat, it's entirely unchanged

Seriously, why?

Yeah it's already being printed. I suggest not playing it if you don't like it. I do that a lot. For instance, with half the cleric domains in the game. Or any ancestry besides human. Or the entire investigator class.

But yes, murksight is garbage.

I'll never understand Paizo's hard on for keeping these kinds of sight-based feats locked behind a "natural" clause. These abilities would've been far more attractive (including Storm Druid's) if they either enabled seeing through spell effects or granted a benefit against them on top of their current benefits.
Storm born works on spells. Same with ancestral options, like Cloud gazer. Its just Murksight that's weird and bad.

Relevant quote from Storm Born:

Quote:
You do not take circumstance penalties to ranged spell attacks or Perception checks caused by weather, and your targeted spells don’t require a flat check to succeed against a target concealed by weather (such as fog).

I have always interpreted the "Weather" reference to mean natural effects (like natural fog from environment). Otherwise, it would've called out magical effects. It is only written more ambiguously than Murksight, but I think Paizo wouldn't give this benefit to a level 1 feat compared to Murksight, something they evaluated (for whatever reason) to be worth of an 8th level feat.

Sadly, I think I'm on the right on this one, although I hope I'm not.


Yeah that feat is written more vaguely but nothing about it says it works on magical weather.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Temperans wrote:
Yeah that feat is written more vaguely but nothing about it says it works on magical weather.

It doesn't need to.

Murksight doesn't work on magic fog because it explicitly says it doesn't. Stormborn just says it works in fog.

The only reason anyone is even calling it ambiguous is because murksight is so egregiously bad, but nerfing storm born wouldn't make it any better.


Calliope5431 wrote:

Yeah my concern is that this wasn't really an issue before. "Familiar spots enemies from the air" or whatnot is already possible, and I'm not certain how much the special senses add. It may, depending on table, but it certainly seems weaker than the other options once you get into combat.

Also, sending in your familiar to scout sometimes results in them getting gunned down/eaten by monsters/setting off nasty traps. Which isn't fun.

Ya, I’m starting to lean into that it isn’t *bad* exactly, but I just wish now that it had something else relevant that it can do when you don’t need to point things out (or victimize nature…despite your patron being a defender of nature…)

But I guess, a Witch doesn’t have to be defined by their class ability (Hexes and Familiar) like a Bard and their compositions or a Thaumaturge and their implements…wait…

I really want to know whether or not Wilding Word was changed.


breithauptclan wrote:
I'm just finding it amusing that people are posting these arguments about familiars and action economy as though graystone and I haven't gone over every possibility of the current rules three times already.

People keep bringing it up with you two because none of them can believe just how wrong you are. :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The rules on familiars and companions are anal but not nearly as anal as graystone suggests. No one plays like that


Tunu40 wrote:
(or victimize nature…despite your patron being a defender of nature…)

As a side note: You can cast a spell without a valid target. It also goes around the 1 minute immunity of Hexes.


SuperBidi wrote:
Tunu40 wrote:
(or victimize nature…despite your patron being a defender of nature…)
As a side note: You can cast a spell without a valid target. It also goes around the 1 minute immunity of Hexes.

Lol, Wilding Word every single piece of dirt for the familiar’s Keen Senses.

If I don’t look like crazy enough old man at that point…!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have got to stop reading threads about game balance for character options I'm interested in. I was excited for the remastered Witch and now I've gone back to not wanting to play one in case my character ends up being bad.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

That's understandable. If the familiar abilities are the only change to the witch and a few feats, probably not good enough to make them competitive.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Especially not for the Rune Witch. Paizo better be making familiars outright immortal if we're supposed to be putting them in melee range.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Deriven Firelion wrote:
That's understandable. If the familiar abilities are the only change to the witch and a few feats, probably not good enough to make them competitive.

I strongly object to the characterization of Spirit/Stitched Familiar and Ceremonial Knife as "just a few feats."

The damage on Spirit/Stitched Familiar is straight-up the same as 3rd level fireball , and scales exactly as well. It also has side benefits. It recharges every 10 minutes, meaning it's best compared to a focus spell...that gets around focus point caps and doesn't cost a focus point to cast.

And it takes one action on your part to use. No other focus spell in the game is that damaging to a single target for that cheap of a cost - it's the same damage as pulverizing cascade and the other druid blaster spells against one target while costing, and I will bold this again, half the actions to use . That is completely OBSCENE damage.

Likewise, ceremonial knife is giving you two bonus spells roughly equal to the max spell rank you can cast - 2 (so 2nd rank spells at level 8, 5th rank spells at level 14, etc).

These two features vastly increase spell slot sustainability relative to the closest comparable classes (which also get only 3 spells per level): druid, cleric, and bard. Obviously, bard is still likely the strongest caster in the game after the remaster, but at the very least I would argue this puts witch in strong competition with druid and cleric. Not in the same niche, of course, but certainly up there in terms of raw power.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Regardless of spell slots, witch needs the actual Hex cantrips to be buffed by a substantial amount.

If people wanted more slots they would be playing wizards. Hexes need to function on the same power level as compositions since that's the entire point of the class.


Calliope5431 wrote:
Deriven Firelion wrote:
That's understandable. If the familiar abilities are the only change to the witch and a few feats, probably not good enough to make them competitive.

I strongly object to the characterization of Spirit/Stitched Familiar and Ceremonial Knife as "just a few feats."

The damage on Spirit/Stitched Familiar is straight-up the same as 3rd level fireball , and scales exactly as well. It also has side benefits. It recharges every 10 minutes, meaning it's best compared to a focus spell...that gets around focus point caps and doesn't cost a focus point to cast.

And it takes one action on your part to use. No other focus spell in the game is that damaging to a single target for that cheap of a cost - it's the same damage as pulverizing cascade and the other druid blaster spells against one target while costing, and I will bold this again, half the actions to use . That is completely OBSCENE damage.

Likewise, ceremonial knife is giving you two bonus spells roughly equal to the max spell rank you can cast - 2 (so 2nd rank spells at level 8, 5th rank spells at level 14, etc).

These two features vastly increase spell slot sustainability relative to the closest comparable classes (which also get only 3 spells per level): druid, cleric, and bard. Obviously, bard is still likely the strongest caster in the game after the remaster, but at the very least I would argue this puts witch in strong competition with druid and cleric. Not in the same niche, of course, but certainly up there in terms of raw power.

Those do sound like good feats.

I'm waiting to see the whole thing before I freak out too much. I hope I can write even fewer house rules after the remaster. I'd love for Paizo or WotC to put out a game I didn't have to house rule at all to feel good playing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Calliope5431 wrote:
Deriven Firelion wrote:
That's understandable. If the familiar abilities are the only change to the witch and a few feats, probably not good enough to make them competitive.

I strongly object to the characterization of Spirit/Stitched Familiar and Ceremonial Knife as "just a few feats."

The damage on Spirit/Stitched Familiar is straight-up the same as 3rd level fireball , and scales exactly as well. It also has side benefits. It recharges every 10 minutes, meaning it's best compared to a focus spell...that gets around focus point caps and doesn't cost a focus point to cast.

And it takes one action on your part to use. No other focus spell in the game is that damaging to a single target for that cheap of a cost - it's the same damage as pulverizing cascade and the other druid blaster spells against one target while costing, and I will bold this again, half the actions to use . That is completely OBSCENE damage.

Likewise, ceremonial knife is giving you two bonus spells roughly equal to the max spell rank you can cast - 2 (so 2nd rank spells at level 8, 5th rank spells at level 14, etc).

These two features vastly increase spell slot sustainability relative to the closest comparable classes (which also get only 3 spells per level): druid, cleric, and bard. Obviously, bard is still likely the strongest caster in the game after the remaster, but at the very least I would argue this puts witch in strong competition with druid and cleric. Not in the same niche, of course, but certainly up there in terms of raw power.

Hard agree. Spirit/stitched familiar are insane. They are so good I'm a little miffed they compete with Improved Familiar at the same level, because I like Improved Familiar and will never, ever take it over those two.

Also worth noting that wilding and rune are at the low end of the new familiar abilities. The Resentment may become the single best debuffer in the game, Starless Shadow is budget Dirge of Doom, and Fate and Flame's Faithful are both really solid buffs to your front line.

Survivability of the familiar is a concern, but probably an overblown one given the number of defensive options familiars already had and the very likely possibility we will get more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SP3CT3R wrote:
I have got to stop reading threads about game balance for character options I'm interested in. I was excited for the remastered Witch and now I've gone back to not wanting to play one in case my character ends up being bad.

I play Witch currently. Yes it is bottom tier class. Yes, that is a bad thing for it to be there.

But even being a bad class, the characters are still just fine and playable. I have a lot of fun with my Witch character. Even if the focus cantrips don't change, the improvements that I have seen would be a solid improvement over what we currently have.

And as was pointed out way back at the beginning of this thread - we haven't seen the new Hex cantrips. I expect that those have been improved too.


SP3CT3R wrote:
I have got to stop reading threads about game balance for character options I'm interested in. I was excited for the remastered Witch and now I've gone back to not wanting to play one in case my character ends up being bad.

It is weird that the Witch was identified as a class that needed to be remastered, but the remaster has many of the same problems as the original.

Makes me feel better for skipping this.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
EberronHoward wrote:
SP3CT3R wrote:
I have got to stop reading threads about game balance for character options I'm interested in. I was excited for the remastered Witch and now I've gone back to not wanting to play one in case my character ends up being bad.

It is weird that the Witch was identified as a class that needed to be remastered, but the remaster has many of the same problems as the original.

Makes me feel better for skipping this.

This is a weird take when we don't actually know the full extent of the remaster.


I'm still hopeful for the final product. The familiar abilities seem fun


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:
EberronHoward wrote:
SP3CT3R wrote:
I have got to stop reading threads about game balance for character options I'm interested in. I was excited for the remastered Witch and now I've gone back to not wanting to play one in case my character ends up being bad.

It is weird that the Witch was identified as a class that needed to be remastered, but the remaster has many of the same problems as the original.

Makes me feel better for skipping this.

This is a weird take when we don't actually know the full extent of the remaster.

We know murksight still sucks. So no matter what else may improve, that's one thing we can be sure of.


Calliope5431 wrote:
I strongly object to the characterization of Spirit/Stitched Familiar and Ceremonial Knife as "just a few feats."

I don't agree for Ceremonial Knife (but everyone knows my position on Wands) but I must admit Spirit and Stitched Familiar really change the Witch. These feats are no-brainers as much as Debilitating Dichotomy is for the Oracle, and they happen to be of the same level. So I have an Oracle feel out of the Witch now.

They still raise the question of the position of the Familiar on the battlefield, though, as they both have a rather limited range.


Unfortunately on the Pet general feat we see the ambiguous language of "never use or have their ability modifiers" that has brought so many issues.

Although this once more reinforces RAI that not having a modifier is vastly different than having a 0, since in the case of Pet we really are just looking at plain animal friends like cats and dogs which are supposed to function as normal animal pets (intelligence wise) hence not mindless.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have seen no evidence that the remaster witch feats will be any better outside of the spirit familiar. And I hate the spirit familiar feat because that makes no sense for a witch who should be focusing on cursing people.

51 to 100 of 168 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Witch Rework: Wilding Steward Needs a Serious Rework All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.