Witch is absolutely carrying the party


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 141 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm currently dming Rise of the Runelords for a fairly experienced group; all of the players are contributing and rping well.

One thing that I have noticed, however, is that the party's witch is completely carrying them. From level 1, he had Cackle and Fortune (bonus hex feat), allowing the martials to roll twice on attack. Soon after, he got Misfortune, reducing the enemies' saves/attacks. Pretty much everyone in the party loves him. The martials are always hitting and the other casters are landing their DC based spells. He carries around a wand of hex vulnerability and took the scar hex, so he can buff/debuff from a mile away and can reuse hexes on allies/enemies.

The party is still extremely strong without the witch, given their experience and character synergy, but with the witch, they are almost doubly strong, with the witch's hexes alone -not including his almost full arcane casting. I'm not interested in shutting his build down; I've been using their increased combat power to thrower harder and more entertaining encounters at them. He isn't stealing the spotlight because he is throwing buffs at his teammates, so he is generally enjoyable to have at the table.

I saw a thread earlier considering them weaker than other arcane casters and such, but from my standpoint, they seem pretty great. Does anyone consider hexes to be extremely strong? I feel like the witch would still be strong if he only had hexes. Inbetween his arcane casting and hexes I think the witch is potentially the strongest arcane caster.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

A good support should significantly increase the power of the group so it doesn't seem like the witch is doing so excessively.


Imagine what they would be like with a Bard added to the crew.


I played a witch in a Serpent Skull campaign who pretty much did the same thing. Everyone loved her so they didnt mind that she worshipped the Lord of the Nine and was summoning devils to also help out.


Now, if only Cackle wasn't so annoying as for perma-cackling to be fitting of a fate like that of Sir Robin's Minstrels . . . You want to know what's REALLY scary? In college, one of my Organic Chemistry professors did this -- anyone ever hear of a Hexchemist archetype?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Your witch didn't take the slumber hex? Count your blessings, dude. :)

Liberty's Edge

I feel like witches may be the most potent support class out there. With the capacity to dole out a seemingly endless stream of re-rolls, for both good and ill, I see why designers and players might not appreciate their power in a vacuum, but how they drive some GMs batty.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

^Oh, yeah, thanks for reminding me -- several of my college professors took that too. :-)


7 people marked this as a favorite.

You should audit your Witch's encumbrance more often.


Buffers always seem to carry the party. I get a little of that from my investigator, i hate playing skill focused/support but the group seems to feel its just too useful.

Liberty's Edge

Ryan Freire wrote:
Buffers always seem to carry the party. I get a little of that from my investigator, i hate playing skill focused/support but the group seems to feel its just too useful.

I think it's stil a "seems to" though - support characters are useless without characters to support. Yeah, it feels like they're giving steroids to the rest of the party, until you realize that doing so is their role in the game.

Personally, I enjoy playing those characters (insert YMMV statements here), but I'm playing a barbarian right now and wishing we had a little more support integral to the party.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Hex Vulnerability removes the once per day gating on friendly hexes, so that's probably why it feels like that. Else he'd have to pick his fights for Fortune.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
You should audit your Witch's encumbrance more often.

I am sure that the rest of the party loves the witch giving them rerolls on everything enough to carry some trail rations for him.


11 people marked this as a favorite.
Snowblind wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
You should audit your Witch's encumbrance more often.
I am sure that the rest of the party loves the witch giving them rerolls on everything enough to carry some trail rations for him.

*WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH*


mercilessdm wrote:

I'm currently dming Rise of the Runelords for a fairly experienced group; all of the players are contributing and rping well.

One thing that I have noticed, however, is that the party's witch is completely carrying them. From level 1, he had Cackle and Fortune (bonus hex feat), allowing the martials to roll twice on attack. Soon after, he got Misfortune, reducing the enemies' saves/attacks. Pretty much everyone in the party loves him. The martials are always hitting and the other casters are landing their DC based spells. He carries around a wand of hex vulnerability and took the scar hex, so he can buff/debuff from a mile away and can reuse hexes on allies/enemies.

The party is still extremely strong without the witch, given their experience and character synergy, but with the witch, they are almost doubly strong, with the witch's hexes alone -not including his almost full arcane casting. I'm not interested in shutting his build down; I've been using their increased combat power to thrower harder and more entertaining encounters at them. He isn't stealing the spotlight because he is throwing buffs at his teammates, so he is generally enjoyable to have at the table.

I saw a thread earlier considering them weaker than other arcane casters and such, but from my standpoint, they seem pretty great. Does anyone consider hexes to be extremely strong? I feel like the witch would still be strong if he only had hexes. Inbetween his arcane casting and hexes I think the witch is potentially the strongest arcane caster.

The witch is weaker than a wizard and a druid, but so is a sorcerer, but both of these "weaker" full casters can still make GM's cry.

The witch is a good debuffer. You put him in a game with undead and many of those hexes don't work as well.
The witch does things differently* which throws GM's off if they are not ready for it. Many witches use the hexes a lot and save the spells for when they need them. If he goes with the evil eye+slumber combo things can get really annoying.
That witch might have a higher floor than a sorcerer or even a wizard, but the witch's ceiling is not as high as a wizard. I also find sorcerers hard to challenge.

Hexes dont care about SR, and for the witch the DC scale with level.


Rynjin wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
You should audit your Witch's encumbrance more often.
I am sure that the rest of the party loves the witch giving them rerolls on everything enough to carry some trail rations for him.
*WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH*

Please, enlighten me. What am I missing?

Scarab Sages

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber

I think he is referring to the thread's title.


sanwah68 wrote:

I think he is referring to the thread's title.

Derp.

That makes sense.

Scarab Sages

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber

Fairly amusing mental image though


She did take the slumber hex. She was a dirty player especially once she learned how to fly.


A Wand of Hex Vulnerability at minimum caster level will do next to nothing. Enemies will easily make the DC 11 Will save and it will do nothing for allies. With a duration of only 1 round it will expire before you have a chance to do anything with it.


She also had a compy familiar that she named Book like Winifired Sanderson's BOOOK from Hocus Pocus. She was a worshipper of Asmodeus who was going to get an imp familiar and take a few levels in Diabolist.


andreww wrote:
A Wand of Hex Vulnerability at minimum caster level will do next to nothing. Enemies will easily make the DC 11 Will save and it will do nothing for allies. With a duration of only 1 round it will expire before you have a chance to do anything with it.

The value of Hex Vulnerability is to put stuff on your allies again. Lets you re-use stuff like Fortune or the Healing Hexes.


kestral287 wrote:
andreww wrote:
A Wand of Hex Vulnerability at minimum caster level will do next to nothing. Enemies will easily make the DC 11 Will save and it will do nothing for allies. With a duration of only 1 round it will expire before you have a chance to do anything with it.
The value of Hex Vulnerability is to put stuff on your allies again. Lets you re-use stuff like Fortune or the Healing Hexes.

I think andreww's point is that if the witch swings the wand, the Hex Vulnerability effect lasts only 1 round, so will end at the start of the witch's next turn. This is before the witch can use the Fortune Hex.

Of course, the workaround is to have another character use the Hex Vulnerability wand, such as the Witch's familiar.


Or a CL2 wand. Easy.


I'm actually playing a witch right now and loving it. I went for Slumber Hex and it's a lot of fun to single-handedly coup de grace enemies one by one. I'm picking up as many save-or-dies as I can in the future (though I'll try to stay away from the AoE. I had a bad experience with Haunting Mists couple of weeks ago...).


voideternal wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
andreww wrote:
A Wand of Hex Vulnerability at minimum caster level will do next to nothing. Enemies will easily make the DC 11 Will save and it will do nothing for allies. With a duration of only 1 round it will expire before you have a chance to do anything with it.
The value of Hex Vulnerability is to put stuff on your allies again. Lets you re-use stuff like Fortune or the Healing Hexes.

I think andreww's point is that if the witch swings the wand, the Hex Vulnerability effect lasts only 1 round, so will end at the start of the witch's next turn. This is before the witch can use the Fortune Hex.

Of course, the workaround is to have another character use the Hex Vulnerability wand, such as the Witch's familiar.

Indeed, with this kind of workaround being often available, Hex Vulnerability seems awfully powerful. It should really be bumped up to a Level 2 spell.


That workaround doesn't actually work though?

Hex Vulnerability works on "your" hexes only. If you're not the one casting/using the wand, it whiffs.

Easy enough for a level one, CL2 wand, but handing it off to your familiar doesn't help.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

At least one major mistake is your allowing Hex Vulnerability to work on beneficial Hexes when it's clearly intended not to, even if the raw reading of the text allows it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh no, not again.

Can we not get into a discussion about the intent of that spell. If the writer of the rules text wanted it to only work on harmful hexes, they should have put it in the rules text. Besides, creative uses of spells are half of the fun of playing a caster.

After all, doing hilarious things things like using stone to flesh as a wall breaching tool is something I doubt that the writer of that spell thought of, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't work.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
sanwah68 (edited together for ease of quoting) wrote:

I think he is referring to the thread's title.

...
Fairly amusing mental image though

Obviously, is mighty Scarred Witch Doctor. Care not for weakness of puny men. Back in Mother Belkzen, breakfast weigh more than wet noodle that call selves adventurers.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Snowblind wrote:

Oh no, not again.

Can we not get into a discussion about the intent of that spell. If the writer of the rules text wanted it to only work on harmful hexes, they should have put it in the rules text. Besides, creative uses of spells are half of the fun of playing a caster.

After all, doing hilarious things things like using stone to flesh as a wall breaching tool is something I doubt that the writer of that spell thought of, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't work.

One really can't ignore the 800lb gorilla when it comes by for tea.

Like it or not, the subject is relevant in the context of the discussion. As the OP points out, the witch player is using Hex Vulnerability as a buff. And the flavor text of the spell, the NAME of the spell clearly spells out the intent. And that has a major impact in how the witch is supporting her party.

The only "fault" of the mechanics creators is that they don't create the game with cheese monkey rules lawyers in mind. And I don't think they should. It's up to GMs to police these things and players to show better form.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

Oh no, not again.

Can we not get into a discussion about the intent of that spell. If the writer of the rules text wanted it to only work on harmful hexes, they should have put it in the rules text. Besides, creative uses of spells are half of the fun of playing a caster.

After all, doing hilarious things things like using stone to flesh as a wall breaching tool is something I doubt that the writer of that spell thought of, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't work.

One really can't ignore the 800lb gorilla when it comes by for tea.

Like it or not, the subject is relevant in the context of the discussion. As the OP points out, the witch player is using Hex Vulnerability as a buff. And the flavor text of the spell, the NAME of the spell clearly spells out the intent. And that has a major impact in how the witch is supporting her party.

The only "fault" of the mechanics creators is that they don't create the game with cheese monkey rules lawyers in mind. And I don't think they should. It's up to GMs to police these things and players to show better form.

Some people value creativity and intelligence in their players and characters. I certainly do, and absolutely love it when my players come up with new ways to use an ability or a spell.

Some people hate it, and force "rules intent" or just flat out ban things to prevent people from doing things creatively or intelligently. I'm not sure why, but I do have my suspicions. Most of my suspiscions circle around two ideas: Not wanting other people to look smarter than you, and not wanting other people to question your authority. Now, I can't say this for certain, as it's not written down, but I'm fairy certain that's the intent.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bookrat wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

Oh no, not again.

Can we not get into a discussion about the intent of that spell. If the writer of the rules text wanted it to only work on harmful hexes, they should have put it in the rules text. Besides, creative uses of spells are half of the fun of playing a caster.

After all, doing hilarious things things like using stone to flesh as a wall breaching tool is something I doubt that the writer of that spell thought of, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't work.

One really can't ignore the 800lb gorilla when it comes by for tea.

Like it or not, the subject is relevant in the context of the discussion. As the OP points out, the witch player is using Hex Vulnerability as a buff. And the flavor text of the spell, the NAME of the spell clearly spells out the intent. And that has a major impact in how the witch is supporting her party.

The only "fault" of the mechanics creators is that they don't create the game with cheese monkey rules lawyers in mind. And I don't think they should. It's up to GMs to police these things and players to show better form.

Some people value creativity and intelligence in their players and characters. I certainly do, and absolutely love it when my players come up with new ways to use an ability or a spell.

Some people hate it, and force "rules intent" or just flat out ban things to prevent people from doing things creatively or intelligently. I'm not sure why, but I do have my suspicions. Most of my suspiscions circle around two ideas: Not wanting other people to look smarter than you, and not wanting other people to question your authority. Now, I can't say this for certain, as it's not written down, but I'm fairy certain that's the intent.

I value creativity, but I believe a distinction should be made between being creative and taking advantage of text loopholes. Almost every munchkin defends their shennanigans under the banner of "being creative". And the line should be drawn when the game becomes worse for it, instead of better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmmm. "You can be as creative as you like right up to the point where I don't like it." Yup. Definitely falls under "Thou shall not question my authority."

Alternativey, "Only pre-approved versions of creativity shall be permitted" read the doublethink sign.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bookrat wrote:
Hmmm. "You can be as creative as you like right up to the point where I don't like it." Yup. Definitely falls under "Thou shall not question my authority."

"How dare you tell me what I can or can't do". Sounds like player entitlement to me.

Two can play your game, sir.


Considering how hex vulnerability Will affect action Economy on the witch i dont see it being used for in combat buffs.
But i assume it is standart practice to force the wizard or magus to run away if he cast Expeditious retreat since the RAI here is "just as clear"?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cap. Darling wrote:

Considering how hex vulnerability Will affect action Economy on the witch i dont see it being used for in combat buffs.

But i assume it is standart practice to force the wizard or magus to run away if he cast Expeditious retreat since the RAI here is "just as clear"?

The RAI as well as the RAW also makes it very clear that the caster retains full control on how he uses his enhanced mobility, so no, it's not the same thing. And it's also clearly a self buff spell as opposed to an enemy debuff.


Obviously, but the witch is supposed to be more subtle about it.....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Cap. Darling wrote:

Considering how hex vulnerability Will affect action Economy on the witch i dont see it being used for in combat buffs.

But i assume it is standart practice to force the wizard or magus to run away if he cast Expeditious retreat since the RAI here is "just as clear"?
The RAI as well as the RAW also makes it very clear that the caster retains full control on how he uses his enhanced mobility, so no, it's not the same thing. And it's also clearly a self buff spell as opposed to an enemy debuff.

The flavor text (the name) of expeditious retreat clearly indicates that by RAI you are supposed to retreat with expeditious retreat. You should be retreating, you cheese monkey rules lawyering munchkin you.

Unless the potential usage of spells isn't limited to just what is in their name and flavor text. That would be a novel concept, wouldn't it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Snowblind wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Cap. Darling wrote:

Considering how hex vulnerability Will affect action Economy on the witch i dont see it being used for in combat buffs.

But i assume it is standart practice to force the wizard or magus to run away if he cast Expeditious retreat since the RAI here is "just as clear"?
The RAI as well as the RAW also makes it very clear that the caster retains full control on how he uses his enhanced mobility, so no, it's not the same thing. And it's also clearly a self buff spell as opposed to an enemy debuff.

The flavor text (the name) of expeditious retreat clearly indicates that by RAI you are supposed to retreat with expeditious retreat. You should be retreating, you cheese monkey rules lawyering munchkin you.

Unless the potential usage of spells isn't limited to just what is in their name and flavor text. That would be a novel concept, wouldn't it.

Expeditious Retreat is generally the use most Wizards make of the spell. Again, there's nothing besides the name that indicates a constraint in how the Wizard makes use of his speed buff. It's still a speed buff either way. It's not being reversed to make it a "slow" on others.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
bookrat wrote:
Hmmm. "You can be as creative as you like right up to the point where I don't like it." Yup. Definitely falls under "Thou shall not question my authority."

"How dare you tell me what I can or can't do". Sounds like player entitlement to me.

Two can play your game, sir.

"Player entitlement" is only an issue to GMs who shall not have their authority questioned.


I don't see anything in Hex Vulnerability that would imply you aren't allowed to use it on allies...

However, are you allowed to voluntarily fail saves? I recall a thread about using Bluff to convince someone that you were casting, say, a cure spell, but would instead cast something else...

If that's the case, then according to the spell, you would HAVE to roll a save against it?

Doesn't seem OP to me.


You Can decide to fail a save. Dosent make sense with poison saves but reflex and Will saves makes perfect sense. To me that is:)


I don't want to stifle creative use of spells -- I just don't want it to be TOO easy and build-dependent. So bump Hex Vulnerability to level 2 (just 1 step beyond the Caster Level 2 it needs to work in the first place if you don't have a UMD-able Familiar, unless you manage to get your hands on a Rod of Quicken Spell while still at level 1), and we'll call it good.

* * * * * * * *

Cap. Darling wrote:
You Can decide to fail a save. Dosent make sense with poison saves but reflex and Will saves makes perfect sense. To me that is:)

Off-original-topic, but speaking of this, what are some good ways of tricking a creature into deciding to fail a save (other than the one explicitly written into Trap the Soul)?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:

I don't want to stifle creative use of spells -- I just don't want it to be TOO easy and build-dependent. So bump Hex Vulnerability to level 2 (just 1 step beyond the Caster Level 2 it needs to work in the first place if you don't have a UMD-able Familiar, unless you manage to get your hands on a Rod of Quicken Spell while still at level 1), and we'll call it good.

* * * * * * * *

Cap. Darling wrote:
You Can decide to fail a save. Dosent make sense with poison saves but reflex and Will saves makes perfect sense. To me that is:)

Off-original-topic, but speaking of this, what are some good ways of tricking a creature into deciding to fail a save (other than the one explicitly written into Trap the Soul)?

It's a bit difficult because saving rolls are instinctual effects, not conscious actions. (The exampel given of Trap The Soul isn't about a creature deciding to fail a save, but tricking it into bypassing the process altogether.) Saving rolls are instantaneous events... the duck/cringe/jump for a fireball or lightning bolt, the tensing of the body on poisoning, the inherent reaction from a mind thrust.


Witches are really flavourful, but playing effective ones can be really boring. Is there any advice on how to steer players away from the boring options? Is it as simple as removing Icy Tomb and slumber?


^Not really advice, since I haven't had a chance to try it yet, but playing a healing and/or buffing Witch would be a worthy challenge (definitely uphill, though, because the Hexes and spells for this for the most part don't synergize as well with each other as the ones for debuffing), and Cleric and Oracle just lend themselves better to this (now if we had an AP set in some place Rahadoum or Razmiran that bans divine casters, this would be different). The Cartomancer archetype also opens up some interesting potential (link to archetype and link to somebody's character sheet that uses this in an actual PbP that I have been following, although unfortunately I have fallen behind on this due to work and stuff -- at least I have seen that the player is making this pretty cool). Dimensional Occultist looks like it could be interesting, but I haven't seen anybody try this (Wrath of the Righteous is the only AP that I can think of that it would really lend itself to). For an Evil campaign (or for a villain NPC), Gravewalker would be highly flavorful, although not necessarily the most effective. For something completely different (for Good or Evil), White-Haired Witch could be used to make an interesting gish, which some people have talked about on these messageboards, although I have yet to see an example. Another gish option would be Orc (could be Half-Orc but not as good) Scarred Witch Doctor, optionally with a dip of 1 or 2 levels into a martial class and then proceeding into Eldritch Knight (which, after the recent SLA FAQ nerf, is pretty much the ONLY way to make a decent Eldritch Knight).


Well, I don't see how the use of Hex Vulnerability to support your allies is bad... Per RAW, it is possible. Per RAI, maybe it's not, but what does it change? I mean, it will just make martial class more powerfull, and they need it when they have wizard in their team...


LazarX wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:

I don't want to stifle creative use of spells -- I just don't want it to be TOO easy and build-dependent. So bump Hex Vulnerability to level 2 (just 1 step beyond the Caster Level 2 it needs to work in the first place if you don't have a UMD-able Familiar, unless you manage to get your hands on a Rod of Quicken Spell while still at level 1), and we'll call it good.

* * * * * * * *

Cap. Darling wrote:
You Can decide to fail a save. Dosent make sense with poison saves but reflex and Will saves makes perfect sense. To me that is:)

Off-original-topic, but speaking of this, what are some good ways of tricking a creature into deciding to fail a save (other than the one explicitly written into Trap the Soul)?

It's a bit difficult because saving rolls are instinctual effects, not conscious actions. (The exampel given of Trap The Soul isn't about a creature deciding to fail a save, but tricking it into bypassing the process altogether.) Saving rolls are instantaneous events... the duck/cringe/jump for a fireball or lightning bolt, the tensing of the body on poisoning, the inherent reaction from a mind thrust.

There are a lot of spells that have saving throws, such as ant haul. However they are completely harmless. So it is assumed that the target will choose to fail the save.

Think about the implications.

1 to 50 of 141 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Witch is absolutely carrying the party All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.