![]() The irony of a binding patron being a trap for the witch itself isn't lost on me, but I don't think the purpose of the game is to punish new players who missed the line about magic circles in calling spells, requiring DM fiat to make them work or allowing them to trade away their patron at a later time somehow? I don't know about you, but to me it seems like a trap for newer players having one patron allowing you to use planar binding spells, and a different one giving access to magic circle spells. For example: a hedge witch/hex channeler with the healing patron can not only cure ability damage and status conditions, they can spontaneously cast cure spells and channel just like a cleric. Most of the stuff you are asking for is patron/archetype dependent.ĭepending on choices, the witch can access almost everything you are asking for, and is some cases considerably more. I'd be more likely to offer up things like accelerate poison to make things nastier rather than the witch safer. but I probably wouldn't add both poison use/save bonuses and the curative spells. If someone really wanted poison, I'd create a custom archetype that adds some poison use, save bonuses and maybe a patron with some suitable spells. Poison use is the most questionable to me, as it's probably easier to just re-flavor a curse as being delivered by food or drink. If your DM is flexible and creative, you could even come up with a good or neutral or whatever variation on Infernal Contract. Hedge Witch has already been mentioned and the Healing Patron covers even more.īoundaries + Infernal Contract can get you the allies and circles, but it's not rules legal by default I don't think. Some of those things can be accomplished with existing tools. I can see granting one subset of those things via Patron or Archetype (or both) and not having a problem. ![]() The better you make the witch list, the less reason there is for the other classes to exist. First, no witch should be good at all of those things, even if we all agreed they are "traditional witch spells". Wooh.Īs I see it, there are a few reasons why the list is how it is. Hey, at least they're good at rune traps thanks to having a good list of symbol, sigil, and glyph spells. It really feels like the creators cut most of the witchy spells out intentionally so they could be more lazy about making patrons. Heck, if they do get planar binding with a patron they can't make circles to even do the job. Working with them becomes suicidal and stupid.Ĥ) Shapeshifting, but they get shafted on polymorph spells.ĥ) Calling outsiders and spirits to play tricks or do their dirty work, but they have no planar ally or planar binding abilities. ![]() What witches are supposed to be good at? All the things they're not good at, naturally!ġ) Healing, but they can't even deal with ability damage or most status conditions.Ģ) Hedging out spirits with salt circles and such, but they have none of the basic magic circle spells or the effective occult style magics (even after OA was added to the game).ģ) Poison trickery, but they can't remove or resist them with neutralize poison or even delay poison, have no bonuses to deal with them, and have low fortitude.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |