D&D 5E 5e witches, your preferred implementation?

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I get it. For whatever reason, people are super against there being a class called "Witch" in the PHB. A casual look through DMs Guild, Drive-Thru RPG and Kickstarter shows there's a lot of people who do want it, but those folks are all wrong to want that, as are the players I've talked to who've asked for one.

Excellent gatekeeping, everyone. 10/10

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I can go edit to make Wikipedia say that a warlock is a female kangaroo. Not the best citation.

It explained the usage history. Do you doubt it? Because I'm pretty sure it is correct.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I get it. For whatever reason, people are super against there being a class called "Witch" in the PHB. A casual look through DMs Guild, Drive-Thru RPG and Kickstarter shows there's a lot of people who do want it, but those folks are all wrong to want that, as are the players I've talked to who've asked for one.

Excellent gatekeeping, everyone. 10/10

No. I am against pointless proliferation of classes because there are words in thesaurus. That already got us sorcerer. There are too many caster classes, more are definitely not needed. Personally I'd combine sorcerer and warlock and call the resulting class 'witch.' Or just rename warlock 'witch.' Absolutely nothing against the term, I'd prefer it over 'warlock.'

 

[Cadence]

Yes. Leaving aside the merits of Charmed, there's debate around the issue, not anything approaching unanimity.

So, the witch class should include all of the most popular things in popular culture about witches and let a new player make any of them as part of the Witch class? Or should it be the designer gate keeping what should qualify as a true D&D witch? Should it make any definitive statements on what being a witch is? Should it pick a side on what Warlock can refer to?

 

[MGibster]

I'm not sure what the motivation is for everyone pretending they don't know what a "witch" means to the general public and saying "look, this totally different thing that we can argue is the same thing under a different name, even though it doesn't otherwise match what people are asking for," but it's not convincing. But hey, full internet points for whatever it is that was accomplished here.

Pictured below: What the general public thinks of when you say witch.

 

[Cadence]

I get it. For whatever reason, people are super against there being a class called "Witch" in the PHB. A casual look through DMs Guild, Drive-Thru RPG and Kickstarter shows there's a lot of people who do want it, but those folks are all wrong to want that, as are the players I've talked to who've asked for one.

No. I am against pointless proliferation of classes because there are words in thesaurus. That already got us sorcerer. There are too many caster classes, more are definitely not needed. Personally I'd combine sorcerer and warlock and call the resulting class 'witch.' Or just rename warlock 'witch.' Absolutely nothing against the term, I'd prefer it over 'warlock.'

I'd be interested in WotC doing a survey to see how players and prospective players felt about nuking Druid and Warlock from the next edition and putting in a Witch class that would subsume them as variants, and kicking something up. Feels like a thing to me!

 

[Cadence]

Excellent gatekeeping, everyone. 10/10

I need help with the definition. Is the throwing out of things in pop culture that don't fit what you might use, like post #152, gatekeeping? Or is that one true-waying? Or...? Or did you mean "everyone" literally? ;-)

 

[cbwjm]

If the designers did make a witch class, going off past creations I think they'd be looking more at pop culture references than historical references. They'd look at TV shows, books, and movies and base the class off those while creating some sort of "witchy" mechanic that differentiates the class from the other casters.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Pictured below: What the general public thinks of when you say witch.
View attachment 138162

And?

 

[MGibster]

And?

You're the one hung up on what the general population thinks of a witch. I thought maybe you could let me know what that means.

 

[MGibster]

If the designers did make a witch class, going off past creations I think they'd be looking more at pop culture references than historical references. They'd look at TV shows, books, and movies and base the class off those while creating some sort of "witchy" mechanic that differentiates the class from the other casters.

I think they already looked and created the Warlock class.

 

[Cadence]

You're the one hung up on what the general population thinks of a witch. I thought maybe you could let me know what that means.

Disadvantage vs. houses and water buckets. Advantage with flying monkeys.

 

[MGibster]

Disadvantage vs. houses and water buckets. Advantage with flying monkeys.

Does a gazebo attack as a house?

 

[Cadence]

Does a gazebo attack as a house?

We'll, the small size means it can't use a pike or other large weapon. (Or at least that feels right based on the halfling thread).

 

[cbwjm]

I think they already looked and created the Warlock class.

Yeah, maybe. It definitely has some of the pop culture witch flavour mixed in with stuff from past editions (mainly eldritch blast).

 

[Yaarel]

D&D magic is super flashy, and these days video gamey. Merlin didn't go around shooting magic lasers at people either.


That some people very hard want to argue against the commonly understood definition, doesn't mean that it isn't the commonly understood definition. Otherwise they wouldn't need to argue against it!

Warlock - Wikipedia

"A warlock is a male practitioner of witchcraft."

I suspect WotC chose Warlock as the name for the class rather than Witch, because:

• "Witch" is always ambiguous, can be Good or Evil, and has always been used this way, even when prevalently demonized.
• "Warlock" is mostly Evil, with few exceptions until recent popculture (young Merlin, Potter, etc.) − darker edgier.

 

[Neonchameleon]

In the current edition arcane/divine divide is just one fluff sidebar so it doesn't really matter.

Plus there's the different means of spell prep.

Pact of the Blade Hexblade Warlock is my go-to 5e Gishy.

Mine, if I'm not going past level 10 has been Celestial Pact Warlock (normally Pact of the Tome and grabbing shileleagh or however you spell it). Radiant Soul + Greenflame Blade gives you double scaling so your melee damage is a respectable Weapon + Stat +2d8 with a stat+1d8 to a secondary target if you have one. Sacred Flame at 3d8 damage as your ranged attack is very much a backup but doesn't suck. It's not a full striker build, but surprisingly effective and doesn't even have Eldritch Blast.

And on the Eldritch Blast tangent, it's one spell and one invocation (Agonizing Blast) - and Eldritch Blast is what you do when you have nothing better to do. There should be a modification of the damage type with each patron as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah, Sorcerer fills a mechanical space better if it is only about spell points.

Spell points in my experience don't really work that well as a gameplay option unless you only have a few of them.

The pop culture wizard doesn't forget his spells once cast either. Although influenced by a variety of sources, D&D is very much its own thing. It's not like the Barbarian is something Greeks or Romans would have recognized as a barbarian.

4e eliminated the "forgetting spells" thing and 5e didn't bring it back.

I'd be interested in WotC doing a survey to see how players and prospective players felt about nuking Druid and Warlock from the next edition and putting in a Witch class that would subsume them as variants, and kicking something up. Feels like a thing to me!

Unlikely to happen. Druid's been there forever. Warlock has a strong identity. And Witch is too vague.

 

[Garthanos]

4e did eventually make a Witch its flavor text was like this it includes a lot of Warlock isms... but it somewhat open

 

[Garthanos]

Mechanically it was a slightly different wizard and had some fun spells that were added a long side the class like one for momentarily making the enemy into a toad.

 

[Garthanos]

4e eliminated the "forgetting spells" thing and 5e didn't bring it back.

the at-will in 4e and the Cantrip in 5e are kind of definite.
However In 4e dailies could easily be seen as vancian and encounters with mild effort? I could picture my vancian caster digging out his book for a quick refresh between fights on some of the less heavy magics (that might be reasonable in the original jack vance books even if D&D did not allow it previously)