Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 8302017" data-attributes="member: 7635">D&amp;D's issue with witches was kinda two-fold. It was originally an NPC class partially because they didn't want to mess with balancing it like a PC class, but also an assumption that the audience of the time (mostly while males) wouldn't be terribly interested in it. 2e made it a wizard kit, 3e a couple of prestige classes, but it isn't until Pathfinder and later 4e that they tried to make it a regular class (or subclass) option. Personally, I think the 4e witch is flavorful but suffers some weird issues involving its power-structure (an issue that arises occasionally in 4e subclasses) and I've loved Pathfinder's witch (at least in 1e) but I can see the reason why WotC might not have wanted to go full 20-level class with it.When I designed my subclass, I wanted to evoke a specific archetype; a &quot;wizard&quot; that isn't from a formal school or magic but instead evoked &quot;hedge&quot; or &quot;low&quot; magic with thier high magic. Mechanically, I wanted to mix a little warlock into a normal caster progression class. Is it the be-all-end-all of witches? Nah, and I think a second druidic version (along with the warlock) should provide a lot of coverage for the idea. I just wanted something more than &quot;refluff an X&quot; as an option.For me, its a strong enough archetype as &quot;assassin&quot; &quot;cavalier&quot; &quot;samurai&quot; or &quot;beastmaster&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 8302017, member: 7635"] D&D's issue with witches was kinda two-fold. It was originally an NPC class partially because they didn't want to mess with balancing it like a PC class, but also an assumption that the audience of the time (mostly while males) wouldn't be terribly interested in it. 2e made it a wizard kit, 3e a couple of prestige classes, but it isn't until Pathfinder and later 4e that they tried to make it a regular class (or subclass) option. Personally, I think the 4e witch is flavorful but suffers some weird issues involving its power-structure (an issue that arises occasionally in 4e subclasses) and I've loved Pathfinder's witch (at least in 1e) but I can see the reason why WotC might not have wanted to go full 20-level class with it. When I designed my subclass, I wanted to evoke a specific archetype; a "wizard" that isn't from a formal school or magic but instead evoked "hedge" or "low" magic with thier high magic. Mechanically, I wanted to mix a little warlock into a normal caster progression class. Is it the be-all-end-all of witches? Nah, and I think a second druidic version (along with the warlock) should provide a lot of coverage for the idea. I just wanted something more than "refluff an X" as an option. For me, its a strong enough archetype as "assassin" "cavalier" "samurai" or "beastmaster" [/QUOTE]

Verification