Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RealAlHazred" data-source="post: 8539958" data-attributes="member: 25818">I've seen all of these approaches.<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Divine: mechanically, for 5E, the <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/fosd9g/divine_domain_witchcraft_see_through_cursed_eyes/" target="_blank">Cleric domain of Witchcraft</a>. If your conception of witches in your setting is as devotees of forgotten or forbidden gods (due to some religious upheaval or whatever), then this is a way to represent it.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Spirit: mechanically, for 5E, <a href="https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-M-WtrKeZNFdEXq0MKXw" target="_blank">the Occultist class</a> by KibblesTasty, or the <a href="https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L7gG0ZSzBHgbWv7t_wf" target="_blank">binder-style Witch class by Zarieth</a>. If the witches deal with subdivine powers, or if it is a setting where there was a war between real gods, then perhaps the "losers" were reduced in power instead of being slain (how can a true god be slain?) In that case, something like this works. Also appropriate, the Vestige binder from 3.5E, or the Vestige Pact warlock from 4E.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Attunement: a closer tie to nature was the old 4E power source called "Primal." Mechanically, this can be represented in 5E as <a href="https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-La8O0iRUdm_q9mdVNKL" target="_blank">the Druid circle of the Coven</a>, or the <a href="https://www.dmsguild.com/product/220319/Druidic-Circle-Circle-of-Witchcraft" target="_blank">circle of Witchcraft</a>. To my mind, this is closer to the power source for what I would call an Occultist class, were I to create one.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Wizardry: for 5E, the <a href="https://www.dmsguild.com/product/252537/School-of-Witchcraft" target="_blank">Wizard school of Witchcraft</a>. In 4E, where they actually had an official Witch subclass, it was a Wizard subclass that got rid of the spellbook. The advantage in D&D for this approach is that it allows wizards to learn witch spells and vice versa. Appropriate if manipulating the stuff of reality is done through practice and training in mental disciplines.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Rage/Panache/Grit/Qi: Interestingly, way back in the OD&D era, this was the basis for the first witch class intended for players to use, in an issue of Judges Guild Journal. It used the psionics rules, which had just come out in the Eldritch Wizardry supplement.</li> </ol>So, if you're trying to make a folkloric witch, all three of your last points have to be reflected.a. Witches were said to have sworn pacts. 5E has made this inherently a warlock thing, but I would do it in a D&D clone as something like a feat. Everyone should be able to take a "shortcut" to power, and defer the true costs to later on down the line.b. Witches didn't usually have any written objects, and were said to be taught their spells by their familiar. In my OSE games, the familiar becomes the spellbook, and no other rules need to change.c. Witches weren't always clearly calling on a specific spirit to do their magic. They could, but some witches were thought to have powers (usually the "evil eye") which seemed to be innate abilities as opposed to spells or the actions of demons.Ultimately, you have to figure out what kind of witch you want in a setting. A storybook, fairy-tale witch? A wise woman or cunning man from Medieval European history? A spiritualist like the witches from the Gaslight era revival? A name you use for some out-group in your game, to instinctively make players be distrustful but ultimately allow individuals to be uniquely "good" or "bad"?</blockquote>

Verification