D&D 5E So Where my Witches at?

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Wisdom-based arcane casters. Hmmm - that's an interesting concept.

Yep. It would be different from any other arcane caster in the game. It would also fit the theme of occultists/witches being "searchers" of more unearthly magic, requiring more "perception" to master than "book smarts".

Another option might be that they need both good Int and good Wis - say, good Int to learn their spells and then good Wis to cast them?

Eh, I'm not so sure. Other spellcasting classes aren't dependent on two mental ability scores for their class features. Maybe just give them proficiency in Wisdom and Intelligence saving throws, like the Wizard?

Every arcane caster has to learn spells (once only for each one) so I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Elaborate?

Sorry, maybe I worded that incorrectly. Wizards prepare their spells, as do Clerics and Druids. Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Bards get a predetermined amount of "Spells Known" at each level. A way to make Occultists/Witches be more restricted in their spellcasting could be requiring them to use Spells Known instead of preparing their spells.

Does that make sense?

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Looking this thread over, I'm left wondering if D&D could take any inspiration from Pathfinder's implementation of a witch character class, something it's had in both first and second edition. Given that there's no discussion among Pathfinder fans (that I'm aware of) about "playing a character with levels in the witch class doesn't really feel like playing a witch," I'd presume that Paizo's succeeded in fulfilling the conceptual space that we think of a witch as occupying. What, if anything, could D&D take away from that?​

Of course, the original wizard class back from AD&D - the Magic-User - was deliberately intended to encompass the conceptual space of "witch". Given that several spellcasters (very particularly the warlock) continue to appeal to the archetype, I maintain that it would be better to find ways to help existing classes better fit the fantasy lore - with addition of existing resources such as new feats, spells, and/or MAYBE a subclass; rather than creating new ones. That said, the Paizo incarnation of the witch was great (first edition anyway; have not seen the second) - both flavorful and consistently powerful; though I'm not sure how well their mechanics would fit 5e given 5e game design elements like bounded accuracy.

Regrettably, Paizo also created a number of design abominations, such as the Summoner (FTR - overpowered, required extensive DM auditing, was able to cast certain spells earlier than the supposed masters of magic), in the same book, if I recall correctly.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Err...a douche bag isn’t female. It’s an inanimate object, and usually (in my experience) applied to men, and...curiously enough...often to exactly the sort of guy who uses the word “witch” to describe a woman who is insufficiently awed by his own imagined alpha status.

If there’s any misogyny inherent in the word, it might be the implication that a product designed for that purpose is especially unclean.

GIRLS ARE AWESOME

GIRLS ARE AWESOME

girlsareawesome.com

It's not really a derogatory term meant to offend the female sex anymore, but it was originally used that way.

 

[Remathilis]

Or maybe they are rare because so many get burned at the stake.

Only the ones who are bad at hiding thier ability from the clueless peons or fanatic zealots.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Only the ones who are bad at hiding thier ability from the clueless peons or fanatic zealots.

Yeah. In my D&D worlds that take place around medieval times, the only "witches" that get burned at the stake are either sorcerers that had an outburst of magic, or innocent women that either made the mistake of pretending to curse someone, or were just a convenient scapegoat.

The real "witches" will just charm someone to go away, or turn invisible, or murder the person and hide their body.

 

[Remathilis]

Yeah. In my D&D worlds that take place around medieval times, the only "witches" that get burned at the stake are either sorcerers that had an outburst of magic, or innocent women that either made the mistake of pretending to curse someone, or were just a convenient scapegoat.

The real "witches" will just charm someone to go away, or turn invisible, or murder the person and hide their body.

Fair. I typically view witchcraft as magic that doesn't quite fall into the traditional methods of obtaining it. For example, a wizard who gains magical learning via some mysterious entity rather than traditional lore, a druid who draws on darker aspects of nature or fey rather than the traditional natural balance, a sorcerer who might be a changeling (the fey type, not the Eberron shapechanger) or even a warlock who doesn't have a traditional patron but instead has learned some Primal form of magic. They might superficially resemble other casters, but other practitioners, can tell the difference. In a setting like Eberron, they might be viewed more like a hedge mage or uncultured cousin, while in Ravenloft its far more torches-and-pitchforks, even in a domain where other magic is tolerated.

 

[Guest 6801328]

That's just it - the idea of a rare class is that every player can't choose it: it only comes up once in a while.

I don’t understand. Why can’t they? If the players wanted to form a party of all (insert rare class) why can’t they? They can still be rare in the world. In fact, maybe they are the only ones in the world. What is gained by disallowing this?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I don’t understand. Why can’t they? If the players wanted to form a party of all (insert rare class) why can’t they? They can still be rare in the world. In fact, maybe they are the only ones in the world. What is gained by disallowing this?

Exactly this. They can be rare in the world without being disallowed from the campaign.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You do know the origin of "douch bag" right? I don't think its general.

It’s usage as an insult is 100% general.

 

[Lanefan]

Yep. It would be different from any other arcane caster in the game. It would also fit the theme of occultists/witches being "searchers" of more unearthly magic, requiring more "perception" to master than "book smarts".

Eh, I'm not so sure. Other spellcasting classes aren't dependent on two mental ability scores for their class features.

Doesn't mean this one can't be, to be both different and less common.

Sorry, maybe I worded that incorrectly. Wizards prepare their spells, as do Clerics and Druids. Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Bards get a predetermined amount of "Spells Known" at each level. A way to make Occultists/Witches be more restricted in their spellcasting could be requiring them to use Spells Known instead of preparing their spells.

Does that make sense?

Yep. Not sure which way I'd lean, though.