D&D 5E So Where my Witches at?

GlassJaw · Jan 17, 2021

Start with druid, swap wild shape for the Wild Companion familiar option in Tasha's, customize the spell list a bit with some thematic spells from the wizard/warlock spell lists (Bestow Curse, Hex, etc), take a circle like Land, Spores, Stars, etc.

Voila.

Kurotowa · Jan 17, 2021

Remathilis said:
The issue though is that right now, no single class/subclass mix really represents the concept well.

Two points. First, what's "the concept"? As I tried to point out, there's a lot of flavors of "witch" possible and it's as hard to get people to agree on which should be the definitive one as it is to get then to agree on a definitive psionics model. Second, there's degrees of escalation and I feel you should start at the bottom and work your way up only as lesser steps fail. First would be using existing mechanics with a flavor reskin, then might be a new subclass for an existing class, and past that a new base class. The last of which, I'll remind you, needs to be able to support at least three or four subclasses to justify being an entirely new base class.

Faolyn · Jan 17, 2021

Enevhar Aldarion said:
As for Witch, you have to deal with the stereotype that only females can be witches, so in the early days of D&D, when the vast majority of players were male, of course a Witch class failed.

Especially since the witches classes--yes, there were more than one of them in early Dragons--were specifically female only, and had spells like "charm man."

Faolyn · Jan 17, 2021

Remathilis said:
You could make the same argument about paladin, ranger, or druid, not to mention necromancer, assassin, or cavalier.

One could.

But first you have to determine if you really need another caster class. Personally, I don't think so. Look at @FrozenNorth's lovely list of witches to see how well the witch can be done with other classes.

Secondly, each of the caster classes in D&D has a different way of getting their magic. How do witches get theirs? In lore and media, they're show as getting their magic by: being born that way (sorcerer), through channeling minor or "pagan" gods (cleric), through herb lore (druid, possibly even ranger), through study (wizard), by being in tune with the world around them (druid, possibly even bard, who literally tune in), or through pacts with the devil or with spirits (warlock). The only other option I can think of might be for some sort of neopagan crystal-user, but that's something that could either be a druid archetype, since crystals are natural, or something a bit more psionics-like in nature, and 5e has been doing their psionics as archetypes and not a class.

Faolyn · Jan 17, 2021

Remathilis said:
So here are my brainstorm thoughts on this. They are a little raw...

Witches are spellcasters who learn their magic from some alternate way, and that alternate is a little... unsettling... to others. It could be magic from fiends, hags, deities, or the like, or some manner of folk "old" magic. Their magic is a little bit strange, even if the effects are like what a normal spellcaster produces.

As far as effects go, a witch's magic focuses on charms (robbing people of agency), curses (robbing them of ability) and polymorphs (robbing them of identity). There are secondary themes of nature (a witch is often rural and has some ability over the land), divination, and summoning (fey, fiends, shadows, the like). Tertiary, healing/herbalism and a touch of necromancy and general spellcasting (flight, etc.) round out the package. The thing I feel is that a witches magic is a little more subtle than traditional wizardly magic; some have said closer to a bard's list mixed with some of the spookier parts of the warlocks, but lacking the raw evocation damage that warlocks, wizards, and sorcerers are known for.

See, that sounds exactly like a warlock. I'd say that the focus on attack magic you mention later is more because they're built for PCs who are going adventuring, not PCs who are more stay-at-home, like your typical witch.

So to create a witch warlock: pick your appropriate spell list and give them proficiency in the Herbalism and/or Poisoner's kit. Give them a druid-like shapechanger at higher levels. Perhaps, eventually, an ability to create a poppet that they can use to cast spells on a target even when the target isn't at range, as long as they have the poppet. Many of their other abilities already exist as invocations. If necessary, create a few new spells. I've converted tons of spells from 2e to 5e (previously posted on Reddit), and a lot of them are appropriate for witches.

Faolyn · Jan 17, 2021

Kurotowa said:
The Warlock trying to pass herself off as a "Sorcerer"? She can probably pull it off, as long as she sticks to the boonies and avoids people with a high enough Arcana to tell the difference.

In the game I'm running, we have a Sun Soul Monk that calls himself a sorcerer (and is absolutely convinced he is one). It makes complete sense with his background: the magic came from his magical (wizard) family, and the martial aspects is because he was a city guard.

Remathilis · Jan 17, 2021

Kurotowa said:
Two points. First, what's "the concept"? As I tried to point out, there's a lot of flavors of "witch" possible and it's as hard to get people to agree on which should be the definitive one as it is to get then to agree on a definitive psionics model. Second, there's degrees of escalation and I feel you should start at the bottom and work your way up only as lesser steps fail. First would be using existing mechanics with a flavor reskin, then might be a new subclass for an existing class, and past that a new base class. The last of which, I'll remind you, needs to be able to support at least three or four subclasses to justify being an entirely new base class.

At this point I feel I'm just repeating myself...

1. The concept has been named all over this thread. A spellcaster who focuses on curses, enchantment, potions, subtle magics, and natural or folk magic. Right now, I don't feel the warlock covers this well as they are too focused on EB spam and I feel their isn't a subclass in wizard, sorcerer, druid or bard that grabs that feel either without ignoring or rewriting them.

2. Refluffing something is fine if you and your DM agree on it, but I wanted something a little more concrete as far as archetype support. Refluffing only gets you so far.

3. I've said repeatedly that I'm not in favor of a base class and I'm realistic that there won't every be one. I'm arguing for a subclass which WotC is far more likely to consider.

4. I consider the witch to be as iconic an archetype as samurai, assassin or cavalier; all concepts that CAN be done with other classes and lots of refluffing, but benefits from mechanical support.

There are a number of archetypes that could use some love in 5e besides witch, but WotC has opted for some rather obscure ideas like wild magic barbarian over adding some of the classics. Really makes me wonder...