D&D 5E So Where my Witches at?

[Lanefan]

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?

When I think of something like a class or race being rare in the world I also think of it being rare in play; that somehow the odds of being able to play one are quite limited.

Otherwise, for play purposes they're not rare at all, and what's the point of calling them rare if they're not?

 

[Guest 6801328]

When I think of something like a class or race being rare in the world I also think of it being rare in play; that somehow the odds of being able to play one are quite limited.

Otherwise, for play purposes they're not rare at all, and what's the point of calling them rare if they're not?

What's the point of "calling" something rare? If it is rare, players will rarely encounter them and come to their own conclusions.

And if the party comp is statistically improbable because there are several of that rare class in the party....so?

I really don't get what your objective is here.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My rules about politically correctness are different. Let's use as example of minority the mutants from marvel comics. If I say horrible things about a mutant supervillain this doesn't mean I hate all mutants. If I say Doctor Doom is the big bad guy this doesn't mean I hate all people from Lavterian country. If I report the bad actions by the member of a community this doesn't mean hate against the rest of the group.

The queen Bavmorda from Willow movie might be a good example of witch. Melissandre, from Game of Thrones would be a "cleric", but her behavior would very close to a "witch" from RPG.

It's curious because we can't safe about D&D witches to be totally arcane, divine or primal spellcasters.

The witches from the fantasy fiction, not only from TTRPGs but also TV shows, novels and videogames, haven't to be a true reflection of the witchcraft from the real world. D&D isn't to teach true occultism or esoterism.

* Why the witch covens should be tolerated or pursued by the D&D clery? There are living idols in Zakhara (al-Quadi), former deities who lost their worshipers. Could witches be the worshipers of forgotten idols?

Living idol

Living idols were animated, semi-intelligent statues of stone, presumably created to serve as foci of ancient religions in Zakhara.[1] Beyond this, they could be found in some areas of the Domains of Dread.[2] As of 1367 DR,[note 1] they were sometimes worshiped by small cults, who empowered the...

forgottenrealms.fandom.com

* Shaman is closer to become a future new class.

* Can the word "curandero" be used or can't we use foreign words because it's cultural apropiation?

* Who would want to play a PC witch? Somebody who wants a spellcaster with gothic fashion clothing and rebel personality.

 

[Lanefan]

What's the point of "calling" something rare? If it is rare, players will rarely encounter them and come to their own conclusions.

Even if there's only fifteen of something in the world, when there's five of them in the same room then that thing is not rare in that place. In the context of that room the thing is rather common, and people will become accustomed to seeing it.

If a PC creature type or a class is intended to be rare and special, to me that means maybe one such PC might show up during an entire long-run multi-party campaign. I see the Paladin in 1e as working like this: it's gated behind a high enough stat requirement to make it fairly rare, assuming people are rolling honestly, but if you do manage to get one it can really rock.

Sadly, when people are using point-buy or standard array then gating behind high stat requirements no longer really works. The only other means of gating it I can think of is some sort of randomizer: for a rare class, say, a player could either freely choose between some basic classes or roll on a table that has the benefit of having a wider range of options including the rare ones but the drawback of having to play what you roll no matter what. (this latter method is what I already do for PC race in my game - you can choose from a range of basics or roll on a much-wider-ranging table, but if you choose to roll you're stuck with what you get)

The whole rare-and-special element of something is rather lost if players can play it whenever they like and a single party can contain three or four of them at a time.

And if the party comp is statistically improbable because there are several of that rare class in the party....so?

I really don't get what your objective is here.

My objective is to make playing a "rare" class or race an uncommon occurrence.

 

[Lanefan]

* Shaman is closer to become a future new class.

That's another one that's been tried before - several times, if memory serves, particularly as an NPC class for opponents - and also hasn't ever really caught on.

* Who would want to play a PC witch? Somebody who wants a spellcaster with gothic fashion clothing and rebel personality.

I hardly think anyone needs a separate class to play that.

 

[Remathilis]

When I think of something like a class or race being rare in the world I also think of it being rare in play; that somehow the odds of being able to play one are quite limited.

Otherwise, for play purposes they're not rare at all, and what's the point of calling them rare if they're not?

My take for my games:

Common: Found effectively everywhere. Option always allowed without permission.
Uncommon: Found in most places, but occasionally not. Usually allowed without permission, but subject to the DM stating otherwise.
Race: Found only occasionally or only in certain places. DM permission is required to take, and quotas on how many can be chosen might be in effect.

Common things include humans, dwarves, elves, halflings, fighters, clerics, rogues, and wizards.
Uncommon things include dragonborn, gnomes, half-orcs, tieflings, bards, rangers, druids, and warlocks.
Rare things include drow, aasimar, monstrous races, tritons, artificers, certain subclasses like samurai or gunslinger.

However, the groups are fluid and things may change from setting to setting, game to game. Eberron has goblinoids as uncommon, while Faerun has goblinoids are rare PC choices. Occasionally, there is also Very Rare, which is unique to a certain group or even individual and requires strict DM oversight (custom lineage is an example, as would a gunslinger in Eberron). Those don't get advertised; they are strictly for people who ask for options not usually on the table.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Sam: I want to play a Halfling, too.
DM: You can’t. Frodo already chose Halfling, and Halfling adventurers are rare. There’s only been one in over a century.
Merry and Pippin: Ummm....

 

[steeldragons]

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.

Just a note on this whole "gating" thing...

I have worked this out with my homebrew game/campaign setting with ability score requirements. It is quite simple, really.

The classes are grouped into categories: Warriors, Mystics, Rogues, Wizards.
"Base/default" classes have their single Primary Ability, a la the original game: Warriors/the Fighter: Strength, Mystics/the Cleric: Wisdom, Rogues/the Thief: Dexterity, Wizards/the Mage: Intelligence.

"Specialist" classes, predominantly ye olde school (and now, again, in 5e) "sub-classes," have a secondary ability and minimum thresholds on both they must meet. Cavaliers must have a decent Strength + Charisma. Illusionists must have a decent Intelligence + Dexterity. ...and so on.

Then, what I call "League" classes (I'm still not 100% on the name, but it's the best I've come up with thus far). To qualify as a League class, the class must:

1. Have its own specific Archetype of a class in one of the four core categories.
2. They have a specific ability or different mechanic than the default and specialist classes use.
3. and (generally) there is a second layer of character option (more akin to 5e's style of "subclasses," or Pathfinder's style of "archetype") that makes them different enough to warrant their own class separate and apart -not 'under"- the default class.

League classes have a Tertiary ability score with minimum threshold they must meet and is, indeed, entirely intended to make these classes the most unusual and rarely encountered types of characters. These are classes that form a "league of their own," hence "League classes."

Ex. League class: Barbarian. 1)They are a cultural archetype of Warriors for specific human peoples, totemic clans of a particular region in my world. 2) Of course, all characters of the Barbarian class have the "Berserker Rage" mechanic/feature...which other warriors, particularly the default, do not have. 3) The Barbarian character, at creation, must choose their Clan: Lion, Stag, Bear, etc.... This clan dictates proficiency with a [exotic] clan weapon, certain non-combat skills, certain features as the barbarian advances, AND their Tertiary Ability. So, to be a Barbarian, you must have a Primary Strength score (it is a Warrior class) higher than the average Fighter or other specialist subclasses thereof, a Secondary minimum score in Constitution, and a Tertiary minimum score (the lowest threshold) determined by the player's choice of clan/totem. (Half-elves or half-orcs of this tribal heritage, raised in a clan, may also be the Barbarian class)

Maybe not he best example, since there is a racial threshold as well, but other league classes allow more species options/are more open (if not universal).

BUT, point being, a Witch's "rarity" could easily be "gated" by adding a secondary and/or tertiary ability score to qualify at character creation.

My own homebrewed Witch ["league"] class uses Intelligence (as an Arcane magic wielder, they are in the Wizard class group), Charisma (force of will and strength of personality is largely important, as well as allowing certain class features to be based on or augmented by Charisma bonus), and Constitution (there is a degree of "toughness" and ability to "endure" punishment - which may be physical or cause physical damage, inherent to certain types of magic-use). [EDIT: Nope. I lied. Just looked it up and the tertiary ability is determined by the choice of Coven] They have 'Crafts" and "Incantations" as mechanics features that other Wizard types do not have. And must choose their "Coven" at character creation which will determine, among other features, a bonus spell/magic list of Nature Magic, Divine Magic, or more Occult/Supernatural powers (there are several other covens I have thought up, but for ease of entry, and because I run heroic games, I basically limit the initial player to three Covens that cover broad witchy archetypes, fit into the world, and provide the power and tools that would be useful for a life of adventure.

 

[Remathilis]

Sam: I want to play a Halfling, too.
DM: You can’t. Frodo already chose Halfling, and Halfling adventurers are rare. There’s only been one in over a century.
Merry and Pippin: Ummm....

So replace that with aarakroca, and it makes a touch more sense.

 

[Alzrius]

So replace that with aarakroca, and it makes a touch more sense.

Or a paladin, if you make it class-based instead of race-based.

Mark: I'm playing a paladin, a holy warrior the likes of which have been unseen for generations, whose coming was foretold to mark the fall of the demon king-
Simon: Oh, actually I'm playing a paladin too. I was born with the God of Justice's holy symbol as my birthmark, and was trained by clerics since birth to put an end to the lich lord-
Elaine: Wait, my character is a paladin who traveled here from a distant land after receiving a vision from her god that her blade would be needed to stop the arrival of the Old Ones-
Jim and Steve: Hey, we're playing paladins too! Destined holy warriors, represent!
Beth: My character's a bard, but according to what I got on the rumor tables, a group of paladins just passed through here last week.