Standard Witch?

[JoeGKushner]

Many adventures, modules, and settings use the witch. It's a standard sterotype of the lone woman, young or old, in the woods.

Would any publisher consider using an OGC Witch for their products so that there is some uniformity as to what a Witch actually means?

I think there are three now. One from Mongoose, Green Ronin and Mystic Eye Games.

This is part of the problem with having general broad names for classes in that a witch to one person may mean mage, but a witch to another may mean adapt, and a witch to a third may mean one of the above core classes.

 

[CCamfield]

As if those weren't bad enough, I think one could also make something of an argument for the sympathetic magic-user (whatever the class is called; I forget) in Occult Lore being very much like a witch. They need things associated with people (a lock of hair, or the tie from their sword) to cast spells. That's lot like the way I'd expect witches' magic to work.

And then there's the witch stuff in the DMG as well.

 

[Geoff Watson]

The problem with a 'standard' Witch is that Witch means different things to different people. Same problem as the Ninja.

Som people may thing of witches to be the black-clad broomstick riding hag like Brunhilda, or some type New Age Pagan (or old traditonal pagan), or Sabrina the Teenage Witch, or several other archetypes.

Geoff.

 

[Mystic Eye]

He Joe, I think there are even more witch class and books on Witches out their now than you mentioned.

What we did was this. We put the Witch class in our world setting book. We explained what a witch is "in our world" and then wrote the class up generically enough so it could be used in other games as is or tweaked to what you need.

We are pretty clear within our setting how witches are viewed in the various nations (and the church united) and what it is to be a witch (followers of elder "pagan" gods with strong ties to nature).

That being said, the write-up for the witch class itself leaves most of this out so it can be used elsewhere.

So, that is how we chose to deal with the issue of what a witch means to us. In our world, it is very clear, if you pull it out of our world the material is there for you but you decide how they are viewed and what a "witch" is.

 

[der_kluge]

Speaking of witches, anyone have any word on the netbook of witches?

 

[Gez]

And there's also the "Do-It-Yourself" witch class in the DMG (basically, same as a sorcerer, but casting divine spells (like druids) and having an alternate spell list IIRC).

 

[maransreth]

Netbook of Witches and Warlocks

die_kluge,
The Netbook is still going, just going through editting at the moment before it is released.

 

[Monte At Home]

I don't understand how having a bunch of different witches is a problem. It's like being offered six different flavors of ice cream rather than just being given vanilla. Even if you like vanilla, why is it a problem that others can choose something else?

Even better, you can mix scoops of different ice creams, or put them in a blender and make your own shake.

OK, enough with the goofy analogy, but the point remains. Lots of choices, I don't think, should never present a problem. For years, one company gave D&D players one choice (sometimes with an option or two) and said "take it or leave it." Now other people get the chance to provide new choices. That's the real beauty of OGL.

That said, I do understand the larger, general sentiment. For years, TSR said "my way or the highway--use official products or you're not playing the game right." It's going to take us all a while to get that attitude out of our systems, I think.

 

[Crothian]

Lots of choices, I don't think, should never present a problem.

I totally agree with this. I perfer a thousand options to one. Also, it keeps the players guessing because they won't know which whitch you're using.