How do Witches fit in?

[RickAllison]

Somewhat simple question, but how does the traditional concept of a "witch" (gender-neutral, sort of like on Charmed) fit in with the 5e concepts of the divisions of magic-users, or is it something entirely different? I might edit these requirements and descriptions as other posters or I think of them.

Witch Requirements:

Uses both potion-based and cast magic

Has a "Book of Shadows", a time containing learned knowledge and spells

May have a special "theme" for their go-to powers (though that is likely a fluff limitation like how a cryomancer picks spells about freezing things even though it isn't required).

My first instinct is a wizard (Book of Shadows) and the Artificer from UA gives potions as well, but there might be other alternatives I haven't thought of.

Other casters' descriptions:

Wizard: Uses intelligence, learns how to tap into other sources of power to improve abilities. Seems to run a lot of similarities with witches based on my limited knowledge.

Sorcerer: Has great reserves of internal magical power, learns to increase that inner strength. Runs a lot like how the Charmed witches do, with a variety of low-power but at-will abilities while you have some more limited abilities that you are flexible with.

Warlock: Taps into the power from a greater being. Unless you use something like a Willow-esque witch who borrows the power of demons and lesser gods, probably doesn't fit.

Cleric: Devoted follower of a certain god, or possibly a group of lesser god-like entities who equal the power of a full god. This might also work for a Willow-esque witch calling on various pseudo-gods like Hecate. Again, not like the Charmed witches.

Bard: Performance-based, not really any kind of witches, unless you are trying to do a dancing one. Maybe, but not a usual thing. The one that doesn't really fit at all.

[Naanomi]

'Charmed' witches specifically have to be born with the power, so I'd say sorcerer... many of which take the ritual casting feat.

However I think any of the casting classes can be used to represent a witch (including druid, which wasn't on your list); with all except Bard being common across media; as do some monsters (Hags specifically)

[Reaver25]

I would think of a mix between Sorc/Wiz. It seems in a lot of content that witches have an innate ability and spells that they need to research. It makes sense that an Artificer and a Sorc combo would work. Or, you could even use a Warlock for a Witch.

[NecroDancer]

Maybe more of a fey warlock 3/wild magic sorcerer X. 3 levels of warlock gives you the tome of shadows and wild magic sorcerers could represent "old and untamed" power of magic.

[Gastronomie]

I don't know "Charmed". When I hear the word "Witch", I more or less imagine the cackling hag who made a contract with a devil and engages in highly forum-inappropriate rituals, then eventually get found by the church and getburned at the stake. In which I think Warlocks are thematically appropriate.

But that's the "Black Witch". If it's the "White Witch", or the "Witch Doctor", perhaps Druids will be more like them.

Or you can always homebrew to get a specific "feel".

[RickAllison]

'Charmed' witches specifically have to be born with the power, so I'd say sorcerer... many of which take the ritual casting feat.

However I think any of the casting classes can be used to represent a witch (including druid, which wasn't on your list); with all except Bard being common across media; as do some monsters (Hags specifically)

How could I forget Druids!


I would think of a mix between Sorc/Wiz. It seems in a lot of content that witches have an innate ability and spells that they need to research. It makes sense that an Artificer and a Sorc combo would work. Or, you could even use a Warlock for a Witch.

I could see that :smallsmile:


Maybe more of a fey warlock 3/wild magic sorcerer X. 3 levels of warlock gives you the tome of shadows and wild magic sorcerers could represent "old and untamed" power of magic.

I forgot about the Pact of the Tome, which would fit for a Book of Shadows if one doesn't want to be Int-focused.

[Specter]

I'd say Warlock with Alchemist, but notice that Bards don't need to perform anything to do magic, they just know the words of creation and take magic from there.

[RickAllison]

I'd say Warlock with Alchemist, but notice that Bards don't need to perform anything to do magic, they just know the words of creation and take magic from there.

Actually Bards are tied to performance, it is baked into their stuff (though it shows in different ways). They don't need to be playing an instrument necessarily, but it is entirely about expressing themselves and, by expressing themselves, altering reality.

That expression doesn't have to be musical. Dance, art, oratory, crochet, all of those are forms of expression that could be used by a Bard. It is just the fluff and can be changed, but doing so doesn't really help with analyzing how a style of magic is captured within 5e defaults.

[Sigreid]

For Salem style witch - Warlock Pact of Tome

For Wicca style witch - Circle of the land druid.

[JackOfAllBuilds]

The charmed ones have to rhyme to make spells, other than some of their innate magical gifts

Total sorc/bard. Performance poetry! Rhyme those spells

[Axorfett12]

Speaking of homebrew, I just had a player roll up a character using the Witch base class from the Middle Finger of a Vecna. The character hasn't yet seen play yet but the class seems balanced and fun. It has a debuffing playstyle, and is very unique. Might be what you are looking for.

The problem I realize as I type this is that the Witch is Patron restricted. Curses.

Hrmm... A V. Human Fey Tome-lock multiclassed with Land Druid (Swamp) ought to do it. Alchemist feat for the potion flavor. Make sure you pick up find familiar for your book of shadows. A tad unusual with the stat placement, as you'll be a low dex light armored characrer, but that's what barkskin is for.

[NNescio]

Somewhat simple question, but how does the traditional concept of a "witch" (gender-neutral, sort of like on Charmed) fit in with the 5e concepts of the divisions of magic-users, or is it something entirely different? I might edit these requirements and descriptions as other posters or I think of them.

Witch Requirements:

Uses both potion-based and cast magic

Has a "Book of Shadows", a time containing learned knowledge and spells

May have a special "theme" for their go-to powers (though that is likely a fluff limitation like how a cryomancer picks spells about freezing things even though it isn't required).

My first instinct is a wizard (Book of Shadows) and the Artificer from UA gives potions as well, but there might be other alternatives I haven't thought of.

Other casters' descriptions:

Wizard: Uses intelligence, learns how to tap into other sources of power to improve abilities. Seems to run a lot of similarities with witches based on my limited knowledge.

Sorcerer: Has great reserves of internal magical power, learns to increase that inner strength. Runs a lot like how the Charmed witches do, with a variety of low-power but at-will abilities while you have some more limited abilities that you are flexible with.

Warlock: Taps into the power from a greater being. Unless you use something like a Willow-esque witch who borrows the power of demons and lesser gods, probably doesn't fit.

Cleric: Devoted follower of a certain god, or possibly a group of lesser god-like entities who equal the power of a full god. This might also work for a Willow-esque witch calling on various pseudo-gods like Hecate. Again, not like the Charmed witches.

Bard: Performance-based, not really any kind of witches, unless you are trying to do a dancing one. Maybe, but not a usual thing. The one that doesn't really fit at all.

Feylock with Pact of the Tome, done. They even get a Book of Shadows. Pick the appropriate backgrounds to get both herbalist and alchemist kit proficiency if you really want to make potions.

Plus, Neena the First Witch is probably best modeled as some sort of archfey anyway post-ascension.

[JellyPooga]

One Witch build I theorised was a Land (Swamp) Druid 8/ArchFey Tome Pact Warlock 12, focused on Enchantments, Illusions and Curses.

Druid 8 is mainly to get flying Wild Shapes, but that can be ratchetted back for a more optimised build, given that Polymorph will do the job better (albeit less frequently).

[Asmotherion]

Somewhat simple question, but how does the traditional concept of a "witch" (gender-neutral, sort of like on Charmed) fit in with the 5e concepts of the divisions of magic-users, or is it something entirely different? I might edit these requirements and descriptions as other posters or I think of them.

Witch Requirements:

Uses both potion-based and cast magic

Has a "Book of Shadows", a time containing learned knowledge and spells

May have a special "theme" for their go-to powers (though that is likely a fluff limitation like how a cryomancer picks spells about freezing things even though it isn't required).

My first instinct is a wizard (Book of Shadows) and the Artificer from UA gives potions as well, but there might be other alternatives I haven't thought of.

Other casters' descriptions:

Wizard: Uses intelligence, learns how to tap into other sources of power to improve abilities. Seems to run a lot of similarities with witches based on my limited knowledge.

Sorcerer: Has great reserves of internal magical power, learns to increase that inner strength. Runs a lot like how the Charmed witches do, with a variety of low-power but at-will abilities while you have some more limited abilities that you are flexible with.

Warlock: Taps into the power from a greater being. Unless you use something like a Willow-esque witch who borrows the power of demons and lesser gods, probably doesn't fit.

Cleric: Devoted follower of a certain god, or possibly a group of lesser god-like entities who equal the power of a full god. This might also work for a Willow-esque witch calling on various pseudo-gods like Hecate. Again, not like the Charmed witches.

Bard: Performance-based, not really any kind of witches, unless you are trying to do a dancing one. Maybe, but not a usual thing. The one that doesn't really fit at all.

I think Sorcerer given they are born with their powers, and, if I remember correctly, can have more than one at will ability. Their at-will abilities can be interpreted as cantrips (although admitedly broken ones), and they then have some limited ability to cast spells, presumably using spell slots. As mentioned, they have the ritual caster feat.

An other take at this could be warlock. In older descriptions of warlock, the warlock was potentially a "person born with inate arcane power, that just happens to manifest differently than for a sorcerer". He then has limited spell slots and depending on his level, his spells become more powerfull (does not have a choice in the matter). I remember a whole lot of episodes recycling the theme of "I wanted to do this minor change with a spell, but I ended up making a huge thing by accident, because of my high level of power". They also have a book of shadows directly connected to their powers rather than merelly a textbook to write down spells, as in the case of a wizard. It is very difficult to steal their book of shadows, and when it is done, it downs their powers.

The less fitting of them in my oppinion would be the Wizard. They don't have access to a lot of spells, and the Book of shadows is mostly consisted of Demon Profiles, and notes on how to venquish them... sometimes even summon them. The spells however are limited and ussualy appear randomly in the book. In rare cases were they "create a spell", it could be interpreted as "finding the right parameters for a specific demon, for a spell we already have used many times" (such as venquishing spells/potions).

Leo and other Elders would be divine casters... clerics and paladins of a sort who use divine magic.

[RickAllison]

I think Sorcerer given they are born with their powers, and, if I remember correctly, can have more than one at will ability. Their at-will abilities can be interpreted as cantrips (although admitedly broken ones), and they then have some limited ability to cast spells, presumably using spell slots. As mentioned, they have the ritual caster feat.

An other take at this could be warlock. In older descriptions of warlock, the warlock was potentially a "person born with inate arcane power, that just happens to manifest differently than for a sorcerer". He then has limited spell slots and depending on his level, his spells become more powerfull (does not have a choice in the matter). I remember a whole lot of episodes recycling the theme of "I wanted to do this minor change with a spell, but I ended up making a huge thing by accident, because of my high level of power". They also have a book of shadows directly connected to their powers rather than merelly a textbook to write down spells, as in the case of a wizard. It is very difficult to steal their book of shadows, and when it is done, it downs their powers.

The less fitting of them in my oppinion would be the Wizard. They don't have access to a lot of spells, and the Book of shadows is mostly consisted of Demon Profiles, and notes on how to venquish them... sometimes even summon them. The spells however are limited and ussualy appear randomly in the book. In rare cases were they "create a spell", it could be interpreted as "finding the right parameters for a specific demon, for a spell we already have used many times" (such as venquishing spells/potions).

Leo and other Elders would be divine casters... clerics and paladins of a sort who use divine magic.

See, everything about it just makes me want to run a Charmed campaign...

[Asmotherion]

See, everything about it just makes me want to run a Charmed campaign...

My best bet about the book of shadows, if you do, is to make it work as an artifact... Potentially as a re-fluffed Book of The Still Tonge, with a couple of changes to the mechanics...

[smcmike]

This is interesting, because it seems that there are very different conceptions of "witch."

For example, I had never heard of a book of shadows. I guess that's a Wicca thing? Is it in Charmed? My conception of a witch doesn't necessarily use a book, and isn't necessarily even literate - they are usually country folk.

Things I associate with witches:

- consorts with the devil OR nature-based powers, either Salem or Granny Weatherwax of Discworld
- changes into animals - in Salem, thewitches were always turning into black dogs or cats or whatever.
- flies (or travels quickly by night by some other means) - broom optional but encouraged
- familiars - a connection with either the devil or with nature, every witch should have a familiar
- double double toil and trouble - Shakespeare says they have to have a cauldron and make potions, and I'm not arguing with Will.
- curses. A witch's magic should be subtle. Enchantment, not evocation.

Overal, Warlock or Druid fit most closely.

[Ninja_Prawn]

My vote is for wizard! I even homebrewed a Witch Arcane Tradition here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/s3crmpfdbc5u5x5/Fey%20Creatures%20Complete.pdf?dl=0) (page 46). Partly it's because Find Familiar is wizards-only in D&D, partly it's a holdover from 4e, partly it's because the mechanics (spellbook, ritual casting) seem to fit. There's also the linguistic tie of 'witches and wizards', which usually makes a gender-based distinction (thus meaning witches and wizards are the same thing if you make everything gender-neutral). And I think Int works as a casting stat because witches have to be crafty so they can trick people into their lairs, etc.

[smcmike]

Wizard works, but I'd always heard that a male witch was a warlock

[arrowed]

Wizard works, but I'd always heard that a male witch was a warlock

And then there are enchantresses, who are no better than they should be. :smallwink: Sorry, can't resist a good Discworld quote.
I personally place witches somewhere between druid, wizard and warlock, since they have strong ties to the idea of rituals and nature magic. However, like the way the term sorcerer means many different things outside D&D, the term witch has so many different meanings you could justify most of the spellcasting classes as one form of witch or another.

[RickAllison]

Wizard works, but I'd always heard that a male witch was a warlock

Not necessarily. Wicca, one of the sources of the term "witch" and a term brought forth for its modern use, is actually the masculine form of the word. Wicce is the feminine. Historically, it was also used in a gender-neutral way, even into the last few centuries. The leaning toward a strictly feminine usage seems to be more of a modern construction.

[Socratov]

I'd say Warlock with Alchemist, but notice that Bards don't need to perform anything to do magic, they just know the words of creation and take magic from there.

Besides, there are many fantasy tropes where song or music carry magical significane (actually quite a fun reference to the importance of songa and poetry to cultures that don't have a written tradition), some are like the pied piper, but on the opther hand, some stories are turnid into musicals where they use the very literal power of song to explain concepts and sotrylines. And that's just song and poetry (remember just about any spell when reading in fairy tales, don't they always share a certain rhyming scheme?). Let's talk aobu the cultural significne of dance. Form medicine men, circle dances, rythmic drums beating to bring people to a trance. I'd say that bards are excellent candidates for traditional witches. Maybe a bit more recent and a deconstruction of the traditional black with trope, I'd consider just about any Discworld with to be a bard, if only because psychology (or headology) is such a great part of it (and mards make excellent mindbenders). They also remark on the improtance of making something seem as something else to give it actual meaning.

[smcmike]

Not necessarily. Wicca, one of the sources of the term "witch" and a term brought forth for its modern use, is actually the masculine form of the word. Wicce is the feminine. Historically, it was also used in a gender-neutral way, even into the last few centuries. The leaning toward a strictly feminine usage seems to be more of a modern construction.

Ok, but in modern standard usage, one common definition of "warlock" is "male witch."

[Mirakk]

Ok, but in modern standard usage, one common definition of "warlock" is "male witch."

Maybe, but not for people who practice the craft. Warlock means oath breaker and is considered a serious accusation in Wicca. It usually applies to someone removed from a coven for inappropriate magical behavior.

[smcmike]

Maybe, but not for people who practice the craft. Warlock means oath breaker and is considered a serious accusation in Wicca. It usually applies to someone removed from a coven for inappropriate magical behavior.

I have no background on the craft. Like I said, one of the things that is interesting about this thread is how different people take the core concept. Wicca is very low on my personal list of inspirations.

[Naanomi]

The dictionary definition of warlock includes 'a male practitioner of witchcraft' as its first definition; and it is definitely the common usage. However it's etymology is through 'traitor of covenants' and has even closer ties to 'devil worship' historically than witch does.

Likewise the dictionary (and popular) definition of witch is gendered as well, 'a female practitioner of magic, often malignant' (in old English Wicca was the masculine form, wicce the feminine; wicche being the genderless collective form). The most popular entomology ties it to 'divination' via old English 'wigle', though there are other well respected possibilities

Modern practitioners of Wicca (and other traditions) have adopted these terms in various forms, but this modern use isn't a continuation or revival of use of old terms as much as it is a repurposing or appropriated (in the same way I call myself an 'Indian' in some contexts knowing that the entomology of that term has no historical connection to my actual ancestory)

[MrStabby]

Warlock is kind of tempting but for a broad base I think Lore Bard is best.

You get healing, curses, buffs, enchantmets and the ability to flesh out any missing spells through magical secrets.

You can dip another class if needed to pull in the more diabolical aspects.

[Socratov]

Warlock is kind of tempting but for a broad base I think Lore Bard is best.

You get healing, curses, buffs, enchantmets and the ability to flesh out any missing spells through magical secrets.

You can dip another class if needed to pull in the more diabolical aspects.

as I mentioned before, you ahve the added benefit of getting expertise in insight and HeadologyPersuasion

[SillyPopeNachos]

Likely a warlock custom pact. Pact of the Cauldron would give proficiency in alchemist's tools, and and maybe add an eldritch invocation exclusive to this pact granting expertise in such. Obviously to craft potions of x spell would require an arcana check (maybe 10 + the spell level).

Edit: upon re-reading some of the other excellent takes on it in this thread, maybe an added list of additional spells from the wizard and druid lists.

[Sir cryosin]

The charmed girls are wizards. phoebe is a divination wizard, Piper is a mix of evocation, enchantment hybrid. Paige is more of a sorcerer. They all have prof with alchemist tool and herbalism kit.

[Christian]

However, like the way the term sorcerer means many different things outside D&D, the term witch has so many different meanings you could justify most of the spellcasting classes as one form of witch or another.

So really, the correct response to the OP's question is to ask another question:

Which witch?

:smallcool:

[Millstone85]

I could see the Charmed Ones as clerics of the arcana domain. They are prophesied champions of the good side of magic, destined to protect innocents against the forces of evil. Their powers can go haywire when used wrongfully and there is also the possibility of a fall-from-grace styled transformation into an evil witch or warlock. Other witches in the show are like this too, albeit in a less awesome fashion than the Charmed Ones.
Or at least that was the original pitch. You can call me a bitter former fan. The sisters never permanently got the dark side makeover, but seasons of bad writing have, in my opinion, turned them into villain protagonists.

Witches on the Discworld now, those are druids. It is rare for one to shapeshift but they do a lot of "borrowing", something similar to "warging" in A Song of Ice and Fire. Either way, it is meaningful for them to see the world through the eyes of a beast. They also have a connection to the land and consider themselves the first line of defense against otherworldly invasions. Most witches are found in rural communities, with the idea of an urban witch being met with disbelief.

Without such inspiration, I would expect a 5e D&D witch to be a warlock whose patron is a hag. This opens both the fey and fiendish options. Then choose Pact of the Tome, complete with Book of Ancient Secrets and the find familiar ritual.

[Grey Watcher]

I don't know "Charmed". When I hear the word "Witch", I more or less imagine the cackling hag who made a contract with a devil and engages in highly forum-inappropriate rituals, then eventually get found by the church and getburned at the stake. In which I think Warlocks are thematically appropriate.

This is pretty much my response. Generally, unless I'm running a system where there's a specific class called a Witch (ie Pathfinder), I just treat the word witch as an in-universe term synonym for magic user. Probably a pejorative one, at that. So, a Druid who has been harassing farmers in an effort to get them to stop encroaching on the forest he protects might be referred to by said farmers as the "Witch of the Woods". A haughty, abusive, and generally non-OSHA compliant Sorceress who has a ascended to a throne might be termed a Witch Queen. The college of wizards that tolerates necromancers and thus has earned the ire of the local Crazy Dogmatic Paladins might be branded as a (very large) coven of witches. And so forth.

Or maybe instead (or in addition to), "witch" refers to something that isn't even (demi-)human. Maybe a witch a synonym for hag (as in the ones in the Monster Manual), or maybe witches are hags that have some extra power and/or authority (much like an archfey is much more than a faerie who rules a kingdom).

So yes, until Wizards decides to release a class, sub-class, or prestige class that uses the term witch, it basically means whatever you and the DM agree it means in your particular setting.

[Socratov]

snip

Witches on the Discworld now, those are druids. It is rare for one to shapeshift but they do a lot of "borrowing", something similar to "warging" in A Song of Ice and Fire. Either way, it is meaningful for them to see the world through the eyes of a beast. They also have a connection to the land and consider themselves the first line of defense against otherworldly invasions. Most witches are found in rural communities, with the idea of an urban witch being met with disbelief.

snip

while I understand your angle, I consider them lore bards: they get to steal the Beast Sense spell, but otherwise specialize in bending the minds of their subjects and convincing their targets into doing what they want. Also the fact that they can effectively boost others into doing better or cull the opposition by using headology on them (cutting words) makes for a very convincing discworld witch in the form of a lore bard. The all have perform (acting) to make sure they are able to pretend they are what people expect them to be (the whole boffo thing) and they have Perform (oratory) to make sure they can damn well argue a square to be a circle in public (and thus shaping a square into a circle in the process). The fact that they need to have knowledge of nature (herbal remedies, animals), insight, deception, performances, knowledge history, medicine, persuasion, investigation, and a plethora of other things they will enjoy the lore bard's skills and expertises.

[RickAllison]

So it appears that the consensus is that D&D does not really have a "Witch" standpoint and that the witches from Charmed could be made in numerous ways (Warlocks ironically, Wizards, clerics, sorcerers, etc.). A Witch in D&D seems to be about the defined level of a Mage, a stand-in for any kind of caster.

[atlas_hugged]

Old School Witches, who make a contract with the Devil are clearly warlocks. Modern interpretations, like Harry Potter, Charmed, Sabrina, etc, tend to have a bloodline element to them, so you're born with the powers.

If you think of Wiccanism as modern witch craft (it's closer to modern paganism, imo, but pagans were probably heavily associated with witchcraft back in the day), then the magic of witch craft is just a series of rituals that anyone with the appropriate willpower can accomplish. (I am glossing over a whole bunch of other wiccan views of magic).

I think Pact of the Tome or Chain warlocks best represent the concept of Witch.

[smcmike]

So it appears that the consensus is that D&D does not really have a "Witch" standpoint and that the witches from Charmed could be made in numerous ways (Warlocks ironically, Wizards, clerics, sorcerers, etc.). A Witch in D&D seems to be about the defined level of a Mage, a stand-in for any kind of caster.

I would say the consensus is that "witch" is not a unitary concept.

D&D 5e has a very good representation of one sort of witch, and it's a fiend warlock.

[EvilAnagram]

I think we really need to look at the original question: How do Witches fit in?

Now, naturally opinions will be split on this, but I prefer the tripple-double folding method when fitting my witches in storage. Now, I know some people prefer the double-double or even the ~ shudder ~ rolling method, but I believe the triple-double simply allows for the most witches per cubic inch.

[Socratov]

I think we really need to look at the original question: How do Witches fit in?

Now, naturally opinions will be split on this, but I prefer the tripple-double folding method when fitting my witches in storage. Now, I know some people prefer the double-double or even the ~ shudder ~ rolling method, but I believe the triple-double simply allows for the most witches per cubic inch.

You know, for storage it's best to reduce them to their least voluminous form, so obviously to reduce them to powerder and then storing in sherical shapes makes for the least sotrage space used.

[MrStabby]

I think we really need to look at the original question: How do Witches fit in?

Now, naturally opinions will be split on this, but I prefer the tripple-double folding method when fitting my witches in storage. Now, I know some people prefer the double-double or even the ~ shudder ~ rolling method, but I believe the triple-double simply allows for the most witches per cubic inch.

Have you tried blending them?

[smcmike]

For reducing a witch, the best option is to melt her. The only trick is capturing the drippings.

[EvilAnagram]

Have you tried blending them?

The powdering and blending methods are fine until you need to retrieve your witch.

[Naanomi]

Be careful in attempting to dehydrate your witches, especially wicked ones; they may melt when water is applied

[Joe the Rat]

Aw, here I had something to contribute, and it went silly already.

Herbalist kit and alchemist tools should cover all of your consumable needs - you just need to learn formulas. If you really want to play up the alchemy/sympathy aspect, use the component pouch for your spells. That can be everything from pulling random animal parts as part of your casting, to having prepared "vanquishing potion" style reagents premade.

You need a familiar. Wizard/Warlock has the leg up here, but anyone can grab Magic Adept or Ritual Caster.

The one thing you really need is a circle/coven shared ritual casting mechanic.

---

Personally, I find witches stack like cord-wood as-is. Compressing them further requires a binder.

[DizzyWood]

I love it when a tread goes off the rails like this lol. It is still ON topic but not.

[MrStabby]

Be careful in attempting to dehydrate your witches, especially wicked ones; they may melt when water is applied

If your witch doesn't fit, you can give her cocaine.

[DizzyWood]

All of this witch talk has me wanting to play one. Maybe a prestige class that could slot over one of the magic users my thoughts are bard or warlock. It would need to have several paths to accommodate peoples different ideas of what a witch is. Sure you could come up with a witch class of its own but that seems unnecessary, so much of what the witch is already is present in the game even without multi classing.
Has anyone seen any home brew like that?

[Socratov]

The powering and blending methods are fine until you need to retrieve your witch.

just rehydrate them like you would make instant ramen.

[MrStabby]

All of this witch talk has me wanting to play one. Maybe a prestige class that could slot over one of the magic users my thoughts are bard or warlock. It would need to have several paths to accommodate peoples different ideas of what a witch is. Sure you could come up with a witch class of its own but that seems unnecessary, so much of what the witch is already is present in the game even without multi classing.
Has anyone seen any home brew like that?

I did this for the Granny weatherwax style witch. Lore bard with a generous DM allowing me to swap spells for iconic ones (find familiar mainly).

Frankly I think you can fit it in as an archetype for the bard - expanded spell list like a cleric domain and a few class features. Or a warlock.

Frankly the easiest thing to do might be to just build a list of spells that should be available to a witch and let players take it with any casting class in place of the normal spell list.

[DizzyWood]

OH god!!!! DO NOT google witches in a box at work.... I might be fired now. All to make a joke.

[MrStabby]

OH god!!!! DO NOT google witches in a box at work.... I might be fired now. All to make a joke.

Tried that - just a little bit more sad than anything else. :smallfrown:

[smcmike]

OH god!!!! DO NOT google witches in a box at work.... I might be fired now. All to make a joke.

Huh. All I got was wooden boxes full of witchcraft paraphernalia.

[Socratov]

Tried that - just a little bit more sad than anything else. :smallfrown:

I thought it was hardly worth the effort and a little bit sad to be honest.

[Baptor]

The charmed girls are wizards. phoebe is a divination wizard, Piper is a mix of evocation, enchantment hybrid. Paige is more of a sorcerer. They all have prof with alchemist tool and herbalism kit.

Um, you just said they are all wizards, then said one was a sorcerer. I don't think it means what you think it means. ;)

But in all seriousness, the Halloween "classic" witch is either a hag (think Wizard of Oz) or a warlock (think Salem). Either a supernatural creature that is not nor never was human or a human who has made a deal with the devil for magic powers. Seriously when I look at the splash page for Warlock in the PHB my first thought is "witch." (Not that I don't love playing them, thanks to Erin Evans.)

The charmed girls are sorcerers. Born with the power and learn through training/accident/trial-and-error. The Book is an artifact and not part of their class.

To me it's pretty easy. But YMMV.

[RickAllison]

Um, you just said they are all wizards, then said one was a sorcerer. I don't think it means what you think it means. ;)

But in all seriousness, the Halloween "classic" witch is either a hag (think Wizard of Oz) or a warlock (think Salem). Either a supernatural creature that is not nor never was human or a human who has made a deal with the devil for magic powers. Seriously when I look at the splash page for Warlock in the PHB my first thought is "witch." (Not that I don't love playing them, thanks to Erin Evans.)

The charmed girls are sorcerers. Born with the power and learn through training/accident/trial-and-error. The Book is an artifact and not part of their class.

To me it's pretty easy. But YMMV.

It becomes less clear-cut when you consider that half of their powers are tied to potions and (until later seasons) the rest but their cantrips are from the book. The only powers that they use without actually learning them are telekinesis/teleporting, freezing/exploding, and precognition/levitation.

[DizzyWood]

Huh. All I got was wooden boxes full of witchcraft paraphernalia.

Well after about three rows I got hardcore girl on girl action. And as a gay man that was rather shocking to me! Also explained to my boss what happened and he was cool with it. Turns out we pay for professional version of chrome that uses broader search parameters. So I guess this happens all of the time.

[Baptor]

It becomes less clear-cut when you consider that half of their powers are tied to potions and (until later seasons) the rest but their cantrips are from the book. The only powers that they use without actually learning them are telekinesis/teleporting, freezing/exploding, and precognition/levitation.

You have a point, and I happily concede that point, but here are some more points to consider.

1. Very few stories/movies fit easily into D&D mechanics. You're going to have to shoehorn some stuff in and handwaive the rest. It's just how this works.

2. I could see the potions as spell components. Sorcerers use those.

3. The Book could impart powers to the users, like the Tome of Infinite Spells. The reason I don't think the Book is part of their class is because it would be like three Beastmaster Rangers sharing the same animal companion. If they each had their own book, sure. Also, many previous sisters have used this same Book. It's clearly and heirloom/legacy item IMHO.

4. You have a point about the inherited powers. I could handwaive this as Sorcerers have a small and limited list of spells to choose from, but I will instead speculate on what else this could be. They could be a non-traditional form of Warlock: maybe a pact was made centuries ago and the females inherit it? The sisters themselves make no pacts (or do they? do they make a vow with the book at some point? I can't remember.) and seem to oppose spellcasters who make pacts of that sort.

Ultimately though I'm sticking with sorcerer because the main thing that separates the mage classes RP wise is origins. Wizards get the power through study and hard work. Warlocks get it through pacts and bargains with other beings. Sorcerers get it from an inherited bloodline, and this is the origin story of the Charmed sisters.

For me, its the origin story, not the mechanics, that determine the class.

[Sabeta]

Maybe, but not for people who practice the craft. Warlock means oath breaker and is considered a serious accusation in Wicca. It usually applies to someone removed from a coven for inappropriate magical behavior.

Not sure which Covens you've attended, but modern Wicca was founded in the 1960s, long after Warlock lost its "Oathbreaker" meaning. At the very least, the ones I've attended have taken no offense to the word Warlock, but do take offense to Wizard. Most Wiccans I've met or dealt with have expressed a disdain for Harry Potter's association of "Witches and Wizards". I would hardly consider myself an expert, but it's important to remember that Wicca does not feature a governing body, and as such most of what goes on is subject to one's own spirituality and experiences, rather than what others say.

In modern terms, Warlock merely means Male practitioner of Magic. Witch is still a gender neutral term, but is frequently associated with femininity. This is what I was taught at the Coven in Lackland AFB, and since most people I've met around the world corroborate those definitions I'm sticking to it.

With that out the way, what really defines a Witch is less to-do with the powers they have and more to do with their belief. Paganism has been around for a very long time, and the powers associated with those witches is changed depending on the lense of society at the time. Modern Wicca for example suffers from a number of social misunderstandings. The use of a Pentagram frequently gets them associated with Satanists, but it's much closer to Earth-Based worship. In fact, Modern Wicca is very similar to Druidism (Most likely Circle of the Land) with its focus on group healing and nature.

I don't know enough about early Pagans, but from what I understand Wicca and Heathens are attempts to get back to their roots and disassociate Satan from their practices. As such, they probably fall closer to Druid than anything else.

Wicca's Book of Shadows however is a real part of the religion. When I attended Lackland's Coven they said the Book was more-or-less optional. The original Book of Shadows contained rituals, religious poetry, and belief systems like any other religious text, but just like how Wiccans lack a governing body there is no official Book of Shadows. Consequently, it is optional. Each Coven is free to create their own, buy the published original version, or do without it completely. The book serves primarily as a reference rather than a source of power. That being said, Lackland's Coven did have a Book of Shadows.

Since TC wants to be a Charmed witch specifically, I suggest going either
A) Warlock: Pact of FeyTome - Satanism is not for Charmed girls. If you wanted to be a Salem witch pick Fiend. Find Familiar is optional, but you can get the slightly less cool Familiar via the Tome anyways, so either way you're good. Pick up Herbalism and Alchemy kits and you're good to go.
B) Wizard: Any - The fluff of Wizards is incompatible with Witches in my opinion, but in terms of powers they're all there. Simply call yourself a Witch and refluff whatever you need to fit the theme.
C) Druid: Doesn't come with a book, but it's also not critical. Nature Magic is the closest to modern Wicca you can get, but Charmed itself more closely aligns with the powers of Wizard.
D) Sorcer(ess) - Doesn't really fit in my opinion. The whole "Natural Talent" thing is just fluff, and you can attach that to any other class.
E) Cleric - See Druid.
F) Bard - See Wizard

Oh wait that's basically every caster. Point is TC, anything can be a Witch if you fluff it the right way. Warlock is clearly aligned the most with "Witchy" powers in the sense of being spooky and magical. The rest will fit in slightly closer to characters from Charmed but at the cost of not fitting the fluff of a modern Wicca; which doesn't exist in the D&D world anyway so knock yourself out. (Keep in mind that according to SCAG, most practitioners get along with each other and respect each other's powers. They all study the weave in different ways)

That got way too rambly, and I'm not going back through and editing myself for mistakes/clarity as I need to go to work. Good luck with your game TC. I personally would choose Warlock but that's because I pretty much always play spooky witch girls in my campaign and Warlock fits the fluff best imo.

[Temperjoke]

One thing that seemed to stick out to me in Fantasy Literature, was that witches never seem to be formally trained or educated, more of a master/apprentice sort of system, whereas wizards always seem to have more formal training and education, with classes, books, and structure than you usually see with witches. Witches also seem to deal more with spirits and natural forces, not necessarily making bargains and pacts, more consultation and understanding, along with the usual potions and medicines. So, to me, druids and clerics would seem to make for a better fit for a witch than a wizard or sorcerer, but I wouldn't object to a player who wanted to play something like an enchantment or divination wizard as a witch.

[Grey Watcher]

One thing that seemed to stick out to me in Fantasy Literature, was that witches never seem to be formally trained or educated, more of a master/apprentice sort of system, whereas wizards always seem to have more formal training and education, with classes, books, and structure than you usually see with witches. Witches also seem to deal more with spirits and natural forces, not necessarily making bargains and pacts, more consultation and understanding, along with the usual potions and medicines. So, to me, druids and clerics would seem to make for a better fit for a witch than a wizard or sorcerer, but I wouldn't object to a player who wanted to play something like an enchantment or divination wizard as a witch.

I dunno, I feel like the idea of a Wizard school that runs like a college or university is a fairly modern idea. I feel like apprenticeship was the model for wizards for quite a while. If anything I feel like witchcraft involves even less formality in the education: it's something that is inborn, granted by the Devil/the Faerie Queen/Cthulhu/etc., or just learned intuitively. A witch's teacher, in my experience, is usually less about "this is how you shoot lighting from your fingertips" and more about "when you shoot lighting from your fingertips, consider these precautions to avoid unintentionally hurting someone". Or perhaps "you can turn into woodland creatures, and here are some forms I've found especially useful".

Of course, I also feel like Wizard shed the "gets their powers from being in league with something evil" a lot earlier and more thoroughly than Sorcerers, Witches, Warlocks, Beldams, Conjurers, Necromancers, and a whole host of others. (The only reason Magician get there even earlier is because it was the usual name taken by performers who use slight-of-hand, misdirection, and other techniques to create displays that appear magical.)

[grell]

Somewhat simple question, but how does the traditional concept of a "witch" (gender-neutral, sort of like on Charmed) fit in with the 5e concepts of the divisions of magic-users,

As I've read the thread the thing is that 5E seems to allow a plethora of ways to build this concept.

So I guess the question is, in your mind what do you see when you envision your witch? Male, Female? pouring over mystic tomes? How about the color scheme and clothing, fine lace and high collars with ink stained sleeves? Homespun tough wearing cloth with a bandoleer of animal parts and vials, small belt pouches containing various components and maybe a small potions knife?

I guess I'm trying to say in a case like this where you could make it work so many ways; reverse the input. Instead of > class > subclass > finished product (character) try from the other side of the equation; looks, personality, desire in how to role play concept > leading to class/race/subclass.

Bring the character to life in your head, cackling madly, or quietly casting and see what his or her preferred visuals in your mind point to.

This just strikes me as the rare situation where how you can build is so open it's more what will you end up wanting to be perceived as then anything else.

Good luck!

[Temperjoke]

I dunno, I feel like the idea of a Wizard school that runs like a college or university is a fairly modern idea. I feel like apprenticeship was the model for wizards for quite a while. If anything I feel like witchcraft involves even less formality in the education: it's something that is inborn, granted by the Devil/the Faerie Queen/Cthulhu/etc., or just learned intuitively. A witch's teacher, in my experience, is usually less about "this is how you shoot lighting from your fingertips" and more about "when you shoot lighting from your fingertips, consider these precautions to avoid unintentionally hurting someone". Or perhaps "you can turn into woodland creatures, and here are some forms I've found especially useful".

Of course, I also feel like Wizard shed the "gets their powers from being in league with something evil" a lot earlier and more thoroughly than Sorcerers, Witches, Warlocks, Beldams, Conjurers, Necromancers, and a whole host of others. (The only reason Magician get there even earlier is because it was the usual name taken by performers who use slight-of-hand, misdirection, and other techniques to create displays that appear magical.)

Well, I don't deny that it's a more modern idea. I'm just saying that my ideas on witch vs. wizard were shaped that way.

[2D8HP]

I dunno, I feel like the idea of a Wizard school that runs like a college or university is a fairly modern

The Cave at Salamanca (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_magic_schools#Legendary)?

Scholomance (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholomance)?

The Black School (http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type3000.html)?