What would you call a magic user who makes contracts with spirits?

[Greywander]

I've been playing with an idea for a magic system (to be used alongside others) in which the magic user doesn't cast spells themselves, but instead summons spirits, makes contracts with those spirits, and has the spirits perform services for them. I've seen the word "theurgy" used to refer to this type of "spirit" based magic, but I think I'd prefer to reserve theurgy specifically for religious/divine magic, which would be similar in theory but different in practice.

At the moment, I'm leaning toward "witch" as the user, and "witchcraft" as the name for that type of magic, since consorting with (usually evil) spirits was one of the main accusations leveled against suspected witches. These terms carry a certain negative connotation, though, particularly in religious communities in which RPGs already have a bit of a bad rap, and I'd prefer to avoid exasperating that. On the other hand, it might actually fit, since a similar level of suspicion would likely be leveled toward "witches" in-universe. While you could have benign witches who only made contracts with benevolent or neutral spirits, one idea I had was that any new witch PC would start with the "contact info" of one powerful evil spirit, offering them power in exchange for a terrible price. The temptation would thus always be there any time things got tough to call on the evil spirit for help when everything else had failed. Ergo, people would have a justifiable reason to fear witches, as they were at constant risk of corruption. The spirits want to exploit the witch as much as the witch wants to exploit the spirits.

I suppose "summoner" would work, but for some reason it just seems to lack, I don't know, personality? "Summoner" sounds like a video game class, while "witch" sounds like something you'd actually read about in fantasy novel. "Binder" is another one, but I have sort of the same problem with it (not to mention that someone at the table probably keeps all their notes in a "binder"). "Conjurer" I'm about half-and-half with.

"Warlock" is another option, and the 5e class of the same name is basically what this type of magic is. But what do warlocks do? Warlockery? I don't feel like I can have just a name for the user and not a name for the type of magic being used.

Sorcery might be another viable term, but I might prefer to use that for innate magic (the sorcerer is the "source" of their own magic). I'm hoping to be able to have multiple magic systems running alongside each other that all feel very different, so might run out of terms for different types of magic.

Or, maybe, I could call them "paranormal lawyers", or maybe "paranormal contractor" would be more appropriate, since the spirits are basically being "hired" to do a "job".

[noob]

Medium?
Spiritualist?
Insane cultist?(In coc anything that have to do with spirits or stuff from beyond earth (or underwater) becomes quickly dangerous and is generally done by insane cultists)

[John Out West]

I did something similar. I called mine Minstrels, as they used magic-songs to communicate with the spirits, and other magic-songs to call them to their oaths.

Witches, Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Summoners all have previous connotations, and i might suggest making up a new term to specifically describe this class/magic type, or something more to do with spirits, such as a Witch-Doctor, Medium, Clairvoyant, Mystic, or Voodoo Priest.

Sounds like a cool system though.

[MoiMagnus]

But what do warlocks do? Warlockery?
Pacts. Warlocks do pact/contract magic.
We says that wizards do magic, not "wizardry", so the two words are not required to be etymologically linked.



Or, maybe, I could call them "paranormal lawyers", or maybe "paranormal contractor" would be more appropriate, since the spirits are basically being "hired" to do a "job".
Is it modern time? Or at least early industrial era? That name feel out of place in a medieval fantastic.
Moreover, "paranormal" suggest that it isn't normal, while if it is used and recognize as existing, it is probably "normal", not "paranormal". So "spirit contractor" is probably better. Note that "spirit engineer" works too.


Other suggestions:
+ Pactiser. They make pacts.
+ Lightmen/lightwomen. (They act as lighthouses for spirits). They guide spirits.
+ Spirit trainer. They tame spirits.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I use the "contract with (nature) spirits" idea as my foundation for the magic used by druids and rangers.

But otherwise, I'd call it shamanism or shamanic magic, at least if the spirits were those of nature (beasts, plants, etc) or ancestral spirits of the person's culture.

[JeenLeen]

I think one problem with this terminology question is that a lot of words mean what you are talking about, but are used in so many contexts that they often refer to other stuff. Like Conjurer from your opening post: to conjure something is to call it into bring or bring it forth or summon it, or some such, but it's been used for specific jargon (Conjuration school in D&D 3.5) to a general term for any magic (e.g., books where conjurer basically means spellcaster or wizard.)

One thing to consider is that, if magic in general works by making pacts with spirits, then there might not be a specific word. Or, rather, a lot of words are used. Witch with negative connotations. Wizard with more noble ones, perhaps. Some folk calls 'em summoners, some conjurers, but there's no real difference.

Or you could have the different terms be based on what they focus on or how they make pacts. Some force spirits into obedience, binding them, and thus are called binders. Some negotiate and make deals with spirits... maybe something like Pactmasters or just Shaman. To get a more traditional wizard feel, you could have lines of spellcasters who pass on their alliance with spirits down the line and solidify it via rituals and rites--so the spellcasting seems like you'd think of cliche wizard spellcasting, but it's based on loyalty between a wizarding line and their associated spirits.

Of course, that is more for how it's used in-game than mechanically and for system design.

---

However, I understand if that doesn't exactly work since you mentioned theurgy and divine magic, so I reckon there are multiple types.
But you could have demons and angels (or the equivalent messengers of the gods) be another type of spirit, and the mechanics are similar even if the method of getting a pact/deal/whatever is different.

[GaelofDarkness]

I was going to suggest shaman as well. The dictionary definition is: a person regarded as having access to, and influence in, the world of good and evil spirits. So that does fits pretty well.

If you want to make it a non-divine counterpart to theurgy, might I suggest calling the practice goetia. The practitioner could still be a witch, warlock, etc. or maybe goetes, goeticist, etc.

[JeenLeen]

Also, if you haven't already read it, you might really enjoy Pact, the online web serial by Wildbow. It's magic system sounds rather similar to this.

I played in a FAE-based game loosely based on Pact, where we gained our magic by pacts with spirits, and it was a lot of fun before the game died. But there wasn't any really broad name (besides practitioner), but depending on what you bound or made deals with, that determined your focus and general name. (Necromancers make deals with or bind ghosts. Enchanters tend to work with fey. Diabolists bind (and usually end up corrupted or destroyed by) demons. And so on.)

[The Kool]

I'm just going to mention Binders, from 3.5, who perform a type of ritual pact magic with powerful spirits. Their flavor is that they bind the spirits to themselves, but it's worth a mention.

[Yunru]

A Shaman of course.

[continuumg]

Oathcrafter

Oathcrafters are masters of oathcraft or oathcrafting

No weird connotations/prejudices for that

[TrashTrash]

I think Oathcrafter is a good option, personally.

Some other names might be
- Peguam ('lawyer' in Malay, referencing the making of contracts)
- Penahan ('retainer' in Malay, referencing the restraining of the evil spirit)

I hope this helps!

[Xalyz]

one option could be to have a few different names for how the spirits are used.

For example:

A Shaman might try to coexist with them

An Entropomancer might try to use spirits to fight harmful spirits(think pokemon)

A Spiritualist might try to use them for divination

[Breccia]

A Shaman of course.

In my opinion, this is the correct answer. But if I was stuck in 5E with PHB only I'd make them a Warlock, since the power they're calling on isn't their own but also isn't divine.

[olskool]

I've been playing with an idea for a magic system (to be used alongside others) in which the magic user doesn't cast spells themselves, but instead summons spirits, makes contracts with those spirits, and has the spirits perform services for them. I've seen the word "theurgy" used to refer to this type of "spirit" based magic, but I think I'd prefer to reserve theurgy specifically for religious/divine magic, which would be similar in theory but different in practice.

At the moment, I'm leaning toward "witch" as the user, and "witchcraft" as the name for that type of magic, since consorting with (usually evil) spirits was one of the main accusations leveled against suspected witches. These terms carry a certain negative connotation, though, particularly in religious communities in which RPGs already have a bit of a bad rap, and I'd prefer to avoid exasperating that. On the other hand, it might actually fit, since a similar level of suspicion would likely be leveled toward "witches" in-universe. While you could have benign witches who only made contracts with benevolent or neutral spirits, one idea I had was that any new witch PC would start with the "contact info" of one powerful evil spirit, offering them power in exchange for a terrible price. The temptation would thus always be there any time things got tough to call on the evil spirit for help when everything else had failed. Ergo, people would have a justifiable reason to fear witches, as they were at constant risk of corruption. The spirits want to exploit the witch as much as the witch wants to exploit the spirits.

I suppose "summoner" would work, but for some reason it just seems to lack, I don't know, personality? "Summoner" sounds like a video game class, while "witch" sounds like something you'd actually read about in fantasy novel. "Binder" is another one, but I have sort of the same problem with it (not to mention that someone at the table probably keeps all their notes in a "binder"). "Conjurer" I'm about half-and-half with.

"Warlock" is another option, and the 5e class of the same name is basically what this type of magic is. But what do warlocks do? Warlockery? I don't feel like I can have just a name for the user and not a name for the type of magic being used.

Sorcery might be another viable term, but I might prefer to use that for innate magic (the sorcerer is the "source" of their own magic). I'm hoping to be able to have multiple magic systems running alongside each other that all feel very different, so might run out of terms for different types of magic.

Or, maybe, I could call them "paranormal lawyers", or maybe "paranormal contractor" would be more appropriate, since the spirits are basically being "hired" to do a "job".

The modern term for someone who deals with spirits is The Animist but you could use Shaman instead. Demonologists study the nature of darker spirits (including both the Nature of and Dismissal of said beings).

The Warlock to me is MISREPRESENTED in D&D5e. The WITCH (female) or WARLOCK (male) should be a caster who relies on an outside source, usually a Demon, Devil, powerful Spirit, or Demigod for their magical power. Their magic should be mostly summonings, curses or blessings bestowed by touch or the gift of an object and Spirits called to harass or aid a person. They are a blend of Cleric and (Wizard) Summoner.

[Onos]

Personally I'd lean towards Shaman but if that doesn't tickle your pickle then Communer or Soulspeaker could work reasonably well for this sort of magic system. Do your "magic-users" go on a spirit quest of sorts to find suitable spirits to bind? If so Spiritwalker/Aetherstrider could work, or if it's more a case of summoning entities perhaps Shadecaller or Echobinder might work for you.

If you want to subvert people's expectations you could just call everyone who uses this power Necromancers (though that may not fit with the rest of your lore).

[Crisis21]

Medium: a person claiming to be in contact with the spirits of the dead and to communicate between the dead and the living.


This way, you could play a halfling (or a gnome), take this class, and then go on the run from the local authorities. So you'd be playing a small medium at large.

[Greywander]

Thanks for all the responses. I think I'm going to stick with witch/witchcraft as the general or "system" terms, but include a short section going over alternate names. "Witch" often has negative connotation, though many witches embrace the term. Those seeking to avoid a negative public opinion might call themselves something else, particularly if they specialize in a certain area. So a village might have a "shaman" who deals primarily with nature spirits. The villagers would still be afraid of witches, but don't perceive their shaman as a witch. The shaman might be a bit more savvy, scrutinizing potential witches for dealings with evil spirits instead of more benign ones and letting them go if they seem alright. Likewise, someone who deals exclusively with ghosts might call themselves a "medium". And so on.

And honestly, no one needs to know necessarily that their supernatural feats are derived from summoning and using spirits, so they could just as well call themselves conjurers, magicians, or wizards. Basically, they can dress up what they're doing as being "not witchcraft", even if it totally is. Like, people wouldn't think of a shaman or medium as being witches, because, in their mind, witches deal with evil spirits while shamans and mediums do not.


Pacts. Warlocks do pact/contract magic.
We says that wizards do magic, not "wizardry", so the two words are not required to be etymologically linked.
Well, "wizardry" is a real word, so there's that. And if I want to have a skill associated with this type of magic, it has to be called something. I suppose something like "pact magic" would work fine, though.


The Warlock to me is MISREPRESENTED in D&D5e.
Kind of. The flavor is there, as their magic is allegedly derived from making a pact with some kind of entity that then granted them power. However, this is missing entirely in the actual mechanics of the class. I want to very much represent the aspect of making pacts in the mechanics of the game, to the point that witches would be looking forward to encountering a new (non-hostile) spirit or a book with a summoning ritual just as much as a 5e wizard looks forward to spellbooks and spell scrolls.

Another aspect of contrast with the 5e warlock is that most spirits can't just "give you power" (there would be exceptions, of course, especially for particularly powerful spirits). If you want to buff yourself, or gain new powers that you use directly, instead of by proxy through a spirit, then you have to make a contract with a spirit to "possess" you. While the spirit is possessing you, it is able to allow you to use its own abilities as if they were your own. However, this also allows the spirit to try take over your body if it wants to. The spirit could also decide to stop lending you its power at a critical moment. These sorts of things would probably require some kind of contested roll to see who's will is able to dominate the other. In any case, a contract for such a service should probably include a clause that prevents these sorts of things.

It's kind of exciting to think of all the different ways this type of magic could be used. Here's a short list of some of the general uses I've thought of so far:

Permanent summons - Like pets and familiars. Usually weaker spirits with minor supernatural powers that require some kind of daily feeding (gold sink) or grooming (time sink) as payment for their services.
Temporary summons - Battle summons in particular, though there would be other uses, like a spirit that can craft items. Would probably cost a rare or expensive ingredient specific to that spirit.
Spell-like summons - Instead of sticking around, they just show up, use one of their abilities, and leave. For example, a spirit that can teleport you and your party up to 1000 miles away.
Possession spirits - Can be temporary or permanent. Let's you use some of that spirits supernatural abilities directly. Payment could be a rare item as above, but could also be that it gets to take you over and control your body for a while.

Payment could also be things like quests, although this would likely be only for really powerful spirits that you don't call on much. Don't want to sidetrack the game with a sidequest, but the GM should be able to work it into the plot if its a rare enough occurrence.


Medium: a person claiming to be in contact with the spirits of the dead and to communicate between the dead and the living.


This way, you could play a halfling (or a gnome), take this class, and then go on the run from the local authorities. So you'd be playing a small medium at large.
While amusing, this isn't actually for 5e. I was thinking of use Fudge, actually, but I'm still wrapping my head around that system. One of the nice things about this sort of magic system is that it can be mostly independent of the underlying system. I can make up a way for contracts to work, but the system-dependent stuff is just going to be which skill you roll or what monsters/spirits are available. So I guess this could totally be a 5e class, but I don't think it would fit with the 5e design philosophy.

In any case, it will probably be a skill-based system instead of a class-based system. So there won't be a witch class, it's just a matter of how many points you put towards the requisite skills, and how much gold you dedicate toward the necessary ingredients/materials needed for payment.

[Crisis21]

While amusing, this isn't actually for 5e. I was thinking of use Fudge, actually, but I'm still wrapping my head around that system. One of the nice things about this sort of magic system is that it can be mostly independent of the underlying system. I can make up a way for contracts to work, but the system-dependent stuff is just going to be which skill you roll or what monsters/spirits are available. So I guess this could totally be a 5e class, but I don't think it would fit with the 5e design philosophy.

In any case, it will probably be a skill-based system instead of a class-based system. So there won't be a witch class, it's just a matter of how many points you put towards the requisite skills, and how much gold you dedicate toward the necessary ingredients/materials needed for payment.

...halflings and gnomes exist in more systems than 5e last I checked. I get if you are making this for a system that doesn't have them as races, but that seemed like an odd disclaimer given the context.

[Bjarkmundur]

How about Galdur / Galdr

Means spell in Icelandic.
There are many others, but most of them just sound ridiculous with an American accent xD

[Greywander]

...halflings and gnomes exist in more systems than 5e last I checked. I get if you are making this for a system that doesn't have them as races, but that seemed like an odd disclaimer given the context.
Ah, okay, my bad for assuming. Out of curiosity, though, how many other systems can you name that are both (a) class-based, and (b) have gnomes and halflings? D&D is the only one I can think of, off the top of my head, but I'm not exactly knowledgeable on a wide variety of systems.

Mostly, I just wanted to specify that this probably wasn't going to be for a class based system.

Not sure if gnomes or halflings would exist, I haven't really hammered out any specifics on a setting. Likely if I create my own homebrew system (even based on Fudge, I don't think it has a default setting), I'd fit it first to a generic kitchen sink fantasy setting, then maybe create a specific and more detailed setting that could be used. This way, there are more options, and the generic setting could probably be adapted to fit other settings, whereas the specific setting would probably have too many details already in place to be easily adapted to something different.

[noob]

Ah, okay, my bad for assuming. Out of curiosity, though, how many other systems can you name that are both (a) class-based, and (b) have gnomes and halflings? D&D is the only one I can think of, off the top of my head, but I'm not exactly knowledgeable on a wide variety of systems.

Mostly, I just wanted to specify that this probably wasn't going to be for a class based system.

Not sure if gnomes or halflings would exist, I haven't really hammered out any specifics on a setting. Likely if I create my own homebrew system (even based on Fudge, I don't think it has a default setting), I'd fit it first to a generic kitchen sink fantasy setting, then maybe create a specific and more detailed setting that could be used. This way, there are more options, and the generic setting could probably be adapted to fit other settings, whereas the specific setting would probably have too many details already in place to be easily adapted to something different.

you do not need to be in a class based system to be called a medium merely to communicate with spirits or see stuff.
so you can have gnome mediums in a classless system.

[Crisis21]

Ah, okay, my bad for assuming. Out of curiosity, though, how many other systems can you name that are both (a) class-based, and (b) have gnomes and halflings? D&D is the only one I can think of, off the top of my head, but I'm not exactly knowledgeable on a wide variety of systems.

Mostly, I just wanted to specify that this probably wasn't going to be for a class based system.

Not sure if gnomes or halflings would exist, I haven't really hammered out any specifics on a setting. Likely if I create my own homebrew system (even based on Fudge, I don't think it has a default setting), I'd fit it first to a generic kitchen sink fantasy setting, then maybe create a specific and more detailed setting that could be used. This way, there are more options, and the generic setting could probably be adapted to fit other settings, whereas the specific setting would probably have too many details already in place to be easily adapted to something different.


Except you didn't specify D&D, you specified 5e, which is only one of D&D's systems. I'm not sure what all systems halflings and gnomes are part of outside D&D, but I do know that they are part of all of D&D's systems.

It is natural, given that the major focus of this forum is D&D, for us to assume that you are talking about D&D homebrew unless you specify otherwise.

[noob]

Except you didn't specify D&D, you specified 5e, which is only one of D&D's systems. I'm not sure what all systems halflings and gnomes are part of outside D&D, but I do know that they are part of all of D&D's systems.

It is natural, given that the major focus of this forum is D&D, for us to assume that you are talking about D&D homebrew unless you specify otherwise.

In shadowrun you can have a gnome getting its powers from spirits.
So Gnome mediums are a thing in systems other than the D20 line of systems.

[Bladewing2013]

Take a bit from the Dresden Files and call them ectomancers?