Is there enough lore space for a witch class?

[Gamevizier]

The closest thing that comes to a "witch" at the moment is elemental shaman. a class that can put curses (hexes) on enemies, use voodoo or other nefarious means to deal with their enemies, or use the power of tidal waves (sea witches) to deal damage to enemies. We've seen some examples of these individuals in the game: Naga Sea Witches, Troll Shadow Hunters, Hermits who are not shamans but are able to put curses on other individuals.

So in your opinion guys, can the lore support a witch class?

[ZazuuPriest]

No

/thread

[ComputerNerd]

Lore is one thing, but if there is actually room for it gameplay wise is what will determine that in the end.
You give examples there where much of the apparant toolkit is already available in-game from multiple classes or specs.

[Deleted]

The lore probably could support it, but the game can not. As you say, it's close to elemental shaman for the most part. The regular "witch" is a magic user and we already have Mage for the general magic and Warlock for the darker arts. It would only make a far too similar class to the current ones.

[Hallowseve17]

I don't think so, unfortunately.

Male witches are "warlocks", female witches are "witches", if we're going to say what people in real life call them. I personally use this in-game, too.

I do think it would make for a cool class, but we can already pretty much play as them.

[Futhark]

A female troll warlock would be the witchiest thing you can play right now IMO.

[Deleted]

I don't think it would fit anywhere, too much overlapping with shaman and warlock (and also bit with druids) with hexes and curses.

[therealbowser]

Depends on what your definition of a witch is, but presumably they are already covered by shaman, warlocks, or shadow priests already. Furthermore, witches are exclusively female, which obviously would not work for World of Warcraft.

If witches were extremely strong in lore (like Demon Hunters, for instance) they could overcome these boundaries, but they are not. This is a wishful thinking class that has virtually no support in lore. Sorry.

[LongJohn]

no.

Next question please.

[vep]

You mean like CURSE of Affliction?

[Gamevizier]

The lore probably could support it, but the game can not. As you say, it's close to elemental shaman for the most part. The regular "witch" is a magic user and we already have Mage for the general magic and Warlock for the darker arts. It would only make a far too similar class to the current ones.

don't know if they count as "mages" though, Mages draw power from the ley lines and their magic is classified as arcane magic. we are still not sure what "voodoo" is but there are NPCs that commune with and draw their power from the voodoo or at least have knowledge about this malicious source of power. (hence why they warn us to stay away from it)

An Affliction Warlock's "Curse" is fel in nature, they spread fel corruption and drain the life out of their victims.

As for gameplay, let's say a pet class that uses tiki statues (or spiritual tiki warriors), masks, hexes or even the power of the tides to deal damage. I know that shamans

[Zeth Hawkins]

I'd be down for witches if they work like Bayonetta (arguably the most historically accurate witch in gaming).

[Deleted]

don't know if they count as "mages" though, Mages draw power from the ley lines and their magic is classified as arcane magic

In lore, yes. But gameplay, as I commented on, would not support it due to them being too similar. You again mention things that already exist in the Shaman (statues and hexes), Warlock (pet class and "dark" magic) and Mage (magic in general) classes, so adding yet another class to do that, would simply be too much. It doesn't matter, from a gameplay perspective, that Warlocks use Fel, Mages use Arcane and Witches could be Voodoo. Again, as I said in my first reply, the lore could probably support a Witch. But the game can not.

[Nivinya]

I think making a good witch class would be difficult without stepping on the toes of other specs/classes. I wouldn't mind seeing one if they could pull it off though as it'd be nice to get a new caster.

I don't think so, unfortunately.

Male witches are "warlocks", female witches are "witches", if we're going to say what people in real life call them. I personally use this in-game, too.

I do think it would make for a cool class, but we can already pretty much play as them.

While a lot of people do use the words "warlock" and "witch" the way you do, and in Scottish it is or at least was used that way, it is not the correct way in current usage in general and calling a witch a warlock is considered offensive. Neither term is gender specific, a warlock is simply a witch (of either gender) who has broken their oath and been kicked out of their coven. Obviously in WoW is different, but there's also no connection between witches and warlocks in game, at least that I've seen.

[Deleted]

I would go for a necromancer class instead, to be honest.

I mean, it's already existent and we are desperate for a new class that isn't melee.

[Arrashi]

You mean like marisa from touhou ? Stealing shit, riding broom, making lesbian harems and master sparking some jackasses ?

Im all out for it.

Also give them hats. If no hats, then we can give up on idea.

[Maletalana]

I don't think it would fit anywhere, too much overlapping with shaman and warlock (and also bit with druids) with hexes and curses.

bump to this, I imagine it being a culture-variant of the D3 Witchdoctor. Yes, those (sub)classes exist within WoW's lore, but no, it would not fit enough of a clear distinction to be made playable by players. "Fighter" is also a class that some lore characters are described as, even though as players, we are limited to Warrior as the only melee focused class (ignoring any rogue, surv, enhance, etc., obviously).

[Nirathiel]

Just roll a female warlock

[WintersLegion]

Depends on what your definition of a witch is, but presumably they are already covered by shaman, warlocks, or shadow priests already. Furthermore, witches are exclusively female, which obviously would not work for World of Warcraft.

If witches were extremely strong in lore (like Demon Hunters, for instance) they could overcome these boundaries, but they are not. This is a wishful thinking class that has virtually no support in lore. Sorry.

I don't get where you see that Witches are exclusively female, and even if that was the case in lore. In the lore Night Elf females are the only ones that can shadowmeld and only male Night Elves could be druid.

[Golden Yak]

Lorewise, absolutely. There are loads of enemy humanoids in the game who are distinct classes in that sense - Twilight Shadow Paladins, Defias Bloodmages, etc. Each of them have some abilities that set them apart from the standard player-available classes.

Gameplay-wise that might be a different story, since a lot of the potential abilities you could make use of are tied up with other classes. But things feel simpler in Legion (I don't play many alts, but I rolled a few in Legion to get at artifact lore), so you might be able to develop a class that's different in some way, maybe the different specs would be based on things like pure-curse, voodoo, etc.