Here is an Odd Question: Male Witches

[TriOmegaZero]

Mike Schneider wrote:

It's an oversight which will be corrected as soon as some moist towelette whines.

Someone call the Wet Blanket!

I think Paizo will be able to avoid that, if only because there are plenty of other targets for the PC censors to select from.

[Gorbacz]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Someone call the Wet Blanket!

I think Paizo will be able to avoid that, if only because there are plenty of other targets for the PC censors to select from.

Like, nipples in the Bestiar... oh, wait.

[Epic Meepo]

Gorbacz wrote:

Like, nipples in the Bestiar... oh, wait.

I don't really understand your nipple fetish, but your repeated posts on the subject have inspired me to investigate. And your claim that there are no nipples depicted in the Bestiary is patently false. For proof, see the illustrations of the dretch, the hill giant, the satyr, and the wraith.

[Carbon D. Metric]

Mike Schneider wrote:

It's an oversight which will be corrected as soon as some moist towelette whines.

Quite incorrect, the he/she references have been (Since 3.0) always been in reference to the iconic art character the class is represented by. In pure RAW it is a crapshoot though.

[Bobson]

Carbon D. Metric wrote:

Mike Schneider wrote:

It's an oversight which will be corrected as soon as some moist towelette whines.

Quite incorrect, the he/she references have been (Since 3.0) always been in reference to the iconic art character the class is represented by. In pure RAW it is a crapshoot though.

I seem to remember that it alternates by chapter, unless there's specific iconics being used in an example. And spells avoid pronouns.

But it's late and I didn't check any of that, so I could be misremembering.

On topic - this just came up in my about-to-start Kingmaker game. I just told the witch's player that I'd probably refer to him as a warlock, which works for him because he liked the 3.5 warlock and the 4e warlock. I just can't wrap my mind around a male witch for whatever reason. In character, no one refers to them by class, so in the end, it doesn't really matter.

[Mike Schneider]

(Nod.)

For some reason or another I was always playing classes with female art in 3.5.

What would Freud say?

[Dirlaise]

Umbral Reaver wrote:

You do know Wicca didn't exist until the 20th century, right?

Wicca, in my post, was being used as a modernized term that has been adapted to represent 'witchcraft' as discussed in the Maleus Maleficarum. Modern understanding of Wicca, as a practice, is a descendant of original unnammed Witch-Cults attacked by the persecution of any pagan/non-Christian religious beliefs instigated by the book. Since, in the volume, these practices are almost wholly designated as 'Satan Worship', I chose against using that terminology and favored 'Wicca'.

The point still stands. As of publication of the book, 'witchcraft' has been designated as feminine territory, and strictly for purposes of maintaining patriarchy. This perspective is no more true than assuming that paganism has been a purely female pursuit - which thousands of years of 'pagan' theology firmly disputes.

In the interest of staying on topic, regardless of whether my terminology clouds the point that I'm attempting to express, there is a very distinct real-world shift into the gender identification that doesn't exist in the game world. Frankly, the worship of Golarion gods would be an affront to the religion that spawned gender identification of 'witches' - if it existed in game. It doesn't, and so the manufactured byproducts don't either - until the developers see fit to say otherwise.

[Epic Meepo]

Dirlaise wrote:

Wicca, in my post, was being used as a modernized term that has been adapted to represent 'witchcraft' as discussed in the Maleus Maleficarum. Modern understanding of Wicca, as a practice, is a descendant of original unnammed Witch-Cults attacked by the persecution of any pagan/non-Christian religious beliefs instigated by the book.

Um, you can't just take the name of someone's religion and appropriate it to mean whatever you want it to mean. Wicca doesn't mean "every pagan religion" any more than Christianity means "every monotheistic religion."

[Dirlaise]

Epic Meepo wrote:

Um, you can't just take the name of someone's religion and appropriate it to mean whatever you want it to mean. Wicca doesn't mean "every pagan religion" any more than Christianity means "every monotheistic religion."

I didn't. I made a highly disputable claim concerning the evolution from organized pagan practices only known as "Witch Cults" or "The Witch Cult" into modern Wicca. There are plenty of arguments which suggest differently, but modern misconceptions about Wicca and the false accusations made in the Maleus Maleficarum are similar enough to suggest a connection - if only in terms of misinformation rather than actual practices.

Sorry if that was unclear.

[Dark_Mistress]

Mike Schneider wrote:

(Nod.)

For some reason or another I was always playing classes with female art in 3.5.

What would Freud say?

That your inner female yearns to be free. :)

[Eben TheQuiet]

I thought male witches were called 'mitches'... no?

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Eben TheQuiet wrote:

I thought male witches were called 'mitches'... no?

Nope - witchaloks.

[Oterisk]

Dark_Mistress wrote:

Mike Schneider wrote:

(Nod.)

For some reason or another I was always playing classes with female art in 3.5.

What would Freud say?

That your inner female yearns to be free. :)

I keep mine in a pumpkin shell.

I tried to let her out, but my GM wouldn't let me...

[Mike Schneider]

She's the big one in the middle.

[LazarX]

Dirlaise wrote:

The widespread understanding that witches are primarily female is a result of the 1487 anti-witchcraft handbook the Malleus Maleficarum, a text of influence concerning what eventually became the widespread persecution of Wiccan practitioners. Of particular emphasis in the book is that witches, in the vast majority, are female - which jives with beliefs held in religious practice even today (original sin, Eve's corruption of Adam, etc.). Ultimately, it came down to gender persecution, where females were placed in a state of fear and compliance, since unusual or unwanted activity could easily result in unfounded accusations of witchcraft, generally leading to execution.

Of course, the volume provides as little meaningful knowledge of actual Wicca as possible, pushing religiously theocentric intolerance and ignorance. This includes the misconception that witches are all women, which was merely a convenient method of maintaining patriarchal religious rule. The Latin "Maleficarum" is even a feminine gender word. Application of the word "warlock" to males, considering the 'oath breaker', 'in league with the devil' etymology, seems to be an artifact of the same religious intolerance. Since the roots of the word are negative, applying the term to those who would practice non-Christian belief systems furthers the agenda of the church.

Since Golarion lacks these histories, it can be safely assumed that within the confines of the game world there is no gender distinction for witches. Use of popular terms for game elements is a way to supply ease of understanding through recognition. There is no real gender limitation, real world or otherwise.

One should note that what was persecuted back then wasn't Wicca, as that would not be invented until the beginning of the 20th century. What was being persecuted was anything that could stand as a challenge to the male patriarchal authority of the Roman Church. Women in any form of autonomous authority were especially suspect, especially if villagers turned to them for advice as opposed to the local cleric. Also to be noted under the broad band of witchcraft persecution were Gypsies, and of course the Jewish population as Anti-Semitism was practically universal in Europe (and hasn't quite left yet). (with the noted exception of Moorish Spain)

[nighttree]

Umbral Reaver wrote:

Dirlaise wrote:

Of course, the volume provides as little meaningful knowledge of actual Wicca as possible...

You do know Wicca didn't exist until the 20th century, right?

+1

Wiccan definition aside.....

1: Warlock is a primarily Scottish word (possibly a corruption of the Scandinavian word "varÝlokkur" = "Spirit chanter" ).

2: In traditional Scottish wichcraft traditions, the word warlock was, and is still, used to describe a male witch.

[HangarFlying]

Furthermore, if you are going to base your character off of a modern interpretation of what a witch should be, you need to make her fat, with red hair, attends Ren-fairs regularly, wears homemade leather boots, and plays D&D in the basement of her fat boyfriend's parents house. Nah, I kid. I did see one hot Wiccan once that made me consider converting...or maybe she was goth...ah who cares, she was tasty to look at.

[Snorter]

Mike Schneider wrote:

(Nod.)

For some reason or another I was always playing classes with female art in 3.5.

What would Freud say?

Dark_Mistress wrote:

That your inner female yearns to be free. :)

I sympathise; I am a lesbian, trapped in a man's body.

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Snorter wrote:

I sympathise; I am a lesbian, trapped in a man's body.

Heh, Jerry Springer, or one of the other trash tv talk shows, did an episode many years ago about just that topic.

[W E Ray]

Male Witches:

This actually came up a couple weeks ago in one of my groups. I told the Player that was running a male Witch that I just couldn't keep calling him a Witch (except when referencing Monty Python) -- that from then on, unless he had a real problem with it, I was gonna start calling him a Warlock.

He's a Warlock now.

(When it ever happens that one PC runs a male Witch and another runs a Pathfinderized Warlock from the Complete Arcane, I'll deal with it then but it'll probably be easiest just to rename the old 3E Warlock -- cuz, afterall, that was a Swamp Donkey-Ass name for that class anyway; a Warlock is a male Witch, NOT an Eldritch Blast PC!

Spoiler:

Kinda like how a "Magus" IS NOT a Gish!

[Eric Hinkle]

All I'll say here is that there are and were "male witches" -- you found them in Dutch Country (SE Pennsylvania), you found them among Native American tribes (Navajo skinwalkers, anyone?), in Sub-Saharan Africa, in Europe where 90% of the witches slain in Iceland's witch hunt were men -- and always have been.

That and the idea of the witch being often female, and usually old, is much, much older than Christianity and by no means specific to Europe. It was an old stereotype when Lucan wrote the Pharsalia in Ancient Rome. Several historians have pointed out the likeliest reason for this: the young men didn't need witchcraft or poison to kill an enemy, they had the strength to use physical violence.

And as far as being an anti-female "plot" by the RCC... the earliest laws in Christian Europe that covered witchcraft were the Canon Episcopi and the Salic Laws of Charlemagne. They condemned a belief in witchcraft as Un-Christian and unworthy of the faithful, and the Salic Law specifically stated that anyone who killed someone for being a witch was to be put to death for murder. A lot of judges, prosecutors, and witnesses in the later witch hunts ended this way too after the trials ended and people began examining the cases more closely.

Oh, and the wise women of Europe who were the "victims" of all this? More commonly, they were the ones encouraging it. Historians specializing in the Witch Hunts have worked and found the evidence in Church records, personal journals, and trial transcripts that have proved it.

If you doubt any of this, then please, go and read such works as Ronald Hutton's Triumph of the Moon and Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles; or Norman Cohn's Europe's Inner Demons; or the series on European Magic and Witchcraft from the University of Pennsylvania by Bengt Ankarloo and Stuart Clark. That's just a sampling of titles.

*sighs* Sorry for the lecture, this is a sore subject with me.

[greatamericanfolkhero]

Vanulf Wulfson wrote:

El Baron de los Banditos wrote:

While he has yet to see play, I have one as one of many backups for Temple of Elemental Evil.

He insists he is a warlock, but his crow familiar calls him a man-witch.

** spoiler omitted **

Mmmmm, Manwich. Sloppy Joe's, anyone?

I was forbidden by my current Pathfinder GM from making a male witch specifically because I made this joke.

:-p

[W E Ray]

Eric, sorry about hitting a sore spot, but...

Despite being inaccurate and even downright ignorant, I gotta admit to embracing Paizo's disclaimer on the Witch's Class name -- that, even though real world myths and legitimate beliefs and spiritual dogma are considerably different from the fantasy "witch" -- it is that witch that I "see" in D&D.

Hopefully without offending anyone, when I think of a D&D Witch I think of the old hag with her broom stick, black cat, cauldron and stolen human baby -- with her pointy black hat shadowing that hairy wart on her nose singing "Double Double Toil and Troble" as something wicked this way comes.

And I then remind everyone that she's the one that turned me into a newt.
(Or gnewt).

Not my real life friend the Wiccan.

[Viktyr Korimir]

I'm playing a male Witch, but witchcraft is a womanly art and I'll not tolerate such slander. I am a chirurgeon.

If you are sick, I will make you well for a small fee.

If you are vain, I will make you beautiful for a modest fee.

And if you are fearless, I will make you as glorious and as terrible as you can afford.

[LazarX]

Eric Hinkle wrote:

All I'll say here is that there are and were "male witches" -- you found them in Dutch Country (SE Pennsylvania), you found them among Native American tribes (Navajo skinwalkers, anyone?), in Sub-Saharan Africa, in Europe where 90% of the witches slain in Iceland's witch hunt were men -- and always have been.

That and the idea of the witch being often female, and usually old, is much, much older than Christianity and by no means specific to Europe. It was an old stereotype when Lucan wrote the Pharsalia in Ancient Rome. Several historians have pointed out the likeliest reason for this: the young men didn't need witchcraft or poison to kill an enemy, they had the strength to use physical violence.

And as far as being an anti-female "plot" by the RCC... the earliest laws in Christian Europe that covered witchcraft were the Canon Episcopi and the Salic Laws of Charlemagne. They condemned a belief in witchcraft as Un-Christian and unworthy of the faithful, and the Salic Law specifically stated that anyone who killed someone for being a witch was to be put to death for murder. A lot of judges, prosecutors, and witnesses in the later witch hunts ended this way too after the trials ended and people began examining the cases more closely.

Oh, and the wise women of Europe who were the "victims" of all this? More commonly, they were the ones encouraging it. Historians specializing in the Witch Hunts have worked and found the evidence in Church records, personal journals, and trial transcripts that have proved it.

If you doubt any of this, then please, go and read such works as Ronald Hutton's Triumph of the Moon and Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles; or Norman Cohn's Europe's Inner Demons; or the series on European Magic and Witchcraft from the University of Pennsylvania by Bengt Ankarloo and Stuart Clark. That's just a sampling of titles.

*sighs* Sorry for the lecture, this is a sore subject with me.

Actually the truth is far more basic.

For the most part, the word "witch" itself is a relatively modern derogatory term, dating from it's use in the King James Bible. The reason the term "witch" is usually applied to women is because women were marginalised in the sight of Christianity as beeing seen as the agent of Adam's Fall. Witch was a term applied to wise women who were seen as a threat to the influence of a male-dominated clergy. Wise women were generally female because their roles were considered "unmanly" compared to the arts of warfare.

The vast majority of witch hunts were directed against women, frequently women who had been left to the margins of society, generally aged spinsters.

[Stewart Perkins]

I'd also like to echo the sentiments that class names don't translate into game world except in very few cases. It's why I dislike the name barbarian for the class since it is very clear they are berserkers or some such. Barbarian is a way of life or a people, savage tribes are refferred to as barbarians, that includes the children and women etc. Witch is very much the same. Honestly the name fighter is the same, it describes what most everyone does, while the name warior (the npo class) better fits the fighter class, its just something that has happened over the years. Its also fair to assume that npcs, especially townsfolk and the like, are going to see warrior (woodsmen, berserkers, soldiers, and knights, even Inquisitors, etc), clerics/priests (Druids and Clerics and Oracles), Brigands and Cutpurses and thieves (Rogues ), and Wizards, and witches (Sorcerers, Wizards, Witchs, Summoners, and even Oracles sometimes based on their build). Because to the simple folk theres not magical difference between magic missile and spiritual weapon, arcane/divine is only inferred to them by whos using it. To them they know its godly magic because it heals or an obvious priest is using it, its all sorcery and the like if some random stranger starts pointing his finger and burning stuff. And to the peasant the raging barbarian is the same as the fighter, theyre big guys with big swords cutting stuff down, however they are beholden to looking like a savage or a soldier.

[LazarX]

Exactly, class terms are game devices. To many folks use them in ways they are not intended.

[Shisumo]

Wait, I thought the male version of a witch was a wizard. That's what all the kids down at the quidditch pitch always told me, anyway...

[Mr. Quick]

I have to admit, I am intriged by the Witch class. I've only seen them in play once but it was an intriguing class to throw into an adventuring party.

[Epic Meepo]

LazarX wrote:

For the most part, the word "witch" itself is a relatively modern derogatory term, dating from it's use in the King James Bible.

The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, disagrees with you. "Witch" is the Standard English spelling of the otherwise identical Middle English word, "wicche." Being Middle English, "wicche" predates the King James Bible by several centuries.

Also, in my opinion, the definition of the word "witch" in the context of the King James Bible has little relevance to the definition of the word in general usage, much as the use of the word "atheist" as a derogatory term by a certain Christian commentators does not make "atheist" derogatory term in the larger English-speaking community.

[Mr. Quick]

Epic Meepo wrote:

LazarX wrote:

For the most part, the word "witch" itself is a relatively modern derogatory term, dating from it's use in the King James Bible.

The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, disagrees with you. "Witch" is the Standard English spelling of the otherwise identical Middle English word, "wicche." Being Middle English, "wicche" predates the King James Bible by several centuries.

Also, in my opinion, the definition of the word "witch" in the context of the King James Bible has little relevance to the definition of the word in general usage, much as the use of the word "atheist" as a derogatory term by a certain Christian commentators does not make "atheist" a derogatory term in the larger English-speaking community.

I am both amazed and horrified at the level of education inherent to this post.

Dear God...I'm gonna need another college degree just to keep up with the paizo boards!

[Dark_Mistress]

Mr. Quick wrote:

Epic Meepo wrote:

LazarX wrote:

For the most part, the word "witch" itself is a relatively modern derogatory term, dating from it's use in the King James Bible.

The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, disagrees with you. "Witch" is the Standard English spelling of the otherwise identical Middle English word, "wicche." Being Middle English, "wicche" predates the King James Bible by several centuries.

Also, in my opinion, the definition of the word "witch" in the context of the King James Bible has little relevance to the definition of the word in general usage, much as the use of the word "atheist" as a derogatory term by a certain Christian commentators does not make "atheist" a derogatory term in the larger English-speaking community.

I am both amazed and horrified at the level of education inherent to this post.

Dear God...I'm gonna need another college degree just to keep up with the paizo boards!

You should start with Paizo 101 and Introduction to the Paizo Forum.

[Mr. Quick]

Dark_Mistress wrote:

You should start with Paizo 101 and Introduction to the Paizo Forum.

which part of 'i'm lazy' was I unclear on...?

[Shadewest]

Snorter wrote:

You'll see the same wording used for the Barbarian, Cleric, Druid, Inquisitor, Oracle, Paladin, Rogue and Sorcerer.

OK, so we've established that Witches do not need to be female, but what about divine iconics?

[Kaiyanwang]

Gorbacz wrote:

In before "Male witches should be called warlocks" followed by "no wai, that's TOTALLY not who warlocks really are" and "3.5 Warlocks are overpowered.".

I use the way more elegant and hystorically-based "witch-dude".

[Epic Meepo]

Kaiyanwang wrote:

I use the way more elegant and hystorically-based "witch-dude".

Well played.

[LazarX]

Shadewest wrote:

Snorter wrote:

You'll see the same wording used for the Barbarian, Cleric, Druid, Inquisitor, Oracle, Paladin, Rogue and Sorcerer.

OK, so we've established that Witches do not need to be female, but what about divine iconics?

Required to be female under the California Surfer Dude law.

[Shadewest]

LazarX wrote:

Shadewest wrote:

Snorter wrote:

You'll see the same wording used for the Barbarian, Cleric, Druid, Inquisitor, Oracle, Paladin, Rogue and Sorcerer.

OK, so we've established that Witches do not need to be female, but what about divine iconics?

Required to be female under the California Surfer Dude law.

Ah, I see. So I need to move out of California to play a male cleric?

[Svensor]

Did anyone know that more than 60 percent of the witches prosecuted in post-medieval slavic lands were male witches? So much for emancipaction.

[LazarX]

Shadewest wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Shadewest wrote:

Snorter wrote:

You'll see the same wording used for the Barbarian, Cleric, Druid, Inquisitor, Oracle, Paladin, Rogue and Sorcerer.

OK, so we've established that Witches do not need to be female, but what about divine iconics?

Required to be female under the California Surfer Dude law.

Ah, I see. So I need to move out of California to play a male cleric?

Your blonde wig and falsies are on order.

[vixengmer]

Stomphoof wrote:

Looking at the Witch Class, I noticed that it defaults to the "she" when talking about the character.

This implies that the default sex would be female. Makes sense when you think about it really, witches are classically female.

But I was curious, as I often am!

Has anyone made a Male witch? Can you do it? I see nothing in the class's description preventing it.

Thoughts?

I see all classes as dual gender, its just nice that they mix up to pronouns so people don't feel left out. I think a male witch would be awesome!

[HaraldKlak]

Well, it is nice to know that you can play a male witch.

But when are the introducing the Nun class, so female characters can get something equivalent to Monks...?

[brassbaboon]

Just had my first session with my male voodoo witch. Was a blast, really. The flavor of the class is just freaking awesome. The role-playing opportunities are unbelievable.

In game I never use the term "witch" I just say my character is "magic". I generally feel using class names in game is metagaming anyway.

Witches rock, if you don't mind not being the character that mows down the enemy. Other than the druid I don't think there is an equally versatile class. Was a ton of fun.

[ProfessorCirno]

Yo just a heads up you can now make a male witch who has a moustache, and the moustache punches people.

Literally there is nothing more you could want from this.

[Aazen]

Next time I play a witch. He will be called Norman of Ozborne. He will insist on being called a Man Witch. ;)

[Viktyr Korimir]

Aazen wrote:

Next time I play a witch. He will be called Norman of Ozborne. He will insist on being called a Man Witch. ;)

Heh. If you take Improved Familiar, can you have a goblin for a familiar? It doesn't have any abilities the other Improved Familiars don't.

[Andrew R]

Mallius malificarum was about Christianity's satanic witches and predates the existance of wicca and ignores any real knowledge of the pagan religions that inspired it. it was about those believed to be in league with the devil and the stupid ways it was believed you could ID one.

[Aazen]

Viktyr Korimir wrote:

Aazen wrote:

Next time I play a witch. He will be called Norman of Ozborne. He will insist on being called a Man Witch. ;)

Heh. If you take Improved Familiar, can you have a goblin for a familiar? It doesn't have any abilities the other Improved Familiars don't.

Makes me want to play a H-Orc Witch now. H-Orc, because he's green. ;)

[W E Ray]

Dark_Mistress wrote:

You should start with Paizo 101 and Introduction to the Paizo Forum.

.

Mr. Quick wrote:

Which part of 'i'm lazy' was I unclear on...?

. . . . Man, I dunno, I'm too lazy to read long posts.

[Panguinslayer7]

Ummm... my friend made a witch that was a guy,and I think we just called him Damian or some such.