Witch: DMG Spells Known vs Entire List.

[Yogibear41]

Does the Witch in the DMG get its entire spell list?
The test says it casts as a sorcerer and uses the spells per day table, but makes no mention of spells known.

[Venger]

There is no textual answer to this question. Given that it implies having stuff from the sor/wiz, cleric, and druid is a reasonable argument that it does. Also balance-wise, it's hardly going to be an issue to give them access to all of these as knowns.

[redking]

Does the Witch in the DMG get its entire spell list?
The test says it casts as a sorcerer and uses the spells per day table, but makes no mention of spells known.

I believe the inference is that witch spells known are from the entire list. The witch is a kind of prototype design that was later seen in the beguiler, dread necromancer and warmage. Given this, you can negotiate with your DM for the advanced learning class feature from these classes to be added to your witch class features.

[Tzardok]

Casters who use their entire list like the warmage hadn't been invented yet at the point the witch was written, and wouldn't be for years. The most logical thing to do would be to take the sorcerer's spells known. The witch casts like a sorcerer in all other ways, so why not in this way too?

[Troacctid]

I'm not sure why the witch would default to knowing all its class spells at once, since that's not how the sorcerer works, nor is it the default for arcane casters. It seems pretty clear from context that changes only the class spell list and is otherwise identical to the sorcerer—I mean, unless you're also going to argue that witches should have no good saves and no BAB, since neither of those is mentioned either.

[redking]

Casters who use their entire list like the warmage hadn't been invented yet at the point the witch was written, and wouldn't be for years. The most logical thing to do would be to take the sorcerer's spells known. The witch casts like a sorcerer in all other ways, so why not in this way too?

Not years. A year. Complete Arcane in 2004. The inference I make from the text is because it specifically talks about spells per day as sorcerer, and the spell list of the witch. Whatever the intention, having all the spells available in the witch list causes no balance issues whatsoever, while limiting the witch to sorcerer style spells known turns the witch into an underpowered mess. That is why one could even add the advanced learning class feature of the beguiler and similar classes to the witch with zero issues as far as the DM, other players, and gameplay goes.

[Tzardok]

Not years. A year. Complete Arcane in 2004. The inference I make from the text is because it specifically talks about spells per day as sorcerer, and the spell list of the witch. Whatever the intention, having all the spells available in the witch list causes no balance issues whatsoever, while limiting the witch to sorcerer style spells known turns the witch into an underpowered mess. That is why one could even add the advanced learning class feature of the beguiler and similar classes to the witch with zero issues as far as the DM, other players, and gameplay goes.

Years. The witch was introduced in the 3.0 DMG, published 2000. That makes three years between it and the first publishing of the Warmage (Miniatures Handbook, 2003).

[Bavarian itP]

Why do people care about this when we don't even know the size of the witch's hit die?

[Tzardok]

Why do people care about this when we don't even know the size of the witch's hit die?

Propably like sorcerer, like everything else.

Incidentally, may I tell you that I like the cut of the jib of your signature?

[Bavarian itP]

Propably like sorcerer, like everything else.

The target demographic of my comment are people who don't believe everything else to be identical to the sorcerer, e.g. the thread starter. I guess I'm somewhat on your side of the argument.

Incidentally, may I tell you that I like the cut of the jib of your signature?

Thanks. They have great chemistry, for example here or here.

[RandomPeasant]

The idea that it is "clear from context" that the class does a thing it doesn't say it does is the sort of thing that leads only to madness in your interpretation of the rules. The RAW answer is that the Witch is unfinished, and you can finish it in whatever direction you think is appropriate. Personally, the spell list is about the right length and quality for it to be a Warmage-type caster, so I would just do that, because making it "the Sorcerer, but a little different" doesn't really produce interesting outcomes, as in most cases the best spells for a Witch to learn at any given level are ones the Sorcerer already could learn.

[Thurbane]

Just as an aside, the 3.0 Mortal Hunter PrC (BoVD) used this mechanic a full year before the Warmage appeared in the Miniatures Handbook, and before the 3.5 DMG was published. Although I'm lead to believe the Witch appeared in the 3.0 DMG?

And while I can't comment on the RAI/RAW of the Witch being a set list caster, if you make it the same as Sorcerer with spells know, it's just a massively down-powered Sorcerer with access to a much smaller spell list, and no ACFs or other support that Sorcerers get.

[RandomPeasant]

And while I can't comment on the RAI/RAW of the Witch being a set list caster, if you make it the same as Sorcerer with spells know, it's just a massively down-powered Sorcerer with access to a much smaller spell list, and no ACFs or other support that Sorcerers get.

Exactly. Look at the Witch's 9th level spells. The only one that's not a 9th level spell for Sorcerers is earthquake, which is an 8th level spell for the people who get it, and not a particularly impressive one. Conversely, it doesn't get wish, time stop, gate, and a whole bunch of other good spells the Sorcerer does. If you expect the Witch to select its spells like a Sorcerer does, it's just going to be a worse Sorcerer 99% of the time, and that's simply not an interesting option to add to the game.