Why do wizards come across as more powerful than witches?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Why do wizards come across as more powerful than witches?
Why do wizards come across as more powerful than witches?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
A lot of witch archetypes revolve around like, living in a big and doing magic with animal parts. Not everyone thinks of it as the feminine word for wizard
Pretty much this.
Other than that, ultimately they can do similar things.
"WItch" conjures images of someone on an active quest for knowledge/power, whereas "Wizard" conjures images of a passive bookworm or sometimes even a bumbling old fool.
>"WItch" conjures images of someone on an active quest for knowledge/power
No that's the wizard.
>"Wizard" conjures images of a passive bookworm or sometimes even a bumbling old fool.
Also the wizard.
because that's the way the witches like it
Why are witch hats bigger than wizard hats? Are they overcompensating?
You're like a little babby. Watch this.
It is droopy and gay looking, like a sad tit
bigger
The final form of witch.
BIGGER
Men get more respect, women get more sympathy. That's just how it is.
Logan's hat is bigger than Ranni's.
RONIN WIZARD
I am now imagining wizards who also train in katanas for self defense. Which I guess just makes them jedi.
Or my Elden Ring int/dex katanabro character.
Big hats are sexy.
It's a signal to anyone who knows, like how cougars leave their napkin set up a certain way at bars to signal young men.
A witch with a big hat is a witch who wants to be bent over her cauldron.
>like how cougars leave their napkin set up a certain way at bars to signal young men
wat
Cougars gonna coug.
>like how cougars leave their napkin set up a certain way at bars to signal young men
elaborate extensively
big hats are what codpieces where. the bigger the better.
Wizards: Formal education (quality)
Witches: Informal education (quantity)
You have it backwards
> Wizards: classroom lecture based education, quantity
> Witches: hands on apprenticeship learning, quality
Witches always come across as more danger in folklore anyway. A wizard does shit like throw a fireball or summon a demon to do their bidding. Cool stuff and all, but Witches rewrite the entire history of your kingdom with a curse because *one guy* annoyed them. Wizards seem much more constrained in what they can do, while whenever a witch gets involved in a story hold onto your butts because some fricking MAGIC is about to happen and if you are expecting it to make sense you are going to get fricked sideways.
>Wizards don't have more personal apprenticeships / teacher's pets outside of the classroom
Anon, I ...
You are using old, busted outdated wizard lore that isn't canon anymore. These days, every wizard graduates from Wizard College, which is exactly as shitty as normal modern college because you graduate with a useless degree in Theoretical Electricity and can't get a job so you have tot urn to dungeon delving to pay off the demon that holds the rights to your student loan debts.
>You are using old, busted outdated wizard lore
Fireballs is new, busted wrongthink wizard lore
>Witches always come across as more danger in folklore anyway.
So do wizards.
>wizard does shit like throw a fireball
Nobody does this in folklore.
>summon a demon
Only the most powerful wizards do this. Witches prostitute/sell themselves to demons. Wizards command them or learn under them.
>Witches rewrite the entire history of your kingdom with a curse because *one guy* annoyed them.
What makes you think wizards don't do fate/destiny, like the sage mentors to heroes they usually are? Blind oracles in Greek myth are usually men.
always come across as more dangerous [than wizards] in folklore anyway.
>So do wizards.
Are you actually moronic? Because you either have the reading comprehension of a 10 year old, or you are actually that young and shouldn't be here.
I am saying both are dangerous. Don't panic. Take a deep breath.
Wizards are reactively dangerous, they hold incredible power but don't usually have much reason to use it
Witches are proactively dangerous, they hold incredible power and they're gonna make it everyone else's problem at every step of the way whether they're good or evil
So, witches are wicked, wizards are wise, okay, news at eleven.
>wizards
>not quality
That concept existed for longer than any uncountable eon, you don't get to change it.
Wizard archetype is the can do whatever entity, ranging from people only beginning to seek truth to literal eldritch abominations of highest sorts.
Nope, sorry. It was decided without you. Wizards are just college students with powers. That's where all of these first level wizards with no backstory keep coming from.
If you wanted a vote you should have showed up for the meeting.
Mere interpretation.
Kind of this. Way more stories have the witch as more of a local problem for a village or an individual like the hero or some princess that was cursed.
Wizards are usually much bigger game that deal with a whole kingdom or they go out playing around in the realm of the gods and frick with the lord of the underworld. There are a couple Russian folktales that have wizards being more of a local problem but they seem to be treated more as a wandering god that is best left alone than anything else.
What are these folktales? I only recall Morozko (who isn't an antagonist) and Koschei the Deathless (who is definitely a kingdom-level threat)
The Wizards Apprentice and the Miller and the Wizard, Yuri and the Red Book immediately come to mind. They mostly involve a random local wizard that is just kind of helpful or exists in town that no one wants to deal with.
There are actually a LOT of Russian fairytales that they wrote down in the last two centuries that there should be plenty to draw from. The challenge is just taking the time to look into them since there are at last 4 huge books of them to filter through.
Kingdom level wizards are more found in the stories of Charlemagne. His knights killed an awful lot of wizards in towers along with all the semi magical Saracens coming over from Andalusia.
Test
Wizards: No sense of right or wrong - powerful
Witches: Bound by rules - weak
>not calling the witch a “sand witch”
YOU HAD ONE JOB
The definition of all magic users is going to vary in all settings, and ultimately they are whatever the writer wants to be.
A wizard is someone who tries to draw power from ancient texts and scrolls. They typically focus on finding answers in the past from other wizards or from hidden vaults of arcane magic.
A witch is more focused on magic that comes from nature, and is typically knowledge that is passed down from one generation to another. It's more like folk magic. The weakest of witches will be simple herbalists, while the more powerful are probably drawing on some kind of forbidden lore (demon magic or other kind of magic that requires some kind of sacrifice).
Wizards may or may not be shunned by society. Witches are typically shunned by society.
This is the way i see it. Witches are more small time local level village herbalists. Like their magic is based around doing "Witchy" stuff like collecting certain mushrooms, herbs, hair and other random garbage from around the woods and brewing it into something magical. Like they draw out the native magical qualities in random objects for a spell instead of using an incantation or symbols.
They are more along the lines of a local village alchemist than any kind of a priest or sorcerer. They fly with flying ointment on a broom, they turn people to toads with brewed potions they slip into someone's food, they cure curses with a tea made from certain tree bark and
Making that into a magic system might mean you have to make up a list of random ordinary objects found in nature and assigning some kind of basic magical quality to them. Like the DnD component pouch of shit like feathers, string etc. but taken a few steps further. Feathers have an air quality for air spells, soot has a fire quality, bottles of lake, river, and ocean water for different water effects, various scales, hairs from mundane and magical animals, etc and they mix them together for a specific spell to use on someone. A fire spell might require a chip of coal, a salamander tail, and some copper. A healing spell might require treebark, some cocoon silk and rspring water.
A witch is just a female warlock.
But should witches be burned?
I never heard about a wizard being burnt at the stake
No, hanged.
Cunning folk are very different from witches.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunning_folk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunning_folk_in_Britain
>very
Nah, they overlap. Semantics.
What about brutal folk?
Ogres are already hunted
Discipline vs intuition
What sort of artificial dichotomy is this?
It's not artificial, it's same trained vs untrained (or order/chaos if you will) dichotomy but with other words and slight change of point of view
Wizard is taught magic within strict borders and customs of school he attends, rituals and spells are well defined and prone to change upon some sort of punishment. However they unleash maxium possible potential.
Witchery is not actually taught, it's more gut feeling type of magic. No well defined rules or manuals, and spell usually come at low potential. However, witches tend to come with some new or unusual ways to use known magic.
Those who are talented are hunted by rnd department of magical schools and usually end in party van working for goberment
One series i read a while back had it separated into High Magic and Low Magic. The wizards learned high magic which was learning various language, symbols and the lore to know what to write and what strange language incantations to use to draw out magical energies.
While low magic was the common peasant stuff that was learning to recognize and gather up various magical herbs and plant pieces in nature, as well as bits of magic creatures like tails, scales, tongues, and claws. Then learning to draw out the magical energies within these common items.
A wizard might be limited by their education, how many spell incantations they can remember, how skilled they are at ancient forgotten languages, or having their spell book nearby to quick reference. A Witch is limited by how many spell ingredients they have collected and on hand. Any spell book for them is more of a recipe filled cook book.
That's incredibly limiting. Proceeding about self-education in an orderly fashion isn't always so orderly even when one is interacting with institutions, and use of intuition is pretty much basic intelligence usable in learning processes.
Probably because femininity is inherently weaker than masculinity.
Old wizards/witches > young ""wizards/witches""
If your wizard doesn't have a big ass unkempt beard, he is not a wizard.
If your witch doesn't have a wrinkly, warty nose/face, she is not a witch
unequivocally correct
Because witches are women.
Way more stories have big powerful wizards trying to conquer the universe or revive dark gods.
Stories with witches usually consist of curing a princess, or a single person for some petty reason.
Probably for the same reason that men dominate the highest level of all real crafts and professions.
My take is this
>Wizards are academics who study to do their magic, sometimes in an apprenticeship but more often at a formal magic school, and they mostly use a single magical instrument like a staff or rod to convey their power.
>Witches are informal magic users, their magic often passed down from parent to child, and rather than a single magical instrument they use animal parts, ingredients, potion making, etc.
I always liked the idea of the witch being the poor villager magic user. They had a broom instead of an ornate magical staff because that is just what that peasant had at the time. They have their grandma's old cookbook instead of a grand grimoire. And the old family cookpot instead of the rune etched cauldron for the potion brewing.
Also I liked the idea of their magic tools being hidden in plain sight as common mundane things if it's a setting that hates witches. Hiding the magic staff as a broom works since every household needs a broom. Writing "Grandma's Recipes" on the cover of the spellbook and hiding the spells as various recipes can hide it from the authorities.
I've always interpreted "witch" as not even a class of magic user, but rather a profession in which one meets the magical needs of small rural communities. Wizards can be witches, but so can any other spellcaster.
thats shaman, also called witch doctor
Well yeah. Except the Western European flavor of that.
shaman are people who commune with spirits
they can definitely do the job, yes
Witch is an insult for casters, especially hedge wizards.
I don't know why your limited knowledge/twisted world view would make you come to such a faulty conclusion universally, when witches and wizards vary greatly between settings.
Only you know the answer to that.
Academia was heavily biased in the favour of men throughout history, not women. Of course there were exceptional cases, but those were just that, outliers. Even autistically brilliant, high-IQ youngsters were seen as annoying in a climate of old farts. You need to be built up to it.
Witches (hedge wizards) and young wizards are the downtrodden of the wizarding world, doesn't matter how talented they are, as they still know their place. Age is equated with respect. Humans are monkeys and appearance is everything. An annoying kid could have all the answers in the world, and yet you wouldn't want to hear it, not if it wasn't some old man in a cave or something.
Silly, I know, but ego/pride is something we just cannot ditch.
Plato wrote his dialogues in his mid-twenties. Newton discovered calculus in his mid-twenties. So was Leibniz if you prefer to be anal about it. So I'm not sure what "climate of old farts" you're talking about.
If they didn't discover such things early in life, then they wouldn't be able to sit and ponder such things later in life. What are you getting at, exactly?
>I'm not sure what "climate of old farts" you're talking about.
William James Sidis. Mozart. Older types did not like super exceptional prodigies much. The former was lecturing people older than him, leading to bitterness. Even just slightly older students threatened him. Sad.
Yeah a lot of it is more social class than anything else. No one wants to hear some farmer's son or sheepherder's opinions on anything. But the son of a noble with a formal education is to be listened to as they have knowledge the lower classes cannot afford.
>No one wants to hear some farmer's son or sheepherder's opinions on anything.
An old sheepherder doesn't want to listen to some farmer's son over another fellow aged and experienced sheepherder, even if the farmer's son happens to be right. The old sheepherder will just assume them to be less experienced.
>the son of a noble with a formal education is to be listened to
An older educated noble (of a society of elitist fart sniffers) won't listen to the son of a nobleman who has huffed farts for a much shorter period of time than the other, older gentleman in the same room as him. Maybe if that son is the offspring of someone particularly noble...
Youthful politicians are vastly outnumbered by old mummies. Now why do you think this is?
Old mommy politicians, huh?
It's funny, in the game where your image is from (Tactices Ogre LUCT), the witch (Debeb) is the most powerful recruitable character, who has a super special class you get for finishing a secret sidequest before recruiting her that is basically an upgraded version of the witch class.
wizard magic is like really obvious, vulgar stuff like 'i evaporate the left side of your body, perish' and witch magic is like 'you forget the left side of your body is there and your brain can't work in those conditions, perish'. the end result is the same but the former involves a horrendous meat-splosion and the latter involved the target flopping down on the floor, catatonic.
so, like, witches don't use pneumatic drills when a chisel will do, whilst wizards are like 'perhaps i can engineer a way to use multiple pheumatic drills at once, to impress my peers and menace my foes'
I think being a practitioner of magic gives you access to lots of power. It boils down to talent and ambition.
A man asks a witch to deal with a recent landslide that covered a road. The witch embarrasses the rocks enough to roll away just by looking at them. The road can now be used.
A man asks a wizard to deal with a recent landslide that covered a road. The wizard roars and FRICKING EXPLODES the rocks into dust, with a gaping hole in the middle of the road.
as weak as womans magic
as wicked as womans magic
-a tale of earthsea
The most iconic wizards in mythology and fantasy fiction are supernatural beings of immense power who are slumming it with the main characters of the story (Gandalf, Merlin, etc). Witches are fairy tale monsters and historically something you call a woman (or man) if you want the church to murder them for you.
But the answer you want is lol sexism.
>with the main characters
Or teaching them. Merlin was the one who taught the sword, iirc.
That was an implication that didn't need to be said.
Because they are. A wizard lives in a tower, a witch in a hut. A wizard has a golem as a companion, a witch has a cat familiar. A hedge wizard and a witch are of the same power level though.
Because witches have to use their sexuality to aid them, meaning their actual magical abilities suck. They are like a failing student sucking off the tutor to get an A+. Wizened old men, on the other hand, are more powerful as they have to rely on their actual knowledge and strength in the magical arts.
Because men are stronger and wiser.
wizards want to know and use the rules of the universe
witches do petty shit with power they dont care about
Men are simply better at things?
They don't to me, but I grew up on Harry Potter where 'witch' was just the female wizard. Plus, an Asian upbringing made me see the idea of Witches who just like to live in the woods or on the outskirts of society doing small things kind of made me think perhaps Witches are the more powerful (archetype of the wise hermit) or at least more satisfied with their lives.
Witches are based on real world superstitions, which is why the stuff they do is subtle, like curses and hexes. Wizards are more fantastical and can spit lightning
Wizards are male, witches are female.
Wizards study magic, witches pour scolding hot water into their buttholes, dance in the woods naked, sacrifice children, and drink goat piss.
Every man should have a government-assigned witch with a big hat, for therapeutic purposes.
Patriarchy
>Why do wizards come across as more powerful than witches?
Because they're men.
witch:
>lives hidden deep in buttfrick nowhere
>just sells potions unless bothered
>can frick you up if you actually bother her, but would rather hang out
>got her powers from a pact with some weird entity or just a single tome
>hiring her usually ends with your soul getting claimed
wizard:
>lives in huge tower, will build it anywhere convenient and probably upgrade to his own demiplane soon(tm)
>got his magic from studying hard, keeps doing so as much as he can
>travels the world to find more arcane secrets
>will nuke your face if you're in his way (or if he was hired to do so)
>own an huge library
>hiring him just costs you gold, will only frick you over if you try to scam him