wotc decisions offend me. this why i use 3.5 edition. 6th edition is shaping up to be worst edition since 4th.
This does raise some interesting questions of perspective, even if it only applies to a video game. I know that game “Smite” would occasionally run into trouble when they’d add a new mythological character only to have someone point out that particular belief system is still alive and well. To my knowledge, however, it never really amounted to anything.
In theory a similar situation could be applied when anyone throws around terms such as Shaman, Druid, Priest, or others as those are roles filled by people in the real world and have clear connections to beliefs (as opposed to say, Hunters, which are just people who hunt). I suppose the deciding factor is the audience- are enough of them upset to impact sales? If not, why worry?
Still, I can’t help but think of a few times I’ve seen Christian imagery used in anime and Japanese video games by folks who clearly had no idea (or interest) in what they were using, they probably just thought it looked cool (a big bruiser of a priest beating enemies to death with a huge cross comes to mind). I wouldn’t call it offensive, but I would say they rather missed the point. Would whether or not that sort of thing is okay be up to the company, the customers, or someone else entirely?
it’s not a creature type but there are many cards named witch in them.
They are currently in the newest set too.
2 Likes
Sir, I am offended by your statement people are too easily offended! I demand you censor yourself to appease me!
2 Likes
As a person who plays druid in every single game. What do I call myself now? Life wizard? Lmao 
What’s hilarious is that I’m old enough to remember when they removed a bunch of cards for 4th edition to make Magic bible belt friendly.
Like “Contract from Below” and “Resurrection” and “Guardian Angel”.
(Oh and let’s not forget “Sacrifice”. lulz)
God, I swear the global IQ drops a point every time someone says this in the context of “made an inclusivity change I didn’t agree with”.
Don’t understand this what has this to do with druids and shamans?
This.
Priest is a far more controversial term than witch or druid or shaman considering priests actually exist IRL.
I think anyone offended by that should be offended. They deserve it.
I am guess the people getting offended are people that are not actual practitioners of said religious/beliefs. Most pagans I know have no problem with the terms. In fact, most prefer them. Usually because it makes people squirm 
Are they? Or is this just something that some dingus has claimed they’re doing in order to stir up the outraged honking from the reactionary idiots?
1 Like
Druids, remain shrouded in the mists of uncertainty. Their once-vibrant religious practices are but echoes in the corridors of time long forgotten. So, why the uproar over their portrayal? Is it a rational response, or an emotional tempest that logic cannot contain? Should we allow such sentiments to dictate the boundaries of creative expression?
‘Shaman,’ it’s a term so casually tossed around. A catch-all phrase for the spiritual outliers, the unorthodox believers. In the sprawling narrative of WoW, Shamanism isn’t a throwaway inclusion; it’s an intricately woven tapestry, drawing threads from the diverse mythologies and obscure traditions that linger on the fringes.
Yet, the central query remains—What if someone does take offense? Does their reaction possess the weight of reason or the unpredictable turbulence of raw emotion? Should the creative journey within a video game be held hostage to the ever-changing currents of human feelings?
In this expansive digital realm, Druids and Shamans are not triggers for offense but vessels of exploration. They add layers to the narrative, inviting players to ponder the real-world cultures that inspired these in-game concepts.
Ultimately, WoW is an invitation to explore the kaleidoscope of perspectives that make up our world. Druids and Shamans are not mere elements of the game but reflections of the multifaceted nature of human experience. So, let it be known: art, comedy, and creativity cannot thrive in an atmosphere of constant fear and self-censorship. We must resist the pressure to capitulate to irrational emotions and defend the freedom to express ourselves. Only by embracing diverse perspectives and protecting artistic liberty can we truly appreciate the beauty of the gaming universe and the richness of our real world."
Moo!
That’s weird, because the only two Wiccans that I know both play MTG and have never complained about how the cards are named.
I’d like a source, because they just released a set that was themed specifically on witches and warlocks. 
Now, witches are not a creature type in MTG. They did exist a long time ago (decades), but they’ve been errata’d out and are now Wizards or Warlocks. So, this isn’t even remotely new. We still see mention of witches on cards, so that hasn’t gone anywhere.
I’d also like to say that Witch, Shaman, Druid or Warlock are not pejorative terms.
This kind of feels like a bait thread.
I wouldn’t want this to happen purely because religion / faith / culture is an intended part of WoW. We have priests, druids and shaman. All of them are relevant and important. Changing them would be a disservice.
Anyone know if this is true or not?
They’re called Wiccans. WotC are being pansies. Witches are straight out of the Wizard of Oz. It’s 2023. Everything offends someone. Wiccans are the type to not be offended by it. It’s virtue signaling at its finest.
It would be easy to pick new names. Druid becomes Shapeshifter, Shsman becomes Elementalist, done. Changing every reference to those names in the game and Warcraft related products is an entirely different matter. I don’t expect to see it because it’s very impractical to do.
And anything is possible OP.
Never say never, we are living in bizarro world as it is.
“clown world” if you may.