I can't understand how a 1st level wizard can have a familiar but not a 1st level warlock. It just makes no sense. The Oxford dictionary says "A warlock is a male practitioner of witchcraft". We all know that WITCHES are the ones that, according to historical lore, had a familiar. NOT wizards! WTF! Why are wizards "The Golden Class" that get the best features of every other magical class? Recognizing this travesty, WotC finally gave UA warlock their Pact Boon at 1st level, although UA warlocks still suck in so many other ways. Lastly, ANY fool 1st level wizard can have a familiar, but only specialized Pact of the Chain warlocks can have one? Why is that?
I think that the Find Familiar spell should be available to ALL warlocks at 1st level. That way, any starting warlock who wants a familiar could have a standard familiar at 1st level (just like any starting wizard). Then, if the warlock wants to pick Pact of the Chain, they could have a better familiar. What is wrong with that? Why hasn't it always been that way? I try not to be envious, but it seems like wizards steal the thunder of every other magical class for themselves. Wizards have to be the best at everything. Bleh!
Because there isn't a universally-recognized International Standard warlock or witch. Both describe a huge variety of of people, characters, and archetypes, of which familiars are attached to a subset, but do not wholly belong to that subset.
The OED definition is only etymologically relevant; A D&D Class Warlock isn't just 'A male witch'' it's an assortment of interactions and rules mechanics derives partially from folklore, partially from fantasy literature, and partially from DND's own lore and history.
If you're going with a folkloric witch or warlock, any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill, depending on exactly what type of witch or warlock you're trying to emulate.
And there's always the "Design a Warlock Subclass that has Find Familiar on it's first level spell list" option.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Because there isn't a universally-recognized International Standard warlock or witch. Both describe a huge variety of of people, characters, and archetypes, of which familiars are attached to a subset, but do not wholly belong to that subset.
The OED definition is only etymologically relevant; A D&D Class Warlock isn't just 'A male witch'' it's an assortment of interactions and rules mechanics derives partially from folklore, partially from fantasy literature, and partially from DND's own lore and history.
If you're going with a folkloric witch or warlock, any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill, depending on exactly what type of witch or warlock you're trying to emulate.
And there's always the "Design a Warlock Subclass that has Find Familiar on it's first level spell list" option.
Well sure, most DM's will let a starting warlock trade a 1st level spell for Find Familiar. But that is homebrew, which you really shouldn't have to do in this case. Still, your statement doesn't explain why the Wizard gets a familiar at 1st level by the rules and a Warlock does not. If you read the Find Familiar spell, you will see that it is ONLY for wizards. Pact of the Chain warlocks ONLY (and not the other Pacts) are an exception to that otherwise universal rule. So your statement that "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" is a little disingenuous. Because that is going to require some homebrew or a feat or something, when the golden boy wizards get familiars for free.
If one is going to be honest, one would admit that witches and warlocks are more associated with familiars than are wizards. The only honest excuse for how the rules are now is "we designed wizards to be the best magic using class and all the other magic using classes were designed to be inferior." Because, quite honestly, the consensus of the D&D community is precisely that. Look at all the class tier rankings posted on YouTube or elsewhere. Wizards are always ranked number 1. Show me one that ranks a straight (not multiclassed) Warlock ahead of a straight Wizard. There probably is one somewhere, but there are very few people that would rank a straight warlock ahead of a straight wizard.
Dude, you're asking random peeps about something only the designers know. What answer are you expecting here?
The people who wrote 5th edition decided "I think this would be a wizard only spell" and made it so.
There is a lot of focus on the spell list being the biggest benefit of the wizard, hence the limits on how many spells they can know compared to other prep-type casters.
Other than "the designer said so", no other answer is true. We can speculate, but no matter our speculations you're not going to agree with them because you want to compare warlocks and wizards for some silly reason and have predetermined find familiar shouldn't be wizard only spell and warlocks should get it to. I can already tell nothing anybody writes here is going to change that for you -- nor should it. It's your preference, and a very valid one. The issue is you're expecting some genuine reason beyond speculation and there isn't one.
It's just the way the game peeps made it. That's it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ If you need more - go ask them. They don't read these forums.
Well, I think that we are in violent agreement here. :-)
Yes, none of us can know the intent of the designers when they made Find Familiar a wizard only spell. Thanks for admitting that my preference is a valid one, at least for me. My intent was just to point out something that I think was a design mistake. So if tomorrow a new player is rolling up a character and he or she wants a warlock with a familiar, they can refer their DM to this discussion and say, "Hey DM friend, I want to play a Warlock and have a familiar at 1st level. This guy Salguod says I should be able to get one, Cyb3rM1nd says he has a point, and WotC is giving all arcane casters (including Warlocks) the Find Familiar spell at 1st level when the new UA comes out. Would it be okay if I swapped one of my 1st level spells for Find Familiar?"
And if just one DM says yes, my mission here is accomplished.
I'm not sure why a DM would look at this and think "well some randos on a net says it ok then it must be" - most DMs will run the game they want.
But, bonus, if you're thinking of the UA everyone gets a free start feat and can use it for Arcane Initiate or Ritual Caster to get the spell, no matter what class they are. Problem solved. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm not sure why a DM would look at this and think "well some randos on a net says it ok then it must be" - most DMs will run the game they want.
But, bonus, if you're thinking of the UA everyone gets a free start feat and can use it for Arcane Initiate or Ritual Caster to get the spell, no matter what class they are. Problem solved. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't think everyone is reading UA feats in the same way. Also, I'm not saying that I am reading them correctly and others are wrong. But the way I read it is that you are NOT going to be able to pick just any feat at 1st level (like Vuman or Custom Lineage). At 1st level, you are going to be limited to 1st level feats only. Ritual Caster is listed as 4th level in the UA, and Magic Initiate isn't even listed, but I'm willing to bet it will be 4th level. So no relief for my long suffering warlock there. :-(
Because the Wizard is the person who's spent no small amount of their life studying and practicing magic, while the Warlock is someone who got powers the easy way and is thus more limited in them without direct gifts from their patron.
At 1st level, nobody has done anything yet. So if that is your justification for why Wizard gets Find Familiar and Warlock does not...I think that is pretty weak tea. Why would the warlock's patron not be willing to grant the Find Familiar spell to their new 1st level warlock? Why would the (never done a thing in his life) wizard get the spell just for walking through the library? Was there a familiar hanging out in the library stacks? Again, my point is that (if you reference historical beliefs) the Find Familiar spell is MORE thematic for Warlock than Wizard...at the very least, it is equally so.
But as things are currently in the UA, Find Familiar is on the Arcane Spell list for everybody. So new warlocks will get it at 1st level. It is only current warlocks that are screwed.
Because the Wizard is the person who's spent no small amount of their life studying and practicing magic, while the Warlock is someone who got powers the easy way and is thus more limited in them without direct gifts from their patron.
...Why would the warlock's patron not be willing to grant the Find Familiar spell to their new 1st level warlock?
and, upon re-reading, it kinda sounds like you could have both a pact familiar and an arcane familiar (per the Arcane spell list (which UA-5 warlocks have access to as you mention above)). sooo, why do warlocks get all the cool stuff? two familiars! wow!
Because the Wizard is the person who's spent no small amount of their life studying and practicing magic, while the Warlock is someone who got powers the easy way and is thus more limited in them without direct gifts from their patron.
...Why would the warlock's patron not be willing to grant the Find Familiar spell to their new 1st level warlock?
and, upon re-reading, it kinda sounds like you could have both a pact familiar and an arcane familiar (per the Arcane spell list (which UA-5 warlocks have access to as you mention above)). sooo, why do warlocks get all the cool stuff? two familiars! wow!
I don't think it works that way. But (under the current rules) a 1st level Warlock could get a Find Familiar pet at 1st level (if he could convince the DM to give him the spell) and then upgrade to a Pact of the Chain familiar at 3rd level. With the UA rules, the warlock simply gets his Pact at 1st level, and that would include the familiar if he chooses Pact of the Chain. (Hmmm...now that I read it again, I don't think you even need to be Pact of the Chain, any UA Warlock can cast the new Pact Familiar spell). But either way, it is quite clear that you can have only ONE familiar at a time. I'm pretty sure that Jeremy said so (if there was ever any doubt).
Because there isn't a universally-recognized International Standard warlock or witch. Both describe a huge variety of of people, characters, and archetypes, of which familiars are attached to a subset, but do not wholly belong to that subset.
The OED definition is only etymologically relevant; A D&D Class Warlock isn't just 'A male witch'' it's an assortment of interactions and rules mechanics derives partially from folklore, partially from fantasy literature, and partially from DND's own lore and history.
If you're going with a folkloric witch or warlock, any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill, depending on exactly what type of witch or warlock you're trying to emulate.
And there's always the "Design a Warlock Subclass that has Find Familiar on it's first level spell list" option.
Well sure, most DM's will let a starting warlock trade a 1st level spell for Find Familiar. But that is homebrew, which you really shouldn't have to do in this case. Still, your statement doesn't explain why the Wizard gets a familiar at 1st level by the rules and a Warlock does not. If you read the Find Familiar spell, you will see that it is ONLY for wizards. Pact of the Chain warlocks ONLY (and not the other Pacts) are an exception to that otherwise universal rule. So your statement that "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" is a little disingenuous. Because that is going to require some homebrew or a feat or something, when the golden boy wizards get familiars for free.
That's not what I meant when I wrote "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" . I meant that any spellcasting class, and a few non-spellcasting ones can be a character concept that is a witch or small-w warlock without homebrewing, and without the character being misunderstood, delusional, or lying, because the definition of "witch" is extremely broad, and has no sharp borders.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Because there isn't a universally-recognized International Standard warlock or witch. Both describe a huge variety of of people, characters, and archetypes, of which familiars are attached to a subset, but do not wholly belong to that subset.
The OED definition is only etymologically relevant; A D&D Class Warlock isn't just 'A male witch'' it's an assortment of interactions and rules mechanics derives partially from folklore, partially from fantasy literature, and partially from DND's own lore and history.
If you're going with a folkloric witch or warlock, any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill, depending on exactly what type of witch or warlock you're trying to emulate.
And there's always the "Design a Warlock Subclass that has Find Familiar on it's first level spell list" option.
Well sure, most DM's will let a starting warlock trade a 1st level spell for Find Familiar. But that is homebrew, which you really shouldn't have to do in this case. Still, your statement doesn't explain why the Wizard gets a familiar at 1st level by the rules and a Warlock does not. If you read the Find Familiar spell, you will see that it is ONLY for wizards. Pact of the Chain warlocks ONLY (and not the other Pacts) are an exception to that otherwise universal rule. So your statement that "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" is a little disingenuous. Because that is going to require some homebrew or a feat or something, when the golden boy wizards get familiars for free.
That's not what I meant when I wrote "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" . I meant that any spellcasting class, and a few non-spellcasting ones can be a character concept that is a witch or small-w warlock without homebrewing, and without the character being misunderstood, delusional, or lying, because the definition of "witch" is extremely broad, and has no sharp borders.
Hmmm...I'm not quite sure of your intended meaning here. But whatever...I think that this thread has pretty much run its course.
I can't understand how a 1st level wizard can have a familiar but not a 1st level warlock. It just makes no sense. The Oxford dictionary says "A warlock is a male practitioner of witchcraft". We all know that WITCHES are the ones that, according to historical lore, had a familiar. NOT wizards!...
Thoughts? Am I wrong for some reason? Why?
Yes, you are wrong because you use the wrong dictionary for the definition of the warlock. What you have there is the Oxford Dictionary's definition of this world's warlock. You should use the dnd-world's definition of the warlock. In dnd-world, "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods...More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice...Warlocks are seekers of the knowledge that lies hidden in the fabric of the multiverse" (Player's Handbook).
A warlock is NOTa male practitioner of witchcraft in the dnd world. Witchcraft does not have to be a part of the warlock class and witchcraft can be part of any spell-casting class in dnd world. In other words, any male spell caster can fit the definition of "a male practitioner of witchcraft". For example, an evil alignment Wizard could learn his spellcasting from an evil witch. Also please answer the following question: "How is an Archfey female warlock, who made a pact with the arch-Dryad and swear to protect nature, considered as a male practitioner of witchcraft?"
I can't understand how a 1st level wizard can have a familiar but not a 1st level warlock. It just makes no sense. The Oxford dictionary says "A warlock is a male practitioner of witchcraft". We all know that WITCHES are the ones that, according to historical lore, had a familiar. NOT wizards!...
Thoughts? Am I wrong for some reason? Why?
Yes, you are wrong because you use the wrong dictionary for the definition of the warlock. What you have there is the Oxford Dictionary's definition of this world's warlock. You should use the dnd-world's definition of the warlock. In dnd-world, "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods...More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice...Warlocks are seekers of the knowledge that lies hidden in the fabric of the multiverse" (Player's Handbook).
A warlock is NOTa male practitioner of witchcraft in the dnd world. Witchcraft does not have to be a part of the warlock class and witchcraft can be part of any spell-casting class in dnd world. In other words, any male spell caster can fit the definition of "a male practitioner of witchcraft". For example, an evil alignment Wizard could learn his spellcasting from an evil witch. Also please answer the following question: "How is an Archfey female warlock, who made a pact with the arch-Dryad and swear to protect nature, considered as a male practitioner of witchcraft?"
D&D is a fantasy game based on historical and cultural beliefs. Thus, it is appropriate to reference historical and cultural beliefs when discussing the game. Very clearly, historical witches were associated with familiars. When creating our characters, we should be free to create a "witch" that fits this mold. Unfortunately, WotC has not created a Witch class. Other systems like Pathfinder do have a special class for Witch. But it is the intent of WotC to allow flexibility when characters are created so that everyone can play the character that they want to play. I still don't understand why you feel that only the Wizard class should have this ability, when very clearly, WotC intended the Warlock to have a familiar and only Warlock has a sub-class that includes a familiar (neither Wizard or any other magical class or sub-class includes a familiar). It is obvious to me (obviously not obvious to you) that Warlock is the WotC class that is closest to a classical (Salem) Witch, who would have had Satan for her patron. The Wizard class seems very far from that mark, IMHO. But we can freely disagree, because if you look at the WotC Warlock definition that you quoted and then look at the WotC definition of Wizard, neither class says anything about Witches whatsoever.
But the beauty of D&D is that we can just agree to disagree, and we are all free to play our character as we wish. I fail to see how my witch having a familiar at 1st level would break the game, but apparently some people feel very strongly that the opposite is true, and that only a Wizard is worthy of having a familiar. (sigh)
The way I always saw it is that anyone can learn a bit of magic, but a Patron has to have a relationship with you before they bestow a familiar on you, and that requires more than one level in the class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I can't understand how a 1st level wizard can have a familiar but not a 1st level warlock. It just makes no sense. The Oxford dictionary says "A warlock is a male practitioner of witchcraft". We all know that WITCHES are the ones that, according to historical lore, had a familiar. NOT wizards! WTF! Why are wizards "The Golden Class" that get the best features of every other magical class? Recognizing this travesty, WotC finally gave UA warlock their Pact Boon at 1st level, although UA warlocks still suck in so many other ways. Lastly, ANY fool 1st level wizard can have a familiar, but only specialized Pact of the Chain warlocks can have one? Why is that?
I think that the Find Familiar spell should be available to ALL warlocks at 1st level. That way, any starting warlock who wants a familiar could have a standard familiar at 1st level (just like any starting wizard). Then, if the warlock wants to pick Pact of the Chain, they could have a better familiar. What is wrong with that? Why hasn't it always been that way? I try not to be envious, but it seems like wizards steal the thunder of every other magical class for themselves. Wizards have to be the best at everything. Bleh!
Thoughts? Am I wrong for some reason? Why?
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
Because there isn't a universally-recognized International Standard warlock or witch. Both describe a huge variety of of people, characters, and archetypes, of which familiars are attached to a subset, but do not wholly belong to that subset.
The OED definition is only etymologically relevant; A D&D Class Warlock isn't just 'A male witch'' it's an assortment of interactions and rules mechanics derives partially from folklore, partially from fantasy literature, and partially from DND's own lore and history.
If you're going with a folkloric witch or warlock, any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill, depending on exactly what type of witch or warlock you're trying to emulate.
And there's always the "Design a Warlock Subclass that has Find Familiar on it's first level spell list" option.
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Well sure, most DM's will let a starting warlock trade a 1st level spell for Find Familiar. But that is homebrew, which you really shouldn't have to do in this case. Still, your statement doesn't explain why the Wizard gets a familiar at 1st level by the rules and a Warlock does not. If you read the Find Familiar spell, you will see that it is ONLY for wizards. Pact of the Chain warlocks ONLY (and not the other Pacts) are an exception to that otherwise universal rule. So your statement that "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" is a little disingenuous. Because that is going to require some homebrew or a feat or something, when the golden boy wizards get familiars for free.
If one is going to be honest, one would admit that witches and warlocks are more associated with familiars than are wizards. The only honest excuse for how the rules are now is "we designed wizards to be the best magic using class and all the other magic using classes were designed to be inferior." Because, quite honestly, the consensus of the D&D community is precisely that. Look at all the class tier rankings posted on YouTube or elsewhere. Wizards are always ranked number 1. Show me one that ranks a straight (not multiclassed) Warlock ahead of a straight Wizard. There probably is one somewhere, but there are very few people that would rank a straight warlock ahead of a straight wizard.
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
Dude, you're asking random peeps about something only the designers know. What answer are you expecting here?
The people who wrote 5th edition decided "I think this would be a wizard only spell" and made it so.
There is a lot of focus on the spell list being the biggest benefit of the wizard, hence the limits on how many spells they can know compared to other prep-type casters.
Other than "the designer said so", no other answer is true. We can speculate, but no matter our speculations you're not going to agree with them because you want to compare warlocks and wizards for some silly reason and have predetermined find familiar shouldn't be wizard only spell and warlocks should get it to. I can already tell nothing anybody writes here is going to change that for you -- nor should it. It's your preference, and a very valid one. The issue is you're expecting some genuine reason beyond speculation and there isn't one.
It's just the way the game peeps made it. That's it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ If you need more - go ask them. They don't read these forums.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Well, I think that we are in violent agreement here. :-)
Yes, none of us can know the intent of the designers when they made Find Familiar a wizard only spell. Thanks for admitting that my preference is a valid one, at least for me. My intent was just to point out something that I think was a design mistake. So if tomorrow a new player is rolling up a character and he or she wants a warlock with a familiar, they can refer their DM to this discussion and say,
"Hey DM friend, I want to play a Warlock and have a familiar at 1st level. This guy Salguod says I should be able to get one, Cyb3rM1nd says he has a point, and WotC is giving all arcane casters (including Warlocks) the Find Familiar spell at 1st level when the new UA comes out. Would it be okay if I swapped one of my 1st level spells for Find Familiar?"
And if just one DM says yes, my mission here is accomplished.
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
I'm not sure why a DM would look at this and think "well some randos on a net says it ok then it must be" - most DMs will run the game they want.
But, bonus, if you're thinking of the UA everyone gets a free start feat and can use it for Arcane Initiate or Ritual Caster to get the spell, no matter what class they are. Problem solved. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
I don't think everyone is reading UA feats in the same way. Also, I'm not saying that I am reading them correctly and others are wrong. But the way I read it is that you are NOT going to be able to pick just any feat at 1st level (like Vuman or Custom Lineage). At 1st level, you are going to be limited to 1st level feats only. Ritual Caster is listed as 4th level in the UA, and Magic Initiate isn't even listed, but I'm willing to bet it will be 4th level. So no relief for my long suffering warlock there. :-(
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
At 1st level, nobody has done anything yet. So if that is your justification for why Wizard gets Find Familiar and Warlock does not...I think that is pretty weak tea. Why would the warlock's patron not be willing to grant the Find Familiar spell to their new 1st level warlock? Why would the (never done a thing in his life) wizard get the spell just for walking through the library? Was there a familiar hanging out in the library stacks? Again, my point is that (if you reference historical beliefs) the Find Familiar spell is MORE thematic for Warlock than Wizard...at the very least, it is equally so.
But as things are currently in the UA, Find Familiar is on the Arcane Spell list for everybody. So new warlocks will get it at 1st level. It is only current warlocks that are screwed.
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
UA-1, Character Origins, Feats: Magic Initiate (page 17), 1st level feat. two cantrips and a 1st-level spell.
UA-5, Handbook Playtest, Spells: Pact Familiar (page 10), starting warlock cantrip.
and, upon re-reading, it kinda sounds like you could have both a pact familiar and an arcane familiar (per the Arcane spell list (which UA-5 warlocks have access to as you mention above)). sooo, why do warlocks get all the cool stuff? two familiars! wow!
I don't think it works that way. But (under the current rules) a 1st level Warlock could get a Find Familiar pet at 1st level (if he could convince the DM to give him the spell) and then upgrade to a Pact of the Chain familiar at 3rd level. With the UA rules, the warlock simply gets his Pact at 1st level, and that would include the familiar if he chooses Pact of the Chain. (Hmmm...now that I read it again, I don't think you even need to be Pact of the Chain, any UA Warlock can cast the new Pact Familiar spell). But either way, it is quite clear that you can have only ONE familiar at a time. I'm pretty sure that Jeremy said so (if there was ever any doubt).
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
That's not what I meant when I wrote "any spellcasting class (And even some non-spellcasting classes) can fit the bill" . I meant that any spellcasting class, and a few non-spellcasting ones can be a character concept that is a witch or small-w warlock without homebrewing, and without the character being misunderstood, delusional, or lying, because the definition of "witch" is extremely broad, and has no sharp borders.
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Hmmm...I'm not quite sure of your intended meaning here. But whatever...I think that this thread has pretty much run its course.
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
Yes, you are wrong because you use the wrong dictionary for the definition of the warlock. What you have there is the Oxford Dictionary's definition of this world's warlock. You should use the dnd-world's definition of the warlock. In dnd-world, "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods...More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice...Warlocks are seekers of the knowledge that lies hidden in the fabric of the multiverse" (Player's Handbook).
A warlock is NOT a male practitioner of witchcraft in the dnd world. Witchcraft does not have to be a part of the warlock class and witchcraft can be part of any spell-casting class in dnd world. In other words, any male spell caster can fit the definition of "a male practitioner of witchcraft". For example, an evil alignment Wizard could learn his spellcasting from an evil witch. Also please answer the following question: "How is an Archfey female warlock, who made a pact with the arch-Dryad and swear to protect nature, considered as a male practitioner of witchcraft?"
D&D is a fantasy game based on historical and cultural beliefs. Thus, it is appropriate to reference historical and cultural beliefs when discussing the game. Very clearly, historical witches were associated with familiars. When creating our characters, we should be free to create a "witch" that fits this mold. Unfortunately, WotC has not created a Witch class. Other systems like Pathfinder do have a special class for Witch. But it is the intent of WotC to allow flexibility when characters are created so that everyone can play the character that they want to play. I still don't understand why you feel that only the Wizard class should have this ability, when very clearly, WotC intended the Warlock to have a familiar and only Warlock has a sub-class that includes a familiar (neither Wizard or any other magical class or sub-class includes a familiar). It is obvious to me (obviously not obvious to you) that Warlock is the WotC class that is closest to a classical (Salem) Witch, who would have had Satan for her patron. The Wizard class seems very far from that mark, IMHO. But we can freely disagree, because if you look at the WotC Warlock definition that you quoted and then look at the WotC definition of Wizard, neither class says anything about Witches whatsoever.
But the beauty of D&D is that we can just agree to disagree, and we are all free to play our character as we wish. I fail to see how my witch having a familiar at 1st level would break the game, but apparently some people feel very strongly that the opposite is true, and that only a Wizard is worthy of having a familiar. (sigh)
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
The way I always saw it is that anyone can learn a bit of magic, but a Patron has to have a relationship with you before they bestow a familiar on you, and that requires more than one level in the class.