| Bara |
"Role: While some druids might keep to the fringe of battle, allowing companions and summoned creatures to fight while they confound foes with the powers of nature, others transform into deadly beasts and savagely wade into combat."
Would a druid really allow animals and summoned creatures to fight while keeping at the fringe of battle? Aren't animals used in this way being exploited by the druid?
Our group had a lively debate about the ethics of being a druid.
Argument One
Animals cannot be exploited in any way for the personal gain of the Druid. Take a canary in a coal mine for example. If dangerous gases leaked into the mine, the gases would kill the canary before killing the miners, thus providing a warning to exit the tunnels immediately. A druid can absolutely not use a canary in this way. Druids are likely to be vegetarians’ and not kill animals for food if they have other options. Training an animal to scout for the party, when that animal could potentially set off a trap and die, is grounds for the druid losing their druidic powers.
Argument Two
There are many types of druids and not all have to be played the same way. There may be some druids that hold animals in such high regard that they would never sacrifice an animal needlessly. But the same rules do not to apply to all druids. A Storm Druid could in fact sacrifice an animal to their god. Alternatively it is fine for a druid to have no god at all. A poster on theses boards describes a dwarven druid that considers the greater mystery of the earth. "Before the dwarves recognized the deities they knew rock, lava, gems and metals. The earth spoke to them and if you listened it would tell you its story". A dwarf druid played in this way is perfectly acceptable and it is reasonable for such a druid to enjoy a suckling roast pig. It is not appropriate to apply strict rules about animals to all druids in the same way.
Agree?/disagree? Interested in hearing other opinions.