That would be pretty boring, I think.
For a long time Druid has been that treehugging serial killer with the scimitar...what if their role is to function as a primitive Paladin...as the Guardian of all Life?
If druids are the clerics of natures, then I see the ranger filling the nature-paladin role.
Personally, I think if you are running a druid as any type of serial killer (N/E druids possibly excluded), you may have missed the point when it comes to what a druid is. I think Fletch has got it right:
Druids = priests of nature
Rangers = paladins of nature
Of course, some of the changes in rangers over the years have turned them into highwaymen rather than protector of anything ;-)
So in answer to the original question: Yes, I think many people are getting the druids wrong.
For a long time Druid has been that treehugging serial killer with the scimitar...what if their role is to function as a primitive Paladin...as the Guardian of all Life?
Treehugging serial killer/primitave paladin? Sounds like terrorist/freedom fighter to me.
I think it is entirely dependent on how your druid views nature as that is his guide. If he views it as a great balance then that is how he should be played. If he views nature as "red in tooth and claw" as shown by hyenas, baboons and chimpanzees then he should be true to that. So long as protecting nature is his primary concern.
I think what most people forget is that a true nuetral druid has as little time for good societies as he does for evil societies. To the druid those 40 acres of farmland are as big an insult as those orcs burning trees down. In fact if the orcs are wandering nomads he probably prefers them because their impact on nature is less. He has no problem with animals being killed it is probably wanton slaughter that he dislikes. Beware you royal hunting parties.
and here I'm thinking Druid should be the tiny mouse that sneaks into a room and then shape shifts into an Earth Elemental to the horror of the guards inside MWHAAHAH
Neutral, Smneutral Mother Nature's a b!&~# and the b%&&+ wants BLOOD !
lol
I think what most people forget is that a true nuetral druid has as little time for good societies as he does for evil societies. To the druid those 40 acres of farmland are as big an insult as those orcs burning trees down. In fact if the orcs are wandering nomads he probably prefers them because their impact on nature is less. He has no problem with animals being killed it is probably wanton slaughter that he dislikes. Beware you royal hunting parties.
I think any druid that equates 40 acres of farmland with orcs burning trees has probably lost all perspective. I look at druids mostly as they appeared in T1 - Village of Hommlett, practitioners of the old religion. They still deal with congregations of people. They just make sure that they respect the bounty of the land and make the proper sacrifices and care for any natural land they must put into agricultural production.
I also think there would be some wilder sects than others but that's just differentiated roles within the greater druidic calling, as it were.I don't see rangers at all as nature's paladins. Rangers are wilderness warriors whose job is to protect the people by using small unit or singular, mobile action rather than heavy armor and massed troops. Because they operate in the wild, they learn to deal with it, respect it, and use it to their advantage and the advantage of the groups they protect.
Priests serve for a variety of reasons--so too, I think, do druids.
A few are like Poison Ivy--ecoterrorists. They operate in small cells.
Some are gardeners by nature, only they work on a large scale--they focus on healing/tending. They find peace by working alone.
Some are political--they speak to governments about conservation, pollution, deforestation, and the like. These Druids are not isolationists, they are teachers and persuasion is part of their modus operandi.
Some are researchers--they travel to remote regions and look for herbal cures for deadly/debilitating health problems. They respect all life and view man, animal and plant as a complete ecosystem. Highly intelligent, they work in small groups so that ideas can be discussed.
A few are just free spirits--they prefer wildshape to shed their concerns and run with the wind. Such individuals travel alone or in mated pairs.
I also think that the various races might have different takes on what a druid is or why they become one. Dwarves probably want to impose some order on nature in order to improve it, while elves look for ways to enhance natural beauty by making minimal changes to enhance what's already there. Halflings might view the druid as a pillar of the community, helping find a balance where all can live comfortable and sustainable lives. A warforged druid (!) might be trying to investigate the very nature of his being as a living thing.
I think that there is a lot of room for playing different kinds of druids.
For a long time Druid has been that treehugging serial killer with the scimitar...what if their role is to function as a primitive Paladin...as the Guardian of all Life?
I have had/played several concepts of a Druid, but I have never heard of the Tree-Hugging Serial Killer, lol.
1. Tree-Hugger Elf
2. Shapeshifting Explorer (African) <Master of Many Forms>
3. Shapeshifting Barbarian (American Indian) <Shapeshifter Variant PHB2>
4. Animal Companion Cavalier (Mounted)
Then again, it is a rare opportunity that any of my DMs have let a group play an Evil character, so that probably put a bit of a damper on the whole Serial Killer thing.
There are those druids (in movies) similar to what someone mentioned above... underground cults that sacrifice people/animals for the purpose of getting greater powers/benefits from the land, usually an evil being/deity that they claim/believe is "Mother Nature". ("Children of Corn" and "Wickerman" is the 2 best examples of this that I can think of atm.)
Perhaps not Serial Killers, but maybe Ritual Killing Zealots... yea, thats the ticket!
A Druid's Role?
Whatever you want it to be.... Healer, Farmer, Cavalier, Crazy Cat Lady, Circus Trainer, Organ Grinder, Psuedo-Werewolf, etc... I can think of a ton of really cool Druid themes/roles.
and here I'm thinking Druid should be the tiny mouse that sneaks into a room and then shape shifts into an Earth Elemental to the horror of the guards inside MWHAAHAH
Neutral, Smneutral Mother Nature's a b%%&! and the b%%&! wants BLOOD !
HAHAHAHA Oh man, that was so, so good! :)
Lewis
1. Tree-Hugger Elf
2. Shapeshifting Explorer (African) <Master of Many Forms>
3. Shapeshifting Barbarian (American Indian) <Shapeshifter Variant PHB2>
4. Animal Companion Cavalier (Mounted)
I played a Neutral Druid, but he wasnt a guardian of nature. Instead, Karl (that was his name) was about survival and knowledge. His motivation for adventure was to learn new things, see new places, and expand his horizons. His motivation for being a druid was simply that he could feel and tap into nature to use it. He was more of a magical outdoorsman. In fact, Karl viewed nature as something to be exploited. He didnt take his Animal Companion, and he didnt especially like or dislike animals. To Karl, animals were food, and all of nature was food. He was in tune with nature, he had a talent for it, but his magical connection to nature was something for him to exploit. I dont mean exploit in the evil sense, only in the literal sense that he used it to his advantage.
Now you might say such a character would be more suited to being a Ranger. Perhaps. I certainly later regretted not having an Animal Companion (I hate keeping track of Hirelings, Animal Companions, Familiars, etc) because a LOT, maybe most, of the Druid's power was wrapped up into his Animal Companion. However, being a fan of Druids back from before they ever had Animal Companions, I really liked Druids more for being an exotic spellcasting class.
My GM was nice enough to let me cast as a Sorcerer once my no-companion version ended up being significantly less effective than everyone else in the party. It was nice to not have to decide in advance what to cast, and it brought me back up to about where everyone else was. The Druid spell list wont make you a powerhouse, esp without an animal companion to leverage some of the spells, but it does make you flexible if you can cast whatever spell is needed as a Sorcerer.
I do wish there was some kind of official variant Druid with some kind of spellcaster upgrade in exchange for dumping the Animal Companion. I saw some Dragon Magazine thing, but it was awful. You gave up either Wild Shape or Animal Companion (I forget) in exchange for nothing for some reason; and you could spontaneously cast to electricity spells, but most of the Druid elemental damage spells suck from a damage perspective compared to the level you get them. So it kinda blew chunks.
I think it would be cool to give up the AC in exchange for Sorcerer style casting, or better yet Magister style casting, and you switch the spontaneous casting to the Warmage Electrical spells only.
Oh well I'm rambling at this point, but I hate animal companions. I prefer to view animals as meat. Well for Karl anyway. I'm not sure how I'll approach my next Druid.
Lewis
I play rangers and druids a great deal... I think the mention of the "Old Religion" is a good concept (that and I LOVE the VIllage of Hommlet...). I have found the now mostly forgotten early 90's techno act, The Shamen, to have a decent insight (they were house music, yes, but their lyrics, insights, etc. were heavily blended with psychedelic mysticism and neo-druidic/shamanistic philosophies.)
More or les the druid is the same thing as a shaman.
|
...and what exactly is the deal with druids not knowing how to work a bow? Can't use metal weapons... except scimitars for some reason... but the best ranged weapon they can figure out is a sling? If there's one thing about the Pathfinder druid that disappointed my group, it would be the continuing reign of the sling-only ranged druid.
Sorry to go off topic, but that was the first thing I thought them I saw the thread title.
Eberron has a few good examples of druids. Some are guardians/wardens, keeping the foolish out the dangerous parts of the earth for their own good. Others are zealots, seeking to drive out all humanoid traces from their lands. Others yet bridge the gap btwn the wild and the other races.
There are some nasty spells in the Spell Compendium, like Contagion, for a druid to use to 'persuade' that logging camp to give up their operation.
I run my druid as one that seeks balance. Man serves Nature and Nature serves Man. I only go serial when undead are around. Cursed Abominations!
...and what exactly is the deal with druids not knowing how to work a bow? Can't use metal weapons... except scimitars for some reason... but the best ranged weapon they can figure out is a sling? If there's one thing about the Pathfinder druid that disappointed my group, it would be the continuing reign of the sling-only ranged druid.
Sorry to go off topic, but that was the first thing I thought them I saw the thread title.
That's why I played an elven druid. Took him from level 1 (when he was too poor to buy a backpack AND something to put in it!) to level 16 (when the DM moved away). Originally he was going to be a variation of the archer cleric, except druidic, but he eventually became a powerhouse of versatility. I think his feats were Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Natural Spell, Craft Wand, Empower Spell, Improved Counterspell. Turned out he was the heir to the throne of the Unseelie Court.
Rapid Shot actually synergized quite well with Produce Flame.But his take on druidism was that he had to save the world (campaign plot hook) so the world might as well help him do it. Besides, it's where he has all his stuff.
...and what exactly is the deal with druids not knowing how to work a bow? Can't use metal weapons... except scimitars for some reason... but the best ranged weapon they can figure out is a sling?
A druid is supposed to be similar in combat (without wildshape) to a cleric. Clerics cannot use bows either. Clerics tend to use crossbows instead. A crossbow is too complex, has too many mechanical parts for druidic sensibilities.
If a druid learned how to use a bow (multiclassing, proficiency feats, or being an Elf), they can use it. But as for a core druid, its because crossbows are off limits.
Also, the best ranged weapon a druid can use isn't a sling. It's a spear. (Or Flame Strike.)
As for the scimitar, imagine it as a Machete instead.
My GM was nice enough to let me cast as a Sorcerer once my no-companion version ended up being significantly less effective than everyone else in the party. It was nice to not have to decide in advance what to cast, and it brought me back up to about where everyone else was. The Druid spell list wont make you a powerhouse, esp without an animal companion to leverage some of the spells, but it does make you flexible if you can cast whatever spell is needed as a Sorcerer.
I had a DM who also used this method for Clerics, however that was 2nd Edition. I don't remember if we had Spontaneous Healing back then and we definitely did not have Domains. It actually makes quite a bit of sense as well since a Divine Caster, at least clerics, would likely pray to cast. Why not pray for the spell you need at any given moment, not just something you thought you might need at some point during 24 hours.
...and what exactly is the deal with druids not knowing how to work a bow? Can't use metal weapons... except scimitars for some reason... but the best ranged weapon they can figure out is a sling? If there's one thing about the Pathfinder druid that disappointed my group, it would be the continuing reign of the sling-only ranged druid.
Sorry to go off topic, but that was the first thing I thought them I saw the thread title.
It likely stems from the origin of the Druid being placed in D&D as to why they use scimitars. I couldn't tell you why or where though.
As for not using bows, the animal companion might have something to do with that, no hunting... love animals, hug trees or some crap like that. 3.5E can use a crossbow though can't it? (I really do have to stop leaving my PHB at my DMs house.) Kind of odd though, makes you into a Druid Rifleman or Soldier of sorts, carrying a sabre (scimitar) at that point would almost be normal or themed. Add a Horse companion and you have a Cavalry... CHAAAAAAAARGE!!!
...and what exactly is the deal with druids not knowing how to work a bow? Can't use metal weapons... except scimitars for some reason... but the best ranged weapon they can figure out is a sling? If there's one thing about the Pathfinder druid that disappointed my group, it would be the continuing reign of the sling-only ranged druid.
Sorry to go off topic, but that was the first thing I thought them I saw the thread title.
It likely stems from the origin of the Druid being placed in D&D as to why they use scimitars. I couldn't tell you why or where though.
As for not using bows, the animal companion might have something to do with that, no hunting... love animals, hug trees or some crap like that. 3.5E can use a crossbow though can't it? (I really do have to stop leaving my PHB at my DMs house.) Kind of odd though, makes you into a Druid Rifleman or Soldier of sorts, carrying a sabre (scimitar) at that point would almost be normal or themed. Add a Horse companion and you have a Cavalry... CHAAAAAAAARGE!!!
Who needs a bow/crossbow when you have Splinterbolt (SC 203)? Love that 2nd level spell.
We have plenty of archers in our large group so my opportunites to snipe are limited.
|
Someone I know once pointed out that druids can be played as tree-hugging jedi. Think about it: they tend to wear loose brown robes, they have sole access to the Flame Blade spell, they have high wisdom scores. Well, I thought it was funny.
I play druids with an intellectual bent. They're extremely badass Biologists. They're people who skipped out on gods because the natural world gave them a feeling of affirmation and oneness far more than the local temple ever did.
I prefer to play druids with perspective. The natural world is old enough to take care of itself for the most part, and they dont begrudge a bit of farmland and a city or two. But, start slash-and-burning, drain rivers and leave thousands of fish stranded, go whaling (seriously, there are better ways to get lamp oil, and whales arent a sustainable resource), start killing wolves out of paranoia, kill tigers and elephants for shits and giggles, dump rediculous ammounts of alchemical waste, hunt an inncouous bird into extinction because it's pancreas is a highly-sought-after canape bought by very rich idiots to impress other very rich idiots, and they will come down on you like the wrath of a thousand indignant hornets. Your carthorses will bite and kick you, your dogs will turn on you, slaughterhouse animals will turn the tables, the choked trees in your streets and potplants in your house will choke you with poisonous pollen, The river your befouled will rise drown you, and creatures long-extinct on the material plane will return with the impresson that it was your fault, and all the while, the lone druid will sit on a hill, laughing his ass off as the fires burn and the lightning strikes. Because, as a pervious poster most elegantly put it: Mother natures' a b1tch, and the b1tch wants blood!
A major concern is when really bad things turn up. HTfBRs, for example. Or demons.
But, there are other ways to play druids. I mean, no one insists that every WIZARD has to be power-mad, fire-ball-hurling, ivory-tower douche.
I went down the path of natures warrior and natures vengence. People are part of Nature so I protect them as long as they respect nature, which often means other people as well.
If you want the total Bad A$$ Druid, going down the summoner path works very well. I went with Rapid Spell and Metamagic School Focus.
Beng able to cast summoning spells as a standard action makes you one of the most powerful characters in the party.
Sometimes our party sits back and lets the giant summoned monsters take care of the enemy. Or I can buff my animal companion into one of the most powerful creatures in the party as well. Nothing like Bite of the Weretiger and then animal growth to let him tear into almost anything.
Lots of Druid fun!
3.5E can use a crossbow though can't it? (I really do have to stop leaving my PHB at my DMs house.) Kind of odd though, makes you into a Druid Rifleman or Soldier of sorts, carrying a sabre (scimitar) at that point would almost be normal or themed. Add a Horse companion and you have a Cavalry... CHAAAAAAAARGE!!!
A saber is more likely to be a rapier than a scimitar. And no, druids can't use crossbows (without taking a feat or multiclassing).
I prefer to play druids with perspective. The natural world is old enough to take care of itself for the most part, and they don't begrudge a bit of farmland and a city or two. But, start slash-and-burning, drain rivers and leave thousands of fish stranded, go whaling (seriously, there are better ways to get lamp oil, and whales aren't a sustainable resource), start killing wolves out of paranoia, kill tigers and elephants for s#&@s and giggles, dump ridiculous amounts of alchemical waste, hunt an innocuous bird into extinction because it's pancreas is a highly-sought-after canape bought by very rich idiots to impress other very rich idiots, and they will come down on you like the wrath of a thousand indignant hornets. Your carthorses will bite and kick you, your dogs will turn on you, slaughterhouse animals will turn the tables, the choked trees in your streets and potplants in your house will choke you with poisonous pollen, The river your befouled will rise drown you, and creatures long-extinct on the material plane will return with the impression that it was your fault, and all the while, the lone druid will sit on a hill, laughing his ass off as the fires burn and the lightning strikes. Because, as a previous poster most elegantly put it: Mother natures' a b%*%!, and the b*&!* wants blood!
That's awesome.
For a long time Druid has been that treehugging serial killer with the scimitar...what if their role is to function as a primitive Paladin...as the Guardian of all Life?
Generally I find Druids a very bad PC class, the druid should be the custodian of forest sections and have little interest outside their own area of protection. So why so many up and leave their forest and sacred grove to wonder the entire world I really can't fathom.
In addition they are now a very powerful summoner and within a few minutes of a combat the entire area looks like it's been invaded by Dr Dolittle. Very annoying.
I've not really investigated the Pathfinder modified druid but I hope the summoning power is calmed down.
Any PC wanting to play a druid better have a damn good reason to bring one into my campaign with a cracking background story.
|
Personnally I love the nature classes...Ranger and Druid!! I play my Druids Neutral in Alignment which really upset a DM I had once.
I started out with his background being an orphan and taken in by the Druidic Circle. Druidism being all he know. He saw Mother Nature as the supreme entity and driving force behind everything, to include the other deities. He saw the other Deities and miss-guided creations by man choosing to worship only one aspect of Nature and not the entirety of it. Lost Souls he called them. He began adventuring to find out more of Mother Nature, to experience the different climates that she has provided on the world and to find his own grove, a grove that needed more focused attention from Mother Nature that only he could provide as a chosen weilder of such magics. He worked well in the party because he understood to complete his greater mission he needed others and because he could possibly show them the errors of their ways in false worship.
Now don't mis-conscrew this, he wasn't all preachy...but a side kicker I stuck in for him was if someone in the party blatantly harmed Mother Nature and did not ask for forgiveness his magics would not work on them. I had fun in game with different ways for party members to redeem themselves and by doing this I felt help me keep my Neutral alignment.
I also was the one more willing to talk to the small band of Goblinoids over attacking them right away which really bothered the DM, because I ended up befriending some of the encounters with the lesser Goblinoids.
All in all it was fun and I still love to play Druids!
For a long time Druid has been that treehugging serial killer with the scimitar...what if their role is to function as a primitive Paladin...as the Guardian of all Life?Generally I find Druids a very bad PC class, the druid should be the custodian of forest sections and have little interest outside their own area of protection. So why so many up and leave their forest and sacred grove to wonder the entire world I really can't fathom.
Yes, and most druids should be like that. Adventurers by nature (no pun intended) are the exception. Wizards should be in their tower/lab/chamber hoarding spell components, scribing magical tomes and training apprentices. An adventuring wizard is not a logical thing, but yet we've been playing them since the dawn of D&D.
Yet, I don't see why Druids should all be green-peace activists. Druids are those who use nature as a power source (with no reference to 4ed) the same way wizards manipulate the force of the arcane and cleric channel the powers of their deity. The line between cleric and druid is blurred for a few reasons:
1) They used to be "speciality priests" in older editions.
2) Historically, they where spiritual leaders of older faiths.
3) Many settings oblige druids to choose a patron deity from which they cast their spells, tying them to a cult and thus, to a certain attitude toward what their deity claims to be the right thing to do.
But druids are separate enough from clerics to have their own spellcasting source (they even get their own spell list). They may hang on to nature and protect it, since without it their source of power would fade. But I don't think druid should have the "save the trees" philosophy by default. This would be an acquired attitude depending on ethnic, cultural and religious factors.
Druids have power over nature, it doesn't mean the druid should be allied with nature...
I play my Druids Neutral in Alignment which really upset a DM I had once.
What was he upset about ? Your character being neutral ?
What's wrong with neutral ?
|
I play my Druids Neutral in Alignment which really upset a DM I had once.What was he upset about ? Your character being neutral ?
What's wrong with neutral ?
Depends on how you play Neutral:
1) Does neither Good nor Evil, or2) Does both Good and Evil.
If your DM is like me and runs a "no Evil PC's" game, some players might see Neutral as a way to skirt the rules, allowing them to perpetrate the occasional Evil act as long as they balance it out with something good.
So, depending on the campaign's ground rules for alignment and the players involved, Neutral COULD be a problematic alignment.
-Skeld
That's because Mordenkainen was a jerk.
|
|
He didn't like it because I would try to communicate with most creatures in the wild to include Goblinoids, especially low level ones. Like when the hulking Half-Ogre Fighter stomps like two Goblins and the rest kinda pause because of Morale issues (I love playing with morale) I would try to turn the table to conversation. Instead of the party hacks away killing them all.
Like we had a scenario were we were going into a cave to rescue some priests son, well the cave was inhabited by Goblins, the Half-Ogre slayed two outright and the remaining one stood there in shock. So since for some reason I actually took Goblinoid as a lang I tried to communicate to the creature and in turn wound up getting the party past the entire cave for some Good Berrys. He really didn't expect that and was used to people just slaying everything with the Evil name to it.
I try to balance the Good and Evil yes...but like I said before I normally did this in how I affected the party. As in if the fighter just got down hacking a tree for fire wood, I normally would let it slide as Nature will run it's course Full circle and will come back to him. (kinda a karma thing) Well it turned out the tank got messed up bad in the party and I was the only one with healing ability. He came to me...roleplayed the whole my spells wont' work on you because you have befouled Nature. So it turned into a what can I do to appease Nature and recieve healing...which in turn I had him planting trees and praying with my character at Dawn for Mother Natures blessing.
It was fun. :)
That's because Mordenkainen was a jerk.
Was ?
That's because Mordenkainen was a jerk.Was ?
Greyhawk is dead...so 'was'.
Greyhawk is dead...so 'was'.
Greyhawk is not dead. Mordenkainen neither.
The fact that Oerth is not currently developped by WotC doesn't mean the world is destroyed.Many players are keeping it alive and well.
Same thing for Al Qadim, Birthright, Dark Sun, Dragonlance, Mystara, Planescape, Ravenloft...
For that matter, WOTC hasn't ended Greyhawk development, just the 3.5 Living Greyhawk campaign. It doesn't mean there wont' be a 4.0 campaign in the future.Greyhawk is dead...so 'was'.Greyhawk is not dead. Mordenkainen neither.
The fact that Oerth is not currently developped by WotC doesn't mean the world is destroyed.
Many players are keeping it alive and well.
Same thing for Al Qadim, Birthright, Dark Sun, Dragonlance, Mystara, Planescape, Ravenloft...
Especially if they can make money on a half dozen 4.0 version books. ---- Oops did I say that out loud?
|
|
...and what exactly is the deal with druids not knowing how to work a bow? Can't use metal weapons... except scimitars for some reason... but the best ranged weapon they can figure out is a sling? If there's one thing about the Pathfinder druid that disappointed my group, it would be the continuing reign of the sling-only ranged druid.
Sorry to go off topic, but that was the first thing I thought them I saw the thread title.
OT. Tis true. But well said. The lack of bows for druids makes little sense to me as well.
ON TOPIC. I would add my two cents to those others who perceive Druids as the Clerics of Nature and Rangers as the Priests. Indeed, I would not be surprised to see WotC make a branch of powers to reflect Druids as Nature Clerics, instead of a different class altogether.
The lack of bows for druids makes little sense to me as well.
Clerics don't get Bows either. The Druid and Cleric selections are supposed to be similar in power. The difference is that Druids can't use crossbows.
Personnally I love the nature classes...Ranger and Druid!! I play my Druids Neutral in Alignment which really upset a DM I had once.
I started out with his background being an orphan and taken in by the Druidic Circle. Druidism being all he know. He saw Mother Nature as the supreme entity and driving force behind everything, to include the other deities. He saw the other Deities and miss-guided creations by man choosing to worship only one aspect of Nature and not the entirety of it. Lost Souls he called them. He began adventuring to find out more of Mother Nature, to experience the different climates that she has provided on the world and to find his own grove, a grove that needed more focused attention from Mother Nature that only he could provide as a chosen weilder of such magics. He worked well in the party because he understood to complete his greater mission he needed others and because he could possibly show them the errors of their ways in false worship.
Now don't mis-conscrew this, he wasn't all preachy...but a side kicker I stuck in for him was if someone in the party blatantly harmed Mother Nature and did not ask for forgiveness his magics would not work on them. I had fun in game with different ways for party members to redeem themselves and by doing this I felt help me keep my Neutral alignment.
I also was the one more willing to talk to the small band of Goblinoids over attacking them right away which really bothered the DM, because I ended up befriending some of the encounters with the lesser Goblinoids.
All in all it was fun and I still love to play Druids!
Now THAT is a Druid player, I still find it difficult to have a druid adventuring unless the whole adventure is linked to the Druids Forest or glade( some demon is poisoning the forest using dire magic and the PC's must uncover who it is and stop them,even by hunting them to the hells etc) but at least you sound like a druid. They are generally not inclined to attack things unless the things they are up against are working against their territory.
Befrending Goblins..unusual but I'd prefer seeing a druid in a game doing that than running round everywhere and throwing summoned critters at the goblins. Make an interesting encounter playing goblins talking to the druid.I had a party who made an alliance with a hobgoblin band. The Hobgoblins were LN generally due to a culteral change( an elf used illusions to dupe the Hobgoblins into following Torm over 200 years previous..the elf thought it was funny) and the hobgoblins whilst still brutal in their laws were good neighbours to the humans once the PC's struck an agreement and destroyed the evil hobgoblin tribes.
|
|
Thanks ProsSteve.
Now as far as my Rangers go...I normally tend to play the loner/survivalist type. Kinda like Aragorn from LoTR.
I personnally like rangers because of their skill set...and Track. I use the hell out of the Track skill and Survival with my rangers. Why carry more than 4 days rations when I can forage for it?
I normally play them with a slight disdain for the city dwellers or cities themselves. Kinda like everyone else is missing out on the bigger picture...that the world is harsh and one must be strong to survive it. I never play the a$$ with them, but definitely the blunt guy who doesn't have time to sugar coat things.
Thanks ProsSteve.
Now as far as my Rangers go...I normally tend to play the loner/survivalist type. Kinda like Aragorn from LoTR.
I personnally like rangers because of their skill set...and Track. I use the hell out of the Track skill and Survival with my rangers. Why carry more than 4 days rations when I can forage for it?
I normally play them with a slight disdain for the city dwellers or cities themselves. Kinda like everyone else is missing out on the bigger picture...that the world is harsh and one must be strong to survive it. I never play the a$$ with them, but definitely the blunt guy who doesn't have time to sugar coat things.
Well you've sparked my interest, in a new Campaign being started I will play either a Ranger or a Druid. Probably ranger ( don't normally play them) so I'm inspired to develope the character. Campaign is set in Moonshae Isles FR so I'm going for a Ffolk Noble over a small area. The Ffolk are more rustic culterally than other parts of the realms bit like ancient celtic Britain so was making the character based on that.
Very devoted to the Goddess\earth mother of the Isles and guiding the people to living respectfully living on the isles, destroying anything that threatens it(goblinoids, Firebolgs, Fomorians, northman etc).
That's exactly where my Druid was from!
Go figure that for a co-incidence. I'm not sure exactly where the campaign is but its near Cair Callidyr( please excuse the spelling).
One of our DM's is starting a new campaign after he got annoyed with 3.5 and dropped his previous campaign.I've introduced him and his dad who also DM's and both are starting new Pathfinder campaigns along with another DM in our group who's either going to convert his present campaign or start anew.
Now I'm even tempted to play a druid but another member of the group is already going to be one so we'll see.
The proficiencies for druids are a little skewed. I also found the fact that they aren't proficient with heavy armor interesting since in the items there is dragon scale full plate specifically for the druid to use...
Most of the time when I encounter things like this I'd just talk to the GM and say "this doesn't make sense" and we'd work it out. But since this is a playtest it should probably be mentioned that the proficiencies the druid has should reflect their beliefs a little better. Bows can be made from things found in nature so they should be allowed. I have yet to see a scimitar as a naturally occurring phenomenon.
The druids should probably be as proficient as clerics or basic fighters except that they cannot use metal. All of their carried goods would have to be made out of wood or stone. As such while the cleric wields the steel heavy mace the druid would wield the same weapon that has a wooden handle and granite end. In the end the weapon and its damage would be the same but it would add flavor to the druid and be in line with the druid's beliefs.
|
well if were going to give them martial ranged weapons then lets also give them full BAB, d10 and bonus feats, just to make sure the fill every role the can (people say they are not good healers but the vigor spells beg to differ)lets not talk about better arming the druid, its fine and i can almost fully stomach it with the new polymorph rules. slings are so you can use the spell magic stones. if you need a ranged weapon just look at your spell list and you will find them. (wow, does produce fire really get used a whole lot at lower levels or what!?)
Generally I find Druids a very bad PC class, the druid should be the custodian of forest sections and have little interest outside their own area of protection. So why so many up and leave their forest and sacred grove to wonder the entire world I really can't fathom.
I always hear this concept but for me it sounds completely alien. A druid is foremost an intermediary between civilization and anarchy. Gods and men. Nature and development. And what use is an intermediary if they aren't properly embedded within the rural communities? They are as integral to society as any other class. Not separate and equal, but a contributing part of the Township.
A few acres of cabbages is no more insulting than a hill of termites because humans (and other sentients) are no less a part of nature than any other creature. Its absurd to assume that a druid gave up their humanity to live in the woods with a loincloth snuffling for truffles like swine. Instead. I allow them their place within a society, if not always to the benefit of politicians.. so be it. A farmer, or even a member of the aristocracy sending their child of to become a druid shouldn't raise any more notice than sending one off to be a monk.(read as cleric)But then again. I do dislike the suggestion of primitive savagery when it comes to druids.. If a player wants to play a savage cleric, they should opt for barbarian-cleric as it makes much more sense.
And that Is just a personal opinion. I simply prefer the traditional, non neo-pagan historical view that the druid fills a role in their community first. Then you make allowances for fantasy and adventure.