As I see it, Druid is looking good right now.
Wildshape is as good as I can expect without making it an elaborate system. I am interested in seeing it in the final book.
You misunderstand the stacking rules.You only discount the cumulative effect, and you always take the best bonus and worst penalty, add them together, and apply what's left:
...Stacking
In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect) if they come from different sources and have different types (or no type at all), but do not stack if they have the same type or come from the same source (such as the same spell
Actually,
I'm afraid you are not using it correctly. Please note the above refers to checks or rolls.If you refer to the template section of the MM.
Applying a template step by step.
...
Add all ability score modifiers from size and from the Abilities entry to the base creatures score.
So, for templates, like half-dragon, you would add them to the base creature. So if the base creature had a racial adjustment of -2 STR, +2 CON, and the half-dragon template had +8 Str & +4 Con (I think that's it, didn't bother looking it up), the Half-Dragon would end up with final adjustments of +6 Str and +6 Con.
That implies that Racial bonus's to stats always stack, as in all are added together, not 'take biggest penalty and highest bonus'. Unfortunately, this is another one of those 'implied but not spelled out' things in SRD. Blech.
|
I was under the impression that racial bonus's stack. Otherwise, you have the wierd situations of two characters built with exactly the same base stats, one human, one gnome. The gnome has a strength 2 less than the human. Then apply the Half-Dragon template, and you end up with a small half-dragon and a medium half-dragon (one half human, the other half-gnome) with exactly the same str stat (since if they don't stack, the half-gnome/half-dragon's gnomish racial penalty would be replaced by the half-dragon's boost).
Templates don't apply racial modifiers, they adjust the current modifiers. From the SRD:
Abilities
If a template changes one or more ability scores, these changes are noted here.
And from the Half-dragon template:
Abilities
Increase from the base creature as follows: Str +8, Con +2, Int +2, Cha +2.
It doesn't say racial bonus anywhere (Other than the fact that end total end result is a racial bonus).
It doesn't say racial bonus anywhere (Other than the fact that end total end result is a racial bonus).
*nod*
*sigh*
A rose by any other name is still going to gum up the gears because you didn't put a name on it. I wish this had been addressed in PRPG, but I'm betting it's still a racial bonus that's not typed.
Oh well.
Director of Games
|
Summary:
The pathfinder druid, as I see it, has gone from being a generalizing druid who can do many things, but none of them as well as primary classes (with a little work on toning down wildshape), to a specializing druid that is almost two classes in one, but he must choose to focus on only one specialty if he wants to be good enough at it to not be laughed at - leaving the other specialty to rot in the dust.
I think you are being a bit extreme here. To imply that wild shape is not a useful ability unless you get a big Str, Dex, and Con is not true. Wild shape can allow you to scout, fly, and gain a host of other useful abilities that are valuable in many situations. The opposite is also true. There are plenty of druid spells that do not rely on your opponent making saves, meaning that you could go the minimum Wis route, buy up a solid Str, Dex, and Con and go the wild shape combatant route.
And, to top it off, you get a reasonable animal companion to fight along side you, or a cleric domain to enhance your spellcasting. What the druid lost is the ability to have both specialties for a minimal investment in anything other than Wisdom.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
((One other aside.. druids have some lackluster spells on their list, but they also have some really solid choices.. and that is without taking into account some of the crazy spells from other sources))
|
|
It doesn't say racial bonus anywhere (Other than the fact that end total end result is a racial bonus).*nod*
*sigh*
A rose by any other name is still going to gum up the gears because you didn't put a name on it. I wish this had been addressed in PRPG, but I'm betting it's still a racial bonus that's not typed.
Oh well.
Well templates are really a special thing. Really only a DM has access to templates and a player will not (Only under certain circumstances, celestial badgers for one). Therefore the rules don't have to be explicit when giving template rules to allow a DM freedom to do what she wants to do. Other than a template can you think of anything else that gives a racial bonus? I think I do remember a Dwarf's Belt or something giving the racial bonuses to a non-dwarf. But per the stacking rules a racial bonus wouldn't stack (Just checked SRD, it only mentions dodge and circumstance), and that makes perfect sense. A dwarf who puts on the belt would be useless, he already has the racial modifiers.
Summary:
The pathfinder druid, as I see it, has gone from being a generalizing druid who can do many things, but none of them as well as primary classes (with a little work on toning down wildshape), to a specializing druid that is almost two classes in one, but he must choose to focus on only one specialty if he wants to be good enough at it to not be laughed at - leaving the other specialty to rot in the dust.
I think you are being a bit extreme here. To imply that wild shape is not a useful ability unless you get a big Str, Dex, and Con is not true. Wild shape can allow you to scout, fly, and gain a host of other useful abilities that are valuable in many situations. The opposite is also true. There are plenty of druid spells that do not rely on your opponent making saves, meaning that you could go the minimum Wis route, buy up a solid Str, Dex, and Con and go the wild shape combatant route.
And, to top it off, you get a reasonable animal companion to fight along side you, or a cleric domain to enhance your spellcasting. What the druid lost is the ability to have both specialties for a minimal investment in anything other than Wisdom.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing((One other aside.. druids have some lackluster spells on their list, but they also have some really solid choices.. and that is without taking into account some of the crazy spells from other sources))
I have to agree with Jason on this one. In my current 3.5 game, my wife is playing a Druid. She's not a powergamer, she just enjoys hanging out with us, so she's a casual player. Rather than make her deal with wild shape and an animal companion, we gave her the shape change alternate class ability from the PHB2.
She loves it, she knows exactly what she turns into (very similar to the way PRPG handles it with polymorph school), and she primarily scouts, not combats. In combat, she buffs, heals, and uses snakes swiftness a lot to turn the fighters into blenders. At no point does she feel the need to be a melee monster (although, since she's a woodling, she has the highest AC in the group, so she can mix it up in melee if she has to, she just chooses not to). She could fight in her cat form very effectively, if she wanted to, she just doesn't.
There are many more roles for a druid than melee monster, and the changes just encourage players to get out of the mindset of 'Me Druid Battle Master' and into the mindset of 'I am a druid, and I will be what nature intends me to be'.
|
Is this something I've missed, do size bonuses stack?So, we went with a size bonus for one big reason, for those that are curious. We realized that if it stacked with any other common bonus (such as racial or enhancement) adjudicating the effect would be even more complicated (since you would have to compare and only take the higher bonus). I should note that this applies to spells of the polymorph school in general, not just the wild shape ability.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
As per the BETA polymorph subschool description, you cannot have two size altering magicks at the same time, and as per the RAW, the only type of bonus that stacks with itself is the dodge bonus.
(so in Beta, you could not have a medium druid wildshaped into a large horse also benefit from enlarge; but you could have a medium druid wildshaped into a medium dog AND THEN have the druid enlarged into a large dog)
In the final version of the PRPG, if I suspect the wording on size altering magicks will not change, except perhaps for the addition of a small clause to deal with enlarge/wildshape, etc. (i.e. both enlarge and wildshape now use size bonuses, so it will be interesting to see if they can still be combined for the shapes that are the same size as your original size...)
I think you are being a bit extreme here. To imply that wild shape is not a useful ability unless you get a big Str, Dex, and Con is not true. Wild shape can allow you to scout, fly, and gain a host of other useful abilities that are valuable in many situations.
True, but I see those abilities as the other side of the coin. In my 2-sided-coin analogy, one side has all the neat druid "flavor" stuff, some of which is very effective, while the other side had the "turn into a beast and charge into battle" stuff.
Scouting, flying, deep-sea diving, and such things are on the neat druid flavor side.
The opposite is also true. There are plenty of druid spells that do not rely on your opponent making saves, meaning that you could go the minimum Wis route, buy up a solid Str, Dex, and Con and go the wild shape combatant route.
And now we're leaking into the druids must choose which speacialty they want. Generalizing is much less possible with the new druid changes. Decide at birth to be good at one side of the coint but suck at the other.
Which, all-in-all, is preferable to being awesome at both.
Me, I would have preferred if they could be merely good at both, or good at one and passable at the other.
Well templates are really a special thing. Really only a DM has access to templates and a player will not (Only under certain circumstances, celestial badgers for one). Therefore the rules don't have to be explicit when giving template rules to allow a DM freedom to do what she wants to do. Other than a template can you think of anything else that gives a racial bonus? I think I do remember a Dwarf's Belt or something giving the racial bonuses to a non-dwarf. But per the stacking rules a racial bonus wouldn't stack (Just checked SRD, it only mentions dodge and circumstance), and that makes perfect sense. A dwarf who puts on the belt would be useless, he already has the racial modifiers.
It doesn't say racial bonus anywhere (Other than the fact that end total end result is a racial bonus).*nod*
*sigh*
A rose by any other name is still going to gum up the gears because you didn't put a name on it. I wish this had been addressed in PRPG, but I'm betting it's still a racial bonus that's not typed.
Oh well.
Sorry,
It's all competence and enhancement bonus's, not racial bonus's.And it specifically states only non-dwarves get the enhancement bonus's to con, the darkvision, etc.
I can't think of anything that grants racial bonus's except racial bases (racial bonus's are usually to skill checks too, or saves vs something).
I can't think of anything that gives a racial bonus to an attribute, except the implied racial bonus of templates. I do disagree that templates are only for GM's though. I've had several people over the years have templates on their characters. Half-Vampire for one, woodling, half-dragon, etc.
This is all true, but only if you plan to specialize. A generalizing druid, on the other hand, is in trouble here.
To me, the druid is a two-sided coin. On the one side, he has druid stuff. Spells, nature, pets, etc. All the classical stuff from literature and mythology that we think we know about druids. On the other side is theire wild side, the aiblity to transofrm into critters and tear their enemies up on the battlefield.
Now I'm all about game balance. There is no way a druid should equal a full-melee class on the battlefield AND equal a full-caster class in that realm.
Druids already have the weakest spell list of any full caster. Their spellcasting ability makes them sweet and fluffy, but ineffective, naturalists. It matters very little that they cast as many spells of the same levels as the other primary casters because they are much less effective due to their limited spell list. With the possible exception of buff spells - they seem mostly comparable in this category.
Generalizing druids also have the most MAD of any class, so their primary casting ability will likely be lower than any cleric, sorcerer, or wizard. They also will be splitting up their feats, unlike primary casters who can mostly focus on improving their spellcasting.
So with all that in mind, I think druids are already sufficiently weaker as a primary caster than all the other...
I think you are overestimating the need for excellent stats and underestimating the Druid's ability to make up for other stat shortcomings.
Int: Druid doesn't need it. This is a dump stat.
Cha: Druid doesn't need this either. In point buy I wouldn't drop it below 10, but I also certainly wouldn't put any bonus into it.
Con: This one is nice to have but far from required. A Druid already has a good Fortitude save and can use magic to supplement their hit dice. Not to mention the bonuses granted from favored class or the Toughness feat.
Dex: This is nice, worth a bonus, but not required to be super high.
Str: If you want to Wildshape and Melee this is required. It should be your second best, possibly best, stat.
Wis: Core casting stat and the Druid is a core caster. I feel that this should be the Druid's highest stat.
So a generalist Druid only "needs" 2 good stats, has a 3rd stat that would be really nice to have, and a 4th stat that would be nice but is far from required. This sounds like just about every other class save perhaps the Wizard.
Using PfRPG 25 point buy rules you could start at level 1 with:
Str: 16
Dex: 14
Con: 12
Int: 8
Wis: 18 (+2 Racial)
Cha: 10
|
The big problem there is that it gets complicated fast. Racial bonuses don't stack, so if you add them to a character, you have to go in and look at the base race and the new source to figure out which one goes and which one stays. Size bonuses, on the other hand, are a lot easier to manage since they're already sort of built around a sort of slider type bonus that changes as you change size.
Basically... size bonuses are easier to keep track of than racial bonuses.
James,
Thanks for the response, but that's really not what I was asking about...
When I do a character sheet on computer, I use a spreadsheet. I can keep cells with the racial bonuses separate from the base scores. I can then either change those values temporarily, or make a "temporary bonus" column that overrides it. Same for size modifiers. So, for me, having it be a racial bonus is no more difficult than having it a size bonus.
What I wanted to know is: Disregarding the complicated issue, is there any other reason (i.e. balance issues) for it to be a size bonus rather than a racial bonus? Will I nuke my game balance if I houserule it to make it a racial bonus?
|
With lower HP, lower BAB, no armor, and no weapons except natural ones, wildshaping into a bear or lion or whatever and then jumping into melee alongside the party's fighter becomes a truly suicidal idea.
I respectively disagree with this being a suicidal idea (unless you are talking about jumping in with the fighter in front of a Tarrasque!). Previously under 3.5, the druid would jump into melee and shove the fighter aside, as the druid was a better melee combatant, came with a credible second, and could cast spells! Now the druid can jump into melee, contribute damage, and still has a credible second and can still cast spells!
With the changes to wildshape, the druid has gone from a I-can-do-it-all-on-my-own class to a team player class. The druid shouldn't be a better or as good melee class as the fighter. The only classes that should be in the better to as good as the fighter category are the paladin, ranger, barbarian, and arguably the monk.
I think we are much closer to middle ground with the druid than we have been in years. YMMV.
Thanks for reading.
|
Director of Games
|
Thanks for the response, but that's really not what I was asking about...
When I do a character sheet on computer, I use a spreadsheet. I can keep cells with the racial bonuses separate from the base scores. I can then either change those values temporarily, or make a "temporary bonus" column that overrides it. Same for size modifiers. So, for me, having it be a racial bonus is no more difficult than having it a size bonus.
What I wanted to know is: Disregarding the complicated issue, is there any other reason (i.e. balance issues) for it to be a size bonus rather than a racial bonus? Will I nuke my game balance if I houserule it to make it a racial bonus?
The real problem here is that it would then stack with other size bonuses, which is something we are trying to avoid.. for a myriad of reasons.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
I can't think of anything that gives a racial bonus to an attribute, except the implied racial bonus of templates. I do disagree that templates are only for GM's though. I've had several people over the years have templates on their characters. Half-Vampire for one, woodling, half-dragon, etc.
Sorry, let me restate. I think templates were only intended for DMs, not for PCs. While many PC ask DMs if they can do it... it isn't something you can simply walk into a game with a new character and say "I'm playing a Phrenic Fighter." and expect that the DM would have it approved cause it's in the SRD. (I.E. it requires approval, whereas saying you're playing an elf doesn't require approval.)
It really comes down to a DMs playstyle, which is fine, but the rules take a stance that it isn't the purview of the players unless the DM wants it.
As for the Belt of Dwarvenkind... you're right it's all competence. I do remember seeing it somewhere, maybe it was a spell that gave +2 racial to saves vs. poison, something like that.
|
|
What I wanted to know is: Disregarding the complicated issue, is there any other reason (i.e. balance issues) for it to be a size bonus rather than a racial bonus? Will I nuke my game balance if I houserule it to make it a racial bonus?The real problem here is that it would then stack with other size bonuses, which is something we are trying to avoid.. for a myriad of reasons.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Jason,
Thanks. Can you elaborate on any of those reasons? Why would stacking with size bonuses be such a problem?
(Hope I'm not being too much of a pest, just trying to understand. 8^)
I can't think of anything that gives a racial bonus to an attribute, except the implied racial bonus of templates. I do disagree that templates are only for GM's though. I've had several people over the years have templates on their characters. Half-Vampire for one, woodling, half-dragon, etc.Sorry, let me restate. I think templates were only intended for DMs, not for PCs. While many PC ask DMs if they can do it... it isn't something you can simply walk into a game with a new character and say "I'm playing a Phrenic Fighter." and expect that the DM would have it approved cause it's in the SRD. (I.E. it requires approval, whereas saying you're playing an elf doesn't require approval.)
It really comes down to a DMs playstyle, which is fine, but the rules take a stance that it isn't the purview of the players unless the DM wants it.
As for the Belt of Dwarvenkind... you're right it's all competence. I do remember seeing it somewhere, maybe it was a spell that gave +2 racial to saves vs. poison, something like that.
Actually, you need permission to play an elf in my current game (but that's because they either died out 2000 years ago in a massive war, or fled to a different continent), but that's neither here nor there, and is just me finding irony where it wasn't intended. :)
Yes, I understand your point, and agree with it.
|
|
Actually, you need permission to play an elf in my current game (but that's because they either died out 2000 years ago in a massive war, or fled to a different continent), but that's neither here nor there, and is just me finding irony where it wasn't intended. :)
Touche. :)
The funny part was as I was writing that I was saying to myself "You know, I bet he doesn't allow elves in his campaigns...."
|
Director of Games
|
Jason,
Thanks. Can you elaborate on any of those reasons? Why would stacking with size bonuses be such a problem?
(Hope I'm not being too much of a pest, just trying to understand. 8^)
In part, its to avoid confusion. Spells like animal growth can not be used because they cannot target the druid (who does not change types). Also, it gets into some weird scenarios with Enlarge Person, which is contradictory with the wild shape setting your size.
It was just easier and simpler to avoid the mess by making them a size bonus.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
(Just checked SRD, it only mentions dodge and circumstance), and that makes perfect sense. A dwarf who puts on the belt would be useless, he already has the racial modifiers.
I found the problem.
Dodge bonuses and circumstance bonuses however, do stack with one another unless otherwise specified.
With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus works
So...uhh...everybody wins? Or loses. I forget what the game was.
|
|
In part, its to avoid confusion. Spells like animal growth can not be used because they cannot target the druid (who does not change types). Also, it gets into some weird scenarios with Enlarge Person, which is contradictory with the wild shape setting your size.It was just easier and simpler to avoid the mess by making them a size bonus.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thanks, Jason. Sounds like animal growth is a non-issue, then, but Enlarge Person could complicate things. I'll have to take a good look at how they interact when my subscription ships. 8^)
(And, if it isn't obvious, I'm not trying to criticize doing it how you did. I think I understand your rationale, and I agree that's probably best for most situations.. I'm just thinking about a houserule... 8^)
With lower HP, lower BAB, no armor, and no weapons except natural ones, wildshaping into a bear or lion or whatever and then jumping into melee alongside the party's fighter becomes a truly suicidal idea.I respectively disagree with this being a suicidal idea (unless you are talking about jumping in with the fighter in front of a Tarrasque!). Previously under 3.5, the druid would jump into melee and shove the fighter aside, as the druid was a better melee combatant, came with a credible second, and could cast spells! Now the druid can jump into melee, contribute damage, and still has a credible second and can still cast spells!
With the changes to wildshape, the druid has gone from a I-can-do-it-all-on-my-own class to a team player class. The druid shouldn't be a better or as good melee class as the fighter. The only classes that should be in the better to as good as the fighter category are the paladin, ranger, barbarian, and arguably the monk.
I think we are much closer to middle ground with the druid than we have been in years. YMMV.
Thanks for reading.
I tend to agree with this assessment.
Also in games with higher point buy or rolling methods (like ours) I think the 3.75 druid is going to be quite attractive.
Using PfRPG 25 point buy rules you could start at level 1 with:
Str: 16
Dex: 14
Con: 12
Int: 8
Wis: 18 (+2 Racial)
Cha: 10
For the record, PFRPG default is 15 point buy (equivalent to 25 in 3.5), 20 for Pathfinder Society. 25 would be a very potent point-buy. Not extreme, but very potent.
I am just a bit twitchy right now after the lengthy bard discussion.
Jason
I guess I'm one of the people who gave you a hard time during the bard discussion. So let me tell you, I love the new druid.
New druid, simply great.
With lower HP, lower BAB, no armor, and no weapons except natural ones, wildshaping into a bear or lion or whatever and then jumping into melee alongside the party's fighter becomes a truly suicidal idea.I respectively disagree with this being a suicidal idea (unless you are talking about jumping in with the fighter in front of a Tarrasque!). Previously under 3.5, the druid would jump into melee and shove the fighter aside, as the druid was a better melee combatant, came with a credible second, and could cast spells! Now the druid can jump into melee, contribute damage, and still has a credible second and can still cast spells!
With the changes to wildshape, the druid has gone from a I-can-do-it-all-on-my-own class to a team player class. The druid shouldn't be a better or as good melee class as the fighter. The only classes that should be in the better to as good as the fighter category are the paladin, ranger, barbarian, and arguably the monk.
I think we are much closer to middle ground with the druid than we have been in years. YMMV.
Thanks for reading.
Agree with you sowhereaminow and..
I will admit that a size bonus feels akward for it because you get a size bonus to stats, even if you wildshape into smaller
So cats are clumsier than elephants?
CHA ... making it a dump stat feels very un-druidic.
A lot of druids I read about in stories are gruff, not very friendly, and part of their choice to become druids was that they were unconfortable around humans.
I sort of feel like the altered Wild Shape has a little less flavour to it, I rather like the Druid turning into something indistinguishable from the real thing.
"See that wolf there?"
"What about it?""It's a druid"
"What? How do you know that? It looks like an average wolf."
"Exactly"
"Huh?"
"Nature doesn't do average."
Using PfRPG 25 point buy rules you could start at level 1 with:
Str: 16
Dex: 14
Con: 12
Int: 8
Wis: 18 (+2 Racial)
Cha: 10For the record, PFRPG default is 15 point buy (equivalent to 25 in 3.5), 20 for Pathfinder Society. 25 would be a very potent point-buy. Not extreme, but very potent.
25 points happens to be the set for which I have a complete listing of all possible combinations. The logic, however, holds at 15, 20 or 25.
Str: 14
Dex: 14
Con: 12
Int: 8
Wis: 16 (14 +2 from race)
Cha: 10
I developed the 25 points matrix after reading several posts where people were complaining that 25 points was not enough. I was surprised by this, I assumed that 25 points would lead to very high stats, and so I built the matrix to find out who is correct. I have the data in 3 sheets: Highest Stat Descending, Lowest Stat Descending, and Total Bonus Descending.
Just in to say how much I really like this version of the Druid.
...
I really like it!
Heh,
I just realized, I haven't actually congratulated Paizo yet. I really really like the new Druid, and I'm looking forward to reading the details in the book when it comes (noms on the calendar to speed up the passage of time).
Excellent job.
And, if it makes you feel better, I've not seen anything so far in any of the previews I hated. Some of it I like less than others, but nothing I considered a deal breaker or a screwed pooch.
Thanks a lot guys, this makes me very happy, I was very very very unhappy when 4E came out. Now I'm a happy camper again.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Summary:
The pathfinder druid, as I see it, has gone from being a generalizing druid who can do many things, but none of them as well as primary classes (with a little work on toning down wildshape), to a specializing druid that is almost two classes in one, but he must choose to focus on only one specialty if he wants to be good enough at it to not be laughed at - leaving the other specialty to rot in the dust.
I think you are being a bit extreme here. To imply that wild shape is not a useful ability unless you get a big Str, Dex, and Con is not true. Wild shape can allow you to scout, fly, and gain a host of other useful abilities that are valuable in many situations. The opposite is also true. There are plenty of druid spells that do not rely on your opponent making saves, meaning that you could go the minimum Wis route, buy up a solid Str, Dex, and Con and go the wild shape combatant route.
And, to top it off, you get a reasonable animal companion to fight along side you, or a cleric domain to enhance your spellcasting. What the druid lost is the ability to have both specialties for a minimal investment in anything other than Wisdom.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing((One other aside.. druids have some lackluster spells on their list, but they also have some really solid choices.. and that is without taking into account some of the crazy spells from other sources))
It's true. I've never understood the "druids have a sucky spell list" argument - I've played druids to high levels and dealt out big damage easily the equal of anyone else in the party if not better. This is esp. true if you are using the Spell Compendium - there are mountains of big-damage/screw you druid spells. And I got disgusting wild shaping and a badass AC on top of it.
I wasn't even going for the big cheats and taking Vow of Poverty... :)
|
|
So cats are clumsier than elephants?I will admit that a size bonus feels akward for it because you get a size bonus to stats, even if you wildshape into smaller
Of course not. That's why Enlarge Person or creature advancement inflicts a Dex penalty for a size increase. However, in this system, an Ogre Druid who shifts into a wolf gains +2 str due to size? From a flavor perspective, that's very non-intuitive.
That said, who really cares?
Why does Divine Power offer a luck bonus instead of sacred? For balance purposes. Why does wild shape give a size bonus? For balance purposes. There's a lot of little things in the game that don't make much blasted sense, but I'm not going to cry myself to sleep over it.
For flavor, I'd prefer it be a racial bonus. I like the idea that the Ogre turns into a wolf and gains strength because he's got the scary of an ogre mixed with the scary of a wolf. Mucho scary to go around.
On the other hand, making it a size bonus is a useful shorthand to remind people "a size change may be occurring here, but do not follow the regular rules for size changes. These are the modifiers to use"
It's also a little strange that a small creature could wild shape to medium, then get hit with Enlarge Person up to large for only a total +2 to strength. But he still gets the natural weapon dice bumped, so he can quit complaining.
Ok,
Quick question. I'm late to the party on Pathfinder, so didn't get to do any of the beta testing (just found it right before the end of the Beta, about 3 weeks before they announced it was heading for the printers).
Is the druid wild shape and polymorph sizes based on the size of the caster, or is it fixed by spell level?
I mean, it seems that if a medium creature can only change to a small or large creature at a given level, then a small creature should only be able to do tiny/medium, and a large could only do medium/huge.
For example....
1st level druids all (just assume I got the animal sizes right, ok?)
Gnome --> House cat (Tiny), Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium)
Human --> Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large)
Ogre --> Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large), Sabretooth Cat (Huge)
Wow, I have to admit, I'm really surprised here.
I thought this thread would be a war between the wildshape haters and the wildshape lovers.
I think I'm the only one on the wildshape haters side. Of course, as a tarrasque, the fight is still unfairly balanced in favor of me...
And I don't really hate it. It needed nerfing. I like the way it's streamlined now. The mechanic was the right idea. It's just too much nerfing.
But I'm really surprised there are not more people who think druids in foam-rubber animal costumes is a silly and/or excessive over-nerf of druidic usefulness.
I suspect it's because we have all hated the overpowered druid CODZilla for so very long that we're all relieved to see the big guy take the hard fall. Like when the neighborhood bully gets squashed by someone who finally stands up to him and gives him the beating he deserves.
Well, it is what it is, I guess.
Everyone plays this game for fun, and most people seem to be able to have all the fun they need without worrying about game balance or resource management or any of that unfun stuff. I say, more power to them.
Me, I'd like to ensure game balance when I'm away from the table so it never rears its head during play.
This change will cause the druid to be a drain on the party's resources or on his own, which ultimately amounts to the same thing, or will relegate wildshape to a fluff trick for scouting, etc. Which is too bad, really. I think it will make the druid a burden on his friends or will take away some of the fun the class once was, unless you can still have fun doing 12-15 damge some of the time while your friends are doing 20+ damage most of the time, and getting rocked to -HP in half the time it takes to drop any of your allies.
Is it exactly that bad? Hard to say. Probably not quite; my example here is probably a little drastic. Time and more playtesting with the full rules will reveal the truth.
To Paizo's credit, this one was the hardest class-balance challenge they faced. At least in my opinion. The most clearly overpowered class of the core classes, with enough class features for two separate classes (wildshape uberness and full spellcasting capability), and something had to be nerfed. Knowing how to nerf it was anybody's guess, and getting it right on would take a miracle, or would take way more playtesting than practicality and business needs would provide.
Every MMO I've ever seen (and I've played almost all of the top-10 to date) has had the same problem. How to balance the hybrids. Druid is D&D's hybrid, as are bard, paladin and ranger. The hybrids have class abilities (or class niches) from two or more different classes. The easy (and always fatal) assumption is that 1/2 of one class + 1/2 of the other class makes a whole hybrid. That never every works - all it produces is someone who is extremely ineffective at two different things.
Evidently Paizo knew this and avoided this pitfall. I wouldn't say the druid is half a spellcaster, nor would I say he is half a meleeist. So much credit for avoiding this trap that every MMO seems to fall into.
In a MMO, the right balance seems to be around 80-90% of the two parent classes. For example, a paladin should fight 80-90% as well as a fighter and should do cleric stuff 80-90% as well as a cleric. This works well in MMOs, but would probably be over the top for D&D (imagine a paladin with 8th level cleric spells and fighter feat progression...).
I don't claim to have the right answers for the druid. I do claim that Pathfinder presents most of the right answers and goes a long way towards druid balance, with the one exception being that their melee ability gives the illusion that they can do it without giving the substance, which means players who miss this important fact will make the mistake of not specializing enough, not building from the ground up (how much gamemastery does the average player have?), and will rush in over their head, taking wounds and draining resources, while not causing nearly enough harm to justify the lost resources.
Yes, yes, I know that we clever players who hang out here on the forums are all wise enough to build our druids right, to specialize in our melee abilities, even to the neglect of our spellcasting. And when we do, we'll be almost OK in combat.
I just don't feel that balancing a class for the most expert players who have the highest level of game mastery is the right path to take. On the other hand, when we don't, then we have to live with CODZillas...
A very tough balancing act indeed.
|
|
I will admit that a size bonus feels akward for it because you get a size bonus to stats, even if you wildshape into smaller
So cats are clumsier than elephants?
Really, that's your argument to the fact that i find it akward to have a medium sized creature transmorf into a medium size creature, and get a size bonus to their stats.
|
|
Now I get it ! This Bestiary preview image is of an animal companion Dire Tiger chasing his druid master who was dumb enough to Wild Shape into a Tiny Wild Pig ! :P
Ok,
Quick question. I'm late to the party on Pathfinder, so didn't get to do any of the beta testing (just found it right before the end of the Beta, about 3 weeks before they announced it was heading for the printers).Is the druid wild shape and polymorph sizes based on the size of the caster, or is it fixed by spell level?
I mean, it seems that if a medium creature can only change to a small or large creature at a given level, then a small creature should only be able to do tiny/medium, and a large could only do medium/huge.
For example....
1st level druids all (just assume I got the animal sizes right, ok?)
Gnome --> House cat (Tiny), Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium)
Human --> Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large)
Ogre --> Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large), Sabretooth Cat (Huge)
Pssssst...
Since you're a tiger and all...
Tigers are bigger than lions. Though there are smaller tiger species, the Siberian tiger averages in the mid-500 pound range, while the male African lion wighs in the low-400 pound range. Largest tiger on record wieghed 1,025 pounds, 200 pounds more than the largest lion on record at only 826 pounds.
You'll note the d20 SRD has similar statistics on their average weight, and both are "Large" by D&D terminology.
Ok,
I realize it's just artwork, but, it looks to me as if Droogami is easily a medium sized creature, not a small (he looks big enough to be a mount for Lini in the picture).
It makes me wonder, is this just a case of the artwork not matching the game rules, or is it a case of...
Droogami's other statistics are derived from a simple chart that tells you the number of Hit Dice, skill points, feats, natural armor bonuses, and Strength and Dexterity bonuses. Droogami also receives an ability score boost that can be placed anywhere (Dexterity in this case). All of this is on top of the old druid animal companion abilities, such as share spells and evasion.
...the Hit Dice bonus's he get's boosting him up a size category? Or possibly an option for a companion? That would be awesome if instead of needing to take 'improved familiar' your companion naturally grew as you did, developing new abilities, increasing in size, etc, based on what you chose.
Ok,
Quick question. I'm late to the party on Pathfinder, so didn't get to do any of the beta testing (just found it right before the end of the Beta, about 3 weeks before they announced it was heading for the printers).Is the druid wild shape and polymorph sizes based on the size of the caster, or is it fixed by spell level?
I mean, it seems that if a medium creature can only change to a small or large creature at a given level, then a small creature should only be able to do tiny/medium, and a large could only do medium/huge.
For example....
1st level druids all (just assume I got the animal sizes right, ok?)
Gnome --> House cat (Tiny), Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium)
Human --> Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large)
Ogre --> Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large), Sabretooth Cat (Huge)Pssssst...
Since you're a tiger and all...
Tigers are bigger than lions. Though there are smaller tiger species, the Siberian tiger averages in the mid-500 pound range, while the male African lion wighs in the low-400 pound range. Largest tiger on record wieghed 1,025 pounds, 200 pounds more than the largest lion on record at only 826 pounds.
You'll note the d20 SRD has similar statistics on their average weight, and both are "Large" by D&D terminology.
Pssst,
Since you're a tarrasque, you can't tell the difference between a mountain lion, an african lion, a siberian tiger, and a bengal tiger. :) They're all itty bitty annoying meals that claw your gums before you chomp them.Seriously though, I just picked names and didn't bother too much whether I had it right. I figured the lion/tiger might have been reversed, but wasn't too concerned, I was more worried about the idea of relative size to caster/druid.
Ok,
I realize it's just artwork, but, it looks to me as if Droogami is easily a medium sized creature, not a small (he looks big enough to be a mount for Lini in the picture).
His stat block puts him at Medium, as well.
|
Ok,
I realize it's just artwork, but, it looks to me as if Droogami is easily a medium sized creature, not a small (he looks big enough to be a mount for Lini in the picture).It makes me wonder, is this just a case of the artwork not matching the game rules, or is it a case of...
...the Hit Dice bonus's he get's boosting him up a size category? Or possibly an option for a companion? That would be awesome if instead of needing to take 'improved familiar' your companion naturally grew as you did, developing new abilities, increasing in size, etc, based on what you chose.
Droogami's other statistics are derived from a simple chart that tells you the number of Hit Dice, skill points, feats, natural armor bonuses, and Strength and Dexterity bonuses. Droogami also receives an ability score boost that can be placed anywhere (Dexterity in this case). All of this is on top of the old druid animal companion abilities, such as share spells and evasion.
Animal companions can increase in size as they increase in Hd.
|
Ok,
I realize it's just artwork, but, it looks to me as if Droogami is easily a medium sized creature, not a small (he looks big enough to be a mount for Lini in the picture).It makes me wonder, is this just a case of the artwork not matching the game rules, or is it a case of...
...the Hit Dice bonus's he get's boosting him up a size category? Or possibly an option for a companion? That would be awesome if instead of needing to take 'improved familiar' your companion naturally grew as you did, developing new abilities, increasing in size, etc, based on what you chose.
Droogami is Medium - his stats are just under Lini's in the preview.
It also explains how that came to be - if you scroll down to the listing of "how he started," you'll note a section labeled "4th level advancement," which mentions (among other things) that his size grows to Medium.
His stat block puts him at Medium, as well.Ok,
I realize it's just artwork, but, it looks to me as if Droogami is easily a medium sized creature, not a small (he looks big enough to be a mount for Lini in the picture).
Ah!
I knew there was something bothering me there. Since the stat block below for leopard indicates they are small (see preview), that does sort of indicate that something in the progression allows an increase in size, the exact game mechanic of course is still to be determined.
Woohoo! I like this so far. Imagine taking the same mechanic and applying it to a tiger.
Now, why did I suddenly get a flashback of my youth and seeing an over muscled blonde surfer crying 'Battlecat ho!'.
Ok,
I realize it's just artwork, but, it looks to me as if Droogami is easily a medium sized creature, not a small (he looks big enough to be a mount for Lini in the picture).It makes me wonder, is this just a case of the artwork not matching the game rules, or is it a case of...
...the Hit Dice bonus's he get's boosting him up a size category? Or possibly an option for a companion? That would be awesome if instead of needing to take 'improved familiar' your companion naturally grew as you did, developing new abilities, increasing in size, etc, based on what you chose.
Droogami is Medium - his stats are just under Lini's in the preview.
It also explains how that came to be - if you scroll down to the listing of "how he started," you'll note a section labeled "4th level advancement," which mentions (among other things) that his size grows to Medium.
DOH!
See what happens when you read the preview at 3:30AM and then go back to bed, and only grab a section for a quote later instead of rereading it?
So,
only one thing to say to that...
WOOOHOOOO!!!!!!!!
I think I'm the only one on the wildshape haters side.
I don't really like the change either, but commenting isn't going to change it now. Once I see the final rules and how wildshape will play out in the full range of levels, then I can house rule it if need be. I read what your concerns were during the Beta regarding druid wild shaping and I agreed with it. Even though wild shaping still got a big nerf, at least the stat boosts were changed away from being enhancement bonuses.
Overall, the Pathfinder changes have been much more good than bad from my point of view. I'm real happy that so much of what was discussed during beta made it into the final rules and the other druid changes to the animal companion and the option of a domain are good ones.
Ok,
Quick question. I'm late to the party on Pathfinder, so didn't get to do any of the beta testing (just found it right before the end of the Beta, about 3 weeks before they announced it was heading for the printers).Is the druid wild shape and polymorph sizes based on the size of the caster, or is it fixed by spell level?
I mean, it seems that if a medium creature can only change to a small or large creature at a given level, then a small creature should only be able to do tiny/medium, and a large could only do medium/huge.
For example....
1st level druids all (just assume I got the animal sizes right, ok?)
Gnome --> House cat (Tiny), Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium)
Human --> Leopard (Small), Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large)
Ogre --> Tiger (Medium), Lion (Large), Sabretooth Cat (Huge)Pssssst...
Since you're a tiger and all...
Tigers are bigger than lions. Though there are smaller tiger species, the Siberian tiger averages in the mid-500 pound range, while the male African lion wighs in the low-400 pound range. Largest tiger on record wieghed 1,025 pounds, 200 pounds more than the largest lion on record at only 826 pounds.
You'll note the d20 SRD has similar statistics on their average weight, and both are "Large" by D&D terminology.
It's probably my fault for distracting him with the Marshall thread. ;)
It's probably my fault for distracting him with the Marshall thread. ;)
Actually,
It's more just my inherent prejudices. Intellectually, I know tigers are generally bigger than lions (specific breeds are exceptions of course).It's more that when I was growing up, I saw tigers in person, but never lions, and since they were the 'King of Beasts' I just always had this mental image of lions being bigger than tigers. Was a huge letdown when I finally saw then and saw how small (in relation) they were.