This is not a complaint, but it is my opinion that a party with 4 druids can own roughly 80% of the campaigns thrown at them? What is your take at this? Starting at the 6th level the druid gains the wildshape ability to trans-morph into a fire elemental, thus trolls means very little to her anymore. Likewise, the ability to fly pretty much kills the challenge of any long distance to be covered. Add to this the druid's decent attack rolls, the good weapon selection, an animal companion, summonings and healing magic, not to mention stuff like heat metal, call lightning and the mighty sirocco, and you've got an unstoppable army. I mean I would think it twice before jumping in front of a druid... less four of them.
I think when you look at druids as a class, they are and can be exactly what they are supposed to be: characters that can and do survive on their own in the wilderness. THey get a good mix of spells, as you've mentioned and a (usually) beefy combat companion to aid them as well.
They are a great stand alone class, and function well in a group.
That having been said, they, imho, are not over powered.
|
Well its true to an extent, but I would argue they would be weaker than many more standard party set ups. At equal optimization levels a fighter should imo outshine a druid, he will have fewer attacks, but they will hit harder, more often and do more damage. The wizard spell list is simply better than the druids, clerics are much better healers and similar level combatants - depending on build - um maybe leave out the rogue and take another decent combat class.
You could say the same thing about many other classes. Even the long range travel thing is easily dealt with at level six with relatively cheap magic items. Druids are very self-reliant to be sure, but that's their whole schtick.
They were much more powerful in 3.5 imho.
In my current campaign, I've found that the Druid PC has been pretty brutal, particularly his wolf companion. The mooks I'm throwing at them might just be a tad too weak, but his companion's 1d8+9 plus trip bite attacks have been tearing the baddies apart, doing damage comparable to the group's fighters.
I'm really considering jacking up the party's APL by +1 because of him, though I have already done so because of their above average stats (I use rolling).
4 druids would have a lot of advantages but plenty of disadvantages depending on the campaign. They wouldnt for instance be able to deal with traps very well. The druid spell list also isnt as potent or as versatile as the wizard or the cleric list. The action economy would definately be on their side, but no individual (druid/companion combo) would have the same staying power as a well armored fighter given their relatively low AC's and only average HP. A wildshaped druid is something of a glass cannon, they can do a lot of damamge, but they cant stay in the fight as long as a typical front liner. I think it would entirely depend on the campaign the dm created. Often the most powerful animal companions can be more problem then boon. (4 Large sized companions and a series of 5ft corridors/doors for instance). Or a fight, followed by a social interaction, followed by a fight followed by more social, forcing the druid to burn through wild shapes faster then he'd probably like if he wants to be involved in all 4 events.
Druids can do everything, but a single druid cannot, which is one of the big changes for pathfinder. With a party of 4 druids, I would expect something like the following.
One character focuses on melee. Strength, Dex and Con are good stats. Wisdom is just good enough to cast the highest level spells. Feats are focused on wild shape and combat.
One character focuses on healing. Without channel energy, more cure spells will be needed, so one character is probably memorizing mostly cure spells (like a 2nd ed cleric). At higher levels, everyone probably memorizes some cures in their lower level slots.
One character focuses on (non-healing) casting. Wisdom is maxed and physical stats are in the moderate to dump range. Feats are focused on boosting spell DCs, beating spell resistance and otherwise increasing spell power.
So far, it looks like a fighter, cleric and wizard. Missing from the standard configuration is the rogue, which means they are light on skills. At 4+int, they can have max ranks in most skills, although many of them will be missing the class bonus.
The other problem they will have is anti-magic zones. That nullifies wild shape and spell casting, so suddenly, they are not going to be able to do much other than hide behind their pets.
As many have pointed out, druids are a great stand-alone class. Great survivors in the wilderness. I am fond of the class, though I agree I don't think they are overpowered.
The thing you have to keep in mind when playing a druid, or preparing an entire army of them, is that they have heavy restrictions on what they can wear/wield that in most campaigns are going to present the main thrust as to keeping them balanced. One might be tempted to remove these restrictions by creating a world totally reliant on wood and bone technology, but that would be the same as prepping your fighter for a world where all the weapons are martial weapons and all armor is metal.
Those things might be fun as one-offs, but you don't want to play like that forever.
Druid is a class where some of the features dwell in a half-fluff/half-mechanic that presupposes a campaign world that will allow their limitations to be a factor in balance.
One might be tempted to remove these restrictions by creating a world totally reliant on wood and bone technology
You mean, like in Dark Sun?
Another weakness of combat druids is DR.
They are using natural weapons, so no silver or adamantite weapons. They can't just grab a silver dagger or use silver arrows like a lot of other classes can.
Greater magic fang does not help in overcoming DR, the druid must get an amulet of mighty fists +3 or better to do this.
Most of the high damage druid builds rely on having lots of weaker attacks. When you are making 5-6 attacks at 15-20 damage a pop, a DR of 10/X really cuts into your damage output. A two hand fighter who is making 2-3 attacks at 30 a pop is not as effected by DR. Also, druids don't get access to high threat ranges weapons(falchions, rapiers, etc) which also help in overcoming DR.
Greater magic fang does not help in overcoming DR, the druid must get an amulet of mighty fists +3 or better to do this.
Eldritch Claws would likely solve the issue for silver and magic.
Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :D
Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :D
Is that still allowed in Pathfinder? I always considered wildshaping into an ape to wear humanoid armor and wield humanoid weapons to be one of the unbalancing aspects of 3.5 druids.
Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :DIs that still allowed in Pathfinder? I always considered wildshaping into an ape to wear humanoid armor and wield humanoid weapons to be one of the unbalancing aspects of 3.5 druids.
Yes, and logically so. If animals(tigers and such) can get barding then why can't an ape?
Yes, and logically so. If animals(tigers and such) can get barding then why can't an ape?Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :DIs that still allowed in Pathfinder? I always considered wildshaping into an ape to wear humanoid armor and wield humanoid weapons to be one of the unbalancing aspects of 3.5 druids.
So, you might notice that I listed "humanoid" armor and weapons. That was deliberate to separate it from "barding." The reason I did that is because I saw 3.5 druid/apes routinely wearing magical armor intended for humanoids, as well as wielding magic weapons also intended for humanoids.
I have no issue with "barding", even magical barding is OK.
Greater magic fang does not help in overcoming DR, the druid must get an amulet of mighty fists +3 or better to do this.Eldritch Claws would likely solve the issue for silver and magic.
Yeah, it helps, but druids still have less options than a lot of other classes when it comes to handling DR.
Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :DIs that still allowed in Pathfinder? I always considered wildshaping into an ape to wear humanoid armor and wield humanoid weapons to be one of the unbalancing aspects of 3.5 druids.
I don't see why it wouldn't be; an ape is physically capable of wearing armor and wielding weapons, and a wild shaped druid retains the intelligence necessary to use the weapons. It really isn't all that unbalancing in Pathfinder considering that wild shape only gives minor buffs and a temporary new skin, unlike 3.5 which actually transformed the druid's body into the animal.
They are using natural weapons, so no silver or adamantite weapons. They can't just grab a silver dagger or use silver arrows like a lot of other classes can.
Why not? They're only restricted to non-metal armor.
Why not? They're only restricted to non-metal armor.They are using natural weapons, so no silver or adamantite weapons. They can't just grab a silver dagger or use silver arrows like a lot of other classes can.
It has nothing to do with their ability to wield the weapon, and more to do with the massive loss in ability a melee druid takes when they switch to caster form. The druid goes from 5 attacks at 20 damage a swing to 2 swings with a weapon at 10 damage a swing. They also lose the benefit of all feats effecting their natural attacks.
On top of they they lose natural armor and mobility. Generally speaking, switching to caster form is not a good idea.
I don't see why it wouldn't be; an ape is physically capable of wearing armor and wielding weapons, and a wild shaped druid retains the intelligence necessary to use the weapons. It really isn't all that unbalancing in Pathfinder considering that wild shape only gives minor buffs and a temporary new skin, unlike 3.5 which actually transformed the druid's body into the animal.Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :DIs that still allowed in Pathfinder? I always considered wildshaping into an ape to wear humanoid armor and wield humanoid weapons to be one of the unbalancing aspects of 3.5 druids.
LOL, I got into this same argument on the Wizards boards so I won't do that again. Perhaps it is less cheesy in Pathfinder due to druids retaining their own physical attributes when wildshaped, but it still feels cheesy to me.
I will say that physiologically apes are much, much different than humanoids. They walk on all fours and can only stand for short periods of time. Their "hands" are only nominally handlike and are not suited for grasping and manipulating objects the way a human hand is. Their upper body is proportioned totally differently as are their legs.
It's not a matter of intelligence, apes are physiologically limited in what they can hold and manipulate. An ape hand and arm could clumsily swing a club, but there is no way they could hold and fight with a sword. Their bones, muscles, tendons and (most importantly) thumbs simply are not designed to hold things the way humans do.
But no doubt all the druid ape shapers will come out to defend their humanoid apes...
They can't just grab a silver dagger or use silver arrows like a lot of other classes can.
Also, druids don't get access to high threat ranges weapons(falchions, rapiers, etc) which also help in overcoming DR.
I haven't found anything in the game mechanics that disallow a druid from using or wielding silver/adamantine/cold iron weapons. Indeed, many an elven druid in my campaign have just purchased a long bow with silver arrows, and I do know of a certain druid in my campaign who took a level of fighter to burn the bonus feat on two-weapon fighting, and had both a +2 cold iron scimitar and a +1 silver kukri, she was a storm to behold!
Also, I think i remember something about magical weapons being able to bypass DR just by sheer magic, something like a weapon of +1 or higher ignores the DR X/special material or something like this....
On top of they they lose natural armor and mobility. Generally speaking, switching to caster form is not a good idea.
YOu mean there are druids that DON"T get natural spell as a feat?
On top of they they lose natural armor and mobility. Generally speaking, switching to caster form is not a good idea.YOu mean there are druids that DON"T get natural spell as a feat?
I haven't seen one, BNW.
Greg
"In ancient times...
Hundreds of years before the dawn of history
Lived a strange race of people... the Druids
No one knows who they were or what they were doing
But their legacy remains
Hewn into the living rock... Of Stonehenge
Stonehenge! Where the demons dwell
Where the banshees live and they do live well
Stonehenge! Where a man's a man
And the children dance to the Pipes of Pan"
Heh... Spinal Tap
On topic, I tend to think an all druid party inferior to an all fighter, all rogue, or (shiver) all cleric party, much less a classic balance (arcane, divine, warrior, skill monkey)
Heh... Spinal Tap
On topic, I tend to think an all druid party inferior to an all fighter, all rogue, or (shiver) all cleric party, much less a classic balance (arcane, divine, warrior, skill monkey)
Spinal tap!
All [something-or-other] parties can be very powerful. An all-rogue party, for example, can ambush ridiculously well. Fireball might not be the most powerful spell, but a level 5 party of 5 invisible wizards syncing their initiative and casting 5 simultaneous fireballs should pretty much destroy most CR 5 encounters. There are many more examples.
On the other hand, they face unique challenges. Some will be very vulnerable to traps, incorporeal enemies, constructs, etc. Parties with big gaps can be a lot of fun to play, but somewhat less so in pre-written adventures.
The biggest problem with a group of all one class is that it gets boring to play! Games are a lot more fun when everyone has their own shtick.
This is not a complaint, but it is my opinion that a party with 4 druids can own roughly 80% of the campaigns thrown at them?
I am not convinced that an 80% success rate is very good. :)
A human druid can sub in pretty well for a rogue: extra skill point, skill focus stealth and disable device and you're good to go. The only thing they have trouble with is acting as the parties face, and even that's manageable if you want to have a high int and not use spells that require a saving throw.
For fun, i made up a half elven druid who's rat could substitute for trap finding and disarming.
4 animal companions > 1 fighter
The druids can heal. They may have problems with things like curses.
Druids can be fairly blasty if they need to be. Balefull polymorph is one of the lower level sod spells. (even if you are technically, alive, your contribution to the fight as a turtle is going to be prettyy minimal)
This doesn't mean that druids are the most POWERFULL class. Just one of the most versatile.
On top of they they lose natural armor and mobility. Generally speaking, switching to caster form is not a good idea.YOu mean there are druids that DON"T get natural spell as a feat?
What does natural spell have to do with wielding a weapon in humanoid form to bypass DR?
A well designed level 10 melee druid deals about 70ish damage on a pounce. Max strength, good con, good dex with a 15-16 wisdom.
Lets say they are up against a demon DR 10/cold iron or good
They can use natural spell drop a flame strike for 10d6 with a DC of around 16-17. That is 18 damage before resistances because most level 10 challenges can easily make the reflex save.
If they shift into humanoid form and use a masterwork cold iron scimitar to overcome DR. 2 swings at 1d6 + 8 ish, that is about 25ish damage. In addition, they lose all their armor and movement bonuses for animal form.
Or they stay in animal form, and do their normal attack. 5 attacks at 20-25 damage each. Even with DR they will still do 20-30 damage.
No matter what you do, you are going to be doing half the damage a front line damage dealer should be dealing.
TLDR - Druids don't have a lot of good options for dealing with certain DRs(good, cold iron, adamantite)
On top of they they lose natural armor and mobility. Generally speaking, switching to caster form is not a good idea.YOu mean there are druids that DON"T get natural spell as a feat?What does natural spell have to do with wielding a weapon in humanoid form to bypass DR?
A well designed level 10 melee druid deals about 70ish damage on a pounce. Max strength, good con, good dex with a 15-16 wisdom.
Lets say they are up against a demon DR 10/cold iron or good
They can use natural spell drop a flame strike for 10d6 with a DC of around 16-17. That is 18 damage before resistances because most level 10 challenges can easily make the reflex save.
If they shift into humanoid form and use a masterwork cold iron scimitar to overcome DR. 2 swings at 1d6 + 8 ish, that is about 25ish damage. In addition, they lose all their armor and movement bonuses for animal form.
Or they stay in animal form, and do their normal attack. 5 attacks at 20-25 damage each. Even with DR they will still do 20-30 damage.
No matter what you do, you are going to be doing half the damage a front line damage dealer should be dealing.
TLDR - Druids don't have a lot of good options for dealing with certain DRs(good, cold iron, adamantite)
I think he's saying that with that feat you don't have to shift to caster form...you can cast no matter what form youre in.
On top of they they lose natural armor and mobility. Generally speaking, switching to caster form is not a good idea.YOu mean there are druids that DON"T get natural spell as a feat?I haven't seen one, BNW.
Greg
Me neither.
When people ask me, "What's a feat tax?" I often reply, "For example, look at natural spell for the druid..."
Yes and no. I mean, it's a tax every druid is very happy to pay.
Is more a no-brainer.
Or wildshaping into an ape with a frickin' giant club! :DIs that still allowed in Pathfinder? I always considered wildshaping into an ape to wear humanoid armor and wield humanoid weapons to be one of the unbalancing aspects of 3.5 druids.
I was assuming the Wild Enhancement on the druid's armor. If I'm a medium sized druid (wearing mundane armor) and I shapeshift into a Large sized ape, the armor would simply be subsumed by the polymorph.
I think he's saying that with that feat you don't have to shift to caster form...you can cast no matter what form youre in.
I am saying that for certain types of druid(IE melee optimized druid), casting spells to deal damage is the absolute worst thing you can to, so having natural spell is irrelevant.
That leaves you two choices for dealing damage against a creature with DR are attack in animal form, or switch to humanoid form and wield a weapon that overcomes the DR. Both options stink.
I am saying that for certain types of druid(IE melee optimized druid), casting spells to deal damage is the absolute worst thing you can to, so having natural spell is irrelevant.
I think he's saying that with that feat you don't have to shift to caster form...you can cast no matter what form youre in.
Yes but there might come a time when you'd like to heal yourself without having to change forms.
I am saying that for certain types of druid(IE melee optimized druid), casting spells to deal damage is the absolute worst thing you can to, so having natural spell is irrelevant.
It's not a given so you can deal damage-dealing spells.. but so you don't have to drop form to do stuff like Obscuring Mist, Cures, or Faerie Fire... to name a few.
Natural Spell is never irrelevant; whether you use wild shape to turn as big as possible and get into someone's face, or to turn as small as possible and hit them with range spells directly, or spells that shape the battlefield in general, being able to use both major class abilities at the same time is very important to any druid.
well we are talking about one of the most hybridiest hybrids that have ever hybrided a hybrid. Depending on how you build your druid, you could be playing a frontline melee combatant with boat loads of HP or a trick battlefield spellcaster, shifting the ground under their opponent's feet. Oh, and all of them can heal themselves if so prepared. Need a scout? wildshape into a mouse or an air elemental.
With all that said, no class is special snowflake these days. While some classes are better in some roles, most classes if built well enough can cover something they are usually meant to cover. Even with spellcasting, usually somewhat exclusive, anybody with a high UMD and a wand or two can cover some of it.
In the end it matters little that druids can take on a lot of roles. What matters is are you having fun playing in a party of 4 druids.
Yes but there might come a time when you'd like to heal yourself without having to change forms.I am saying that for certain types of druid(IE melee optimized druid), casting spells to deal damage is the absolute worst thing you can to, so having natural spell is irrelevant.
I think he's saying that with that feat you don't have to shift to caster form...you can cast no matter what form youre in.
Yes, but that is off topic. I have been talking about the problems that druids have with overcoming DR.
To which some people responded that a druid can just nuke them with a spell. Other people responded that you shift to caster and use a weapon.
Both of those option are as bad if not worse than just staying in animal form.
Yes, but that is off topic. I have been talking about the problems that druids have with overcoming DR.
To which some people responded that a druid can just nuke them with a spell. Other people responded that you shift to caster and use a weapon.
Both of those option are as bad if not worse than just staying in animal form.
Enter my suggestion that you turn into a ape with a giant club. DR problem fixed! (Not to mention the fact that you now threaten a giant section of the map :D)
Round and round we go!
Respectfully, the ape thing is a loophole abuse (nevertheless if allowed I suppose is quite fun to role).
How is it loop-hole abuse. (If there's already a thread discussing this, link it to me. I'm genuinely interested.) This seems like a totally kosher move by a druid.
Yes, but that is off topic. I have been talking about the problems that druids have with overcoming DR.
To which some people responded that a druid can just nuke them with a spell. Other people responded that you shift to caster and use a weapon.
Both of those option are as bad if not worse than just staying in animal form.
Enter my suggestion that you turn into a ape with a giant club. DR problem fixed! (Not to mention the fact that you now threaten a giant section of the map :D)
Round and round we go!
A giant ape with a club...
1. Wouldn't be able to bypass the DR as the club can't be cold iron or adamantitite.
2. It is debatable that an ape can actually wield a club.
3. Still does less damage than the druid as a large cat pouncing.
I was asking why it was loophole abuse.
Why wouldn't the druid be able to wield in a club in ape form. He's not an ape... he's a druid in ape form. Since he retains the manual dexterity of an ape (which is more than enough to wield a club), there's no reason he couldn't use the weapon. Plus, many apes have shown the ability to use tools. :D
I didn't realize you couldn't make a club out of other materials, but even if that's true, you could just as easily sub in another weapon. How about a spear with the appropriate tip? How about a mace with an approriately high enhancement bonus to bypass the DR?
Adn regarding the DR, huge STR + two-handed power attacks go a long way towards getting that damage back up.
How is it loop-hole abuse. (If there's already a thread discussing this, link it to me. I'm genuinely interested.) This seems like a totally kosher move by a druid.
An ape is an animal, not an humanoid. The shape of his body is more similar to an orc or an elf than one of a bear or a boar, but is still an animal.
AFAIK, similarities among primates are more superfical than most peole think.
As an example, see the Knuckle Walking in apes, and the differencies between Gorilla and Chimp.
To be clear: I think is debatable and Druid does fine enough without these things. If you want to make it work, fine I do no want to seem dismissive or something. :)
We're not talking about him picking a lock or tying intricate knots.... He's throwing around a big ole, thick-hafted weapon.
I was asking why it was loophole abuse.
Why wouldn't the druid be able to wield in a club in ape form. He's not an ape... he's a druid in ape form. Since he retains the manual dexterity of an ape (which is more than enough to wield a club), there's no reason he couldn't use the weapon. Plus, many apes have shown the ability to use tools. :D
There are many who think that apes do not have the right muscle and bone structure to properly wield a weapon made for humanoids.
I didn't realize you couldn't make a club out of other materials, but even if that's true, you could just as easily sub in another weapon. How about a spear with the appropriate tip? How about a mace with an approriately high enhancement bonus to bypass the DR?
Yes, I will just carry around a +5 club worth 50k gold just in cast I need it. Meanwhile a fighter can make their main weapon adamantite, and carry a non-magical cold iron and silver weapon for around 2k. If the fighter is forced to switch weapons, all they lose the the magic enhancements on their normal weapon.
If you are at the point where you can afford a +3 to +5 backup weapon, then you should already have an amulet of mighty fists. The problem is that at lower levels, druids usually can't afford that.
Adn regarding the DR, huge STR + two-handed power attacks go a long way towards getting that damage back up.
And losing 3 attacks at 1d8 + bonuses attack goes a long way towards pushing the damage back down.
At level 10
Cat does 70 damage normally
Cat does 30 damage vs DR
Ape does 50 damage normally
Ape does 30 damage vs DR
No matter how you go at it, a druid who can't overcome DR loses over half their damage and there are several DR types that a druid can't easily overcome(adamantite, cold iron, alignment) unless that drop a ton of gold on an amulet of mighty fists.
|
An all-druid party would need at least 5 druids, so that when their powers combine... (just be prepared for an argument over who has to wear the "heart" ring)
In all seriousness: an all-druid campaign might be kind of fun. Of course, there would have to be some major plot about environmental destruction and so forth to provide the conflict.
This is not a complaint, but it is my opinion that a party with 4 druids can own roughly 80% of the campaigns thrown at them? What is your take at this? Starting at the 6th level the druid gains the wildshape ability to trans-morph into a fire elemental, thus trolls means very little to her anymore. Likewise, the ability to fly pretty much kills the challenge of any long distance to be covered. Add to this the druid's decent attack rolls, the good weapon selection, an animal companion, summonings and healing magic, not to mention stuff like heat metal, call lightning and the mighty sirocco, and you've got an unstoppable army. I mean I would think it twice before jumping in front of a druid... less four of them.
It's true. A party of 4 druids is actually really impressive. It's not so much because of their pure power either, but because of their versatility. They can generally have something to adapt to different situations. Druids are basically bards but with a different bent; they're good at everything, master of nothing (not even masters of shapeshifting, since stuff like polymorph is better).
The thing is, an all-druid party has four members who can A) Fighter reasonably well or exceptionally well with certain forms, B) heal themselves and each other, C) engage battlefield control, D) bring the rain (fire) with some blasting spells, and E) spam minions + summoning spells.
This gives them a very solid set of options. Also, a dip or two into other classes can give them new options. For example, monk 1-2/druid X gives them good saves, and wisdom to their AC while shapechanged. Rogue 1 / Druid X gives Trapfinding.
It's not merely druids however. A party of 4 clerics is an amazing sight to behold in action. They can get animal companions (animal domain) and they can cast spells like animate dead which gives them a lot of cannon fodder (enemies as treasure is fun too; since if you kill that hydra, now you have a hydra), they get summoning spells; and most importantly they can heal like crazy. A group of clerics is almost immortal when you consider their healing capabilities (everyone can spontaneously cast cure spells, everyone can have chanel positive energy and so forth).
All of them can support a high AC, and can essentially trade off actions. It doesn't matter if they're ambushed from front, behind, or above, because all of them can effectively do the same job if needed. I actually had a group of tabletop players do this to see how much team-synergy they could create with a single-classed party; and honestly, they were brutal in Red Hand of Doom.
Bards can also do this pretty well, because of their versatility. Less noticeable than druids and clerics, because most people don't regard bards as being capable of melee combat, and most underestimate their spellcasting abilities (which is fair 'cause they really aren't amazing casters), but bards can do this sort of thing too if built right.
The classes that have the hardest time with a 4 player party are classes that rely on other classes to cover their weaknesses. These are things like Fighters (best killers in the game, no magic), or even Wizards (they tend to be squishy so while they can make an amazing party of 4, they have to all be very smart). 4 Wizard parties are amazingly fun as well, since technically everyone is squishy, but you can all share your spellbooks.
In many ways, it reminds me of the 4 class party challenges from Final Fantasy 1 (which ironically was heavily influenced by D&D, including having a spells per day system). And honestly, if your group is all cool with playing the same class, these kinds of games are really fun to do.
You just can't be worried about someone "stealing my role", and be more teamwork minded. It's not about having the most dakka. It's about being able to multiply that dakka by 4.
For the record: I've never taken Natural Spell as a druid. Neither has my girlfriend, and she plays wild-shape focused druids to the exclusion of all other classes. We have never used Natural Spell, ever. Maybe it's optimal for maximum druid versatility, but it's never been an interest of ours.
Now if there was a feat that allowed you to talk while wild-shaped...