... And if not then why?
Druid is arguably one of the strongest classes in the game, yet I have never seen anyone complain about it's disruptiveness like they do about arguably weaker classes like the chained summoner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think most of that's a matter of optimization floors rather than optimization ceilings. Like the wizard, the Druid only really hits their top levels of power in the hands of a player with really solid system mastery. You have to know which spells to pick, which feats to take, which forms to Wild Shape into, which Animal Companions are good, etc.
Optimizing a chained summoner, on the other hand, is pretty simple. Their spell list is already really good, and all the evolutions needed to turn your Eidolon into a combat monster are self-evident. Even a player with low system mastery can how to give their monster a ton of attacks that all hit hard.
In other words, it's a lot more likely to disrupt an "average" game than a druid.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Generally speaking the druid's spell list is weaker than the wizard's (it's still very good, but unlike the wizard's it's focused on terrain control rather than with being able to do everything needed by snapping your fingers) but he makes up for that with access to the animal companion.
All in all the druid is powerful but not too powerful, and the fact the spells aren't as cookie cutter as the arcane casters' ones help a lot diverting most of the complaints away from the druid class.
Also, the druid has actually been nerfed in PF compared to D&D 3.xx, unlike the wizard who was buffed.
P.S.
What I can't stand about pet classes with summons is how much time/effort you have to give them on the table compared to everyone else. I just find when you have to spend 5 minutes/round for someone and he rolls like crazy while everyone else resolves everything in less than a minute rolling one or twice, it can ruin fun for everyone, unless you can handle it carefully.
Agreed. Druid powers are good, and being able to change shape is fun, but it was rightly nerfed in the move to PF, so as long as you follow the rules and only give yourself the boosts that the rules mandate, you're good. A good druid really needs a lot of good stats, so if you play be point buy, you have difficult choices to make. If you roll stats and got lucky, then you could be a monstrous druid. But not a game breaking guy, not compared to well-played wizards or (shudder) summoners.
The pet and the various critters you can summon is another issue. IF (and only if) the druid's player has all the stats printed out in front of him, it can be fairly stremlined. Critters only get one attack when they move (unless they have pounce) and even when they full attack you can roll all the dice at once. Not a big problem. Summoned critters need to be figured in advance as well, with all the appropriate templates and bonuses, and can be fairly streamlined. But the more critters you have on the table, the longer things take, be they PCs or animal companions or whatever, and some DMs get tired of that.
As a DM, the thing I don't like is when characters try to take wonky companion choices like raptors and such, and then don't understand why they are getting stares walking down the streets of Podunkville. Even a pet wolf or tiger can be problematic, so players wanting that need to be extra patient with whatever lengths the DM imposes to simulate their place in our imaginary societies. As with all things, there are up sides and down sides, and the players need to be ready to roll with how it goes.
I find druids to be ridicously powerfull at first and second level, but they tend to taper off from there into more manageable territory.
|
It depends what you compare them to. They're less powerful than other classes - so people don't complain. If full arcane casters were all nerfed - then people would probably start to complain about druids.
It's like if a pit bull and a miniature poodle are both mauling you - which one are you going to complain about?
|
I find druids are balanced by their own complexity, which is to say, anyone capable enough to play the druid to its peak is already such a good player that any class they lay their hands on they can make shine.
That being said, I don't welcome Druids to my table with open arms, for every player out there capable of running a druid reasonably efficiently, there are 5 more who drag the game to a grinding halt with pets, polymorphs and summons. I also find the class necessitates a certain amount of role playing characteristics that don't always logically follow with many campaigns (why is this druid seeking a lost artifact of power? or care about orcs killing humans?)
Chengar has the right of it. "Broken" classes generally have more to do with optimisation floors rather than optimisation ceilings. Paizo doesn't balance classes, options OR adventure paths according to ceilings, but rather according to a theoretical 'average player' who is roughly as capable at system optimisation as a concrete block.
This is less useful for us with a bit more know-how, but I believe the theory is experienced players capable of advanced optimisation also tend to play in games where GMs and players are more capable of adapting party and encounter balance as they go along. Thus, you balance around those without the experience to adjust. I'm not sure how well that holds up in practise, given internet guides and PFS no adjustment policies.
Concerning game design, I always place "broken" and "overpowered" in different boats, though often something can become overpowered because it's broken or vice versa in extreme cases. I personally consider "overpowered" as simply being too high on the power curve whereas "broken" screws up a fundamental aspect of the game system.
With the above definitions in mind, I consider the druid overpowered, but not necessarily broken. I consider them overpowered because their class feature suite simply has too much going for it. Summoning is broken in some respects due to being able to control so many expendable creatures that grinds the play flow to a halt, but I attribute that to summoning spells, not the class itself.
I consider the summoner broken because the class is designed as a one-man party, which undermines Pathfinder as a team game. In many cases, it's just not a fun class to have in your party. Any class that makes it miserable for other players is a poorly designed class.
I think a good strategy for playing any class is setting aside in the range of 20-30 percent of character development resources to enhance team play. Playing a rogue with a high crit range weapon? Take something like the outflank feat. Playing a Druid, pick a few good team buffs in your spell list and summon flank buddies for melee types. Playing a fighter, don't hesitate to run to the front and be a meat shield for your buddies. Character classes with more potential for OP and more net resources need to devote more for party support. That's a good internal balancing method.
The problem is that you may run into scenerios where a fighter gets all hurt because the cleric decided to cast buffs on himself instead of the fighter. Say the cleric was built to be a war cleric type. He is fully justified in buffing himself for combat (after all, that is how clerics fight).
That or you pigeonhole people into certain roles. What if the party ninja wants to play a shuriken build? That will pretty much eat all his feats and a good nber of his ninja tricks.
I have seen all too many martials get butt hurt because someone didnt force their character to play around himself (like beinga. N cleric with inflict or alchemist that does not grab infusion immediately)
|
|
Like the wizard, the druid only shines when the *player* is a master at bookkeeping. You pretty much need a different character sheet for every wildshape you're gonna use.
The barbarian was re-hauled via Unchained book, and simplified everything with the +2 hit/dmg and temp HPs instead of recalculating a separate char sheet for rage mode... now that I think of it, I wonder if something for the druid could be done, in a similar manner? beast shape is pretty straightforward, but unlike barbarian, you can go smaller to gain dex instead of str... so that would be a freaggin challenge...