Druids and undead

[huggin]

In 3.5 it is clearly stated druids hate undead but I dont see that anywhere in pathfinder. Was that omitted to save space or did Paizo can how druids view undead?

Given how pathfinder describes druids I see them as being anti-undead

[LordKailas]

I don't think druids have any particular stance on undead any more then say wizards might. Some hate them, some are indifferent and some like them.

I say this because druids in pathfinder can actually become necromancers via the blight druid archetype. A blight druid with the death domain might animate a bunch of corpses from a graveyard and use them to attack towns and settlements in an attempt to restore the natural balance of things.

[Klorox]

Well, druids are essentially priests of Nature even evil outsiders are less unnatural than undead. Of course druids hate undead, they just are not ideally equipped to deal with them.

Though yes, Blight druids might be the exception to the rule.

[Mark Hoover 330]

There's no stated commentary on druids' interactions with undead in Pathfinder so I suppose it's entirely subjective. As for druids not being equipped to deal with them... clerics control/destroy such creatures through divine/profane energies; druids just do it with claws and fire.

Thanks to the Blight Druid, they can even make their own unliving minions. Can you imagine? A bunch of poachers, over-hunting local forests, taking only choice animals and leaving butchered carcasses behind. Suddenly one dark, fog-addled night into the village stalks a Blight Druid with a half-dozen animated animals with the Fast Zombie template attached?

MAN, that just writes itself!

[Dave Justus]

'Unnatural' is a curious concept. Everything is 'nature' so in a sense everything that is possible is 'natural.' Our concept of 'unnatural' is aesthetic rather than scientific.

I don't know that animating a body via magic that is part of the natural world is more unnatural than animating a statue to make a golem, or even more unnatural that the mutations that create magical beasts. But we generally don't think of Druids embarking on a great quest to destroy all the Unicorns because they are 'unnatural.'

[The Sideromancer]

I mean, if we're going to start going back and forth on magic being natural, I feel the need to bring in a previous character.

"So you're saying what I do is unnatural. You take your carbon fuel, open a path to whatever plane it is, and muck about with all sorts of supernatural junk. Me, I mix the carbon with two other rocks, and then I bang a third rock into it. Which one of us is in any position to complain about unnatural stuff?"

[blahpers]

It varies. Reincarnated druids, as embodiments of the natural cycle of life, death, and rebirth, are likely to find undead abhorrent unless they consider undeath to be part of said cycle. (There's a strong argument to be made for that in settings like Golarion and its universe.) Followers of the Green Faith are likely to be similarly averse to undead--again, unless they rationalize undeath as a natural force.

Uskwood druids, on the other hand, are more than willing to animate the dead to further their goals. Some blight druids do the same, though perhaps for different reasons.

[Mark Hoover 330]

Y'know, Justinian's comments above raise a point I've always gone back and forth on in my own head: what are Aberrations?

So in one or two monsters' descriptions under this type, they've talked about the origin of the creature being that they "came from the Beyond" or whatever, suggesting they're aliens or like C'Thulu or something. But then other Aberrations are clearly just a regular monster or humanoid that has mutated and then bred true as it's own new thing.

In the case of druids then, couldn't they be all into the "mutant" Aberrations then? Like, if the mutation of the original creature happened purely naturally?

I mean, if you took a goblin, induced a third arm in it using alchemy, then over generations of more alchemy and selective breeding got an entire new 3-armed Aberration type monster out of it, I could see a druid not being down with that.

But on the other hand if an animal adapted to being forced underground by losing its fur, gaining climbing tentacles, and spitting acid, but was STILL in some way related back to the primeval chicken it had been, couldn't a druid be like "that's cool; do you bro" and leave it be?

Back on track I still think that animating the dead should be fine for a druid. Consider: in RL druids believed in reincarnation. When the body dies the soul is already slated for another form, so no worries about what happens to the old one. Granted, the most "natural" thing to happen then is for the body to rot away to bones so maybe I could see an issue from a "standard" druid with, say, a zombie.

But a skeleton? Umm, they're just bones guy. I can either pick 'em up, throw 'em in a bowl and tell you your future, or I can ensorcel them to make a handy minion. What else do they have goin' on?

I think druids are as "anti-undead" as, say, a neutral shaman. Why do I say that? B/C on the PRD blurb about druids it says that they might revere nature gods but also might get their powers from "vague spirits." So if you're capable of a druid build that gets to the spell Animate Dead and you've used the fluff that you worship "vague spirits," how much of a stretch is this from some kind of shaman with this as part of their standard repertoire?

I mean, are they EXPERTS with the undead, either for OR against? Certainly not; I feel like there's a lot of builds that deal with this creature type with greater efficacy at either controlling or destroying them. You can't deny though that there's a build path, and thus a flavor of druid, that fully embraces the dead and the unliving.

Y'know, there's even a way to get a druid to Channel. You need to have the Summon Familiar class ability, be at least CL4 with Divine spells and have a Cha of 13 or better. Take the feat Adept Channel and you've got 2 uses/day.

So a Blight Druid takes the Death domain as their "nature bond" alternative. They also take Skill Focus/Knowledge: Religion and start the game with a 13 Cha. This qualifies them for Eldritch Heritage, giving them a Familiar. At 5th level they pick up Adept Channel and get 2 channels/day at CL -3. They're like a hedge cleric now!

Again, I'm not saying it's the BEST build, but it could happen. Now you're a druid that knows a LOT about religion, channels energy (maybe negative to heal your minions and later to take another feat so you can control undead) and has a Familiar. And now you're very NOT anti-undead.

[blahpers]

PRD wrote:

An aberration has a bizarre anatomy, strange abilities, an alien mindset, or any combination of the three.

That's pretty much it. They don't have to be Things from Beyond™'; they just have to be sufficiently weird to deserve lumping into a "who's who" of weird things. As far as I know, while particular aberrations may be anathema to nature, druids have no particular aversion to aberrations as a creature type any more than they do to, say, magical beasts or outsiders.