| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I was pretty disappointed to find out that the Druid Archetype doesn't have a feat for Wild Empathy.
It sort of feels like an oversight, since Wild Empathy is a class feature for the Druid while it is a class feat for Rangers. Ranger and Beastmaster archetypes can get it at 4th level but if you want to be more caster-like there is no real option for you. There is an easy enough fix to homebrew by just giving the Druid Archetype the feat as a level 4 option, but I was wondering if anyone else thought this was an oversight? I can't think of any mechanical or flavor reason to not allow the Druid dedication to have it as a feat.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh that's weird. Yea it should totally be an archetype feat for level 4.
Though this isn't really a place for complaining about the rules, rather asking how certain rules work. Since this isn't really a rules question it should probably be moved to General Discussion.
|
Yeah, it has always struck me as an oversight too. Mind you, wild empathy working off diplomacy has always struck me as an oversight too.
Note that there is a workaround. Mechanically, wild empathy just allows you to use diplomacy on animals. So does speaking to them, either by the spell or by an ancestral ability (sprites and gnomes can both get it by level 5)
Huh that's weird. Yea it should totally be an archetype feat for level 4.
Though this isn't really a place for complaining about the rules, rather asking how certain rules work. Since this isn't really a rules question it should probably be moved to General Discussion.
I wasn't really intending to complain, I found it curious and was wondering other players thoughts on the matter. I would say this is similar to the powerful alchemy post that is also in this section. That being said I don't mind where it ends up, I'm just explaining the logic I used to ultimately post in the Rules section.
Gnomes and Sprites are also an option to be able to do this thing and I suppose that helps diversify someone's choices.
Note that there is a workaround. Mechanically, wild empathy just allows you to use diplomacy on animals. So does speaking to them, either by the spell or by an ancestral ability (sprites and gnomes can both get it by level 5)
It isn't exactly the same. Specifically Wild Empathy adds 'In most cases, wild animals will give you time to make your case.' But Speak With Animals instead says 'The spell doesn't make them more friendly than normal.'
So it is much easier for the GM to forbid even making the Diplomacy check in the first place even if you can talk to the animal.
|
|
Note that there is a workaround. Mechanically, wild empathy just allows you to use diplomacy on animals. So does speaking to them, either by the spell or by an ancestral ability (sprites and gnomes can both get it by level 5)It isn't exactly the same. Specifically Wild Empathy adds 'In most cases, wild animals will give you time to make your case.' But Speak With Animals instead says 'The spell doesn't make them more friendly than normal.'
So it is much easier for the GM to forbid even making the Diplomacy check in the first place even if you can talk to the animal.
While you're right, in practice their seems to be little difference. I've got characters using pretty much all combinations of wild empathy, speak with animals spell, speak racial ability, glad-hand. It generally comes down to what the GM thinks is interesting/useful/reasonable/balanced in any particular situation regardless of precise mechanics and flavour. Given the lack of specificity in the various abilities that is probably just as Paizo intended.
Yeah, it has always struck me as an oversight too. Mind you, wild empathy working off diplomacy has always struck me as an oversight too.
...
Druids are also the only casters that don't get a Cantrip Expansion feat. Weird.
I wasn't really intending to complain, I found it curious and was wondering other players thoughts on the matter.I believe it is 100% intentional. I haven't done an exhaustive search, but some (and maybe all) Dedications do not grant ALL of the associated class features. The Ranger Dedication give you Hunt Prey, but it does not give you Hunter's Edge. Nor do you ever get any of the other class features.
The Fighter Dedication never grants the +2 to combat or the AoO feature (but you can take it as a Feat later).
Personally, I agree with this approach. A Dedication should not be equal to actually being that class. This approach is a nerf on multi-classing efficacy, but still provides the flavor/aspect of the additional class. YMMV
I could see that and for the most part I agree with it. But then we have Champions who have like feats for both lay on hands and the champion reaction. So some classes do in fact have more options from their class then others. That being said Druids do for the most part line up with the number of feats and types of feats that other casters get. So it is probably intentional. It is a shame though, it's mostly a ribbon ability that can be get via other archetypes still so I don't see it as protecting the niche of the druid anyways.
EDIT: Just out of curiosity, what does the following clause actually restrict?
You don't gain any other abilities from your choice of order.
What does the Dedication not give from the Order?
The Dedication doesn't give you the Focus Spell or the Class Feat associated with the Order.
It is a shame though, it's mostly a ribbon ability that can be get via other archetypes still so I don't see it as protecting the niche of the druid anyways.The only way I see to acquire Wild Empathy outside of Druid, is to take the Ranger/ Beastmaster Dedication and then acquire it as a Feat. So if you take the Druid Dedication, it's actually harder to get Wild Empathy. If you just wanted that ability, you'd take one of the other Dedications.
Whether, and to what extent, this protects the Druid's class feature is open to debate. There's a strong argument that forcing someone who takes a Druid Dedication to also take a second Dedication to acquire Wild Empathy, goes a long way to separating Druids and those who are merely Dedicated (if WE is integral to the comparison).
While I am inclined to agree with the sentiment of calling this a "ribbon" ability, it's arguably more mechanically usable than it was in PF1. And, you can argue that it is so hard to acquire Wild Empathy, that this makes it a signature ability (in flavor, not efficacy) of the Druid. For me, having WE is going to give me a sense of agency over non-Druids and those who merely take the Dedication, even if I hardly use it.
To be fair, my perspective is one of the pure class player. I don't want someone being able to take a Dedication and then get all my class features while cherry-picking the best feats. I think this is one of the major challenges (bug/feature) with PF1 multi-classing. PF2 seems to be saying that, hey, you can still optimize, but we want to make it really hard for you to be able to fully supplant the pure class.
If Wild Empathy is that important (from a flavor perspective) then start out as a Druid and multi-class out of it.
And again, if there's one design approach I really like about PF2, it's this. It was really annoying to see someone go Ranger 2 / XXXX and get all the 1st and 2nd level Ranger feats, and then all the benefits from their second and third classes.
I...
I suppose for me if Wild Empathy was a signature ability for the Druids that it has to be protected from the dedication, that gives power of agency over non druids then why can
RangersRanger Archetypes
And
Beastmaster can get them.
It just doesn't mentally jive. If anything it would make more sense that someone who had dedicated themselves to the drudic cause then that of some fighter who wanted a pet dog(beastmaster is clearly more then that, it has a wide versatility of fluff.)
I understand wanting to protect a class fantasy and wanting to prevent cherry picking. The character of mine that I was considering, well I wanted to be martial protector of druids, someone with minor magical ability but still trained and lived under the culture and practices of a drudic circle. She was a monk with ki spells, and the druid dedication for some minor elemental abilities that she used to protect the forest and other druids. It certainly wasn't an optimized or cherry pick build( Heck my cantrips were ray of frost and produce flame hardly optimal compared to electric arc+flurry) Sure I could have build her as a druid first but then I would have (the arguably more powerful magic.) But I also get I'm not the only type of player and there are who buld for optimization first and character second.
AS for what do you get from your order, nothing really. You get
- the anthema associated with your order ( so fun roleplay stuff)
-access to druid feats which require that order.
- Trained in the orders specific skill.
Not from your order but from the dedication, you get 2 cantrips, and the nature skill. And of course being trained in primal magic dcs and attack rolls
You don't get any focus spells of feats associated with the order (so animal druid doesn't get it's animal companion. Leaf doesn't get leshy, etc.) You can still spend later archetype feats to get those things, but you don't get them from just the dedication
I suppose for me if Wild Empathy was a signature ability for the Druids that it has to be protected from the dedication, that gives power of agency over non druids then why can
Rangers
Ranger Archetypes
And
Beastmaster can get them.Signature <> Only available to. Rangers had WE in PF1 and they got it for free. That fact that PF2 strips it from the Ranger by default, IMO, makes it even more of a Class differentiator. Granted, I'm not saying Paizo is trying to elevate/promote WE as some foundational aspect of being a Druid--and certainly not on an efficacy level- but it has essentially worked out in that only Druids are going to consistently have it.
None of those other Class/Dedication options give you Wild Empathy by default. You have to expend a Class Feat to get Wild Empathy. The benefit of WE is so situational, IME, that it essentially is chosen for flavor as oppose to efficacy (or you know your campaign is going to be dealing with lots of animals).
The other thing to keep in mind, is that the fact it is available via those other Dedications may be more of an unavoidable consequence of how Rangers were implemented. In PF1, Rangers got it for free. But...because it's been commoditized as a Feat, then it just works out that those two (and only two) Dedications can pick it up. So kind of a semi-loop hole, but no easy way around it, given the design.
I think the only disconnect for me is that you can't get it at all via the Druid Dedication, which does seem odd given the fact that it can be via the Ranger. You can justify that IC, but again, it's most likely an unintended design oversight. Since Druids get it for free, there is no option to go back and pick it up as a Feat.
And as HumbeGamer points out, they need to withhold something.
I mean your disconnect is the same as mine. I would want it to be a feat you have to buy not an aspect of the dedication.
I think perhaps for the official rules it maybe best since I do sort of agree with having to withhold something. But I think i'll continue my homebrew of it being a level 4 druid archetype feat.