PDA

View Full Version : Druids and turning aberrations



Moriato
2009-10-12, 10:35 AM
I've always thought of aberrations as being the natural enemy of druids. If there's one thing that druids really should be opposed to, I would think it would be these wholly unnatural abominations.

Oddly though, with the exception of one kind of "meh" prc in lords of madness, druids don't really have anything geared specifically towards fighting them.

So what do you playgrounders think about adding an ACF that would allow druids to give up wildshape, or possibly their animal companion, for the ability to turn aberrations like a cleric turns undead?

Good idea? Bad idea? Overpowered? Underpowered? Already an ACF that I don't know about?

Cyrion
2009-10-12, 10:41 AM
I think as a traded feature it's more in line with losing the animal companion than the wildshape, but then you're adding a reasonably useful power to an already powerful class and opening up the argument that druids should be able to power their metamagic with it a la divine metamagic.

Maybe make it cost one of their daily wildshape uses to use. That way they get to use it more often as they level, but it comes with a significant trade in what they can do that day.

Moriato
2009-10-12, 10:47 AM
Well it's not actually adding an ability, it's trading one. I believe druids are usually considered to be overly powerful because of their animal companions, and ability to wildshape. I wouldn't want to add anything without taking at least one of those away. Spending a wild shape use isn't a bad idea, though.

As far as divine metamagic goes, I think there's usually a prerequisite that requires you to be able to turn undead specifically, so druids still wouldn't qualify.

Alternatively, you could not even call it turning. Call it something like "Enforce natural law" or some such thing, and avoid that problem altogether.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-12, 10:49 AM
One of the Eberron splatbooks beat you to the idea.

Moriato
2009-10-12, 10:55 AM
One of the Eberron splatbooks beat you to the idea.

I've never been a fan of eberron, so if it's out there, that's the one place I wouldn't find it, heh. Care to share which one it was?

Grumman
2009-10-12, 10:55 AM
Bad idea. For a start, unlike undead or outsiders, aberrations don't have an inherent magical nature that would make them vulnerable to turning. It would be like having the power to turn goblinoids.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-10-12, 10:56 AM
Requires druid level 3, Gatekeeper Initiate (requires druid level 1), and is called Repel Aberration. Just in basic ECS. Doesn't quite turn, but keeps them from approaching.

Cyrion
2009-10-12, 10:56 AM
Well it's not actually adding an ability, it's trading one. I believe druids are usually considered to be overly powerful because of their animal companions, and ability to wildshape. I wouldn't want to add anything without taking at least one of those away. Spending a wild shape use isn't a bad idea, though.



Yes. I think that it's going to be somewhere between the animal companion and wildshape in power. Trading it as an ACF is going to be a trade up for an animal companion (I tend to be less impressed with those than the general board consensus) and a huge trade down for wildshape.

Optimystik
2009-10-12, 11:03 AM
Yes. I think that it's going to be somewhere between the animal companion and wildshape in power. Trading it as an ACF is going to be a trade up for an animal companion (I tend to be less impressed with those than the general board consensus) and a huge trade down for wildshape.

The right animal companion is worth his weight in gold. I'd say it's a trade down for both class features, as a companion is more versatile (able to take on more creature types besides just aberrations, unlike the turning idea.)

Aberrations may be unnatural, but they are still living creatures. It's Constructs that Druids hate the most, I'd say. Rangers would probably be more keen on hating Aberrations.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-12, 11:13 AM
Requires druid level 3, Gatekeeper Initiate (requires druid level 1), and is called Repel Aberration. Just in basic ECS. Doesn't quite turn, but keeps them from approaching.

And then IIRC either Faiths of Eberron or Magic of Eberron expands it into Turning, but not Destroying.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-10-12, 11:16 AM
Scanned MoE. Nothing there. Must be in Faiths, then.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-12, 11:29 AM
Scanned MoE. Nothing there. Must be in Faiths, then.

It may not be a feat. I doubt it's a PrC in and of itself, but it is possible.

lord_khaine
2009-10-12, 12:12 PM
Aberrations may be unnatural, but they are still living creatures. It's Constructs that Druids hate the most, I'd say. Rangers would probably be more keen on hating Aberrations.


I cant see why druids should care about something thats basicaly a slab of stone imbued with a elemental spirit.

If druids should hate anything it should really be the undead, it doesnt get more unatural that that, aberations are still part of the natural cycle of life and death, where the undead are in direct defiance of it.

Mercenary Pen
2009-10-12, 12:15 PM
I cant see why druids should care about something thats basicaly a slab of stone imbued with a elemental spirit.

If druids should hate anything it should really be the undead, it doesnt get more unatural that that, aberations are still part of the natural cycle of life and death, where the undead are in direct defiance of it.

There are many druid circles where these arguments are debated for seasons at a time... Some druids will take one side of the argument, others will take another side.

Moriato
2009-10-12, 12:15 PM
aberations are still part of the natural cycle of life and death, where the undead are in direct defiance of it.

I have to disagree there. My understanding of abberations is that they were originally magically created, or came from some other plane and took root in the prime material (thinking of kaorti), and not part of the "natural order" at all.

Ravens_cry
2009-10-12, 12:17 PM
Bad idea. For a start, unlike undead or outsiders, aberrations don't have an inherent magical nature that would make them vulnerable to turning. It would be like having the power to turn goblinoids.
There's a way you can turn hippopotamuses. It's a feat in fact. (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Blessed_By_Tem-Et-Nu,Sa[/url)

lord_khaine
2009-10-12, 12:19 PM
I have to disagree there. My understanding of abberations is that they were originally magically created, or came from soem other plane and took root in the prime material (thinking of kaorti), and not part of the "natural order" at all.

Some of them might have come from Elsewhere, but they are still natural beings, they live, breed and die just like normal creatures.

Myrmex
2009-10-12, 12:24 PM
Bad idea. For a start, unlike undead or outsiders, aberrations don't have an inherent magical nature that would make them vulnerable to turning. It would be like having the power to turn goblinoids.

Goblinoids also don't have an inherent magical ability that makes them burn, but it doesn't keep be from hitting 'em with Fireball.

Bayar
2009-10-12, 12:35 PM
There was a feat that let you turn or command animals up to 2 times your druid level in HD. Initiate of Nature was it ?

Berserk Monk
2009-10-12, 12:39 PM
I don't really see how it fits. Abberrations are still living creatures that were created by gods/evolved from nature. I mean, it seems more likely they'd turn constructs (artificial beings given life).

Bayar
2009-10-12, 12:43 PM
I don't really see how it fits. Abberrations are still living creatures that were created by gods/evolved from nature. I mean, it seems more likely they'd turn constructs (artificial beings given life).

No, they are not natural, they are abberant. They are things that should not be. Things the mortal mind was not meant to know.

Sophismata
2009-10-12, 12:58 PM
There are many druid circles where these arguments are debated for seasons at a time... Some druids will take one side of the argument, others will take another side.

...and some will have no strong feelings, one way or the other (http://theinfosphere.org/Neutral_President).

Moriato
2009-10-12, 01:09 PM
It may be useful to this discussion to note that aberrant and unnatural are synonyms. Aberrations are unnatural. That's why they're called aberrations.

Myrmex
2009-10-12, 01:15 PM
Lords of Madness has something in it about how all aberrations are directly or indirectly spawn of the Far Realm, which is an infinite number of planes beyond the multiverse. It's an amoral sea in which the fragile reality of D&D cosmology exists as a sort of bubble.

Random832
2009-10-12, 01:19 PM
There's a way you can turn hippopotamuses. It's a feat in fact. (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Blessed_By_Tem-Et-Nu,Sa[/url)

No, that says you can rebuke them, not turn them.
----
Anyway, re aberrations:

So the question is - since the 'natural' cosmology is clearly actually the exception to what is normally (maybe even say 'naturally') present...

would a druid opposing abberations be morally justified? :smallcool:

Anyway, I got the impression (I don't know how, i thought it was something someone said here - haven't read lords of madness) that it's actually an infinite number of equally fragile realities, to which the 'standard' one is just as alien/dangerous/unnatural as they are to it, and which are in no sense particularly grouped together (i.e. any one might see any other one as 'unnatural'/aberrations in the same sense)

Doc Roc
2009-10-12, 01:34 PM
I initially read this as:
Druids and Turing aberrations.

I got extremely excited. I felt you should know.

Spiryt
2009-10-12, 01:38 PM
I don't really see how it fits. Abberrations are still living creatures that were created by gods/evolved from nature.

No, aside from what others said, the whole point is that they're something alien, that are torn in nature and reality.

Like Gibbering mouther - maddening creature that feast upon the blood and sanity of different creatures, and turn fertile earth to quicksands.

Or Will o wisp which point of existing is to feed on suffering victims last thoughts.

Quite self explaining Mind Flayers.
Leaving aside some more horrid stuff like Worm That Walks.

Of course, like many things from WotC, they're not very coherent. I don't really know what's so abberant about Grick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/grick.htm), that it can't be just Magical Beast (other that it has TENTACLES!)...

Random832
2009-10-12, 01:49 PM
What might be an interesting campaign idea (for a high-level group, set mostly in the far realms) is to include that symmetry concept I mentioned.

All the aberrations that we see on the Material plane are of course the stronger ones. The ones that are mentally tough enough not to go insane from seeing the things native to this plane every day. But for a high-level adventurer (or even worse, a dragon) going to one of the Far Realms, the situation is reversed - most of the locals are absolutely terrified of these 'aberrations', and some may even be driven insane at the sight of them

Of course, the party wouldn't be immune to having their sanity eaten away by being immersed in such an alien environment, but provide a slow build-up to a revelation that in this place, the party are the unnatural aberrations.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-10-12, 02:01 PM
Some of them might have come from Elsewhere, but they are still natural beings, they live, breed and die just like normal creatures.

Yes, but rocks don't live, breed, or die. Sort of like constructs. Since druids object not to rocks, why would they object to constructs? Neither harms the ecosystem, after all - they just sort of sit there.

Or were you the anti-undead, pro-aberration, pro-construct guy? It's getting confusing.

subject42
2009-10-12, 02:18 PM
I forget the sourcebook, but there's an ACF that replaces the Fey ability resistance with aberration resistance. It might be worth it for flavor and the "Stuff it, Mind Flayer" factor.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-10-12, 02:19 PM
That's dungeonscape. Unfortunately, it comes with some forced underground mushroom stuff too IIRC.

bosssmiley
2009-10-12, 02:25 PM
I've always thought of aberrations as being the natural enemy of druids.

Nah, it's Romans...or possibly property developers. :smallwink:

sonofzeal
2009-10-12, 02:30 PM
I initially read this as:
Druids and Turing aberrations.

I got extremely excited. I felt you should know.
I'm with you there.


Re: aberrations, most are pretty unnatural, but it depends on your campaign setting. In Eberron, all aberrations are the spawn of the Dalkyr, and the Gatekeeper Druids (there are other orders) are tasked with the specific responsibility for keeping the Dalkyr and their minions bound. It makes perfect sense for them to have anti-aberration powers, then. If in your setting all aberrations have a connection with the Far Realm, well that works too. If all are things that don't belong on earth (like Neogi from the stars or Mindflayers from the future), hey, I could see Druids getting a special focus there too. But if they're just the more bizarre of the natural creatures in your setting, well that answers your question in the other direction.

So yeah, depends on the setting.

daggaz
2009-10-12, 02:52 PM
Well it's not actually adding an ability, it's trading one. I believe druids are usually considered to be overly powerful because of their animal companions, and ability to wildshape. I wouldn't want to add anything without taking at least one of those away. Spending a wild shape use isn't a bad idea, though..

It is if you are trying to avoid overpowering the overpowered druid. One use of wildshape lasts all freaking day by midlevel. Most days, one is all the druid needs.

Grumman
2009-10-12, 06:43 PM
There's a way you can turn hippopotamuses. It's a feat in fact. (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Blessed_By_Tem-Et-Nu,Sa[/url)

There was a feat that let you turn or command animals up to 2 times your druid level in HD. Initiate of Nature was it ?
Rebuking or commanding animals makes sense for a druid, because control of natural creatures and environment is what druids do - look at their spell list. Druids don't pin down their enemies with Hold Person, they Entangle them. For the same reason, turning aberrations isn't going to be a power druids get just because they are enemies.


Goblinoids also don't have an inherent magical ability that makes them burn, but it doesn't keep be from hitting 'em with Fireball.
Get a match. Light it. Slap yourself for making an analogy that doesn't work, when any idiot can identify real-life evidence that something doesn't have to be an inherently magical creature to be flammable.

Bayar
2009-10-12, 06:56 PM
Rebuking or commanding animals makes sense for a druid, because control of natural creatures and environment is what druids do - look at their spell list. Druids don't pin down their enemies with Hold Person, they Entangle them. For the same reason, turning aberrations isn't going to be a power druids get just because they are enemies.


Have you ever played a druid in 3.0 ? I didnt, but the way I heard it, the druid could have done this naturally, and just amassed a whole army of animals which he could command, for free. Think about it, it would be like having as many animal companions as 2 times your HD. Plus another one for good measure. That are free and easily to replace. That makes sense, but it is overpowered. Add to that wildshape, spellcasting and wildshape spellcasting. Top it off with planar sheppherd just to sure you got every last drop of cheese from the old cow.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-12, 07:48 PM
Get a match. Light it. Slap yourself for making an analogy that doesn't work

Grumman, I'm sorry, but I have to steal this. As a writer who specializes in Creative Writing (especially analogies and metaphors), this is simply too good not to use.

I'll credit you every time I use it though.