Chaotic Good Druid? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Alaris

2012-10-20, 02:47 AM

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-20, 06:38 AM

Without going 3rd party, I'm pretty sure this is impossible except via DM fiat. He might be more amenable to the idea if you actually choose a patron nature deity that's either good or chaotic to begin with.

Edit: unless you're playing in eberron. The setting's designed with the relaxation of alignment restrictions in mind. IIRC, you can become a non-neutral druid by RAW, you just can't take any more druid levels after the alignment shift.

GnomeGninjas

2012-10-20, 06:50 AM

Arcanist

2012-10-20, 07:02 AM

A druid who becomes chaotic good loses all spells or druid abilities, and cannot take more levels in druid until she atones. It does not say that she has to become neutral again before the atonement. This isn't factoring in errata or anymore recent books.

Being Neutral is a requirement of being a Druid. If you are not Neutral then you cannot be a Druid. Hell, being Non-Neutral is grounds for an automatic "fall" for a Druid so if you atone and you're not Neutral then you just automatically fall again...

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-20, 07:03 AM

A druid who becomes chaotic good loses all spells or druid abilities, and cannot take more levels in druid until she atones. It does not say that she has to become neutral again before the atonement. This isn't factoring in errata or anymore recent books.

The biggest hitch in this one, is RP related. You have to get a caster to drop an atonement for you without actually being sorry for what you did. Even if you can finagle that, you still can't advance any further as a druid since you no longer meet the class's alignment restriction requirements.

GnomeGninjas

2012-10-20, 07:18 AM

Being Neutral is a requirement of being a Druid. If you are not Neutral then you cannot be a Druid. Hell, being Non-Neutral is grounds for an automatic "fall" for a Druid so if you atone and you're not Neutral then you just automatically fall again...

My argument is: The text under ex-druids says "changes" not "is", "are",or "changed". You fall for changing to a prohibited alignment and lose all druid abilities. Then if you get an atonement you get spell casting back. You don't fall again because you all ready were a prohibited alignment. "Changes" is present tense so it happens when you become a prohibited alignment and not when you all ready are a prohibited alignment.

Arcanist

2012-10-20, 07:36 AM

My argument is: The text under ex-druids says "changes" not "is", "are",or "changed". You fall for changing to a prohibited alignment and lose all druid abilities. Then if you get an atonement you get spell casting back. You don't fall again because you all ready were a prohibited alignment. "Changes" is present tense so it happens when you become a prohibited alignment and not when you all ready are a prohibited alignment.

My argument is that because you no longer meet the pre-requisites for being a Druid you no longer have access to the classes features (i.e. regaining access to druid features with an atonement). This is a flaw in the system where two specific rules conflict each other. Regardless though since any sane (or sadistic) DM will gladly allow a player to take an extreme alignment this is fairly moot :smallsigh:

However a nitch in my argument is that it depends which books are in play really :smallsigh:

Alleran

2012-10-20, 07:46 AM

You have to get a caster to drop an atonement for you without actually being sorry for what you did.
I'm not sure if that can be done:

"The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds."

From the text of the spell here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm). So if you aren't actually sorry for becoming Chaotic instead of Neutral (and don't want to reverse the change), then the spell won't work.

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-20, 07:50 AM

I'm not sure if that can be done:

"The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds."

From the text of the spell here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm). So if you aren't actually sorry for becoming Chaotic instead of Neutral (and don't want to reverse the change), then the spell won't work.

Hey, a role-playing requirement supported by RAW.

It's always nice to see those when they unambiguously make sense like this.

Arcanist

2012-10-20, 07:52 AM

The title pretty much sums it up, is there a way to be Chaotic Good as a druid? In all likelyhood my DM would allow it, but i would like a variant class feature or feat that lets me be chaotic good. Thank-You in advance.

P.S. third party solutions are also acceptable, though not preferable.

AHEM! So, to clear up your question, just ask your DM. I'm sure s/he'll be cool with it :smallbiggrin:

Hell, if my players asked to be vulnerable to Dictim and Blasphemy, I'd hug them :smallamused: with a Paragon, Pseudonatural Pit Fiend w/ Epic Spellcasting and an infinite leadership chain

...AREN'T I A NICE DM!? :smallbiggrin:

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-20, 07:59 AM

AHEM! So, to clear up your question, just ask your DM. I'm sure s/he'll be cool with it :smallbiggrin:

Hell, if my players asked to be vulnerable to Dictim and Blasphemy, I'd hug them :smallamused: with a Paragon, Pseudonatural Pit Fiend w/ Epic Spellcasting and an infinite leadership chain

...AREN'T I A NICE DM!? :smallbiggrin:

Compared to me you are :belkar:

Come into my web of machiavellian intrigue, full of double- and triple-crosses, supported by more cloak-and-dagger activity than you could shake a stick at; then lets see how much you think of a couple of nasty combat spells.

MUWHA HA HA HA HA........... ahem. *straigtens clothes and spikey mad-DM hair* :smallbiggrin:

Lateral

2012-10-20, 10:13 AM

AHEM! So, to clear up your question, just ask your DM. I'm sure s/he'll be cool with it :smallbiggrin:

Hell, if my players asked to be vulnerable to Dictim and Blasphemy, I'd hug them :smallamused: with a Paragon, Pseudonatural Pit Fiend w/ Epic Spellcasting and an infinite leadership chain

...AREN'T I A NICE DM!? :smallbiggrin:

Actually, they'd be susceptible to both as Neutral Good or Chaotic Neutral. Dictum and Blasphemy affect nonlawful and nonevil creatures, respectively.

ShriekingDrake

2012-10-20, 11:45 AM

Draz74

2012-10-20, 12:13 PM

Actually, they'd be susceptible to both as Neutral Good or Chaotic Neutral. Dictum and Blasphemy affect nonlawful and nonevil creatures, respectively.

Sure, but what he's really excited about is how they're also becoming vulnerable to Word of Balance ... :smallcool:

GnomeGninjas

2012-10-20, 12:36 PM

I'm not sure if that can be done:

"The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds."

From the text of the spell here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm). So if you aren't actually sorry for becoming Chaotic instead of Neutral (and don't want to reverse the change), then the spell won't work.

Maybe the person is sorry for what he did but acepts that it would be hard to change his ways.

TuggyNE

2012-10-20, 03:38 PM

Maybe the person is sorry for what he did but acepts that it would be hard to change his ways.

That's ... not very well supported by the thrust of "truly repentant" (which implies not merely apologizing, but avoiding that in the future). Furthermore, there's an echo of "desirous of setting right its misdeeds" later on in the spell where it mentions the requirements to voluntarily change alignments. In other words, being willing and having this spell cast on you is enough in itself to fix your alignment.

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2012-10-20, 04:28 PM

Alignment: Druids, in keeping with nature’s ultimate indifference,
must maintain at least some measure of dispassion. As such,
they must be neutral on at least one alignment axis (chaotic–lawful
or good–evil), if not both. Just as nature encompasses such
dichotomies as life and death, beauty and horror, and peace and
violence, so two druids can manifest different or even opposite
alignments (neutral good and neutral evil, for instance) and still be
part of the druidic tradition.
Even if you switch to a non-neutral alignment, even if you get an Atonement spell and manage to retain your non-neutral alignment while having access to your class features, you cannot gain more Druid levels until you go back to an alignment that's at least partially neutral.

That's also assuming that your deity would be willing to continue granting spells to a non-neutral Druid, as detailed in the Atonement spell.

If you want a non-neutral druid-like character, check out the Wild Shape Ranger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#ranger) (possibly combining it with Mystic Ranger for better spellcasting) or the Spirit Shaman (CD), possibly also with Wild Cohort (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a).

Psyren

2012-10-20, 05:01 PM

If the magic is what you're after, consider being a Skylord (RotW) - they can get any spells from the druid list you would want with their spellpool.

If it's the wildshape, companion and other stuff, there's lots of ways to get those.

GnomeGninjas

2012-10-20, 06:22 PM

Even if you switch to a non-neutral alignment, even if you get an Atonement spell and manage to retain your non-neutral alignment while having access to your class features, you cannot gain more Druid levels until you go back to an alignment that's at least partially neutral.

That's also assuming that your deity would be willing to continue granting spells to a non-neutral Druid, as detailed in the Atonement spell.

If you want a non-neutral druid-like character, check out the Wild Shape Ranger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#ranger) (possibly combining it with Mystic Ranger for better spellcasting) or the Spirit Shaman (CD), possibly also with Wild Cohort (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a).

Where is the rule that you can't gain levels in a class if you don't have the right alignment, I believe you that it exists but I can't find it? Under ex-druids it says "She cannot therefore gain levels as druid until she atones (see the atonement spell description, page 201)" I believe that this means that once she gets an atonement spell she can continue taking levels, it doesn't say that she need to go back to a legal alignment (though taking more levels isn't great she doesn't get back her druid abilities other than spell casting from atonement).

toapat

2012-10-20, 06:27 PM

Dragon Magazine 310/311 will have CG/CE/LE/LG varients

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2012-10-20, 06:29 PM

Where is the rule that you can't gain levels in a class if you don't have the right alignment, I believe you that it exists but I can't find it? Under ex-druids it says "She cannot therefore gain levels as druid until she atones (see the atonement spell description, page 201)" I believe that this means that once she gets an atonement spell she can continue taking levels, it doesn't say that she need to go back to a legal alignment (though taking more levels isn't great she doesn't get back her druid abilities other than spell casting from atonement).

The section on falling and atoning does not override the "must be neutral" statement in the section I quoted. Even after atoning, they still must abide by the requirements for the class to have/gain levels in that class.

Furthermore, per Atonement, "The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds." That means the ex-Druid would actually have to want to go back to being neutral for the Atonement to work in the first place.

GnomeGninjas

2012-10-20, 06:52 PM

The section on falling and atoning does not override the "must be neutral" statement in the section I quoted. Even after atoning, they still must abide by the requirements for the class to have/gain levels in that class.

Furthermore, per Atonement, "The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds." That means the ex-Druid would actually have to want to go back to being neutral for the Atonement to work in the first place.

That makes sense. I think I lose.

For sake of drawing out arguments much longer than they deserve to be (as is our custom on these forums): I have thought a situation in which a druid could be non-neutral and still cast spell (though have no other druid abilities and be unable to take more levels in druid [though prestige classes that advance spell casting still work]). A druid is chaotic neutral, they are trying to defend a forest from civilization. After only attacking people who are intentionally harming the forest for a while the druid decides that they need more drastic measures. Naturally they kill a load of innocent people an be come evil. Since they are now chaotic evil they lose there druid powers. They feel really bad afterwords and want to make up for what they did (I am assuming that intentions for redemption don't change you alignment). they find a druid who casts atonement on them. This restores their spellcasting though they still can't take druid levels or have their druid abilities. They spend a few days on their path to chaotic-neutralhood. Before they have fully became chaotic neutral some evil person uses mindrape to make them stop trying to repent.

The druid was a legitimate target for atonement at the time so I believe that it would work.

Gnome Alone

2012-10-20, 07:23 PM

Why do you want to be Chaotic Good? Were I the DM, I'd want a good case made for deviating from the rules.

Personally, I think it's one of the dumber alignment restrictions, so as a DM I'd have no problem with it.

If I could be devoted to nature and a dedicated do-gooder at the same time (NG), and I could be a markedly chaotic individual with that same devotion (CN), why couldn't I be a druid that is a Robin Hood type (CG)?

If neither being Good nor Chaotic is enough of a distraction from the druid's code, why would they be one when combined? Is that just too many things going on? When you consider how complex people are, I don't think so.

What about a Chaotic Neutral druid who is married with a family? That's a lot more to worry about, and it could end up conflicting with the demands of being an ecoterrorist warpriest (Note: joke.) But a druid with no filial obligations can't happen to have a Chaotic Good personality? I don't think that makes sense.

EDIT: So to sum it up, isn't "the rules are dumb" a pretty good case for deviating from them?

Mari01

2012-10-20, 07:49 PM

Personally, I think it's one of the dumber alignment restrictions, so as a DM I'd have no problem with it.

If I could be devoted to nature and a dedicated do-gooder at the same time (NG), and I could be a markedly chaotic individual with that same devotion (CN), why couldn't I be a druid that is a Robin Hood type (CG)?

If neither being Good nor Chaotic is enough of a distraction from the druid's code, why would they be one when combined? Is that just too many things going on? When you consider how complex people are, I don't think so.

What about a Chaotic Neutral druid who is married with a family? That's a lot more to worry about, and it could end up conflicting with the demands of being an ecoterrorist warpriest (Note: joke.) But a druid with no filial obligations can't happen to have a Chaotic Good personality? I don't think that makes sense.

EDIT: So to sum it up, isn't "the rules are dumb" a pretty good case for deviating from them?

This is addressed in the text. Something along the lines of being neutral in respect to nature. All druids in some capacity have to respect nature, which is reflected by being part neutral. Nature itself is TN since good and bad don't really matter (Is it evil for a wolf to kill a rabbit?), and law and chaos are moot in the face of things that don't care.

TuggyNE

2012-10-20, 07:58 PM

This is addressed in the text. Something along the lines of being neutral in respect to nature. All druids in some capacity have to respect nature, which is reflected by being part neutral. Nature itself is TN since good and bad don't really matter (Is it evil for a wolf to kill a rabbit?), and law and chaos are moot in the face of things that don't care.

That is, it's in-between the restrictiveness of a paladin's alignment and a cleric's: paladins have to be exactly LG, clerics can be within two steps of their deity's alignment, while druids have to be within one step of TN. (You'll note that a cleric of a TN god can be any alignment.)

However, I do generally agree that those restrictions are a little silly.

toapat

2012-10-20, 08:12 PM

That is, it's in-between the restrictiveness of a paladin's alignment and a cleric's: paladins have to be exactly LG, clerics can be within two steps of their deity's alignment, while druids have to be within one step of TN. (You'll note that a cleric of a TN god can be any alignment.)

However, I do generally agree that those restrictions are a little silly.

no, Clerics have to be 1 step from their god, Paladins have to be any Extreme, Druids as cleric if True Neutral diety.

Dragon 310-312 have Lawful barbarians, Chaotic Monks, Non-exteme Paladins, Extreme Druids, and non-chaotic bards.

KnightOfV

2012-10-20, 10:33 PM

The top secret, perfect way to play a Chaotic Good Druid by RAW.

Step 1: Write 'NG' or 'CN' on the character sheet where it asks for your alignment. Accept that when alignment spells target you, this is how you will detect/ be affected.

Step 2: Play your Druid like you want, acting Good and Chaotic. Just make sure to love nature, and most DMs will either not notice, or not mind.

I think it is a silly class restriction myself, but then again I am flexible with alignment as long as the character is roleplaying and has good reasons for their actions. I mean c'mon... Druids can be Chaotic, and Druids can be Good, but they can't be Chaotic and Good? That is the silliest alignment restriction ever... except for the one where Paladins of a Chaotic Good god have to be Lawful.

TuggyNE

2012-10-20, 11:42 PM

no, Clerics have to be 1 step from their god

You're right, I have no idea why I thought it was two steps.

In that case just accept it's like a Cleric and move on.

Mari01

2012-10-21, 12:09 AM

TuggyNE

2012-10-21, 12:42 AM

LG paladins can't have a patron deity be Chaotic Good. Those paladins are CHAOTIC Good. A paladin of Heironeious is LG. A paladin of Corellon is CG.

Support? Naturally, the variants work well if you want to do this, but the standard PHB Paladin is all LG all the time, and derives power more from generic good than a specific deity. (There is no reference in either the standard or UA variant class features/requirements to their deity's alignment, or any adjustments to be made for that.)

So no, a normal paladin of Corellon would be LG, assuming they even identified as such.

toapat

2012-10-21, 12:44 AM

Support? Naturally, the variants work well if you want to do this, but the standard PHB Paladin is all LG all the time, and derives power more from generic good than a specific deity. (There is no reference in either the standard or UA variant class features/requirements to their deity's alignment, or any adjustments to be made for that.)

So no, a normal paladin of Corellon would be LG, assuming they even identified as such.

the 3rd rulebook Champions of the Faith even refferences this, even though elves are typically CG, as is their god, some of them will go LG to be paladin

any sane paladin though is a CG paladin of Mystra

Edit: or LE paladin of Mystra.

yes, you can do that

HunterOfJello

2012-10-21, 12:59 AM

LG paladins can't have a patron deity be Chaotic Good. Those paladins are CHAOTIC Good. A paladin of Heironeious is LG. A paladin of Corellon is CG.

All paladins refereed to in any 3.5 book , outside of Unearthed Arcana, are of the LG variety.

~

The information about the Church of Tymora specifically references that its adherents are all one step from CG, but that it also includes paladins even though they're LG. Paladins are a notable exception to several religion's alignment rules.

Paladins don't have to worship a deity to use their magic and abilities. If they choose to worship someone, then they can worship whoever they want without penalty (assuming that their act of worship isn't to some evil god and an act of evil itself).

Paladins are most likely to worship deities that are LG, NG, or LN. However, they don't have to worship anyone at all and they can worship any N or CN deity they want as long as it doesn't interfere with their alignment restrictions. A character's alignment isn't a restriction to who they can worship.

Edit: or LE paladin of Mystra.

yes, you can do that

THAT would be badass!

(and confuse the Harpers to no end)

Courier6

2012-10-21, 03:04 AM

Thank-You for the responses everybody, though does anyone know where the variant druids that toapat is talking about are at I can only find some thee druids that are explicitly restricted to the same alignment in Dragon 311.

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-21, 05:07 AM

LG paladins can't have a patron deity be Chaotic Good. Those paladins are CHAOTIC Good. A paladin of Heironeious is LG. A paladin of Corellon is CG.

As has been pointed out, this is incorrect. It's also largely irrelevant since Tymora and Sune Firehair are practically the only chaotic gods that actually sponsor paladins.

Playing a paladin of a CG goddess of love, lust, and beauty sounds fun. I might have to try that some day.

Arcanist

2012-10-21, 05:12 AM

As has been pointed out, this is incorrect. It's also largely irrelevant since Tymora and Sune Firehair are practically the only chaotic gods that actually sponsor paladins.

Playing a paladin of a CG goddess of love, lust, and beauty sounds fun. I might have to try that some day.

If memory serves "The Book that shall know no name" actually details what Lawful love making looks... from my perspective, it's pretty damn sweet and romantic :smallredface:

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-21, 05:16 AM

If memory serves "The Book that shall know no name" actually details what Lawful love making looks... from my perspective, it's pretty damn sweet and romantic :smallredface:

I have the book, but I don't take RP advice from it for general gaming. That one's more for me and the wife.

Arcanist

2012-10-21, 05:19 AM

I have the book, but I don't take RP advice from it for general gaming. That one's more for me and the wife.

... (http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ma4837OBTv1r13b9f.gif)

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-21, 05:33 AM

... (http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ma4837OBTv1r13b9f.gif)

*gives the highest of fives*

Believe it or not though, there's a few spells and magic item variants in there that actually work in normal play with very little chance of causing a disruption. Some of the others though; not so much.

Arcanist

2012-10-21, 05:43 AM

*gives the highest of fives*

Believe it or not though, there's a few spells and magic item variants in there that actually work in normal play with very little chance of causing a disruption. Some of the others though; not so much.

Disrobe is a personal favorite from that book since it effectively just strips an Artificer. Can't remember which action it is to pick up an item, I've always just used a Move action in my games, but if it is anything greater, then rad :smallsmile:

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-21, 06:02 AM

Disrobe is a personal favorite from that book since it effectively just strips an Artificer. Can't remember which action it is to pick up an item, I've always just used a Move action in my games, but if it is anything greater, then rad :smallsmile:

It's a move action per item, and that spell is a good reason to get magical peircings instead of wearing magical clothes (I seperated the piercing idea from the associated PrC), then disrobe is just embarrasing rather than potentially deadly.

Arcanist

2012-10-21, 06:12 AM

It's a move action per item, and that spell is a good reason to get magical peircings instead of wearing magical clothes (I seperated the piercing idea from the associated PrC), then disrobe is just embarrasing rather than potentially deadly.

Engorged Strike makes Monk's hit a little harder... pretty neet :smallamused:

Kelb_Panthera

2012-10-21, 06:21 AM

Engorged Strike makes Monk's hit a little harder... pretty neet :smallamused:

Meh, enlarge weapon is a spell in an offical source that does the exact same thing, then there's mighty wallop/greater mighty wallop. There's too many ways to size stack for a monks unarmed strike for that spell to be noteworthy.

That's probably enough of this conversation though. I'd wager we'll end up making someone uncomfortable if we continued.

toapat

2012-10-21, 09:39 AM

THAT would be badass!

(and confuse the Harpers to no end)

Mystra sponsors anyone of Good or Lawful alignement (because her predecessors clergy), that means that you can have LE, LG, and CG paladins in the same order.

its just that CG paladin is slightly better then LG paladin, while LE paladin is better then either of them when it comes to non-exploit builds (Wherein you want the CE paladin to get as much as possible out of the abuse of blackguard)

edit: back on topic: Dragon Magazine 310-312, im not going to look for the exact book and page number, but that is where the CG druid is (more specifically in 310 or 311)

ShriekingDrake

2012-10-21, 10:43 AM

Personally, I think it's one of the dumber alignment restrictions, so as a DM I'd have no problem with it.

If I could be devoted to nature and a dedicated do-gooder at the same time (NG), and I could be a markedly chaotic individual with that same devotion (CN), why couldn't I be a druid that is a Robin Hood type (CG)?

If neither being Good nor Chaotic is enough of a distraction from the druid's code, why would they be one when combined? Is that just too many things going on? When you consider how complex people are, I don't think so.

What about a Chaotic Neutral druid who is married with a family? That's a lot more to worry about, and it could end up conflicting with the demands of being an ecoterrorist warpriest (Note: joke.) But a druid with no filial obligations can't happen to have a Chaotic Good personality? I don't think that makes sense.

EDIT: So to sum it up, isn't "the rules are dumb" a pretty good case for deviating from them?

DMs should definitely deviate from the rules where they see fit. Druids are already really powerful. Having to make some sacrifices, like not getting to do exactly what you want when playing the, does not seem all that bad to me. But, if in your world, you see it differently, have at it. That said, I would make such a change come with a sacrifice. "Sure, you can be Chaotic Good, but, unfortunately, your animal companion no longer trusts you and you can no longer cast summon nature's ally spontaneously." This example might not be a good one, but I think there should be consequences for giving the most powerful class in the game--at least up to level 14 or 15--a pass at changing the rules.

Again, I'm not saying that the rule necessarily makes sense, but given the power of druids, having some consequence seems appropriate to me.

sleepyphoenixx

2012-10-21, 10:59 AM

according to the alignment descriptions a Robin Hood type could just as likely be lawful good, if you use "personal code of honor" as the basis for the lawful part. The system is so dependent on interpretation that it's usually easier to just ignore it if everyone in the party is ok with that.

the only practical reason to enforce alignment restrictions at all, imo, is to prevent certain class combinations, which can be just as easily be accomplished by a case by case ruling.