I think I found the anti druid

[CyberThread]

I have googled this a few times, and many folks bring up things like , blighter and things of that nature.


I think I may have found the prc for the role


Talontar BlightLord from unapproachable east.

Very strong on the decay aspects, and "anti" druid as far as I could ever find without going into pathfinder.

[Bakeru]

Depends on your view. Blightlords are focused on sickness, or rather, a specific sickness (Talona's Blight), and worship the goddess of Disease and Poisons.
I'd argue that's not really all that far from an evil druid: Diseases are part of nature, Blightlords just go overboard with them. Enough to say they aren't druids any more (they don't care what their diseases do to nature), but not really "anti" either.

[karkus]

Well, there's always the "Blighter," or something along those lines, from Complete Divine, but that's more of an ex-Druid Blackguard type of a thing. Might not be an "anti" in the strictest sense... :smallannoyed:

[TuggyNE]

Well, there's always the "Blighter," or something along those lines, from Complete Divine, but that's more of an ex-Druid Blackguard type of a thing. Might not be an "anti" in the strictest sense... :smallannoyed:

It's definitely an anti: Druids are strong, and Blighters are weak. :smalltongue:

[Just to Browse]

If you violate the druid oath, you lose all druid abilities, including spellcasting. As a blightlord, you may increase your spellcasting, but it can't be druid spellcasting because by using any blightlord abilities you are forsaking your druidic capability to cast spells. Your animal companion(s) is/are not actually blightspawn creatures because you don't get them anymore. It's like the person writing this didn't read the PHB on druids.

By RAW and even liberal interpretation of the rules, the blightlord is inferior to the blighter, and that's saying something. If you really want an anti-druid, a cleric or sorcerer casting destruction spells is fine.

[CyberThread]

I would like to counter that argument , just to browse

Proficiency: Glaive. A druid who wields a glaive is in violation of her spiritual oaths, but a character may take a Martial Weapon Proficiency feat with the weapon and simply refrain from wielding it until she qualifies for the blightlord class.

[TuggyNE]

Proficiency: Glaive. A druid who wields a glaive is in violation of her spiritual oaths, but a character may take a Martial Weapon Proficiency feat with the weapon and simply refrain from wielding it until she qualifies for the blightlord class.

What? Why? Where is this found? Druids, so far as I know, have no restriction on weapons wielded, only armor and shields.

[Coidzor]

What? Why? Where is this found? Druids, so far as I know, have no restriction on weapons wielded, only armor and shields.

Indeed, they've got a wonky set of weapon proficiencies, but they're not restricted to just those weapons.

So that's a pretty egregious error if that's part of the PrC writeup.

[tyckspoon]

So that's a pretty egregious error if that's part of the PrC writeup.

It is. And yes, it makes no sense.

[Slipperychicken]

Diseases are part of nature

This is what I thought. If anything, a Druid would support mortality (they are strongly anti-undead), disease, and wildfire to clear out the old/weak so they don't linger and impede the life cycle.


An Anti-Druid would be required to destroy and desecrate all things natural, and fall for using armor and weapons made primarily of animal/vegetable products, instead favoring synthetic materials and metal. His code would likely require that he oppose nature, and he would probably gain some kind of fire breathing demon/clockwork-monster as a companion.

Or it could just be a Cleric of some anti-nature philosophy.

[Just to Browse]

Even if the druid chooses to never wield a glaive ever (yay feat tax), they're worshipping talora and "revile in death and decay". That just reeks (hah get it?) of no longer revering nature, which is all sorts of ex-druid feels.

[Slipperychicken]

Even if the druid chooses to never wield a glaive ever (yay feat tax), they're worshipping talora and "revile in death and decay". That just reeks (hah get it?) of no longer revering nature, which is all sorts of ex-druid feels.

It's a question of to what extent the Druid code embraces death and decomposition as essential parts of the natural order. If you enjoy life, why not death too? Isn't death just an opportunity for a new generation to inherit the earth?

Don't forget that Druids may be Evil. They're often portrayed as a good class, but can be all kinds of nasty as long as they maintain one Neutral component.

[FleshrakerAbuse]

That'd actually fit with a wild reaper type of class.

[Just to Browse]

It's a question of to what extent the Druid code embraces death and decomposition as essential parts of the natural order. If you enjoy life, why not death too? Isn't death just an opportunity for a new generation to inherit the earth?

Don't forget that Druids may be Evil. They're often portrayed as a good class, but can be all kinds of nasty as long as they maintain one Neutral component.

That's reaaaaally a stretch. First off, "revile in death and decay" totally doesn't reflect natural order at all. It reflects actively ruining things. Secondly, the domains of talona are Chaos, Destruction, Suffering, Evil, and the class grants Blightbringer. That's so anti-druid that might as well be wearing metal armor. If that's not enough for you, the name of the class is blightlord. As in lord of blights. I don't think the ex-druid-ness is any more obvious than that. Seriously, just read the intro text for the blightlords before remaking your argument.

Of course, even if you were willing to ignore the screaming wall of "YOU ARE AN EX-DRUID" text, you're faced with yet-another problem. If the blightlord still somehow qualifies as a druid, it fails as an anti-druid, which is the purpose of this thread in the first place.

[Jeff the Green]

That's reaaaaally a stretch. First off, "revile in death and decay" totally doesn't reflect natural order at all. It reflects actively ruining things. Secondly, the domains of talona are Chaos, Destruction, Suffering, Evil, and the class grants Blightbringer. That's so anti-druid that might as well be wearing metal armor. If that's not enough for you, the name of the class is blightlord. As in lord of blights. I don't think the ex-druid-ness is any more obvious than that. Seriously, just read the intro text for the blightlords before remaking your argument.

Of course, even if you were willing to ignore the screaming wall of "YOU ARE AN EX-DRUID" text, you're faced with yet-another problem. If the blightlord still somehow qualifies as a druid, it fails as an anti-druid, which is the purpose of this thread in the first place.

Actually, the lack of death and decay would be horribly unnatural. Blights are part of nature (they're usually fungi), and destruction and suffering are very natural. And if a god that offers Chaos and Good as domains (Mielikki) can have druids, so can one that offers Chaos and Evil.

Saprophages are people natural too!

[icefractal]

I would say an Artificer could easily be an anti-druid. While they're not required to be anti-nature, they certainly could be, and they've got a tendency to mechanize things. Add in the fact that a lot of Eberron-tech is based on forcefully binding elementals (which Druids are generally supposed to get along with), and it fits even more.

Also Elan, Warforged, and Necropolitan/Lich are all potentially quite anti-natural, as they live forever and don't need to eat - they could perfectly well enjoy a dead, entirely artificial world. Those aren't classes though.

[Ashtagon]

I would say an Artificer could easily be an anti-druid. While they're not required to be anti-nature, they certainly could be, and they've got a tendency to mechanize things. Add in the fact that a lot of Eberron-tech is based on forcefully binding elementals (which Druids are generally supposed to get along with), and it fits even more.

Also Elan, Warforged, and Necropolitan/Lich are all potentially quite anti-natural, as they live forever and don't need to eat - they could perfectly well enjoy a dead, entirely artificial world. Those aren't classes though.

This.

To me, an anti-druid would be a character focused on using tools and abilities that are not derived from nature. Diseases are strongly associated with nature. Undead, constructs, technology, and cybernetics are not. That is where you need to look for an anti-druid class.

[sonofzeal]

Evil Druids are a thing. And what, exactly, would you expect an evil Druid to use if not blights and plagues?


And, seconding Artificers as the "anti-Druid".

[Just to Browse]

Actually, the lack of death and decay would be horribly unnatural. Blights are part of nature (they're usually fungi), and destruction and suffering are very natural. And if a god that offers Chaos and Good as domains (Mielikki) can have druids, so can one that offers Chaos and Evil.

Saprophages are people natural too!Sure, let's go with that. Since death is natural, and digestion is natural, then eating things while they're alive is natural (natural order and all). Since eating is natural and so is intra-species competition, cannibalism is good! Since constructing buildings impedes the growth of nature, burning villages to the ground is good! So I'm going to build a neutral evil druid of sfkjdflsjdf that burns and eats people while they're alive and randomly kills animals for the detritivores!

Justification of your personal desire for a fantasy trope by equating biological functions to morality is a slippery slope, and you can either go all the way down it or not touch it at all.

An artificer is a great idea for an anti-druid. I especially like it because it's not Druid*(-1).

[Ashtagon]

Sure, let's go with that. Since death is natural, and digestion is natural, then eating things while they're alive is natural (natural order and all). Since eating is natural and so is intra-species competition, cannibalism is good! Since constructing buildings impedes the growth of nature, burning villages to the ground is good! So I'm going to build a neutral evil druid of sfkjdflsjdf that burns and eats people while they're alive and randomly kills animals for the detritivores!

Justification of your personal desire for a fantasy trope by equating biological functions to morality is a slippery slope, and you can either go all the way down it or not touch it at all.

You're confusing "natural" with morality. Natural is focused with the cycles of nature. Morality (and ethics) is concerned with the purposes towards which those cycles are manipulated. That's why both good and evil (and lawful and chaotic) druids can exist.

My "ultimate antidruid" would be a warforged who specialises in technomagic (a group of spells sadly underdeveloped in D&D).

[sonofzeal]

Sure, let's go with that. Since death is natural, and digestion is natural, then eating things while they're alive is natural (natural order and all). Since eating is natural and so is intra-species competition, cannibalism is good! Since constructing buildings impedes the growth of nature, burning villages to the ground is good! So I'm going to build a neutral evil druid of sfkjdflsjdf that burns and eats people while they're alive and randomly kills animals for the detritivores!
Honestly? Sure, go for it. You'd probably fit right in to the cannon "Children of Winter" druid sect in Eberron, who believe it's time to basically wipe the slate clean so nature can rebuild.

Although the cannibalism might be a bit far. Depredation of one's young is one thing, but cannibalism of adult members of the same species is usually not natural behavior for most species, and thus can't rightly be considered "natural" on the whole. An evil Druid probably wouldn't care about it, but they wouldn't enshrine it as a virtue either. But ecoterrorism and cullings? Totally acceptable to a Druid.

[Jeff the Green]

Sure, let's go with that. Since death is natural, and digestion is natural, then eating things while they're alive is natural (natural order and all). Since eating is natural and so is intra-species competition, cannibalism is good! Since constructing buildings impedes the growth of nature, burning villages to the ground is good! So I'm going to build a neutral evil druid of sfkjdflsjdf that burns and eats people while they're alive and randomly kills animals for the detritivores!

Justification of your personal desire for a fantasy trope by equating biological functions to morality is a slippery slope, and you can either go all the way down it or not touch it at all.

An artificer is a great idea for an anti-druid. I especially like it because it's not Druid*(-1).

Natural =/= Good.

[Leon]

But ecoterrorism and cullings? Totally acceptable to a Druid.

Circle Orboros from the Iron Kingdoms in a nutshell.

Ive been just working on a "Dark Druid" idea centering on using the Bone Knight PrC from Five nations (tossing up between just Multiclassing Cleric or swapping out Wildshape or Companion for Turn/Rebuke Undead) mixed with the Child of Winter Aspects.

[Ashtagon]

fwiw, d20 Modern's holy/unholy knight prestige class (the paladin/blackguard expy) has an official "nature" variant, which specifically has corporations, constructs, and undead as its enemies.

[ericgrau]

I think endless death and decay of natural life is quite against druids and they would try to stop those who were blighting and razing forests. Death is more about recycling, not about wiping everything out. Which is exactly what a protector of the forest would fight against to his last breath.

I do like an artificial item lover as an anti-druid. Metal gear and so on. But then it starts to lack all similarity with its opposite. If you go with artificer it's not really related at all, just another class. A real anti should have some commonality with the original, so some kind of nature destroying class may fit better. Or the artificial theme could work with a mechanized companion and the ability to transform into a construct. Could fit well thematically with partial arcane magic too.

[Jeff the Green]

I think endless death and decay of natural life is quite against druids and they would try to stop those who were blighting and razing forests. Death is more about recycling, not about wiping everything out. Which is exactly what a protector of the forest would fight against to his last breath.

How do you think blights and decay work? All it is is preferring one kind of creature (saprophages/pathogens) over another (producers/herbivores/carnivores).

[sonofzeal]

I think endless death and decay of natural life is quite against druids and they would try to stop those who were blighting and razing forests.
Bolded for the key word.

Yes, I'll agree that no good druid would want ENDLESS death and decay. But I'd wager most good druids accept, and some embrace, death and decay as part of the natural cycle of things. A druid who spends their life planting seeds and cultivating new life would still acknowledge the place of death within the Great Circle... and a druid who spends their life spreading disease and rot would still value the new beginnings that inevitably follow from every ending. The question is one of temperment, outlook, and what they feel is called for. A druid of death and decay is merely a druid who sees things that need to end; it does not imply that they think there should never be a new beginning. It's simply not their job to worry about that side of things. Leave that to the good-aligned druids - and let the evil ones get on with the business of purging the dead wood.

[Grim Reader]

It's definitely an anti: Druids are strong, and Blighters are weak. :smalltongue:

You get 9th level spells in 9 levels, and can enter at level 5. While your spell list is limited, untill you reach level 10 in the class, you'll always be a level ahead on an Ur-Priest on spells.

There are ways around a limited spell list, and you do get Wild Shape. I'd hardly call it weak.

[ericgrau]

Bolded for the key word.

Yes, I'll agree that no good druid would want ENDLESS death and decay. But I'd wager most good druids accept, and some embrace, death and decay as part of the natural cycle of things. A druid who spends their life planting seeds and cultivating new life would still acknowledge the place of death within the Great Circle... and a druid who spends their life spreading disease and rot would still value the new beginnings that inevitably follow from every ending. The question is one of temperment, outlook, and what they feel is called for. A druid of death and decay is merely a druid who sees things that need to end; it does not imply that they think there should never be a new beginning. It's simply not their job to worry about that side of things. Leave that to the good-aligned druids - and let the evil ones get on with the business of purging the dead wood.



Their plagues have transformed the western reaches of the Rawlinswood into a foul green hell of diseased monsters and deadly poisons. Worse yet, the blightlords seek to infect the healthy forests and lands nearby with the same sickness. Under the tutelage of the horrible Rotting Man, the Talontar blightlords marshal the Rawlinswood's black horde, leading their infected minions forth to scourge the nearby lands.

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and guess that the blightlords do not wish the plagued regions to resprout and continue the cycle.

[Jeff the Green]

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and guess that the blightlords do not wish the plagued regions to resprout and continue the cycle.

Which, I repeat, doesn't matter. They're transforming one habitat into another, something that happens naturally all the time. Unless you object to plant growth increasing the natural rate of growth of plants, you shouldn't object to blightbringers increasing the natural rate of growth of bacteria and fungi. It's evil, sure, but not unnatural

[HurinTheCursed]

I once played an ecoterrorist druid, it's very druidic in fact to defend nature against civilisation.

The worst enemy of nature is indeed a civilisation using nature as ressource with no care about it: cities spreading, agriculture where they were forests, sport or systematic hunting of species, pollutions... I find no worse enemy of nature but Saruman who was a nature destroyer (even if it wasn't his goal) at the industrial scale in a fantasy setting.

[Ashtagon]

*waves hand*

"These are not the druids you are looking for."

[sonofzeal]

I'm going to take a shot in the dark and guess that the blightlords do not wish the plagued regions to resprout and continue the cycle.
Eh... it'd certainly make more sense than pure "4 TEH EVULZ". Any druid worth their salt should be obedient to the cycle. Creation, preservation, and eventual destruction. Good, neutrality, and evil. There are likely many within the Blightlords who'd wish it to be a permanent state of affairs, but nothing prevents one from believing it to be a temporary, if necessary, stage in a larger process. Just because someone signs up for an order with a certain ideology does not mean they have forsaken all personal judgement.

[Slipperychicken]

Bolded for the key word.

Yes, I'll agree that no good druid would want ENDLESS death and decay.

It's called the Life Cycle. If the life part of it gets stuck (like when undead are created or people linger in the "life" stage too long), that's unnatural and Druids don't like that. Good and evil have nothing to do with it, Druids can be any alignment with a Neutral component, even Evil. A Druid can take pleasure in inflicting suffering, death, and decay (they're part of the natural order, deal with it) and generally do whatever the hell he wants as long as he reveres nature and follows the code.


Things live, things die, things eat the dead and grow, something is born and takes the dead creature's place. The death and decay are endless and reoccurring, just like the birth and life are.

[Bakeru]

I think there are two main "anti-druids".
One is the artificer, when played as "Technology Vs. Nature".

The other is... a necromancer. Not an "I kill you"-necromancer (druids do that, too, and necromancy itself doesn't automatically go against the druid's themes, since they do have necromancy spells featuring - you might have guessed it - natural decay), but an "Creating (and being a) horrible abominations against life as well as ripping souls out of the natural order of death and rebirth"-necromancer.
Arcane or Divine doesn't matter, but the Dread Necromancer kind of offers itself to the concept.

[Deophaun]

I once played an ecoterrorist druid, it's very druidic in fact to defend nature against civilisation.

Except, with the possible exception of Eberron, nature is't threatened by civilization in standard D&D settings. A druid defending nature from civilization is like a bodyguard protecting a heavyweight boxer from a two-year-old: not doing anything useful. A better take was in the recent druid code thread which focused on the historic role of druids being intercessors with nature or protecting the seeds of civilization from the natural forces that would destroy them.

[Sith_Happens]

I feel like the Golgari Swarm (http://wiki.mtgsalvation.com/article/Golgari_Swarm) is somehow relevant to this discussion. For those not familiar with M:TG, the Golgari are a guild of necromancer-druids on the city-plane of Ravnica, who use undead labor to grow a large portion of the plane's food from its waste.

[Urpriest]

You get 9th level spells in 9 levels, and can enter at level 5. While your spell list is limited, untill you reach level 10 in the class, you'll always be a level ahead on an Ur-Priest on spells.

There are ways around a limited spell list, and you do get Wild Shape. I'd hardly call it weak.

You're missing the BAB requirement. As-is, absent early entry you need at least 6 levels before you enter, which means you've got 1sts at 7, 2nds at 8, 3rds at 9, 4ths at 10, 5ths at 11, 6ths at 12, 7ths at 13, 8ths at 14, and 9ths at 15. So you're behind an Ur-priest.

[Unusual Muse]

I think the ultimate anti-druid is the Defiler wizard from Dark Sun; to fuel their magic they suck the life out of nature around them, turning vegetation and soil into inert and lifeless dust. It's the Exxon of base classes.

[georgie_leech]

I think the ultimate anti-druid is the Defiler wizard from Dark Sun; to fuel their magic they suck the life out of nature around them, turning vegetation and soil into inert and lifeless dust. It's the Exxon of base classes.

Flat out ending the cycle of nature? Yeah, I can see Druids along the whole alignment spectrum ganging up on these guys.

[Grim Reader]

You're missing the BAB requirement. As-is, absent early entry you need at least 6 levels before you enter, which means you've got 1sts at 7, 2nds at 8, 3rds at 9, 4ths at 10, 5ths at 11, 6ths at 12, 7ths at 13, 8ths at 14, and 9ths at 15. So you're behind an Ur-priest.

Am I misremembering? I thought the BaB requirement was +4, with no particularily difficult skill requirements?

[Jeff the Green]

I think the ultimate anti-druid is the Defiler wizard from Dark Sun; to fuel their magic they suck the life out of nature around them, turning vegetation and soil into inert and lifeless dust. It's the Exxon of base classes.

Yeah, that's a good one. Even my hypothetical blightbringer druid would be foaming at the mouth at the thought of one of those.

[sonofzeal]

Am I misremembering? I thought the BaB requirement was +4, with no particularily difficult skill requirements?
A pure druid doesn't have +4 BAB until lvl 6. Which is exactly what they said.

[animewatcha]

Wouldn't druid with the Heretic of the Faith feat be the 'anti-druid' ? Be the druid terminator firing nukes along the neutral alignment restriction.

[Grim Reader]

A pure druid doesn't have +4 BAB until lvl 6. Which is exactly what they said.

I am glad you said that...you know that saying/Firechanters sig?

"So you know, university Physics D&D 3.5 Optimization is essentially three seven years of this discussion among like-minded enthusiasts. Done with supercomputers, access to the textsplatbook collections of five continents and thirty languages with thousands of classes, prestige classes, feats and spells.
On four hours sleep a night.
With no sex.
You're not going to find the loophole these guys missed."

Here is my entry for a loophole I've never seen anyone else catch:

Elans can fluff away Blighters ex-Druid requirement.

The character can totally have been a fifth-level Druid before becoming an Elan. (Failed saves to negative levels can fluff it away too. "having been something" belongs in back story anyway, imho.)

That makes Blighter a class that can be entered by a full-bab character after levle 4, giving 9th level spells in 9 levels, plus Wildshape with Undead immunities. Spell list is not hot, but thats fixable.

[Maginomicon]

There's the wild reaper druid variant (Dragon 311 page 55), metal master druid variant (Dragon 311 page 59), and winter warden druid variant (Dragon 311 page 60) all of which... well admittedly kinda suck compared to a "standard" druid, but each in their own way fit the "anti-druid" flavor to a tee.

There's also the Dark Sun-like variants you can take for "defilers" (Dragon 315 page 32).

[Magatsu Izanagi]

A Tainted Druid (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20030428a) could be another variant on the general theme of the anti-druid. They don't serve nature, but rather a fiendish parody of it. Not quite as overt as some of the other candidates for anti-druid, but still very insidious.

[Flickerdart]

Since eating is natural and so is intra-species competition, cannibalism is good!
Very few species eat their own kind, because that's stupid - you're susceptible to exactly the same diseases that the thing you're eating would have been. Good job, you now have them too. Cannibalism would definitely be a non-druidic practice.

[Shining Wrath]

I second Artificers or Necromancers as the antithesis of druids.
The other possibility is a hunter, such as a Ranger. Normally people think of Rangers as druid-like since they share spells, but the attitude toward nature *can* be "Druid: I am one with nature" vice "Ranger: I am an apex predator outside of nature".

[Maginomicon]

I second Artificers or Necromancers are the antithesis of druids.
The other possibility is a hunter, such as a Ranger. Normally people think of Rangers as druid-like since they share spells, but the attitude toward nature *can* be "Druid: I am one with nature" vice "Ranger: I am an apex predator outside of nature".
The ranger's fluff is more "I respect nature in all I do, and take from its bounty only when necessary." (otherwise they lose their divine abilities)
A Wilderness Rogue or Survivalist (fighter variant) might also be a good fit for an anti-druid, but now we're stretching into anything that could be a "threat to nature".

[Shining Wrath]

The ranger's fluff is more "I respect nature in all I do, and take from its bounty only when necessary." (otherwise they lose their divine abilities)
A Wilderness Rogue or Survivalist (fighter variant) might also be a good fit for an anti-druid, but now we're stretching into anything that could be a "threat to nature".

I do not think that RAW limits a Ranger to a code of conduct.

[Maginomicon]

I do not think that RAW limits a Ranger to a code of conduct.
Not a "code of conduct" specifically, but it's not like their divine powers come from nothing. They get them IIRC like druids, from nature itself, and so it would make sense that if they grievously disrespect nature that they get their divine abilities taken away.

[Hecuba]

Secondly, the domains of talona are Chaos, Destruction, Suffering, Evil, and the class grants Blightbringer.


You seem to be presuming Druids are Good. There are 5 alignments available to them, only one of which is good. And one of which is evil.

Nature can be chaotic (have you seen the aftermath of a tornado?). It can bring suffering (drought, famine, poison, diseases). It can bring destruction (floods, hurricanes).
And someone who wields and revels in those aspects of nature can most certainly be Evil.

So long as they are Neutral Evil, they do not cease to be a Druid.

[Bakeru]

I think the ultimate anti-druid is the Defiler wizard from Dark Sun; to fuel their magic they suck the life out of nature around them, turning vegetation and soil into inert and lifeless dust. It's the Exxon of base classes.I think we have a winner.
Going by Dragon Magazine 315, page 33 and following, we have arcane casters who (as good as permanently) destroys nature to power up their spells, and who turn into an undead if they overdo it.
Make it a dread necromancer for bonus points, because the defiler rules apply to any arcane caster, not just to wizards and sorcerers.

[Grayson01]

That's reaaaaally a stretch. First off, "revile in death and decay" totally doesn't reflect natural order at all. It reflects actively ruining things. Secondly, the domains of talona are Chaos, Destruction, Suffering, Evil, and the class grants Blightbringer. That's so anti-druid that might as well be wearing metal armor. If that's not enough for you, the name of the class is blightlord. As in lord of blights. I don't think the ex-druid-ness is any more obvious than that. Seriously, just read the intro text for the blightlords before remaking your argument.

Of course, even if you were willing to ignore the screaming wall of "YOU ARE AN EX-DRUID" text, you're faced with yet-another problem. If the blightlord still somehow qualifies as a druid, it fails as an anti-druid, which is the purpose of this thread in the first place.

Did you even read the text in the Book? I have it in my lap right now, it actually says "Druids no longer need to abide by their weapon and armor restriction, as blightlords turn their backs on the conventional Druidic tradition." It's clear that you retain your Druidic statuses when becoming a Blightlord. The Druid class is not a restricted point if view class like the Paladin. An evil Druid can easily believe that the natural order of the world is found in that which comes at the end, and that death and blights wrought on the world bring things closer too the natural state of death. Use say that because they can't be Druids because of the "Destruction" domain being one of the domains of Talona, nature has soooo many distructive elements and faseste, hurricanes, tornados, earth quakes, and a host of others. There are so many ways for a Druid to be evil and have an evil point of view about the natural order.

[Just to Browse]

Did you even read the text in the Book? I have it in my lap right now, it actually says "Druids no longer need to abide by their weapon and armor restriction, as blightlords turn their backs on the conventional Druidic tradition." It's clear that you retain your Druidic statuses when becoming a Blightlord. The Druid class is not a restricted point if view class like the Paladin. An evil Druid can easily believe that the natural order of the world is found in that which comes at the end, and that death and blights wrought on the world bring things closer too the natural state of death. Use say that because they can't be Druids because of the "Destruction" domain being one of the domains of Talona, nature has soooo many distructive elements and faseste, hurricanes, tornados, earth quakes, and a host of others. There are so many ways for a Druid to be evil and have an evil point of view about the natural order.

I fail to see how "turn their back on conventional druidic conditions" implies anything other than "you're an ex-druid". In fact, it seems clearer that you're an ex-druid with that statement. Now since you've got the book in your lap, I invite you to read the first paragraph of the flavor text. Specifically, this:


Their plagues have transformed the western reaches of the Rawlinswood into a foul green hell of diseased monsters and deadly poisons. Worste yet, the blightlords seek to infect the healthy forests and lands nearby with the same sickness. Under the tutelage of the horrible Rotting Man, the Talontar blightlords marshal the Rawlinswood's black horde, leading their infected minions forth to scourge the nearby lands."

Definitely no.


Very few species eat their own kind, because that's stupid - you're susceptible to exactly the same diseases that the thing you're eating would have been. Good job, you now have them too. Cannibalism would definitely be a non-druidic practice.
Well, first off, if you read that sentence context of the entire post, you will notice that it's not related to disease and is instead about me making a bunch of terrible logical assumptions based off a little bit of quasi-related evidence. So of course a bad idea can come up, because the entire idea is that I make up things that are bad and anti-druidic and attempt to justify them with something involving nature. Secondly, in case you were curious about cannibalism and how prominent it actually is, this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism_(zoology)) is great bedtime reading material. About 90% of aquatic organisms commit cannibalism, and you'll even see herbivores do it. Yuck.

EDIT (Off-topic): If any of you wanted to know more about cannibalism, you might be interested to know that the swarm-like Mormon crickets (the ones pictured at the top of the wiki page) travel in a forced march both as competition for food and because the Mormon crickets in the back will eat them if they move to slowly. The first thing that came to mind was Russia in WWII. Oh man.

[TuggyNE]

Secondly, in case you were curious about cannibalism and how prominent it actually is, this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism_(zoology)) is great bedtime reading material. About 90% of aquatic organisms commit cannibalism, and you'll even see herbivores do it. Yuck.

EDIT (Off-topic): If any of you wanted to know more about cannibalism, you might be interested to know that the swarm-like Mormon crickets (the ones pictured at the top of the wiki page) travel in a forced march both as competition for food and because the Mormon crickets in the back will eat them if they move to slowly. The first thing that came to mind was Russia in WWII. Oh man.

Moral lesson #1 from nature: don't get your moral lessons from nature. :smalltongue: :smallyuk:

[Harrow]

The Artificer was the first thing to come to my mind for a good Anti-Druid, but then I remembered something else.

I half-remember reading somewhere, I think on article on the WotC website, something about Druids and what they do and don't like. To summarize, Druids aren't necessarily against undead, as there are types that occur naturally and temporarily. A grave-robbing Dread Necromancer? Yeah, they wouldn't like him. But undead aren't inherently wrong.

That fine label would go to Aberrations which are all... well... Aberrant.

Don't remember the name of the article, but it would imply Fleshwarper would be very un-Druid, being a PrC that focuses on the corruption and perversion of nature. Heck, some classes focus on the perversion of nature, but they use nature to do it, so it doesn't really count. These guys... they change things.

[Just to Browse]

I didn't consider aberrations. I think anything from the Far Realms (thanks Bruce) would be significantly anti-druid. Of course, all that really comes to mind is homebrew...

[Jeff the Green]

I didn't consider aberrations. I think anything from the Far Realms (thanks Bruce) would be significantly anti-druid. Of course, all that really comes to mind is homebrew...

Alienist, then? It's also the opposite of druid in that it makes you worse at your main schtick than you were before you entered.

[Just to Browse]

Alienist, then? It's also the opposite of druid in that it makes you worse at your main schtick than you were before you entered.

That's a class written for arcane summoners. I'm going to posit that no WotC PrC ever with significant anti-druid flavor is going to be as interesting or powerful as the druid itself. You're going to need homebrew classes or homebrew fixes.

[Slipperychicken]

How about Wizards, for the fact they gain most of their power from paper products like books and scrolls, stay inside their towers mutilating/desecrating trees all day, and gain their spells by staring for a full hour at the defiled and mutilated corpse of a dead tree?

[CyberThread]

Did you even read the text in the Book? I have it in my lap right now, it actually says "Druids no longer need to abide by their weapon and armor restriction, as blightlords turn their backs on the conventional Druidic tradition." It's clear that you retain your Druidic statuses when becoming a Blightlord



Love how ignored this statement was.

[Augmental]

Elans can fluff away Blighters ex-Druid requirement.

The character can totally have been a fifth-level Druid before becoming an Elan. (Failed saves to negative levels can fluff it away too. "having been something" belongs in back story anyway, imho.)


The character must be an ex-druid previously capable of casting 3rd-level druid spells

If the elan was an ex-druid, he would have ex-druid levels, but since the elan reincarnated he doesn't have the ex-druid levels anymore.

[Jeff the Green]

That's a class written for arcane summoners. I'm going to posit that no WotC PrC ever with significant anti-druid flavor is going to be as interesting or powerful as the druid itself. You're going to need homebrew classes or homebrew fixes.

What I mean is that, while druids have awesome power, Alienist forces you to specialize in one thing to enter (summoning) and then makes you worse at that one thing.

For other far-realms weirdness, you could go with the PF summoner (tentacles, ho!) or ozodrin (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153536).

[The Ravensong]

Follow me here...
Transmuter/Fleshwarper holed up in a tower in the forest of a nearby kingdom that's been using the local chimpanzee and gorilla populations as test subjects for potential grafts... and the survivors as footsoldiers.

Perhaps this Fleshwarper could take the leadership feat to accrue an army of such experiments... perhaps a whole legion of awakened monkeys with abberant feats, like starspawn?

Perhaps, given time, the vile nature of the Fleshwarper's experiments has begun to warp and twist the surround forest into something dark and unnatural... So much so that the kingdom's Druid/Planar shepherd (tuned to the astral plane so she can use her planar bubble to travel through objective gravity), summons a champion from another plane to help overcome the villain, gifting her champion with ruby slippers of planar banishment, and promising the command word as a reward.

This champion, a wisdom-dumped extraplanar sorceress along with her dog familiar, uses her affably innocent nature to recruit some henchmen of her own to help even the odds against this wicked witch and her army of flying monkeys...

Perhaps an axe-wielding warforged, a catfolk with the craven feat, and an awakened scarecrow...

[Slipperychicken]

What I mean is that, while druids have awesome power, Alienist forces you to specialize in one thing to enter (summoning) and then makes you worse at that one thing.


Doesn't it also kill you at the capstone?

[Jeff the Green]

Doesn't it also kill you at the capstone?

No, that's Risen Martyr. It does have a class feature that specifies that you're "stolen away by horrible entities when [your] time is up, and [you are] never seen again," but that's when you'd normally die of old age.

[Grim Reader]

If the elan was an ex-druid, he would have ex-druid levels, but since the elan reincarnated he doesn't have the ex-druid levels anymore.

There are no requirements for ex-Druid levels in the class.

[The Ravensong]

There are no requirements for ex-Druid levels in the class.

I think they were referring to the Blighter PRC from complete divine, which does require you to be an "ex-druid previously capable of casting 3rd level spells".
So, being Elan, you wouldn't need to actually violate a druid oath to join the prc, you simply have to have reached 5th level before becoming an Elan, which turns you into a first level character of any class you want...
say, maybe Duskblade
Which helps you get the rest of your requirements (+4 BAB) a few levels early...
+1 lulz for sticking around till level 5 for the free quickened spell 1/day
and cast all your blighter spells as part of an attack...
and gives you access to level 9 spells as early as level 13 (more realistically 14)... dropping transmute mud to rock and an incindiary cloud (Read: remote control napalm) turn one, and earthquake (or another heaping helping of napalm) turn 2?
:smalleek: well, that escalated quickly :smalleek:

[Augmental]

I think they were referring to the Blighter PRC from complete divine, which does require you to be an "ex-druid previously capable of casting 3rd level spells".
So, being Elan, you wouldn't need to actually violate a druid oath to join the prc, you simply have to have reached 5th level before becoming an Elan, which turns you into a first level character of any class you want...

So if you were playing a character like this in a campaign, you would have to get to 5th level, then become an elan - which brings you down to 1st level, while the rest of the party stays at 5th level? Sounds like just going straight druid would be easier.

[The Ravensong]

So if you were playing a character houthis in a campaign, you would have to get to 5th level, then become an elan - which brings you down to 1st level, while the rest of the party stays at 5th level? Sounds like just going straight druid would be easier.

Ah, aha! I thought we were talking about villains!
Otherwise, yes, definitely, stay druid.

[Grim Reader]

So if you were playing a character like this in a campaign, you would have to get to 5th level, then become an elan - which brings you down to 1st level, while the rest of the party stays at 5th level? Sounds like just going straight druid would be easier.

No, you start as a 1st level Elan. And write the "was a druid before becoming an Elan" into your backstory. Its what I've been trying to say, the ex-druid requirement can be fluffed away by being an Elan.

[Sith_Happens]

Follow me here...
Transmuter/Fleshwarper holed up in a tower in the forest of a nearby kingdom that's been using the local chimpanzee and gorilla populations as test subjects for potential grafts... and the survivors as footsoldiers.

Perhaps this Fleshwarper could take the leadership feat to accrue an army of such experiments... perhaps a whole legion of awakened monkeys with abberant feats, like starspawn?

Perhaps, given time, the vile nature of the Fleshwarper's experiments has begun to warp and twist the surround forest into something dark and unnatural... So much so that the kingdom's Druid/Planar shepherd (tuned to the astral plane so she can use her planar bubble to travel through objective gravity), summons a champion from another plane to help overcome the villain, gifting her champion with ruby slippers of planar banishment, and promising the command word as a reward.

This champion, a wisdom-dumped extraplanar sorceress along with her dog familiar, uses her affably innocent nature to recruit some henchmen of her own to help even the odds against this wicked witch and her army of flying monkeys...

Perhaps an axe-wielding warforged, a catfolk with the craven feat, and an awakened scarecrow...

http://forum-img.pinside.com/pinball/forum/?bb_attachments=379843&bbat=41268&inline

[Augmental]

No, you start as a 1st level Elan. And write the "was a druid before becoming an Elan" into your backstory. Its what I've been trying to say, the ex-druid requirement can be fluffed away by being an Elan.

Only if the other characters get LA +5 to compensate.

[Grim Reader]

Only if the other characters get LA +5 to compensate.

I don't think houserules have any place in this.

You seem determined to make Blighter entry say something it doesn't. Now clarly that is motivated by an interpretation of game balance, which is not a bad thing. But it is not supported by the rules, and we are not talking about characters for an actual game here. Just that the rules do allow a character, with the right race and background, to satify the "ex-Druid" requirement without actually investing five dead levels in Druid.

[Socratov]

Ehm... is it too late to suggest metal spells picking warforged wu-jen as anti druid?

[ksbsnowowl]

Indeed, they've got a wonky set of weapon proficiencies, but they're not restricted to just those weapons.

So that's a pretty egregious error if that's part of the PrC writeup.It's not an egregious error if you actually know your D&D history.

3.0 Druids were restricted from using any weapon NOT on the druid's weapon list.

Unapproachable East was written in the transition phase from 3.0 to 3.5. It has elements of both within its pages (3.5 skills [Survival instead of Wilderness Lore], 3.0 DR, etc).

The 3.5 PHB, where the updated Druid no longer had the restrictions against using any other weapons, was not printed until several months after UE had hit the shelves.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Blightlords are a "better" option than Blighter. It can advance druid casting; any claim to the contrary is ridiculous.

[The Ravensong]

Blightlords are a "better" option than Blighter. It can advance druid casting; any claim to the contrary is ridiculous.

I most certainly agree with you there.
I think the best way to go about making an "anti-druid" is to ask yourself what that means to you.
If it means someone who wants to bring about the destruction of the natural world, then Blighter or similar concept is a great fit
If you're "anti-druid" is, instead, someone who's goals and ideals otherwise fit into the normal druid's philosophy save for a grossly divergent/blasphemous take on what nature is/how nature should be treated, thats when you'd get into the territory of say...
a Blightlord that wants to support the spread of disease to the exclusion and detriment of all other life
a Fleshwarper that's decided to take an active role in the survival of the fittest by forced evolution
an evil aligned druid that believes that the undead are natures' response to humanoids advancing beyond their natural predators.
a druid from another part of the plane that's brought with him an invasive species that begins to out-compete that areas' natural inhabitants.
a druid from another plane entirely that seeks to reshape this plane to reflect his home.
The core of most campaign world's druids have a philosophy focused on balance (generalizing from my own experience), which is reflected in their required alignment of any neutral, they don't normally have access to the 4 extremist alignments. An anti-druid, then, would want to somehow upset the natural balance or perhaps enforce balance in an unnatural way.

[almightycoma]

I think entropomancers have a good case for being anit-druid's. The druid draws power from the natural world or the planes. The fluff of entropomancy is wielding the power of nothingness. To me using nothingness seems like the opposite of power derived from veneration of the natural world.
In a similar line of thought binders may have a case as well. They get power from beings who broke the rules of reality so hard they left it behind to go somewhere else entirely. That seems very against the natural order of things which druids usually try to protect/maintain.

[Kelb_Panthera]

For the whole "is disease something acceptable to druids" discussion: Contagion: Druid 3 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/contagion.htm)

Either disease is okay by druids or they have a spell on their list that no druid can ever use.

[TuggyNE]

For the whole "is disease something acceptable to druids" discussion: Contagion: Druid 3 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/contagion.htm)

Either disease is okay by druids or they have a spell on their list that no druid can ever use.

Don't press too hard on the spell list argument, though; Healers have deathwatch on their list, and we all know how that turned out.

[Jeff the Green]

Don't press too hard on the spell list argument, though; Healers have deathwatch on their list, and we all know how that turned out.

True, but that's one mistake. In BoVD there are three druid spells that cause disease (two are mechanically diseases, one called "Pox" that just does Con drain).

[Larkas]

I'll get on the truck about an Artificer being a viable anti-Druid.

A warforged Artificer, bent substituting nature for something "more efficient". I'm even thinking "Cybertron" here! Yep, that fits just right in my book.

[Sith_Happens]

I'll get on the truck about an Artificer being a viable anti-Druid.

A warforged Artificer, bent substituting nature for something "more efficient". I'm even thinking "Cybertron" here! Yep, that fits just right in my book.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/33879890.jpg

[Timballisto]

Also Elan, Warforged, and Necropolitan/Lich are all potentially quite anti-natural, as they live forever and don't need to eat - they could perfectly well enjoy a dead, entirely artificial world. Those aren't classes though.

Funny you mention that. I'm in a gestalt game playing an Ironwood-body Warforged:
Barbarian 1/Totemist 9/Bear Warrior 1/Totem Rager 3//Warblade14

He's all about the plants. I put ranks into Craft (woodworking) and Profession (gardener), he carves statues out of dead fall, keeps gardens in several cities, and even spent 1,000,000gp to buy a forest from a city-state to preserve it. He is an odd one, he has a "Waste not, want not" mentality. After his master who created him passed away, he skinned and tanned his master and made a satchel from the leather. He currently has a warforged component called a docent, who he believes is inhabited by the soul of his master.

[Larkas]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/33879890.jpg

Precisely! :smallbiggrin:

[Kelb_Panthera]

Don't press too hard on the spell list argument, though; Healers have deathwatch on their list, and we all know how that turned out.
I don't see your point. Healers aren't prohibited from casting spells with the evil descriptor (which that spell almost certainly shouldn't have,) so it looks to me like it worked out just fine.