Intended Minor Nerf to the Druid - Am I going too far?

[Larkas]

I want to decrease the druid's capacity for direct combat a little. Specifically, I'm dropping them to low BAB and, seeing as that doesn't do that much to wildshaped druids, limiting them to Medium or smaller wild shape forms. I intend to buff their spellcasting capabilities a little to compensate, and also give it a couple of other misc. bonuses. Basically, I'm aiming at making a cloistered cleric-like druid variant, with a focus on divination.

I'm not sure if the nerf went too far, though. What do you think? Am I hitting it too hard with the nerfbat?

[(Un)Inspired]

Tough call. If players want to turn in combat monsters and ruin their enemies they probably just won't play Druids at all with your nerf. They'll probably just play a Synthesist.

[Larkas]

Tough call. If players want to turn in combat monsters and ruin their enemies they probably just won't play Druids at all with your nerf. They'll probably just play a Synthesist.

Well, that's to be expected. And that's actually already the case more often than not, even without the nerf.

[Vhaidara]

Actually, from what I've heard about the PF changes (haven't had a chance to play a mid level PF druid), the fact that you are in PF more r less destroyed the melee druid already, since they don't get stat replacement, just stat impovement

[Elkad]

I make them choose between animal companion or wildshape. It's not much, but they at least have to choose between overpowered at 1st level and overpowered later.

Companion Druids get a modified Companion Spellbond as a bonus feat. Range is 5' times (qualifying class levels squared). (5' 1st level, 20' 2nd, 125' at 5th, 500' at 10th, etc). It becomes 1 mile/level at 17th, and unlimited (same plane) at 19th.
Also available as a Feat choice for other classes with special bond companions, including mounts and familiars. The Enspell Familiar and original Companion Spellbond feats do not exist.

As a rough rule of thumb, Wildshape druids can't increase any physical stat or natural armor more than their druid level by shifting. (Size bonuses are separate, so you can get a couple extra points that way). I specifically reserve the right to beat abusive druids with books. One specific example, which applies to all forms of shapechange. Stuff with multiple heads/brains (hydra, dvati, etc) do NOT get the full independent actions of the form.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Are you also giving Cleric and Summoner poor BAB, nerfing eidolon/synthesist evolutions, and banning or severely nerfing the cleric self-buffs?

Druid already took it where the sun don't shine pretty harshly with PF, not sure why you're targeting them alone.

[ericgrau]

If they already can't do much with combat forms then that leaves utility and defense forms which won't be affected too much by poor BAB.

[The Insanity]

In our games we buffed Druid by using The Giant's Polymorph houserule, but we also nerfed him by giving him poor BaB and d6 and forcing him to choose between Wildshape or Animal Companion.

[Larkas]

Are you also giving Cleric and Summoner poor BAB, nerfing eidolon/synthesist evolutions, and banning or severely nerfing the cleric self-buffs?

Druid already took it where the sun don't shine pretty harshly with PF, not sure why you're targeting them alone.

Read that again, SOTS. I said I'm making a cloistered cleric-like variant. That means it's just an archetype. It will either see play along with regular druids and/or with cloistered clerics/priests. Keep in mind I don't use the regular rules for the synthesist's "wild shape" either (and intend to nerf the spell list and the summon features too). This is just one of the intended tweaks for an upcoming game.


If they already can't do much with combat forms then that leaves utility and defense forms which won't be affected too much by poor BAB.

Care to elaborate? I think I might agree with you, but you didn't make much of a point, really.


In our games we buffed Druid by using The Giant's Polymorph houserule, but we also nerfed him by giving him poor BaB and d6 and forcing him to choose between Wildshape or Animal Companion.

Oh, I totally forgot about that tweak! Thanks for pointing it out!

[Coidzor]

I want to decrease the druid's capacity for direct combat a little. Specifically, I'm dropping them to low BAB and, seeing as that doesn't do that much to wildshaped druids, limiting them to Medium or smaller wild shape forms. I intend to buff their spellcasting capabilities a little to compensate, and also give it a couple of other misc. bonuses. Basically, I'm aiming at making a cloistered cleric-like druid variant, with a focus on divination.

I'm not sure if the nerf went too far, though. What do you think? Am I hitting it too hard with the nerfbat?

Give Druids Fine, Dimunitive, Tiny, and Small forms with either no natural weapons or very piddly ones, increase their skillpoints and give them the necessary class skills for spying and understanding what enemies are saying as well as any spells that they don't have on their spell list like tongues or comprehend languages that they might be lacking. Thus, they only use their wild shape for scouting and spying not combat. Bam.

Well, unless PF kept in Natural Spell, but you seem like the kind of guy who'd get rid of Natural Spell if you want to do this, so... If you didn't get rid of Natural Spell, or specifically disallow this archetype from taking Natural Spell, then they can also have Tiny flying forms in combat, I suppose.

Give Rangers full wildshaping progression. Possibly take spellcasting from them in exchange for it, but you wouldn't really have any need to do so. Maybe give them something so they can do something with natural weapons from level 1. *shrug*

Done.

Anyone who wanted to be a melee beast and caster at the same time would be a Synthesist anyway since they can dump their physical stats and be suave, smart mother****ers while also ripping face.

[ericgrau]

Care to elaborate? I think I might agree with you, but you didn't make much of a point, really.

Travel forms like flying creatures and forms with a lot of hp. Then you cast spells with natural spell and don't care at all about poor BAB. Or did PF get rid of natural spell?

Plus assuming PF already made it hard to fight with a druid, you're more likely to already be doing the above anyway. In which case you already weren't using your BAB.

[RoboEmperor]

Why are you nerfing druids in the first place? The only reason why I'd ever play a druid is so I can be an equipment-independent gish. You put those nerfs and I won't play druid (not that I play druid, hate the fluff)

Ask your players if they're ok with the nerf. If they are then they aren't planning on meleeing anything. If they aren't then they won't play druids, or with you.

So again, why are you nerfing druids?


Read that again, SOTS. I said I'm making a cloistered cleric-like variant. That means it's just an archetype. It will either see play along with regular druids and/or with cloistered clerics/priests. Keep in mind I don't use the regular rules for the synthesist's "wild shape" either (and intend to nerf the spell list and the summon features too). This is just one of the intended tweaks for an upcoming game.

From this quote I get that you aren't nerfing druids, but making a variant. Those two are very different things. In that case it doesn't matter, because the player can choose to play a regular druid or your variant. If you're asking if you're variant is too weak or too strong, then maybe the topic title needs to change :P

[Vhaidara]

Why are you nerfing druids in the first place? The only reason why I'd ever play a druid is so I can be an equipment-independent gish. You put those nerfs and I won't play druid (not that I play druid, hate the fluff)

Because druids are OP as all hell. T1 casting, with a T3 class feature (Wildshape Ranger is T3 with only Wildshape) and a T4 character built into the class (Animal Companion).


Maybe pathfinder is better for you. Their wildshapes are stat increases, not replacements.

Note the title: "Pathfinder Intended..."


Ask your players if they're ok with the nerf. If they are then they aren't planning on meleeing anything. If they aren't then they won't play druids, or with you.

Stated in the thread, he's making an archetype. Basically an ACF.


So again, why are you nerfing druids?

See first response.

[RoboEmperor]

Because druids are OP as all hell. T1 casting, with a T3 class feature (Wildshape Ranger is T3 with only Wildshape) and a T4 character built into the class (Animal Companion).

Note the title: "Pathfinder Intended..."

Stated in the thread, he's making an archetype. Basically an ACF.

See first response.

Yeah.. noticed those stuff and was editing my post XD. I swear pathfinder tags are invisible to me @_@

[Coidzor]

Because druids are OP as all hell. T1 casting, with a T3 class feature (Wildshape Ranger is T3 with only Wildshape) and a T4 character built into the class (Animal Companion).

Err, this is PF already, no intended about it. :smallconfused:

And isn't PF Wildshape Tier 4 and the PF Animal Companion T5, both having gone down a tier?

[Vhaidara]

Err, this is PF already, no intended about it. :smallconfused:

And isn't PF Wildshape Tier 4 and the PF Animal Companion T5, both having gone down a tier?

I included the ellipse because I didn't feel like typing the whole thing.

Either way, it's a T1 with a T4 and a T5 glued on.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Druids may be tier 1 casting, but there's a lot of room in a tier. They've always had the weakest spell list of all the tier 1's. Really, aside from the "level behind, every other level", Sorcerers are MUCH better casters than Druids, IMO. Especially in PF, with Human favored class, Paragon Surge cheese, etc...

Gluing on some tier 4 and tier 5 doesn't vault them over the other tier 1's with the better casting.

Larkas, sorry, your title was misleading. Yeah sure, make it an option. Whether it's too strong or too weak really depends on the buffs you give to the casting. When you limit wildshape to medium or smaller...do they still get the higher stat mods the larger sizes would have given? What about the abilities of the later beast shape, etc... spells? (You need BS 2, which gives large forms, to get pounce, most importantly...if you take that out too, you may as well just say they never get the higher level shaping spell equivalents, which is an odd nerf when wizards and others can just cast them as spells anyway)

[Psyren]

If it's just a variant, how does this solve the problem you perceive with the druid? Can't a player who wants a more combative druid simply ignore yours?

If on the other hand you're forcing them to take this version, then claiming it's "just an archetype" is disingenuous, as it would at that point be replacing the regular druid.

[Larkas]

Larkas, sorry, your title was misleading. Yeah sure, make it an option. Whether it's too strong or too weak really depends on the buffs you give to the casting. When you limit wildshape to medium or smaller...do they still get the higher stat mods the larger sizes would have given? What about the abilities of the later beast shape, etc... spells? (You need BS 2, which gives large forms, to get pounce, most importantly...if you take that out too, you may as well just say they never get the higher level shaping spell equivalents, which is an odd nerf when wizards and others can just cast them as spells anyway)

The idea is not to give the increased size bonuses, but the other bonuses would remain untouched. You could emulate a leopard with pounce and rake at 8th level, and take the shape of a medium air elemental immune to bleed damage, critical hits, and sneak attacks and with DR 5/— at 12th.


If it's just a variant, how does this solve the problem you perceive with the druid? Can't a player who wants a more combative druid simply ignore yours?

If on the other hand you're forcing them to take this version, then claiming it's "just an archetype" is disingenuous, as it would at that point be replacing the regular druid.

Not a problem per se, it's just that I want to make a druid that's more focused at casting and less at ripping faces. More of a sagely druid that reads the future in a bird's flight pattern and less of a... Heck, where do D&D's druids come from? Actually, I was inspired by reading this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druid#Sacrifice). For such, I'm giving it one new divination spell per level, the Knowledge Domain's granted powers (only) and the Divination School's first power (this one is a heck of a boost), plus more skills and skill points. I was actually leaving wild shape alone, but I started questioning if -5 to attacks is enough to hold it back, though SOTS make a strong case for it (wizards can cast polymorph as spells anyways).

If I indeed end up using it as a replacement for the druid wholecloth, the idea is to homebrew a fixed feral hunter for players that want to shred the battlefield as some kind of beast (Coidzor is on the money on this one).

[caimbuel]

Not sure about your game, but in Pathfinder Most over on pazios site agree druids are t2, solid t2. The ability to be a beat stick, with varied movement is t4 to maybe t3 at best. The spell list is more about control and summons, and if they are doing that they are not focused as much on beat stick. You want to change them more into casters give more divinations and the ability to cast both summon monster and summon natures ally maybe. One thing to keep in mind, you force them to be small you may have a very tiny caster hard as hell to see, with huge ac boosts casting enough spells to make things interesting.

[The Insanity]

You mean T1.