PDA

View Full Version : Druids, Overpowered?



doliemaster
2007-05-02, 09:22 PM
I have got to get this off my chest. I have a druid player in my campaign and he generaly slaughters 25-30 enemy's with his higher level spells and it is p***ing me off. The whole reason the game fell apart, in my opinon was that A. I was inexperienced, B. He thanks to some interparty arrangements became more powered. C. One guy kept losing his sheets.
Who agrees or has druid horror stories?

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-05-02, 09:26 PM
They're part of the core power three. Full casters are all overpowered without much need for tweaking. Though druids are perhaps the easiest of the casters to wield.

Innis Cabal
2007-05-02, 09:28 PM
class's arnt overpowered....DM's are to lax

Starsinger
2007-05-02, 09:30 PM
"Foolish girl! I am a druid, I have special abilities that are more powerful than your entire class!"

While I've never personally seen a Cheese druid, I don't doubt their existence for a moment.

JaronK
2007-05-02, 09:32 PM
class's arnt overpowered....DM's are to lax

Wrong. Druids are simply very strong by comparison, especially in core only games.

I find that the strictest DMs tend to be the ones that make the most unbalanced games.

That said, any Druid is going to be strong if played at all intelligently.

JaronK

Innis Cabal
2007-05-02, 09:33 PM
and i obviously disagree, i have played lots of games with druids that have not been overpowered in the slightest. There has to be a happy medium in a game, and when there isnt we get threads like these

Hamster_Ninja
2007-05-02, 09:34 PM
Druids are quite insane. With the ability to change into a form and get its physical ability scores, they are just as good warriors as fighters/barbarians/etc. and they can do it without having to spend money to improve their scores, leaving them more money to spend improving their fullcaster-ness.

TheOOB
2007-05-02, 09:35 PM
class's arnt overpowered....DM's are to lax

That statements going to need a little more backing it up to be fully credible.

Druids are usually considered one of the most powerful classes in the game. Think of it like this, druids get full spellcasting, up to 9th level spells. They have single spells that are better then any ability non casters get, and instead of only getting an ability every level or two, they get lots and lots of spells, not only that, they don't really need any feats are equiptment to be any good at these abilities, heck wisdoms really the only stat they need anyways.

As if thats not enough, preperation spellcasters (and especially druids), can change their abilities every day. When a fighter picks a feat they are stuck with it, but a druid can change their spells prepared every single day, and if their spell arn't enough, well they can just change into a big mean animal and fight better then a fighter.

The_Snark
2007-05-02, 09:35 PM
class's arnt overpowered....DM's are to lax

Eh, maybe. But I will say that the high-level druid is truly fearsome. Wild Shape makes them capable in melee, sometimes better than capable, and only a few levels after getting it they can pretty much stay in it as much as they like.

They've got a good array of spells in the core books, discounting polymorph spells; if Complete Divine or, better yet, the Spell Compendium is allowed, they become truly fearsome. Even if you don't ever use wild shape, they're very good.

the_tick_rules
2007-05-02, 09:45 PM
i'm of the opinion it's more the skill of the player than the class.

TheOOB
2007-05-02, 09:49 PM
i'm of the opinion it's more the skill of the player than the class.

That is an important factor, but the fact remains that 9/10 times a wizard, cleric, or druid played by a competent player will be vastly superior to a fighter, rogue, barbarian, ranger, other non spellcaster played by an expert player.

Skill matters to a point, but when you start with better materials, you're likely to make a better product.

asqwasqw
2007-05-02, 09:49 PM
i'm of the opinion it's more the skill of the player than the class.

If all the players are the same skill, the druid will still be better (unless the players suck, in which case the druid may suck...)

AmoDman
2007-05-02, 09:50 PM
I'd still rather play a Cleric.

the_tick_rules
2007-05-02, 09:55 PM
well it's also important to remember the classes were designed to work together to beat monsters. there's a reason all D&D parties aren't all wizard,druids, and sorcerers all the time. there are ocassions where the fighter,monk, and rogue prove their worth.

geez3r
2007-05-02, 10:04 PM
It all depends on the player. A class could have every statistical advantage on paper, but if its not brought to the table, it makes no difference. True druids are really powerful, you'll get no argument from me on that front. It's all a matter of what the player does, and what the other players do. Every class has the potential to break the game (granted some are easier to pull off than others), but not every player does.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-02, 10:29 PM
The problem with the Wiz/Clr/Dru set is that poorly played versions of those classes are still better than well-played versions of the Ftr/Barb/Rgr set.

Orzel
2007-05-02, 11:07 PM
Druids are top tier class wise. They can help in almost every situation a group will face. With players of decent skill, they will be at the top of the group. Only when the players are a true newbie to the game can the druid be outperfromed by a lot. Druids are top tier with the other full casters, followed by partil and scroll casters with high skill points (who try to mimic the full casters).

The_Snark
2007-05-02, 11:30 PM
Druid spells are very all-encompassing; they include buffs, damage and other types of attack spells, and a lot of utility spells, many of which still have combat uses.

The thing is, it's really, really easy to make a powerful druid. None of your spell choices are permanent; eventually, you're going to start realizing what spells are useful and start preparing them. Even poor stat and feat choices won't hamper you that much, since wild shaping will still make you good in combat. A fighter, on the other hand, is easily made mediocre, and often can't recover very well.

Dhavaer
2007-05-02, 11:52 PM
The problem with the Wiz/Clr/Dru set is that poorly played versions of those classes are still better than well-played versions of the Ftr/Barb/Rgr set.

I'd argue a fireball-obsessed Evoker/Red Wizard who bans Abjuration, Conjuration and Transmutation would be equal or inferior to a Leap Attack Barbarian. It doesn't stretch believability too far either, although it is pushing it.

JaronK
2007-05-03, 01:27 AM
well it's also important to remember the classes were designed to work together to beat monsters. there's a reason all D&D parties aren't all wizard,druids, and sorcerers all the time. there are ocassions where the fighter,monk, and rogue prove their worth.

See, that's the thing. A druid can Wild Shape into something nasty (Legendary Ape, for example) and fight way better than the Fighter could ever dream of fighting. The monk... well he can't do anything except not die and run fast, so he isn't doing anything special either. The rogue can trap find, but that's all he can do... Wizards open locks better than rogues, and summoned critters can handle traps.

JaronK

Dhavaer
2007-05-03, 01:34 AM
and summoned critters can handle traps.

Someone found a trap heavy pre-made adventure and ran the numbers. It's apparently safer to have the barbarian run down all the hallways and set off the traps rather than have the rogue search for them.

JaronK
2007-05-03, 01:40 AM
Someone found a trap heavy pre-made adventure and ran the numbers. It's apparently safer to have the barbarian run down all the hallways and set off the traps rather than have the rogue search for them.

If you've ever done some of the really old adventures, the traps are intensely leathal and often can't be found by searching. As a result, it really is best to just summon something expendable and have it handle things, instead of the rogue.

Binders actually do this best by binding Malphas and using their free summoned bird to trigger anything nasty, since they can summon it at will an unlimited number of times without penalty.

JaronK

tsuyoshikentsu
2007-05-03, 02:08 AM
If you've ever done some of the really old adventures, the traps are intensely leathal and often can't be found by searching. As a result, it really is best to just summon something expendable and have it handle things, instead of the rogue.

Binders actually do this best by binding Malphas and using their free summoned bird to trigger anything nasty, since they can summon it at will an unlimited number of times without penalty.

The ironic thing is, there's precedent for this in one of the world's older myths.

DM: "As you watch from the deck of the Argo, the ship before you is crushed by the two cliffs moving together!"

JAson: "Ooookay.... I'll get that bird to fly in first."

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-03, 07:35 AM
Hi everyone,

I dare jump in again and say as Innis Cabal (albeit in more detail): druids are not overpowered in core. Likely some ill-fortuned circumstances led to a mess in doliemaster's campaign, but if the class is properly handled, with properly balanced other pcs as envisionend in the rules and DMed in such a way, a druid should not be a problem. Powerful and cool to play, yes, but no fun-spoiler or campaign disruptor.

Let's take a closer look at the weaknesses/drawbacks of a druid's powers.
- wildshape. This is a really great ability, but it lures the druid too often (if he goes beyond using it for uitillty, say fly and dive in water, or occasional fights) into melee fights. Melee fighting, however, is the least effective route in combat, after ranged spells (best are area control, or no-saves here) and ranged combat (archery etc). Reason? You get hurt more easily!
The problem with wildshape is also that, unlike for a cleric with his divine power might, the no. of attacks for a druid remain weak even in wildshape AND most of the more powerful animals do not have that high DEX scores (meaning you will not go first in combat, a great disadvantage in high-level play, in particular vs enemy casters and ranged fighters).
Add to this that you can no longer communicate with your fellow adventurers and are limited in your equipment, and you should handle wildshape with a bit more caution.
Ah, and in higher-level play you are capped by HD15 animals and if you run into an antimagic field opponent while in melee (more often than you think at those levels!), you are toast.
- spells: the druid spell list is the weakest of all full casters, in exchange for the various extra powers and highest skill points of all full casters (non counting the bard). They also often have blaster (elemental) combat spells which are considered among the weakest combat spells on these boards and none of the most powerful spells (MMM, MoP, Foresight, Miracle, Wish, holy word, time stop, gate). Shapechange they do get at 17th level, but that one spell is, likewise, not free of problems since they need to be "familiar" with the creatures they turn into and thus, since they have no knowledge skills except on nature, do not get the nicer monsters (dragons, outsiders, aberrations like the choker).
- preparing spells everyday. Interestingly, this has been considered an advantage of druids further up. Of course, it is a disadvantage when compared to the spontaneous casters since once they have learned the spells, they are stuck with them for the day (the may leave open some slots to learn later). Plus: If they are attacked during recovering the spells, or if they have prepared the wrong spells, they are as useful as the npc expert class with specialisation in some nature skills.
- Animal Companion:
Remember the old first edition cartoon strips where some villains threaten a wizard's familiar: "Don't move wizard, or your familiar gets it!".
Well, this also highlights the vulnerability of a druid through his animal companion, although more at a fluff level. Mechanically, at all times except maybe at the low levels, the animal companion is highly at risk since all challenges are made for the character levels, not the comparatively weaker animal companion. And since it takes the druid 24 (!) hours of UNINTERRUPTED prayer to get another animal companion once his former one is lost, a killed animal companion during the adventure likely cannot be recovered during that adventure; and if the druid has powerful enemies at a higher level, they may even harass him enough (just 1 round distraction in the 24-hr prayer suffices) to prevent a new animal companion for a while.
- Ex-druids. Now this section is overlooked as often as that for the clerics. For druids, it's even worse, since they lose their class abilites even when someone dominates/tricks them into teaching druidic language to someone else. Remember: fighters and rogues may be stuck with their feats/skills for life, but they never risk losing their feats. Ever. Not even from Antimagic fields...:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

NullAshton
2007-05-03, 08:42 AM
Actually... both clerics and druids can't leave a 'blank cheque' for spells. Their spells MUST all be prepared in the morning, and at a specific time to boot. And if for some reason they can't prepare their spells during that specific hour, that has to be the same time for the rest of their life(barring changing gods or some such thing)...

Saph
2007-05-03, 09:02 AM
Hi everyone,

I dare jump in again and say as Innis Cabal (albeit in more detail): druids are not overpowered in core.

Mmm . . . sorry, but no. I agree with what you said right afterwards, that it doesn't have to unbalance or spoil the game, but druids are extremely strong. I'd even say they're the strongest class in the game at the mid-levels.

Here's why.

I started playing in a World's Largest Dungeon game a couple of months ago. It was a core-only game. The rest of the party was a rogue, a sorcerer, a fighter, a barbarian, and a cleric. The DM told me at the start that the WLD book recommended against playing druids in the WLD, since they "wouldn't do very well in the artificial environment". I said I'd take my chances. :)

My druid started off at 3rd-level, one level behind the rest of the party. Here he is at 6th-level.

Ran Saneseph

6th-level Druid

Stats

Str: 11 (0)
Dex: 12 (+1)
Con: 16 (+3)
Int: 11 (0)
Wis: 18 (+4)
Cha: 8 (-1)

(4d6 stat roll generation. I got a decent set of rolls. Starting Wis of 17, put it up to 18 at level 4.)

HP: 55
Init: +1
AC: 16 (+3 armour, +2 shield, +1 dex)
Attacks: Unarmed

(I have almost no equipment. The WLD is a lousy place for finding druid stuff, but then, I don't really need any. I don't bother wielding a weapon anymore, for reasons I'll go into later.)

Feats: Spell Focus (Conjuration), Augment Summoning, Track, Natural Spell
Class Features: Animal companion, nature sense, wild empathy, woodland stride, trackless step, resist nature's lure, wild shape 2/day
Spells per Day: 5/4/4/3
Skills: Concentration, Listen, and Spot all at +12.
Lots of other stuff that doesn't matter very much.

Animal Companion - Dusty (War-trained riding dog)

HD 6d8+12 (39 HP), Speed 40, AC 21, Bite +8 (1d6+4), trip on hit, various feats, skills, and tricks.

Summoned Creatures

(This is where the real power comes from. I'm only including the top choices from each tier to save on space, so bear in mind that this list doesn't include the dire badger, crocodile, and flying creatures that I also use.)

Level 1 - Wolf. 17 HP, Speed 50, AC 14, bite +5 (1d6+3), trip on hit
Level 2 - Black bear. 25 HP, Speed 40, AC 13, 2 claws +8 (1d4+6), bite +3 (1d6+3)
Level 3 - Dire wolf. 57 HP, Speed 50, AC 14, bite +13 (1d8+13), trip on hit
Level 3 (alternate) - Lion. 42 HP, Speed 40, AC 15, 2 claws +9 (1d4+7), bite +4 (1d8+3), pounce, improved grab, 2 rakes +9 (1d4+3)

Wild Shape Forms

Black bear - As above. Str 18, three natural attacks.
Leopard - Str 16, Dex 19, up to five natural attacks on pounce, improved grab.
Crocodile - Str 19, swim, improved grab.

Tactics

Round 1 - Start summoning a creature. Dusty stands in front of me and readies an action to attack anything that comes near.
Round 2 - Summoned creature(s) appears next to enemy and full attacks it. Dusty continues guarding me. I start summoning a second creature.
Round 3 - Second summoned creature appears next to enemy and full attacks it. First summoned creature stays next to enemy and full attacks it. Dusty moves up and attacks as well.

By this point the enemy, whatever it is, is taking between five and nine attacks per round just from my animals. Usually the fight's all but over by now. On the rare occasions where it isn't, I'll use wild shape and move in myself, adding another 1-5 natural attacks to the mix. Unless the enemies are overwhelmingly powerful or have some way of completely evading attacks, they will die horribly. Damage reduction won't help, because one of my animals will grapple it and the rest will rip it to pieces while it's helpless. And bear in mind that I can do this three times a day.

Outside of combat, I have the highest Listen and Spot scores in the party, I can heal, and I can summon animals to set off traps (the WLD is littered with them). Then there are all my utility spells, like spider climb and stone shape.

So far, we've only had two battles where I was in any serious danger. The first was where we were fighting an entire army of goblins (a gray render, several spellcasters, some mutated hammer-using aberration goblins, and about fifty 1st- and 2nd-level goblin warriors) and the second was when we were going up against an army of ghoul/deathknight undead things that respawned every time we killed them. In both cases the CR was at least 4 points about our party level, and we still won due to the amount of damage my animals could deal and soak up.

Three points to remember:

1 - This is CORE ONLY. I'm not using anything not from the PHB or Monster Manual.
2 - I wasn't particularly trying to make my druid overpowered when I created him. The feat choices were just the obvious ones from the PHB, all picked in 5 minutes.
3 - This is all with no equipment whatsoever.

Conclusion? Yes, druids are way overpowered. In our battles, I control about as many figures and do almost as much damage as the rest of my party put together, and I'm just as effective out of combat. We do need all that combat power, since the WLD is a really lethal place, but there's no doubt that my class is a good deal stronger than it should be.

Oh, and whoever said that druids don't do well in unnatural environments . . . was a little off base. :)

- Saph

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-03, 10:11 AM
Hi Saph,

your druid looks like a solid character to me, but what are the other characters at lvl 6 doing?
A fighting class could have 3 attacks with a bow by now, doing already 3d8+15 or more at range/round.
A melee barbarian could already power attack/cleave also quite nicely with, say a STR 18, getting already 2d6+20 damage per hit (and still have better attack bonuses than your critters).
A cleric is not yet as powerful as he'll be later, but may also join you in summoning stuff (they get similarly powerful creatures) while being protected by the barbarian or fighter.
The sorcerer could have haste (also making your critters more powerful, but really kicking in the archery batteries to four/round...), some ray spells, web, illusions.

As for your opponents- they obviously do not attack you yet at range, neither with dispels, nor with missile attacks to thwart your spellcasting. Summonings are great, but take 1 round for effect, which may be survived in lower level play, but is quite disadvantageous at higher level play.

Animals summoned are also worse than outsiders summoned (by, say, the cleric), since they are subject to various stuff like shying away from fire, mind-affecting, being easily fooled by illusions etc. They are good, though, for sniffing out invisible foes with scent (also works nicely in darkness, although the animal may get some penalities if it is not used to the dark). Plus, like all summoned creatures, they can be dispelled.

But I agree: including the animal companion and summons, you can quite readily sway a combat to your side with sheer numbers if you are unopposed. Also, I like the idea of shaping into a leopard since that is one of the rare animals with a high DEX.

- Giacomo

Marius
2007-05-03, 12:10 PM
Hi Saph,

your druid looks like a solid character to me, but what are the other characters at lvl 6 doing?
A fighting class could have 3 attacks with a bow by now, doing already 3d8+15 or more at range/round.
A melee barbarian could already power attack/cleave also quite nicely with, say a STR 18, getting already 2d6+20 damage per hit (and still have better attack bonuses than your critters).
A cleric is not yet as powerful as he'll be later, but may also join you in summoning stuff (they get similarly powerful creatures) while being protected by the barbarian or fighter.
The sorcerer could have haste (also making your critters more powerful, but really kicking in the archery batteries to four/round...), some ray spells, web, illusions.

As for your opponents- they obviously do not attack you yet at range, neither with dispels, nor with missile attacks to thwart your spellcasting. Summonings are great, but take 1 round for effect, which may be survived in lower level play, but is quite disadvantageous at higher level play.

Animals summoned are also worse than outsiders summoned (by, say, the cleric), since they are subject to various stuff like shying away from fire, mind-affecting, being easily fooled by illusions etc. They are good, though, for sniffing out invisible foes with scent (also works nicely in darkness, although the animal may get some penalities if it is not used to the dark). Plus, like all summoned creatures, they can be dispelled.

But I agree: including the animal companion and summons, you can quite readily sway a combat to your side with sheer numbers if you are unopposed. Also, I like the idea of shaping into a leopard since that is one of the rare animals with a high DEX.

- Giacomo

But the druid while wildshaped can be just as good as the fighter or the barbarian in melee and he still has an animal companion to help him (flank anyone?) just as many skill points in several skills AND he's a full caster. He can heal, summon, buff and use utility spells. What can the fighter do besides combat? They can do everything melee classes do and much much more.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-04, 02:23 AM
Ah...Marius, my old nemesis...we meet again:smallsmile:


But the druid while wildshaped can be just as good as the fighter or the barbarian in melee and he still has an animal companion to help him (flank anyone?) just as many skill points in several skills AND he's a full caster. He can heal, summon, buff and use utility spells. What can the fighter do besides combat? They can do everything melee classes do and much much more.

Heal, summon, buff and utility spells all go to the druid (plus skill points and skills!), you're correct. And to balance that, they pay the price with the drawbacks I outlined above.
But in combat, they are worse, as they should be. Changing into an animal (at 6th level even capped to small and medium animals) does not change that. The druid does not even have the cleric divine power spell to get on equal terms with BAB (let alone feats), and Saph's druid wisely chose not to zilla, but to focus on spells (conjuration in this respect). Even if she had zillaed, it would not be a good idea, since the druid is dependent on melee for this, with the various problems I outlined above.

Now in combat...when compared to an archer fighter, the druid, even with her summoned animals, will have much less damage output than the fighter, I daresay, in particular at that level where mass buffs may not be that frequent (haste comes to mind, though). The comparison to the melee barbarian is even worse (who is then inferior to the fighter in other aspects to balance it).
The fighter has 3 attacks, all with much higher attack bonus than the animals (key in the fight vs the BBEG), and can always full attack (while the animals may be tactically inferior in melee combat, may trade only 1 attack per round vs intelligent opponents). Plus, the summoned creatuers need time to get to the combat; time which the party at some times may not have. Do not get me wrong: the summoned animals should be useful, but will likely only contribute to combat like everyone else does.

- Giacomo

Marius
2007-05-04, 09:38 AM
Heal, summon, buff and utility spells all go to the druid (plus skill points and skills!), you're correct. And to balance that, they pay the price with the drawbacks I outlined above.

The problem is that those "drawbacks" don't balance the druid power at all. Other classes are still weaker than the druid, the fighter can't even heal himself, it's completely unskilled, is more vunerable to magic, has worse saves and can only deal damage at range (at that level if you build him to be good at range he'll suck at melee and in a dungeon sometimes melee is not an option) and even his AC won't be higher than the druid AC (if he's a ranged fighter) in time the druid will buy a monk's belt to send his ac through the roof.
The druid can fly or swim if he has to and even cast spider climb or longstrider to have greater mobility. He can scout while wildshaped (or not) pretty well and he'll have the highest spot and listen checks. He can also track better than the ranger or the barbarian (and his animal companion can help him too since he probably has scent.
Wild empathy means that he can avoid fights with animals and even magic beasts.
He can use sponteneus summon natural ally spells and with the Augment Summoning feat they can be fearsome. A dire wolf has a strengh of 29 so if he hits you, he trips you and if one grapples you, you are done for (with what is the fighter going to hit them?).
Oh yes, druids can heal with skill or magic or items (a wand of CLW paid by the party and you don't have to spend slots in cure spells.). Plus all those other useful spells like "lesser restoration", etc. But if they don't want to spend slots in them, they can just buy scrolls.
They also have good buffs like "bull's strengh" or "Cat's grace", Protection from energy", etc. if they know what is comming.
Plus several utility spells, like "speak with animals", "stone shape", "Obscuring mist", etc.
What does the fighter have? He does damage. You really think that your drawback balance any of this?



But in combat, they are worse, as they should be. Changing into an animal (at 6th level even capped to small and medium animals) does not change that. The druid does not even have the cleric divine power spell to get on equal terms with BAB (let alone feats), and Saph's druid wisely chose not to zilla, but to focus on spells (conjuration in this respect). Even if she had zillaed, it would not be a good idea, since the druid is dependent on melee for this, with the various problems I outlined above.

But a zilla druid doesn't fight alone, he has his animal companion and summoned creatures. Of course he won't fight unless he has too, but if he has he can hold his own, in Leopard form he has 3 natural attacks, pounce and improved grab (and a good speed) and rake. His animal companion has improved trip (for free in every hit). So they do have feats.



Now in combat...when compared to an archer fighter, the druid, even with her summoned animals, will have much less damage output than the fighter, I daresay, in particular at that level where mass buffs may not be that frequent (haste comes to mind, though). The comparison to the melee barbarian is even worse (who is then inferior to the fighter in other aspects to balance it).

At level 6 haste is already an option. And it's after level 5 when druids start to be really overpowered.



The fighter has 3 attacks, all with much higher attack bonus than the animals (key in the fight vs the BBEG), and can always full attack (while the animals may be tactically inferior in melee combat, may trade only 1 attack per round vs intelligent opponents). Plus, the summoned creatuers need time to get to the combat; time which the party at some times may not have. Do not get me wrong: the summoned animals should be useful, but will likely only contribute to combat like everyone else does.

- Giacomo

The fighter has 3 attacks IF he's a ranged fighter, and maybe he won't be able to do anything if the BBEG has low level mooks running around you (or he's a spellcaster with wind wall), or he has cover, etc.). The druid in leopard form and his animal companion have 6 attacks, improved grab and improved trip, with pounce he can do 5 attacks and he can even cast if he has to.
The druid can take one round to summon and move, while his animal companion guards him. The next round the summon, the druid and his animal companion can attack for 9 attacks! Even if he has a high AC some attack will get though with high chances that the victim ends up grappled or tripped.
This is at level 6! As you level up the gap increases. At 7 level you get 4th level spells (Reincarnate, Dispel magic, Scying, Flame Strike). At 8th level you can wildshape in large animals. At 9th level you get 5th level spells and you start getting save or die spells like Baleful Polymorph.

KIDS
2007-05-04, 11:54 AM
Druids are very strong, but not imbalanced. They have durability, strength and spells (and at the same time!) that should be either nerfed or the fighing classess buffed (see: ToB). But they aren't nearly as sick as clerics and wizards are, with their acces to infinite loops or divine metamagic persistent cheese.

Zynex
2007-05-04, 12:04 PM
Druids are balanced. Though people tend to believe that they are overpowered, a druid is as like any other core class if DM'ed properly.

They may seem unfettered but they have certain restrictions that make roleplaying real well essential so that they can keep their class features. Can't say I can name or ennumerate all instances but I will do my best.

Alignment is one thing, I don't think everybody wants to be all neutrally. Make any mistakes in a few string of judgments and you could very well lose your druidic capabilities.

Also, There's the restriction to use tempered metals. A lot of magical items that greatly aid PC's are made from worked on metals, prominently armors and weapons, hence hinders Druids from ever wielding that +5 keen vorpal sword that fells countless monsters with good roles.

Although, druids are probably the most balanced class in moderate levels. They have access to good area effect damage spells, they have adequate proficiencies and animal forms for close combat or other miscellaneous jobs like scouting. And lastly, they can heal, both themselves and their teammates. Oh, before i forget, they have d8 hit die, quite generous compared to other casters.

I have never played a druid but now that i've mentioned these, makes me interested in trying the class out. :smallbiggrin:

Little_Rudo
2007-05-04, 12:17 PM
Alignment is one thing, I don't think everybody wants to be all neutrally. Make any mistakes in a few string of judgments and you could very well lose your druidic capabilities.

Also, There's the restriction to use tempered metals. A lot of magical items that greatly aid PC's are made from worked on metals, prominently armors and weapons, hence hinders Druids from ever wielding that +5 keen vorpal sword that fells countless monsters with good roles.


On Alignment: I actually find Neutral to be one of the easier alignments to play. You're allowed a bit more leeway than an extreme character, who have a hard time justifying acting in the extreme against their alignment (a Lawful character acting Chaotic, a Good character acting Evil). I have a hard time finding how playing, say, a Neutral Good or Chaotic Neutral druid would be harder than a Cleric, Bard or Barbarian, who also face alignment restrictions.

On Metals: Actually, I believe there are no restrictions for a Druid using metal weapons, just armor. I'm not terribly fond of this, but seeing as a Shillelagh'd Quarterstaff is a very powerful weapon in the druids hands, I don't think it's a huge drawback, especially since many druids will be wildshaped in battle more often than not.

Marius
2007-05-04, 02:38 PM
Alignment is one thing, I don't think everybody wants to be all neutrally. Make any mistakes in a few string of judgments and you could very well lose your druidic capabilities.

You don't have to be "all neutrality" you can be chaotic neutral, neutral evil, etc. And even if you are True neutral you can justify everything you do, let's say you do a lot of good actions, you can say that there's too much evil in the world and you act like that to balance the world.



Also, There's the restriction to use tempered metals. A lot of magical items that greatly aid PC's are made from worked on metals, prominently armors and weapons, hence hinders Druids from ever wielding that +5 keen vorpal sword that fells countless monsters with good roles.

You can wield a +5 keen vorpal scimitar without any problem. You don't need armor, you just need a Monk's belt to add your wisdom mod to your armor (and that's a lot). And you can wear any metal item by RAW. The only thing that they cannot wear is metal armor or shields.

Wolf53226
2007-05-04, 03:05 PM
And then, on the armor side, they just get dragon scale armor. Or one of the other non-metal special armors that make normal armor look like a joke.

PirateMonk
2007-05-04, 07:25 PM
BWL's comments on the druid spell list:


The Core druid's spell list is mostly mediocre.

However, he gets some highly useful spells.

Level 1: Entangle, one of the best low-level control spells; Produce Flame isn't so bad.
Level 2: Barkskin, Bull's Strength.
Level 3: Call Lightning, Greater Magic Fang, Poison, Wind Wall, Plant Growth (situational).
Level 4: Air Walk, Flame Strike, Freedom of Movement, Dispel Magic
Level 5: Animal Growth, Wall of Thorns, Death Ward, Baleful Polymorph, the absolutely devastating Control Winds.
Level 6: Antilife Shell, Spellstaff (basically, a free highest-level slot), Greater Dispel Magic, Fire Seeds, Transport Via Plants.
Level 7: Control Weather, Heal, True Seeing, Wind Walk.
Level 8: Finger of Death, Sunburst's okay, Repel Metal Or Stone.
Level 9: Shapechange, Foresight.

Plus the SNA spells, with Augment Summoning especially.
So Druids aren't TEH AWESOMETASTIC, but they're definitely not bad.

The Spell Compendium adds enough great spells to make them a force to be reckoned with (and a druid casting Bite of the Weretiger or Bite of the Werebear on himself is ridiculously potent in wildshape. That is, more so than he was before. And he gets the Tiger one at 11, the Bear one at 13).
Level 1: Cloudburst (make your Call Lightning stronger), Hawkeye (combine with WIS primary stat and Spot as a class skill), Lesser Vigor, Enrage Animal (for your companion).
Level 2: Blinding Spittle (way too good--WHY do they keep reprinting this?), Healing Lorecall (makes the Heal skill useful!), Kelpstrand, Listening Lorecall, Nature's Favor (swift-action, woo), Master Air, Wings of Air/Cloud Wings for flying shapes.
Level 3: Blindsight, Bottle of Smoke, Entangling Staff (+ape Wild Shape), Icelance, Lion's Charge, Mass Resist Energy, Vigor, Mass Lesser Vigor, Spiderskin.
Level 4: Greater Blindsight, Bite of the Wereboar, Contingent Energy Resistance, Enhance Wild Shape, Moon Bolt, Greater Resistance, Sheltered Vitality, Boreal Wind (Frostburn) and its Sandstorm counterpart.
Level 5: Anticold Sphere (situationally very useful, most of the time, not so much), Bite of the Weretiger (gah), Mantle of the Icy Soul (situational, or comboed with Energy Immunity: fire), Owl's Insight, Phantom Stag (like Phantom Steed but even BETTER), Sirine's Grace (depending on your CHA), Greater Vigor.
Level 6: Bite of the Werebear (+16 Enhancement bonus to strength, and more. GAH.), Energy Immunity, Enveloping Cocoon (turn a save-or-lose on its list into a Ref save! Yes, now you can hit the fighter's or dragon's Ref save with Baleful Polymorph!), Superior Resistance, Tortoise Shell (big Natural Armor bonus; forget Barkskin).
Level 7: Aura of Vitality, Master Earth (a druid Greater Teleport, really), Word of Balance.
Level 8: Brilliant Aura, Stormrage.
Level 9: Summon Elemental Monolith, Mass Death Ward, Nature's Avatar (a swift action. Give your animal companion +10 AB/damage and haste? yes, please), Tsunami, Greater Whirlwind (very devastating, no save/SR).

The druid becomes a powerful spellcaster on top of what he was before. And he gets huge buffs that get around his difficulty of item use and more (like Bite of the X and Superior Resistance).

Stephen_E
2007-05-04, 08:11 PM
Personally I consider the Druid is balanced when played poorly, or very well.
A well played Druid will be strong, but won't overshadow the rest of the party. The player will carefully downplay their strengths where they compete with other PCs. The worst Druids are those played ny people who're good enough to work out how to make their Druid uber, but not good enough to know when/why not to play him "uber".

Why?. Because DnD is a group game, and is about having fun. If the rest of your group feel lousy because you're overshadowing them, then sooner or later it will have a negative impact on your enjoyment (Maybe not until they kill your PC in its sleep, or give up the game, but do you really want to see that happen).

I also don't think you can rely on "good DMing" to control the Druid who isn't been controled by her player. While situational modifying by the DM is good for helping weak PCs, it is very limited for reining back strong PCs, especially allround PCs like the "Uber Druid". You're rapidly going to find yourself heading into DM/PC warzone, and IMHO this ISN'T a sign of good DMing. The DM is better off sitting down with the player and saying "I realise that you having lots of fun with your Druid PC, but you've designed him so well that he's simply overpowering the campaign. I need you to rein him back. How about we look at interesting changes that we can make ,that are fun, without overly dominating the campaign".

Stephen

Tobrian
2007-05-04, 08:31 PM
You can wield a +5 keen vorpal scimitar without any problem. You don't need armor, you just need a Monk's belt to add your wisdom mod to your armor (and that's a lot). And you can wear any metal item by RAW. The only thing that they cannot wear is metal armor or shields.

Are druids overpowered? Yes. Well, that's my opinion. You can of course disagree.

Compare wizard and druid. Wizards get worst HD possible (d4), only 1/3 good saves, only 2 base skill points, a familiar that's terribly fragile unless you're wasting tons of feats on it, they can't use armor, can't use many weapons without extra feats etc. Everyone justifies it on wizards being weak-chested bookworms (intellectual bookworms that oddly only get 2 skill points per level? yeah right) And why? "Because they're full casters!" whines the anti-wizard faction. "They need to be incompetent at everything else because OMG they CAN CAST SPELLS!"

Funny. Druids are full casters too, with the same spell level progression as clerics. :smallyuk: And they get tons of added feats. Wildshape alone becomes ridiculously powerful over time. Druids can fight, use weapons and wear druidic armor (dragon hide anyone?), they have have armor spells, have access to healing spells, good HD (d8, better than a rogue), 2/3 good saves, and 4 base skill points per level. They become immune to all poisons, and by 15th level they don't age and can't be aged magically either, similar to the monk. They have animal companions that can fight and get similar power add-ons like the familiar, but that become more powerful as the druid levels up without the druid having to expend an extra feat like the wizard does for Improved Familiar (care for a dire tiger?) or can even become celestrial creatures if the druid takes the exalted path. Fun all around!

Wildshape (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#wildShape) is more powerful than a wizard's Polymorph spell. THe druid heals hp everytime he changes shape! He gets the A Thousand Faces power at 13th level, AT WILL, effectively the same power as the Changeling race of Eberron has, making the druid a splendid spy, a role usually reserved for rogues and bards. And with the Natural Spellcasting Feat they can even cast spells while wildshaped into an animal! Savage Species had a feat that allows a druid to manifest a Spell-like, Supernatural or Extraordinary ability of whatever creature they've morphed into! Not to mention the terribly broken Warshifter PrC. At high levels, druids effectively become elementals, and when in elemental form can use ALL the elemental’s extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities. THe druid also gains the elemental’s feats for as long as he maintains the wild shape, but retains his own creature type! Well, blimey, isnt that nice.

The only "restriction" druids (and for that matter clerics too) face as "payment" for all their powers is some vague alignment/religious vow, that boils down to roleplaying giving lip-service to a nature deity... and if you play some sort of tainted evil blighter druid PrC or a nature's avenger kind of druid, you can get away with burning down forests or slaughtering anyone who "violates" Mother Nature. Once upon a time, druid did offer human blood sacrifices to the sun and moon; the king of the bean must die and blood must be spilled so that the spring will come and the sun will rise, sort of thing.


You don't have to be "all neutrality" you can be chaotic neutral, neutral evil, etc. And even if you are True neutral you can justify everything you do, let's say you do a lot of good actions, you can say that there's too much evil in the world and you act like that to balance the world.

Yep. Players can bend logic to justify nearly any action their PC takes. Ask 10 players how they judge Action X in terms of alignment, and you'll get 10 different answers.

A class should never receive lots of powers and have it "balanced" only by a roleplaying restriction without any rules-related modifiers. In regard to the Flaws optional system, WotC game designers explicitely caution DMs that when creating new flaws never to allow flaws that are merely roleplaying flavour without any actual numerial game-mechanical effect on the character's stats. They should've taken their own advice with the druid.

Look at all the problems people have with paladins - and paladins actually have a VERY tight alignment restriction and a paladin oath to live up to. Druids on the other hand don't even need to tithe to a church if they're just sitting in a glade in the forest. Whether adventuring PC druids are fighting fiends or are in a dungeon wading through undead, it's not hard for them to stay true to a vague druidic oath. Nature wants you to kill unnatural stuff, so you do. Roleplaying, give me a break. Most "adventurers" have some Neutral in their alignment anyway.

MeklorIlavator
2007-05-04, 08:43 PM
I would say that the reason the druid seems to be overpowered in aloy of campaigns is that unlike every other class, it takes 5 minutes to make a very effective druid.
With wizards, you have a huge spell list that has many duds (from the pure-optimization perspective), and clerics you really have fight the group urge to be the walking bandaid.

With the tanks, you can easily make a subpar build by looking into the wrong feat tree, and the same can be said for skillmonkeys.

But with the druid, most of their most powerful ablities glare at the character(I can change into a bear! Awesome!), and the feat choice is centered around natural spell. When i first cracked the book, I though that natura spell was necessaary to make a palyble druid, and from what I hear, most other new players think along the same lines. Therefore, while other classes take a while to build to be game breakers from, druids come preassembled. Thus a higher number of beginners will make an excellent druid on their first time than an excelent wizard or cleric. And short of DM intervention/bias, you can't do anything about it. With a wizard, you can not let them rest or take their spell ook, while clerics have that ready made diety intervention. But wildshape, the main feature of the class, has no such limitations, and therefore in nigh-uncontrollable.

The druid is an unbalnced class because of the ease of optimization, not the powerlevels of the class itself.

Tobrian
2007-05-04, 09:11 PM
Well, I used to play a half-elf druid in AD&D 2nd Ed, way back years ago, and compared to the rest of the group he felt very weak. His spells sucked. The best thing that happened to him was being magically turned into a full elf by an artifact (into an elven teenager, dammit), and just when he'd reached sufficient level (9) to be able to change shape (wildshape in AD&D 2nd was much MUCH weaker than it is under d20, and you had to be higher-level than now to get it) he died. (Killed off in a major end-of-campaign battle with an evil possessed arch-druid which netted the other characters something like 2 million XP.) And was reincarnated. As an eagle. Meh.

An intelligent eagle that could theoretically have wildshaped three times a day into a humanoid, but with one thing or another back then the DM wasn't happy with the idea of letting me play an intelligent eagle druid - this was AD&D, remember, no weird races or talking animals or LA races as PCs - and I wanted to play a new character anyway.

Last year the same DM tentatively offered me to bring that character back, converted to 3rd edition, if I wanted. But I declined, thinking back on how often that character had sucked (among other things, I had rolled really badly on attributes), and while the DM offered me to reroll attributes for the new reincarnation, I still declined.

Back then I hadn't really had a good look at the new improved shininess of the druid class, but now I have. And while I'm tempted to convert the character to 3E just for fun, I'm afraid if he were allowed to enter the group at the current power level (12) he'd simply dominate the rest of the group. And all the "playing nice" of the world and downplaying those shiny new abilities would not change that - after all, there's no logical reason for the character NOT to use those powers if it benefits the group.

doliemaster
2007-05-04, 09:41 PM
The part that ticked me off, just saying were certain spells and WHAT, they did to my men, in particular two spells and wildshape, one spell, I now hate is ice storm, which my druid ALWAYS filled up on, I.E. every slot of that spell level was ice storm, that wide range damage was a murderer in close combat with lots of lesser enemy's, the only reason I didn't kill him off was that the other characters would have DIED otherwise, since they were a half-elf bard that barely knew what he could do, and a horribly spected sea-elf fighter. The other spell I hate is HARM! I didn't know he had that, so when I made a giant monster boss that had huge saves and Hp, he killed it in one party round. Finally with wildshape I had a powerful warrior they were fighting and guess what. He became a cat and ran away! The others would have died if I hadn't killed the guy off with plot! The boss, not the druid.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-05, 04:21 AM
Hi again,

sorry, this post could get a bit longer, but I feel I have to comment on what Tobrian and Marius have posted earlier in more detail.


Are druids overpowered? Yes. Well, that's my opinion. You can of course disagree..

And I will, in particular with the following:


The only "restriction" druids (and for that matter clerics too) face as "payment" for all their powers is some vague alignment/religious vow, that boils down to roleplaying giving lip-service to a nature deity... and if you play some sort of tainted evil blighter druid PrC or a nature's avenger kind of druid, you can get away with burning down forests or slaughtering anyone who "violates" Mother Nature. Once upon a time, druid did offer human blood sacrifices to the sun and moon; the king of the bean must die and blood must be spilled so that the spring will come and the sun will rise, sort of thing.
(...)
Yep. Players can bend logic to justify nearly any action their PC takes. Ask 10 players how they judge Action X in terms of alignment, and you'll get 10 different answers.
(...)
Look at all the problems people have with paladins - and paladins actually have a VERY tight alignment restriction and a paladin oath to live up to. Druids on the other hand don't even need to tithe to a church if they're just sitting in a glade in the forest. Whether adventuring PC druids are fighting fiends or are in a dungeon wading through undead, it's not hard for them to stay true to a vague druidic oath. Nature wants you to kill unnatural stuff, so you do. Roleplaying, give me a break. Most "adventurers" have some Neutral in their alignment anyway.
(....)
A class should never receive lots of powers and have it "balanced" only by a roleplaying restriction without any rules-related modifiers. In regard to the Flaws optional system, WotC game designers explicitely caution DMs that when creating new flaws never to allow flaws that are merely roleplaying flavour without any actual numerial game-mechanical effect on the character's stats. They should've taken their own advice with the druid..

But they did. It's all in the "ex druids" section.

From the SRD
A druid who ceases to revere nature, changes to a prohibited alignment, or teaches the Druidic language to a nondruid loses all spells and druid abilities (including her animal companion, but not including weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She cannot thereafter gain levels as a druid until she atones (see the atonement spell description).

There are cursed items that change alignment, there are ways to trick the character into non-neutral behaviour (cf the symbol of insanity cast by Xykon in the lastest great OOTS strip), plus an opponent disguised as a fellow druid may trick you into teaching druid (or better, forces you with dominate person; just one word of teaching is enough to lose all class abilities).

And this is not even the roleplaying stuff, which tends to come up in normal campaigns. As for a cleric, the DM and the player should sit together ahead of character creation to check the religious dimension of the class, i.e. what "prohibited alignment" or "cease to revere nature" behaviour means, even for evil druids. And then that player has to abide by them. Anything else deviates from the rules and is as if the fighter player switches the feat Weapon Focus to different weapon as he pleases during the campaign.

Of course, this is a very extreme drawback and should be handled with care (i.e. talk to player before, resolve conflicts out of game). But its mere threat should make the druid more cautious. And in the course of a 1-20 lvl campaign, it is likely to come up, where the other players in the group have to help out their fellow adventuring druid.

Apart from that, there are also so many other ways to balance spellcasters with the many RAW drawbacks I outlined above, that it is quite astounding that many of you do not realise when to apply the balancing recommendations outlined in the DMG p. 13.

In the following answers to Marius, I hope to provide some more details on how druid power can be handled in game.
I have to admit, after reading Marius' posts I have to join Zynex in his wish to play one soon! Seriously, the class with that many possiblilities looks like fun to play.


The problem is that those "drawbacks" don't balance the druid power at all.

Well, let us say that the druid really has all these powerful abilities and spells. What does a DM do with the many drawbacks I outlined? Will he ignore them? Why should he do that? And I am not talking about the heavy DM artillery to make a Druid lose his class abilities if he meets the situation of the "ex-druids" section, although at higher levels that, too, should be part of the game (at least the risk thereof).



(...)the fighter can't even heal himself, it's completely unskilled, is more vunerable to magic, has worse saves...

You are right, the druid has advantages here, but by no means as dramatic as you depict.
No-one except bard, cleric and druid can get healing from spells (arcane spell users with limited wish/wish indirectly later, at XP cost). From skill (even untrained): yes, it is possible even for the fighter. Simple rest gets back hitpoints. Plus many, many cheap items provide magical healing if there is no healer in the party. Plus, the AC of fighters is likely higher than that of druids (in particular at lower levels), so they get hit less often. They are less skilled than the druid, but they can make use of skills like ride, climb, jump and intimidate. They are behind in magic defense only in will saves. Those can be taken care of with iron will feat and protective items like a cloak of resistance that a druid cannot wear if he wants to wild shape into a leopard.


and can only deal damage at range (at that level if you build him to be good at range he'll suck at melee and in a dungeon sometimes melee is not an option) and even his AC won't be higher than the druid AC (if he's a ranged fighter) in time the druid will buy a monk's belt to send his ac through the roof.

Now that is a big exaggeration. A human fighter of 6th level has 8 feats that can be used for point blank shot, rapid shot, weapon focus bow, weapon specialisation bow, and then power attack, iron will, maybe magical apitude to better combat spellcasters with spellcraft and UMD (or likely better: improved initiative), and expertise.
His AC will be definitely higher than Saph's druid, and likely most druids not pumping DEX. Mithral Full Plate+1, buckler +1, DEX +3. Combined with fighting defensively and expertise, this can push his AC to 30, beyond the scope of most creatures encountered at that level to hit him with anything than a "20". At these levels, the fighter archer can be both tank and artillery as needed. The monk's belt likely will be only available several levels later, at which point the druid reaches maybe his high point among the classes with animal growth.


The druid can fly or swim if he has to and even cast spider climb or longstrider to have greater mobility.

For those rare moments where a fighter is on his own (not with a party) and cannot swim or climb (both STR-based, class skills) his way out of trouble, there are always some emergency potions (potion of levitate gets out of climbing and swimming trouble). Plus, in 6th-9th level, many permanent items that allow levitate, flight, water breathing are available for everyone.


He can scout while wildshaped (or not) pretty well and he'll have the highest spot and listen checks. He can also track better than the ranger or the barbarian (and his animal companion can help him too since he probably has scent.

Hide and Move Silently are no class skills for druid, so only in animal form he may get some better DEX modifier, but no skills of that animal. That animal MAY not appear suspicious, though, that is true, and only at high levels, the druid gets alter self at will (usable for disguise as well).
He cannot track better than a ranger, only if he takes the tracking feat. The animal companion helps both the ranger and the druid.
But overall, these are areas where a druid (beside his spells) are definitely better than fighters, true.


Wild empathy means that he can avoid fights with animals and even magic beasts.

Oh, a fighter could use intimidate for that, but it also works on other monsters.


He can use sponteneus summon natural ally spells and with the Augment Summoning feat they can be fearsome. A dire wolf has a strengh of 29 so if he hits you, he trips you and if one grapples you, you are done for (with what is the fighter going to hit them?).


You keep underestimating the combat strength of the fighter in trying to prove the druid is better at everything, which I strongly disagree with.
An augmented dire wolf can hit the above example AC 30 with a 17 or better, not all that likely, and quite a nuisance if he disappears after 6 rounds. If the dire wolf (only AC 14) needs time to approach the fighter, that fighter can pelt the critter with arrows before melee starts. If the fighter manages to avoid melee combat altogether (ludicrously cheap tanglefoot bags, potions of hide from animals with which an opponent can continue to attack the druid, but also smokesticks or eversmoking bottle come to mind), then summoned animals have a hard time. Additionally, if there are casters on the side of the fighter that can create illusionary pits, obstacles, area dispels, fire etc.



Oh yes, druids can heal with skill or magic or items (a wand of CLW paid by the party and you don't have to spend slots in cure spells.).

That would equally benefit the fighter.


Plus all those other useful spells like "lesser restoration", etc. But if they don't want to spend slots in them, they can just buy scrolls.
They also have good buffs like "bull's strengh" or "Cat's grace", Protection from energy", etc. if they know what is comming.
Plus several utility spells, like "speak with animals", "stone shape", "Obscuring mist", etc.
What does the fighter have? He does damage. You really think that your drawback balance any of this?

At 6th level, definitely yes. The druid spells are great, though not as great as the spells of the other full casters at that level (check the above list by BWL for core; they do not even have yet dispel magic, getting it at the same time as the bard). And you probably do not even need the drawbacks outlined by me above yet (like attacking the druid when trying to regain spells or tricking him into betraying only one meaning of a word in druid languages).
Reasons:
- the otherwise great summon nature's ally III takes a full round to cast. That is quite dangerous vs mobile or ranged opponents. Add the almost must-have speak with animals (otherwise you cannot direct the summoned animals), you need another round (or a quicken rod, too expensive for that level)
- once the spells are cast, intelligent opponents will behave appropriately. I.e. withdraw until the short-term buffs have run out (closing a door in a dungeon is enough for this vs animals).
- there are not so many spells learned at that level. Say, the druid has cast some buffs, used speak with animals and the summon nature's ally III and loses one spell to an enemy ranged attack in that first encounter for the day. After that, he heals his animal companion (which was in melee, so took some hits, since it has a crappy AC vs encounters tailored for 6th level pcs, not a 6HD animal). That is already around a third of the druid's spells gone for the day (and about 21 arrows of the fighter in the meantime). And the day has not even started yet (three more, possibly increasingly difficult encounters to come).



But a zilla druid doesn't fight alone, he has his animal companion and summoned creatures. Of course he won't fight unless he has too, but if he has he can hold his own, in Leopard form he has 3 natural attacks, pounce and improved grab (and a good speed) and rake. His animal companion has improved trip (for free in every hit). So they do have feats.
(...)
At level 6 haste is already an option. And it's after level 5 when druids start to be really overpowered.
(...)
The fighter has 3 attacks IF he's a ranged fighter, and maybe he won't be able to do anything if the BBEG has low level mooks running around you (or he's a spellcaster with wind wall), or he has cover, etc.). The druid in leopard form and his animal companion have 6 attacks, improved grab and improved trip, with pounce he can do 5 attacks and he can even cast if he has to.

Archery has WAY better chances vs the BBEG hiding behind his minions than the critters having to fight their way to him in 6 rounds and meanwhile waiting for his spellcasters dispels and/or countermeasures.
The key windwall to help vs arrows can be nicely countered/dispelled by the party's full casters.


The druid can take one round to summon and move,
while his animal companion guards him. The next round the summon, the druid and his animal companion can attack for 9 attacks! Even if he has a high AC some attack will get though with high chances that the victim ends up grappled or tripped.

Even if tripped, opponents will be able to strike back with melee weapons from prone. If grappled, they may survive the 6 or less rounds the critters are around. Summoning takes a full round, so no movement possible in the same round.
And the full attack options are only there for animals with pounce (not the dire wolf) and only if they charge. This may not always be possible, especially not in dungeons or in rough terrain.


This is at level 6! As you level up the gap increases. At 7 level you get 4th level spells (Reincarnate, Dispel magic, Scying, Flame Strike). At 8th level you can wildshape in large animals. At 9th level you get 5th level spells and you start getting save or die spells like Baleful Polymorph.

True, in mid-levels, druids truly shine. But so did the fighters before. And the other casters after them. And the DM can do a lot to balance that so that all the time everyone feels needed, challenged and contributing.

I do have the feeling that I cannot convince Marius with this :smallsmile: (we had already some discussions on cleric and fighter way back with little mutual convincing). But I hope that for other readers of the thread and the OP the stuff I wrote outlined ways to put a druids' power into perspective.

- Giacomo

Stephen_E
2007-05-05, 05:09 AM
Hi again,


But they did. It's all in the "ex druids" section.

From the SRD
A druid who ceases to revere nature, changes to a prohibited alignment, or teaches the Druidic language to a nondruid loses all spells and druid abilities (including her animal companion, but not including weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She cannot thereafter gain levels as a druid until she atones (see the atonement spell description).

There are cursed items that change alignment, there are ways to trick the character into non-neutral behaviour (cf the symbol of insanity cast by Xykon in the lastest great OOTS strip), plus an opponent disguised as a fellow druid may trick you into teaching druid (or better, forces you with dominate person; just one word of teaching is enough to lose all class abilities).

And this is not even the roleplaying stuff, which tends to come up in normal campaigns. As for a cleric, the DM and the player should sit together ahead of character creation to check the religious dimension of the class, i.e. what "prohibited alignment" or "cease to revere nature" behaviour means, even for evil druids. And then that player has to abide by them. Anything else deviates from the rules and is as if the fighter player switches the feat Weapon Focus to different weapon as he pleases during the campaign.

Of course, this is a very extreme drawback and should be handled with care (i.e. talk to player before, resolve conflicts out of game). But its mere threat should make the druid more cautious. And in the course of a 1-20 lvl campaign, it is likely to come up, where the other players in the group have to help out their fellow adventuring druid.

Apart from that, there are also so many other ways to balance spellcasters with the many RAW drawbacks I outlined above, that it is quite astounding that many of you do not realise when to apply the balancing recommendations outlined in the DMG p. 13.



Helm of Opposite Alignment comes with a DC 15 Will save to negate, and even if he rolls badly it'll onlt cause him problems if he's true Neutral. If he's NG, CN, LN or NE he just switchs to the opposite Neutral alignment.

Teaching the Druidic Language: Teaching a word isn't teaching the language. If you rule that way then lets be honest, you're just using DM fiat to screw the PC. This is BAD DMing. As for Dominating the Druid to teach you Druid Tongue. Again it's a Will save, the Druids best save, and he gets a 2nd save when you tell him to teach you, with a +2 bonus. And frankly if you've managed to longterm dominate a PC it's not a question of whether he's screwed, it simply a matter of how you do it.

Symbol of insanity and tricking people into alignment change: Insanity doesn't change your alignment. It causes you to suffer a permanent "Confusion". Actions you don't control don't change your alignment. The same for "tricking" a person in to alignment change. Pretty much impossible. Single acts don't change alignment, and unlike the Paladin it takes an alignment change to one of the extremes to lose your Druid status. Extreme alignments are in many ways the toughest, and to suggest that a player will be tricked or accidentally slip into these is silly, or involves use of GM fiat.

GM: "I've decided your recent pattern of behaviour is LG/CG/LE/CE and you've just lost your Druid status". Player: "My behaviour hasn't be suitable to cause an alignment shift, and you're supposed to warn me if that's happening". GM: "I decide what counts as alignment shifting behaviour, and I don't have to warn you. You're no longer a Druid." Player: "Well you can take your DM rulings and <beep> them. I quit and I go looking for a DM who knows what he's doing"

Regarding Fighter boosting their AC's to 30+ with Combat Expertise and Defensive Fighting. That's fine. Then they aren't hitting, and the Druid can always cast Flame Blade and hit them with a touch attack. The Touch AC is going to be nothing like it. Also the Animal Companion WILL be able to hit AC 30, and will have AC 30 itself, with the Fighter probably can't hit after he;s reduced his attack by that much.

Of course the best responce to someone using Combat Expertise and Defensive fighting is Disarm. Opposing attack rolls, applying all the current penaties, so the fighter attack roll is reduced by his CE and Defensive fighting penalties, and if a Dire Wolf ever connects the Fighter is so going down on the ground. Prone is -4 to his AC and attack. Or if a Bear grapples, it's even worse. No Dex, CEx or defensive fighting, and damn all attacks from the Fighter.

A good melee build can do stuff the Druid can't, but if it comes to the Melee build squaring off against the Druid and Horde, the Fighter is so screwed.

Stephen

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-05, 06:26 AM
OK, I'll try it from a different angle then, much shorter:

Assume, like the OP, you have a group where a druid player character dominates with his class abilities since they are not opposed.
Why should you as a DM do that?
- why should the druid or any other caster cast as they please in combat?
- why should they never risk running out of spells and gain them back automatically?
- why should they behave as they please even though the ex-xy sections states otherwise?
- why is there never something as simple as a cheap 50gp hide from animals among the druid's opponents?

You could easily transfer it non-casters, say, a fighter specialising in archery and spiked chain tripping (he can do it at 6th level already)
- why would enemies never seek cover from the arrows, choosing to remain in range and in melee with other party members?
- why would all enemies be land-based to get tripped?
- why would no enemy ever make use of the fighter's likely weak will save or touch AC?
etc.

This does not sound like a very challenging game (again, check the DMG for recommendations here).
I already admitted that losing class abilities in case of fulfilling the ex-xy conditions is harsh. But "DM fiat" is if you simply ignore the druid's drawbacks and thus are unfair with the players of non-casters. As a DM, I would likely try a houserule that gets rid of the ex-section (as many of you seem to do), to make play easier. However, in that case I would then take away some of the advantages of the class to balance it. Say, the druid has 2 instead of 4 skill points/level as the other caster classes, will have less animal shape/day, only d6 hit points or some such.

- Giacomo

@StephenE: I would be interested to know how an animal companion gets AC 30 for a 6th level druid. Ah, and the animal companion would meet not defensive, but offensive opposition (contrary to the summoned versions), which will more likely kill it (in particular if in melee) than any of the pcs, since it is weaker than a pc of that level. As a druid player, I would almost never risk my animal companion in combat, only in emergency situations.
EDIT: the pumped AC is there for tanking purposes, i.e. to hold off enemies while others in the group will be able to do their stuff unimpeded. So the fighter does not need to hit anything in this case, although he still could, even at -9 penalty.
EDIT2: if you teach someone, it starts with the first word you teach. Druid is a secret language, and you violate your code if you even betray ONE word of it, not after you have tought all 30,000+ obscure vocabulary and grammar. The latter version would be "DM fiat" on the lenient side and unfair to the other players without such a drawback, including other caster classes. Similarly, the druid has the problem of having to "rever" nature. If he goes mad and destroys a forest and pollutest stuff, that will be put under severe strain. And pcs DO get hit by insanities...why should it be considered more "unfair" for a druid than for a rogue? The druid before had tossed around hordes of animal growthed dire somethings at enemies while the rogue painstakingly sneaked up on the BBEG to do his xd6 extra damage. It all should balance out over time...the atonement spell is around in core rules for a reason, you know...but as I said above, I would also as a DM try to houserule it with another weakness (or lessened class abilities) to balance it before play.
The sorcerer is widely considered here as the weakest of the full caster classes. And he is the only one without an "ex-section" or dependency on an item (spellbook). A coincidence? Likely not.

Marius
2007-05-05, 11:26 AM
Well, let us say that the druid really has all these powerful abilities and spells. What does a DM do with the many drawbacks I outlined? Will he ignore them? Why should he do that? And I am not talking about the heavy DM artillery to make a Druid lose his class abilities if he meets the situation of the "ex-druids" section, although at higher levels that, too, should be part of the game (at least the risk thereof).

Stephen_E already ansered this so I'll just move along.



You are right, the druid has advantages here, but by no means as dramatic as you depict.
No-one except bard, cleric and druid can get healing from spells (arcane spell users with limited wish/wish indirectly later, at XP cost). From skill (even untrained): yes, it is possible even for the fighter. Simple rest gets back hitpoints. Plus many, many cheap items provide magical healing if there is no healer in the party. Plus, the AC of fighters is likely higher than that of druids (in particular at lower levels), so they get hit less often. They are less skilled than the druid, but they can make use of skills like ride, climb, jump and intimidate. They are behind in magic defense only in will saves. Those can be taken care of with iron will feat and protective items like a cloak of resistance that a druid cannot wear if he wants to wild shape into a leopard.

Sure, the rogue could also usa a wand of CLW but the point is that the fighter has to depend on other classes while the druid doesn't.



Now that is a big exaggeration. A human fighter of 6th level has 8 feats that can be used for point blank shot, rapid shot, weapon focus bow, weapon specialisation bow, and then power attack, iron will, maybe magical apitude to better combat spellcasters with spellcraft and UMD (or likely better: improved initiative), and expertise.
His AC will be definitely higher than Saph's druid, and likely most druids not pumping DEX. Mithral Full Plate+1, buckler +1, DEX +3. Combined with fighting defensively and expertise, this can push his AC to 30, beyond the scope of most creatures encountered at that level to hit him with anything than a "20". At these levels, the fighter archer can be both tank and artillery as needed. The monk's belt likely will be only available several levels later, at which point the druid reaches maybe his high point among the classes with animal growth.

At 6th level you can't buy a Mithral Fullplate (10k) and by the time that you can (level 9th) the druid could also buy his monk's belt (13k). And you have to remember you have only 2 skill points per level, using them in 2 cross class skills means that you are a human with a +1 int mod and you are using all of your skill points in UMD an spellcraft, there goes jumping, intimidate, listen, spot, climb, ride...




For those rare moments where a fighter is on his own (not with a party) and cannot swim or climb (both STR-based, class skills) his way out of trouble, there are always some emergency potions (potion of levitate gets out of climbing and swimming trouble). Plus, in 6th-9th level, many permanent items that allow levitate, flight, water breathing are available for everyone.

Yes they are STR based but the fighter has a big heavy armor with a penalty far greater than his STR mod. Even a Mithral fullplate will give you a -6 penalty.



Hide and Move Silently are no class skills for druid, so only in animal form he may get some better DEX modifier, but no skills of that animal. That animal MAY not appear suspicious, though, that is true, and only at high levels, the druid gets alter self at will (usable for disguise as well).
He cannot track better than a ranger, only if he takes the tracking feat. The animal companion helps both the ranger and the druid.
But overall, these are areas where a druid (beside his spells) are definitely better than fighters, true.

If he takes the feat he can track better than anyone and why won't he?



Oh, a fighter could use intimidate for that, but it also works on other monsters.

It doesn't work on non intelligent monsters, plus you have to communicate with them somehow, and I doubt that you can.



You keep underestimating the combat strength of the fighter in trying to prove the druid is better at everything, which I strongly disagree with.
An augmented dire wolf can hit the above example AC 30 with a 17 or better, not all that likely, and quite a nuisance if he disappears after 6 rounds. If the dire wolf (only AC 14) needs time to approach the fighter, that fighter can pelt the critter with arrows before melee starts. If the fighter manages to avoid melee combat altogether (ludicrously cheap tanglefoot bags, potions of hide from animals with which an opponent can continue to attack the druid, but also smokesticks or eversmoking bottle come to mind), then summoned animals have a hard time. Additionally, if there are casters on the side of the fighter that can create illusionary pits, obstacles, area dispels, fire etc.

You are really defending the fighter saying that "he can have spellcasters around to defend him"!?!? The point is that the druid can solo better than anyone, he can fight as well as do other stuff.



That would equally benefit the fighter.

Sure but the fighter can't do that, my point is that you have to sit and wait for him to do it. He can do almost everthing.



- the otherwise great summon nature's ally III takes a full round to cast. That is quite dangerous vs mobile or ranged opponents. Add the almost must-have speak with animals (otherwise you cannot direct the summoned animals), you need another round (or a quicken rod, too expensive for that level)

Actually it takes 1 round to cast, but the animal can attack the same round that appears (and lions can use pounce to full attack you even if you moved).



- once the spells are cast, intelligent opponents will behave appropriately. I.e. withdraw until the short-term buffs have run out (closing a door in a dungeon is enough for this vs animals).

If they have somewhere to run away, maybe they HAVE to fight to protect something. And in any case you can follow and open the door.



- there are not so many spells learned at that level. Say, the druid has cast some buffs, used speak with animals and the summon nature's ally III and loses one spell to an enemy ranged attack in that first encounter for the day. After that, he heals his animal companion (which was in melee, so took some hits, since it has a crappy AC vs encounters tailored for 6th level pcs, not a 6HD animal). That is already around a third of the druid's spells gone for the day (and about 21 arrows of the fighter in the meantime). And the day has not even started yet (three more, possibly increasingly difficult encounters to come).

Saph build could do his trick 3 times and still have wildshape if his out of spells. Besides not every encounter is a fight, a trap is an encounter too.



Archery has WAY better chances vs the BBEG hiding behind his minions than the critters having to fight their way to him in 6 rounds and meanwhile waiting for his spellcasters dispels and/or countermeasures.

Really? Lot's of low level minions? Entangle, the druid doesn't have to use the same tactic over an over.
His spellcasters dispel? They would have to be 5th level plus the minions plus the BBEG... that's not a 6th level encounter.



The key windwall to help vs arrows can be nicely countered/dispelled by the party's full casters.

We all know how spellcaster rule, they point is that the druid can do that by himself. You're defending the fighter saying that he can do something if the full casters help him...



Even if tripped, opponents will be able to strike back with melee weapons from prone. If grappled, they may survive the 6 or less rounds the critters are around. Summoning takes a full round, so no movement possible in the same round.

Survive 6 rounds in grapple with 3 or 4 animals with 3 attacks each while you can do anything? I don't think so but if he does and he is the BBEG the druid can just join in or cast more spells.



And the full attack options are only there for animals with pounce (not the dire wolf) and only if they charge. This may not always be possible, especially not in dungeons or in rough terrain.

You can summon them right beside the enemies, the fighter won't always be an archer, what if you want to play a tank?



True, in mid-levels, druids truly shine. But so did the fighters before. And the other casters after them. And the DM can do a lot to balance that so that all the time everyone feels needed, challenged and contributing.

Fighters never shine over other classes, at very low levels they can contribute just like the rest (in a fight, out of them they are useless).

Knight_Of_Twilight
2007-05-05, 11:36 AM
I hate the fact that the DM is apprently resbonsible for fixing any problem with the game. Some players like to be powerful, and frankly, don't want the DM telling them constantly what they can and can't do. As a DM, I'll nix something that is obviously to powerful, but I can't think of every possibility!

Is it so bad for us to say that WOTC needs to balence the game better?

Indon
2007-05-05, 12:18 PM
Yeah, Druids are crazy overpowered. I mean, they can tank as well as Warriors and with more health, and Cat Form deals high damage without needing a respec, and let's not even mention if they spec resto!

...oh, wait. Wrong game, my bad.

My point is, D&D, it's not an MMO. "Overpowered" is a nonapplicable concept. Yes, Druids have the potential to be played more powerfully than many other classes, and are easier to play effectively; great. This allows less-experienced (or less skilled at optimization, aka 'stupid' to those who think it's so pathetically easy to break the game with any number of classes) players to be able to contribute in a party despite their inexperience.

Meanwhile, more experienced players should know how to (and why they should) tone down their power to match their group so that everyone can contribute. So, how is druid power a problem except by accident (Oops, this character concept was much more effective than I expected!) by a less-experienced player, or intentional game-breaking (Hey, did you know there's a new animal in MMVII that gets four full attack actions a turn? MY DRUID DOES!) by an experienced one. Of course, there's always the desire to optimize to various degrees, so keep reading.

There is a good point to say that a player should have the freedom to optimize fully without fear of surpassing their party, but in this game (or ANY game in which balanced character capability is desirable) it's not a realistic option. Even in a game in which all the classes really ARE perfectly balanced, either more optimized players will seriously outperform less optimized ones (admittedly not a problem if all characters can and want to optimize with equal ability), or there won't be enough to optimize to make the system interesting for optimization. As such, I do not recommend using optimization in D&D as anything more than a mental exercise, save for select PC groups who've made it part of their playstyle.

Honestly, having differing class power levels caters much more to a nonoptimal playstyle than an optimal one. D&D in general terms doesn't take well to optimization, it's just not the best system for it. Rebalancing it so that optimization is easily supported potentially hurts groups in which varying levels of optimization desire and skill will be present.

D&D abandoned that playstyle, that paradigm, decades ago when it stopped being a wargame and became a roleplaying game, and it's been drifting away from it more and more ever since in its' quest to be an RPG system which players can easily pick up and have fun in, even if they have zero experience in the system.

So, if you really want to play a game with balanced classes where you're encouraged to optimize, I personally recommend World of Warcraft. It's a fine game, even if druids are a bit overpowered.


-In short: D&D isn't a computer game, classes don't have to be balanced and there are benefits to not having them balanced. Those who suffer the drawbacks to those benefits may be better off playing in a different system.

Orak
2007-05-05, 12:42 PM
Druids may be a powerful class in combat but if you are playing more than a hack and slash then they lose a lot of their prestige. Figuring ways around traps will always be the forte of the rogue and occasionally arcane caster. Negotions and diplomacy are usually not a strong point of a druid; sometimes you can't win just by being the strongest.

With the recent nerfs to the druid shapechanging abilities (check the eratta on the D&D website) druids are not the monsters of melee that they once were. Also shapechanging is based on what creatures you have come into contact with. If you are playing in a city campaign and the toughest race you come across is an ogre then you won't benefit much from shapechanging.

Druids may have their strengths but they are situational, they are not all-powerful all the time.

Starbuck_II
2007-05-05, 12:51 PM
There are cursed items that change alignment, there are ways to trick the character into non-neutral behaviour (cf the symbol of insanity cast by Xykon in the lastest great OOTS strip), plus an opponent disguised as a fellow druid may trick you into teaching druid (or better, forces you with dominate person; just one word of teaching is enough to lose all class abilities).

Helm of opposite does'nt work: the opposite of NN is NN. THe opposite of NG is NE.
Yuo stay a Druid.
Confusion does'nt change alignment: or it would say so.

A word isn't the language: you have to teach enough to learn it.


Now that is a big exaggeration. A human fighter of 6th level has 8 feats that can be used for point blank shot, rapid shot, weapon focus bow, weapon specialisation bow, and then power attack, iron will, maybe magical apitude to better combat spellcasters with spellcraft and UMD (or likely better: improved initiative), and expertise.
His AC will be definitely higher than Saph's druid, and likely most druids not pumping DEX. Mithral Full Plate+1, buckler +1, DEX +3. Combined with fighting defensively and expertise, this can push his AC to 30, beyond the scope of most creatures encountered at that level to hit him with anything than a "20". At these levels, the fighter archer can be both tank and artillery as needed. The monk's belt likely will be only available several levels later, at which point the druid reaches maybe his high point among the classes with animal growth.

According to RAW: you aren't supposed to be able to buy something more than 30% of Standard wealth per level on single item.

So you aren't being fair.

If you can buy a Mithral full: he can buy a Monk's Belt (same cost almost) so looks like you are doing the Strawman or False Dilemma.




- the otherwise great summon nature's ally III takes a full round to cast. That is quite dangerous vs mobile or ranged opponents. Add the almost must-have speak with animals (otherwise you cannot direct the summoned animals), you need another round (or a quicken rod, too expensive for that level)

You need to reread the spell. It isn't nice to come unprepared to a debate.
You do'nt need spesk lanuage unless doing tasks outside of combat.

It knows who your enemies are and fights them to the best of its abilities.



- there are not so many spells learned at that level. Say, the druid has cast some buffs, used speak with animals and the summon nature's ally III and loses one spell to an enemy ranged attack in that first encounter for the day. After that, he heals his animal companion (which was in melee, so took some hits, since it has a crappy AC vs encounters tailored for 6th level pcs, not a 6HD animal). That is already around a third of the druid's spells gone for the day (and about 21 arrows of the fighter in the meantime). And the day has not even started yet (three more, possibly increasingly difficult encounters to come).

What AC ae we talking? My Riding Dog has good AC at level 6

Master, my riding dog (war trained of course with tricks)
AC: 4 na (from level) + 4 na (from being a dog) + 3 Dex + 6 mithral +1 Chain shirt (or full plate if want to not count much Dex)= AC 26 / 28 in +1 Full plate.

Hmm, so 28 AC sucks at level 6? Wow, if all your characters have 26 AC at level 6: you play a very powerful campaign.

And I still haven't bought him a ring of protection (cheap at 2k), Amulet of Na, etc

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-05, 12:56 PM
My point is, D&D, it's not an MMO. "Overpowered" is a nonapplicable concept.

Grand! I'll just introduce this new class of mine, then, shall I? It possesses Immunity to Everything and a +100 bonus to hit and damage!

Chosen
2007-05-05, 01:29 PM
I have mixed feelings on the druid being overpowerd. Without the spell compendium the druid spell list is rather limited compared to a wizard. In my opinon before level 6 druid is only a ok class but after natural spell feat is much more powerful.

Druid is differently in the big three but still behind wizard and cleric.

Indon
2007-05-05, 01:44 PM
Grand! I'll just introduce this new class of mine, then, shall I? It possesses Immunity to Everything and a +100 bonus to hit and damage!

I believe this falls under:



...or intentional game-breaking (Hey, did you know there's a new animal in MMVII that gets four full attack actions a turn? MY DRUID DOES!) by an experienced one.

Eh?

But hey, if you could go about the character concept responsibly, it might be something interesting to see.

The_Snark
2007-05-05, 02:31 PM
Just a comment on the idea of the druid's alignment/RP restrictions as a balancing factor:

This is a terrible balancing factor. There's no middle ground. Either the character has all its abilities, and is possibly more powerful than usual, or the DM rules that the character has lost all abilities, and is now useless. That sort of thing can be a great roleplaying thing—the character can either desperately try to atone, or retrain into Blighter. But as a balancing factor, it's no good, because the character goes straight from more-powerful status to basically useless. Paladins have the same problem, although they don't really get as much out of their restrictions.

It's the same with saying that the wizard's spellbook is a weakness. Great, the wizard's spellbook was destroyed. Unless the player took Spell Mastery recently, that wizard is pretty close to useless; if he never took Spell Mastery, he's basically limited to using magic items. It simply isn't a good system to have a balancing factor that can completely destroy the character.

As a contrast, there's the knight, who receives less severe penalties for breaking the code of conduct—maybe not severe enough, actually. A balance between the two would be better, because then the DM could actually invoke the penalties for breaking with the class's code of conduct without robbing the character of every ability he's ever had.

Stephen_E
2007-05-05, 05:07 PM
- Giacomo

@StephenE: I would be interested to know how an animal companion gets AC 30 for a 6th level druid. Ah, and the animal companion would meet not defensive, but offensive opposition (contrary to the summoned versions), which will more likely kill it (in particular if in melee) than any of the pcs, since it is weaker than a pc of that level. As a druid player, I would almost never risk my animal companion in combat, only in emergency situations.
EDIT: the pumped AC is there for tanking purposes, i.e. to hold off enemies while others in the group will be able to do their stuff unimpeded. So the fighter does not need to hit anything in this case, although he still could, even at -9 penalty.
EDIT2: if you teach someone, it starts with the first word you teach. Druid is a secret language, and you violate your code if you even betray ONE word of it, not after you have tought all 30,000+ obscure vocabulary and grammar. The latter version would be "DM fiat" on the lenient side and unfair to the other players without such a drawback, including other caster classes. Similarly, the druid has the problem of having to "rever" nature. If he goes mad and destroys a forest and pollutest stuff, that will be put under severe strain. And pcs DO get hit by insanities...why should it be considered more "unfair" for a druid than for a rogue? The druid before had tossed around hordes of animal growthed dire somethings at enemies while the rogue painstakingly sneaked up on the BBEG to do his xd6 extra damage. It all should balance out over time...the atonement spell is around in core rules for a reason, you know...but as I said above, I would also as a DM try to houserule it with another weakness (or lessened class abilities) to balance it before play.
The sorcerer is widely considered here as the weakest of the full caster classes. And he is the only one without an "ex-section" or dependency on an item (spellbook). A coincidence? Likely not.

AC30: Dire Bat Animal Companion, with the Natural Bond feat to pay the lev adj for his bonuses.
Base 10, -1 size, +5 NAC, +4 NAC (lev bonuses), +3 NAC (Barkskin), +7 Dex (+6 natural, +1 from companion boosts, damn it's a shame that animals only have low dex), +2 (+1 Magical Padded Armour).
AC30.
Note that was the el cheepo version.
If I cough up the 5000+gp for +1 Mithral chainshirt barding, the Dex goes down by 1, and the total AC goes to AC32, AC33 if I toss a ring of protection in.

Now if we look at the NPC Fighter, DMG, he has +10 to hit. Your fighters put all his cash into armour, so he's not going to be doing any better. Which of us is going to be relying on 20's to hit?

Edit 1) This 6th level Fighter with no magic weapon (no cash left) isn't hitting squat at -9. The NPC Fighter with is +10 att is probably a reasonable comparison here. So your Fighter is down to +1 to hit. The summoned animals are looking at 15+ AC's. That leaves your Fighter needing a 14+ on the easy stuff, and 20's for the tough stuff.

Edit 2) Bull. I know one word of Latvian (a swear word). I was not "taught" Latvian. To be taught a language you must be taught the modest vocabulary and basic syntax. Until then you haven't been taught the language.

Burning down a forest is a natural activity revering nature (forest fires are natural). Polluting forests would indeed show a lack of reverence for nature. I've never seen a Druid even contemplate such an activity.

I didn't say a Druid couldn't go insane, just that with his will saves it's a lot less likely to happen, and even if it does it won't change is alignment.

As for your comments regarding how it's only fair that Druids should be balanced with Rogues, and that you'd house rule further restricyions for the Druid. I thought you were saying that Druids WERE balanced. If you're saying that Druids need to be disadvataged to be fair I can't see what we're arguing about.

Stephen

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-05, 05:51 PM
Helm of opposite does'nt work: the opposite of NN is NN. THe opposite of NG is NE.
Yuo stay a Druid.
Confusion does'nt change alignment: or it would say so.

Yep, you are correct with the helmet thing, although the opposite of true neutrality should be everything completely non-neutral.
The alignment is not the big issue for druids, it is the things they do while mad to nature which they are sworn to revere. The atonement spell specifically outlines that it is there for true repentance and/or something the divine caster did but which he was not ultimately responsful for.


A word isn't the language: you have to teach enough to learn it.

What is "teaching" to you? I am not a native speaker, but the moment someone starts to teach me, say "building nuclear weapons", that person starts to transgress the law, not at the point where I actually start to build the weapons. But as I admitted, the whole ex-section thing is tricky and should be houseruled otherwise.


According to RAW: you aren't supposed to be able to buy something more than 30% of Standard wealth per level on single item.
So you aren't being fair.
If you can buy a Mithral full: he can buy a Monk's Belt (same cost almost) so looks like you are doing the Strawman or False Dilemma.

Well, the monk's belt is just barely inside the wealth limit (allowing no other equipment for the druid), while a mitrhal full plate, if IÄm correct, costs less at 11,500. But I corrected my error above.


You need to reread the spell. It isn't nice to come unprepared to a debate.

Please do not do that. I read the spell, and you as well, but you apparently did not see the problems that I did. You apparently also erred on the detail of the monk's belt price, and this is a gaming discussion, so it's all for the fun :smallsmile:


You do'nt need spesk lanuage unless doing tasks outside of combat.
It knows who your enemies are and fights them to the best of its abilities.

But the animal will not be able to react to certain things like "do not avoid that wall, it is just an illusion" or "run after that guy, he is trying to trigger the mechanism". etc. It is just an animal, after all.


What AC ae we talking? My Riding Dog has good AC at level 6
Master, my riding dog (war trained of course with tricks)
AC: 4 na (from level) + 4 na (from being a dog) + 3 Dex + 6 mithral +1 Chain shirt (or full plate if want to not count much Dex)= AC 26 / 28 in +1 Full plate.
Hmm, so 28 AC sucks at level 6? Wow, if all your characters have 26 AC at level 6: you play a very powerful campaign.
And I still haven't bought him a ring of protection (cheap at 2k), Amulet of Na, etc

First of all, the riding dog thing immediately made me remember the hilarious statement of Belkar when he saw the paladin's mount of hinjo: "What? He gets to unleash the fury and I get a freakin' Wiener dog?":smallsmile:
Now that is really quite an exotic idea, but...you are not really suggesting pouring all your druid's wealth to improve the AC of your animal companion just to show that it can just barely compete with the fighter in that area? In particular since it is still weaker (your dog only has one! attack of +7, with a measly 1d6+4 damage ), can thus get killed more easily (especially if wasted as a constant melee attacker) and all the dog's armour is useless for the group? What about your druid character? Should the druid cast spells with an AC way below the 20s? Should he not get different items that protect him, say, his weak Reflex saves? (tanglefoot bags, here they come...:smallbiggrin: ).
No.
Saph's idea to keep the dog at here side until she can be sure that she is safe from imminent attacks is the wisest route for the animal companion at those levels.
You play in a very caster-friendly campaign, it seems....

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-05, 06:21 PM
Oh, simultaneous post, but should be answered directly...


AC30: Dire Bat Animal Companion, with the Natural Bond feat to pay the lev adj for his bonuses.
Base 10, -1 size, +5 NAC, +4 NAC (lev bonuses), +3 NAC (Barkskin), +7 Dex (+6 natural, +1 from companion boosts, damn it's a shame that animals only have low dex), +2 (+1 Magical Padded Armour).
AC30.
Note that was the el cheepo version.

Note that was the el non-core version :smallsmile: (I vaguely remember the natural bond feat as part of the complete adventurer book), and the OP and Saph gave examples of core play. If we allow non-core, comparisons get nigh impossible.
Barkskin at that level lasts only 1 hour (plus, one more spell gone for the day, although it is wise choice to cast). The fighter's armour and expertise feat last longer (as in: permanent).


If I cough up the 5000+gp for +1 Mithral chainshirt barding, the Dex goes down by 1, and the total AC goes to AC32, AC33 if I toss a ring of protection in.

And this is following down the same dead end I outlined in my longer post above. An animal Companion remains weaker than any pc, gets hit more often and dies if you use it in combat, then what use is having spent half of your wealth on a dire bat mithral armour (could be more, do not know the mithral modifier for bardings for large creatures).


Now if we look at the NPC Fighter, DMG, he has +10 to hit. Your fighters put all his cash into armour, so he's not going to be doing any better. Which of us is going to be relying on 20's to hit?

Er...even your non-core dire bat animal companion will have trouble hitting a 6th level npc fighter (AC 22) who has the expertise, dodge feats and fights defensively (AC goes to 30, vs the bat's attack bonus of +10...). So both still need "20" to hit. Meanwhile, an npc opponent cleric of third level could cast silence on the fighter, making the poor bat lose as the fighter practically is invisible against it.
Animals are powerful in outright combat, but beyond, they are quite vulnerable.


Edit 1) This 6th level Fighter with no magic weapon (no cash left) isn't hitting squat at -9. The NPC Fighter with is +10 att is probably a reasonable comparison here. So your Fighter is down to +1 to hit. The summoned animals are looking at 15+ AC's. That leaves your Fighter needing a 14+ on the easy stuff, and 20's for the tough stuff.

The example fighter would push his AC to 28 (revision from the full plate thing, could get more with dodge feat or another magic item) in emergency or if tactics demand it. Otherwise, he will have with his masterwork bow or +1 bow an attack bonus of +10/+10/+5 in point blank range. The animal companions do not have these tactical options.


Edit 2) Bull. I know one word of Latvian (a swear word). I was not "taught" Latvian. To be taught a language you must be taught the modest vocabulary and basic syntax. Until then you haven't been taught the language.

If the person who taught you that word were sworn never to teach his language to anyone else, he would incur the penalty. But let us drop this language discussion- there are obviously non-reconcilable interpretations here.


Burning down a forest is a natural activity revering nature (forest fires are natural). Polluting forests would indeed show a lack of reverence for nature. I've never seen a Druid even contemplate such an activity.

Burning down a forest in madness, not because of a natural fire (after period of dryness etc.) or lightning from a thunderstorm, is unnatural in my eyes. Polluting as well.


I didn't say a Druid couldn't go insane, just that with his will saves it's a lot less likely to happen, and even if it does it won't change is alignment.

No alignment change needed. The only thing he needs to do is cease to rever nature, which he does.


As for your comments regarding how it's only fair that Druids should be balanced with Rogues, and that you'd house rule further restricyions for the Druid. I thought you were saying that Druids WERE balanced. If you're saying that Druids need to be disadvataged to be fair I can't see what we're arguing about.

Oh, I DID say they are balanced including the ex-section rules. But since that is awkward to play, I proposed to houserule it differently: get rid of the ex-section rules, and simply REPLACE that disadvantage with a lesser, more constant one, like reducint HD to 1d6 and/or restraining wildshape.

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-05, 06:39 PM
Yep, you are correct with the helmet thing, although the opposite of true neutrality should be everything completely non-neutral.


Just checked again on the DMG on p.275; from the way it is worded, the helm changes all neutral alignments to some extreme alignemnt. So no neutral advantage here.
However, to put it into perspective: why would a druid put on a helm? He could get tricked into it, but even then his will save is quite OK - for the 6th level druid still quite dangerous.

Anyhow, I continue to suggest leaving out the ex-sections since it creates so much controversy and replace it with something else.

- Giacomo

Fax Celestis
2007-05-05, 07:28 PM
Here's why the druid is overpowered:
He is more versatile than the bard (being able to party-face, speak with a variety of NPCs, wildshape into scout-type forms, A Thousand Faces).\
He is a better combattant than the fighter (wildshape, self-buffs, party buffs, healing)
He is better at stealth than the rogue (wildshape into a tiny form, various hide boosts, buffs)
He is capable of healing, albeit not as well as the cleric, bard, or favored soul
He has some of the best direct damage and battlefield control spells in the game, and with the expenditure of a single feat, can cast any spell he knows without issue while wildshaped.

Stephen_E
2007-05-05, 09:29 PM
I dropped the Alignment/falling from grace stuff. As you say, this gets very much into campaign style and it so all or nothing that it isn't particuly practical. Well, I will make one comment. I've seen Paladins and Monks get warned on behvaiour, regarding falling from grace, but I've never seen a Druid get close to be warned.

Also True Neutral has one of the 4 extreme alignments as its opposite.
So opposites are -
LG - CE
CG - LE
NG - NE
CN - LN
N - LG/CG/LE/CE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_E http://www.giantitp.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2540057#post2540057)
AC30: Dire Bat Animal Companion, with the Natural Bond feat to pay the lev adj for his bonuses.
Base 10, -1 size, +5 NAC, +4 NAC (lev bonuses), +3 NAC (Barkskin), +7 Dex (+6 natural, +1 from companion boosts, damn it's a shame that animals only have low dex), +2 (+1 Magical Padded Armour).
AC30.
Note that was the el cheepo version.



Note that was the el non-core version :smallsmile: (I vaguely remember the natural bond feat as part of the complete adventurer book), and the OP and Saph gave examples of core play. If we allow non-core, comparisons get nigh impossible.
Barkskin at that level lasts only 1 hour (plus, one more spell gone for the day, although it is wise choice to cast). The fighter's armour and expertise feat last longer (as in: permanent).

I didn't realise you were restricting to core only. In that case the Fighter just got weaker in the long run. Losing Natural Bond loses 2HD, 2NAC, 1 Dex/Str.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_E http://www.giantitp.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2540057#post2540057)
If I cough up the 5000+gp for +1 Mithral chainshirt barding, the Dex goes down by 1, and the total AC goes to AC32, AC33 if I toss a ring of protection in.




And this is following down the same dead end I outlined in my longer post above. An animal Companion remains weaker than any pc, gets hit more often and dies if you use it in combat, then what use is having spent half of your wealth on a dire bat mithral armour (could be more, do not know the mithral modifier for bardings for large creatures).

And your statement here is simply untrue. An Animal Companion isn't weaker than a PC until you get to high levels. I spend approx 6000gp and the Dire Bat still has an AC of 31, and can FLY. Does not get hit more often, doesn't die if I use it in combat, and is relatively easy in most campaigns to replace if it does die and you don't Raise Dead/Reincarnate it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_E http://www.giantitp.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2540057#post2540057)
Now if we look at the NPC Fighter, DMG, he has +10 to hit. Your fighters put all his cash into armour, so he's not going to be doing any better. Which of us is going to be relying on 20's to hit?



Er...even your non-core dire bat animal companion will have trouble hitting a 6th level npc fighter (AC 22) who has the expertise, dodge feats and fights defensively (AC goes to 30, vs the bat's attack bonus of +10...). So both still need "20" to hit. Meanwhile, an npc opponent cleric of third level could cast silence on the fighter, making the poor bat lose as the fighter practically is invisible against it.
Animals are powerful in outright combat, but beyond, they are quite vulnerable.

My non-core Dire Bat has a +13 to hit, assuming I don't Bulls Strength it.
+8 BAB, +5 Str (17 str base, +2 Str Comp bonuses, +1 Str from +4 HD). +15 for the initial Charge. So I need a 15 to hit on the charge on the 1st round, and 17 on subsequent rounds. The Fighter gets two attacks, but needs 20s on both. I know which way this is likely to go, not even counting that the Dire Bat can withdraw and the Fighter can't. I love Fly. He also has an unused feat. Silence would have no effect unless the Fighter was also invisible. Bats have perfectly good eyesight. Blindsense is in addition to its normal vision.

As for versatility, I mention Fly again, as well as Blindsense, and we stll have the Druid, who's far more versatile than the Fighter (although as I mentioned there is certain stuff a Fighter can do better in the way of battlefield control)



The example fighter would push his AC to 28 (revision from the full plate thing, could get more with dodge feat or another magic item) in emergency or if tactics demand it. Otherwise, he will have with his masterwork bow or +1 bow an attack bonus of +10/+10/+5 in point blank range. The animal companions do not have these tactical options.

How is the Fighter get 3 Bow attacks? Even if he takes Rapid shot (and I hope you're keeping track of the feats he's using) that a -2 to all attacks, so that would be +8/+8/+3 against AC 30.
My Dire Bat can Hover above the Fighter, getting AoO everytime he fires his bow. He can also do Flyby Attacks against the Sword weilding Fighter, which means the Fighter only gets a singkle attack, needing a 20, and the Direbat gets the charge each time, needing a 15.
The Dire Wolf has a Trip the Fighter would die for.
The Bear/Large Cat has Improved Grab.
All options the Fighter doesn't have, or isn't as good at even if he takes the feat build.

And all this ignores the Druid going in with his Flame Blade and slicing the Fighter up (possibly sharing that Barkskin spell). Also note that single attack animals get a 2nd attack from Multi Attack. Yes you can bleed theDruid out of spells, but you can equally bleed the Fighter out of hps, and it's generally easier. And if we go non-core and allow the vigor spells from Comp Divine/Spell Comp, the Druid is actually the best healer out there.

Stephen

Ulzgoroth
2007-05-05, 09:42 PM
My Dire Bat can Hover above the Fighter, getting AoO everytime he fires his bow. He can also do Flyby Attacks against the Sword weilding Fighter, which means the Fighter only gets a singkle attack, needing a 20, and the Direbat gets the charge each time, needing a 15.
Flyby attack doesn't help with charging. A charge is a very specific action, and the only time I know of that it doesn't end next to the target is with Ride-by Attack.

And if we go non-core and allow the vigor spells from Comp Divine/Spell Comp, the Druid is actually the best healer out there.
All the Vigor spells in CDiv are also on the cleric list. Not seeing how they're better for the druid than the cleric.

Roderick_BR
2007-05-05, 09:52 PM
I'd argue a fireball-obsessed Evoker/Red Wizard who bans Abjuration, Conjuration and Transmutation would be equal or inferior to a Leap Attack Barbarian. It doesn't stretch believability too far either, although it is pushing it.
I did one of those once, just for fun. He owned everything in that game. Even the NPC barbarian with outrageous magic itens and ability scores and carefully selected feats didn't beat my wizard.

PinkysBrain
2007-05-05, 09:53 PM
Red Wizard is broken, get a couple of simulacrums ... use circle magic, win.

Thunder_Ranger
2007-05-05, 10:07 PM
I'd have to agree with whomever said that druids are only perceived as overpowered because they are really easy to optimize quickly and efficiently. Which coincidentally, is why they are so ruttin' fun to play.:smallbiggrin:

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-06, 05:57 AM
All right, I do see the powers of the druid. But why do you keep ignoring the disadvantages?

I guess the following sentences say it all:


...Well, I will make one comment. I've seen Paladins and Monks get warned on behvaiour, regarding falling from grace, but I've never seen a Druid get close to be warned.


That is the problem. You have never seen it. I admit, neither have I in my campaigns (both as DM and player) done enough to challenge the spellcasters as intended by the rules. And that is at the heart of the problem. The druid can do so much stuff because it is all at a much higher risk than, say, a fighters' sword and expertise feat.

And it is this risk which most DMs simply choose to ignore, because maybe they
1) do not wish to "nerf" the player and make him sad (whose character is thus stealing the fun for everyone else, see the OP) and
2) because it is very difficult. (quote from the DMG on balance, last sentence p. 13: "Nobody said DMing was easy"). And DMs have loads of other stuff to worry about. But sadly (as I can see from many posts here), that creates a lot of problems and a sense of "overpowered" classes.

One problem in particular with 1) is that caster players in this way get pampered. Not succeeding at using your class ability (spells) because an enemy made you fizzle your spell, because you could not regain them because you were interrupted in your ONE HOUR (!) prayer to regain them, because it was dispelled before it could do stuff?
Come on! This is what happens ALL the time with the stuff the non-caster classes do. Only, fighter players never feel "nerfed" if they do not hit someone with their nice tripping technique, or great rapid shot (windwall, cover whatever) or if they simply get grappled by a dire bat.

This is what is needed to keep the game full of suspense and fun for everyone.

- Giacomo

PinkysBrain
2007-05-06, 06:01 AM
The actions they can take which unbalance them are not actions which will make them loose their druid abilities, as such the fact that they can lose them is not a balancing factor. Hoop jumping no matter how annoying you make it never balances anything, in this case the hoops are pretty easy to jump through as well.

Purely binary aweseome/useless distinctions also do not present a challenge for casters. If you make them useless for a day they will not feel challenged, they will simply feel annoyed. They will stand in the back and fire some arrows all day ... and next day they will get back to owning. This is rather similar to the "wizards suck at low level so they should be allowed to own everything at high level" argument. Such binary distinctions separated in time can not balance a class.

Starbuck_II
2007-05-06, 01:10 PM
First of all, the riding dog thing immediately made me remember the hilarious statement of Belkar when he saw the paladin's mount of hinjo: "What? He gets to unleash the fury and I get a freakin' Wiener dog?":smallsmile:
Now that is really quite an exotic idea, but...you are not really suggesting pouring all your druid's wealth to improve the AC of your animal companion just to show that it can just barely compete with the fighter in that area? In particular since it is still weaker (your dog only has one! attack of +7, with a measly 1d6+4 damage ), can thus get killed more easily (especially if wasted as a constant melee attacker) and all the dog's armour is useless for the group? What about your druid character? Should the druid cast spells with an AC way below the 20s? Should he not get different items that protect him, say, his weak Reflex saves? (tanglefoot bags, here they come...:smallbiggrin: ).
No.
Saph's idea to keep the dog at here side until she can be sure that she is safe from imminent attacks is the wisest route for the animal companion at those levels.
You play in a very caster-friendly campaign, it seems....

- Giacomo
Str: 15 + 2 (level) + 1 (1 point/4 levels)=18 Str
+4 Bab + 4 (Str)=+8 +1 (we can assume magic Fang, Greater since 1hr/level).

Total: Damage Bite +9 [1d6 + 1 (G. MF) + 6 (1.5 Str)=Average damage 10.5].

In damage: the Dog falls short true. But hey, it is just one class feature: I still have the other spells.
And the Dog won't get killed easily. You only need AC 15 + 1.5 Level= 24 at level 6.

What kind of game are you playing that 30 is absolutely neccessary?

Arbitrarity
2007-05-06, 01:18 PM
"I have class features more powerful than your entire class!"

Stephen_E
2007-05-06, 06:08 PM
All right, I do see the powers of the druid. But why do you keep ignoring the disadvantages?

I guess the following sentences say it all:

Quote:Originally Posted by Stephen_E
...Well, I will make one comment. I've seen Paladins and Monks get warned on behvaiour, regarding falling from grace, but I've never seen a Druid get close to be warned.


That is the problem. You have never seen it. I admit, neither have I in my campaigns (both as DM and player) done enough to challenge the spellcasters as intended by the rules. And that is at the heart of the problem. The druid can do so much stuff because it is all at a much higher risk than, say, a fighters' sword and expertise feat.


You completly missed my point. The reason you don't see Druids warned of becoming Ex-Druids because of falling from grace, is that it's so damn easy to meet those requirements. For a Druid to come close to falling from grace pretty much requires either deliberate intent on the part ofn the Player or the GM to create the situation. You may say that the GM should be making the player jump through ridiculous hoops to restrain their character, but that's not a game I want to play in. It's like the GM who tries to make the Paladin fall by railroading the Paladin into unpleasant situations and then saying they're damned if they do, damned if they don't.

As for interupting spellcaster prep so they don't get their spells, aside from other comments people have made, the genereal responce I see in parties when this happens is this. - "OK. I guess we camp for another day until our casters get their spells". The Fighters don't want to go out without magical support. No healing! No buffs! Sod that. So all you're doing is slowing down the game, and that's ignoring that it is relatively difficult to stop a Druid or Cleric getting their spells. Sure they have a chosen hour to pray/meditate, but this only requires relative peace, and if it is interrupted that doesn't mean they don't get their spells for the day, it menas they must do it as soon as possible. (PHB pg179). What are you going to do, attack them with enough force that the caster HAS to get involved, every hour, before the caster gets their hour of rest? Why don't you just drop a asteroid on the party, it makes as much sense.

Stephen

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-06, 06:15 PM
Hi again,

making fighters and rogues miss their opponents (say, because they have high ACs, know good tactics) also "slows down" the game, since it will take them longer to solve the adventure. What is the difference?

And my question remains: WHY, oh WHY do you keep stating "druids are overpowered" while refusing to see their weaknesses ("slowing down the game"). I agree with you that that is not what I would want to play, either. But those are the drawbacks envisionened by the rules. You cannot just ignore them and then deplore the "overpowerdness" of the caster classes like the druid.

If we do not like these kind of drawbacks, we'll have to houserule different disadvantages of the caster classes which will prevent them from stealing the spotlight from the noncasters.

- Giacomo

MeklorIlavator
2007-05-06, 06:44 PM
Hi again,

making fighters and rogues miss their opponents (say, because they have high ACs, know good tactics) also "slows down" the game, since it will take them longer to solve the adventure. What is the difference?

The difference between the 2 situations is that in the first, the players are having fun and don't feel that the DM is cheating them or being unfair to the party. In the second situation, however, the party does feel that they are being cheated, and they aren't having fun, because you are railroading them, specifically, forcing them to do without their casters. And that really screws the party up, after all, you yourself have admitted that the noncasters need the casters for buffs.



And my question remains: WHY, oh WHY do you keep stating "druids are overpowered" while refusing to see their weaknesses ("slowing down the game"). I agree with you that that is not what I would want to play, either. But those are the drawbacks envisionened by the rules. You cannot just ignore them and then deplore the "overpowerdness" of the caster classes like the druid.


Because the only methods that apply to them are either to lax to be of use(alignment restictions that can't really be applied) or are detrimental to the whole party. It doesn't help make the non-casters be more effective by comparison if they suffer just as much(if not more) when the DM has to make nightime encounters to weaken the casters. The noncasters use up HP during these encounters, also, and by making it hard for the casters to regain spells, you make it hard for the noncasters to recover HP or gain buffs that would help them. When the only way to balance a class within the game is to hurt the entire party, that class doesn't have a good balancing system.

Starsinger
2007-05-06, 07:21 PM
If we're going over the top, you could curse the druid so that every morning he wakes up in metal armor... however this is just ridiculous and vindictive.

And I suppose you could try and make them grossly violate their alignment to remove the neutral part of it, but it seems to me, that it's harder to violate neutral, as it allows more lee-way than an extreme alignment. Besides, what's to stop Druid from getting a phylactery of faithfulness? Y'know that cheesy meta-game item that players get so DMs don't screw with paladins.

If you want a druid to not be a giant monster destroying Tokyo, then ask him. Unless he picked druid specifically to be a super monster, he'll probably tone down.

Not that it's on point, the point is... Druids are amazing. Their supposed weaknesses are all easily overcome. The only real way to weaken one is to go out of your way to do so as the DM. Personally, if a DM ever went out of his way to do something like that to me, I would be pissed. If my character is over powering and/or stealing the spotlight from the rest of the party, I'd much rather handle it out of game than in-game. But maybe that's just me.

Shinkoro
2007-05-06, 07:53 PM
I have been following this thread. I'm not a expert or anything. But it seems to me in the fighter vs. druid debate that many assume a fighter would let a druid have a few rounds to buff up or that a druid has various summons up and companions buffed when the fight would start.


One of the strengths of the fighter based classes is that they are ready to go on the spot. No buffs, no summons and since I play them almost exclusively I would never let a druid get that far along casting and buffing. I won't bother with a pet unless one grapples me. And, I would go at the druid ASAP. I get a Attack of Opportunity everytime he cast unless he has invested in various feats.


I play in a low magic game. Not sure about most here but in my DM's game you can't buy magic items after starting. I have a +15 to hit using a 8th level melee based character without a magical weapon +8 Level +4 str +1 focus +2 Mastery. My average damage is 15, thats a DC 25 concentration check for a druid of say 8th level +11 ranks in Concentration, maybe 2 from con. Anyone who wastes a feat for Combat Casting unless they are close to epic levels is crazy. So a druid has less then 50% chance to even pull off his spell in close combat, 1d20+13 vs DC 25.


I'm not saying a fighter can take a well played druid. A druid can pull alot of various factors from his bag of tricks such as quick wild shaped flying and whatnot. But barring these kinds of things with require certain feats. I will hard press a druid who will stand right in front of me for even 2 rounds trying to cast buffs, summons and other casting.

PinkysBrain
2007-05-06, 08:10 PM
The lack of magic item gimps the fighter actually ...

Lets say your opponent has 23 AC (high range for CR8 opponents). You will do (0.65 + 0.4) * 15 = 15.75 damage on an average full attack.

Meanwhile the druid in his dire ape form and prebuffed (long duration) with GMF on his claws will do 2 * 0.55 * 11.5 + 0.2 * 7.5 + 0.55 * 0.55 * 16 = 18.99.

purple gelatinous cube o' Doom
2007-05-06, 08:46 PM
personally, I think the 3.5 druid is pretty well balanced (Druids are my favorite casting class to play). Now the 3.0 druid on the other hand...I was in a game as a druid at 7th level that had a dire tiger for my animal companion. Now THAT'S overpowered.

Marius
2007-05-07, 06:59 AM
One of the strengths of the fighter based classes is that they are ready to go on the spot. No buffs, no summons and since I play them almost exclusively I would never let a druid get that far along casting and buffing. I won't bother with a pet unless one grapples me. And, I would go at the druid ASAP. I get a Attack of Opportunity everytime he cast unless he has invested in various feats.

He doesn't have to invest in feats to cast without provoking attacks of opportunity, all he has to do is take a 5 foot step back or max concentration to cast defensively. Or take an invisibility potion and then buff or summon all he wants.



I play in a low magic game. Not sure about most here but in my DM's game you can't buy magic items after starting. I have a +15 to hit using a 8th level melee based character without a magical weapon +8 Level +4 str +1 focus +2 Mastery. My average damage is 15, thats a DC 25 concentration check for a druid of say 8th level +11 ranks in Concentration, maybe 2 from con. Anyone who wastes a feat for Combat Casting unless they are close to epic levels is crazy. So a druid has less then 50% chance to even pull off his spell in close combat, 1d20+13 vs DC 25.

Low magic games actually favor casters, you really need a caster when you don't have items to heal or buff you.



I'm not saying a fighter can take a well played druid. A druid can pull alot of various factors from his bag of tricks such as quick wild shaped flying and whatnot. But barring these kinds of things with require certain feats.

What feats?

Shinkoro
2007-05-07, 09:59 AM
A fighter can take a 5 foot step too. If potions of invisibility are readily available in a game I would imagine see invis items/ potions are too.

Fighters I have played and seen played in low magic games usually have a AC advantage due to heavy plate and tower shields being common, but rings of protection, dragon armor, bracers of armor and such not being.

Fast Wild Shape and Eagles Wings and the one where you can cast in wild shape come to mind off the top of my head. I Can't recall name of that last one.

Little_Rudo
2007-05-07, 10:05 AM
If potions of invisibility are readily available in a game I would imagine see invis items/ potions are too.

I now have a mental image of the fighters in these games wearing one of those beer hats with the straws, and constantly drinking these potions. (Which, I might add, are surprisingly common in a low magic game. :smallconfused: )

UserClone
2007-05-07, 10:16 AM
Natural Spell.
But More Importantly, your fighter's 5-foot step in this case doesn't give him the ability to make AoO against someone who free-steps out of his reach. and honestly, how many fighters invest in potions of see invis when they will more likely need cure moderate/critical wounds?
The whole point is, fighters eventually run out of feats that matter, but casters who gain the next tier of spells, especially those who gain access to their whole lists at once (CoDzilla, here's looking at you) Always improve. How about an oil of mage armor or a potion of shield of faith?
cripes with a frikkin shillelagh, the druid would have a better weapon than you, if yours is nonmagical, even if it's a Greatsword! To say that at high levels fighter=druid is IMO laughable. even to say that Wiz=Druid at that point is stretching it. Though Tenser's Transformation/Enlarge cast upon your familiar is pretty funny.

PinkysBrain
2007-05-07, 10:33 AM
If potions of invisibility are readily available in a game I would imagine see invis items/ potions are too.
You'd imagine so, but you would be wrong ... there is no such thing as a potion of see invisibility.

Marius
2007-05-07, 10:40 AM
A fighter can take a 5 foot step too. If potions of invisibility are readily available in a game I would imagine see invis items/ potions are too.

But it doesn't matter if the fighter can take a 5 foot tep, he can't make an AoO against the caster.



Fighters I have played and seen played in low magic games usually have a AC advantage due to heavy plate and tower shields being common, but rings of protection, dragon armor, bracers of armor and such not being.

Dragon armor is not magical. And even if it's a low magic campaign a caster can take item creation feats and make his own items.



Fast Wild Shape and Eagles Wings and the one where you can cast in wild shape come to mind off the top of my head. I Can't recall name of that last one.

Natural Spell is a must. You don't need the other feats if you have already access to non-core stuff. There're a lot of animals that already have flight.

Tor the Fallen
2007-05-07, 10:57 AM
Everyone justifies it on wizards being weak-chested bookworms (intellectual bookworms that oddly only get 2 skill points per level? yeah right) And why? "Because they're full casters!" whines the anti-wizard faction. "They need to be incompetent at everything else because OMG they CAN CAST SPELLS!"

When was the last time you played or saw someone play a wizard with less than 15 intelligence?
Wizards get at least 4 skill points/level. Most go for the 18 int and have 6/level. If you don't mind cheesing it up, got for a middle aged gray elf, and get 8/level.

Wizard spells tend to be better than druid spells.

Anyway, here's why the druid is overpowered:


Here's why the druid is overpowered:
He is more versatile than the bard (being able to party-face, speak with a variety of NPCs, wildshape into scout-type forms, A Thousand Faces).\
He is a better combattant than the fighter (wildshape, self-buffs, party buffs, healing)
He is better at stealth than the rogue (wildshape into a tiny form, various hide boosts, buffs)
He is capable of healing, albeit not as well as the cleric, bard, or favored soul
He has some of the best direct damage and battlefield control spells in the game, and with the expenditure of a single feat, can cast any spell he knows without issue while wildshaped.

Saph
2007-05-08, 06:09 AM
Fax's post covers it pretty well.

I've been away for a few days, so some responses:

"Fighter vs. druid" is silly. D&D is a team game, not a player-killing contest. Of course the druid is more likely to win, but that doesn't matter: your characters generally fight together in a party, not against each other. The problem is that a druid can do so much more than a fighter can.

Most of the 'weaknesses' of the druid that I've seen listed here really don't amount to much. For example, I very rarely get my spells interrupted while casting summoning spells. For that to happen, we have to be fighting an intelligent opponent, he has to see me casting and target me, then he has to get past all the other characters and my animal companion to reach me, then he has to hit me, then I have to fail my Concentration check. How often's that going to happen? I think I've lost one or two summon spells over the campaign, but that's all.

The alignment and RP restrictions don't weaken a druid at all. You have to revere nature and stay at least partly neutral. That's really not very difficult; it's less restrictive than a cleric's code and way less restrictive than a paladin's. A DM has to go out of her way to make it hard for a druid to keep to his code.

As for combat ability; yes, a fighter is as powerful as a druid in 1-one-1 combat at mid levels with the right items, but that's missing the point. The druid will have items as well, and an animal companion, and buffs or summons or whatever he's using his spells for. So the fighter needs to gear up and the druid has to drop his equipment and forget about two-thirds of his class features just to get on an even level!

At the moment I'm 6th-level. The gap is going to widen steadily as the party level increases further. At 7th-level I get access to fourth-level spells ; that means I can summon tigers and brown bears, which are ridiculously powerful with Augment Summoning. At 8th-level I'll get to turn into those creatures myself. At 9th-level I'll get a new set of lethal creatures to summon, along with even more powerful spells. What's the fighter going to get in those three levels by comparison? One extra feat.

Again, this doesn't have to spoil the game. The WLD campaign we're playing in is very dangerous, we've all been having fun, and I use my abilities to help the rest of the party, so no-one minds that much that I'm a fair bit stronger than the other characters. But druids are overpowered, and I don't think there's much argument to be made about that.

- Saph

Latronis
2007-05-08, 07:18 AM
At the moment I'm 6th-level. The gap is going to widen steadily as the party level increases further. At 7th-level I get access to fourth-level spells ; that means I can summon tigers and brown bears, which are ridiculously powerful with Augment Summoning. At 8th-level I'll get to turn into those creatures myself. At 9th-level I'll get a new set of lethal creatures to summon, along with even more powerful spells. What's the fighter going to get in those three levels by comparison? One extra feat.



Greenbound summoning makes them even worse, and the only prereq is the ability to cast any summon natures ally spell. Even at lv1 summon a wolf and it will beat a lv1 fighter type.

When i hit lv 13 and could get a dire tiger that can charge undetected and with a 37 for strength it was time to start focusing on healing

Marius
2007-05-08, 07:44 AM
Greenbound summoning makes them even worse, and the only prereq is the ability to cast any summon natures ally spell. Even at lv1 summon a wolf and it will beat a lv1 fighter type.

When i hit lv 13 and could get a dire tiger that can charge undetected and with a 37 for strength it was time to start focusing on healing

That feat is so broken it hurts! The Greenbound template gives +8 level adj

Tobrian
2007-05-08, 12:19 PM
When was the last time you played or saw someone play a wizard with less than 15 intelligence?

I've played a wizard who started out with INT 14 for 5 years. You were saying?


Wizards get at least 4 skill points/level. Most go for the 18 int and have 6/level. If you don't mind cheesing it up, got for a middle aged gray elf, and get 8/level.

Bull****. Attribute bonuses are variables. Variables should never be considered when comparing classes with each other. I hate it when game designers or players blithely assume that every character starts out with an 18 in its main attribute. And even if your hypothetical über-wizard starts with INT 18, he gets only gets 6 skill points for level (7 if he's a human), which is the BASE points for a bard. All other classes that have a large skill selection receive lots of skill points... except the wizard. And yes, the wizard does have a large skill selection; most people merely don't notice, because the various knowledge skills are not listed separately.

If we downsize classes and penalize characters for having a main attribute relevant to stat X, by that same logic why not cut down the fighter's and barbarian's melee BAB while we're about it? Surely they all have high STR anyway already. And the cleric doesn't need a good Willpower save, because every cleric has a high WIS, neither does the rogue need a good Reflex save! Fair is fair. :smallmad:

I also have a special dislike for people who select to play some weird rare race merely because it given them a stat bonus for optimum potential for their minmaxed class combo. Meh.

Latronis
2007-05-08, 01:00 PM
That feat is so broken it hurts! The Greenbound template gives +8 level adj

Especially when compared to augment summoning, which requires a mostly pointless spell focus: conjuration as a prereq.

In my experience its rare the +2CR is accurate for the finished product too.

Orzel
2007-05-08, 05:30 PM
Druids are very powerful and can be overpowered (assume too many party roles) when played by a semi-experienced player.

That scouting better than rogue this is wrong though. Druids don't get Move Silently as a class skill and Tiny size grants no Move Silently bonus. Tiny only gives you +8 at 11th level which almost every good rouge/scout/monk/ranger has or better. A druid is hard to spot but people can pull a #24 on you.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-08, 05:35 PM
That scouting better than rogue this is wrong though. Druids don't get Move Silently as a class skill and Tiny size grants no Move Silently bonus. Tiny only gives you +8 at 11th level which almost every good rouge/scout/monk/ranger has or better. A druid is hard to spot but people can pull a #24 on you.

Druids can scout better than rogues (and scouts, for that matter): Wildshape into a cat, possum, fox, raccoon, or similar Tiny animal. Who cares if they notice you? You're an animal.

Orzel
2007-05-08, 06:01 PM
Druids can scout better than rogues (and scouts, for that matter): Wildshape into a cat, possum, fox, raccoon, or similar Tiny animal. Who cares if they notice you? You're an animal.

Monsters eat animals.

Accersitus
2007-05-08, 06:07 PM
IMO Druids are a bit overpowered lvl5 - lvl10, when the summons are quite nice compared to spell lvl. These summons give the DM quite a hard time, since even though theit HP and AC are low, he knows they will disappear in a few rounds. This can have two effects: either the party looses some HP and need to heal up after a short encounter. (since the summons deal quite some dmg), or the fight is a bit longer, but with less attacks on the players since the monsters are focusiong on summons.

Caelestion
2007-05-08, 06:19 PM
A simple change would be to make Wild Spell a metamagic feat (+1 level). That would certainly make druids think twice about using it endlessly.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-08, 06:45 PM
Monsters eat animals.

Monsters, yes, sure, but city guardsmen are going to ignore an alley cat.

Marius
2007-05-08, 07:14 PM
A simple change would be to make Wild Spell a metamagic feat (+1 level). That would certainly make druids think twice about using it endlessly.

You mean "natural spell"?

Caelestion
2007-05-08, 07:51 PM
Doh! Yes :)

Latronis
2007-05-08, 10:49 PM
Natural spell is effectively free use of both still and silent spell feats while wildshaped for the cost of one feat.

So it wouldn't be out of whack to make it a metamagic feat that increases spell level by 2 and since it's only useful while wildshaped, still and silent are still somewhat useful and it shouldn't be unbalanced since the need for wildshape to benefit makes up for it onl costing one feat.

You could still cast a natural spell while not in wildshape but you only ignore the verbal and somatic components while in wildshape.

Ulzgoroth
2007-05-08, 11:00 PM
Natural spell is effectively free use of both still and silent spell feats while wildshaped for the cost of one feat.
Uh, no? Natural spell casting still has verbal and somatic components as normal. It's just possible to perform those components in whatever wild shape you happen to be in. It doesn't let you eschew the material components either.

Tor the Fallen
2007-05-08, 11:24 PM
I've played a wizard who started out with INT 14 for 5 years. You were saying?

That's still 4/level. Did you purposely gimp your wizard, or did you roll crummy?




Bull****. Attribute bonuses are variables. Variables should never be considered when comparing classes with each other.

They absolutely should be! Whether or not a character has MAD should absolutely be taken into account. A monk, for instance, needs good str, dex, con and wisdom to function at a fraction of the power of, say, a fighter or druid. Since a monk can't wear armor, he needs 16+ in both wis and dex to equal a full plate with only 10 dex, who focused on strength. On top of that, the fighter is hitting more often and harder than the monk. Attribute scores are an absolute premium, and if you want to play an effective character, you need to pay attention to what stats are important. Characters with only one or two important abilities are at a significant advantage to those who have three or four.


I hate it when game designers or players blithely assume that every character starts out with an 18 in its main attribute. And even if your hypothetical über-wizard starts with INT 18

In standard generating of stats (25, 28, 30, 32, 36 pt buy, 3d6, 4d6 drop lowest, elite array), a 15 isn't very uncommon. For a wizard, who really only needs one good stat, having a modifier of +2 or higher isn't that much of anything. Unless you really like playing characters who don't ever have any ability scores over 14.


he gets only gets 6 skill points for level (7 if he's a human), which is the BASE points for a bard. All other classes that have a large skill selection receive lots of skill points... except the wizard. And yes, the wizard does have a large skill selection; most people merely don't notice, because the various knowledge skills are not listed separately.

Monk: 4 + int (an ability that's fifth on the list of important abilities for a monk)
Fighter: 2 + int (Again, an ability at the bottom of the list, unless for some reason they want to take weapon expertise)
Ranger: 6 + int (after wis, dex, and con)
barbarians: 4 + int (barbs rarely have an int above 12, and that's because they need good con, str, and dex. This is especially more so in low point buy games.)
Sorceror: 2 +int (usually 4th, cha, dex, and con are too important)

If these characters are played effectively, as humans, and have a relatively high point buy, the ranger and bard will get 8-9/ level. The wizard gets almost as many, for just being a wizard.


If we downsize classes and penalize characters for having a main attribute relevant to stat X, by that same logic why not cut down the fighter's and barbarian's melee BAB while we're about it?

Because high BAB allows for extra attacks. Strength does not.
Furthermore, fighters and barbarians can only swing weapons. They don't do anything else well. Wizards get access to lots of skills points by virtue of being a wizard, sacrificing nothing. A meleer has to consider con and dex.


Surely they all have high STR anyway already. And the cleric doesn't need a good Willpower save, because every cleric has a high WIS, neither does the rogue need a good Reflex save! Fair is fair. :smallmad:

Saves are different, as they increase with level at a far greater rate than abilities. Skills, on the other hand, are static.


I also have a special dislike for people who select to play some weird rare race merely because it given them a stat bonus for optimum potential for their minmaxed class combo. Meh.

The Gray Elf has been in Core since at least 3.0.

Latronis
2007-05-08, 11:25 PM
effectively

In normal circumstances you can't make those verbal or somatic components as an animal. Wildshape with natural spell ignores that restriction. It's effectively the same as still and silent in that regard. Its the lack of language and manual dexterity as an animal that prevents spellcasting (well most) Still and Silent get around that, as does Natural Spell. I never said they were identical, but mechanically it serves the same purpose. Now of course if you cant howl as a wolf because you're silenced then your still up the proverbial creek without a paddle but barring outside influence Natural Spell accomplishes the same thing as Silent+Still while wildshaped.

Leon
2007-05-09, 12:17 AM
That's still 4/level. Did you purposely gimp your wizard, or did you roll crummy?


Not everyone aims to optimize

Dhavaer
2007-05-09, 12:20 AM
Since a monk can't wear armor, he needs 16+ in both wis and dex to equal a full plate with only 10 dex, who focused on strength.

18+, assuming you aren't counting the level bonus.

Starsinger
2007-05-09, 12:20 AM
Not everyone aims to optimize

Yes but really, what's the point of being a wizard with 11 int? Fighters without strength or constitution are feasible. But a wizard with 11 int is someone who can fire off a magic missile and have a pet cat.

Stephen_E
2007-05-09, 12:22 AM
Slighty off topic.

I agree with Tobian that the 2 skill points/lev for Wizards, the nerds of DnD, is silly. As a weakness it annoying rather than crippling, but it is dumb. The class shouldn't be relying on good stats to meet the fluff of the class, and even with the high Int it's still to few skill points. Estimating that Rogues have about 4-6 less Int points than Wizards, the Rogue still has way more skill points (and Rogues aren't over endowed for what they're supposed to do/know). IMHO Wizards (and to a lesser extent Clerics) should be the "knowledge monkey" in the way that Rogues are the generic "skill monkey". Wizards should have 4 or 6 pts/lev IMHO, but equally I'd be tempted to insist that half have to go into Int based skills.

The reason they should have all those skill points is because they're bookworms. Bookworm = book knowledge.

Stephen

Turcano
2007-05-09, 02:24 AM
effectively

In normal circumstances you can't make those verbal or somatic components as an animal. Wildshape with natural spell ignores that restriction. It's effectively the same as still and silent in that regard. Its the lack of language and manual dexterity as an animal that prevents spellcasting (well most) Still and Silent get around that, as does Natural Spell. I never said they were identical, but mechanically it serves the same purpose. Now of course if you cant howl as a wolf because you're silenced then your still up the proverbial creek without a paddle but barring outside influence Natural Spell accomplishes the same thing as Silent+Still while wildshaped.

So Natural Spell is like Still Spell and Silent Spell, except for the "still" part and the "silent" part. Glad we cleared that up.

Leon
2007-05-09, 04:40 AM
Yes but really, what's the point of being a wizard with 11 int? Fighters without strength or constitution are feasible. But a wizard with 11 int is someone who can fire off a magic missile and have a pet cat.

And some may want to play a character like that

Tor the Fallen
2007-05-09, 05:48 AM
18+, assuming you aren't counting the level bonus.

I gave the monk a few levels, since by the time the fighter can aford fullplate, the monk would likely be around level 5 with wis or dex boosting item.

Leush
2007-05-09, 06:11 AM
a) Druids are as balanced as a one legged dog tightrope walking in the middle of a hurricane. Balancing them fully would require a rewrite of the whole class. I generally eplace a d8 hitdice with a d4, but that doesn't seem like enough...

b)
And some may want to play a character like that

I so wanna be a wizard with 11 int and a pet cat! I'm gonna make one of those....:smallbiggrin: When I have time...

Seriously though, if you think about, comparing classes based on what stats they get can be silly- It's reasonable when you all use pointbuy, however, if you roll your stats, then MAD becomes something else entirely. If you get a lot of high rolls, off you go being a monk. If you got a bunch of low rolls and one high, off you go to full spellcaster school... It is an advantage as much as a disadvantage of a class, to be able to make better use of a high roll when it comes about...

To be fair the lack of skillpoints of a fighter and sorcerer has always peeved me- as in fighters and barbarians are mechanically the same, but fighters have fewer skill points. Okay, we understand, the barbarian doesn't spend all his waking hours swinging swords and can go and do other stuff with his life.

But wizard and sorcerer- okay, the wizard spends all his time studying arcane texts and so doesn't have time for anything else, but a sorcerer? He has all the time in the world, so why the 2 per level skill points? To be fair, I can agree with wizards getting 2 skillpoints- it makes no sense, but it balances- overall, however, it makes very little sense and even less balance.

As for fullplate- full plate comes with armor check penalty, which can bite you in the donkey when you least want it.

Indon
2007-05-09, 02:04 PM
Yes but really, what's the point of being a wizard with 11 int? Fighters without strength or constitution are feasible. But a wizard with 11 int is someone who can fire off a magic missile and have a pet cat.

A maximized, quickened Magic Missile followed by persistent, heightened Grease.

PirateMonk
2007-05-09, 06:22 PM
A maximized, quickened Magic Missile

25 damage as free action at level 15+. I'm thrilled.



As for skill points, I say make everyone illiterate, give the cleric and wizard 8 (base) skill points, bump the rogue down to 6, the ranger down to 4, and the Barbarian to 2.

I also have an idea for breaking Natural Spell into five feats: The first lets you use the spells, but there's a spell failure chance and they can't cast spells higher than, say, 3rd level. Another feat mitigates the spell failure substantially, while a third removes it entirely. Another line of feats boosts the spell level roof, first to 6, than to 9. So it takes them all their feats from level 6 to epic levels to accomplish what they get at 6 for one feat currently. Speaking of which, if they want epic spells wildshaped, there's a whole other epic feat they need...

So, what does everyone think of those ideas?

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 06:19 AM
I gave the monk a few levels, since by the time the fighter can aford fullplate, the monk would likely be around level 5 with wis or dex boosting item.
That would be 4th. M/W full plate (1,650 gp) and M/W weapon (300+wpn gp) still leaves 3,400 gp to spend on minor magic items and other equipment.

Saph
2007-05-10, 07:19 AM
As for skill points, I say make everyone illiterate, give the cleric and wizard 8 (base) skill points, bump the rogue down to 6, the ranger down to 4, and the Barbarian to 2.

So, what does everyone think of those ideas?

Terrible idea. You're boosting two of the strongest classes in the game and nerfing one of the weakest. The whole point of the Rogue class is to have lots of skills, and the Ranger's extra skills are supposed to be what makes up for his mediocre HD and armour proficiencies. Meanwhile, the wizard and cleric can now do EVERYTHING - even more than they could do already.

A wizard with a 16 Int already has enough to max out Concentration, Spellcraft, two Knowledges, and one other skill of his or her choice. That's plenty. Wizards are quite powerful enough. The don't need extra skill points, or anything else.

- Saph

Leush
2007-05-10, 07:32 AM
I also have an idea for breaking Natural Spell into five feats: The first lets you use the spells, but there's a spell failure chance and they can't cast spells higher than, say, 3rd level. Another feat mitigates the spell failure substantially, while a third removes it entirely. Another line of feats boosts the spell level roof, first to 6, than to 9. So it takes them all their feats from level 6 to epic levels to accomplish what they get at 6 for one feat currently. Speaking of which, if they want epic spells wildshaped, there's a whole other epic feat they need...


I think that since druids don't get bonus feats, taking up all their feats with wild shape feat tree is nice, but sadly, since a druid doesn't need feats full stop to be effective it would change very little. Although it is significantly better than what is.

I'd say remove it altogether (or at least make it a +1 metamagic feat) and make them use still and silent spell instead and prepare their 'wildshaping' spells in advance (granted this is not a problem when they can spend all day in wildshape) and take a full round action to cast their spells and have to use lower level spells whist wildshaped.

Latronis
2007-05-10, 08:14 AM
So Natural Spell is like Still Spell and Silent Spell, except for the "still" part and the "silent" part. Glad we cleared that up.

EDIT: Eh it's been a long day, i should've realised that.

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 08:23 AM
That's called sarcasm. He was poking fun at your somewhat confused and over-labyrinthine post.

ZeroNumerous
2007-05-10, 08:39 AM
Honestly, one of the druid's problems is the fact that it has spellcasting and wild shape. Why not break it into two different progressions, ALA ranger? You can be a spellcasting druid, or a wildshaping druid, not both.

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 08:48 AM
That's how they do it in Diablo II after all. You can be a summoning/spell-casting druid or a summoning/wild-shaping druid, but you can't be both. (You can summon animals but not cast your elemental spells in wolf or bear form.)

That said, spell-casting up to 3rd-level or so is fine. They should make the choice after that.

Latronis
2007-05-10, 08:55 AM
convienently enough that just so happens to be the point you first get Wildshape

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 08:57 AM
Either you're telepathic or you've just realised that that is exactly why I suggested it :)

Latronis
2007-05-10, 09:01 AM
We'll go with telepathic i think :smallbiggrin:

shuntsu
2007-05-10, 09:40 AM
I think I would simply eliminate Natural Spell outright, which would put Wildshape more on par with how the new Polymorph Subschool spells work.

No magic while wild shaping, you essentially replace your character sheet with your animal, (except for HP).

This eliminates most forms of magic/equipment/combat mix abuse.

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 09:41 AM
Except for mental statistics and hit points :) Good idea though.

Latronis
2007-05-10, 09:44 AM
I like it, i do

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 10:44 AM
I beg your pardon?

Latronis
2007-05-10, 10:52 AM
The previously suggessted changing wildshape to be more in line with the newer versions of polymorph.

Apparantly 'I like it' alone isn't enough letters to be considered taking part in the discussion.

Marius
2007-05-10, 11:38 AM
I think I would simply eliminate Natural Spell outright, which would put Wildshape more on par with how the new Polymorph Subschool spells work.

No magic while wild shaping, you essentially replace your character sheet with your animal, (except for HP).

This eliminates most forms of magic/equipment/combat mix abuse.

You can still use some equipment and magic items while in wildshape and all of the items if you can wildshape into a lengendary ape.

Leon
2007-05-10, 02:31 PM
Im a fan of the Druid broken down into exclusive parts, the Circle Orbos Druid Pdf (http://privateerpress.com/noquarter/default.php?x=webextra 2nd one down) outlays it nicley. the base Druid class is changed somewhat but it fits well with the way that IK works - it wouldnt be hard to configure it for normal D&D

shuntsu
2007-05-10, 03:11 PM
You can still use some equipment and magic items while in wildshape and all of the items if you can wildshape into a lengendary ape.

If I understand you right you're taking off all your items, wild shape and put them back on.

I don't try to fix this sort of cheese with rules because it's clearly busting the spirit (if not the letter) of the rules when the wild shape ability states your equipment melds into your new form and is not usable any more. I leave this kind of stuff up to DM's and players to fix themselves.

Otherwise if you wanted to fix it, you could simply state that Wild Shape and Polymorph subschool changes nullify your ability to use magic items regardless, and be done with it. Then you basically achieve the effect of swapping character sheets with your target form.

Marius
2007-05-10, 05:25 PM
You can still use some equipment and magic items while in wildshape and all of the items if you can wildshape into a lengendary ape.

If I understand you right you're taking off all your items, wild shape and put them back on.

I don't try to fix this sort of cheese with rules because it's clearly busting the spirit (if not the letter) of the rules when the wild shape ability states your equipment melds into your new form and is not usable any more. I leave this kind of stuff up to DM's and players to fix themselves.

Otherwise if you wanted to fix it, you could simply state that Wild Shape and Polymorph subschool changes nullify your ability to use magic items regardless, and be done with it. Then you basically achieve the effect of swapping character sheets with your target form.

It doesn't matter if it breaks the "spirit" of the rules, by RAW you can do that without any problem and since you can stay wildshaped for hours I don't see why a druid wouldn't do it (from the in-character perspective).

Indon
2007-05-10, 05:50 PM
It doesn't matter if it breaks the "spirit" of the rules, by RAW you can do that without any problem and since you can stay wildshaped for hours I don't see why a druid wouldn't do it (from the in-character perspective).

Druids, in their human form, can't use many tools (many metal weapons, metal armors) because they are too unnatural. In fact, doing so strips the druid of his powers until the druid Atones.

Now, tell me, is a wild animal wearing any of the below:

-A belt
-A vest
-Rings
-An amulet
-Boots
-Gloves

...natural?

Starbuck_II
2007-05-10, 06:10 PM
Druids, in their human form, can't use many tools (many metal weapons, metal armors) because they are too unnatural. In fact, doing so strips the druid of his powers until the druid Atones.

Now, tell me, is a wild animal wearing any of the below:

-A belt
-A vest
-Rings
-An amulet
-Boots
-Gloves

...natural?

You do realize Dtuids can use metal weapons in 3.5: all metal weapons. 3.5 only restricts metal armor.

Marius
2007-05-10, 07:17 PM
Druids, in their human form, can't use many tools (many metal weapons, metal armors) because they are too unnatural. In fact, doing so strips the druid of his powers until the druid Atones.

Now, tell me, is a wild animal wearing any of the below:

-A belt
-A vest
-Rings
-An amulet
-Boots
-Gloves

...natural?

Tell me, what's natural and what's not natural? We are animals and we wear boots, gloves, vests, belts, etc. Why won't other animals use them? I'm sure they would if they know what they do :smallbiggrin:
But in this case we are not talking about a wild animal, we are talking about a druid in animal form and that's not the same.

Indon
2007-05-10, 07:28 PM
You do realize Dtuids can use metal weapons in 3.5: all metal weapons. 3.5 only restricts metal armor.

Ah, so it is. Good to know.


Tell me, what's natural and what's not natural? We are animals and we wear boots, gloves, vests, belts, etc. Why won't other animals use them? I'm sure they would if they know what they do :smallbiggrin:
But in this case we are not talking about a wild animal, we are talking about a druid in animal form and that's not the same.

DM: "You encounter a bear, it appears hostile. Roll initiative."

*rolling ensues*

DM: "All right, the bear attacks... hit. A searing blast of flame emerges from the bear's circlet..."

PC: "Wait, what? Why didn't you tell us the bear was wearing a circlet!"

DM: "I fail to see the problem."

PC: "BEARS SHOULDN'T HAVE CIRCLETS OF BLASTING!"

DM: "How do you know it doesn't occur naturally on some bears?"

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-10, 07:33 PM
Oh, please. "Natural" is an essentially meaningless term. After all chairs are not natural[/i]. Neither is fine art.

Indon
2007-05-10, 07:41 PM
Oh, please. "Natural" is an essentially meaningless term. After all chairs are not natural[/i]. Neither is fine art.

And it is just as absurd and inappropriate (from the in-character perspective) for a man shapeshifted into an animal to be running around with a chair or fine art as it is for them to run around with magical bling.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-10, 07:57 PM
And it is just as absurd and inappropriate (from the in-character perspective) for a man shapeshifted into an animal to be running around with a chair or fine art as it is for them to run around with magical bling.

"Magical....bling."

Please don't ever say that again.

Marius
2007-05-10, 08:08 PM
Ah, so it is. Good to know.



DM: "You encounter a bear, it appears hostile. Roll initiative."

*rolling ensues*

DM: "All right, the bear attacks... hit. A searing blast of flame emerges from the bear's circlet..."

PC: "Wait, what? Why didn't you tell us the bear was wearing a circlet!"

DM: "I fail to see the problem."

PC: "BEARS SHOULDN'T HAVE CIRCLETS OF BLASTING!"

DM: "How do you know it doesn't occur naturally on some bears?"

It's not normal but it can happen, maybe it's a awakened wizard bear who knows!

Caelestion
2007-05-10, 08:12 PM
In my experience, anyone who says, "it goes against the spirit of the rules but, according to the RAW, ..." has already conceded the point but is just looking to argue anyway.

shuntsu
2007-05-11, 12:49 AM
Indeed. Besides the point of this thread was to discuss solutions to the druid's powers, which are numerous and abusable anyway without coming up with ingenious ways to abuse oversights in RAW.

Arguing about such things is simply splitting hairs.

Latronis
2007-05-11, 12:23 PM
On second thoughts i don't really like the idea of having a spellcasting or a wildshaping druid because then the wildshaping druid can't be a healer

Thoughtbot360
2007-05-11, 03:19 PM
Alignment is one thing, I don't think everybody wants to be all neutrally. Make any mistakes in a few string of judgments and you could very well lose your druidic capabilities.

A player? Changing Alignment? from True Neutral?


BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA!

You crack me up, seriously where do you get this stuff?

Oh, you're serious?

Well, As Cocytus has said (http://www.gamegrene.com/node/320?from=90&comments_per_page=90), Alignments aren't tied to specific behaviors:


In the section titled "Changing Alignment," both of the recent (3rd Edition and 3.5) versions of the Dungeon Master's Guide contain this passage: "If a player says, 'My neutral good character becomes chaotic good,' the appropriate answer is 'prove it.'" In my opinion, the appropriate player response to such a question is, "how?" There are no hard and fast guidelines for D&D alignments.

This is the crux of the problem with D&D alignments: the system gives us insufficient data with regard to what behaviors are associated with specific alignments. "Good," the Player's Handbook tells us, "implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others." But it doesn't tell us what kind of sacrifices, or how often they should be made. Where does a DM draw the line between a good character and a neutral one? The choice is arbitrary.

Notice that last note: "Where does a DM draw the line between a good character and a neutral one? The choice is arbitrary. (And what about neutral to evil? Unless the character in question goes on murder streaks with little or no provacation like Black Mage or a Belkar, whose to say the character isn't neutral?) Cocytus lists a number of solutions, including banning alignment and having alignment based spells only affect outsiders (and possibly clerics or other chars with a divinely-infused alignment aura). I have a solution for DMs that aren't ready to do something Ca-razy like that: Play True neutral (or Lawful neutral if you're a Monk). I swear you will never have a problem. Be a TN Cleric of Boccob (Who cares if he doesn't care about people, the gods never help you beyond giving you're spells anyway.) and get the Magic domain (Wands of 3rd-level Magic missile and Mirror Image? Yes please.) and the Knowledge domain for the boost to Divination spells. Its not that I totally dismiss the classic battle between good and evil, its just that I think the alignment system is a bad way to represent it, and many things adventurers do are neutral acts at best, anyway. Also, you can still be a hero, but you are never expected to march into hell to save a kitten.

One thing to note is that for Paladins, Monks, Druids, Bards, and Barbarians ( thats most the classes in the game! not counting Clerics that fit this example) the boundary between Lawful Good and Neutral Good is dangerously thin, and they rely on the DM not having a good idea of what Law and Chaos really mean just to breathe easily (Monks and Bards only lose the ability to progress, not thier powers, but thats still bad.)

Seriously, can we on this little thread come to an agreement on just one way you can switch from LG to NG? Or vice versa? We can easily imagine falling from LG to LN, we saw Miko do it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html). A bad GM might even magically teleport a Paladin to chaotic evil land if the Paladin kills the wrong NPC (he detected evil, it was justified in that sense, but the DM just-needed-that NPC.) Wow! That GM is just full of surprises! But seriously:


"If a player says, 'My neutral good character becomes chaotic good,' the appropriate answer is 'prove it.'" In my opinion, the appropriate player response to such a question is, "how?"

All you who say that alignment will hold back a Druid, you need to answer this "appropriate player response" not only so that this play can change to chaotic good (NG to CG? They are no benefits from that change. LN to LG will help your ex-Paladin, but NG to CG? Just give it to the player, don't slow down the game, you anal-retentive freak.) but also so that a DM might have even a smigeon of a shell of a husk of a right to reign in on the Druid with your so called "alignment restriction." Check the spoiler below for a short rant on what I could do to overcome (or at least make the DM regret enforcing) the "druidic alignment restriction."

besides, you cannot alignment change diagonally, if my Druid becomes neutral Good, I'll become a rampaging murder that eats babies until I become TN (which I want to do just for the alignment buffer zone). If NE, I'll become a saint. If I get warped from NG to NE without stopping at TN, I'll become disruptive. A simpering humanoid-itarian (kobolditarian? monsteritatian?) that get in the way of the party during a fight when Evil, and throwing daggers into desperate NPC's brains when they run up to our table whimpering for help when I'm Good. And thats just the tip of the iceberg of want I will do until I become TN again, killed by the party, or get banned from the group.
Is that childish? Perhaps. But I think it is about as childish as the GM screwing with my character's head by flipping a good/evil switch (or law/chaos) because I don't fit his (and it IS his) definition of TN and making it profitable for me to act in this schicophinic manner.

But seriously, Sir Giacomo, Zynex, all you other guys talking about alignment change, give me a fair reason for a DM to change NG Druid to CG or LG, and then we might be obliged to take a second look at your "alignment penalty."

and now a Song:
*to the Sound of MC Hammer's "Can't touch this"*
da-dada-dum, dada-dum-I'm Neutral
da-dada-dum, dada-dum-I'm Neutral
da-dada-dum, dada-dum-I'm Neutral
True Neutral

I, I, I, I bypass all the arguements
the ones that hold you back
I'm True neutral, so I am cut some slack
When it comes to alignment spells,
You might tell me that I'm screwed
but the only ones we see are Evil,
so I'm better off than you
And this is an alignment you can't touch

I told you DM, I'm neutral
Yeah, that's how we gamin' and ya know,
I'm neutral
Lookit my spells and abilities, man, can't touch this
Put your alignment straight jacket up, I'm neutral

Indon
2007-05-11, 03:47 PM
besides, you cannot alignment change diagonally, if my Druid becomes neutral Good, I'll become a rampaging murder that eats babies until I become TN (which I want to do just for the alignment buffer zone). If NE, I'll become a saint. If I get warped from NG to NE without stopping at TN, I'll become disruptive. A simpering humanoid-itarian (kobolditarian? monsteritatian?) that get in the way of the party during a fight when Evil, and throwing daggers into desperate NPC's brains when they run up to our table whimpering for help when I'm Good. And thats just the tip of the iceberg of want I will do until I become TN again, killed by the party, or get banned from the group.
Is that childish? Perhaps. But I think it is about as childish as the GM screwing with my character's head by flipping a good/evil switch (or law/chaos) because I don't fit his (and it IS his) definition of TN and making it profitable for me to act in this schicophinic manner.


If a player in my campaign played in such a flippant manner, he'd find himself with some metaphorical rocks falling on him in no time. Then maybe he could reroll something he won't screw up.

Yes, there's wiggle room for the alignments. Good, it lets a DM play alignment how they want. Ideally, if a character is shifting alignments (yes, in the DM's view, I'm sorry WotC didn't publish an absolute moral and ethical system for you), the DM should issue warnings to the player so he can get his character together. But a character who just acts however they want without regard for the consequences, until I finally force an alignment change and then they go off eating kitten heads or something stupid to get back to where they want their character, OOC? Oh hell no.

Also, Miko didn't neccessarily change alignments, she just Fell. A Paladin's code is more than just "Stay Lawful Good", and they can break it and remain LG.

Thoughtbot360
2007-05-11, 06:21 PM
But a character who just acts however they want without regard for the consequences, until I finally force an alignment change and then they go off eating kitten heads or something stupid to get back to where they want their character, OOC? Oh hell no.

Ah, but, True Neutral IS just acting how they want and its difficult to even justify an alignment change in the first place. (Which was my point in the other post. The threat of breaking alignment is not a tangible drawback on the druid.)

The good news about that is it means you won't be dump any metaphorical rocks due to kitten-head-eating anytime soon, so chin up.


...well at least not for this type of foolishness. The right combination of bad players has reduced many a talented GM to tears (and at least one case of insanity. The wards say he still has those bouts where he just screams randomly and then curls up in a ball and whimpers himself to sleep. I probably shouldn't've brought it up.)

DSCrankshaw
2007-05-11, 10:37 PM
Tell me, what's natural and what's not natural? We are animals and we wear boots, gloves, vests, belts, etc. Why won't other animals use them? I'm sure they would if they know what they do :smallbiggrin:
But in this case we are not talking about a wild animal, we are talking about a druid in animal form and that's not the same.
See, this I have trouble with. If I were DMing a game, I'd say that a bear couldn't wear a ring because he has no fingers, nor could he wear a belt, because he has no waist, he can't wear gloves or boots because they won't fit his paws. He can't wear helmets or circlets because the shape of his head is different. And while you could technically put an amulet on a bear, because of the position of his neck and head, it'd drag on the ground or fall off, or snag on things and choke him. Magical items may resize to fit the creature, but they don't reshape: that's outside of the scope of what they were designed to do. If you want something designed for a bear to wear, special order it, and expect to pay a premium (and for it not to fit when you're in any other shape).

Thoughtbot360
2007-05-11, 10:57 PM
See, this I have trouble with. If I were DMing a game, I'd say that a bear couldn't wear a ring because he has no fingers, nor could he wear a belt, because he has no waist, he can't wear gloves or boots because they won't fit his paws. He can't wear helmets or circlets because the shape of his head is different. And while you could technically put an amulet on a bear, because of the position of his neck and head, it'd drag on the ground or fall off, or snag on things and choke him. Magical items may resize to fit the creature, but they don't reshape: that's outside of the scope of what they were designed to do. If you want something designed for a bear to wear, special order it, and expect to pay a premium (and for it not to fit when you're in any other shape).

Good thinking. With this, all the druid can have is a +5 bandana of something-something. And thats it.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-11, 11:28 PM
See, this I have trouble with. If I were DMing a game, I'd say that a bear couldn't wear a ring because he has no fingers, nor could he wear a belt, because he has no waist, he can't wear gloves or boots because they won't fit his paws. He can't wear helmets or circlets because the shape of his head is different. And while you could technically put an amulet on a bear, because of the position of his neck and head, it'd drag on the ground or fall off, or snag on things and choke him. Magical items may resize to fit the creature, but they don't reshape: that's outside of the scope of what they were designed to do. If you want something designed for a bear to wear, special order it, and expect to pay a premium (and for it not to fit when you're in any other shape).

Please note: only magical jewelry resizes for its wearer.

Latronis
2007-05-11, 11:50 PM
Ah, but, True Neutral IS just acting how they want and its difficult to even justify an alignment change in the first place. (Which was my point in the other post. The threat of breaking alignment is not a tangible drawback on the druid.)


no acting how you want is pretty the definition of chaotic neutral, you want be flip-flopping between good and evil to get a net true neutral.

You'll be CN and one could make an argument for flipping between CG-> CE

which is loss of levels

Stephen_E
2007-05-12, 01:18 AM
See, this I have trouble with. If I were DMing a game, I'd say that a bear couldn't wear a ring because he has no fingers, nor could he wear a belt, because he has no waist, he can't wear gloves or boots because they won't fit his paws. He can't wear helmets or circlets because the shape of his head is different. And while you could technically put an amulet on a bear, because of the position of his neck and head, it'd drag on the ground or fall off, or snag on things and choke him. Magical items may resize to fit the creature, but they don't reshape: that's outside of the scope of what they were designed to do. If you want something designed for a bear to wear, special order it, and expect to pay a premium (and for it not to fit when you're in any other shape).

A few points. I don't have my books on me, but IIRC it does say how you have to ring slots even if you've had your hands amputated, you can have the rings as Ear rings or Nose rings. A Bear DOES have a waist, so can wear a belt, in fact all it needs is a torso. A Helmet wouldn't fit unless specially resized, but the circlet would be fine, although you might have to tie it on to stop it falling off, but that's probably a good idea even when in human form. Amulets fine, we are talking a necklace here. Provided it's not to loose it's not going to drag. Bears don't exactly have small necks, and they don't slither.

Stephen

DSCrankshaw
2007-05-12, 03:16 AM
A few points. I don't have my books on me, but IIRC it does say how you have to ring slots even if you've had your hands amputated, you can have the rings as Ear rings or Nose rings. A Bear DOES have a waist, so can wear a belt, in fact all it needs is a torso. A Helmet wouldn't fit unless specially resized, but the circlet would be fine, although you might have to tie it on to stop it falling off, but that's probably a good idea even when in human form. Amulets fine, we are talking a necklace here. Provided it's not to loose it's not going to drag. Bears don't exactly have small necks, and they don't slither.

Stephen

See, a lot of this depends on definitions, and the first thing you have to remember is how I began: if I were DMing a game. These are the rules I would apply. Whether a bear has a waist or not is really a matter of definition: sure, he has a place where his legs join his pelvis, but that has little resemblance to a human waist. True, you could wrap a belt around the bear's belly and say he was wearing it in his waist slot. For that matter, your human-shaped druid could wear a belt around his neck and say it was filling his neck slot: it'd fit, but that doesn't make it true. The DM has to first decide whether the bear has a waist slot, and if we go by core rulebooks, there's no clear answer. The body slots listed, on page 214 of the DMG, are strictly for humanoids: "A humanoid-shaped body can be decked out in magic gear consisting of one item from each of the following groups, keyed to which place on the body the item is worn." [Emphasis added.] What, if any, slots non-humanoid characters have is apparently left to the DM.

If you go to the Magic Item Compendium, however, you find something very different on page 219: "As a default rule, treat creatures of any shape as having all the normal body slots available." Now, I like a lot of things in the Magic Item Compendium. Augment Crystals and Runestaffs are sure to find their way into my games, and my human diviner will give up his +1 Twilight Mithral shirt when they pry it from his cold, dead fingers, but I'm sticking with the DMG when it comes to body slots. If animals have body slots at all, they'll be strictly defined and greatly reduced.

Turcano
2007-05-12, 03:23 AM
See, a lot of this depends on definitions, and the first thing you have to remember is how I began: if I were DMing a game. These are the rules I would apply. Whether a bear has a waist or not is really a matter of definition: sure, he has a place where his legs join his pelvis, but that bares little resemblance to a human waist. You could wrap a belt around his belly and say the bear was wearing it in his waist slot. Your human-shaped druid could wear a belt around his neck and say it was filling his neck slot: it'd fit, but that doesn't make it true. The DM has to first decide whether the bear has a waist slot, and if we go by core rulebooks, there's no clear answer. The body slots listed, on page 214 of the DMG, are strictly for humanoids: "A humanoid-shaped body can be decked out in magic gear consisting of one item from each of the following groups, keyed to which place on the body the item is worn." [Emphasis added.] What, if any, slots non-humanoid characters have is apparently left to the DM.

If you go to the Magic Item Compendium, however, you find something very different on page 219: "As a default rule, treat creatures of any shape as having all the normal body slots available." Now, I like a lot of things in the Magic Item Compendium. Augment Crystals and Runestaffs are sure to find their way into my games, and my human diviner will give up his +1 Twilight Mithral shirt when they pry it from his cold, dead fingers, but I'm sticking with the DMG when it comes to body slots. If animals have body slots at all, they'll be strictly defined and greatly reduced.

There is a page (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031125a) on the Wizards site that deals with animal item slots; it's ostensibly for animal companions, but it could apply to wildshape forms as well.

DSCrankshaw
2007-05-12, 03:35 AM
I think I would simply eliminate Natural Spell outright, which would put Wildshape more on par with how the new Polymorph Subschool spells work.

No magic while wild shaping, you essentially replace your character sheet with your animal, (except for HP).

This eliminates most forms of magic/equipment/combat mix abuse.
I think this was largely the idea behind the Shapeshifting variant in PHB II. Shapeshift at will, but no Natural Spell and no animal companion, and what you shapeshift into is very strictly defined. I think that it's a much better system than the 3.5 druid.

As for the alternate list on Wizards' page that Turcano mentions, I might allow them, but they'd have to be specially made for the animal: meaning that they'd cost more (maybe by the same multiple as barding), and they'd be specially designed for each animal type (not fitting both your human form and your animal form, and definitely not fitting a bear and a hawk).

Thoughtbot360
2007-05-13, 01:39 AM
no acting how you want is pretty the definition of chaotic neutral, you want be flip-flopping between good and evil to get a net true neutral.

You'll be CN and one could make an argument for flipping between CG-> CE

which is loss of levels

Well, if thats the case, then what was Indon getting all worked up about when I said this:


besides, you cannot alignment change diagonally, if my Druid becomes neutral Good, I'll become a rampaging murder that eats babies until I become TN (which I want to do just for the alignment buffer zone). If NE, I'll become a saint. If I get warped from NG to NE without stopping at TN, I'll become disruptive. A simpering humanoid-itarian (kobolditarian? monsteritatian?) that get in the way of the party during a fight when Evil, and throwing daggers into desperate NPC's brains when they run up to our table whimpering for help when I'm Good. And thats just the tip of the iceberg of want I will do until I become TN again, killed by the party, or get banned from the group.
Is that childish? Perhaps. But I think it is about as childish as the GM screwing with my character's head by flipping a good/evil switch (or law/chaos) because I don't fit his (and it IS his) definition of TN and making it profitable for me to act in this schicophinic manner.

Is that not flip-flopping between Good and Evil? Also, Law and Chaos confuse me (no, the PHB doesn't outline them at all, and quite frankly, I don't think more than 0.0001% of all DM give a hoot.)

DM: So the King says he'll pay you two brave heroes hansomely if you track down and capture the thief whose somehow been able to rob the royal treasurey from until his nose every month.

Barbarian: Sure, We'll take the job.

DM: THAT'S TOO LAWFUL AN ACTION! YOU SWITCH FROM NEUTRAL GOOD TO LAWFUL GOOD! YOU LOSE YOUR ABILITY TO RAGE! AND THE CLERIC OF KORD ALSO BECOMES LAWFUL AND LOSES HIS SPELLS!

PCs: Son of a.....

Latronis
2007-05-13, 02:13 AM
Yes but the 9 alignments ARE defined, acting in that fashion will make you chaotic neutral.

Ulzgoroth
2007-05-13, 02:35 AM
Will it? Pardon me if I'm not seeing the freedom or adaptability of obsessively shifting yourself off the scopes of both Detect Good and Detect Evil. Flexibility, maybe...but that's one of the three hallmarks of Chaos, from the SRD. Of the drawbacks, you're only likely to show irresponsibility, and not necessarily even that. Recklessness, arbitrary actions? Not somebody defending their class features/bond with nature so aggressively. Resenting authority is completely tangential, you can take it or leave it.

I grant you, we're not showing much in the way of Law markings either. You could be obedient to authority, and honorable and reliable aren't out of the question if you have a moderately broad understanding of those words. For cons, you've got reactionary adherence down, I would contest, and might or might not be close-minded or judgemental. A severe lack of adaptability is probably out, I suppose.

So...shows only a few features of Chaos, and probably only a few features of Law. Probably weakly, in all cases. What's it spell? Neutral. PHB alignment descriptions do allow a character to select their alignment by balancing deeds for the desired effect.

I grant, that sort of behavior is more than likely a remarkably disgusting piece of blatant metagaming, and if it isn't, I would consider it a case of Lawful Evil...but that's based on analyzing the character's thoughts, not their actions, and applying a related but improved alignment description.

Stephen_E
2007-05-13, 06:03 AM
I'll point out one big disadvantage of True Neutral. The Holy Word spells.
A True Neutral gets burned by ALL of them. For that matter quite a lot of the alignment targeted spells hit all BUT their alignment.

Stephen

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-13, 11:42 AM
A player? Changing Alignment? from True Neutral?

BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA!

You crack me up, seriously where do you get this stuff?

Oh, you're serious?

(...)

But seriously, Sir Giacomo, Zynex, all you other guys talking about alignment change, give me a fair reason for a DM to change NG Druid to CG or LG, and then we might be obliged to take a second look at your "alignment penalty."

and now a Song:
*to the Sound of MC Hammer's "Can't touch this"*
da-dada-dum, dada-dum-I'm Neutral
da-dada-dum, dada-dum-I'm Neutral
da-dada-dum, dada-dum-I'm Neutral
True Neutral

I, I, I, I bypass all the arguements
the ones that hold you back
I'm True neutral, so I am cut some slack
When it comes to alignment spells,
You might tell me that I'm screwed
but the only ones we see are Evil,
so I'm better off than you
And this is an alignment you can't touch

I told you DM, I'm neutral
Yeah, that's how we gamin' and ya know,
I'm neutral
Lookit my spells and abilities, man, can't touch this
Put your alignment straight jacket up, I'm neutral


Nice song.:smallbiggrin:

This way, of course, the druid is "overpowered". Any class is if you ignore the disadvantages, in particular casters.

Hi everyone, it's me again drumming the balance rythm...:smallsmile:

Seriously now, I have followed this thread for a while and come to see that the disadvantages of the caster classes envisioned by the rules do not work for all.
What seems to be wrong for casters (and the druid) and how I would handle the drawbacks as a DM is:

1) alignment dependencies of divine casters simply will not work if there are players around who say: it is not 100% clear in the RAW (and they are right about this, although the "anything goes mentality" to thward any DM's sanctions is, of course, silly). In my view the rules are fairly obvious that it is not possible to do as you please, and that the limited coverage of ALL aspects of moral and ethical behaviour into that 9 alignemnt variants, plus the religious aspects at best touched will necessitate the DM and player agreeing beforehand on what that means. If both do nothing, of course, you quickly will have the situation where "anything" goes. (Funnily, this does not hold for a paladin, but this may be because there may be more of a consensus what "lawful good" means than what "neutral" means.)
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DMs would be, to avoid any conflicts: play without alignments. But strict pc game mechanic religion guidelines I would not do without as long as someone would wish to play a divine caster. And this caster would have problems if he/she would not follow the stuff laid out both by him/herself and the DM (in this case me) before the campaign. Still, even in this case I would not use the RAW (meaning no escalation between "OK" and "You lose all your powers"), but rather more mild game effects if something is amiss and make sure the player agrees outside of play.

2) the spells/day limit is useless, apparently, for some players, since they will see either their fun inhibited if they ever cannot refresh them (see any instance this happens as "DM fiat"), or that of the group's other players (strangely enough, the non-casters are seen by those players obviously as having the fun of their lives failing often in their class abilities like missing in combat, failing to open a lock or losing in a grapple attempt).
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DMs: Of course it is to keep stuff realistic, so the spells/day hold. If magic is powerful, intelligent opponents will want to counter it and attack caster pcs primarily, try to prevent them from relearning etc. Similarly, if the non-caster's magic bow wreaked havoc on them before, they will try to eliminate the archer in the group at all costs (goes also for sneaky rogues with deadly poison, fast monks, superstrong barbarians etc.).
However, if casters take measures to protect them from attacks while relearning (say, a rope's trick), that will similarly be honoured. Stil, measures like these will never include anything like a "win button" interpretation of MMM or some such (it is a game meant for suspense, after all).

3) Similarly, in combat, some caster players seem to assume that they will always be able to unload their spells before something hits them.
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DMs: as in 2). Try to keep it realistic. At low levels, an enemy armed with ranged weapons is already enough vs casters, as is the enemey going first (winning initiative, or even surprising!).
As there are many tactcis vs charging barbarians, ranged rogues, fast monks, there are also countertactics vs spellusers.

4) Single spell and supernatural ability powers sometimes appear so awesome; but drawbacks, sometimes minor, sometimes major, still remain. For the druid, the animal shape and wild casting appears to come without a drawback. The morphing rules appear to be a bit unclear as to what the druid may still wear as magic items. And if an animal companion ever is lost, some obviously expect to regain it automatically, as the spells (although this time, instead of 1hour of uninterrupted prayer, it needs be 24 hours...)
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DMs: Let the druid player do as he pleases. If the player considers it logic by the RAW that in animal form he will still be able to use humanoid-meant magic gear, let him. The player may feel "nerfed" otherwise.
The animal companion should not be nerfed, it is already weak enough and risks to get killed too often in EC levels faced by characters of the druid's level without the druid's support.
However, if it is lost, chances are, the druid will not get back in the current adventure, and is at a risk of regaining it between adventures if he has powerful enemies (not that unlikely during a campaign).

Now 1) and 4) in my view, since they depart from the original RAW drawbacks (a houserule) mean they need to be countered by a houserule to keep the balance.
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DMs (for the "overpowered" druid case):
- try to find something that will prevent a druid using his powers unimpeded to steal a non-caster's fighting show: Reduce HD to d6, wildshape use to x/month (x the number of times/day the druid can use it as in PHB. This also nicely sidesteps the often non-roleplaying based notion of many players to have all physical stats as "dump stats", since the druid is running around as a physically stronger animal all the time, while being unable to communicate with his fellow team members).
- to dampen the druid getting to much on the turf of the skill-based nature classes (barbarian, ranger), reduce the skill points/level to 2 (in line with the other full casters).



Hope that helps.

- Giacomo

Ulzgoroth
2007-05-13, 12:04 PM
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DMs: Let the druid player do as he pleases. If the player considers it logic by the RAW that in animal form he will still be able to use humanoid-meant magic gear, let him. The player may feel "nerfed" otherwise.
You seem to imply that this is a matter of opinion. It's certainly a matter of world-design choice, but the DMG indicates that magical garments of all sorts (except actual armor) generally resize to fit wearers. Granted, they specifically refer to characters of medium or small size with varying dimensions. The various creature books, however, such as Draconomicon and Lords of Madness talk about items demonstrating essentially unlimited size flexibility and substantial tolerance of odd shape, to the point that any dragon has every item position a human does, and a Beholder can replicate many of them.

Anything you can fit to a dragon, you can fit to a bear...though you might have some trouble if you buy normal humanoid gloves and want to use your claws.

I think the intended balance is for the Druid to be unable to use magic items in animal form (at least without any of the gimmicks that explicitly bypass that), and that's just fine...I doubt adding that as a feature of the Wild Shape ability would cripple the druid. I can't imagine any way of preventing the druid from having mundane barding made for their favorite animal shape, though.

Thoughtbot360
2007-05-14, 12:39 AM
Yes but the 9 alignments ARE defined, acting in that fashion will make you chaotic neutral.

Right you are-they are (vaguely) defined. I particularly like the final sentence that sums up the alignment at the bottom:

Neutral:


Neutral is the best alignment you can be because you can act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion.

-Also, before we continue, might I point out that there are TWO types of neutral: 1) Making sure neither Good or Evil "win" the universal conflict variety and 2) "bored with moral and ethical debate." If you'll notice the second type He's simply ignoring alignment ENTIRELY and doing what he feels like. This implies that being chaotic is somehow a proactive choice and you can "apathy" your way out of the chaotic alignment. Like, you have be the sort of a guy that would, I don't know, Cast time stop in the middle of negoiation and make the bad guys' general eat delayed action fireballs (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2574548&postcount=648), but if thats the case, how do enforce such a rule? Indeed, Alignment is best left dead. Hence, my reccomendation for players to play TN characters so none (or practicallly none, those that bump into Latronis running a game might wind up CN) of the DM's "home-cooked" rules and requirements for alignment and just as a security measure to avoid the silly headaches attached with alignment, you might even buy a torture device in the right setting (that includes, the right society) and the DM won't be able to whine about it (unless he's just squimish, but thats another topic) if you only use it against the right kind of people. (just ask the Spanish Inquisition) It might be strange that I brought up torture devices, but kept them in mind for another point I wanna make later in the post. Just think about the answer to this question before we get there: can Gray Guards torture?

Chaotic Neutral:


Chaotic Neutral is the best alignment you can be because it represents true freedom from both societies' restrictions and a do-gooder's zeal.

huh. Strange, these two alignments kind of sound alike. Also, they kind imply that all good aligned characters are Miko or something. Lets add Lawful neutral (the proposed original closed-minded zealot alignment) just to complete the set:


Lawful Neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot.

notice all the italized words. Prejudice? Zeal? Zealot? I'm actually off what I was originally talking about after searching through the PHB and finding such harsh language towards Good characters. Dickish Paladins aside, is this really how we understand the Good alignment? Sounds strangely like the neutral alignments are trying to justify themselves (notice the evil alignments sudden end a bad while all the others end on a happy note saying why each alignment is the "best" one to have). Remember how I asked if "Gray Guards" (neutral paladins for rubes) might employ torture without going all the way to evil? Well, if we assume a Lawful Neutral is "reliable and honorable without being a zealot," it sounds like Good is simply anti-evil (evil is bad persay, but "good" is devoted entirely to destroying evil whenever it appears, while morally neutral is concerned about evil but wants to go about ridding it from the world the right way, as opposed to the most expedient). Under such an assumption, "Good" would be more likely to torture than neutral. But the good alignments' "ending notes" don't reflect this at all (although lawful good sounds a bit dangerous with its hunting evil without mercy, and hating to see the guilty go unpunished *cough cough Maiev from WC3: TFT cough*.)



Lawful Good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion -not much compassion if they are guilty, though.


Neutral Good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order. -oh dear, now NG just implied CN and LN are biased (against and for order, respectively)! Did the same person really write all the statements for these alignments?


Chaotic Good is the ...... because it combines a good heart with a free spirit -Apparently, though, if you believe what those neutrals say, CG is the most likely to torture a villain in a setting that has outlawed the practice. But once again when the good alignment speaks, it professes itself to be the first to speak out against the party torturing in a setting that condones it. :smallconfused:

This has lead me to one conclusion: The PHB in regards to alignment contradicts itself more than the Bible! You doubt my claims? The PHB tells you alignment is not a straightjacket (BUWAHAHAHAH- *chokes on a monarch butterfly that wandered into his mouth* -Cough cough oh gods why cough!), but merely a tool for developing your character...And then most the classes and prestige classes have an alignment restrictment (and being evil, while not reccomended, is suspentible to cause huge, huge problems with the party paladin who cannot knowingly associate with you, and its expensive to hide your alignment from him....useless you have a lead sheet and fast reflexes.) If it weren't for the above two factors, alignment would have trouble surviving as a bland joke of Elan and Roy not going to the same afterlife...it would be completely irrevelant. Unless, of course, alignment is a particularly useful tool for developing for character. Its not. On the surface level it kind of says, no there aren't just heroes and villains, characters come in 9 different flavors. But because they don't really explore want traits or behaviors are tied to a specific alignment besides the most general stuff, its only skin deep.

Or as Indun said "sorry they couldn't map out a complete moral and ethically code for you." The fact that they didn't is why I barked in parathesis that D&D did not define the alignments, not because there's not 3 pages introducing alignments to the new 3.0/3.5 player in the PHB, but because those pages, at the end of the day, have produced more questions than answers. I personally think the law and chaos conflict (added so alignment isn't just tired old good and evil by their lonesome and to make this stupid system sound smarter than it really is.) is stupid and empty. When was the last time two characters got in a fight just because one was lawful and one was chaotic? Also, I think Elan's parents split up more on the good vs. evil "irreconcilible alignment grounds" than the law vs. chaos grounds (Dad was LE, Mom was CG (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0050.html))

Besides, what does having "neutral" in your alignment's name have to do with revering nature? (Fun fact: In 2nd edition Bards had those neutral-only alignments restrictions, something about a required lack of commitments. Now in 3rd, Bards just have to be non lawful. But note, CG bards couldn't exist.)

Strange as it may be my ultimate point is that since we are arguing about it, they did not define it. WOTC's own forums have banned new topics on alignment, the arguements are so bad. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=611804)

Sir Gicamo, you reccomended throwing out the alignment system, there is no better option, but since the alignment system is "offical" and their are spells and even super-being that are dependent on the existence of "Lawful Evil" or "True neutral" characters out there, its hard to spread the word.

Indon
2007-05-14, 10:20 AM
Well, I'd say the point to the vagueness of the moral/ethical system is to allow for DM's to have an objective moral/ethical system in their game without having the same moral/ethical system as another DM might.

People have different RL beliefs and some of them have more or less difficulty transferring over to a fictional code of morals or ethics in a game. At the same time, many fantasy staples are reliant on an absolute moral system; but how do you make such a system that won't give someone a reason to flip out?

Easy. Make the DM's do it. You can have your Holy Avenger, and wield it, too.

The downside to this approach is, of course, a DM that doesn't realize they need to put their own spin on the alignment system, and simply refers to the book as the sole guidance, is gonna be in some trouble.

Ulzgoroth
2007-05-14, 10:45 AM
The downside to this approach is, of course, a DM that doesn't realize they need to put their own spin on the alignment system, and simply refers to the book as the sole guidance, is gonna be in some trouble.
The other one is that, whether or not they're trying to go straight by the book, a DM who doesn't make their own perspective on the alignments clear is likely to trip up a player at some point. And while it's perfectly reasonable for your alignment to be fitted to your behavior, it's not reasonable to have the system function as a minefield.

Sir Giacomo
2007-05-15, 06:56 AM
Sir Gicamo, you reccomended throwing out the alignment system, there is no better option, but since the alignment system is "offical" and their are spells and even super-being that are dependent on the existence of "Lawful Evil" or "True neutral" characters out there, its hard to spread the word.

Well, in a group where I play we have made the step to get rid of the alignments. The only thing that still has "good" and "evil" are really the incarnations of that type. I.e. angels are "good" and demons, devils and undead are "evil". So Spells that work for or against such creatures still work.

In normal gameplay, it should be taken into account. A "holy" enchantment for a weapon in a campaign without alignments (but still working vs undead and evil outsiders and other corrupt beings as seen fit by the DM) may not be worth as much as before, but if the campaign is an epic one, then likely the enemies encountered will rather often be of that "evil" type, so there is hardly a difference.

@Ulzgoroth: alignments are basically meant to be only a playing guide. Only for some classes it also serves as a broad guideline that those classes are meant to behave in a certain way (barbarian and bard non-lawful, monk lawful), with more strict suggestions for the divine casters (cleric and druid, as well as paladins. About ranger I'm currently not sure, don't have the rules nearby).

If you say that this could become a "minefield", you are certainly correct. However, I guess this is the case for almost everything that the player imagines and which then needs DM interpretation. If the player has a character
- with any background rooted in the campaign
- with certain aspects of his personality demanding constant active npc reaction (say, a high/low CHR, if he wants to potray the character as charming/repulsive)
- with any higher goal

then he is really dependent on the DM to provide the "fluff" in the way he at least broadly imagines it. If a player imagines he once came from a dispossessed family, it would be a problem if the DM would then introduce family members with plenty of wealth as npcs. If a player imagines his fellow monks of his childhood were killed and persecuted by a kind of inquisition, it would be odd if this never came up in gameplay while the group interacts with said church etc.

Alignment restrictions/agreements ahead of the game and interpretation simply comes ontop of it.

- Giacomo

EDIT: alignment discussions seem to deviate from the orignal thread intent to discuss druid powers, their potential drawbacks, and how to handle it. So please let's get back to that

LordRahl
2007-05-15, 11:51 AM
How about this for a solution to the Druid being too powerful:

1: Reduce hit dice to d4's

2: At first level make them decide if they want to focus on spells or wild shaping. If they focus on spells they get full spells but would wild shape as a Druid of half their level. If they focus on Wild shape they get full wild shape but half spells.

3: Remove natural spell, let them cast silent or still spells instead.

I personally have never encountered anyone who abused the Druid to make themselves way more powerful then the rest of the party. But I can certainly see the potential for it.

Amur_Tiger
2008-04-09, 11:27 PM
That's an excellent solution Rahl now Druids will just be spellcasters with a tightly confined spells list! :smalltongue:
In all seriousness though that might be a bit much though there are some good ideas there.

As a side-note to the whole overpowered/alignment debate I think that druids manage to avoid the whole class restrictions thing mainly due to the nature of D&D campains since the most obviously non-druidic things can only really occur in natural settings instead of cities, dungeons and the like. I could see that in dry fire-prone settings a druid might have to be careful about how they use their flame-strike/call lightning spells, while in a modern context we know that fires are part of the natural process in a world where the gods and magical forces can affect weather one could probably penalize, lightly mind you, a druid for starting a forest fire there. Even moreso there are some places where fires aren't natural and though they'd be more difficult to ignite if a druid managed to set fire to some jungle or temperate rainforest more hefty penalties could be levied. The same goes for killing animals with little effort to try calming or subduing the beast, it -is- possible to imagine a druid being stripped of their class for reasons, I just think that in most contexts there's not enough nature for a druid to have to revere.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-04-09, 11:33 PM
1) Rahl, like all proposed nerfs, you have taken everything way to far. The simple removal of Natural spell is probably enough on it's own. Or the d4 change. Both plus removing half of one of their class features takes them down to practically Barbarian level of balance.


As a side-note to the whole overpowered/alignment debate I think that druids manage to avoid the whole class restrictions thing mainly due to the nature of D&D campains since the most obviously non-druidic things can only really occur in natural settings instead of cities, dungeons and the like. I could see that in dry fire-prone settings a druid might have to be careful about how they use their flame-strike/call lightning spells, while in a modern context we know that fires are part of the natural process in a world where the gods and magical forces can affect weather one could probably penalize, lightly mind you, a druid for starting a forest fire there. Even moreso there are some places where fires aren't natural and though they'd be more difficult to ignite if a druid managed to set fire to some jungle or temperate rainforest more hefty penalties could be levied. The same goes for killing animals with little effort to try calming or subduing the beast, it -is- possible to imagine a druid being stripped of their class for reasons, I just think that in most contexts there's not enough nature for a druid to have to revere.

I could just as easily argue that staring a forest fire is a needed part of nature, and that a Druids job is to prevent forest fires when they shouldn't occur, and to cause them when they should. Any forest that could go up in smoke from a Call Lightning spell needed to be burned down anyway.

Or that survival of the fittest leads and nature having it's place means that if something attacks you, you are obligated to put it down.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-04-09, 11:38 PM
Druids have a natural hatred of necromancers, too.