Druidic Avenger and Divine Rage

[yaluckyboy09]

So I've been messing around with the Druid options of Druidic Avenger for a possible future character. But one thing is bothering me, namely that Druidic Avenger gives the Druid the ability to Rage without the higher versions of it but that means that the Druid can't cast spells.

So I was thinking that since there's a Feat that allows Druids to cast spells while they're Wild Shaped, would it make sense to have a Feat that allows them to cast spells while they're Raging? I mean if they get their Rage ability from the same source that they get their spells, it would make sense that they can use them together.

[fishyfishyfishy]

A single feat seems far to cheap a cost to pay for such an enormous benefit. The only other way to accomplish this normally is to take levels in Rage Mage. I think that a divine version of that class is reasonable.

[Pluto!]

Sounds like a reasonable feat. I'd probably remove Defensive Casting as an option, though, for flavor purposes.

The abilities aren't synergistic and the Druid already has the option of casting and raging in the same fight, so the feat doesn't really give the Druid anything it doesn't have anyway. It just gives the player a little more leeway with their tactical sequencing, which is fine in my book.

Edit: It does favorably compare with Rage Mage, but that's not a bad thing - does anybody seriously think that class is worth losing BA/CL class features for?

[eggynack]

I don't see a problem with this. Druidic avenger is quite weak as ACF's go, so letting you ditch some of that weakness for a feat makes sense. Honestly, this would probably be fine from a balance perspective if you just handed it out for free, but doing it feat style makes sense.

[yaluckyboy09]

I don't see a problem with this. Druidic avenger is quite weak as ACF's go, so letting you ditch some of that weakness for a feat makes sense. Honestly, this would probably be fine from a balance perspective if you just handed it out for free, but doing it feat style makes sense.

That's what I thought too


Sounds like a reasonable feat. I'd probably remove Defensive Casting as an option, though, for flavor purposes.

The abilities aren't synergistic and the Druid already has the option of casting and raging in the same fight, so the feat doesn't really give the Druid anything it doesn't have anyway. It just gives the player a little more leeway with their tactical sequencing, which is fine in my book.

Edit: It does favorably compare with Rage Mage, but that's not a bad thing - does anybody seriously think that class is worth losing BA/CL class features for?

Flavor-wise, I don't see why whatever source gave the Druid his powers would give him powers that intentionally clash. I mean they go out of their way to let you know that you only get the baseline Rage ability and not the improvements, if they gave the Druid the improved Rage abilities I think it would make sense but baseline Rage alone should be usable with the spell the Druid gets at the same time.

[fishyfishyfishy]

Remember we're talking about the Druid you guys. It's insanely powerful even without Wild Shape. That spell list is pretty terrifying, and allowing it to rage while casting seems like giving it back too much to me.

[eggynack]

Remember we're talking about the Druid you guys. It's insanely powerful even without Wild Shape. That spell list is pretty terrifying, and allowing it to rage while casting seems like giving it back too much to me.
The druid with druidic avenger is as tier one as the druid without. That much is true. But, by the same token, giving this ability doesn't do anything like bridge the gap between normal druid and druidic avenger. Rage is so marginal to a druid so as to be completely meaningless.

To put that claim in perspective, if there were a feat that just gave druids rage, spells allowed, I doubt it'd even make my list of possibilities. I understand where you're coming from, the notion that any buff of any kind to a tier one class is bad for its imbalancing impact, but this doesn't seem like one of those situations, coming as a tiny buff after a somewhat larger nerf.

[yaluckyboy09]

The druid with druidic avenger is as tier one as the druid without. That much is true. But, by the same token, giving this ability doesn't do anything like bridge the gap between normal druid and druidic avenger. Rage is so marginal to a druid so as to be completely meaningless.

To put that claim in perspective, if there were a feat that just gave druids rage, spells allowed, I doubt it'd even make my list of possibilities. I understand where you're coming from, the notion that any buff of any kind to a tier one class is bad for its imbalancing impact, but this doesn't seem like one of those situations, coming as a tiny buff after a somewhat larger nerf.

See, if I had this option I'd take the Aspect of Nature and the Spontaneous Divine casting with it most likely dropping it from a Tier 1 to a Tier 2 by virtue of having a more limited spell list, but for me I just like spontaneous casters more anyways

[Troacctid]

I'm not sure casting spells during a rage is even good. What's the point of raging if you're just going to cast spells anyway? It's not like the rage is doing anything to improve your spells. I mean, maybe if you want the option to cast a defensive spell if the fight starts going sideways, I guess, but it's not like Natural Spell where you're in wild shape all the time by default--you can just, like, not rage.

[ben-zayb]

I'd at the very least go for the Rage Mage path and limit the spells available (by school? by components?) for casting. Stuff like Calm Animals really breaks the theme of raging. Well, I mean, yes, any smart-enough person can BS their way with contrivances for stuff like these to make sense, but still.

EDIT: Oh, and here's a shameless plug (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?356949-All-who-challenge-me-will-burn-in-the-fires-of-my-hatred!-3-5-PrC-Fix-PEACH-WIP), if you are open to a little more homebrewing than that.

[yaluckyboy09]

I'm not sure casting spells during a rage is even good. What's the point of raging if you're just going to cast spells anyway? It's not like the rage is doing anything to improve your spells. I mean, maybe if you want the option to cast a defensive spell if the fight starts going sideways, I guess, but it's not like Natural Spell where you're in wild shape all the time by default--you can just, like, not rage.

I kinda agree with you, I wanted it to improve my melee capabilities while also being able to cast spells and I'm understand completely that there are better ways to improve my Strength, mostly I just wanted the versatility