Cleric versus Druids (no, not that way)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

So I've been making some 4e characters for a game I joined recently (totally made Shazaam as a Storm Warden) and I saw the multiclass feats. There is "Initiate of the Old Faith" for Druids and "Initiate of the Faith" for Clerics and I was thinking this could be an awesome way to deal with Clerics and Druids in the new edition.

Why not set up a very distinct rivalry between Druids and Clerics much like you see in the real world with mainstream religions and older religions.

I think there is a lot of potential for the Clerics versus Druid story line and I don't really recall D&D ever doing this, they always seem to have a respect for each other even though they clearly do not follow the same religion/ideologies. I would love to see LG/CG Druids at war with LG/CG Clerics, or something like that.

I'm not the greatest at official lore so I may have missed this in the past, but I think 5e could use this to help further distinguish Clerics and Druids as they... Are getting more similar now days.

====




Class
Barbarian
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Fighter
Monk
Paladin
Ranger
Rogue
Sorcerer
Warlock
Wizard


Barbarian














Bard














Cleric














Druid














Fighter














Monk














Paladin














Ranger














Rogue














Sorcerer














Warlock














Wizard
















D = Disrespect
I = Indifferent
T = Tolerate
R = Respect

I would like to fill out this table. I'm sure there will be some exceptions to the general guideline, such as classes of the same religion obtaining a one slot higher rating than if they were different religions.

Do you all think this is a good range for the love/hate spectrum?

[ji6]

Words

Sounds fun to me! I rather like wars between whole PC classes (usually makes being one of those PCs more interesting). Plus, destroying the underground churches would be an interesting quest for PCs. Alternatively, if they are in Cleric zones, finding and hanging hidden Druids. Making those types of quests lucrative would make a lot of PCs pick a side (or better yet, jump between the defended borders and take quests on both sides, and smuggling)!

As an alternative, in my games, usually Clerics had so much control, they ignored Druids as most people would towards the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just some crazy words from people that are not normal and hiding from the rest of society. Definitely more bland than your idea though, which could make an interesting backdrop to many campaigns.

[rlc]

Maybe nature clerics feel bad for the druids. Or maybe they're lumped in with the druids and don't like that. I can definitely see some moral dilemmas come out of this, especially if you also get paladins and rangers involved. Good idea, especially if you don't mind getting your inspiration from real wrld historical or current events.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Sounds fun to me! I rather like wars between whole PC classes (usually makes being one of those PCs more interesting). Plus, destroying the underground churches would be an interesting quest for PCs. Alternatively, if they are in Cleric zones, finding and hanging hidden Druids. Making those types of quests lucrative would make a lot of PCs pick a side (or better yet, jump between the defended borders and take quests on both sides, and smuggling)!

As an alternative, in my games, usually Clerics had so much control, they ignored Druids as most people would towards the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just some crazy words from people that are not normal and hiding from the rest of society. Definitely more bland than your idea though, which could make an interesting backdrop to many campaigns.

I really think there is way too much playing nice between the PC classes and the idea of respect is overplayed.

I think if you made contention between each class (even among Cleric versus Paladins of the same deity) you can have more dynamic reasons a Cleric and a Druid or a Fighter and Barbarian would team up.


Maybe nature clerics feel bad for the druids. Or maybe they're lumped in with the druids and don't like that. I can definitely see some moral dilemmas come out of this, especially if you also get paladins and rangers involved. Good idea, especially if you don't mind getting your inspiration from real wrld historical or current events.

I would think that Nature Clerics and Druids would hate each other MORE than other types. Not only are they thought as each other but "the other is doing it WRONG" mentality.

[rlc]

I would think that Nature Clerics and Druids would hate each other MORE than other types. Not only are they thought as each other but "the other is doing it WRONG" mentality.

That would definitely be the best way to go about it from a storyline perspective, but I could also see different factions on both sides. Maybe some druids just want to go about their lives. Or maybe it's the other around and a few druids are giving the rest a bad name and the clerics use that to their advantage, but some of the clerics see through it.

[quinron]

This is a great idea. I've been wondering what to do with my druids. I've actually already implemented a nature faith in my setting that's drawn a lot of druids, one that's looked down on by the mainstream faith. I like the idea that most priests are dismissive toward the faith and preach druids as heretics, but some nature clerics have started getting aggressive and hunting them down; fortunately there's neither a druid nor a cleric in my current party, so I don't have to worry about the players being at each other's throats.

[Tanarii]

Which side will the PCs be allowed to play? Clerics or Druids?

[JoeJ]

A hostility between clerics and druids does not necessarily have to be due to religious differences. They could be different organized hierarchies serving the same pantheon, that are rivals within the kingdom for official support, finances, and political influence.

[Longcat]

Which side will the PCs be allowed to play? Clerics or Druids?

Both, of course. More fun that way.

[Tanarii]

Sounds like a recipe for intra-party asshattery to me. I'd rather have a certain halfling ranger/barbarian on my side. :p

Seriously though, setting up a party with enemies in ranks doesn't make much sense. I'd pick one side or the other or neither as allowable PC classes if I was going to set up something like this. Unless I was specifically gunning to have the party Cleric & Druid be the exception that resolves the war.

[rlc]

Why wouldn't you adapt the story based on the choices the party makes anyway? If there's a cleric and a druid in the party, it makes sense to give them a reason to still work together. If neither class is in the party, but the players seem to be more sympathetic towards one side, it makes sense to use that in your story. I'm not sure where the problem is.

[Tanarii]

It depends if you're designing the campaign first with this as a major theme, or it's just something you're tossing in to either an existing campaign. Or even a set of pickup games with players you don't know the classes for the PCs in advance.

I was assuming a new campaign with this as a major theme. In that case, I'd do what I normally do for a new campaign: give the players the list of available classes and races based on the campaign theme. And it'd either be Clerics or Druids. Because extremely destructive oppositional elements (such as enemies) in the same party usually sucks, unless you need it for the campaign to play out. And the players are in on that fact.

If it's not a major campaign theme, or its either existing players or pick up groups, as long as the players keep the hostility to low level antagonism (ie dwarf-elf trope, or paladin-thief trope) it shouldn't be a problem.

[rlc]

Fair enough, though I'd probably still try to adapt the story somehow anyway, just probably not as much as if the players were in on it from the beginning.

[SwordChuck]

Sounds like a recipe for intra-party asshattery to me. I'd rather have a certain halfling ranger/barbarian on my side. :p

Seriously though, setting up a party with enemies in ranks doesn't make much sense. I'd pick one side or the other or neither as allowable PC classes if I was going to set up something like this. Unless I was specifically gunning to have the party Cleric & Druid be the exception that resolves the war.

I was thinking like below...


Why wouldn't you adapt the story based on the choices the party makes anyway? If there's a cleric and a druid in the party, it makes sense to give them a reason to still work together. If neither class is in the party, but the players seem to be more sympathetic towards one side, it makes sense to use that in your story. I'm not sure where the problem is.

Make a story where the players, despite being from oposing view points, work together is definitely the way to go.

Perhaps both PCs are branded as traitors to their organizatiins (though still receive spells, so the higher powers are ok with them) because they are working toward fixing an issue.

Or Perhaps they were childhood friends that played together and didn't know much about the politics of the world. Eventually as they grew up they spent less time with each other but always cared about their friendship.

And it won't be just the Cleric and Druid either... Give each class a reason to distrust, not care for, or straight up hate the other classes. Make the players figure out why they would come together in the first place. Not the plot of the game, just, what is so I'm portent to them that they will put aside all the fighting, religion, and politics to reach a common goal.

Maybe a Rogue PC's little sibling is learning the ways of being a Fighter. The Rogues typically hate Fighters as they are the ones in their way for a lot of the jobs but because the PC loves their little sister they are willing to work with other fighters.

Note: it helps if you view classes as a social status much like Knights or Samurai were.

[Natasha]

The way I run things, is that clerics tend towards the more lawful and angelic, while druids tend to the more chaotic / fey. I even reworked my drow to not use clerics but Underdark druids. So, the difference between the two of them focuses on the difference between the more lawful races (dwarves) and chaotic (elves) as their primary religion.

I make racial culture play a strong role in my game. Even in Eberron, relgions tend to spawn along racial lines. So, I go with that angle.

[Tenmujiin]

Personally I prefer to keep classes mostly mechanical so players can refluff them easily so if I did run some kind of new vs old faith it would have at least have clerics on both sides

[SwordChuck]

Personally I prefer to keep classes mostly mechanical so players can refluff them easily so if I did run some kind of new vs old faith it would have at least have clerics on both sides

I'm not sure how that would change anything.

My druid is now a dragon shaman... Dragon shamans are looked upon as if they are druids. Or Perhaps because they worship Bahamut they are looked at as Clerics.

A refluff of a refluff is quite simple.

Plus if you make classes a social class (like Knights or Samurai) it makes a lot more in game sense why there is a difference between Fighters and all the other soldiers in the army.

[Dimolyth]

Well, on our table, NPC clerics and druids just "don`t like each other". Even if the share patron deity.
Cleric of Wooden God teaches people to respect the forest. This cleric will just let the forest be as it is...
Druid of the same God verify the balance of nature in the forest. And don`t bother about people at all.
They have different job. Each one thinks his job to be more important, than the other is. So, they dislike each other as general rule.

Then, PC conflicts could be fun, if all players love them. Otherwise - that ruins fun for half of the players, even for those who are not involved in the conflict. "Druid vs Cleric" is much as "Wizard vs Sorcerer", "Paladin vs Rogue", "anyone vs Half-Orc", "Dwarf vs Elf", and so forth.

[KorvinStarmast]

Why not set up a very distinct rivalry between Druids and Clerics much like you see in the real world with mainstream religions and older religions.

I think there is a lot of potential for the Clerics versus Druid story line and I don't really recall D&D ever doing this, they always seem to have a respect for each other even though they clearly do not follow the same religion/ideologies. I would love to see LG/CG Druids at war with LG/CG Clerics, or something like that. We did this a number of times in 1e and previous, where the archetypical "civilization versus nature" trope was the background theme. Heh, casting Heat Metal on the Cleric who was giving our stone circle ritual some trouble was most entertaining.

[SwordChuck]

Well, on our table, NPC clerics and druids just "don`t like each other". Even if the share patron deity.
Cleric of Wooden God teaches people to respect the forest. This cleric will just let the forest be as it is...
Druid of the same God verify the balance of nature in the forest. And don`t bother about people at all.
They have different job. Each one thinks his job to be more important, than the other is. So, they dislike each other as general rule.

Then, PC conflicts could be fun, if all players love them. Otherwise - that ruins fun for half of the players, even for those who are not involved in the conflict. "Druid vs Cleric" is much as "Wizard vs Sorcerer", "Paladin vs Rogue", "anyone vs Half-Orc", "Dwarf vs Elf", and so forth.

See, it doesn't have to cause PC conflicts.

Have them give a reason they are working together and then have them deal with society not understanding why they are allies. Them they need to deal with all the religious and political fallout.

They will have to work more and even role play more to get their objectives finished.

Sure the PCs may not like each other but they are working together for a reason and they can play off that. It doesn't have to mean they try to antagonize each other.

×××edit

When the party comes into town that primarily worships Pelor (a town that doesn't like rogues and fighters due to their mercenary ways near by) the Paladin of Pelor gives the rogue a longsword and then gives the rogue and fighter a spare holy symbol to make them look like paladins.

When they get to a trading outpost (full of fighter and rogue mercenaries) that aren't too friendly with religions (especially good one) the Paladin may hide their indentifiers and act as if they are Fighter.

Sooo much role play potential when you get away from the book's "everyone likes each other a little bit or a lot" vibe.

[Millstone85]

Personally, I prefer a perspective in which druids and nature clerics get along.
The forces of nature are numerous: gods, elementals, fey, spirits...
Druids commune with them all, while nature clerics hold a more specific allegiance.
This leads druids to act as mediators between these clerics and the servants of non-divine forces, as well as between clerics of different nature gods.

[Arkhios]

Then, PC conflicts could be fun, if all players love them. Otherwise - that ruins fun for half of the players, even for those who are not involved in the conflict. "Druid vs Cleric" is much as "Wizard vs Sorcerer", "Paladin vs Rogue", "anyone vs Half-Orc", "Dwarf vs Elf", and so forth.

On a slightly (un-)related matter, we're having a weird conflict between a neutral good paladin of the ancients and a chaotic neutral druid of the underdark circle (who, in my opinion, should have somewhat commong ground in philosophies). Both agree that life, as a concept, is a never-ending cycle, that one's death is a lunch for someone else, and so on. However, the paladin thinks that while it's completely alright to leave carcasses for the scavengers to take care of, it would be untasteful to leave them somewhere within 10 to 30 yards of commonly used road, where some (civilized, mind you) bypasser might see them, the paladin would instead hide them behind a tree or rock or other obscuring landscape feature. Druid wouldn't agree and instead would've left them rotting where they died. The stumbling block was that the druid didn't care what happened to the corpse and still wouldn't lift a hand stopping paladin doing what he saw best. Instead he would go on grumbling and fault the decision. Jayzus!

[Dimolyth]

See, it doesn't have to cause PC conflicts.

Have them give a reason they are working together and then have them deal with society not understanding why they are allies. Them they need to deal with all the religious and political fallout.

They will have to work more and even role play more to get their objectives finished.

Sure the PCs may not like each other but they are working together for a reason and they can play off that. It doesn't have to mean they try to antagonize each other.

×××edit

When the party comes into town that primarily worships Pelor (a town that doesn't like rogues and fighters due to their mercenary ways near by) the Paladin of Pelor gives the rogue a longsword and then gives the rogue and fighter a spare holy symbol to make them look like paladins.

When they get to a trading outpost (full of fighter and rogue mercenaries) that aren't too friendly with religions (especially good one) the Paladin may hide their indentifiers and act as if they are Fighter.

Sooo much role play potential when you get away from the book's "everyone likes each other a little bit or a lot" vibe.

Well, I`m totally agree with you.
My point was just to track possible in-party conflict and not to make absolute rivalry just for unnessessary conflict. Paladins & rogues can exist in the same party. So does druids and clerics.
Just because they are friends, or any other in-game reason proposed by DM.

[Millstone85]

I could see the conflict described by Arkhios happen between a paladin of Chauntea and a paladin of Silvanus or between two druids with different views on civilization. I don't think it is a class issue. Also, it sounds pretty cool, including the druid's decision to condemn without violence but condemn still.

[endur]

This really depends on the campaign world.

In an Arthurian game, the old faith druids could include Merlin and Morgan Le Fay. The new clerics of Christianity could be replacing the druids.

In a Greyhawk campaign, the druids represent an older version of the faith that is slowly being replaced by worship of the Gods.