A question about the lore of the druid.

[NecroDancer]

So Druids are suppose to respect nature and all that jazz but could it be possible for a druid to be an advocate of city building?

The druid realizes that people will continue to colonize the wilderness more and more so the druid decided to help them colonize in order to make sure civilization doesn't destroy the wildness. The druid would teach the colonists how to farm without cuttting down forests or depleting the land, the druid would show the colonists how to magically grow trees to provide lumber, and the druid would make sure the colonists don't overhunt any wildlife.

The druid does prefer city life to the outdoors but doesn't want the ecological system to be ruined so the druid hopes his actions can mesh together the natural and the civilized world without harm to either.

[Mike Miller]

Have you heard of the Urban Druid? I believe it was in the Dragon Compendium (but I could be mistaken). I haven't read it for a while, but I feel like that would hit the spot you seek.

[ExLibrisMortis]

There's an urban druid in the Dragon Magazine Compendium, a host of city-themed druid ACFs in the Cityscape web enhancement, and an urban ranger in Unearthed Arcana. Druids who like cities are totally fine.

[flappeercraft]

Again, Urban Druid. Even if not available I think that could go perfectly with a normal Druid, who knows, maybe s/he considers cities to be due to the nature of humanoids which s/he considers to be a kind of natural environment but not a typical one, therefore since both environments (cities and wildlands) don't mesh together s/he is trying to make them do so.

That or it's the only way or the most effective way to protect nature.

[daryen]

The druid does prefer city life to the outdoors but doesn't want the ecological system to be ruined so the druid hopes his actions can mesh together the natural and the civilized world without harm to either.

Isn't that kinda of the default elven position?

But, sure, your description fits a druid just fine (Urban or not). The whole idea of what "respect and preserve nature" even means is widely open and subject to interpretation. Druids can be horribly destructive and hostile to civilized people. They can be incredibly accommodating and encouraging of civilization. Or anything in between. As long as they are respecting and preserving "nature" along the way, they're good.

So, really, it is whatever your DM lets you get away with, to be honest.

[bahamut920]

There are actual druidic sects in the Forgotten Realms (at the very least) who do exactly this. Druids devoted to Good deities like Mielikki, Eldath, and Gwaeron Windstrom tend towards this. Evil druid deities tend to be "Civilization must BURN!" or "Survival of the fittest" types.

[Deophaun]

That would actually be the more historically accurate role of druids. They weren't guardians or avatars of nature: they were intercessors to prevent nature (the biggest, baddest, meanest thing going at the time) from annihilating your village, town, or city (in addition to being the literate class making up politicians, doctors, and lawyers).

Druids were the backbone of civilization for the Celts, so anything that requires them to be in opposition to civilization is just poorly written trash that should be disregarded.

[InvisibleBison]

That would actually be the more historically accurate role of druids. They weren't guardians or avatars of nature: they were intercessors to prevent nature (the biggest, baddest, meanest thing going at the time) from annihilating your village, town, or city (in addition to being the literate class making up politicians, doctors, and lawyers).

Druids were the backbone of civilization for the Celts, so anything that requires them to be in opposition to civilization is just poorly written trash that should be disregarded.

You're right that the D&D druid and the real-life druid pretty much only share a name, but I don't see how this means that all the D&D druid fluff is "poorly written trash that should be disregarded". Even if you insist that anything called a druid must be accurate to real-life druids (which seems like a pretty silly thing to insist on, in my opinion), wouldn't it be simpler to just rename the D&D druid rather than redesigning the fluff (and probably crunch as well) of the class?

[Geddy2112]

In addition to running an urban druid, it should be understood that humanoids are part of nature. Elves, orcs, goblins, humans, dwarves, etc. are biological species. Nature also builds structures and cities- coral, termites, and ants build large structures and have societies. Primates(humans included) have incredibly complex hierarchies and social structures.

All of these have to live in balance with the rest of nature, so there is no reason humanoids cannot as well.

[Deophaun]

wouldn't it be simpler to just rename the D&D druid rather than redesigning the fluff (and probably crunch as well) of the class?
So it isn't poorly written because there is a simple fix that takes three seconds and avoids all the problems that the writers were too incompetent to pursue? I think you prove my point.

And tying fluff to crunch is poor design, so we can tie that around the Druid class's lore's neck as we toss it in the river.

[ExLibrisMortis]

So it isn't poorly written because there is a simple fix that takes three seconds and avoids all the problems that the writers were too incompetent to pursue? I think you prove my point.
It's not poorly written because literally the only thing you take issue with (in the post that InvisibleBison quoted) is the name, nothing else, and on spurious grounds. That 'druid' as historical term doesn't match the class fluff very well doesn't change that 'druid' is a perfectly acceptable name for the class.

[Deophaun]

It's not poorly written because literally the only thing you take issue with (in the post that InvisibleBison quoted) is the name, nothing else, and on spurious grounds.
Only? Are you sure about that. I count two things taken issue with.

That 'druid' as historical term doesn't match the class fluff very well doesn't change that 'druid' is a perfectly acceptable name for the class.
But the fact that the class fluff doesn't make sense on its own is perfectly fine.

It's garbage. Absolute garbage.

[daryen]

It's garbage. Absolute garbage.

And ... no one else cares.

The class provides the ability to become an animal (and later, other things), you get a meat-shield buddy, and ninth-level casting with useful spells. Even if you take one of those away (no wild shape, no companion, or reduced to sixth-level casting), it's still good. The only cost is being a tree-hugging hippy. I can live with that.

So, hate it all you want. Revel in that loathing. Just float and luxuriate in it. Enjoy yourself. No one else cares.

And, again, to the original poster, if you want to hug trees in the city instead of hugging trees in the forest, yes, that still qualifies and is all good.

[Ashtagon]

As written, the druid class has nothing whatsoever to do with the historical druids. (Even the paladin class has more in common with historical paladins than the druid class does with historical druids.)

Urban druids absolutely are an existing variant. Unless your GM has campaign-specific reasons for excluding them, there's no reason not to play one if you want to.

The class itself can't decide if it's a nature priest, a nature wizard, a general nature-loving caster, a shape-shifter, all about the pets, or some combination of the above. Certainly, the default combination of all the above is overpowered CoDzilla fuel.

[Goaty14]

Druid lore is that druids live with other druids in small towns of druids. I don't see how this isn't applicable for druids w/ non druids.

[atemu1234]

Druid lore is that druids live with other druids in small towns of druids. I don't see how this isn't applicable for druids w/ non druids.

TIL Druids live in hippy communes.

[Nifft]

TIL Druids live in hippy communes.

"As long as they stay in their Druish ghetto."

"Excuse me it's pronounced grotto."