What’s the thematic difference between Ranger, Druid, and Nature Cleric?

[KOLE]

Can anybody explain to me the difference here? On the surface, Rangers just seem like less educated Druids. Druids and Nature clerics seem exactly the same, except that nature clerics can use metal/heavy armor for some reason. All of them use Wisdom for their spells, and their spell lists have a lot in common.

[GlenSmash!]

Druids have deep connections to Nature.

Rangers protect civilization from the dangers of the Wild.

Nature Clerics are servants of a deity that has influence over the Natural world.

[KorvinStarmast]

Can anybody explain to me the difference here?
Beyond the very concise answer by Glensmash .....

As presented in the PHB:


Rangers are martial characters who specialize in ranged and melee attacks, depending upon how the character is specialized. They get to choose a fighting style that improves combat ability. They are half casters who know, not prepare, spells. Choose spells wisely. No spell focus. No cantrips. (Magic initiate feat can overcome this; feat is an optional rule, so in a featless game this does not come into play)

Druids are servants of nature, who can wild shape and don't (per the PHB1) use metal armor. Full casters. Divine casters. Prepare spells, from all possible druid spells, rather than be limited by spells known. Yes cantrips. Yes spell focus.

Nature Clerics are servants of nature deities, and can wear metal armor up to heavy armor. They don't have the shape change ability. Full casters. Divine casters. Prepare spells, from all possible druid spells, rather than be limited by spells known. Yes cantrips. Yes spell focus aka holy symbol.

EDIT to ADD (thanks xroads) Nature clerics get access to the full list of cleric spells and some of the druid spells as domain spells. This is another difference between nature clerics & druids.




1 For everyone with a dog in this particular fight: Please keep the annoying flame war arguing about this point for another thread. Yes, we know that at a given table, the DM and players can choose to interpret / adapt the medium armor proficiency to include metal armor for a druid.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Can anybody explain to me the difference here? On the surface, Rangers just seem like less educated Druids. Druids and Nature clerics seem exactly the same, except that nature clerics can use metal/heavy armor for some reason. All of them use Wisdom for their spells, and their spell lists have a lot in common.

For the nature cleric and druid its more of a philosophical difference, but nature clerics can't do all the things druids do, like turn into animals and stuff.

Rangers are warriors. thats the major difference.

Edit: its also important to note that the devs made spell lists to be to be thematic, so when you look at similar themed spellcasters of course they will look similar. Spells also aren't the only thing these three classes have so look beyond that.

[shadowmage]

Ranger - The old scruffy scout that guide people through the wilds and patrol the edge of the wilds around the civilization.

Druid - The old hermit that lives out in the wilds, taking care of it. Protecting it from being ravaged by anyone.

Nature Cleric - The civilized person that teaches other how to live and work in harmony with the wilds, whom probably need to bath a little more often.

[adolann]

From a philosophical perspective, we've always viewed as:
Rangers - Fighters with a health respect for nature
Druids - People who worship Nature (i.e., actually worship the concept of Nature)
Nature Cleric - People who worship a diety whose portfolio includes Nature

[Naanomi]

Druids and Nature clerics are often displayed with Druids as ‘the old ways’ in many settings, and one largely unconconcerned with worship and service of the community. Druidic worship is a private, secretive affair (hence the secret language), and even good Druids who are cooperative with civilization do things on their own ‘for the greater good’ instead of rallying the people the way a Nature Cleric (concerned with worship) would

I feel Rangers, if not for nostalgia, could easily have been a Druid, Fighter, and/or Rogue subclass... but the main idea compare to the other two is that a ranger is a rugged outdoorsy fighting type, without much inherent spirituality. A ranger’s spellcasting is often more like ‘woodsman’s tricks’ than pious magic; intact a ranger could easily be a big-game hunter or the like with little respect or reverence for the wilds, just knowledge of them

[xroads]

3. Nature Clerics are servants of nature deities, and can wear metal armor up to heavy armor. They don't have the shape change ability. Full casters. Divine casters. Prepare spells, from all possible druid spells, rather than be limited by spells known. Yes cantrips. Yes spell focus aka holy symbol.


Good summary. But one minor correction. Nature clerics get access to the full list of cleric spells and some of the druid spells. Which is another important difference between nature clerics & druids.

[Vogie]

The difference is exactly what you make of it.

By RAW
On one hand Druids are a various shades of the animalistic, really nature-y side of nature, reaching out in the most sentient of contexts, following the hierarchy of the natural ecosystem - Safety(Dream), nature-based magic (land), Creatures of all types (moon), The cycle of Life (Twilight), and a sense of the supernatural connections of creatures(Shepherd)

Rangers, on the other hand, are civilization's take on nature, following the hierarchy of mankind overlayed on all of nature - something to be exploited (Gloom Stalker), learned from (Hunter/Monster Slayer), controlled (Beastmaster), and used (Horizon Walker & Primeval Guardian) for their own purpose.

Nature & Tempest Clerics, as well as Oath of the Ancients Paladins, are a bit of both - they are Civilized but following the hierarchy of religious belief in a divine being, which has power over a certain domain... specifically, nature as a whole. They kind of come in the middle of the above spectrum. They aren't subduing or overtaking nature, nor are they gaining their power from nature directly, but rather calling upon their deity or oath, and gaining power from that source in a way that also happens to look very similar to the other two, while not being specifically either.

However, due to the flexibility of the system, you can also adjust it to fit your taste. If you want a "Druid Knight" or "green knight" concept, for example, are you mechanically:

A druid class who is houseruled to have metal armor?
A druid class who has access to metal-armor-alternatives like dragonhide or Ironwood?
A nature or tempest cleric class who calls themselves a druid?
A Oath of Ancient Paladin class who calls themselves a druid?
A Ranger class that is houseruled to be allowed to wild shape?
It's really up to you - they can all be druid knights.

And you can mix and match things up, as well

Maybe create a melee druid by using the Eldritch Knight Fighter skeleton, swapping out the Wizard spell list for the Druid spell list.
In my sig I have a homebrew druid variant from Kevin Hearne's Iron Druid series... because in those novels, the druids are those who bind themselves to Gaia. That doesn't click with the class of druids in D&D, mechanically, but it does sound eerily like a warlock patron.
Wizards themselves came out with the Spore Druid recently, which gives druids an alternative to wild shape. As I'm fond of stating, you can easily use that mechanical skeleton to create other types of elemental druids - Blizzard druids, wildfire druids, and the like.

[KorvinStarmast]

Good summary. But one minor correction. Nature clerics get access to the full list of cleric spells and some of the druid spells. Which is another important difference between nature clerics & druids.

Good call! I'll go back and edit that in.