are druids actually good for noobs? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

King of Nowhere

2020-08-04, 09:11 AM

i've seen that idea often on this forum. if you are not an optimizer and need to power up, play a druid. if you don't know how to make a good build, you can't go wrong with druid. no matter how bad you play, you can't screw up a druid. new player in a veteran party? play a druid to be on par with everyone else.

and i want to counter this widely held belief, because it completely contradicts my experience: druid is actually the most difficult core class to play effectively (except maybe the monk).
let me be clear, i'm not saying druids are not strong. of course they are. i'm saying that druids are very hard to play; that if you don't know very well what you are doing, all of your different powers and class abilities will just amount to different ways to be utterly ineffective. i've seen 4 druids played at my tables, with players ranging from complete noobs to several years of experience, and yet i've never seen one coming close to its potential. most of them were outright weaker than most martial characters.
let's start with the various reasons why that is

- animal companion
"this is so broken! from level 1 you get a companion that is already stronger than a fighter, plus action economy"
not so much. ok, if you know to take a fleshraker and buff it with venomfire, you get a pretty effective companion. this is high op, though - and that specific combo is banned in many tables anyway.
most noob players won't know any better than to take a wolf as companion, and will not know to buff it - at most they will only get very limited buffs. so, unless you know very well what you are doing, your super-powerful animal companion will deal 1d6+3 damage per round. maybe.

- wild shape
"you can tank your str and dex, you won't need them. you can beat people up in melee even if you're not prepared"
well, no. first of all, let's clear the hurdle of the lowest optimization levels: most noobs never realize they should stay wildshaped all the time. it's just not something most people think about. so, while you are in humanoid form, using wild shape is only a perfectly good way to waste one round and losing all your equipment. unless you use wild clasping and similar stuff, which is not core and most new players would have no way of knowing. Second, most d&d players do not know/understand how metamorphosis work. most players think that "you take on the shape of a bear" means "open the monster manual, look for the bear, those are now your stats". they don't know that they keep all their class benefits. the way the ability is written is not helpful in the slightest:
"This ability functions like the alternate form special ability, except as noted here." great, go look at alternate form. the alternate form special ability is a bulklet list of 11 points, referencing all manners of technical stuff, especially the fine distinction between extraordinary/supernatural abilities and attacks, class levels and hit dice. a lot of those concepts require going to read yet more references. are you really suggesting a beginner should read that stuff? I couldn't make sense of it at first, and i've been playing for 5 years when i first read it.
for most beginners, this is a trap option, or good at most for scouting in eagle form.
but let's assume a player knows how the wild shape work and knows to stay wild shaped. in this case, wild shape provides some nice boost to AC due to natural armor... that is lost because all those wild clasping and wild armor and stuff is expensive and you just can't afford protective items as good as anyone else's. and you get some decent physical boost to beat people up in melee. that's still subpar compared to what a fighter of equal optimization can do. and you also have to know the different animal stats and which are most convenient; again, something that is not beginner-friendly

- spells
"ye may haf tha upper hand in magic (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0353.html)"
is druid magic stronger than cleric magic?
let's look a few spell levels.
at level 3, you get call lightning, so you can deal 3d6 damage, provided you do nothing else. contagion, which can be described as "save or be mildly inconvenienced". diminish plants, that only work on normal plants. great, you can cast it on a bonsai and turn it into a real tree! is there anyone who ever used that spell? dominate animal, how many times do you actually fight animals you want to dominate? quench, extinguish nonmagical fire, very useful if you wanted to be a firefighter instead of an adventurer.
clerics heal better and buff better (i don't see anything in that list that compares to prayer). they have specialized spells to fight undead, which are mostly useless but still, undeads are a threat more often than common animals.
at level 6, druids can replicate a lot of enhancement buffs to stats that you should already have from items by now. some offensive spells that are mostly bad (fire seeds? you spend one round to make an acorn that will need another round to be used as a weapon, to deal 1d6 per level to a single target. there are much better ways to deal 1d6 per level). transport via plants is actually good, and something clerics don't get. but still, no heal (you get that at higher level) and no harm.
at level 9, druids have shapechange, which is very strong, but only if properly used. aaand... what else? summon elementals? summon shambling mounds? are those things even remotely useful by the time you get 9th level spells? at best, i've seen those summoned creatures used as walls. clerics get mass heal, implosion, miracle...
druids have some good crowd control, like all the walls, fogs, thorns... but beginners tend to not use those, as they make for very complicated effects to keep track.
the cleric spell list, on the other hand, is pretty straightforward. when you cast heal or harm, you know what you're getting.

so, if you are a noob and you try to play a druid, you will get
- an animal companion that will never manage to hit anything, will deal negligible damage when it does
- you'll be a mediocre fighter in wild shape
- your offensive magic is weaker than the wizard's, your supporting magic is weaker than the cleric's.

even if you are decently experienced, you can expect to be a jack of all trades; versatile, but not particularly powerful in any specific field. i've been playing for years, i hang around this forum, yet even i cannot squeeze more than this out of a druid.
only heavy min-maxing can get a really powerful druid. at least, i assume. i've never seen one that would be any better than other equally minmaxed characters. most of those comparison are between a high-op druid and a low-op fighter with no support from the rest of the party and no magic items.
but regardless, that's not relevant, because i'm specifically discussing ease of use. and it seems to me, all druid abilities are powerful only if they are used correctly, often in combo with other abilities.
as a comparison, a fighter type is easy: get as many plusses to your hit and damage, and you're fine. you will need some advice on feats, but that's easy to get; even if you don't optimize well, you're likely to be at least passable at dealing damage. a cleric is easier. buff and heal, you're not being tier 1, but you're certainly carrying your weight. a wizard is easy; you can do nothing but throwing around fireballs, you're certainly not using your wizard very effectively, but still, you are doing significant damage. a rogue is easy; as long as you flank you get sneak attack, just do that.
with a druid, if you follow the general ur-model of "a bear riding a bear throwing bears" you'll make a lot of attack rolls, most of those will miss, those who hit will deal maybe 1d8+4.
(EDIT: also a druid requires the most bookkeeping, for your stats, your animal companion, your buffs, the animal's buffs, the various forms in which you can wildshape, the various stuff that you can summon.../EDIT)

so, why so many people advertise druid as a class easy to use and good for a beginner?

Mike Miller

2020-08-04, 09:20 AM

I think you have solid points. I wouldn't recommend it for a beginner, because I don't recommend casters to beginners. I think learning the system first is more important than learning how to power up. However, this is the forum. Collectively we have a lot of experience and knowledge. A lot of the time that collective capability is assumed when giving advice and opinion.

That's how I see it, anyway.

DwarvenWarCorgi

2020-08-04, 09:45 AM

Khedrac

2020-08-04, 10:02 AM

On a low op table a wolf is an effective animal companion - it's just not as good as a riding dog (there are plenty of core companions worse at level 1 than the wolf).
I agree that the cleric spell list is better, but the druid list is generally hard to go wrong with, unless you run into a DM who says there are no berries for you to cast goodberry on and no plants to entangle. Going up the levels it becomes easier to choose the wrong spells, but I still don't think it's as bad as you picture.

As for wildshape - staying in wildshape all day works well if someone can cast a telepathic bond otherwise you can quickly run into problems with being unable to communicate with the party. (It is not obvious that you need to get a pearl of speech and equip it after wildshaping, and again, it relies on the DM allowing access.)

All classes can be messed up by a new player, but the druid is significantly harder to mess up than most!

In my experience one of the classes that people do mess up the most is the fighter! People who are not fast with their maths will avoid power attacking, or limit it to whatever bonuses they have up to keep the maths simple. This can really limit the flexibility when compared with someone who makes themselves a power attack chart so they know what their options are.

Druid is a solid core option for a new player - not the best (probably sorcerer or rogue) but far better than wizard, monk, fighter, paladin, barbarian and probably bard and rogue too (as they can be very boring to play until you learn how to do more).

Tvtyrant

2020-08-04, 10:11 AM

Palanan

2020-08-04, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
so, why so many people advertise druid as a class easy to use and good for a beginner?

Originally Posted by DwarvenWarCorgi
Second, most of your other arguments assume a noob player, playing a druid, who has Zero guidance from the rest of the table.

This pretty much describes my entry into 3.5 gaming. I hadn’t played D&D for many years and 3.5 was entirely new to me, to the point that I was overwhelmed just looking at the feats in the PHB. The concept of a feat itself was a new and different thing.

My DM, who was also new to 3.5, suggested the party could use either a monk or a druid, so I went with druid. This was in August 2003, when 3.5 had just come out, and none of us were aware of the WotC forums.

I took to the druid like an eel to water, had a blast from the start and enjoyed it ever after. For all practical purposes I was a beginner, since 3.5 was a completely new system to me—and yet the druid made sense to me, and helped me learn the system along with the rest of our group.

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
your offensive magic is weaker than the wizard's, your supporting magic is weaker than the cleric's.

I had an earful of this from the player who was running the evil drow wizard in the group—the sort of player who liked to run evil characters in otherwise good groups, “because it makes it interesting.” Yeah.

So this player spent a lot of time telling me how the druid was a weak combatant compared with the fighter, and a subpar healer compared with the cleric, and that I would never be good at either role. He did everything he could to put down the druid as a class, and by extension my character's supposedly useless role in the party.

That wasn’t helpful, but it also wasn’t completely accurate, since I did well enough as a backup healer, and between spells and summons I managed to hold my own. The guy running the drow wizard spent much of the campaign taunting and baiting me, both in and out of character, and in one session very smugly ran through a long list of ways that his drow wizard could defeat my elven druid.

That wasn’t pleasant for a new player, but the guy running the drow wizard was constantly trashing 3.5 overall, loudly complaining how much they’d “nerfed everything” compared with 3.0. This was in the first couple years of 3.5, when there weren’t as many supplements, and our group’s overall system knowledge was fairly modest.

So in that context, at the dawn of 3.5 with a DM and group who were all learning the system together, playing a druid as a novice to the system worked out just fine. Obviously this would vary tremendously between groups, and I can’t speak to how it might have been if I’d come in later in 3.5’s run.

But for me, starting 3.5 with a druid made for an excellent gaming experience. Give or take the drow wizard who spent most combats invisible anyway.

Kayblis

2020-08-04, 10:22 AM

Druids are not good for beginners. If you have a complete newbie that never played the game, you don't give him a caster, it's simple. If you're learning the system, you play a simple character. I completely agree with you that Druid is a nightmare for a new player to sit with and figure out. Discussions around Druid don't assume you're talking about someone that never saw D&D before, they assume someone that's not familiar with optimizing, which is a completely different situation.

The deal with druid is that it has the highest skill floor in core. What does that mean? That means you can pick pretty much any feat and still be effective in a party of better optimized characters. You could have Toughness x5 and still be effective. You can pick Wolf as an animal companion and change it later. You can pick any spell and change it the next day. Need something today? Trade that useless spell for a summon, which is always good. No choice cripples you forever or kicks you below the curve. Sure, a Druid with a Fleshraker companion that uses Venomfire and chucks buffed summons at everything is harder to play and to make, but you don't have to do it to be effective. That's the whole deal. This is the inverse of, say, the Fighter or the Monk, that require you to know everything beforehand because all choices are set in stone and you can't change your playstyle later, so if you picked Toughness, you're set back one feat, and your base abilities are not enough to get you up to speed.

The whole argument revolves around someone that knows the system well enough to play a character. As you've probably seen time and time again, it's not a case of someone asking "this is my first game, what should I do?". It's a case of "My Swashbuckler can't keep up with the Warblade and the Sorcerer in my party, what should I play to change it?". It's the same thing with people saying "Wizard is the best class", it assumes a level of competence in the player because it's the norm within the forums it's discussed. Wizard is the worst class to play if you're a first-timer, you're a commoner with randomly selected spells that probably don't work the way you want. That doesn't mean people will stop recommending Wizard, because if you know how to play it, it's the gateway to most of the borked stuff in the system.

All in all, your assessment isn't wrong. It just assumes something that most people don't when talking about the class. Your conclusion relies heavily on the premise that we're talking about a complete noob to the whole game, while other people's arguments just mean someone new to optimization. This is, after all, a non-WotC game forum for a TTRPG, the usual userbase is not "people that never played D&D".

Palanan

2020-08-04, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Kayblis
Druids are not good for beginners. If you have a complete newbie that never played the game, you don't give him a caster, it's simple. If you're learning the system, you play a simple character. I completely agree with you that Druid is a nightmare for a new player to sit with and figure out.

Well, see my comments immediately above.

I was a complete newcomer to 3.5, and for me the druid wasn't a nightmare--it was a world of possibilities that I enjoyed exploring.

Menzath

2020-08-04, 10:36 AM

And I think you have a very biased impression of fire seeds, though if you were 100% new to 3.5 and had never read any of the books I do agree on most other points, simply because too many options definitely makes it easier to make mistakes when choosing something.

But as soon as 3.5 was 10yrs old I think the forum started to assume that anyone looking to play would at least read some of the books or the srd to get an idea of the game mechanics before actually playing.

But the second option of fire seeds, the holly berry bombs. It. Wrecks.
Eight berries that do 1d8+ 1/cl(min cl 11) no cap, command word to set them all off. You literally have your party diviner/monster expert make sure the enemy doesn't have immunity to fire.
Move up in animal form and attack, next turn drop the satchel, and walk away from the explosion while putting on shades. More casts = bigger explosion.

And yes the area isn't that large, but I think that is a good point, you can make pinpoint drops in the middle of combat easier and not have collateral damage. Same if no one has shatter and you need to break through something.

Rebel7284

2020-08-04, 10:53 AM

This 100% depends on the new player in question. You can't just paint everyone with the same brush...

There are some for whom mechanics are overwhelming and they want to learn it in small bits. Don't give this person a caster.
There are some who are excited about the new system and want to learn EVERYTHING.

For the latter player who want to learn about fighting AND magic AND monsters AND etc. Druids are pretty great.

Also, after reading about all the possible poor choices an uninformed druid player can make... it sounds like you still end up with a solid tier 3 support character, about on par with a well-played mid-op bard. That's pretty far from the druid's full tier 1 potential, but considering how easy it is to build a tier 4 sorcerer or wizard, not to mention a sword and board fighter, a solid tier 3 as the worst case scenario is not bad.

gijoemike

2020-08-04, 10:59 AM

I wish to counter these 3 points. You are approaching this issue from an expert level viewing how a new player isn't doing things 100 effective. You are NOT approaching the druid from a beginners point of view. Druid is an EXCELLENT class for a new player to learn the game. LEARN is the keyword. The goal is not to be a top class optimizer.

- animal companion

Yes an optimizer has gone through every monster manual and knows the best ways to buff their companion. Who cares? The druid wants to play Mogli (Jungle Book) raised by wolfs. That wolf at lvl 1 as 13 hp, can free action trip, and cannot be trip countered. That is more hp than a 14 con fighter, has something akin to improved trip. Track and scent*.

As they play this animal companion they are forced to learn tactical movement on the battle map. They experience an attack type that isn't just swing my sword. This opens them up to the world of tactical maneuvers of bull rush, disarm grapple. Other animal companions get other maneuvers. Large cats get both pounce and grapple. Very quickly a noob will see that pounce is AMAZING for martial toons. This single class feature gives the player insight into game mechanics that would take no less than 3 full fighter character builds. They may gain access to experience multi-attack sooner than a non druid PC can.

Oh no, it got killed. I will summon another member of the pack next week and carry on.

- wild shape

Oh no, the noob made a bad tactical decision, or a bad character decision, or realizes as a druid he cannot aid the situation. At lvl 4 the player can choose to "ditch" Mogli and become Baloo the bear or Bagheera the panther. He is a bear now. Bit o' healing, they have more AC. S/he can experience the game as something completely different. They now see how important stats play into different aspects. Dex for AC and Ref. How size can ruin AC and to hit unless countered by Str/Nat armor increases. Multiple tweeks to game mechanics during actual play. They learn the numbers game and get to see just a bit of the monster side of the table.

They don't pick the best creature. They don't even know the best creature exists or have an idea of what that is, yet.

- spells

Cleric's have domains. That domain slot, is limited to just the spells from those domains. Or you can ditch the domain for domain feats. This cannot be changed after character creation. They also have additional powers. And is dedicated to a deity which has in game meaning and forces working against them as a religion.

Mogli the Druid has none of this nonsense. It is one spell less per day. One major headache a brand new player doesn't have to go read ENTIRE CHAPTERS about. There are entire sections of the books dedicated to religion, deities, and domains. As a new player, skip it. We have a simpler magic system than cleric. As a cleric you should know the setting and your religions role. Far less so for a druid.

We don't have a spell book and the minigame of recording spells scrolls into it. I can choose from X ( subset of the list sorc/wizard list). Every morning a open the players hand book and choose a new spell from the druid list. There is no buyers remorse with this system.

Lets talk about bards and sorcs. Choose a spell forever! Until 4 levels later you can switch out just 1 spell. Unless you add in retraining mechanics. This requires PC magic mastery and is not forgiving. Neither of things a new player has.

We have just established a druid has the simplest and most forgiving spell rules. Most of the time they will choose speak with animals, goodberry, or entangle. They can fix a mistake tomorrow once they realize as a player X isn't that helpful. Allow the player to poke and prod the magic system at a pace they choose and have it be forgiving. Soon they will find summon natures ally and "HOWL" for the wolf pack to come assist in battle. Action economy win, anyone?

Conclusion:
We see the druid experiences multi facets of the game mechanics starting at level one via the role of the animal companion. At lvl 4 they can switch to a completely different aspect when they change forms, giving them insight to the monster manual and NPC side of the game (and more tactical combat). And they have the simplest magic system in the entire game.

This eases the player into tactical combat, stat manipulation, and magic all at once. Would you prefer they play a fighter or barbarian and next campaign introduce them into a new game mechanic based on watching other players from the current campaign? I have seen several replies that say never a caster or any caster for a noob is a bad idea. I disagree, how else will they learn unless they try it out? Druid isn't the healer, blaster, or face they can screw up their spells a bit and fix it tomorrow.

Unavenger

2020-08-04, 12:40 PM

Two mediocre combatants, one of whom casts decent spells, is going to be better than a bad combatant who casts decent spells, a mediocre combatant who doesn't cast decent spells, or even a mediocre combatant who casts decent spells (clerics are decent, who knew?). Obviously if you compare a low-op druid to a high-op anything else, the druid is going to have a bad day. But at low-OP the druid's key feature is the fact that it can get two bodies on the field right out of the gate, and then its spellcasting picks up in power just as the player is learning how to use it properly.

Gnaeus

2020-08-04, 01:14 PM

Also a lot of Druid powers are pretty Self explanatory to anyone who is vaguely familiar with popular media. Maybe you don’t have the most optimized form. But I turn into a bird or bat or rat is AT LEAST a T3 power. If all you care to figure out is: you are Beast Boy but you can heal and summon small animals, take all toughness for feats, wolf pet and memorize only heal spells, you are STILL A better combatant than an unoptimized monk, and a reasonable contributor to party utility

Menzath

2020-08-04, 01:58 PM

Though i say I agree 100%, that's in the instance i said were it is a completely new player who knows nothing about the system. And that it is a random poster who I have no idea of their predilections for complexity at that.

I can't say I would recommend playing a
1)caster
2) form changer (Wildshape or poly centric builds)
3) pet handler

Although having a pet by itself is actually easier than the first two.
Maybe if they have played the ice wind Dale series, never winter nights 1/2, or pillars of eternity/deadfire I would feel more comfortable recommending a caster since how they function in those games is similar or the same.

Palanan

2020-08-04, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
most noob players won't know any better than to take a wolf as companion, and…your super-powerful animal companion will deal 1d6+3 damage per round. maybe.

Yup, I took a wolf when I first started. It's a first-level option, which you seem to be overlooking.

But even if the wolf isn’t dealing much damage, it’s engaging with one of your opponents and soaking up damage that would otherwise be directed at party members. This may not be “optimized” in some theoretical sense, but in actual gameplay it’s got practical value.

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
most noobs never realize they should stay wildshaped all the time.

No idea what you’re talking about here. “Wildshaped all the time” doesn’t become feasible until mid-levels, so not really relevant to people just starting out—unless they’re starting the class in mid-levels, which says more about the DM than the class.

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
are you really suggesting a beginner should read that stuff?

Are you suggesting that beginners shouldn’t read their class descriptions?

I did, and I didn't have trouble playing my druid. One suspects a correlation.

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
but beginners tend to not use those, as they make for very complicated effects to keep track.

I’m not sure what you’re basing these claims on, but I certainly leaned into Obscuring Mist from the beginning. It's a simple effect with a simple duration, so not what I would call "very complicated."

Really, are you basing any of these claims on direct observations?

Thunder999

2020-08-04, 02:26 PM

A big part of the argument with druid spells is that you'll quickly notice how crap your contagion, dominate animal etc. are and thanks to being prepared you can try something new, so in a few ingame days you'll find what works, there's not a single caster in the game who only has good spells on their list so this is about as good as it gets, and once the player gives summoning a shot and realises that having disposable bodies on the battlefield is great they'll not even have to wait a day.

Wildshape is only hard if you don't just ask someone who's played before, because all you really need to know is that you get their size, movement speeds, physical scores, natural attacks and most stuff that improves said natural attacks, yes that's not complete, but its more than enough to use almost any normal animal, considering the only special abilities most have are things wild shape does grant, it's when you start with feats that expand wildshape or reach plants that the details matter, and by then the player should be a fair bit more experienced.

As for the companion, that wolf may not be optimal and either this group is all new players and the martials will be just as bad, or there's some more experienced players who'll give our druid some basic advice.

Kyutaru

2020-08-04, 02:48 PM

So, while I don't disagree with most of your points, I do have some issues.

Call lightning is at least 15d6 damage over 5 rounds, not just 3d6. And it uses your action for 1 round.
Not so, he's correct with that complaint. One of the commonly overlooked facts about Call Lightning is that it requires a standard action to call down the remaining bolts each round. Call Lightning is not a 5-round storm spell that zaps things with lightning. It's more like you're equipping your Druid with a storm cloud and can attack using it for five rounds.

AvatarVecna

2020-08-04, 03:27 PM

Saying "wolf only deals 1d6+3" is a weird way of saying "Druid 1 has DPR of 2d6+4", which is surprisingly comparable to a good Fighter without even having to touch on buff spells. Because the druid gets to attack too.

Long story short, this is why druid is generally considered good for newbs. A player who has absolutely no experience with the edition might prepare only crap spells, might never buff their companion, and might spend the whole of each fight just attacking. But a druid and their AC attacking will still contribute decently to fights even without buffs. A druid who's prepared crap spells today can always prepare non-crap tomorrow...heck, a druid who's prepared crap spells today can always spontaneously cast a Summon, which is widely considered one of the stronger tactics anyway. Druid is "minionmancy: the class" because right from level one, a druid has 2-3 pools of HP at any given, only one of which isn't easily replaceable.

Efrate

2020-08-04, 03:41 PM

On animal companions. Wolf is fine at level 1. Not the best but fine. Then at 4 you get a bear. More attacks and damage but lose trip. Then at 7 you get a big cat for a lot of damage, a bigger bear that grapples, or a very big wolf that trips. All these come with pretty commiserate damage bonuses and will out damage most non TOB or not shock trooper fighter types. At 10 you get a bigger bear which is just better. At 13 you get the biggest bear, and you end with a massive cat for damage or a T rex for gobbling down things.

That's a pretty basic core only progression that is put damaging your fighter types, and that before spells. A cursory look through the druid list gets you things like animal growth, magic fang, and the like all of which pretty easily say hey this is good to cast of your pet.

And once they summon.things past level 1 you have that as an always option, and wild shape does lend itself to being in the mix if you want. With next to no work other than just reading what is in the druid description and reading a few druid spells.

If a player is not willing to read a class description or what their abilities do DnD is probably not the game for them and that is more a player problem. Any DM should be able to point them to a few hey you can do this or might want to try this if something is weird. If they willingly ignore most their class features and play like the playtest druid then yeah it's too much, but again that's not the class being complex, thats a player being lazy or out of sync with expectations.

Telonius

2020-08-04, 03:54 PM

I generally steer first-time players away from the classes that involve more paperwork to play (that includes Wizards, Artificers, and Druids); and classes that tend to overwhelm you with options (like Cleric).

When you're absolutely first starting out, it's hard enough to manage a single character sheet, let alone one for your animal companion too. When they get more comfortable with finding where their Will Save is written on their sheet, and knowing where to look when I call for an opposed Grapple, or a Search check, then we can talk about switching back and forth between an Animal Companion and the main PC sheet, dealing with multiple sets of stats for your Wild Shape, and picking Summon Nature's Allies.

I'm not opposed to noobs picking spellcasters generally, but I'd steer them more towards the "point and shoot" sorts of casters. Things like Sorcerer, Warlock, or Beguiler, where you have a small number of options to choose from. Helping them out once in a while at level-up does take a bit of time, but stopping the session whenever you rest, so they can spend 10 minutes picking out spells, can be seriously obnoxious.

King of Nowhere

2020-08-04, 04:03 PM

So, while I don't disagree with most of your points, I do have some issues.

Call lightning is at least 15d6 damage over 5 rounds, not just 3d6. And it uses your action for 1 round.

it does?
doesn't it require an action every round to use it?
"each round after the first you may use a standard action (concentrating on the spell) to call a bolt."
looks to me, every round you need to use your standard action to get the 3d6. and every other person at my table read the same spell and came to the same conclusion. :smallconfused:

Second, most of your other arguments assume a noob player, playing a druid, who has Zero guidance from the rest of the table.

As you've probably seen time and time again, it's not a case of someone asking "this is my first game, what should I do?". It's a case of "My Swashbuckler can't keep up with the Warblade and the Sorcerer in my party, what should I play to change it?".

Are you suggesting that beginners shouldn’t read their class descriptions?

I did, and I didn't have trouble playing my druid. One suspects a correlation.

Really, are you basing any of these claims on direct observations?

i assume a player who has a couple years of experience and who can't be helped much because others at the table aren't that much better.

it was the actual case at my tables. first time, i had already a few years of experience, and i tried to help this player to build a druid. but i failed, the druid was one of the least effective characters at the table. then as DM i made a druid opponent, and this guy was totally ineffective. a few levels later, i made another druid opponent, and it managed to kill a party member because finger of death and tanked saving throw, but none of his druid mojo ended up being of much use. then at a new table, with more experienced players, a guy picked a druid, and he is decently effective, but nothing special. the dm made a druid opponent, and despite a lot of custom top boss benefits, the guy engaged us with a bunch of other high level druids, and all those druids managed to do very little of use.

this is not "one total noob without help from the table". this is "people with a few campaigns under their belts, helping each other". perhaps it's something specific to my table. perhaps we learned to optimize other characters much better than we ever learned druids, and this skews our perspective. but by all our experiences, every time someone tried to make a druid, we had to optimize as best as we could to get to tier 3. anything less than our best effort resulted in a joke character. which goes against the whole "can't do bad" concept.

The deal with druid is that it has the highest skill floor in core. What does that mean? That means you can pick pretty much any feat and still be effective in a party of better optimized characters. You could have Toughness x5 and still be effective. You can pick Wolf as an animal companion and change it later. You can pick any spell and change it the next day. Need something today? Trade that useless spell for a summon, which is always good. No choice cripples you forever or kicks you below the curve.

oh, that actually explains what people mean. thanks.

Also a lot of Druid powers are pretty Self explanatory to anyone who is vaguely familiar with popular media. Maybe you don’t have the most optimized form. But I turn into a bird or bat or rat

yes, it's surprising how many times a druid player at my table in the middle of combat tried to turn into something else in the middle of combat. with the result of losing an action, losing AC, losing a lot of item boosts.
furthermore, for years i've been utterly convinced that turning into an animal would basically turn you into that animal, period. and nobody ever disabused me, until i made some questions on alternate form on this forum.

in fact, i'd go farther in rebuking your claim to say that druid powers are not self-explanatory, and in fact they confuse players. "oh, this power turns you into a bear, i got it, it's clear how it works! so, i turn into a bear" "ok, you turn into a bear, so we go look at the bear, because this power is easy and self-explanatory. [opens the monster manual] ok, now you have 19 hit points and a +6 to hit. congratulations!"
and let's reiterate: i've been playing years with this misconception. because me, and everyone else at my table, assumed the power was self-explanatory.

Multiple tweeks to game mechanics during actual play. They learn the numbers game and get to see just a bit of the monster side of the table.

if that's your table experience, good for you.
my table experience is more like "gets overwhelmed by all the option, sticks to the two or three that are familiar to him for the rest of the campaign". or "gets overwhelmed by reading all that stuff, get most of them wrong, keeps going on with the misconceptions for the rest of the campaign".

Palanan

2020-08-04, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
"oh, this power turns you into a bear, i got it, it's clear how it works! so, i turn into a bear" "ok, you turn into a bear, so we go look at the bear, because this power is easy and self-explanatory. [opens the monster manual] ok, now you have 19 hit points and a +6 to hit. congratulations!"

and let's reiterate: i've been playing years with this misconception. because me, and everyone else at my table, assumed the power was self-explanatory.

Sounds like no one at your table read the polymorph spell to find out how it actually works.

The third sentence of the Wild Shape class feature states that “This ability functions like the polymorph spell, except as noted here.” That would suggest, at a bare minimum, that it might be prudent to reference the spell before using the class ability.

Quertus

2020-08-04, 06:13 PM

Druids are, IME, great characters for new players, up there with Clerics. Druids have…

d8 HP, some armor - they have some staying power, and don't do trivially to poor tactical decisions when facing chumps (unlike, say, Wizards, Sorcerers, Psions, and even Bards and Rogues).

3/4 BAB, animal companion, summons - the player can find if they enjoy contributing in combat, because they've got that option.

Spells - the player can find if they enjoy contributing as a spell slinger, because they've got that option.

Healing - same (also, self-sufficiency in that regard can feel nice)

Wild Shape - the player can find if they enjoy book diving, because they've got that option.

The player can ignore half the character, and still have options, so have the ability to contribute.

And I say this having taught 3e to numerous 7-year-olds.

I recommend - or, at least, do in no way discourage - players new to role-playing to cut their teeth on the 3e Druid. Then, when they talk about wanting to do more of X, possibly with their new character, you can discuss with them the idea of optimizing for X.

EDIT: still, I agree, putting a Druid in the hands of a noob won't magically make them understand optimization, or balance their contribution to a stereotypical Playgrounder (or their table).

Psyren

2020-08-04, 06:32 PM

So, while I don't disagree with most of your points, I do have some issues.

Call lightning is at least 15d6 damage over 5 rounds, not just 3d6. And it uses your action for 1 round.

Second, most of your other arguments assume a noob player, playing a druid, who has Zero guidance from the rest of the table.

This.

If you're assuming no help at all from the rest of the table, then NONE of the casters are good for new players. All contain traps and low floors that are harmed by suboptimal play.

But expecting that kind of scenario for 3.5 or PF, games that the vast majority of "noobs" will only pick up (especially nowadays) because they are being introduced by more experienced players, is extremely unrealistic.

Edea

2020-08-04, 08:31 PM

Regarding the topic: no, they're not. Which seems odd, considering how ridiculous the class is at low levels without any real work put into optimizing it.

Druids are all about bending the action economy over and taking it to pound town. They get an additional set of actions from the animal buddy right off the bat, they're able to spontaneously plunk down more buddies with their spell slots, and it doesn't take them long to become capable of the same mayhem as all of their buddies, while still being a full caster, once wild shape and Natural Spell are in play.

But that's the thing: you're never just playing one character as a druid. You're playing a BUNCH of characters. A newbie is going to have trouble keeping track of all the sheets and their fiddly little modifiers and where they are on the map, on top of the stress of running a full caster in the first place, etc. etc.. In fact, I wouldn't recommend -any- of the prepared casters for a new player.

My recommendation for a newbie is a rogue. There's reasons for this: on the combat side, the rogue's still fairly simple (get in and stab/shoot something), but it's not just that; they need to position themselves properly, take advantage of how the battlefield's shaping up. They still need to pay attention and be engaged. They also get rewarded big-time for this in the form of sneak attack damage, and this doesn't require a lot of optimizing to be effective the way other pure martials would; in fact, the other players at the table will really want to help them ("Hey, that guy's prone, you'll get SA if you stab him now", etc.).

Then the other, even more important reason: out-of-combat. Rogues are the newbie's gateway into handling non-combat scenarios without looking through libraries of spells; since they have so many skills at their disposal, it's easy for the DM to gently push the newbie into doing something with their rogue during these situations that's likely to succeed, again rewarding them for engaging. Traps, social situations, scouting...the new player will have a really good chance of immersing themselves in what's going on and actually roleplay, and you won't have to have them bookkeeping their spell repertoire all the time.

And then, once everyone's higher-level in the campaign and the now-not-so-new player's starting to get a bit like "hmm, I could do with some of that spell goodness, after all"? Well, look at that, rogues have the UMD skill. They can try it out from anybody's list to see what works and what doesn't, and then if they move to playing a full-caster character in another game they'll take that knowledge with them.

Zanos

2020-08-04, 08:43 PM

Gonna throw my hat in the 'no' pile has well. The Druid interacts with pretty much every 3.5 mechanic, and some of the more confusing ones for new players, like vancian casting and polymorph effects. You're controlling multiple creatures from level 1, and potentially 3+ if you're summoning.

I would recommend simple classes for first time players, like Fighter and Barbarian. I know they're not considered good but you shouldn't be forcing people who just picked up the game to optimize.

GoodbyeSoberDay

2020-08-04, 09:49 PM

There are two main claims being made here. One is that druids aren't a great starter class, and the other is that they're ineffective. The first claim is arguable, since the Druid does have more paperwork, interaction with the monster manual, complicated actions (spells), and consistently controlling multiple actors in combat. The counter argument is that you want the player to be learning these things anyway, and learning by doing is the best way to go. I've seen noobs take to druids just fine, even if they tended to be one-note in their spell selection.

The second claim is clearly false. I should say, any class can be bad if you're not following the rules or not even trying to use your class features (see: 3.0 play testing). But if you're following the rules and the druid is using his class features and doing druid-y things, it should be fine. Before wild shape even comes online, things like Entangle and Summon Nature's Ally should be more than enough to be the MVP of many low-level low-op encounters.

Kelb_Panthera

2020-08-04, 09:50 PM

I'm one more for the "nope" crowd for largely the same reasons outlined by King of Nowhere in the OP.

I've always gone for ranger as the newb friendly class. It interacts with all of the core mechanics; basic combat mechanics with attack rolls and armor class, skill checks with a decent list and plenty of points, and just enough situational modifiers to get used to that element of the system. Then, after a few levels, you get a pet and vancian casting in limited amounts so it's easy to make selections and avoid being overwhelmed both before and during combat. The pet's weakness actually forces you to think about how to use it instead of it just throwing it at the enemy as a meat wall.

The thing this has over the druid is that while it interacts with most parts of the system, it doesn't dump it all on your head at once. You get the more complex elements after playing with the basics for a few levels and you don't have to deal with shapechanging at all unless you seek it out. With fairly minimal competence, you should be perfectly viable up to level 7 or 8 unless you've stumbled into a high-op group that doesn't know how to slow down for the new guy.

The default of "hit it with the pointed stick" is a lot easier to grok than the default of "summon teeth and claws to fight for me."

Now I'll happily admit that playing any kind of martial character into the mid levels, never mind high level, requires a bit more system mastery but by then you should've been playing with all the parts of the system long enough to decide which you like and which you don't for a more deep dive.

Oh, and no CoC to worry about, evern if the druid's is the most lenient in the game.

Quertus

2020-08-04, 10:30 PM

So, I'm biased, as I've trained multiple 7-year-olds to play 3e with mechanical (if not always tactical) competence. Even playing multiple characters hasn't been an issue for kids, so I struggle to see why adults should have problems with it, or with most any component of playing a Druid (Polymorph effects, I'll grant, are nontrivial).

However, this bothers me:

The Druid interacts with pretty much every 3.5 mechanic, and some of the more confusing ones for new players, like vancian casting and polymorph effects.

vancian casting? Really? I've trained 7-year-olds to play 3e, I've gamed with college-educated adults who couldn't remember how THAC0 worked / whether they needed to roll high or low or high without going over for a particular roll in 2e… yet none of them have ever had trouble understanding vancian casting. Make list, check off when used.

I may not *like* Vancian casting, but it's super easy - easier than HP, even.

Kelb_Panthera

2020-08-04, 10:35 PM

So, I'm biased, as I've trained multiple 7-year-olds to play 3e with mechanical (if not always tactical) competence. Even playing multiple characters hasn't been an issue for kids, so I struggle to see why adults should have problems with it, or with most any component of playing a Druid (Polymorph effects, I'll grant, are nontrivial).

However, this bothers me:

vancian casting? Really? I've trained 7-year-olds to play 3e, I've gamed with college-educated adults who couldn't remember how THAC0 worked / whether they needed to roll high or low or high without going over for a particular roll in 2e… yet none of them have ever had trouble understanding vancian casting. Make list, check off when used.

I may not *like* Vancian casting, but it's super easy - easier than HP, even.

There's something to be said for changes in neuroplasticity as peole age but I do agree on vancian casting. It's pretty straight-forward.

Zanos

2020-08-04, 10:55 PM

vancian casting? Really? I've trained 7-year-olds to play 3e, I've gamed with college-educated adults who couldn't remember how THAC0 worked / whether they needed to roll high or low or high without going over for a particular roll in 2e… yet none of them have ever had trouble understanding vancian casting. Make list, check off when used.

I may not *like* Vancian casting, but it's super easy - easier than HP, even.
I don't know what you want me to tell you. I've had adults struggle with it who are used to MP or whatever, and it's not like they're stupid people.

Palanan

2020-08-04, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by Zanos
I know they're not considered good but you shouldn't be forcing people who just picked up the game to optimize.

I don’t see how a player choosing a druid is being “forced” to do anything, let alone optimize. I certainly wasn’t “forced” to choose a druid as my first 3.5 character, and I can guarantee you I didn’t optimize, since mercifully I didn’t know the meaning of the term.

And yet I enjoyed myself, held my own in the party, and didn’t have any of these big scary bugaboo moments people keep saying I should have.

Originally Posted by Zanos
The Druid interacts with pretty much every 3.5 mechanic, and some of the more confusing ones for new players, like vancian casting and polymorph effects.

Vancian wasn’t an issue for me, either. You get so many spells of each level, neatly summarized in a handy table. I’m not seeing the problem.

Remuko

2020-08-04, 11:42 PM

I don't know what you want me to tell you. I've had adults struggle with it who are used to MP or whatever, and it's not like they're stupid people.

this. ive been playing since 3.0. im 34 now and vancian still hurts my brain. i can work it but i get super lazy with it and dont optimize cuz its too hard. i wish all casters worked like psionics.

Zanos

2020-08-04, 11:59 PM

I don’t see how a player choosing a druid is being “forced” to do anything, let alone optimize. I certainly wasn’t “forced” to choose a druid as my first 3.5 character, and I can guarantee you I didn’t optimize, since mercifully I didn’t know the meaning of the term.
The point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't balance a game that a new player is picking up around them playing a druid well. If it's a first time a vanilla fighter should be relatively viable while they pick up the mechanics.

Gnaeus

2020-08-05, 05:38 AM

The point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't balance a game that a new player is picking up around them playing a druid well. If it's a first time a vanilla fighter should be relatively viable while they pick up the mechanics.

And the point we’re trying to make is that a first time Druid, using a wolf AC, memorizing nothing but heals, and using WS only for scouting, will contribute more both in and out of combat than will a vanilla fighter at a similar optimization level. AND will have an easier time upshifting tactics as system mastery grows or if he reads a guide halfway through the game. No one expects them to play a Druid well. And any aid given to the fighter (don’t take toughness, it’s a trap) is easily matched on Druid (don’t take wolf, take riding dog and give it some leather barding).

So, I'm biased, as I've trained multiple 7-year-olds to play 3e with mechanical (if not always tactical) competence. Even playing multiple characters hasn't been an issue for kids, so I struggle to see why adults should have problems with it, or with most any component of playing a Druid (Polymorph effects, I'll grant, are nontrivial)..

This matches my experience with my kids. The math might be a bit harder (although helping math skills is a +), but when Dorothy wanted to turn into a bear I just handed her a bear sheet. It’s not like she had trouble understanding why she would want to be a bear or the relative benefits between a bear, a shark and an eagle.

Asmotherion

2020-08-05, 06:27 AM

CoDzilla is very hard to get wrong. That said, I would not suggest a Spellcasting Class 'till you're at least Intermediate, as a complete newbe will get confused on the whole spellcasting mechanics.

The best class for someone who just started IMO would be Fighter or Barbarian, as he has a lot less to keep track of. Or, if they're particularly fond of Magic Users, Warlock or Dragonfire Adept. Invocation using classes have very simple mechanics, and can be usefull for the full game.

King of Nowhere

2020-08-05, 06:31 AM

will contribute more both in and out of combat than will a vanilla fighter at a similar optimization level.
i think this is the main point of contention here: namely, what is a "similar optimization level"?
because when you make that claim, you are probably thinking of a sword-and-board fighter (and not one optimized for shield bash; one who deals 1d8+2 on hit), while i am thinking someone with a greatsword using power attack effectively.
and the reason for it is, i find it easy to optimize a fighter to that point. much more easy than optimizing a druid past the point where you pick only healing.
perhaps you, and other on your side of the argument, adapted better to a druid, or you had someone who could explain it better. perhaps the difference is that at my table nobody learned to use a druid while we learned how to use the other classes, so that our comparison is between decently optimized anything else and badly optimized druid - but for us they are both equally optimized, because they are both optimized to the best of our capacities.

still, i've seen complete noobs pick up a wizard or fighter pretty quickly, getting to a point where they could contribute to the party, with just a few tips (use a double-handed weapon and power attack whenever possible). i've seen players with already some experience pick up a druid and struggle to contribute meaningfully, despite getting tips (you should come to combat already in animal form and pre-buffed. you must buff you animal companion if you want it to be effective. i'm surprised how many times i had to repeat that before people stopped entering combat with no buffs, start combat by buffing themselves, and have the combat end before they are ready to do anything).
the druid has a higher floor than most classes, and a higher ceiling. but getting up from that floor is more complicated than with those other classes.

Sounds like no one at your table read the polymorph spell to find out how it actually works.

The third sentence of the Wild Shape class feature states that “This ability functions like the polymorph spell, except as noted here.” That would suggest, at a bare minimum, that it might be prudent to reference the spell before using the class ability.

looking in retrospect, it looks kinda bad on me and my table. i wonder how it could have come to that.
but the text there is difficult to understand - and the italian version in our manual was written in an even more complicated way. and it keeps referencing technical terms and other spells.so, i'm just trying to guess how we got confused about it, but maybe we started reading it, decided (more or less consciously) it was too complicated and that we would rather just not use that mechanic entirely. or maybe someone got it wrong, and explained it wrong to everyone else. i really don't remember.

And I say this having taught 3e to numerous 7-year-olds.

did you manage to teach those 7-yo how to calculate their stats when polymorphed? because if you did, my job is a teacher, i should probably resign and call you to do it in my place.
perhaps the difference is just having someone who understood the class. at my table, we had someone who understood all other classes, but we had nobody understanding how to play druid.

CoDzilla is very hard to get wrong. That said, I would not suggest a Spellcasting Class 'till you're at least Intermediate, as a complete newbe will get confused on the whole spellcasting mechanics.

The best class for someone who just started IMO would be Fighter or Barbarian, as he has a lot less to keep track of. Or, if they're particularly fond of Magic Users, Warlock or Dragonfire Adept. Invocation using classes have very simple mechanics, and can be usefull for the full game.

I've never seen anyone struggle with clerics. sure, they were unoptimized for melee, most were wery weak at dealing damage. but they were tanky and would hold the line pretty well, plus their magic is straightforward to use: buff and heal. every new player i've seen pick up cleric has become a decent healer-buffer-tank in no time. in fact, i would recommend clerics to new players, as i find them hard to get wrong. with full plate and shield you easily get AC 20, you get plenty of spells and they are easy to use.
even wizards are fine for new players. all they have to learn is to stay out of melee, and they can throw damage spells and be decently effective, if nowhere close to the full tier1 potential. if you need to give them a help, toss them a metamagic rod.
sorceror is also fine for new players, as long as you are lenient with swapping spells for the first few levels.
no, i've never seen people struggle to pick up magic users and contribute. i've seen people struggle to pick up druid, specifically

Elkad

2020-08-05, 06:59 AM

And the point we’re trying to make is that a first time Druid, using a wolf AC, memorizing nothing but heals, and using WS only for scouting, will contribute more both in and out of combat than will a vanilla fighter at a similar optimization level. AND will have an easier time upshifting tactics as system mastery grows or if he reads a guide halfway through the game. No one expects them to play a Druid well. And any aid given to the fighter (don’t take toughness, it’s a trap) is easily matched on Druid (don’t take wolf, take riding dog and give it some leather barding).

You can go even worse than that.
I don't care if you take a camel for an AC, wade into melee combat with a club, and convert all your spell slots directly into a bag of Goodberries each morning. You still beat a fighter at 1st level. And you'll get better every session, even without advice from the DM or party members.

Barbarian? I've got a player in my current party who has never used Rage on her barb. Yet was very effective on her first character ever. A druid. She'd not only never played any version of D&D or any other ttrpg, she'd never so much as played a fantasy-type video game.

Asmotherion

2020-08-05, 07:28 AM

i think this is the main point of contention here: namely, what is a "similar optimization level"?
because when you make that claim, you are probably thinking of a sword-and-board fighter (and not one optimized for shield bash; one who deals 1d8+2 on hit), while i am thinking someone with a greatsword using power attack effectively.
and the reason for it is, i find it easy to optimize a fighter to that point. much more easy than optimizing a druid past the point where you pick only healing.
perhaps you, and other on your side of the argument, adapted better to a druid, or you had someone who could explain it better. perhaps the difference is that at my table nobody learned to use a druid while we learned how to use the other classes, so that our comparison is between decently optimized anything else and badly optimized druid - but for us they are both equally optimized, because they are both optimized to the best of our capacities.

still, i've seen complete noobs pick up a wizard or fighter pretty quickly, getting to a point where they could contribute to the party, with just a few tips (use a double-handed weapon and power attack whenever possible). i've seen players with already some experience pick up a druid and struggle to contribute meaningfully, despite getting tips (you should come to combat already in animal form and pre-buffed. you must buff you animal companion if you want it to be effective. i'm surprised how many times i had to repeat that before people stopped entering combat with no buffs, start combat by buffing themselves, and have the combat end before they are ready to do anything).
the druid has a higher floor than most classes, and a higher ceiling. but getting up from that floor is more complicated than with those other classes.

looking in retrospect, it looks kinda bad on me and my table. i wonder how it could have come to that.
but the text there is difficult to understand - and the italian version in our manual was written in an even more complicated way. and it keeps referencing technical terms and other spells.so, i'm just trying to guess how we got confused about it, but maybe we started reading it, decided (more or less consciously) it was too complicated and that we would rather just not use that mechanic entirely. or maybe someone got it wrong, and explained it wrong to everyone else. i really don't remember.

did you manage to teach those 7-yo how to calculate their stats when polymorphed? because if you did, my job is a teacher, i should probably resign and call you to do it in my place.
perhaps the difference is just having someone who understood the class. at my table, we had someone who understood all other classes, but we had nobody understanding how to play druid.

I've never seen anyone struggle with clerics. sure, they were unoptimized for melee, most were wery weak at dealing damage. but they were tanky and would hold the line pretty well, plus their magic is straightforward to use: buff and heal. every new player i've seen pick up cleric has become a decent healer-buffer-tank in no time. in fact, i would recommend clerics to new players, as i find them hard to get wrong. with full plate and shield you easily get AC 20, you get plenty of spells and they are easy to use.
even wizards are fine for new players. all they have to learn is to stay out of melee, and they can throw damage spells and be decently effective, if nowhere close to the full tier1 potential. if you need to give them a help, toss them a metamagic rod.
sorceror is also fine for new players, as long as you are lenient with swapping spells for the first few levels.
no, i've never seen people struggle to pick up magic users and contribute. i've seen people struggle to pick up druid, specifically

Tell that to me, +/- 10 years ago, were I would pick only phb Blasting Spells on my Sorcerer, and see half my spells resisted or blocked by imunity.

Druids are much easier to play. You have a buff animal companion, and can easily turn yourself into a heavy hitter as well. Sure, you don't really know what spells to use, but you don't have that many useless options to pick from, and as a Divine Caster, you can swap spells from your ENTIRE spell list every day.

Gnaeus

2020-08-05, 09:52 AM

i think this is the main point of contention here: namely, what is a "similar optimization level"?
because when you make that claim, you are probably thinking of a sword-and-board fighter (and not one optimized for shield bash; one who deals 1d8+2 on hit), while i am thinking someone with a greatsword using power attack effectively.
and the reason for it is, i find it easy to optimize a fighter to that point. much more easy than optimizing a druid past the point where you pick only healing.
perhaps you, and other on your side of the argument, adapted better to a druid, or you had someone who could explain it better. perhaps the difference is that at my table nobody learned to use a druid while we learned how to use the other classes, so that our comparison is between decently optimized anything else and badly optimized druid - but for us they are both equally optimized, because they are both optimized to the best of our capacities

Yeah, we are never remotely going to agree there. By the time you reach 2h power attack you are going to get a Druid who is quite capable.

To reach 2H Power attack you need to crunch a ton of numbers. Need to recognize that offense>defense in 3.5 combat. Need to realize (and this requires reading the DMG & MM) that TWF<THF (because the 2 main reasons it does, interaction with DR and the cost of funding 2vs 1 magical weapon are not at all apparent to someone with only PHB). Need to abandon being Lancelot or similar knight concept, Drax or similar dual wielder, legolas or similar archer. Need to read over a dozen core feats, mechanically separate the wheat from the chaff, and arrive at the core feat we play grounders think is best. Before the game begins and they have rolled anything but some 3d6s. That’s actually a fair multi step piece of opti-fu boyo. Or you could just get lucky picking randomly off a list, but the Druid can do that too, and change tactics if they chose poorly. And repeat until they have workable choices.

The Druid, on the other hand, doesn’t need a single piece of forum lore or equation. Hey, I’m still going to take cure light wounds, but I’ll take another spell for my other one. The applications of most Druid spells don’t require a lot of work (and I’ll disagree with Quertus, polymorph is easy, summoning is hard). If I make a fog they can’t shoot me or I could escape is a concept graspable by most anyone. If he does go in for reading and game math, figuring out that riding dog>wolf is pretty obviously easier, from a comparing apples to bigger apples standpoint, than realizing that power attack>weapon focus or dodge. And a riding dog alone will outfight a badly built ranger or monk, even without the healbot standing behind it. More HP/better attack/auto trip. And of course if you screw up and it dies, you aren’t rolling a new character. And this assumes that your nature character with his handle animal can’t read the PHB and ask “could I just buy a second riding dog?”

And if you think those things are obvious without understanding system math, I will direct you to my hackmaster game, in which the pixie fairy with her tiny toothpick bow, and the halfling rogue with her dagger, consistently score more kills than do the THFers. Because THAT system rewards crits with a roll on a crit table, the fast weapons score more crits, and the better attack bonuses from their dex feed into the table to reward them with regular kills. The heart of optimization is system math.

did you manage to teach those 7-yo how to calculate their stats when polymorphed? because if you did, my job is a teacher, i should probably resign and call you to do it in my place.
perhaps the difference is just having someone who understood the class. at my table, we had someone who understood all other classes, but we had nobody understanding how to play druid.y

So, are we comparing a new player at a game with experienced players or a new player in a table of new players? Leaving aside that his kid was 7, (Kudos Quertus I waited til 8) if you have a new player and an experienced DM who wants to make the game run, it takes way less time than I usually spend in game prep to ask what animals they plan to use (maybe with suggestions) copypaste the relevant SRD entry, and make the relevant changes, print out the sheet. Even at 12 I had to regularly help Dorothy with table math, but it was almost all stuff I would have needed for a fighter too (ok, so the bard song gives you +1/+1, and the wizards magic weapon does too, but it doesn’t stack with your masterwork weapon etc).

Honestly, IN PLAY her PF Goliath Druid was easier than a 3.5 fighter. Less math and system mastery needed to determine how much to power attack for.

Leaving aside my daughter, the last low op Druid I played with was a standard low rules DM girlfriend type. Was she a million miles below my sorcerer I was playing or the Druid I would have made? Oh yes. Was she still as good a party member as the rogue and barbarian? Also yes. Did I spend from my WBL making items to help her, and make suggestions to fix major flaws? Yes. About as much as I did the Barbarian and Rogue. I think we (DM and I) guided her to a companion centric build, for ease of play. But really, she was the weakest player from a rules/math sense and she did fine. (And that was a PF Druid, significantly weaker than a 3.5 one).

Quertus

2020-08-05, 11:36 AM

That said, I would not suggest a Spellcasting Class 'till you're at least Intermediate, as a complete newbe will get confused on the whole spellcasting mechanics.

I have numerous 7-year-olds who prove you wrong.

I don't know what you want me to tell you. I've had adults struggle with it who are used to MP or whatever, and it's not like they're stupid people.

this. ive been playing since 3.0. im 34 now and vancian still hurts my brain. i can work it but i get super lazy with it and dont optimize cuz its too hard. i wish all casters worked like psionics.

… how? How is, "do we still have milk, or did you drink it?" a difficult question? How is packing 5 shirts and 5 pairs of pants too complex? What part of slots do people struggle with?

Now, if it's "being Batman", planning well & making good choices, sure, I'll believe that. But that's not struggling with Vancian mechanics, that's struggling with planning and thinking.

did you manage to teach those 7-yo how to calculate their stats when polymorphed? because if you did, my job is a teacher, i should probably resign and call you to do it in my place.
perhaps the difference is just having someone who understood the class. at my table, we had someone who understood all other classes, but we had nobody understanding how to play druid.

… mu? Nobody used much in the way of Polymorph effects. They were probably 10 or so by the time they tried a Polymorph, and I didn't check their math.

Yeah, we are never remotely going to agree there. By the time you reach 2h power attack you are going to get a Druid who is quite capable.

To reach 2H Power attack you need to crunch a ton of numbers. Need to recognize that offense>defense in 3.5 combat. Need to realize (and this requires reading the DMG & MM) that TWF<THF (because the 2 main reasons it does, interaction with DR and the cost of funding 2vs 1 magical weapon are not at all apparent to someone with only PHB). Need to abandon being Lancelot or similar knight concept, Drax or similar dual wielder, legolas or similar archer. Need to read over a dozen core feats, mechanically separate the wheat from the chaff, and arrive at the core feat we play grounders think is best. Before the game begins and they have rolled anything but some 3d6s. That’s actually a fair multi step piece of opti-fu boyo.

Or, you could just look at Power Attack, and decide, "I want to do that", see that it had synergy with 2-handed weapons, and build that. Done. Or see big numbers on a 2-handed weapon, big numbers on Power Attack 2-handed, and be a Timmy. Done. It doesn't require understanding all of what you just said to build that Fighter.

The Druid, on the other hand, doesn’t need a single piece of forum lore or equation. Hey, I’m still going to take cure light wounds, but I’ll take another spell for my other one. The applications of most Druid spells don’t require a lot of work (and I’ll disagree with Quertus, polymorph is easy, summoning is hard).

… how you figure? Summoning, you use the stats straight from the book; Polymorph, you need to "mix and match".

If I make a fog they can’t shoot me or I could escape is a concept graspable by most anyone. If he does go in for reading and game math, figuring out that riding dog>wolf is pretty obviously easier, from a comparing apples to bigger apples standpoint, than realizing that power attack>weapon focus or dodge. And a riding dog alone will outfight a badly built ranger or monk, even without the healbot standing behind it. More HP/better attack/auto trip.

I have yet to meet a Druid player who cared about numbers on their Animal Companion - it's always a matter of personal preference for a particular animal.

So, are we comparing a new player at a game with experienced players or a new player in a table of new players? Leaving aside that his kid was 7, (Kudos Quertus I waited til 8)

Lol. I've trained numerous 7-year-olds. Glad to hear you're starting then young, too.

Remuko

2020-08-05, 12:18 PM

… how? How is, "do we still have milk, or did you drink it?" a difficult question? How is packing 5 shirts and 5 pairs of pants too complex? What part of slots do people struggle with?

Now, if it's "being Batman", planning well & making good choices, sure, I'll believe that. But that's not struggling with Vancian mechanics, that's struggling with planning and thinking.

I have trouble with that too. ADHD, executive dysfunction, choice paralysis. Stuff like that. The very idea that classes in D&D have slots and can "equip" any spell they know into them each day breaks my brain. I can't fathom it, even just in PHB its too much. Maybe if the PHB had 1/20th the spells the mechanics wouldnt have been as overwhelming for me, but it is what it is.

Gnaeus

2020-08-05, 12:40 PM

Or, you could just look at Power Attack, and decide, "I want to do that", see that it had synergy with 2-handed weapons, and build that. Done. Or see big numbers on a 2-handed weapon, big numbers on Power Attack 2-handed, and be a Timmy. Done. It doesn't require understanding all of what you just said to build that Fighter

That’s essentially a random choice. They could just as easily look at Two Weapon Fighting or Improved Shield Bash and build that. Or realize they could have 22 AC and do that. You CAN absolutely randomly decide on power attack/THF. But you can just as easily randomly decide on entangle or other good Druid options. In order to realize it is the best choice, you have to do what I described.

… how you figure? Summoning, you use the stats straight from the book; Polymorph, you need to "mix and match"

Because low op summoning at low levels is trappy. Full round casting is easy to interrupt. You need a lot of animal stats on hand. Some have problems with stuff like reach, or secondary spell likes or things like Mephits you have to understand. And then it only lasts for a round or 2. It’s usually only good in corner cases, like needing a flier or swimmer. Or as an emergency conversion because the spell you prepared doesn’t apply and you can’t swing your scimitar.

Usually wildshape there’s a flight form and a fight form, and everyone knows what a bear or eagle is. Maybe also swim and stealth forms, but until high levels everything is self explanatory from the what does it do perspective. So prepare a few Stat blocks and you are golden. Maybe you get the second or third best combat form. But when an 8 year old turns into a tiger or bear, it’s to rip someone’s face off, and when you want to rip someone’s face off, the obvious choices are all ok. Not venomfire Fleshraker good. But at least “I’m still better than the low op monk but I also have a pet and can drop some heals or utility after the fight” good.

…I have yet to meet a Druid player who cared about numbers on their Animal Companion - it's always a matter of personal preference for a particular animal

That’s a viable method of choice of course. But it is the exact same optimization level as “I want to play Legolas” or “I want to play Drax”. If we are to assume the fighter is reading dozens of options and choosing the best mechanical one, we should give the same to the Druid. Because again, the difference between wolf and riding dog is clearer, looking at the numbers, than the difference between power attack, weapon focus and dodge. Or sword and board and THF. One requires knowing or guessing that attack >defense and damage > to hit, the other requires knowing or guessing that 2d8 hp +1 bab is bigger numbers than 1d8 hp +0 bab.

Some obvious fighter choices are actively bad. Like taking point blank shot and weapon focus long sword with a balanced str/dex. Because it seems reasonable that being able to shoot OR swing a sword is a good choice to have, not realizing that system math makes a generalist fighter an ineffective fighter.

Honestly, even fighter is throwing a bone. There’s no reason why a player with low system mastery wouldn’t choose even trappier options. Hand to heart I once played in a game with a grown man who knew the rules who decided samurai was too OP and rerolled a monk. Who was only a bit worse than the DMs girlfriend’s swashbuckler. I didn’t know what tiers were back then and hadn’t read any guides then but my Druid absolutely outperformed the two of them combined. Like, still I feel bad 15 years later about how much better I was just by reading my spells and forms and picking good ones level of outperformed. It was embarrassing.

RexDart

2020-08-05, 02:12 PM

...

Conclusion:
We see the druid experiences multi facets of the game mechanics starting at level one via the role of the animal companion. At lvl 4 they can switch to a completely different aspect when they change forms, giving them insight to the monster manual and NPC side of the game (and more tactical combat). And they have the simplest magic system in the entire game.

This eases the player into tactical combat, stat manipulation, and magic all at once. Would you prefer they play a fighter or barbarian and next campaign introduce them into a new game mechanic based on watching other players from the current campaign? I have seen several replies that say never a caster or any caster for a noob is a bad idea. I disagree, how else will they learn unless they try it out? Druid isn't the healer, blaster, or face they can screw up their spells a bit and fix it tomorrow.

All of this lines up very well with my recent personal experience. I'm in two campaigns now (one where the characters have progressed from 1-4ish, one from 1-6ish, same DM.) Both parties have druids. In the 4th level campaign, most of the players are new or almost new, with me and another player probably in the "low-to-mid-op" range by forum standards? People who have played enough and are smart enough to find stuff that works well together, but don't scour obscure third-party sourcebooks to find the most broken possible combos, etc. The druid player is, I think, completely new to RPGs.

In the 6thish level campaign, the players are all in that low-mid category, but it's the first time the druid player has ever played a spell caster.

Anyway, both druid players have done well, and experienced the process of LEARNING the game and their class very well as they went along. Both have made what are evidently "stupid n00b" mistakes (yes, they both took wolf as animal companion, though the 6th level druid now has a bison who seems pretty awesome from my perspective anyway.) But they've always been useful, and they're getting good at figuring out the right things to summon in particular circumstances. I think maybe they each could be a little more adventurous with the druid spell list, but summoning more stuff is never a *bad* thing. And most important, they're having lots of fun with the class.

Fouredged Sword

2020-08-05, 02:20 PM

The big advantage of Druids is that they are hard to mess up. You can play them badly, but any lasting choices you make are just an in game day or so away from being fixed for the most part. It's not like Wizard or Sorcerer who have to select spells to know or add to their sellbook. It's not like a Cleric where domains are a thing and god selection can influence how you feel you need to play. It's not like a fighter or ranger or barbarian where feat selection is paramount.

Druids have a low floor. At the worst you can entangle things, heal, and turn into a bear.

Item selection? Play around with it and buy what sounds good. You will be fine as long as you avoid metal armor.
Spell selection? You can pick anew each day and if you pick badly you can just turn into a bear and fight in melee.
Stat allocation? Doesn't matter outside of wisdom and maybe constitution.

Druid is a great class because it lets you not feel like you need to reroll your character every session just because you made a character creation mistake. Learning the class is all about what you do when, not how you build our character. You can learn the parts of the game you like and build your next character around that concept.

Willie the Duck

2020-08-05, 02:59 PM

I do not think that a noob would have trouble figuring out a druid, or playing one to relative effect. I wouldn't suggest one for a new player mostly for everyone else in the playgroup because the issue I have seen come up is the new player having to read. through. every. option. available. to. them. before deciding which one to take, and druids sure do have a lot of options (most of which, as others have noted, can be swapped out frequently).

When it comes to ease of figuring out, I tend to go back to my experience with learning 3.0 when it first came out. My group at the time each bought our books and started reading. Before we had finished reading all the feats, we had figured out 1st level fighters with longspears, quickdraw, and combat reflexes. By the time we had started playing around with making characters, we had figured out that spiked chain/combat reflex/trip-or-disarm feat chains would be highly effective. By the time we started reading the spell sections, we figured out that clerics got a lot of combat boost spells, and boy if you could figure out how to not take 3 rounds casting them all that the clerics would compete with fighters for the fighter's role. It took until someone with a wizard figured out battlefield control's supremacy (web, or 3.0 darkness) before someone figured out 'hey, I bet entangle is as strong, someone should try a druid.' Once someone did that, and certainly after the druid/barbarian splat came out with Natural Spell feat, it was all over. So at least in personal experience, I've found that druids are not the first thing to discover, but it's pretty straightforward in figuring out.

- animal companion
"this is so broken! from level 1 you get a companion that is already stronger than a fighter, plus action economy"
not so much. ok, if you know to take a fleshraker and buff it with venomfire, you get a pretty effective companion. this is high op, though - and that specific combo is banned in many tables anyway.

There was a thread about this a few years ago, I believe it was Ur-Priest or Thurbane who started it. The breakdown was: Playing a Druid in a culturally iconic way makes them decent but not amazing, low levels you cast entangle as a person then natural shape you become a bird and be king of not dying as a caster. The Druid's Wildshape becomes much better out of core.
Druids are fairly susceptible to DM bans of key things (wildling clasps being another one). However, even without much of the non-core stuff, they are still powerful. It's not like a PrC that succeeds based on questionable early-entry exploits or similar (where a DM saying, 'nope, that's cheezy,' can just completely shut them down).

There are two main claims being made here. One is that druids aren't a great starter class, and the other is that they're ineffective. The first claim is arguable, since the Druid does have more paperwork, interaction with the monster manual, complicated actions (spells), and consistently controlling multiple actors in combat. The counter argument is that you want the player to be learning these things anyway, and learning by doing is the best way to go. I've seen noobs take to druids just fine, even if they tended to be one-note in their spell selection.
Pretty much my interpretation.

King of Nowhere

2020-08-05, 04:24 PM

So, are we comparing a new player at a game with experienced players or a new player in a table of new players?

well, this whole post is inspired from my tabletop experience of nobody ever managing to make an effective druid, so i'm talking about any combination of new players up to moderately experienced players.
all the stuff you say is actually very sensible and you would probably persuade me if this was a purely theoretical argument. however, i have seen too often a druid summon something that never landed a single hit in the whole combat, a druid wading into combat wildshaped and being used to mop the floor, a druid being unable to use crowd control because everyone is flying, a druid animal companion becoming gradually the comedy relief of the table, to believe that using a druid is simple.
i've seen druids be very effective with high level spells (sunburst, firestorm), but that's to be expected for any primary caster.

Quertus

2020-08-05, 05:27 PM

I have trouble with that too. ADHD, executive dysfunction, choice paralysis. Stuff like that. The very idea that classes in D&D have slots and can "equip" any spell they know into them each day breaks my brain. I can't fathom it, even just in PHB its too much. Maybe if the PHB had 1/20th the spells the mechanics wouldnt have been as overwhelming for me, but it is what it is.

Choice paralysis? Hmmm… I guess I don't have that (about elf games, at least), and haven't *noticed* anyone else having trouble with it. But that sounds like something that would be exacerbated by Vancian spell selection.

Hmmm… I suppose any class could be incompatible with an individual's flaws (after all, I hold that some "bad players" are fine, so long as they don't play X), but I still hold Vancian casting as trivially easy in the general case.

So there's at least one additional step of, "do you suffer from analysis paralysis" that must be answered before suggesting "Druid" as a good starting character.

Thunder999

2020-08-05, 08:46 PM

If you can't contribute as a druid then you have no hope with other classes.
You need to actually pick useful feats to contribute in combat as a martial.
You need good ability scores as pretty much any other class, but you can waste your best score on charisma and still end up OK as a druid.
You need to pick good spells as any other caster, a druid can just turn them into summons or forget about them and just hit things with two characters.
Add in wildshape and just turning into the same creature as your companion and ganging up on something is probably going to be solid damage compared to a low op martial.

mindstalk

2020-08-05, 08:57 PM

My last long Pathfinder game included a completely newbie playing a druid. It worked pretty well. Was she quick to pick up mechanics? Nope, kept asking "what do I roll?" for many, many, sessions. Did she get some help? Yeah, especially the GM helping her pick spells. Was she effective? Yeah -- decent combat, animal companion, figuring out on her own that the AC meant two tries per combat round. Spells like entangle, heat metal, some flame thing, call lightning, speak with animal, healing; also spider climb prepared for a break-and-enter job. Changing shape to a small animal for scouting, and at least once as a bear -- I think to lure away some other bear for quest reasons.

Her companion was a small/medium cat who became a larger cat with levels; I don't know the details.

Probably the second most effective PC, after my fairly optimized psion, who could do tons of damage while pretending to be a bard. (Even more effective before the GM corrected how I was using slumber. Way more fun as a standard action power :p )

Same game later added a player, who was quite experienced, but mostly in AD&D; he carried over that mindset, and "not wanting to overshadow the casters", making a super high AC fighter. I tried advising him that Things Had Changed Between Editions but it never took.

So, newbie druid player beats (wrong edition) experienced fighter player.

Unrelatedly, in a previous game my magus traumatized the party with Obscuring Mist. GM had had cultists drop some sort of magical darkness on us, that they could see through but we couldn't. We didn't have a direct counter, so I cast OM or Fog Cloud, figuring "if we can't see, no one can see". Tactically sound! And lots of whiffing all around.

Elkad

2020-08-05, 09:48 PM

Her companion was a small/medium cat who became a larger cat with levels; I don't know the details.

I've done that for a druid in the past. Player wanted to have an "only pet" that advanced, but advanced in size as well.
So I modified a serval and leopard to serve as "tiger cub" and "tiger youth" as custom AC picks. As the druid leveled, the AC was flavor-replaced as "growing up".
Since it was an actual companion, it didn't get traded out, or treated like a slightly-more-valuable summon. Even got rezzed a couple times, and on one occasion the druid's last heal went to save the pet, and let another party member die. I still have the base sheets.

https://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=587518
https://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=587541
https://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=587554

Unrelatedly, in a previous game my magus traumatized the party with Obscuring Mist. GM had had cultists drop some sort of magical darkness on us, that they could see through but we couldn't. We didn't have a direct counter, so I cast OM or Fog Cloud, figuring "if we can't see, no one can see". Tactically sound! And lots of whiffing all around.

That. Right there. That's why I love casters, especially Vancian ones. Bending the wrong spell to serve anyway, and making memorable gaming moments.

mindstalk

2020-08-06, 01:49 AM

Not always good memories. :p Years later, if I say "obscuring mist" a friend who was in the game will shout "oh god no!"

vasilidor

2020-08-06, 02:55 AM

DeTess

2020-08-06, 04:04 AM

I'd say the druid is a good class for new players that intend to really get into the mechanical side of the game. It has access to just about every tool and mechanic in the game, so they can learn which bits they like and don't like, and it is highly configurable, so the player can change and improve their character as they learn to be better at the game without needing to actually rebuild anything.

If the new player is only really at the table to drink beer, eat pretzels and have fun with their friends, and have no intention to learn more about the game than they absolutely have to then the druid is indeed an awful choice, and they should probably play a barbarian or something like that instead.

Gnaeus

2020-08-06, 08:05 AM

as to whether or not a druid is good for a starting player, depends upon what the player wants. if the player wants to try a spell caster of some sort, then yes it is perfectly fine. it has a decent spell list, but you may have to help the player out a bit at the start. a wizard on the other hand would be harder for a new player, with it being a lot more fragile and having easier ways to entrap oneself into a bad build, with a sorcerer being worse. a cleric would be another good choice for a new player wanting to be a caster.
If the player does not want to play a spell caster, then no. not at all.
casters as to how i would rate them for new players:
1:casters such as bard and pathfinders alchemist.
2: the druid or cleric, followed up by other predetermined spell list casters.
3: fragile learned casters such as the Wizard
4: casters such as the sorcerer or pathfinder oracle.

I’d put Druid above bard.

Bard starts out with 0 level spells and 6 hp. Wearing basically the same light armor as Druid. The companion alone will outdamage the bard. Given his weapon proficiencies, it’s reasonably likely that a bard 1 will sing (if he can, 1/day) then engage in melee with a long sword or rapier. The druids spells, even as CLW probably out-utility 2 extra skill points. And like the sorcerer the bard (when he gets spells) can’t change his choices. It’s pretty easy, for example, to imagine a well meaning bard taking CLW and Summon Monster, which is basically what we are proposing as minimal op Druid (And even easier imagining him taking Eagles Splendor at 4). And bards, like paladins, get a lot of love from later sources. Stuff like DFI and snowflake wardance, that I wouldn’t expect a new player to find. Not that Druid doesn’t of course. But at least the Druid has a basic reason to go looking for animal forms, as opposed to searching supplements.

It is a bit campaign dependent of course, based on the relative importance of social vs nature skills and exactly what the DM rules that social skills do on a role play vs roll play level. And of course how many party members will benefit from song.

If we are talking about PF of course, bard gets easier, Druid gets harder.

DwarvenWarCorgi

2020-08-06, 09:24 AM

Not so, he's correct with that complaint. One of the commonly overlooked facts about Call Lightning is that it requires a standard action to call down the remaining bolts each round. Call Lightning is not a 5-round storm spell that zaps things with lightning. It's more like you're equipping your Druid with a storm cloud and can attack using it for five rounds.

Wow. Been playing that wrong for decades.

King of Nowhere

2020-08-06, 09:42 AM

Druids are much easier to play. You have a buff animal companion, and can easily turn yourself into a heavy hitter as well.

that kind of forum advice is actually a large part of the reason i can't figure druids. after all, most of what i know of optimization i learned from the forum.

so, forum advice on how to optimize a fighter type:

get power attack, leap attack, shock trooper, so you deal a lot of damage on charges. keep putting multipliers on that; two options to seek are pounce and spirited charge
so, following this advice, even toning it down because we didn't want to go to that level of optimization, we have a fairly inexperienced player who still oneshots most targets in one round. you may call that high op, and it certainly is, but it is easy. you take a noob, write him one line of advice, and he's got a powerful character he can use.

on the other hand, forum advice for optimizing a druid is much less straightforward. it generally goes saying something nebulous about buffing yourself and your animal companion, which is much harder to do properly. tabletop gaming is not like a videogame where you have the door and you know there is an encounter on the other side; often you will be surprised without buffs, or you will cast your buffs preparing for an encounter and there will be no encounter. furthermore, buffing requires keeping track of which kind of bonus is everything. so often an inexperienced buffer will try to use buff spells that don't stack, or that are already covered by items. and even if you do a good job with that, your damage will still not be comparable to the other noob who built an ubercharger with forum help.

and this is exactly what happened in my table. i am comparing a high-op fighter druid to a mid-low op druid build because it's much easier to build a high op fighter than a mid op druid.
and all this is made worse by the expectation that the druid should be stronger and should be easy to use. like "i put so much effort figuring out how all this stuff works, and the guy who just took a bunch of suggested feats had it easier and is more effective. after he intentionally didn't pick some of the most powerful options!" (ok, this is compensated by the druid intentionally not picking a fleshraker).

Gnaeus

2020-08-06, 11:01 AM

that kind of forum advice is actually a large part of the reason i can't figure druids. after all, most of what i know of optimization i learned from the forum.

so, forum advice on how to optimize a fighter type:

so, following this advice, even toning it down because we didn't want to go to that level of optimization, we have a fairly inexperienced player who still oneshots most targets in one round. you may call that high op, and it certainly is, but it is easy. you take a noob, write him one line of advice, and he's got a powerful character he can use.

on the other hand, forum advice for optimizing a druid is much less straightforward. it generally goes saying something nebulous about buffing yourself and your animal companion, which is much harder to do properly. tabletop gaming is not like a videogame where you have the door and you know there is an encounter on the other side; often you will be surprised without buffs, or you will cast your buffs preparing for an encounter and there will be no encounter. furthermore, buffing requires keeping track of which kind of bonus is everything. so often an inexperienced buffer will try to use buff spells that don't stack, or that are already covered by items. and even if you do a good job with that, your damage will still not be comparable to the other noob who built an ubercharger with forum help.

and this is exactly what happened in my table. i am comparing a high-op fighter druid to a mid-low op druid build because it's much easier to build a high op fighter than a mid op druid.
and all this is made worse by the expectation that the druid should be stronger and should be easy to use. like "i put so much effort figuring out how all this stuff works, and the guy who just took a bunch of suggested feats had it easier and is more effective. after he intentionally didn't pick some of the most powerful options!" (ok, this is compensated by the druid intentionally not picking a fleshraker).

Well, maybe.

If I were handing out level 7 pregens for a convention game, and you said “hey, my friend hasn’t played before, can he play?” Absolutely. Fighter is way, way, way easier.

How do you get to that point, though. Let’s ignore every previous argument I have made and still stand behind regarding choice of combat style.

No newb is ever going to reach shock trooper. Ever. It requires build planning multiple levels in advance. And if you picked bull rush at random, you’d probably retrain it. It’s a very situational feat.

The Druid advice, otoh, is completely build independent. I’d usually expect natural spell. It’s a core feat with obvious applications and the only clear Druid feat in core. But it isn’t required. No one is saying “hey, the Druid could be using Aberrant wildshape to be a wil o wisp or dharculus” because that is actually the same op as the fighter you posted (splat feats from different places with emerging synergy, requires advanced build planning with trash prerequisites). And that’s crazy strong.

If they start at level 1, though, Druid isn’t a newb by that point. He had 4 levels as a pet class+ healbot to freely experiment. If he swapped out one spell/day/level and kept the ones that were good, he’s not a healbot anymore. He could be packing mass snakes swiftness and kelpstrand. Then at level 5 he gets to play with wildshape without casting, so maybe scouting eagle. Maybe he experiments with bear and discovers that unbuffed it isn’t that strong. Maybe his pet died 3 times while he was figuring it out. If your fighter died once he probably just rerolled.

And if your fighter read a fighter guide before level 1 and made that build, and the Druid read a Druid guide at level 7 and his feats were toughness x3, natural spell, that Druid is suddenly more powerful than that fighter. Enhance wildshape, Desmodu Bat. Now I spend all day as a flying spellcasting super scout. That single, build independent trick will give more all day utility than fighter gets in his entire career.

And that ignores the OTHER low tier newb fighter problem. Which is that if he hasn’t become a forum regular, he is probably using mostly dropped gear. Druids are mostly gear independent, with innate ways to solve common problems. Fighters need specific usually bought gear to work. They are expected to be able to fight swarms, fliers etc. Druids can generally find workarounds for common problems on their list in 8 hours.

Also, Druid buffing isn’t usually that complicated. Because a lot of their buffs are long duration. Core I would just expect barkskin, longstrider and Greater magic fang to be up if we are in a dungeon. So in combat you cast a spell on round 1 (likely a touch attack spell in core, something like bite of the wereX otherwise) and then engage. It’s not a non-issue. It’s a balancing act between over and underbuffing. But again, you don’t hand a 7th level Druid to a noob. It’s a problem that players figure out over time.

TLDR
If the problem is handing the Druid to a noob, it’s a non issue. If the problem is handing the Druid to a player who just isn’t that smart or isn’t interested in more than a single simplistic play style, not so much. Those are different problems though.

mindstalk

2020-08-07, 02:05 AM

Even if the druid doesn't do as much damage as the fighter, the druid has more options in general. Spells, more skill points (than fighter *or* the other Tier 1 or even Tier 2 casters (okay, wizard Int bonus probably makes up for that)), animal companion, Diplomacy as a class skill.

Reading spells is probably more attractive for the newbie than reading feats, and a bad choice can't stick them in a straitjacket for levels.

So half-assing the druid is probably more fun than half-assing the fighter.

Firest Kathon

2020-08-07, 04:20 AM

I'm strongly in the camp that Druid and similar classes which combine multiple game styles (e.g. Pathfinder Bloodrager) are excellent classes for game beginners. My reason for that is that they allow the new players to experience multiple aspects of the game with the same character, and usually they are able to contribute in most, if not all, situations. I agree that a Fighter may be easier to build and comprehend than a druid, but unless you have a mostly dungeon-delving game with many encounters, the new player will experience many situations where there is nothing to fight and they have to sit back and watch the others play the game.

This of course holds only under certain conditions:

There is an experienced player or GM who is helping with the build, in case of a player they can sit next to the new player and help in-game also (avoiding group advice/discussions).
Low or Mid OP group
The GM is willing and able to adapt the adventure to the group

I fully agree with those saying that *building* a druid is hard. Playing one, with assistance, not so much.

Animal Companion: Tell them what to roll for attack and damage. The GM controls animals companions anyways (RAW), so they can take care about positioning, flanking etc. Once the player is more experienced, they can take over more control as it is played at most tables.
Wildshape: Prepare a second character sheet with wildshaped stats.
Spells: Help with selection, explain when to use which spell.

Don't expect the new player to always contribute to the best ability to the class. For me, it is more important that the new player has fun and can learn different aspects of the game.

GoodbyeSoberDay

2020-08-07, 10:48 AM

Saying "Fleshraker companion and Venomfire" to a noob is as easy as saying "Leap Attack and Shock Trooper." Saying "Enhance Wild Shape plus [form with nice Ex ability]" is as easy as saying "One level of Spiritual Lion Totem Barbarian for pounce." Explaining how to get around the limitations of the charge rules is harder than explaining how (e.g.) Snowsight combines with Sleet Storm, or how multiple castings of Control Wind effectively stack. Everyone agrees that playing a druid is more work, but building a druid and giving him a few simple tricks is easier than building a robust charge fighter.

Elkad

2020-08-07, 09:16 PM

Saying "Fleshraker companion and Venomfire" to a noob is as easy as saying "Leap Attack and Shock Trooper."

Far easier actually. Shock Trooper will get you very dead if you misuse it. Misposition and you kill one guy, then his 8 friends all PA for maximum and still can't miss.

Knowing to mitigate it with careful positioning or bonus movement (like Sudden Leap) isn't exactly hard, but finding out you needed to do that is deadly.

Fleshraker+Venomfire doesn't really have a downside.

Vaern

2020-08-08, 01:07 PM

I'd say no. A few people have argued that they're good for noobs because they can do everything, and that you can ignore half the class while still being effective, but I'd argue that the opposite is true. The sheer number of options is more likely to overwhelm people, especially since they're basically expected to be looking through the monster manual to see what they can wild shape into.

Bards aren't as great as characters, but they're much friendlier to newbies.
Shed the animal companion so you aren't effectively playing two characters at once.
Get rid of wild shaping so you don't need to go through a dozen pages of the monster manual to see what all you can turn into or know what qualities you lose or keep through alternate form.
Swap prepared divine casting for spontaneous arcane casting so you only need to know what half a dozen spells do at any given time, rather than knowing your entire class spell list and trying to plan ahead for what you may need.
What you're left with is a character that is much easier to play and to understand, and can still teach a new player all of the core mechanics of the game from mundane combat to spellcasting to skill checks. And if there's ever an occasion when none of their options seems like a good idea and they'd rather hang back and play it save, they can always fall back on using their action on bardic music to buff the rest of their party instead. On top of all that, playing a charisma-based character with all of the social skills on their class skill list encourages the player to actually roleplay.

Batcathat

2020-08-08, 04:45 PM

It feels like the main disagreement is whether to interpret "good for noobs" as "easy to play for someone unfamiliar with the rules" or "hard to screw up the build for someone unfamiliar with the rules".

Darg

2020-08-08, 05:58 PM

Well you either have a DM that caters to the lowest common denominator or you don't. If they do, it doesn't really matter how you build your character of any class.

mindstalk

2020-08-08, 08:57 PM

hey're basically expected to be looking through the monster manual to see what they can wild shape into.

No wild shape until level 5. And there's no choice of commitment, so if you do enough reading to make a choice at all, and more reading later on, all you've lost is some hypothetical optimization. And I dunno how many Small or Medium animals are better combatants than a 5th level druid anyway, and it's only 1/day to start, so you're probably fine saving your wild shape use for utility transformations like "I'm a bird!"

Kyutaru

2020-08-09, 12:04 AM

No wild shape until level 5. And there's no choice of commitment, so if you do enough reading to make a choice at all, and more reading later on, all you've lost is some hypothetical optimization. And I dunno how many Small or Medium animals are better combatants than a 5th level druid anyway, and it's only 1/day to start, so you're probably fine saving your wild shape use for utility transformations like "I'm a bird!"

Yeah the only real optimization choice druids miss out on or have to watch for with shapeshifting is retaining the ability to use magic. Natural Spell is such a clutch feat for this reason. Noobs turning into bears then trying to cast one of their spells is a big beginner mistake.

Elkad

2020-08-09, 08:16 AM

I'd say no. A few people have argued that they're good for noobs because they can do everything, and that you can ignore half the class while still being effective, but I'd argue that the opposite is true. The sheer number of options is more likely to overwhelm people, especially since they're basically expected to be looking through the monster manual to see what they can wild shape into.

At L5 when they get wildshape, they have a handful of decent choices. DM or Veteran can give them a list of likely choices. Of course if they want to be something else (a pony for disguise?), the list of medium animals is only 20 creatures in core.

Bear, Leopard, Eagle, Deinonychus in core. Shark in case of water, which is unlikely in most campaigns.

Out of core? Fleshraker and Desmondu show up.

They don't get that many more choices on levelup either. Oh sure, they might miss out on Dire Tortoise someday. That's hardly ruining their character.

Until they know to spend feats for Enhanced Aberrant Wild Shape or something, they'll be sticking to beatsticks and scouts. The core beatsticks (ursine/feline) and scouts (generally avian) do that plenty well to keep them at parity or ahead of lesser-tier optimized characters (water orc barbarians, etc)

Ashiel

2020-08-10, 01:02 AM

I personally believe that the best class a newbie can begin with is the Ranger. They can learn all facets of the game in tiny bites without any one facet - especially the more complicated facets - being their bread and butter. Just look at how the ranger progresses.

Level 1-3: It begins as a warrior with good saves and a lot of skill points. This allows you to get the basics of attack rolls and skills under your belt. 1-3 levels in a campaign is plenty of time to learn all your basics and get comfortable with skills and making attack rolls and saving throws. As a warrior you have above-average hit points, armor, and saves, and access to martial weapons. Lower levels are usually the best time to be warriors anyway, and when being a pure warrior feels strongest for most people.

Level 4: After you've had 3 levels to become totally comfortable with the game's core mechanics, you are given a tiny handful of prepared spells that are very useful but not integral to your success, you get your whole spell list, and can swap them out each day, allowing you to learn how magic works without being punished for picking the wrong spell.

You also get a simple but effective minion, the animal companion, giving you one pet to explore things like riding, or handling more than one set of actions at a time. This is a very good stepping stone for stepping into any of the more advanced classes who almost all have some reliable ways to acquire lots of minions (either via summon spells or things like animate dead). Of course, you only get this after you've had the training wheels on for the first three levels.

The Pathfinder version of Ranger is especially great, because it never really slows down at being absolutely awesome and in a lot of ways just revs up.