PDA

View Full Version : 4e Druid Peek



Asbestos
2008-12-01, 12:56 AM
Found here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20081201a)

Primal Controller with leader or striker as the secondary roles. Not really quite what I was expecting I have to say.

JackMage666
2008-12-01, 01:15 AM
Seems fairly decent, but it just doesn't put the controller role out there so much, I don't think.

But, man, imagine a party of 1 Druid and 3 Rogues. That would be DEADLY.

overduegalaxy
2008-12-01, 01:18 AM
Interestingly, they kept it fairly similar to 3.5's Druid. It's still a caster, and it still wildshapes. I would've expected them to focus exclusively on one or the other.

If I had to define 3.5 druids in 4e terms, I'd call it a controller/striker, depending on the build, so the roles seem appropriate.

However, seriously? Only a 2nd level build? Most campaigns will go past 3rd level in a session or two.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-01, 01:23 AM
Interesting indeed.

I think this is as good as we could've expected for a Wild Shape fix, and granting it at first level was a good choice.

Also: free Ritual Casting! That might be an interesting fix between the classes, to make low-level ritual casting a little more accessible.

And check out Savage Rend - an At-Will Slide Power that can be used to OA? Yes, please!

EDIT:
How exactly do you wield a Totem in combat? I guess they meant a small idol or something, but I can't help but imagining a Druid waving a 3-foot length of carved log at his enemies :smallbiggrin:

KnightDisciple
2008-12-01, 01:30 AM
Interesting indeed.

I think this is as good as we could've expected for a Wild Shape fix, and granting it at first level was a good choice.

Also: free Ritual Casting! That might be an interesting fix between the classes, to make low-level ritual casting a little more accessible.

And check out Savage Rend - an At-Will Slide Power that can be used to OA? Yes, please!

EDIT:
How exactly do you wield a Totem in combat? I guess they meant a small idol or something, but I can't help but imagining a Druid waving a 3-foot length of carved log at his enemies :smallbiggrin:

You remember the regular Tauren units in WC3? Yeah, it's like that: a big log you hit people with. :smalltongue:

Asbestos
2008-12-01, 01:34 AM
Just realized that with the Con and Wis bonuses, we might see as many dwarven druids as we do elf druids.

Maybe they meant fetish instead of totem but didn't want people to be all immature about it?

Tengu_temp
2008-12-01, 02:14 AM
Quite an interesting class. Not as cool as Swordmage, but nothing is.

RTGoodman
2008-12-01, 02:21 AM
Just realized that with the Con and Wis bonuses, we might see as many dwarven druids as we do elf druids.

I'm gonna play a Doo-dad!
(Cookie for the reference...)


I actually REALLY like what I've seen so far, but GEEZ that's a lot of 1st-level At-Will powers to choose from...

Asbestos
2008-12-01, 02:31 AM
I'm gonna play a Doo-dad!
(Cookie for the reference...)


I actually REALLY like what I've seen so far, but GEEZ that's a lot of 1st-level At-Will powers to choose from...

Yeah, but then there's this part...

At-Will Attack Powers: You begin with three at-will attack powers. Throughout your career, at least one of those powers, and no more than two, must have the beast form keyword.
Does that mean that Human druids have four at-wills?

Tengu_temp
2008-12-01, 02:32 AM
Does that mean that Human druids have four at-wills?

Yes, and they can use 1-2 of them when shapeshifted, and 2-3 when not. It's not as broken as it sounds.

RTGoodman
2008-12-01, 02:37 AM
Yeah, but then there's this part...

Does that mean that Human druids have four at-wills?

Ah, yeah, I missed that. Tengu's right, though - since you effectively have two sets of at-wills (some for in wild shape, some for out of it), it's not too bad. I think it also sort of plays into my idea that the key "feature" (if you want to call it that) of the Controller class is their versatility.

Athaniar
2008-12-01, 02:41 AM
I'm gonna play a Doo-dad!
(Cookie for the reference...)

That would be Pikel Bouldershoulder, right?

skywalker
2008-12-01, 02:50 AM
Wow. Controller. Well.

*eats hat, pays bets*

I was wrong.

Anyway, I actually think it looks kinda wonky. Primal Predator looks really bad at this point, the benefit pretty much sucks(+1 to speed, whoopty frickin' do!). Plus, having a higher AC probably benefits the striker-type more than the "leader-type"... And since striker-types also want more HP, I think they're gonna want a higher CON, on average, than the leader type, whose powers(or at least the ones Wizards wants them to pick) are based more on hanging back, and not getting dug in.

On the other hand, I suppose since DEX still boosts AC, the power benefit from predator isn't terrible... I just find it strange to recommend CON for the more ranged option and DEX for the more melee option. Actually, I find it dumb. What you really want, is both. DEX for AC, but also CON so that when you do get hit(and you're a striker/controller hybrid, if you don't think you're getting hit, you're insane), you can take it. I think the big animal dishing out damage and status ailments will be quite a juicy target.

I think this was poorly written, I think is what I'm trying to say.

...and that was my favorite hat. :smallwink:

Rockphed
2008-12-01, 02:57 AM
Yeah, but then there's this part...

Does that mean that Human druids have four at-wills?

I think it does. And this makes it harder for me to decide if I want to be a barbarian, a Druid or a rogue. I really need to find a group.:smallfrown:

KKL
2008-12-01, 02:58 AM
For a sneak peek at an unfinished product, it looks fairly fun.

Also, Change Shape being open ended gives you free reign to Wildshape into the more "wtf" stuff. Like abominations from when The Land Was Young And Stuff.

Also, Warforged Druid named Optimus Primus. Since you retain your living construct traits while Wild Shaped...

Wildshapers. More than meets the eye.

Dhavaer
2008-12-01, 03:54 AM
Can someone give a brief description of how wildshape works? I really wasn't expecting it to be a controller; I couldn't think of how wildshape would work with that role.

KKL
2008-12-01, 03:58 AM
Can someone give a brief description of how wildshape works? I really wasn't expecting it to be a controller; I couldn't think of how wildshape would work with that role.

Mechanically, all it does is allow you to use powers with the Beast Form Keyword or something similar. And a whole bunch of stuff drops off or just gets integrated into your body.

tyfon
2008-12-01, 04:28 AM
I'm not really sure if it is best idea with this wildshape/best form keyword combination. As I see many of such powers are burst1/close range, while druid is pretty soft - low hp and AC.

KnightDisciple
2008-12-01, 04:36 AM
Mechanically, all it does is allow you to use powers with the Beast Form Keyword or something similar. And a whole bunch of stuff drops off or just gets integrated into your body.

I've only read it once, but I believe the only stuff that drops off is weapons/shields/anything in your hands. Everything else is "absorbed"; most still give benefits, but some wonderous items and the like (such as potions) would not work, according to my reading.
Of course, if you use a quarterstaff as your weapon/implement, you're golden, since you can still hold those.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-01, 07:55 AM
This strikes me as bland. They did their best to provide versatility in animal companions for the ranger, but now the druid shapeshift ability really doesn't do anything except toggle a few powers on and off. Yes, there is a middle road between the ability to take any shape ever printed in any MM, and taking only one generic copy/paste shape.

None of the powers shown are anything special, either; nothing we haven't seen before.

Tengu_temp
2008-12-01, 08:06 AM
Can someone give a brief description of how wildshape works? I really wasn't expecting it to be a controller; I couldn't think of how wildshape would work with that role.

Feel free to check yourself. It's an open preview this time - everyone can see it, not only prescribers.

Thane of Fife
2008-12-01, 08:18 AM
I find it hilarious that it's considered better to be able to turn into a mouse than to be able to turn into a wolverine.

Tengu_temp
2008-12-01, 08:28 AM
That's exactly how 3.5 handled it, too.

Saph
2008-12-01, 08:30 AM
So in the end their solution was to keep Wildshape, but to have it not actually do anything much. Oh well.

Can't really see what the point of the class is so far, but maybe they'll add something later.

- Saph

Thane of Fife
2008-12-01, 08:41 AM
That's exactly how 3.5 handled it, too.

<Looks>

So it is. That's also hilarious.

Assuming that I understand 4e correctly, it is slightly more hilarious in that edition, as it's something you actually have to choose. Just imagine the PCs sitting around a campfire, trying to decide what powers they want to take with their most recent level:

Druid: Hmm.... Do I want to create bursts of fog to protect my allies, or turn into a mouse?

Morty
2008-12-01, 08:43 AM
Huh. When compared to Barbarian, this looks surprisingly uninspired. Many of the attack evocations lacking the Beast keyword might as well be Wizard spells. The problem of wildshaping was apparently solved by it not doing very much mechanics-wise. But switching between beast form and natural form might be quite interesting.

Kizara
2008-12-01, 08:51 AM
Many of the attack evocations lacking the Beast keyword might as well be Wizard spells. The problem of wildshaping was apparently solved by it not doing very much mechanics-wise.

This is pretty representative of the 4e design philosophy, wouldn't you say?

Morty
2008-12-01, 09:05 AM
This is pretty representative of the 4e design philosophy, wouldn't you say?

I was trying to avoid stirring up yet another edition war by focusing on the class rather than the whole edition.

tyfon
2008-12-01, 09:14 AM
I've really been trying to find one, small word mentioning that You could shift info flying creature. Heh, even if not then still, they mention spider. What is funny - you cannot climb walls as spider-druid - at least not better than any humanoid character...

KnightDisciple
2008-12-01, 09:24 AM
This is pretty representative of the 4e design philosophy, wouldn't you say?

Except...how different could they be, after a point?
Putting aside that this is, ultimately, a rather small preview...
I see very druidy themes: wind, cold, lighting (all 3 are weather/storm related), fire, and plants. Especially thorny vines (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0020.html)vines. I like it. Admittedly, fire seems a bit odd, at first, but there's fire in nature, after all.
Besides, some of these *cough*fire seeds*cough* were lifted from 3.5, and just retouched. It's not a big, new thing.
I'm interested to see if one could make a druid who has almost entirely plant-based spells...

KnightDisciple
2008-12-01, 09:29 AM
I've really been trying to find one, small word mentioning that You could shift info flying creature. Heh, even if not then still, they mention spider. What is funny - you cannot climb walls as spider-druid - at least not better than any humanoid character...

Well, my guess would be it'll be a utility power around the time wizards get flight. Same with other powers that affect movement types/ability. *shrugs* I think it was on the WotC boards that it was suggested this could represent the druid gaining further mastery over their shapeshifting.

Frankly, for me, if the choice is between keeping track of an ever-growing/changing list of animal templates (aka like the ranger pets) or the like, or doing what they've done here, I'd lean towards this interpretation. It lets people assume various looks easier, and even make up your own (what with the suggestion of "shadowy animals, aberrations, and the like"), and then just attach the preferred attacks/abilities as they come along. It feels more modular, and I like to think of it as representing the primal, ever-changing nature of a druid.

The Mormegil
2008-12-01, 10:24 AM
This actually solved some problems, right here...

Anyway, I dont like the preview much. I think they'd be better off splitting the 3.5 Druid themes in 3 classes, as was suggested, instead of mixing all of it in one big, controller (:smallconfused:) class. I am happy with the at-wills, and I am happy for the attribute choices. I am happy for the themes they gave to the to builds, but... +1 speed vs using your secondary stat for AC? I don't see this being too much balanced.

But I like the wildshape fix. It can represent quite EVERYTHING. Talking about the problems it solved I mentioned before, I didnt know how to handle a PC turning from dragon to human form... done! I am a happy man....

Kurald Galain
2008-12-01, 10:37 AM
What is funny - you cannot climb walls as spider-druid - at least not better than any humanoid character...
Spider-druid, spider-druid, does whatever a spider-druid does. Can he swing, from a web? No he can't, he's a druid.


Except...how different could they be, after a point?
The problem is that a refluffed cleric is just as much a druid as this build; they just took the same powers and stuck different names on it. At least the fighter has different mechanics (marking, etc) than the wizard.



But I like the wildshape fix. It can represent quite EVERYTHING.
That means that it actually represents nothing.

The Mormegil
2008-12-01, 10:45 AM
That means that it actually represents nothing.

Or, it represents everything I need it to. Which is amazing.

Mando Knight
2008-12-01, 10:45 AM
Wildshapers. More than meets the eye.

Wildshapers! Warforged in disguise!

...but seriously. This seems to be an interesting class... we'll just have to wait for PHB 2 to come out to see the rest of it, I suppose...

Kurald Galain
2008-12-01, 11:00 AM
Or, it represents everything I need it to. Which is amazing.
It follows that what you need is nothing.

Seriously though, what you call "amazing" is utterly trivial; "wild shapes don't make any difference" is something that anybody could have made up, and certainly required no great thought, effort, or balance on WOTC's part.

Mr.Bookworm
2008-12-01, 11:26 AM
This is...

Much less inspired then what I expected, especially after seeing the coolness that is the Barbarian.

Meh, it's still just a demo. And it's open, to boot. Hopefully, Wizards is actually taking feedback.


This is pretty representative of the 4e design philosophy, wouldn't you say?

Could we not turn this into another pointless argument about 4E? The two million of those we've had already were enough for me.


3.5 Druid themes in 3 classes

This. That would work great.

The Wild Shape aspect could work great as a Defender/Striker. Give another primal class part of the spellcasting abilities for Controller, and give another part, along with some new stuff, for a Leader.

That would, incidentally, create a full set of class roles for the Primal power source, which would be neat.

Kaiyanwang
2008-12-01, 11:37 AM
It follows that what you need is nothing.

Seriously though, what you call "amazing" is utterly trivial; "wild shapes don't make any difference" is something that anybody could have made up, and certainly required no great thought, effort, or balance on WOTC's part.

+1.

Anyway, MAYBE there will be upper-level powers needing wildashape allowing de facto a shapeshift in something different (something like "anything you can imagine also, but bigger. And with bigger fangs").

Asbestos
2008-12-01, 11:56 AM
I'm not really sure if it is best idea with this wildshape/best form keyword combination. As I see many of such powers are burst1/close range, while druid is pretty soft - low hp and AC.

They aren't that soft. They have striker health but with one more healing surge. That is, of course, assuming that you aren't going Guardian Druid in which case you likely have higher hp and maybe a few more healing surges. Either way your AC is comparable to that of a ranger or rogue.

The +1 to speed works for the theme that the Predator Druid seems to have, mobility. All of the powers that work off Dex grant some form of increased mobility. I'm guessing that most predator druids are going to take pounce as an at-will in order to get the most out of their increased speed. Druids in general seem to have better mobility that most since they can shift 1 square when they turn from beast to humanoid form, which takes a minor action.

Random question... if a power says it can be used as a melee basic attack does that mean I can charge and then use it? Or does it just mean I can use it when an OA or a power grants me a free basic melee attack?

THAC0
2008-12-01, 01:34 PM
Feel free to check yourself. It's an open preview this time - everyone can see it, not only prescribers.

I can't! :(

Maybe I'm doing something wrong...

Inyssius Tor
2008-12-01, 01:44 PM
Feel free to check yourself. It's an open preview this time - everyone can see it, not only prescribers.

Um, no it isn't.


"I am the seeker. I am the stalker. I am the storm."


Subscribe Now to Get this Article and Over 120 Pages of
Dungeon and Dragon Content Every Month

Morty
2008-12-01, 01:46 PM
Um, no it isn't.

It was at least for a little while.

Starbuck_II
2008-12-01, 01:55 PM
They aren't that soft. They have striker health but with one more healing surge. That is, of course, assuming that you aren't going Guardian Druid in which case you likely have higher hp and maybe a few more healing surges. Either way your AC is comparable to that of a ranger or rogue.

Agreed, the Rogue need Dex for AC/hit (possibly some Str for feats).

The Guardian Druid needs Con for hps/AC and Wisdom.
I'm reminiscent of the 3.5 Druid (after Wild Shape was changed to Alternate Form).
Whoa, the Druid has good AC, Hps, and attack score...




Random question... if a power says it can be used as a melee basic attack does that mean I can charge and then use it? Or does it just mean I can use it when an OA or a power grants me a free basic melee attack?


All of the above.
Yes, basic attacks rock!

Behold_the_Void
2008-12-01, 01:59 PM
I imagine some encounter or daily powers will round out the wildshape thing more.

Artanis
2008-12-01, 01:59 PM
In response to the "wildshaping doesn't really make much difference" comments:

At first glance, I'd agree. The key phrase there being "at first glance". For all we know, it could be a MASSIVE difference when it's actually used. So I'd wait for it to come out before declaring it to be "unimaginative" and whatnot. Appearing that way, sure. But we don't know for sure yet.

Asbestos
2008-12-01, 02:02 PM
All of the above.
Yes, basic attacks rock!

Well, the question originated because some of the Druid beast form at-wills, like Grasping Claws, say they can be used in place of a basic melee attack while Pounce specifically states that it can be used in place of a basic melee attack when charging. Does this mean that I can use Grasping Claws for OAs and on charges but can only use Pounce on charges?

Artanis
2008-12-01, 02:07 PM
That's what it sounds like. Though since I can't see the article anymore *grumble*, I can't see whether there's some benefit to the charge-only one, like dealing more damage or some such.

Starbuck_II
2008-12-01, 02:13 PM
Well, the question originated because some of the Druid beast form at-wills, like Grasping Claws, say they can be used in place of a basic melee attack while Pounce specifically states that it can be used in place of a basic melee attack when charging. Does this mean that I can use Grasping Claws for OAs and on charges but can only use Pounce on charges?

Page of the PHB:
Basic Attack
A basic attack is an at-will attack power that everyone
possesses, regardless of class. The power comes in two forms: melee and ranged. You calculate the attack bonuses of a basic attack like those of any other attack power (page 274).
When a power allows you to make a basic attack, you can make either a melee basic attack or a ranged basic attack. If a power specifically calls for a melee basic attack or a ranged basic attack, you must use that type.
You use a melee basic attack to make an opportunity attack, and some powers or effects (especially warlord powers) give you the ability to make a basic attack when it isn’t your turn.

Geez, that was a lot of typing.

So yes, for AO automatically.

Charge says:
Move and Attack: Move your speed as part of the charge and make a melee basic attack or a bull rush at the end of your move.

So, according to the PHB: yes, you can Attack of opportunity + Charge with all [melee] basic attacks.

RTGoodman
2008-12-01, 02:16 PM
Yep, that's how it works. Each of them have their own other effects, though - pounce makes the enemy give combat advantage on the next attack against it, grasping claws slows the target, and savage rend lets you slide it one squares.

Since you'll probably only have one or two Beast Form powers, that means you won't have all of them, and then you'll get to pick which effect you want (CA, slide, slow), meaning all of them will get at least a LITTLE use.

RPGuru1331
2008-12-01, 02:30 PM
It follows that what you need is nothing.

Seriously though, what you call "amazing" is utterly trivial; "wild shapes don't make any difference" is something that anybody could have made up, and certainly required no great thought, effort, or balance on WOTC's part.

Actually, it required a lot of thought, given the starting place. "How do we make Wildshape not be stupid powerful like it was in 3.5...?"

Frankly, representing nothing is perfectly fine by me. Some of us prefer Effects-based.

Kletian999
2008-12-01, 02:33 PM
The benefits of wildshaping (so far) according to the preview:
Deshifting to human form (minor action) allows a free [movement] shift. If the class doesn't use it's minor actions for much else this can add up to a lot of extra mobility over multiple rounds (can't use shift more than once a round).

The beast form lets a Single attribute wisdom based caster perform when trapped in close quarters better than other non-str based characters. Since the powers can be used as basic attacks you get solid OAs (free heavy blade opportunist) and useful charge attacks (which means bonus accuracy and movement).

What makes a Druid unique from Clerics and Wizards is that Clerics need multiple attributes to be effective at both melee and range, while wizards never really get good melee options (Spiral tower is ok, but limited), and a Druid moves between the two aspects seemlessly instead of having to build in one direction.

Hzurr
2008-12-01, 02:50 PM
Any chance of someone spoilering the article for those of us who can't see it?

The Glyphstone
2008-12-01, 02:56 PM
Unfortunately, that probably violates the Posting Rules now that subscribers have to pay to see it...copyright issues and all that.:smallfrown::smallfurious::smallmad:

Asbestos
2008-12-01, 02:56 PM
Page of the PHB:
Basic Attack
A basic attack is an at-will attack power that everyone
possesses, regardless of class. The power comes in two forms: melee and ranged. You calculate the attack bonuses of a basic attack like those of any other attack power (page 274).
When a power allows you to make a basic attack, you can make either a melee basic attack or a ranged basic attack. If a power specifically calls for a melee basic attack or a ranged basic attack, you must use that type.
You use a melee basic attack to make an opportunity attack, and some powers or effects (especially warlord powers) give you the ability to make a basic attack when it isn’t your turn.

Geez, that was a lot of typing.

So yes, for AO automatically.

Charge says:
Move and Attack: Move your speed as part of the charge and make a melee basic attack or a bull rush at the end of your move.

So, according to the PHB: yes, you can Attack of opportunity + Charge with all [melee] basic attacks.
Thanks for clearing that up, I guess they thought an OA causing someone to grant CA to be a little bit much.

The level 3 encounter powers are up for those that have subscriptions. Again, the Predator power is all about mobility and melee attacks. The Guardian power is a blast, think thunderwave but better.

Rockphed
2008-12-01, 03:11 PM
Any chance of someone spoilering the article for those of us who can't see it?

I think that breaks Fair Use, though I am not sure. I will attempt to list the basics for everybody(this is from memory).

Druids are controllers who use wisdom as their attack stat. They also use constitution and (possibly) dexterity as modifiers on powers. I didn't actually take that deep of a look.:smallredface:

They get ritual casting for free at first level, and start with 2 rituals, one of which must be animal messenger.

They can wild-shape from first level. Many of their powers can only be activated when wild-shaped. All others are forbidden when wild-shaped.

They get 3 at-will powers(unless they are human, in which case they get 4). Of those, at least 1 and no more than 2 must be of the type that can only be used in wild-shape.

The non-wildshape powers looked very controllery, while I can't say how controllery the wildshape ones are. Fire-seed comes to mind as a good example. It deals 1d8 damage to the target and lights all squares next to the target on fire. Everybody who starts or goes through those squares takes damage equal to wis-mod.

Oslecamo
2008-12-01, 03:17 PM
Like everybody else, druids get hit by the nerf hammer, it seems. HARD.

You broke it, you pay for it, it's WOTC new motto. No more monster manual digging for you powergamers it seems!:smalltongue:

Asbestos
2008-12-01, 03:24 PM
The non-wildshape powers looked very controllery, while I can't say how controllery the wildshape ones are. Fire-seed comes to mind as a good example. It deals 1d8 damage to the target and lights all squares next to the target on fire. Everybody who starts or goes through those squares takes damage equal to wis-mod.

Now if your party has two Druids for some reason, which isn't unimaginable given the dual roles of the class, the second druid can blast the fire seeded enemy with a storm spike. If they move through the fire they take damage, if they don't move they take damage.

The wildshape powers seem more striker/leader like to me. Of course, I have no working definition of 'controller'... even though I've now seen 2 controllers... I'm still not 100% sure what makes anyone a controller, is it an abundance of burst attacks?

Side note: Is anyone else excited to have an all-primal party? I mean, if the Warden is a defender and the Shaman is a leader we'll have all 4 roles filled out. For some reason it seems cooler to me than an all arcane party. Though, an all divine party (assuming that the 2 new divine characters fill the controller/striker roles) could be kind of neat too, but for different reasons.

DSCrankshaw
2008-12-01, 03:27 PM
Really, what wild shape does is change your basic attack, as well as give you access to other melee type attacks. It doesn't change your movement type, or give you scent or low-light vision, and I think that's okay. Specific abilities and shapes come into play when you take certain powers, such as the utility which allows you to become a small creature with improved stealth. I expect there to be others, such as flight, water breath, and scent. There will likely be feats that will improve your abilities when wildshaped as well. For example, a Weapon Focus-like damage improvement, or increased speed or AC. That's really just speculation, but it makes sense.

In any case, I've noticed that a lot of the druid powers are of the "trap the enemy" variety. Flame Seed, Twisting Vines, Wind Prison, and Call Lightning all create penalties for the target if he moves.

Hzurr
2008-12-01, 03:35 PM
In any case, I've noticed that a lot of the druid powers are of the "trap the enemy" variety. Flame Seed, Twisting Vines, Wind Prison, and Call Lightning all create penalties for the target if he moves.


So...a controller, basically?

DSCrankshaw
2008-12-01, 03:41 PM
So...a controller, basically?

Yup. The first line of the description says: "Role: Controller. Your beast form gives you access to powers that provide control at close range, while your humanoid form allows you to hinder your opponents from a distance. Depending on your choice of class features and powers, you might lean toward either leader or striker as a secondary role." (I think I can copy that much without violating fair use.) And it seems like most of the powers fit, although the beast form stuff doesn't seem quite as controllery as the human form.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-01, 04:18 PM
Man, that sucks - WotC did throw the preview back behind their Content Wall :smallannoyed:

Anyhow, I think there's an important point about the Wild Shape fix that folks are missing: it perfectly preserves the Druid flavor without trying other ridiculous limitations.

The 2E "Only one Mammal, Reptile, and Bird per day" caused me to comb through my encyclopedias for interesting choices, and the 3E's various restrictions obviously did little to keep its power in check. The 4E version lets even a 1st level druid transform into a fox, hawk, or large snake which has good fluffy effects (perfect disguise, ability to move about a forest undetected) without causing overwhelming mechanical problems.

Plus, we have already seen a Daily that allows the Wild Shape ability to get extra powers (the Spider Druid power); presumably they'll have others granting improved climb, flight, or whatnot too. I think it's a good mechanic, and the whole "Beast Power / Nature Power" split makes them a mechanically interesting class too.

RTGoodman
2008-12-01, 05:00 PM
I think it's a good mechanic, and the whole "Beast Power / Nature Power" split makes them a mechanically interesting class too.

I agree, and I think we'll probably also seem some cool Paragon Paths that emphasize each aspect. I'd have loved to see a real Playtest article on the Druid, though - one where we get the whole progression - but I guess we have to have something to make us buy PHB2. :smalltongue:

Kurald Galain
2008-12-01, 05:22 PM
At first glance, I'd agree. The key phrase there being "at first glance". For all we know, it could be a MASSIVE difference when it's actually used. So I'd wait for it to come out before declaring it to be "unimaginative" and whatnot. Appearing that way, sure. But we don't know for sure yet.
The fun things about previews is that they show you the good stuff. WOTC knows better than to leave such a key concept behind, if they have any.

Also, funny thing, ever since the first preview of 4E came out, people have frequently responded to any and all criticism with "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!" And so far, these responses have been widely missing the point.

For instance,
Elf preview: you give your teammates +1 to perception as long as they're within 5 squares.
Critics: that's a bonus that'll be generally irrelevant and that people will tend to forget.
Fanbois: "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!"
End result: It is, indeed, a bonus that's generally (95% of the time, by definition) irrelevant, and that indeed people tend to forget (like, oh, pretty much any circumstantial +1 bonus (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html) in the history of D&D).

Awesomologist
2008-12-01, 07:07 PM
For instance,
Elf preview: you give your teammates +1 to perception as long as they're within 5 squares.
Critics: that's a bonus that'll be generally irrelevant and that people will tend to forget.
Fanbois: "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!"
End result: It is, indeed, a bonus that's generally (95% of the time, by definition) irrelevant, and that indeed people tend to forget (like, oh, pretty much any circumstantial +1 bonus (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html) in the history of D&D).

That's really just an opinion. I don't know how much 4e you've played, but in the Heroic Tier of play a +1 to anything is pretty useful. My local group has been playing since June and we've played a bunch of race and class combos. You want to know what comes up every time?
"Did anyone choose an elf? My (insert class) would love a boost to perception!"

I know it may not seem so to 3.5 power gamers, but 4e is pretty well balanced. I recommend anyone check it out and give it an honest try

But back to the subject at hand...

I really like the potential the druid has. I'll be honest, I'm not interested in a controller/striker personally so the beast form stuff, while "neat" just doesn't do it for me. But so far I love the idea of a controller which has the option to do more.
I'm not sure if others have noticed this with your 4e wizard but towards the end of an encounter it seems like wizards just spam magic missile (or ray of frost in case of fleeing enemies). But instead you have the option of turning into a beast and getting in close for a round letting an injured striker to move out and spend a second wind while still slowing/sliding/granting Combat Advantage etc.
We're only seeing a couple of levels but on a whole I like the direction they're going with here.

Artanis
2008-12-01, 07:15 PM
The fun things about previews is that they show you the good stuff. WOTC knows better than to leave such a key concept behind, if they have any.

Also, funny thing, ever since the first preview of 4E came out, people have frequently responded to any and all criticism with "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!" And so far, these responses have been widely missing the point.

For instance,
Elf preview: you give your teammates +1 to perception as long as they're within 5 squares.
Critics: that's a bonus that'll be generally irrelevant and that people will tend to forget.
Fanbois: "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!"
End result: It is, indeed, a bonus that's generally (95% of the time, by definition) irrelevant, and that indeed people tend to forget (like, oh, pretty much any circumstantial +1 bonus (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html) in the history of D&D).
I never, EVER said that it would be good. I said that we don't know what it will be like when played. Nothing more, nothing less. So unless you're trying to tell me that you've used the Druid from level 1 all the way through level 30, you have no place whatsoever to start accusing me of fanboyism based on that statement.

Mewtarthio
2008-12-01, 08:27 PM
Assuming that I understand 4e correctly, it is slightly more hilarious in that edition, as it's something you actually have to choose. Just imagine the PCs sitting around a campfire, trying to decide what powers they want to take with their most recent level:

Druid: Hmm.... Do I want to create bursts of fog to protect my allies, or turn into a mouse?

I actually found that power pretty funny, too, but for a different reason. I picture a druid in the form of a large and feral winter wolf sizing up the situation, thinking, This requires stealth, then shrinking down into a West Highland White Terrier (http://images.google.com/images?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4DMUS_enUS255US256&q=west+highland+terrier&um=1&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title).

KKL
2008-12-01, 08:52 PM
Like everybody else, druids get hit by the nerf hammer, it seems. HARD.

lern 2 terminology

This isn't a nerf. It's closer to a fix than a nerf.

Mewtarthio
2008-12-01, 09:07 PM
I thought that a nerf just made something weaker, so a fix to an overpowered class would still be a nerf.

Granted, this still isn't a nerf, as the 4e Druid never existed before, and the two systems (3e and 4e) use such radically different rules that there is no original Druid to compare the new guy with.

KKL
2008-12-01, 09:12 PM
I thought that a nerf just made something weaker, so a fix to an overpowered class would still be a nerf.

Granted, this still isn't a nerf, as the 4e Druid never existed before, and the two systems (3e and 4e) use such radically different rules that there is no original Druid to compare the new guy with.

A nerf is a fix that happens to something that does not deserve it in the slightest, or a fix so radical that it completely invalidates what was fixed.

A fix is a change to something that desperately deserved it.

My definition may very well be as old as World War 2 though, so I dunno.

Draz74
2008-12-01, 09:15 PM
A nerf is a fix that happens to something that does not deserve it in the slightest, or a fix so radical that it completely invalidates what was fixed.

Not in my experience. I've heard nerf used for things that deserved it.

... had Nerf brand even been invented by WWII? :smalltongue:

Mr.Bookworm
2008-12-01, 09:42 PM
Not in my experience. I've heard nerf used for things that deserved it.

... had Nerf brand even been invented by WWII? :smalltongue:

Goddammit, now I'm going to think about World War II being fought with Nerf weapons for the rest of the night.

tbarrie
2008-12-01, 10:02 PM
Anybody else think it's odd that the Beast Form attacks don't target AC? This is necessary for game balance due to the lack of a proficiency bonus, but it still feels wrong.

(They could fix this by adding a proficiency bonus to attacks while in Beast Form. This would also add an easy way to satisfy those who want more mechanical variety for different shapes, as Druids could be given the option of turning into a high-proficiency/low-damage form or vice-versa - not that I have any problem with the Power-based way of differentiating between forms used in the playtest version.)

KKL
2008-12-01, 10:09 PM
... had Nerf brand even been invented by WWII? :smalltongue:
Don't believe so. 'Twas hyperbole my good man.

Awesomologist
2008-12-01, 10:11 PM
Anybody else think it's odd that the Beast Form attacks don't target AC? This is necessary for game balance due to the lack of a proficiency bonus, but it still feels wrong.

(They could fix this by adding a proficiency bonus to attacks while in Beast Form. This would also add an easy way to satisfy those who want more mechanical variety for different shapes, as Druids could be given the option of turning into a high-proficiency/low-damage form or vice-versa - not that I have any problem with the Power-based way of differentiating between forms used in the playtest version.)

Actually it makes sense since the other defenses are usually lower than AC. this way you aren't missing the +2/+3 proficiency bonus.

tbarrie
2008-12-01, 11:37 PM
Actually it makes sense since the other defenses are usually lower than AC. this way you aren't missing the +2/+3 proficiency bonus.

Yes, I think that was implied by what I wrote..

skywalker
2008-12-02, 12:26 AM
The fun things about previews is that they show you the good stuff. WOTC knows better than to leave such a key concept behind, if they have any.

Also, funny thing, ever since the first preview of 4E came out, people have frequently responded to any and all criticism with "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!" And so far, these responses have been widely missing the point.

For instance,
Elf preview: you give your teammates +1 to perception as long as they're within 5 squares.
Critics: that's a bonus that'll be generally irrelevant and that people will tend to forget.
Fanbois: "you don't kno anytting since its a prv3weiww!!!!"
End result: It is, indeed, a bonus that's generally (95% of the time, by definition) irrelevant, and that indeed people tend to forget (like, oh, pretty much any circumstantial +1 bonus (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html) in the history of D&D).

This is something very intelligent that was said in a not-so-nice way.

I play a ton of 4th ed. My main group plays nothing but 4th ed. I'm quite familiar with it. And I gotta say that that +1 perception bonus sucks. I have never heard anyone say "wow, good thing we had that +1 perception bonus" or anything of the sort. Mainly, it's "good thing the elf chick spotted that thing with her massive perception. Even with that +1, I still failed majorly at seeing it." In rare cases, it's the elf player saying "guys, don't forget your +1" and the party saying "yeah, ok, thanks, I don't think we really needed it." Kinda like bard song in 3.5. Oh hey, KG already linked that comic.

I wonder who's getting in trouble over this uh-oh? I mean, I know uh-ohs happen, but doesn't it seem like Wizards is having quite a few of these? I think they might have planned leaks.

On the other hand, it could be that this thing was getting absolutely trashed by the online community, so they decided to keep it between them and the subscribers, who are by nature a less skeptical bunch(I infer this because they're paying for Insider.).

I think targeting reflex is fine for physical attacks. Perhaps these attacks don't need to get thru/around your armor to hurt? For whatever reason?

The silliest thing about the preview was that they recommended CON for the guy staying in the back, and DEX for the guy going into the front lines. It was a throwback to 3.5's crazy recommendations.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-02, 12:27 AM
Anybody else think it's odd that the Beast Form attacks don't target AC? This is necessary for game balance due to the lack of a proficiency bonus, but it still feels wrong.

(They could fix this by adding a proficiency bonus to attacks while in Beast Form. This would also add an easy way to satisfy those who want more mechanical variety for different shapes, as Druids could be given the option of turning into a high-proficiency/low-damage form or vice-versa - not that I have any problem with the Power-based way of differentiating between forms used in the playtest version.)

A little, though the At-Wills that I remember focused more on hindering than damage; Pounce, for instance, distracts the target so that someone can get CA on them. I can see how it might work, but it is probably mostly balance.

Proficiency bonuses wouldn't necessarily work either since the DCs vary a lot on a single monster. Being able to choose the weakest value is much better than a static +2/+3, and allows for the tactical choice you'd expect in a Controller.

EDIT:
@+1 Bonuses

The perception bonus can be very important if you fight against Stealthy opponents. Sometimes you need to be able to spot someone and not just rely on your Party Spotter to see it for you. This is why I love Holy Lantern :smallbiggrin:

That said, it's funny that certain races grant people near them bonuses to doing things. Like hanging out around Half-Elves makes you sexier :smalltongue:

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-02, 12:37 AM
That said, it's funny that certain races grant people near them bonuses to doing things. Like hanging out around Half-Elves makes you sexier :smalltongue:Which is the inverse of how it works. If you want to look sexy, hang around ugly people. Every face needs a Half-Ogre Orc as a buddy.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-02, 12:40 AM
Which is the inverse of how it works. If you want to look sexy, hang around ugly people. Every face needs a Half-Ogre Orc as a buddy.

On second thought, I guess it makes sense. You don't just need to be by the half-elf to get sexy, you need to be friends with him. Half-Elves are just the perfect Wingmen :smalltongue:

RPGuru1331
2008-12-02, 12:50 AM
On second thought, I guess it makes sense. You don't just need to be by the half-elf to get sexy, you need to be friends with him. Half-Elves are just the perfect Wingmen :smalltongue:

DAMMIT FEYNMAN

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 04:47 AM
That's really just an opinion. I don't know how much 4e you've played, but in the Heroic Tier of play a +1 to anything is pretty useful.
No, it's not. It's mathematical fact that a +1 bonus on a d20 roll is useful exactly 5% of the time (and hence, not useful the other 95%). It doesn't have anything to do with balance, either; it's a perfect example of something that looks useful but in practice really isn't.


I'm not sure if others have noticed this with your 4e wizard but towards the end of an encounter it seems like wizards just spam magic missile (or ray of frost in case of fleeing enemies).
Nope. None of the (half a dozen) wizard characters around here uses either of those.

KKL
2008-12-02, 04:56 AM
On second thought, I guess it makes sense. You don't just need to be by the half-elf to get sexy, you need to be friends with him. Half-Elves are just the perfect Wingmen :smalltongue:

He'd be a terrible wingman. There you are, hitting on the nobleman's daughter who is smoking hot and the DM tells you to roll Insight.

Your Insight tells you to be prepared for sloppy seconds. The Half-Elf's already hit that. Repeatedly. Ever since you entered the town about a week ago. Did I mention repeatedly?

The kicker? The DC for Inisght was so terribly low, you couldn't have botched it anyways.

RPGuru1331
2008-12-02, 04:58 AM
He'd be a terrible wingman. There you are, hitting on the nobleman's daughter who is smoking hot and the DM tells you to roll Insight.

Your Insight tells you to be prepared for sloppy seconds. The Half-Elf's already hit that. Repeatedly. Ever since you entered the town about a week ago. Did I mention repeatedly?

The kicker? The DC for Inisght was so terribly low, you couldn't have botched it anyways.

That con bonus has to be good for something..

Charity
2008-12-02, 04:59 AM
In fairness Kurald as it applies to all party members in a given situation it makes 5% difference to each party member barring the elf, so to an individual it is not spectacular but its combined effect over the whole party is more tangible.

Oslecamo
2008-12-02, 05:02 AM
lern 2 terminology

This isn't a nerf. It's closer to a fix than a nerf.

You're kinda outdated in gaming terminology. Nerf is when something is weakened, regardless of it it was overpowered or not before.

A fix it's when something is changed whitout really changing it's power level, like closing a small rules hole that allowed for abuse.

Kurald Galain:5% is much more than you give credit for. When battles last a lot more rounds and you're probably making multiple attack rolls per round, that extra 5% starts to make a diference.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 05:13 AM
Kurald Galain:5% is much more than you give credit for. When battles last a lot more rounds and you're probably making multiple attack rolls per round, that extra 5% starts to make a diference.
Yeah, except that we were talking about perception checks, not attack rolls.


In fairness Kurald as it applies to all party members in a given situation it makes 5% difference to each party member barring the elf, so to an individual it is not spectacular but its combined effect over the whole party is more tangible.
Yeah, except that the only perception that matters is the highest one in the group (unless you're split up, in which case the elf ability doesn't work). For party-affecting skill checks, the DM isn't supposed to let each PC roll a check, for reasons of statistics.

tyfon
2008-12-02, 05:19 AM
I do not like this 4e druid. Seems like wizard with more close combat powers. Barbarian preview was much better

ShaggyMarco
2008-12-02, 06:16 AM
Anybody else think it's odd that the Beast Form attacks don't target AC? This is necessary for game balance due to the lack of a proficiency bonus, but it still feels wrong.

Here's why it feel right: Controllers don't target AC. They target a variety of non-AC defenses. I suspect we will rapidly discover that this, above all else, is a defining characteristic of controllers in 4ed.

Leon
2008-12-02, 06:33 AM
I think this was poorly written, I think is what I'm trying to say.



Nothing new from WotC

Oslecamo
2008-12-02, 07:46 AM
Yeah, except that we were talking about perception checks, not attack rolls.


Almost same thing. It's the whole party who's rolling, so that +1 will actually net you something along 20% extra chance of someone on the party making the perception check, and warning the others.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 08:06 AM
Almost same thing. It's the whole party who's rolling, so that +1 will actually net you something along 20% extra chance of someone on the party making the perception check, and warning the others.
That is completely wrong if you take a look at the math involved. Like I said before, it's an option that LOOKS good but in fact ISN'T good.

Take five characters, with a 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% and 70% chance to pass some perception check. Normally, only the best guy rolls (possibly with assists) and therefore the elf bonus makes a marginal boost here that is generally (i.e. 95% of the time) irrelevant.

Now take a DM who lets everybody roll. Chance for success is now 97.5%, which is pretty much a guaranteed success. Wanna bet the DM didn't really intend that to happen, and is in fact misunderstanding statistics? Anyway, adding the elf bonus to this doesn't give a 20% increase, as you mistakenly assume, but a boost of a whopping 1%, for a total of 98.5% - which is even more irrelevant than in the previous example.

You don't need to know math to play D&D, but it helps.

Oslecamo
2008-12-02, 08:23 AM
That is completely wrong if you take a look at the math involved. Like I said before, it's an option that LOOKS good but in fact ISN'T good.

Take five characters, with a 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% and 70% chance to pass some perception check. Normally, only the best guy rolls (possibly with assists) and therefore the elf bonus makes a marginal boost here that is generally (i.e. 95% of the time) irrelevant.

Now take a DM who lets everybody roll. Chance for success is now 97.5%, which is pretty much a guaranteed success. Wanna bet the DM didn't really intend that to happen, and is in fact misunderstanding statistics? Anyway, adding the elf bonus to this doesn't give a 20% increase, as you mistakenly assume, but a boost of a whopping 1%, for a total of 98.5% - which is even more irrelevant than in the previous example.

You don't need to know math to play D&D, but it helps.

You're however manipulating the conditions, by giving half the party really good bonus to suceed, and adding a fifth member, wich greatly increases the chance of doing the job.

If for example it was something really hard to notice so everybody has 0% chance of suceeding originally. And a more typical party of 4 people.

Now one of them is an half elf and they can suceed on a 20 thanks to the bonus.

Their combined chance of sucess is around 18.5%.

If they are five people it's 22.6%

Thanks to the elf bonus, the party has a reasonable chance of suceeding on a previously impossible task

You don't need to know statistics to trick people, but it helps. Of course there'll be situations where that 5% bonus is almost irrlevant. But there'll also be situations when it makes all the diference.

Kizara
2008-12-02, 08:27 AM
You're however manipulating the conditions, by giving half the party really good bonus to suceed, and adding a fifth member, wich greatly increases the chance of doing the job.

If for example it was something really hard to notice so everybody has 0% chance of suceeding originally. And a more typical party of 4 people.

Now one of them is an half elf and they can suceed on a 20 thanks to the bonus.

Their combined chance of sucess is around 18.5%.

If they are five people it's 22.6%

Thanks to the elf bonus, the party has a reasonable chance of suceeding on a previously impossible task

You don't need to know statistics to trick people, but it helps. Of course there'll be situations where that 5% bonus is almost irrlevant. But there'll also be situations when it makes all the diference.


None of this addresses the greater problem that it makes absolutely no bloody sense at all.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 08:36 AM
If for example it was something really hard to notice so everybody has 0% chance of suceeding originally. And a more typical party of 4 people.
That is a completely ridiculous example - it assumes that all of the party have the exact same perception rating, and that the DM uses a difficulty that is exactly 21 points above this rating. The former is absurd, the latter is bad DM'ing in addition to being absurd.

Gee, this ability is useful in a singular highly contrived made-up situation that will never come up in play! And 95% useless otherwise! That is so overpowered, we must nerf it immediately!!!!11!!2

The Mormegil
2008-12-02, 08:49 AM
Can we please get back to Druid?

Anyway, I don't need nothing, I need (almost) everything.
The wildshape cannot represent simply different kinds of spells, since it needs a minor action to change and actually implies shapeshifting. But if you work with your DM you can turn into anything you want, from a goose to a dragon.

Oslecamo
2008-12-02, 08:54 AM
That is a completely ridiculous example - it assumes that all of the party have the exact same perception rating, and that the DM uses a difficulty that is exactly 21 points above this rating. The former is absurd, the latter is bad DM'ing in addition to being absurd.

Gee, this ability is useful in a singular highly contrived made-up situation that will never come up in play! And 95% useless otherwise! That is so overpowered, we must nerf it immediately!!!!11!!2

I could say the same thing of your example, since the DM isn't increasing the dificulty of the skill due to being more players.

Well, in a less extreme example, if everybody in the party needs around 15 to suceed, and the party is 4 members big, the elf bonus gives around 9.3% more chance of suceeding. That's not ridiculous, and it's a lot more than the 1% your oversized party who spent all their builds towards feats gets.

The more members the party has, the easier is for someone to pass the skill. Your group may play with half a dozen guys on each session and your DM be bad enough to don't up the dificulty of the ecounters, meaning you pass everything on a breeze thanks to the extra two players.

Other groups however may be stuck with as few as two or three people at a moment, due to lack of players of simply the characters being knocked out/somewhere else, and then the +1 bonus counts a lot more.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 09:27 AM
the DM isn't increasing the dificulty of the skill due to being more players.
Wrong.


and the party is 4 members big, the elf bonus gives around 9.3% more chance of suceeding.
Also wrong.


your oversized party who spent all their builds towards feats gets.
Wrong again.



The more members the party has, the easier is for someone to pass the skill.
Still wrong.



Your group may play with half a dozen guys on each session and your DM be bad enough to don't up the dificulty of the ecounters,
And wrong yet again.


Let's see, you are making a lot of mistakes in your math and rules, and are attributing things to me that I've never said to begin with. I'll just assume your posts in this thread were a failed attempt at humor. Let's see, where's that ignore button again...


Anyway, let's get back to druids.



But if you work with your DM you can turn into anything you want, from a goose to a dragon.
See, here's the thing. The ranger gets eight different animal companions that actually work differently. The genasi gets four or five different "elemental" types that actually work differently. The druid gets one "generic" shapeshift that you can call whatever you want, from ant to dragon, but the difference is meaningless. See the difference here?

The Mormegil
2008-12-02, 09:35 AM
Yes I see it. And that's the point really: if you want a Sound Elemental Genasi you have to work with your DM and create a new racial trait. If you want your PC to become a nything, you play a Druid. Ok, there are other problems, but I like being able to choose different forms. That's it.

Little_Rudo
2008-12-02, 10:13 AM
Really, the Wildshape criticism all comes back to the same debate: Whether or not people like the looser mechanics that don't necessarily fit with the fluff. I'm really not encouraging this topic become an edition debate, but this is just the same argument about the editions, repeating itself with each class.

LoopyZebra
2008-12-02, 10:14 AM
The shapeshift does not let you become anything - I don't have the rules in front of me since they went back behind the Wall of Doom, but if I recall correctly, using the default wildshape, you can only turn into a approximately medium sized animal or fey animal, such as a bear, wolf, or large snake. The level 2 utility hints at more mechanical differentiation between forms. Very small creatures, such as mice, get a +5 bonus to stealth. Other utilities and perhaps feats will most likely create more differences by giving bonuses to forms that are not the generic medium sized creature in the basic druid wildshape.

Awesomologist
2008-12-02, 10:47 AM
Yeah I got a funny feeling that utility spells and feats will really fill in the shapeshifter aspect a bit more giving flying forms, bonuses to defenses and attacks, and I would imagine at higher levels the option to change into more exotic creatures/plants/elementals.

What bums me out most is that we got this nice big PDF of the artificer (a truly lame class IMO) that is missing at least one Paragon Path and At-Will power, but when it comes to D&D archetype classes, the bard and the druid, we get a limited level preview missing all sorts of information that would let us get a better feel for the class.

BardicDuelist
2008-12-02, 10:53 AM
Well, the way I'd look at it:

When you first start out, you ave the amazing ability to make yourself appear as nearly any animal out there. Holy crap. Think about that for a second. No, you can't do everything that the animals do, but you can still look like any animal out there.

Then, you (in game terms, by selecting at-wills) can learn to function differently in your animal form. Cool. You can pounce, etc. You can be an animal, but one that still walks on the ground and lives in essentially the same world you do. Still, by "mortal" standards, pretty amazing.

As you get stronger, better, and more skilled, you learn to use the power that you have better. You can draw out more of your animal self, become more like the beast you appear as.

Shapeshift in 3.5 was pretty vanilla. It was balanced. Look at like this, instead of a static bonus, you gain access to the at-wills. That's how you choose the "crunch" for you wild shape.

This is at first level people. Of course it isn't powerful. It's still pretty good. From what we can see (or could see), utilities and that will add mechanical benefits. Essentially, that's how you choose the crunch. That's where your options are. Get it?

When you look at powers in 4e, you have to think of them as a mechanical representation. People aren't walking around going "yeah, I know this power as my utility" in the game world (unless you're playing an OotS style game). They are abilities you learn to use. Stop metagaming. Think in terms of how your character would think of his abilities. Think in terms of how the world at large would view your character. Peasants don't care if you can climb better because you turned into a monkey. You turned into a freeking monkey!

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 10:58 AM
Shapeshift in 3.5 was pretty vanilla. It was balanced.

Huh? Whatever gave you that idea?

Vortling
2008-12-02, 10:59 AM
Yeah I got a funny feeling that utility spells and feats will really fill in the shapeshifter aspect a bit more giving flying forms, bonuses to defenses and attacks, and I would imagine at higher levels the option to change into more exotic creatures/plants/elementals.

What bums me out most is that we got this nice big PDF of the artificer (a truly lame class IMO) that is missing at least one Paragon Path and At-Will power, but when it comes to D&D archetype classes, the bard and the druid, we get a limited level preview missing all sorts of information that would let us get a better feel for the class.

It makes a lot of sense from a marketing perspective. They know that people want the druid and bard back. The artificer is less well know so they let you see more to get a feel for what it can do. We already know what we want the bard and druid to do so they give us a small preview to whet the appetites to buy the 4e PHB 2 when it comes out.

BardicDuelist
2008-12-02, 11:04 AM
Huh? Whatever gave you that idea?

Shapeshift in the PHB2, not Wild Shape. Wild shape is neither of those...in fact, it was the opposite of them. Shapeshift was essentially: you look like an animal, gain some damage an minor bonuses while losing the ability to cast spells. It becomes more versatile as you level up.

EDIT: Ah, I think I may see where some of this confusion is coming from. Shapeshift the alternate class feature, NOT the crazy broken spell in the polymorph chain that allowed for all sorts of crazy cheese that went above that of polymorph and wild shape.

Starbuck_II
2008-12-02, 11:04 AM
Huh? Whatever gave you that idea?

He means balanced compared to Wild Shape I think... or I haven't a clue what he means.

Kaiyanwang
2008-12-02, 11:11 AM
THAT shapeshift (the one BardicDuelist said) had a good balance between "shift in something I decide the form" and "mechanichal effect of the shift". And it scaled by levels.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 11:22 AM
Shapeshift the alternate class feature, NOT the crazy broken spell in the polymorph chain

Ah okay, I get it now :smallbiggrin:

BardicDuelist
2008-12-02, 11:26 AM
THAT shapeshift (the one BardicDuelist said) had a good balance between "shift in something I decide the form" and "mechanichal effect of the shift". And it scaled by levels.

Wildshape in 4e does have a mechanical effect: it lets you use certain powers. It's not REALLY a power by itself (outside of RP), but something that lets you use those powers. It scales too.

RPGuru1331
2008-12-02, 02:16 PM
None of this addresses the greater problem that it makes absolutely no bloody sense at all.

You're raising this complaint in DnD?

Artanis
2008-12-02, 03:24 PM
*stuff about probabilities*
In some posts, you talk about +1 having a 5% chance of changing things. In others you change the viewpoint to alter the probabilities in favor of your point. Stick to one statistical view so that we can actually debate that, rather than having everybody change the numbers around in such a way as to support their point without having any relevance to what others are saying.

skywalker
2008-12-02, 04:27 PM
When you look at powers in 4e, you have to think of them as a mechanical representation. People aren't walking around going "yeah, I know this power as my utility" in the game world (unless you're playing an OotS style game). They are abilities you learn to use. Stop metagaming. Think in terms of how your character would think of his abilities. Think in terms of how the world at large would view your character. Peasants don't care if you can climb better because you turned into a monkey. You turned into a freeking monkey!

No, they aren't. However, a smart person might say "hey, I turned into a freaking monkey... but my climbing abilities aren't worth a dime because my human form was weak? What the hell is this?!" Did you ever read Animorphs? That's a really good example of why turning into animals is important. There's absolutely no reason to turn into a monkey in the first place if it doesn't let you climb a tree any better. Otherwise it's "I turned into a monkey because... it feels better than being human..." Uh, ok... Add onto that, you lose one of the primary benefits of being human, speech.

So I am thinking about it in how the world at large views it. And the world at large views it as nothing but a cheap parlor trick, with absolutely no "in world" bonus. The only bonus it has is meta-game, and that is that it allows you access to certain "beast form" powers. Unless you start thinking in the abstract about beast form, etc, there's no reason to do it. There's a very tenuous link between shifting to a big cat, and then being able to use pounce. But the only reason a monkey could use pounce is because the rules say so.

On the subject of big parties, spot, probabilities, etc.: 5 party members is the recommended party size in 4e. Should the DM let everybody roll perception if he wants any chance of somebody not noticing? Probably not. Is it very realistic to let only one person roll perception? No. It is more "fair," but less realistic. I think, in a perfect world, the DM should let everyone roll, but should specifically indicate that only the characters who make their rolls or who have the "something" specifically pointed out to them (by those who succeeded) know where it is and are allowed to act accordingly. Sometimes, this can come across as too strict, but if you're going to let every character roll for realism, you also need to maintain realism once the thing is spotted(or heard).

I think, in this last case, the group bonus to perception becomes tangentially more effective. Still, tho, as Kurald says, it only applies to 5% of rolls, and also only applies to people within 5 squares. I really don't think it's that big a deal. *shrug*

Artanis
2008-12-02, 04:34 PM
By RAW, everybody rolls. Take that as you will.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-02, 06:34 PM
By RAW, everybody rolls. Take that as you will.

Not in a skill challenge.
Not during combat (most skills require actions).
Not when using passive skills.

And those combined compose the majority of times when skills matter. Perception, for instance, explicitly points out that it either uses the passive value (thus only the highest of the party actually matters) or it requires actions.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-02, 06:55 PM
No, they aren't. However, a smart person might say "hey, I turned into a freaking monkey... but my climbing abilities aren't worth a dime because my human form was weak? What the hell is this?!" Did you ever read Animorphs? That's a really good example of why turning into animals is important. There's absolutely no reason to turn into a monkey in the first place if it doesn't let you climb a tree any better. Otherwise it's "I turned into a monkey because... it feels better than being human..." Uh, ok... Add onto that, you lose one of the primary benefits of being human, speech.

So I am thinking about it in how the world at large views it. And the world at large views it as nothing but a cheap parlor trick, with absolutely no "in world" bonus. The only bonus it has is meta-game, and that is that it allows you access to certain "beast form" powers. Unless you start thinking in the abstract about beast form, etc, there's no reason to do it. There's a very tenuous link between shifting to a big cat, and then being able to use pounce. But the only reason a monkey could use pounce is because the rules say so.

You really don't see any "in world" bonus to being able to assume an animal form at will? :smallconfused:

I'm not talking about mechanical bonuses - like flight, or improved climbing, or night vision - I'm talking about being able to assume a perfect disguise at will. Pursued by city guards? Turn into a mongrel dog. Scouting out the orc camp in the forest? Turn into a fox.

Honestly, can't you think of some use for this power? And that's not even counting the "special morphs" that it looks like you'd get as Utility powers!

Thane of Fife
2008-12-02, 07:28 PM
Here's some quick calculations I've done about how useful the +1 will be (it's quite possible they're wrong, so I'd appreciate it if someone could check them):

{table=head]Roll Needed on d20 before +1 | Increase in Chance
1 | 0
2 | Effectively 0
3 | Effectively 0
4 | Effectively 0
5 | 0.02%
6 | 0.07%
7 | 0.1%
8 | 0.3%
9 | 0.5%
10 | 0.8%
11 | 1.3%
12 | 1.9%
13| 2.7%
14 | 3.8%
15 | 5.2%
16 | 6.9%
17 | 9%
18 | 11.6%
19 | 14.6%
20 | 18.3%
21 | 22.6%
[/table]

That table assumes that everyone in the party needs the same roll, which is obviously unlikely. If the PCs require different rolls, then the increase in chance will be roughly (very roughly!) equivalent to the increase if they all needed the average of the die rolls they require.

So, if the PCs required rolls of 4, 14, 15, 18, and 18, they could expect a change roughly equivalent to if they all needed 14's. That's not that accurate (they'd be better estimating that they needed about 12.5') but it's not that bad.

Of course, if only 1 PC gets to roll, Kurald is right, and it effectively increases his chances by 5%.

The basic message being that unless the PCs are primarily bad at whatever the bonus is for, it's not much of a benefit.

Use them for your enjoyment/contempt.

Enlong
2008-12-02, 07:45 PM
You really don't see any "in world" bonus to being able to assume an animal form at will? :smallconfused:

I'm not talking about mechanical bonuses - like flight, or improved climbing, or night vision - I'm talking about being able to assume a perfect disguise at will. Pursued by city guards? Turn into a mongrel dog. Scouting out the orc camp in the forest? Turn into a fox.

Honestly, can't you think of some use for this power? And that's not even counting the "special morphs" that it looks like you'd get as Utility powers!

How small can the form be, by the way? Infiltrate a house by turning into a mouse. Escape pursuers in the forest by shifting to snake form and hiding among the leaves. Turn into a tiger or something and roar to scare away some monsters. There's plenty of use for this; it's kind of a 3.5 "image" spell, but limited to animals.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-02, 09:17 PM
How small can the form be, by the way? Infiltrate a house by turning into a mouse. Escape pursuers in the forest by shifting to snake form and hiding among the leaves. Turn into a tiger or something and roar to scare away some monsters. There's plenty of use for this; it's kind of a 3.5 "image" spell, but limited to animals.

IIRC, the standard At Will allowed you to become a creature of your size category. So Human Druids could become Medium Animals while Halfling Druids could become Small Animals. Minotaur Druids, presumably, could become Large animals.

None of those forms have the "special" powers associated with them. A bird form couldn't fly, a gecko form wouldn't have a wall speed, and a cheetah form wouldn't have ridiculous sprinting.

Now, there was a utility power that specifically allowed you to morph into a tiny creature for massive Stealth Bonuses. Those are the kind of powers I expect we'll be seeing in the finished druid as utilities and, possibly, daily attacks. For instance, I bet there's a high Paragon or low Epic Utility that allows you to shift into a Flying Form.

Enlong
2008-12-02, 10:50 PM
IIRC, the standard At Will allowed you to become a creature of your size category. So Human Druids could become Medium Animals while Halfling Druids could become Small Animals. Minotaur Druids, presumably, could become Large animals.

None of those forms have the "special" powers associated with them. A bird form couldn't fly, a gecko form wouldn't have a wall speed, and a cheetah form wouldn't have ridiculous sprinting.

Now, there was a utility power that specifically allowed you to morph into a tiny creature for massive Stealth Bonuses. Those are the kind of powers I expect we'll be seeing in the finished druid as utilities and, possibly, daily attacks. For instance, I bet there's a high Paragon or low Epic Utility that allows you to shift into a Flying Form.

Useful. Very useful. So, basically, you take the shape, but not the true form, of the animal.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-02, 10:56 PM
Useful. Very useful. So, basically, you take the shape, but not the true form, of the animal.

IIRC, that is. Stupid Great Wall of Content :smallannoyed:

I dunno what folks are complaining about - this is exactly the sort of awesome that I wanted to get from a Druid back in 2E. Who cares about min/maxing my animal form? I played a druid to be able to identify with perfect accuracy any plant I came across, as well as pure water.

Come on, tell me that isn't awesome :smallbiggrin:

Edea
2008-12-03, 12:05 AM
Holy crepes, a controller! Problem is it looks to be as pathetic as the Wizard, minus the saving throw nonsense (at least they're balanced against each other, lol). The Barbarian was a FAR superior preview to this. Even the Artificer outstrips this; I'd put this on the level of the Bard preview, which also left me scratching my head feeling nonplussed. Hopefully that has to do with them not showing up in a Dragon magazine yet (if they do so at all). Regardless, somehow I don't see the Druid getting any better with subsequent levels (Bard either, for that matter).

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-03, 12:13 AM
I dunno about "worthless." I'll admit Wizards are sub-par controllers (though they are excellent nukers) but Druids do have an At Will that grants CA. Imagine your Druid playing with a Sniper Rogue!

That's got to count for something.

Enlong
2008-12-03, 12:21 AM
Oh yea. What I heard, though, is some interesting controlling stuff: just tell me that entangling someone with plants doesn't scream Controller.

Wait, an AT WILL? You're right. Rogue's best friend.

I love the idea of this druid; in the one form, we've got funtime nature spells, and then we've got the "turn into any animal that's my size" thing, with a subset of abilities for it. This is gon' be good.

Zero-effort backstory!: was given the power to transform by a dying outsider that resembled a blue mutant centaur and his magic box.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-03, 12:30 AM
Wait, an AT WILL? You're right. Rogue's best friend.

The nice part is that it is a Reflex attack that can be used on a charge. :smallbiggrin:

Yes, that's right. "Transform and roll out" indeed :smalltongue:

Oh, and they have an at-will that shifts the target on a hit (plus damage). It also counts as a basic melee attack. HBO + Tide of Iron at LV 1 FTW. :smallamused:

Enlong
2008-12-03, 12:35 AM
The nice part is that it is a Reflex attack that can be used on a charge. :smallbiggrin:

Yes, that's right. "Transform and roll out" indeed :smalltongue:

Oh, and they have an at-will that shifts the target on a hit (plus damage). It also counts as a basic melee attack. HBO + Tide of Iron at LV 1 FTW. :smallamused:

What we have here is a breakdown in references, I think.

RTGoodman
2008-12-03, 12:42 AM
I just built up a 1st-level Druid, and I have to see my big problem with them, so far, is that despite having two completely separate sets of powers (wild shape and non-wild shape ones), they still have to pick just one when they get to pick new powers. I don't know if it would have been overpowered, but I would have liked to have seen something where you can choose one Beast Form power and one non-Beast Form power at each level and then pick one each day (like the Wizard's Spellbook, but for encounter, daily, AND utility powers. It's probably too strong, but it's the part of the 3.x Druid that I like - you never know whether the elf in the hide armor is gonna zap you with lightning or flip out, turn into a bear, and maul you to death.

skywalker
2008-12-03, 12:55 AM
You really don't see any "in world" bonus to being able to assume an animal form at will? :smallconfused:

I'm not talking about mechanical bonuses - like flight, or improved climbing, or night vision - I'm talking about being able to assume a perfect disguise at will. Pursued by city guards? Turn into a mongrel dog. Scouting out the orc camp in the forest? Turn into a fox.

Honestly, can't you think of some use for this power? And that's not even counting the "special morphs" that it looks like you'd get as Utility powers!

Well, the mechanical bonuses were the primary reason for the feature in 3.5. Really, if you don't get to hit as hard as a bear, there's no reason to turn into a bear. Fine, you make a good (even perfect) scout. This is a limited non-tactical bonus that can come up anywhere from very often to very, very rarely. On the other hand, those animals you mentioned sounded small. So this will work for the halfling druid. But those other races? They're still turning into a horse, a wolf, etc. A horse might be able to pass without notice in a city, and a wolf could, theoretically, go without notice in an orc camp. More likely story? The cops say "Hey, who owns this horse?" and orcs say "Look, a wolf, let's kill it!"

So yes, very little "in world" or "non-meta" reasons to use this version of shapeshifting.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-03, 01:03 AM
OK, first: Transform and Roll Out - it was a catch-phrase on The Transformers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers), used whenever they were about to go into action. I guess you had to be there :smalltongue:


I just built up a 1st-level Druid, and I have to see my big problem with them, so far, is that despite having two completely separate sets of powers (wild shape and non-wild shape ones), they still have to pick just one when they get to pick new powers. I don't know if it would have been overpowered, but I would have liked to have seen something where you can choose one Beast Form power and one non-Beast Form power at each level and then pick one each day (like the Wizard's Spellbook, but for encounter, daily, AND utility powers. It's probably too strong, but it's the part of the 3.x Druid that I like - you never know whether the elf in the hide armor is gonna zap you with lightning or flip out, turn into a bear, and maul you to death.

Well, the power selection still means you don't know what a particular Druid will do, so that's still there. Plus, you have a bit of build diversity among Druids.

I guess it's not so different from other classes though; Rangers usually go either Bow or TWF, and don't mix the two. 4E is going for less "do all" builds and encourages diversification instead.

EDIT:
@Skywalker

OK, so this Druid isn't your 3E Druid. I get that, but it doesn't make the shifting worthless.
If you dislike my initial choice, let's go with a Wolf and a Medium-sized Dog (yes, they exist). I doubt that Orcs would bother killing a Wolf sniffing around the outside of their camp (not good meat, and why risk bringing down a pack?) and guards continue to ignore dogs (even "large" ones). Hell, if you think Orcs would attack a wolf, then look like a Black Bear; even Orcs wouldn't bother killing one of those off hand. Or a snake. Lots of big animals wandering around a forest that your average traveler (even orcs) doesn't bother to kill out of hand.

Halfling Druids, naturally, have an advantage here; good for them.

I guess, in summary, there are lots of nice "in-world" reasons that shifting into the forms of animals is terribly useful. It's a bit surprising to see people contest that point; for me it's like arguing that Mage Hand is useless. I'm personally a little sad that there are people who only saw shifting as a stat-booster, but so be it.

(mini-rant)
Then again, I was brought up on the 2E Druid which, while no slouch, was no Druidzilla. He could Pass Without Trace in the forest, identify plants and clean water with 100% accuracy, and eventually he could turn into a mammal, a bird, and a reptile once per day each. Regular animals were not particularly good in 2E combat by that point (IIRC 6th level?) so you wouldn't bother using them in combat at all.

Ultimately you got some nifty powers (immunity to aging, the ability to survive on the Elemental Planes, immunity to natural poisons) but none of them were earth-shattering. You played a Druid because you liked the idea of playing a Child of Nature, not because it was going to let you summon Unicorns.

Enlong
2008-12-03, 01:08 AM
Oh, I know that phrase, i thought you were misinterpreting the reference I had made. Whoops, sorry.

DSCrankshaw
2008-12-03, 01:31 AM
Not in a skill challenge.
Not during combat (most skills require actions).
Not when using passive skills.

And those combined compose the majority of times when skills matter. Perception, for instance, explicitly points out that it either uses the passive value (thus only the highest of the party actually matters) or it requires actions.
You're kind of missing one of the most common and important uses of the Perception check: surprise rounds. In a surprise round, everyone rolls (or everyone uses their passive perception, depending on how your DM wants to do it), and everyone's check matters. Being able to act in a surprise round when you normally wouldn't be able to is a significant advantage.

The +1 aura is also useful when your elf isn't trained in perception. Maybe he's a fighter or a paladin rather than a ranger or rogue. He's not going to have the highest perception check, but he's going to make the person who does just a little bit better.

Then there's also skill challenges. Everyone rolls in a skill challenge. Not everyone has to roll perception (usually), but if you've got a good modifier for perception, even if it's not as high as the elf's, it's still worth making use of it, and the elf's aura can make it a bit better.

Sure, it's not the most useful ability--not as useful as the elf's own +2 to Perception--but it's not useless either. The two latter uses applies to the half-elf's diplomacy aura too, with the third one being much more common, as diplomacy's a very common skill challenge primary skill, and lots of classes train in it.

skywalker
2008-12-03, 02:53 AM
I guess it's not so different from other classes though; Rangers usually go either Bow or TWF, and don't mix the two. 4E is going for less "do all" builds and encourages diversification instead. I don't want to argue here so much as point out that it's very easy, with the right race, to create a ranger who can do both. I've created an elven ranger whose sheet says TWF, but in reality, she can do both because of a high DEX, which also helps AC. I suppose she's a bit fragile(low CON), but overall I think she's capable of both. Melee would be her primary option, but it's no trouble at all to disengage and switch to ranged attacks i she takes too many hits. I'm sure I'm not the only person who has created something similar.

EDIT:
@Skywalker

OK, so this Druid isn't your 3E Druid. I get that, but it doesn't make the shifting worthless.
If you dislike my initial choice, let's go with a Wolf and a Medium-sized Dog (yes, they exist). I doubt that Orcs would bother killing a Wolf sniffing around the outside of their camp (not good meat, and why risk bringing down a pack?) and guards continue to ignore dogs (even "large" ones). Hell, if you think Orcs would attack a wolf, then look like a Black Bear; even Orcs wouldn't bother killing one of those off hand. Or a snake. Lots of big animals wandering around a forest that your average traveler (even orcs) doesn't bother to kill out of hand.

Halfling Druids, naturally, have an advantage here; good for them.

I guess, in summary, there are lots of nice "in-world" reasons that shifting into the forms of animals is terribly useful. It's a bit surprising to see people contest that point; for me it's like arguing that Mage Hand is useless. I'm personally a little sad that there are people who only saw shifting as a stat-booster, but so be it.

(mini-rant)
Then again, I was brought up on the 2E Druid which, while no slouch, was no Druidzilla. He could Pass Without Trace in the forest, identify plants and clean water with 100% accuracy, and eventually he could turn into a mammal, a bird, and a reptile once per day each. Regular animals were not particularly good in 2E combat by that point (IIRC 6th level?) so you wouldn't bother using them in combat at all.

Ultimately you got some nifty powers (immunity to aging, the ability to survive on the Elemental Planes, immunity to natural poisons) but none of them were earth-shattering. You played a Druid because you liked the idea of playing a Child of Nature, not because it was going to let you summon Unicorns.

I would like to say first that if I personally encounter a medium sized dog, I make quite sure where it came from before going about my business. If it doesn't have a clear owner or place, I get suspicious.

Fair enough, I've never played second edition at all, but one thing that I think has changed since then is that combat is more important now. Specifically, combat options. Especially in 4e, what you bring to the table when initiative is rolled and HPs start dropping is very important.

I will admit I just wanted to argue with you in my previous post. Those are perfectly viable uses. But honestly, if I, personally, was a druid, and I shifted into a bear, I would expect to hit with the force of the bear, not the force of my previous human form. And I think most people would. In this case, there is some "in world" reason for shifting to a dog or similar creature, but there is no reason to shift into a tiger/bear/combat oriented animal, because you don't get the strength/attacks/features of that animal.

I also think that most people, when they think "I can turn into animals" don't think: "Wow, I'll be a great scout/have great escape routes." I think most think: "I can turn into a tiger and go crazy!"

But I do understand where you're coming from.

KKL
2008-12-03, 02:58 AM
Problem is it looks to be as pathetic as the Wizard, minus the saving throw nonsense

what

Barring said saving throw shenanigans, Wizards are far from pathetic and useless.

Mewtarthio
2008-12-03, 03:14 AM
I will admit I just wanted to argue with you in my previous post. Those are perfectly viable uses. But honestly, if I, personally, was a druid, and I shifted into a bear, I would expect to hit with the force of the bear, not the force of my previous human form. And I think most people would. In this case, there is some "in world" reason for shifting to a dog or similar creature, but there is no reason to shift into a tiger/bear/combat oriented animal, because you don't get the strength/attacks/features of that animal.

That's what made the 3e Druid so overpowered. It could shift into a bear and hit as well as a bear, or shift into a cheetah and run as fast as a cheetah, or shift into a condor and take to the skies. Is that what you want out of the 4e Druid, as well?

Or do you just not mind picking a single beast form to use all your career, provided you get bonuses associated with that form? In that case, you might as well declare yourself a bear and pick bear-esque powers, claiming that these powers represent your extra bear strength. How many humans in 4e can penetrate armor with mundane weapons (or, at least, strike hard enough that it doesn't matter if you just hit armor) and leave the target disoriented and distracted enough that your allies get CA against him?*

Obviously, there's still the issue of not exactly being a bear, but that's easily explained. You were born and spent most of your life as a human, so when you become a bear, you're working with a new physiology. It takes time to figure out how to best do your various bear-ish things, and even once you've worked out all the kinks, you'll fight differently than a wild bear.

I will admit that the fluff of the Primal Beast (or whatever it was) is really terrible. It's supposed to be some primordial being that is the progenitor of all animals, and it's essentially described as "take a bit of stuff from each animal and randomly glue it all together." To be honest, it evokes images of those old cartoons when people would get in fights and all you'd see would be a cloud of smoke with various limbs and weapons occasionally poking out. Or possibly a freakish mass of furry, feathery goop that's incapable of moving.

*I, too, am behind the barrier, so I'm working from memory here. Please excuse any errors.

Artanis
2008-12-03, 03:29 AM
I don't want to argue here so much as point out that it's very easy, with the right race, to create a ranger who can do both. I've created an elven ranger whose sheet says TWF, but in reality, she can do both because of a high DEX, which also helps AC. I suppose she's a bit fragile(low CON), but overall I think she's capable of both. Melee would be her primary option, but it's no trouble at all to disengage and switch to ranged attacks i she takes too many hits. I'm sure I'm not the only person who has created something similar.
I think that's pretty much the point.

The Ranger's powers are almost all either TWF or Archery, one or the other. Practically none of them can be used both ways. And to go between the two, you have to change which weapons you're using.

The Druids powers are all either Beast or non-Beast, one or the other. None of them can be used both ways. And to go between the two, you have to change which form you're using.

See the point?

If the Ranger isn't constrained by a facet of the class that's just about as limiting as the Druid's beast-form thing, then the Druid won't be either.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-03, 04:45 AM
Holy crepes, a controller! Problem is it looks to be as pathetic as the Wizard, minus the saving throw nonsense (at least they're balanced against each other, lol).
Could you please elaborate why you consider wizards and druids pathetic? What would you prefer to be different?

BobVosh
2008-12-03, 04:51 AM
Oh, I know that phrase, i thought you were misinterpreting the reference I had made. Whoops, sorry.

Looks like these forums aren't big on animorphs. Don't worry, citizen. That is a good thing.

Overall I don't like the druid much. Not really my kind of control, I liked the save or suck more. I am humored by the rogue squadron + druid combo love though.

Mercenary Pen
2008-12-03, 05:16 AM
I am humored by the rogue squadron + druid combo love though.

Someone's got their references confused, are you playing D&D or Star Wars? Okay, okay, I know you didn't mean THAT rogue squadron

On a more serious note, perhaps wildshaping DID need neutering as much as has been done... I mean, the 3.5 variant may as well have been called 'pick your bonuses straight from the monster manual' on the grounds that you ended up either slowing down play whilst you decided what to wildshape into, or you spent hours ahead of each session trying to pick your best options, possibly both of the above... These situations are not really ideal, so something HAD to change.

The way I interpret 4e wildshaping is that you naturally get the ability to take on the seeming of the animal in question (and I would expect the ability to convince all non-magical senses that you were that animal), but taking on the capabilities of that creature requires more aptitude than a first-level character has.

ShaggyMarco
2008-12-03, 07:45 AM
The Ranger's powers are almost all either TWF or Archery, one or the other. Practically none of them can be used both ways. And to go between the two, you have to change which weapons you're using.

Aren't there a TON of ranger powers that work both ways?

I just looked in the PHB. In heroic tier, you can have a power at every level (except Daily 5) that works both ways. In later tiers, both-way powers are more rare, but they still exist. Martial Power may change this. I'll look later.

I think there should be some eventual option for someone in the existing shape-shift beast-form to be able to use nature spells. Maybe a feat? A Paragon Path? A Utility power?

Oslecamo
2008-12-03, 08:34 AM
EDIT:
@Skywalker

OK, so this Druid isn't your 3E Druid. I get that, but it doesn't make the shifting worthless.
If you dislike my initial choice, let's go with a Wolf and a Medium-sized Dog (yes, they exist). I doubt that Orcs would bother killing a Wolf sniffing around the outside of their camp (not good meat, and why risk bringing down a pack?) and guards continue to ignore dogs (even "large" ones). Hell, if you think Orcs would attack a wolf, then look like a Black Bear; even Orcs wouldn't bother killing one of those off hand. Or a snake. Lots of big animals wandering around a forest that your average traveler (even orcs) doesn't bother to kill out of hand.

Halfling Druids, naturally, have an advantage here; good for them.

I guess, in summary, there are lots of nice "in-world" reasons that shifting into the forms of animals is terribly useful. It's a bit surprising to see people contest that point; for me it's like arguing that Mage Hand is useless. I'm personally a little sad that there are people who only saw shifting as a stat-booster, but so be it.


Hiding/disguising surely isn't an use for shapeshifting in 4e, unless your enemies all have 1 wisdom.

After all, everyone with some knowledge will know that druids can transform into animals, and thus every guard/soldier out there will be instructed to kill any animal that doesn't answer to a spoken warning and acts in some suspicious way.

Even if theyre' not druids, I never saw a soldier refuse extra meals that come directly to them. Where an army passes, all wildlike stupid enough to get close will be included on that night's menu:smalltongue:

This is, you could as well be shapeshifting into a sandwich. Even if they believe you're a real sandwich, you're gonna get eaten attacked.

BardicDuelist
2008-12-03, 08:49 AM
Hiding/disguising surely isn't an use for shapeshifting in 4e, unless your enemies all have 1 wisdom.

After all, everyone with some knowledge will know that druids can transform into animals, and thus every guard/soldier out there will be instructed to kill any animal that doesn't answer to a spoken warning and acts in some suspicious way.

Even if theyre' not druids, I never saw a soldier refuse extra meals that come directly to them. Where an army passes, all wildlike stupid enough to get close will be included on that night's menu:smalltongue:

This is, you could as well be shapeshifting into a sandwich. Even if they believe you're a real sandwich, you're gonna get eaten attacked.

That seems like a jerk way to nerf someone's class ability. And it would be the EXACT SAME THING in 3.5, if you play that way.

A: PCs are rare. It is dumb to have all of your NPCs know what they can do.
B: That is like saying that every old person is killed on sight because they may be a wizard of phenomenal cosmic power.
C: Soldiers on guard duty are often expressly forbidden from hunting. Yes, if you sneak up on a camp there may be those who attempt to hunt you. However, I would give a circumstance bonus to any animal hiding in a forest. You sort of expect them to be there. You can easily change into another animal (out of sight), thus losing the trail as well.

hewhosaysfish
2008-12-03, 10:22 AM
I just built up a 1st-level Druid, and I have to see my big problem with them, so far, is that despite having two completely separate sets of powers (wild shape and non-wild shape ones), they still have to pick just one when they get to pick new powers. I don't know if it would have been overpowered, but I would have liked to have seen something where you can choose one Beast Form power and one non-Beast Form power at each level and then pick one each day (like the Wizard's Spellbook, but for encounter, daily, AND utility powers. It's probably too strong, but it's the part of the 3.x Druid that I like - you never know whether the elf in the hide armor is gonna zap you with lightning or flip out, turn into a bear, and maul you to death.

Or, instead of emulating the Wizard's Spellbook, emulate the Cleric/Paladin's Channel Divinity. Give each encounter power two different effects, one for when you're in human form, one for when you're in beast form. Daily powers, only cropping up once per day, could be limited to one form or the other without being to limiting.

Asbestos
2008-12-03, 11:17 AM
I would like to say first that if I personally encounter a medium sized dog, I make quite sure where it came from before going about my business. If it doesn't have a clear owner or place, I get suspicious.


That's only because you're from a place that has dog catchers and pounds and such. Athens has literally hundreds of stray dogs running around, its insane. In an medieval European city you'd also likely see tons of dogs, pulling carts, running on little hamster wheels to turn spits (the breed was actually called a Turnspit), and wandering as strays all over the place. Really, 'mongrel dog' is probably the best urban form.

Oslecamo
2008-12-03, 11:39 AM
That seems like a jerk way to nerf someone's class ability. And it would be the EXACT SAME THING in 3.5, if you play that way.

In 3.5 I would get actual numeric bonus to hide and dex, giving the druid a real countable modifier in stealth. A rat will probably pass unseen unless there's a very lucky soldier. A bear no.



A: PCs are rare. It is dumb to have all of your NPCs know what they can do.
Yeah, and wolfs/snakes/spiders/rats are completely harmless animals that just want to lick you, so everybody lets them wander wherever they want, suuure. Sorry, I tought we were talking about that D&D world where powerfull monsters wander everywhere and the civilized races are stuck inside points of light.

Actually, unless you're running an elvish society where animals and humanoids live side by side, animals will be driven off from most people, because you don't want a wild rat/dog/cat to start chewing at your stuff or dirtying your stuff.



B: That is like saying that every old person is killed on sight because they may be a wizard of phenomenal cosmic power.


I'm a freaking NPC planing my plan in my private base with tight security to protect myself. Of course any unathourized person who enters it is going to be arrested if not outright executed, depending on how evil I am. Would a generic old man be able to enter the Pentagon whitout any repercussion?



C: Soldiers on guard duty are often expressly forbidden from hunting. Yes, if you sneak up on a camp there may be those who attempt to hunt you. However, I would give a circumstance bonus to any animal hiding in a forest. You sort of expect them to be there. You can easily change into another animal (out of sight), thus losing the trail as well.

Soldier camps are also normally lit with torches to reveal spies and warm up the sentries. Normal animals are afraid of fire and won't aproach. Druids will aproach, and get shot by the sentries, wich actually don't need to move from their place to attack any aproaching thing.

And since you're using houserules now, giving random bonuses here and there, I may as well say there are plenty of monsters who may look as regular animals, wich is actually allowed by the MM, so the sentries are taught to shoot first and ask questions later if anyone aproaches whitout the combined password.

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-03, 12:39 PM
@Oslecamo

For most situations, guards will ignore random animals they come across. Maybe if they knew they were chasing a Druid (and knew what that meant) they'd be suspicious of animals, but it just can't be their general orders. A medieval town or forest is chock full of random animals wandering about - stray dogs, wolves, snakes, birds... the whole nine yards. If you go camping in virgin forest (which is most of a medieval world) then animals rule the roost; there just aren't that many hunters about to make a significant dent in their populations.

Running across a mongrel dog in an alley is perfectly natural; that's where they hang out. Seeing a wolf sniff around the outside of your camp is perfectly natural; animals are always walking by the edges of camps, curious of the light. Maybe your super-guards will be able to notice that the animal is not acting exactly normally (high Nature check?) but most sentries aren't going to start shooting at an animal that isn't getting too close to them. Or they'll be wasting arrows all night!

Some things don't need modifiers, or even rolls, to make sense. Do you require your Fighter to roll an Intimidate check when he's pushing around an old woman? Or a Diplomacy check when the Rogue wants to buy a crossbow at list price? I doubt it, because these all call for natural reactions that just don't need the intervention of dice.

Asbestos
2008-12-03, 02:00 PM
The way I interpret 4e wildshaping is that you naturally get the ability to take on the seeming of the animal in question (and I would expect the ability to convince all non-magical senses that you were that animal), but taking on the capabilities of that creature requires more aptitude than a first-level character has.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I see it too, though it seems like 4e Natural Spell will be quite a bit less powerful than 3.x's, thank goodness.

As for this whole 'people, especially soldiers distrust stray animals' thing. Take a peak at this. [link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/3086553.stm)]
My guess is that druids and wereanimals, though they exist, make up a very small percentage of the population. I'm unlikely to be especially suspicious of every animal I see in the same way that I don't think that every person I see is a murdering sociopath, or in the D&D world, any of the many monsters that can look like something else. I don't know about your party, but no one in mine runs around thinking that every chest, puddle, cloak, or person on the street is really a monster in disguise waiting to devour them. Sadly, I have played in games where the DM tries to make his own Tomb of Annoyance and makes everything that was once harmless into something deadly, I straight up quit after my character spiderclimbed up the wall off of the continually resetting trap floor... only to come into contact with the green slime that coated the walls and ceiling. Its perfectly possible in a D&D world for everything and anything to attempt to kill you, its just outrageously lame.

Even in a world where this (http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/04/01/video-kitty-cornersh.html) exists, I still don't have a fear of kittens coming around corners.

Rockphed
2008-12-03, 02:22 PM
A druid that normally looks like a slightly crazier wizard, what with the scraggly beard, robe and staff, would be able to turn into a dog after ducking into an empty alley to escape pursuit. Any druid could turn into a medium Fox/wolf thing and bound off into the bushes if suspicious guards show up while said druid is sneaking into their camp. Actually sneaking in would require the use of actual sneaking.

skywalker
2008-12-04, 02:46 AM
Obviously, there's still the issue of not exactly being a bear, but that's easily explained. You were born and spent most of your life as a human, so when you become a bear, you're working with a new physiology. It takes time to figure out how to best do your various bear-ish things, and even once you've worked out all the kinks, you'll fight differently than a wild bear. I'm sorry, I just don't consider that "easily explained." When I think "I'm going to turn into a bear," the thought that's implied is "I'm going to turn into a bear so I can beat the crap out of that guy." I understand that it needed to be toned down, but honestly, what it probably really needed was to be thrown out completely, or made very costly. That's the only way to keep it "realistic"(which I put in quotes because I know, I know, turning into a bear isn't realistic in the first place). The current situation might as well be saying "realism? What's that?"

I will admit that the fluff of the Primal Beast (or whatever it was) is really terrible. It's supposed to be some primordial being that is the progenitor of all animals, and it's essentially described as "take a bit of stuff from each animal and randomly glue it all together." To be honest, it evokes images of those old cartoons when people would get in fights and all you'd see would be a cloud of smoke with various limbs and weapons occasionally poking out. Or possibly a freakish mass of furry, feathery goop that's incapable of moving.

You weren't the only one. I thought of Taz...


Aren't there a TON of ranger powers that work both ways?

I just looked in the PHB. In heroic tier, you can have a power at every level (except Daily 5) that works both ways. In later tiers, both-way powers are more rare, but they still exist. Martial Power may change this. I'll look later.

I think there should be some eventual option for someone in the existing shape-shift beast-form to be able to use nature spells. Maybe a feat? A Paragon Path? A Utility power?

You are very correct. In heroic, you tend to get 2 powers that work both ways and might lean slightly one way or the other, and an exclusive for each style. At least I think.


Hiding/disguising surely isn't an use for shapeshifting in 4e, unless your enemies all have 1 wisdom.

After all, everyone with some knowledge will know that druids can transform into animals, and thus every guard/soldier out there will be instructed to kill any animal that doesn't answer to a spoken warning and acts in some suspicious way.

Even if theyre' not druids, I never saw a soldier refuse extra meals that come directly to them. Where an army passes, all wildlike stupid enough to get close will be included on that night's menu:smalltongue:

This is, you could as well be shapeshifting into a sandwich. Even if they believe you're a real sandwich, you're gonna get eaten attacked.

:smallbiggrin: @ real sandwich analogy. If you turn into a predator, tho, they're probably not very likely to kill you for eating purposes. Predators don't taste very good.


That's only because you're from a place that has dog catchers and pounds and such. Athens has literally hundreds of stray dogs running around, its insane. In an medieval European city you'd also likely see tons of dogs, pulling carts, running on little hamster wheels to turn spits (the breed was actually called a Turnspit), and wandering as strays all over the place. Really, 'mongrel dog' is probably the best urban form.

Yes, but most of those dogs you mentioned clearly had owners/jobs. What I meant was, a man sized dog certainly catches my eye, and if I'm a guard looking for somebody who's just disappeared, I might say "hey, that man sized dog doesn't appear to have any owner..." Personally speaking, unattended man sized dogs creep me out. I worry about what those big jaws and paws might do to me.

Strays are common, strays the size of a person are not. I actually live in a rural area, I see plenty of stray dogs, altho perhaps not hundreds. None are even close to person sized.


As for this whole 'people, especially soldiers distrust stray animals' thing. Take a peak at this. [link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/3086553.stm)]

I think the important quote there is "they survived the fighting." Did you ever read Pride of Baghdad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_of_Baghdad)? I also think that soldiers (who tend to be away from home, without companionship, lonely, possibly looking for something beyond fighting, a dog or cat might remind them of home. Plus, none of those are very big dogs) are a lot different from police (the modern equivalent of city guards), who tend to be in their own environment, in a position of certain authority (unlike soldiers, who live in almost complete uncertainty in every regard), etc. I've seen news stories about police men killing dogs for the hell of it.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-04, 03:02 AM
I do think that Wildshape would have been best handled as seperate from the Druid. Give the Druid Leader/Controller abilities and a couple of rituals that let him turn into a bird etc for travel/scouting but that blocks all powers. Then make a "Wilderness Fighter" that's a cross between the Ranger and the Druid in fluff and make the Wildshaping work like the Rage mechanic of the Barbarian. Make the powers mostly Defender with a touch of Striker and it would work. As-is, Wildshape feels too small compared to how character-defining it was.

KnightDisciple
2008-12-04, 03:41 AM
See, all the references via quote to Transformers made me go and watch YouTube clips. Now I'm nostalgic, and want to play a Warforged Druid.
Blast it all...:smalltongue:

Rockphed
2008-12-04, 04:28 AM
I do think that Wildshape would have been best handled as seperate from the Druid. Give the Druid Leader/Controller abilities and a couple of rituals that let him turn into a bird etc for travel/scouting but that blocks all powers. Then make a "Wilderness Fighter" that's a cross between the Ranger and the Druid in fluff and make the Wildshaping work like the Rage mechanic of the Barbarian. Make the powers mostly Defender with a touch of Striker and it would work. As-is, Wildshape feels too small compared to how character-defining it was.

Character Defining in 3rd edition, but, as Oracle Hunter pointed out, it was nigh worthless in 2nd edition. Well, worthless for combat purposes.

I do agree that they would have done well to have powers that could be used both in wild-shape and in Natural form. Or have given druids 2 encounter powers at each level, but they can only use 1 encounter power at any level in an encounter.

Asbestos
2008-12-04, 07:59 AM
Yes, but most of those dogs you mentioned clearly had owners/jobs. What I meant was, a man sized dog certainly catches my eye, and if I'm a guard looking for somebody who's just disappeared, I might say "hey, that man sized dog doesn't appear to have any owner..." Personally speaking, unattended man sized dogs creep me out. I worry about what those big jaws and paws might do to me.

Strays are common, strays the size of a person are not. I actually live in a rural area, I see plenty of stray dogs, altho perhaps not hundreds. None are even close to person sized.


You just have to turn into a medium sized animal, not a specifically human sized animal. The generic D&D dog is medium sized. So... you become a generic dog, not a dog of unusual size. You don't have to be the size of the space you fill, has anyone seen a 10x10 horse? I think not.

Kizara
2008-12-04, 08:41 AM
You just have to turn into a medium sized animal, not a specifically human sized animal. The generic D&D dog is medium sized. So... you become a generic dog, not a dog of unusual size. You don't have to be the size of the space you fill, has anyone seen a 10x10 horse? I think not.

Stop slamming my geletinous cube horse. I love fluffy. :P

Roderick_BR
2008-12-04, 10:27 AM
Found here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20081201a)

Primal Controller with leader or striker as the secondary roles. Not really quite what I was expecting I have to say.
I think a lot of people was expeting a controller caster anyway, though back then it was expected to be something like a divine controller, before the new power sources were announced.

Unfortunatelly, I don't have a subscription there, so I'll have to wait till the book come out :smalltongue:



How exactly do you wield a Totem in combat? I guess they meant a small idol or something, but I can't help but imagining a Druid waving a 3-foot length of carved log at his enemies :smallbiggrin:
There had an exotic weapon like that in Masters of the Wield. :smallbiggrin:
"He hit me. With a tree!" - A dazed Krusk.

hewhosaysfish
2008-12-04, 10:54 AM
I think a lot of people was expeting a controller caster anyway, though back then it was expected to be something like a divine controller, before the new power sources were announced.

When I heard thay druids were going to be focused on Wildshape, I expected to be a Defender. Spend all day as a bear, kinda like the 3.5 concept of druidzilla only without the Animal Companion and full spellcasting. I thoughth the healing and buffing (Leader) and conjuring thorns (Controller) were going to get shifted into other classes.
Makes me wonder what the other classes in the PHB2 are going to be...

ShaggyMarco
2008-12-04, 01:20 PM
You are very correct. In heroic, you tend to get 2 powers that work both ways and might lean slightly one way or the other, and an exclusive for each style. At least I think.

With Martial Power considered, there is a power choice at every single level of encounter and daily powers through the end of Paragon tier that can double serve as bow or 2 weapons

With Epic Powers and most Paragon paths, you have to make a decision between ranged and 2-weapons.

Anyway, point being, there ARE some classes that can be built to effectively do two things at once, and Ranger, up to about level 22, can do that very easily, and after level 22, can still probably do it pretty effectively.

Artanis
2008-12-04, 01:25 PM
I'm sorry, I just don't consider that "easily explained." When I think "I'm going to turn into a bear," the thought that's implied is "I'm going to turn into a bear so I can beat the crap out of that guy." I understand that it needed to be toned down, but honestly, what it probably really needed was to be thrown out completely, or made very costly. That's the only way to keep it "realistic"(which I put in quotes because I know, I know, turning into a bear isn't realistic in the first place). The current situation might as well be saying "realism? What's that?"
That's what the beast-form powers are. You want to turn into a bear and beat the daylights out of something? Oh look, there's a bunch of powers that are exactly that.



As for the Ranger, I concede the point. My powers of observation can be lacking at times, and this time, they did indeed come up short on the number of versatile powers the Ranger has :smallredface:

Myatar_Panwar
2008-12-04, 08:31 PM
I saw this preview before it went exclusive and man am I glad on how they went about with Wildshape.

My druid character from a couple years ago was completely screwed over by 3.5 in respects to wild shaping. I wanted him to be essentially, a wolf master. he rode wolfs, turned into wolfs, wore wolf fur, etc.

It was great up until the higher levels, once you get to a certain point its just no longer viable to be turning into just plain wolfs (or even the dire ones. And heck, it even wasn't viable at the start), and my druid was essentially being forced to change into more powerful crap like dinosaurs and shoot lighting out of his eyes. :smallmad:

skywalker
2008-12-05, 12:36 AM
Character Defining in 3rd edition, but, as Oracle Hunter pointed out, it was nigh worthless in 2nd edition. Well, worthless for combat purposes.

Considering how much they played up wildshape in the preview book, I think they broke down a bit.


You just have to turn into a medium sized animal, not a specifically human sized animal. The generic D&D dog is medium sized. So... you become a generic dog, not a dog of unusual size. You don't have to be the size of the space you fill, has anyone seen a 10x10 horse? I think not.

Well, the generic D&D riding/working dog is. There is no 4.0 dog. The 3.5 standard dog is small. I looked it up. It's not about filling the space. It's that medium-sized means "approximately the size of a human, give or take from dwarf to goliath."


That's what the beast-form powers are. You want to turn into a bear and beat the daylights out of something? Oh look, there's a bunch of powers that are exactly that.

Yes, but the way those powers work, you could just as easily turn into a monkey to beat the crap out of somebody in exactly the same way. By the same token, whether you turn into a monkey or a bear, you can still climb as well as your old human self. It's a much more abstract version which actually allows more, instead of less, silliness. The original argument was over whether or not there was an abstract, "in world" (IE "not meta") reason to wildshape.

Starsinger
2008-12-05, 02:08 AM
Makes me wonder what the other classes in the PHB2 are going to be...

Spirit Shamans (okay not necessarily spirit shamans) will be a leader type class with a spirit companion. The underlined tidbit is confirmed by one of the "Confessions..." articles, everything following is speculation on my part. Most likely the spirit will be the center of the healing ability's burst to determine target, and you'll probably have to move it around like a beast mastery ranger.