Irhtos Sauriv's guide to front line druidism

[busterswd]

I totally get where you're coming from Sabeta, but I think it is a rule. It's under the proficiencies and is pretty declarative.

I think the problem most of us are having is precisely with the fact that it is a choice, as you say. It doesn't make sense that there is a "rule" telling us what our character will choose to do for the entirety of their adventuring career. I can't square that in my head. It would make sense to me if there was a paragraph that said "Druids think metal armor is evilbad because reasons, and it interferes with their connection to nature. So they can't cast druid spells while wearing metal armor."

Ok, then my druid can be fine with metal armor but doesn't wear it because it interferes with his spellcasting. Hmm... kind of like arcane spell failure.

Instead, we just get this blanket "ruling" on every druid's character (as in moral and mental qualities).

But there's already behavioral restrictions in play on characters. Again, Paladin codes are even more stringent than not wearing metal armor.

There's the unspoken rule of behavior which is "you need to be able to work together with your party", but it's simply not logical for every character in every party to get along, and even once the initial adventure is over, there's no reason they would stick together, if they were real people.

There's also the unspoken rule of adventuring, which is "instead of doing the logical thing and not exposing yourself to monsters, traps, and a variety of potentially lethal situations, you risk your life on a daily basis to get better at risking your life on a daily basis."

Player characters by their very nature do illogical things, because there wouldn't be a story or a game if they didn't. It's not that much of a stretch for me for a game system to have implicit behavioral restrictions. I don't necessarily agree that metal armor was the occasion on which it should have been done, but there are way more restrictive examples.

[Sabeta]

Buster I thought you were more...logical than that. None of what you said actually means anything. The paladin oaths are as strict or as loose as you need them to be. Sometimes Paladins are allowed to murder and torture for a greater good, sometimes they aren't. It depends largely on your DMs own interpretation of morality.

You also don't need to work together. I've played games with Chaotic Evil; hell OotS has multiple characters who frequently act outside the best interest of the main party, but they still get by fine because the only thing that actually matters is if bad things die. Which doesn't require teamwork, it requires not being in the way.

And Adventuring is all about the fame, glory, power, or wealth attached to it. You aren't risking your life to be better at risking your life. That's like saying people only sing because they want to get better at singing, rather than getting fame and money from their talents.

But hey, you said yourself that PCs do illogical things. Is it so weird to find it illogical that in a world where an illogical culture has popped out with a taboo against metal, that one of those individuals would be further illogical by instead being logical?

[Dr.Samurai]

But there's already behavioral restrictions in play on characters. Again, Paladin codes are even more stringent than not wearing metal armor.

What is bringing you to this conclusion? The druid just can't wear armor, even though they technically can, because they are being told they *will not*. The paladin oaths have a list of actions for the paladin to aspire to and uphold. It's a guide for their behavior. How is this more stringent than the druid's arbitrary armor restriction?

Under the paladin class it says this about their oaths: "... your oath might represent standards of behavior that you have not yet attained."

There's the unspoken rule of behavior which is "you need to be able to work together with your party", but it's simply not logical for every character in every party to get along, and even once the initial adventure is over, there's no reason they would stick together, if they were real people.

There's also the unspoken rule of adventuring, which is "instead of doing the logical thing and not exposing yourself to monsters, traps, and a variety of potentially lethal situations, you risk your life on a daily basis to get better at risking your life on a daily basis."

Uh, sure. These apply equally to all characters.

Player characters by their very nature do illogical things, because there wouldn't be a story or a game if they didn't. It's not that much of a stretch for me for a game system to have implicit behavioral restrictions.

Yeah, we use the same example as a counter as well. Player characters by their very nature break taboos.

I don't necessarily agree that metal armor was the occasion on which it should have been done, but there are way more restrictive examples.

I'm open to be wrong on this, but some examples would help. I don't see the paladin codes as examples of more restrictive rules.

[Dr.Samurai]

That being said, since your on the side that it's a rule, but it's a rule because it's a choice that has already been made for you, then how do you reconcile multi-classing? Do you assume some imaginary rule exists that prevents a multi-classed Druid from wearing metal armor, as if just being a druid functions as an off switch?

I do assume that, yes. I imagine the restriction superseding the general. It's not a hill I'm willing to die on though, and I've already pointed out how absolutely stupid it is if it works that way.

[Tetrasodium]

{scrub the post, scrub the quote}

With most things, they are willing to do logical "hmm, the rules don't really cover it, ask your gm" type answers... but with druids, there is a lot of "the rules actually say ask the gm" so when asked they rule as narrowly on any technicality that can say no & say no. some examples:

• availability of nonmetal armor is up to your gm, but they don't want to force anyone so the look to see that here's very technically a rule & all you've got to do is roll a 13 on the minor properties table in the dmg143, players can't buy stuff in the dmg so you can't buy it but can find one of a few rare & uniquebits of nonmetal armor if they go through the right adventure and go where/do whatever it takes to find it. rather than just say "well the guy who made $thing is making more, druid players with faction rank X can temporarily buy stone/ironwood/whatever armor with the same stats as the chart on phb145 but for xx% more gold".. they say how you can find some special nonmetal armors.
  
• does tough/durable apply to wildshape? Instead of saying how even at 19 it's only adding 38 & at 20 it wouldn't matter because of archdruid atop beasts at that level havily 100-150 hp & more it;s not really an issue if it does, ask your gm.. they instead say no
  
• want to put armor on a conjured critter?... ask your gm... want to know if narrow beats general so wrt magic armor resizing to fit a bear so the gm can comfortably allow or deny it based on phb 67's "the DM decides weather it is practical for the form to wear a piece of equipment"... no, armor & barding are different... want to know why ask your gm is fine w/ critter lacking armor proficiency but barding overrules the explicit "DM decides if practical"? effect on the campaign itself vrs one spell... nobody would ever abuse a broken spell combo they found... but a druid using one of the ultra unique nonmetal medium magic armors on a bear?... uhoh.. well you can buy barding... so no....

compound the pattern of refusing to just say "it's up to your dm like it says" all the way back to the 3.5 days when it was easier to make a horifically broken "I got this guys, go home & I'll finish up the adventure" druid than one who just said "uhh.. I'd kinda just like to wear some armor and bite stuff, maybe cast a spell here & there" people get this idea that ever saying yes or "hmm, maybe.. lets see how it goes for now..." they jump straight to a kneejerk

Spoiler: of course not, look here

Show

“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

if it involves deciding something about druids.

[busterswd]

What is bringing you to this conclusion? The druid just can't wear armor, even though they technically can, because they are being told they *will not*. The paladin oaths have a list of actions for the paladin to aspire to and uphold. It's a guide for their behavior. How is this more stringent than the druid's arbitrary armor restriction?

Under the paladin class it says this about their oaths: "... your oath might represent standards of behavior that you have not yet attained."

One is assuming that a character class has members who, for whatever belief system or quirk they have, choose not to wear a certain material.

The other is assuming that every single member of the class will swear an oath that binds them both figuratively and practically for the rest of their lives to a cause that shapes every future day of their lives.

Mechanically, druid armor is a harder restriction, because it doesn't leave the possibility for them to do it, ever, whereas the paladin oaths are written to have a lot of mechanical wriggle room. But in terms of your character's personality? The paladin oaths are a huge commitment, and not something that a lot of personalities would readily agree to. It presupposes that every member of the Paladin class is zealous enough to do so, whereas I could easily roleplay a druid not wanting to wear metal armor "because it's so heavy."

Uh, sure. These apply equally to all characters.

But this is straight up crazy behavior for a lot of people. For example, why don't you quit your job, start practicing with fire arms, and then become a soldier of fortune/mercenary and start taking out well armed, but well funded, terrorist organizations? I mean, practical, ethical, and legal implications aside, it's dangerous, it's uncomfortable, and there's no guarantee of money. And yet adventurers do this, and EVERY ONE of them has chosen to do this and continue to do this.

Yeah, we use the same example as a counter as well. Player characters by their very nature break taboos.

Yes, but my point isn't that they break the norms; they break the norms in a pre-mandated fashion, and nobody bats an eye at it because being an adventurer has become a cliche, at this point.

I'm open to be wrong on this, but some examples would help. I don't see the paladin codes as examples of more restrictive rules.

I mean, mainly the above examples. I think the difference here is that 3.5's Paladins were incredibly restrictive mechanically, and this edition made sure to pull back on that. But the idea of being a zealot dedicated to an almost holy cause is not a normal one.

The argument I'm trying to refute is that "it just doesn't make SENSE for me to roleplay a druid that doesn't wear metal, because that's enforcing an unreal standard behavior to an entire occupation of people!", when that's a far less restrictive personality quirk than just about anything else people willfully follow.


Edit: And to reiterate, I feel like whoever designed or finalized the Druid was not on the same page with the rest of the classes. Trying to have flavor text in a mechanical chart is just one example of how Druids are an odd duck.

[Tetrasodium]

{scrubbed}

[Sabeta]

The argument I'm trying to refute is that "it just doesn't make SENSE for me to roleplay a druid that doesn't wear metal, because that's enforcing an unreal standard behavior to an entire occupation of people!", when that's a far less restrictive personality quirk than just about anything else people willfully follow.

I'm saying it doesn't make sense because it's completely illogical in and of itself, and it's contradictory.

They're allowed metal tools and weapons. A druid who who uses a sickle or sword to murder children is behaving as expected of their class. Humanity is a vile plague that must be removed. If the same druid decides "well I'm already using man-made weapons of war to kill their children, might as well wear their armor too" it's suddenly an unforgivable taboo. It's completely nonsensical to be okay with some using metal for murder, but not self defense.

[RickAllison]

{scrubbed}

[Tetrasodium]

{scrubbed}

[busterswd]

{scrub the post, scrub the quote}

On a more fundamental level, the point I'm trying to make is that when playing an RPG, you're not trying to play as realistic a person as possible. Your first priority is to make sure your concept fits the rules and story of the system, within which you have the freedom to go in whichever direction you like.

"People don't act this way in real life" is my point. You mold your character to whatever guidelines are required, explictly or implictly, and then go from there.

[RickAllison]

On a more fundamental level, the point I'm trying to make is that when playing an RPG, you're not trying to play as realistic a person as possible. Your first priority is to make sure your concept fits the rules and story of the system, within which you have the freedom to go in whichever direction you like.

"People don't act this way in real life" is my point. You mold your character to whatever guidelines are required, explictly or implictly, and then go from there.

Oh I was just correcting that little bit! I'm keeping clear of the discussion itself since I have said my piece already and repeating it won't add anything. But I figure correcting a common mistake is worth popping back in.

I'm personally with the "It is a rule, but a stupid one." Any player of mine can ignore it or I can work around it if they want to be consistent with the common archetype. I also don't think there is anything wrong with making a guide based around a common houserule so long as it is led with the disclaimer that such a premise is in play. It won't see as much light as the general guides, but I've always viewed that you only need to help one person for writing it to be worth it. Now whether the OP was making a guide or insulting others is a different question...

[tkuremento]

{scrubbed}

[Dr.Samurai]

{scrubbed}

[tkuremento]

{scrubbed}

[RickAllison]

{scrubbed}

[Kadarai]

{scrubbed}

[Tetrasodium]

with certain parties occupied arguing:

1. "but it's a rule"
2. "yea we know & don't care"
3. "but but it's a rule!"
4. "Yea & it's a stupid unfun one with zero value that deserves to be ignored like sa mentioned"
5. GOTO 1

For the last 9 pages instead of scaring off people by blindly attacking any questions, requests, suggestions or discussions...

all sides have been established & a great deal of those things have finished getting put into the guide.

[Tetrasodium]

Color codes are pretty much set barring anything I overlooked, if you disagree with the color something gets, explain why. The multiclassing section got updated pretty heavily based on the multiclassing podcast(here) the other day clearing up a lot of ambiguities, a life cleric dip got even better.

[SharkForce]

i'm probably way late on this (given so many pages of discussion), but there's some misinformation and out-of-date stuff in here. also some stuff that isn't necessarily wrong, but which i disagree with and just figured i'd throw in my 2 cents. particularly...

from post 2:

"In addition to all of that fun, warcaster also allows you to make concentration checks with advantage on the roll when you do get hit. When the opportunity rolls around, it also lets you make Attacks of Opportunity with a spell that takes 1 action (like your cantrips, or something better).

While this won't let you cast two spells in one round, it will let you cast a cantrip/spell as an AoO & do a dodge action on your turn if the opportunity comes up so attackers roll at disadvantage while you make dex saves at advantage. If you happen to get an AoO spell/cantrip like thi with a bonus action & don't feel a particularly huge need to cast something else on your action, you can use it to take a dodge action & impose disadvantage on anything trying to attack you between now & next turn."

actually, warcaster totally will get you a second (or third in some cases) spell in a round. the restriction is on using spells as a bonus action, not on casting more than one spell (and depending on interpretation, you could argue that, say, poison spray is a cantrip that takes an action to cast, even if warcaster lets you do it as a reaction, so you should be able to cast it even in a round where you cast a bonus action spell. i wouldn't make that argument. but you could).

from post 3:

"Spoiler: multiclassing Cleric gives you

light/medium armor & shields
3 cleric cantrips that will never advance & 2 cleric spell slots"

this is complete and utter nonsense. you get 3 cantrips from the cleric spell list which advance normally (possibly more depending on domain), advance your spell slot progression normally, and probably 6 cleric spells known eventually, which can all be exchanged freely (it's based on wisdom) plus 2 domain spells. also, depending on domain you get heavy armour.

"Natural weapons from beast forms are melee attacks, but not melee weapon attacks & unlikely to get the bonus rage damage unless your gm is feeling nice."

they are very definitely melee weapon attacks, it's right in the stat block. they just aren't attacks with melee weapons (and some might not use strength, it's sometimes hard to say). in contrast, you can make ranged attacks with melee weapons (of the thrown variety), and those do not qualify for rage.

paladin multiclassing section should really discuss the option of going to paladin 2 for smite.

"multiclassing Sorcerer gives you

4 sorcerer cantrips that will never get better 2 sorcerer spells & slots"

as with the cleric cantrips, they're based on character level. you don't gain sorcerer spell slots, you just continue your spell slot progression.

draconic does give you AC 13 + dex which can be useful if you want more dex.
any discussion of sorcerer multiclass that doesn't discuss metamagic at all is missing out on the entire point of multiclassing sorcerer. yes, it takes 3 levels. yes, that is expensive. but leaving it out of the discussion makes it terribly incomplete.

warlock section should probably discuss level 2 and invocations (much like metamagic, these are basically the entire reason for being a warlock).

"multiclassing Wizard gives you

Wizard spellbook with 3 wizard spells, scribe in more first level spells as you find them.
3 wizard cantrips, int+level wizard spell slots
Arcane recovery wizard level/2 rounded up . Given the wording, this could let you recover a first level druid spell slot per long or short rest.
While mage armor & shield could be really nice & sometimes nice, this doesn't give you nearly the jump you get from something life life cleric.
Ritual caster you already have"

a level 1 wizard has 6 spells in their spellbook, not 3.
int + level wizard spells prepared. not slots.
there is no such thing as a "druid spell slot". you have spell slots, and your classes or other abilities allow you to cast certain spells from those spell slots. there is no question whether you can use the spell slots recovered to cast druid spells.
ritual caster as a druid is not the same thing as ritual caster as a wizard.

(feats)

"Healer: Other than a dungeon crawl classics type low level one shot situation, there is almost no reason for anybody to ever take this feat... least of all someone with the healing abilities of a druid."

healer is useful for anyone, regardless of level. now you can spend less resources on healing with spells, and more on doing interesting things with spells instead. like entangling or using faerie fire on an area and then wild shaping in your first turn. because you don't need that level 1 spell for cure wounds or goodberry.

heavily armoured: it's a half feat. it lets you focus more points into con as a secondary attribute while also increasing AC. it may not be amazing, but it isn't bad either.

lucky: is a strong choice for anyone. i don't know anyone who never rolls badly, this feat can help mitigate rolling badly at important moments.

magic initiate: opens up a bunch of strong and interesting options, actually. for example, it can make shillelagh work in combination with warcaster and booming blade, from SCAG. it can also give you mage armour with the same dip. or a familiar, because why not.

mobile: i'm not certain the writer of this guide understands what mobile does. not saying it's amazing (it isn't really), but this feat isn't about generating more opportunity attacks for anyone. the only interaction with opportunity attacks is the guaranteed ability to prevent opportunity attacks on you, which isn't too bad.

mounted combatant: melee spell attack rolls are still melee attack rolls. also, you're a class with a remarkable ability to make friends with beasts of all types in extremely short periods of time. how is this not potentially useful for you? heck, this is useful for anyone who just *wants* to ride a creature, whether they have any class features that specifically support it or not, but druids actually have some class features that help them here.

polearm master: feat intensive, but magic initiate + warcaster + polearm master + shillelagh can do some interesting things. also not sure how the author intended the animal form to be wielding a club or staff.

ritual caster: you do not already have this. you have a crappier version that requires you to select the spells you want to ritually cast. also, you only have the druid option.

spell sniper: thorn whip totally requires you to make an attack roll. range is 100% for sure doubled on that first benefit. also, you can learn it using the third benefit.

(skills)

athletics: officially, you only get to replace attacks with shoves when you use the attack action, not the multiattack action. YMMV.

acrobatics: works just fine for defending against grapples as well.

stealth: you have decent dex, and access to pass without trace. getting a higher modifier is not strictly required, but it sure as heck isn't a bad idea. even in heavy armour, with enough bonuses you should have a decent chance of success. at level 5, in heavy armour, no dex bonus, but proficient in stealth and using PWT, you automatically sneak past most creatures with a wisdom modifier of +2 or lower. this will only get better if you use medium armour and +2 dex modifier, and of course as your proficiency bonus grows (most creatures are not proficient in perception). not required, but very useful.

nature: can also be used to extract poison from poisonous creatures. like your new best friend, the giant venomous snake.

medicine: actually, it's a bad skill for anyone. just carry a healing kit and you never fail, no matter your modifier.

from post 4:

variant human: if warcaster is sky blue, how does it not get mentioned here? i would argue for magic initiate in certain cases as well, but definitely for some of the builds discussed here, variant human deserves a mention for warcaster.

from post 5:

locate object: a 1,000 foot range is not small. it is large enough for you scan the entire area inside the walls of a decent-sized ancient city. if you then move around (for example, while flying in bird form), you can vastly increase the area searched. if the object you're looking for is so incredibly visible that you can see it easily at a 100 foot range (say, a fluorescent yellow umbrella or something), this spell will cut the time you need to spend searching for the object by a factor of 100. oh, and also, it lets you search inside of buildings, secret compartments, pockets, backpacks, barrels, chests, crates, and hastily-buried holes in the ground, among other things. it is not a bad spell.

pass without trace: now that you've prepared this spell, you pretty much get to decide whether stealth is going to be of importance any time you feel like it. in a bounded accuracy system, a +10 bonus to do something is ludicrously huge. this spell is extremely powerful, unless you decide to not make use of it.

protection from poison: poison damage is surprisingly common. combine this with poison effects of your own (like a wizard casting stinking cloud) for good measure. and it doesn't use concentration either.

speak with plants: speaking is a free action, this spell lets you designate certain areas (via speaking) as normal terrain. it doesn't need to work with your land stride. more importantly, you can use it in combination with entangle so that your allies don't get entangled even if they charge in.

freedom of movement: super useful a lot of the time. tons of things entangle, grapple, paralyze, or otherwise restrict your movement. this grants the ability to ignore them all. can be used to allow safe "friendly fire" (like speak with plants, except it works with more things).

polymorph: does not allow you to turn into a dragon or other things not of the beast type, actually. it is, however, a ludicrously powerful buff spell for as long as there are suitable animals to transform people into. at level 7, a giant ape is probably a better fighter than the fighter in at least a few ways. perhaps not a better all-around adventurer, but probably better at smashing things into tiny bits, at any rate.

stoneskin: costs 100 gp to be able to cast as often as you want. that's not so bad. not like money has value for anything else in base rules anyways. as far as magic weapon attacks being super common... there are a few fiends/celestials, golems, slaad, and a handful of other creatures that have magic weapon damage. it really isn't all that common.

planar binding: just because it's lame in a level 5 slot doesn't mean it isn't good. try using it in a higher level spell slot. when you get a (fey/beast hybrid) giant ape for half a year out of your 1,000 gold, it looks a lot better.

antipathy/sympathy: it should be noted that you (and things you carry) are valid targets. as are your friends and things they carry. it can be very useful to make creatures afraid of going near your squishy partymembers. or to make them run from melee with you (and provoke opportunity attacks).

on a side note, you really should include the elemental evil material. there are some definite interesting options for druid characters in it. (there's a free version available from WotC somewhere, just google it).

[Tetrasodium]

i'm probably way late on this (given so many pages of discussion), but there's some misinformation and out-of-date stuff in here. also some stuff that isn't necessarily wrong, but which i disagree with and just figured i'd throw in my 2 cents. particularly...

Spoiler: snip long but good post

Show

from post 2:

"In addition to all of that fun, warcaster also allows you to make concentration checks with advantage on the roll when you do get hit. When the opportunity rolls around, it also lets you make Attacks of Opportunity with a spell that takes 1 action (like your cantrips, or something better).

While this won't let you cast two spells in one round, it will let you cast a cantrip/spell as an AoO & do a dodge action on your turn if the opportunity comes up so attackers roll at disadvantage while you make dex saves at advantage. If you happen to get an AoO spell/cantrip like thi with a bonus action & don't feel a particularly huge need to cast something else on your action, you can use it to take a dodge action & impose disadvantage on anything trying to attack you between now & next turn."

actually, warcaster totally will get you a second (or third in some cases) spell in a round. the restriction is on using spells as a bonus action, not on casting more than one spell (and depending on interpretation, you could argue that, say, poison spray is a cantrip that takes an action to cast, even if warcaster lets you do it as a reaction, so you should be able to cast it even in a round where you cast a bonus action spell. i wouldn't make that argument. but you could).

from post 3:

"Spoiler: multiclassing Cleric gives you

light/medium armor & shields
3 cleric cantrips that will never advance & 2 cleric spell slots"

this is complete and utter nonsense. you get 3 cantrips from the cleric spell list which advance normally (possibly more depending on domain), advance your spell slot progression normally, and probably 6 cleric spells known eventually, which can all be exchanged freely (it's based on wisdom) plus 2 domain spells. also, depending on domain you get heavy armour.

"Natural weapons from beast forms are melee attacks, but not melee weapon attacks & unlikely to get the bonus rage damage unless your gm is feeling nice."

they are very definitely melee weapon attacks, it's right in the stat block. they just aren't attacks with melee weapons (and some might not use strength, it's sometimes hard to say). in contrast, you can make ranged attacks with melee weapons (of the thrown variety), and those do not qualify for rage.

paladin multiclassing section should really discuss the option of going to paladin 2 for smite.

"multiclassing Sorcerer gives you

4 sorcerer cantrips that will never get better 2 sorcerer spells & slots"

as with the cleric cantrips, they're based on character level. you don't gain sorcerer spell slots, you just continue your spell slot progression.

draconic does give you AC 13 + dex which can be useful if you want more dex.
any discussion of sorcerer multiclass that doesn't discuss metamagic at all is missing out on the entire point of multiclassing sorcerer. yes, it takes 3 levels. yes, that is expensive. but leaving it out of the discussion makes it terribly incomplete.

warlock section should probably discuss level 2 and invocations (much like metamagic, these are basically the entire reason for being a warlock).

"multiclassing Wizard gives you

Wizard spellbook with 3 wizard spells, scribe in more first level spells as you find them.
3 wizard cantrips, int+level wizard spell slots
Arcane recovery wizard level/2 rounded up . Given the wording, this could let you recover a first level druid spell slot per long or short rest.
While mage armor & shield could be really nice & sometimes nice, this doesn't give you nearly the jump you get from something life life cleric.
Ritual caster you already have"

a level 1 wizard has 6 spells in their spellbook, not 3.
int + level wizard spells prepared. not slots.
there is no such thing as a "druid spell slot". you have spell slots, and your classes or other abilities allow you to cast certain spells from those spell slots. there is no question whether you can use the spell slots recovered to cast druid spells.
ritual caster as a druid is not the same thing as ritual caster as a wizard.
(feats)

"Healer: Other than a dungeon crawl classics type low level one shot situation, there is almost no reason for anybody to ever take this feat... least of all someone with the healing abilities of a druid."

healer is useful for anyone, regardless of level. now you can spend less resources on healing with spells, and more on doing interesting things with spells instead. like entangling or using faerie fire on an area and then wild shaping in your first turn. because you don't need that level 1 spell for cure wounds or goodberry.

heavily armoured: it's a half feat. it lets you focus more points into con as a secondary attribute while also increasing AC. it may not be amazing, but it isn't bad either.

lucky: is a strong choice for anyone. i don't know anyone who never rolls badly, this feat can help mitigate rolling badly at important moments.

magic initiate: opens up a bunch of strong and interesting options, actually. for example, it can make shillelagh work in combination with warcaster and booming blade, from SCAG. it can also give you mage armour with the same dip. or a familiar, because why not.

mobile: i'm not certain the writer of this guide understands what mobile does. not saying it's amazing (it isn't really), but this feat isn't about generating more opportunity attacks for anyone. the only interaction with opportunity attacks is the guaranteed ability to prevent opportunity attacks on you, which isn't too bad.

mounted combatant: melee spell attack rolls are still melee attack rolls. also, you're a class with a remarkable ability to make friends with beasts of all types in extremely short periods of time. how is this not potentially useful for you? heck, this is useful for anyone who just *wants* to ride a creature, whether they have any class features that specifically support it or not, but druids actually have some class features that help them here.

polearm master: feat intensive, but magic initiate + warcaster + polearm master + shillelagh can do some interesting things. also not sure how the author intended the animal form to be wielding a club or staff.

ritual caster: you do not already have this. you have a crappier version that requires you to select the spells you want to ritually cast. also, you only have the druid option.

spell sniper: thorn whip totally requires you to make an attack roll. range is 100% for sure doubled on that first benefit. also, you can learn it using the third benefit.

(skills)

athletics: officially, you only get to replace attacks with shoves when you use the attack action, not the multiattack action. YMMV.

acrobatics: works just fine for defending against grapples as well.

stealth: you have decent dex, and access to pass without trace. getting a higher modifier is not strictly required, but it sure as heck isn't a bad idea. even in heavy armour, with enough bonuses you should have a decent chance of success. at level 5, in heavy armour, no dex bonus, but proficient in stealth and using PWT, you automatically sneak past most creatures with a wisdom modifier of +2 or lower. this will only get better if you use medium armour and +2 dex modifier, and of course as your proficiency bonus grows (most creatures are not proficient in perception). not required, but very useful.

nature: can also be used to extract poison from poisonous creatures. like your new best friend, the giant venomous snake.

medicine: actually, it's a bad skill for anyone. just carry a healing kit and you never fail, no matter your modifier.

from post 4:

variant human: if warcaster is sky blue, how does it not get mentioned here? i would argue for magic initiate in certain cases as well, but definitely for some of the builds discussed here, variant human deserves a mention for warcaster.

from post 5:

locate object: a 1,000 foot range is not small. it is large enough for you scan the entire area inside the walls of a decent-sized ancient city. if you then move around (for example, while flying in bird form), you can vastly increase the area searched. if the object you're looking for is so incredibly visible that you can see it easily at a 100 foot range (say, a fluorescent yellow umbrella or something), this spell will cut the time you need to spend searching for the object by a factor of 100. oh, and also, it lets you search inside of buildings, secret compartments, pockets, backpacks, barrels, chests, crates, and hastily-buried holes in the ground, among other things. it is not a bad spell.

pass without trace: now that you've prepared this spell, you pretty much get to decide whether stealth is going to be of importance any time you feel like it. in a bounded accuracy system, a +10 bonus to do something is ludicrously huge. this spell is extremely powerful, unless you decide to not make use of it.

protection from poison: poison damage is surprisingly common. combine this with poison effects of your own (like a wizard casting stinking cloud) for good measure. and it doesn't use concentration either.

speak with plants: speaking is a free action, this spell lets you designate certain areas (via speaking) as normal terrain. it doesn't need to work with your land stride. more importantly, you can use it in combination with entangle so that your allies don't get entangled even if they charge in.

freedom of movement: super useful a lot of the time. tons of things entangle, grapple, paralyze, or otherwise restrict your movement. this grants the ability to ignore them all. can be used to allow safe "friendly fire" (like speak with plants, except it works with more things).

polymorph: does not allow you to turn into a dragon or other things not of the beast type, actually. it is, however, a ludicrously powerful buff spell for as long as there are suitable animals to transform people into. at level 7, a giant ape is probably a better fighter than the fighter in at least a few ways. perhaps not a better all-around adventurer, but probably better at smashing things into tiny bits, at any rate.

stoneskin: costs 100 gp to be able to cast as often as you want. that's not so bad. not like money has value for anything else in base rules anyways. as far as magic weapon attacks being super common... there are a few fiends/celestials, golems, slaad, and a handful of other creatures that have magic weapon damage. it really isn't all that common.

planar binding: just because it's lame in a level 5 slot doesn't mean it isn't good. try using it in a higher level spell slot. when you get a (fey/beast hybrid) giant ape for half a year out of your 1,000 gold, it looks a lot better.

antipathy/sympathy: it should be noted that you (and things you carry) are valid targets. as are your friends and things they carry. it can be very useful to make creatures afraid of going near your squishy partymembers. or to make them run from melee with you (and provoke opportunity attacks).

on a side note, you really should include the elemental evil material. there are some definite interesting options for druid characters in it. (there's a free version available from WotC somewhere, just google it).

Thanks. for the great reply, you didn't miss much in the earlier pages & they can be mostly summarized in this one post. I think that I've updated most everything (I think).

I disagree on the interpretation that you can't use shove with things like the bear's multiattack feature. here is a teet with a screengrab of the full sections from phb & mm, but it amounts to "If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them." and "Multiattack. The bear makes two attacks: one with its bite and one with its claws."
the shove(s) would replace one of those attacks, but I don't see any reason that it can't make both a shove. I don't see any reason why it would need to eat both attacks any more than it would eat the full chain for something like a fighter's extra attacks since they are both attacks rather than a reaction based AoO or something.

[Klorox]

Sweet guide, thank you!!

[th3g0dc0mp13x]

I disagree on the interpretation that you can't use shove with things like the bear's multiattack feature. here is a tweet with a screengrab of the full sections from phb & mm, but it amounts to "If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them." and "Multiattack. The bear makes two attacks: one with its bite and one with its claws."
the shove(s) would replace one of those attacks, but I don't see any reason that it can't make both a shove. I don't see any reason why it would need to eat both attacks any more than it would eat the full chain for something like a fighter's extra attacks since they are both attacks rather than a reaction based AoO or something.

Unfortunately by raw you are not taking the attack action you are taking the multiattack action as such it's invalid for replacing one of those attacks.

That being said most dms are not going to go that heavily into the minutia of attack action vs. multiattack action.

Edit here is a tweet from mearls about it https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/19/multiattack-and-grapple/