Could a Blighter "respect" ( kinda ) nature?

[Conradine]

Blighter are described as spiteful , insane individuals that delight in destroying forests and natural places.
Could a Blighter exists that do not hates nature but considers it a precious resource to be carefully exploited?

I mean, he knows natural places are his reserve of power, so he optimize his parasitism ( by taking only the energy he needs for his spells, using all the spells before recharging, casting spells only if really useful ) and actively prevents incidents that would cause that resorce to be depleted ( killing creatures that deliberately damage forests, stopping fires from spreading and so on ) not for love of nature but simply because he views it as his reserve of cash.

It's a plausible concept?

[Saintheart]

Decay, dissolution, blight ... these are all natural things. All part of entropy, all part of that single force by which even stars die. How can you not respect the one force which brings death not only to the living but to the natural world itself?

How could you not respect a force that resides in all things, that even the tiniest seed holds its inevitable end hidden within itself at the point of its creation?

[SangoProduction]

At best, you could probably have one that's pragmatic about having a reliable source of power to tap....but it were pragmatic, it wouldn't be using an intentionally "wasteful" form of magic.
Of course, it killing the greenery is a neat added benefit which furthers the default Blighter's goal of.....being Evil?

Just bury the class under a volcano, and never think of it again. It's so incredibly poorly written.

(Now, if you want a similar fluff, with a much less "I will destroy everything because reasons" undertones, there's Terrain Casting drawback in the Spheres of Power casting tradition.)

[Falontani]

You choose easily use a child of winter druid or Spirit Shaman. Perhaps some Talona BlightLord.

[Conradine]

but it were pragmatic, it wouldn't be using an intentionally "wasteful" form of magic.

Someone that wants pseudo-druidic power but doesn't want the responsibilities and limitations of a Druid. Akin an Ur-Priest.

[noob]

There is no link between respecting something and protecting it.
You could very well hate nature and respect it and try to destroy it like you respect and try to destroy a worthy opponent.
Or you could not respect nature at all and consider it is a dishonourable opponent and spit at it each time you can and have to protect it right now because you are researching in a close area a secret for destroying all nature once and for all without even leaving blight.

[Zaq]

“Respect” is an incredibly vague term. One might even say that it’s vague on purpose in a context like this. Go with what makes the game interesting. I wouldn’t stress the details on this one.

[Conradine]

Ok.

More explicitly: can a Blighter be a cold, pragmatical and rational exploiter instead of a laughing pyromaniac?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Dark Sun has nearly all arcane casters being capable of doing the blighter thing (they're called despoilers), only they gain a massive power boost instead of needing to destroy just to get their spells on for the day. The most powerful arcanists in the entire setting have permanently transmuted themselves into dragon gods, and at least one of them does this. The nation he's cultivated is beautiful and green, completely unlike the rest of the setting. It's a literal natural paradise by comparison.

Sure, it draws in touristry like nobody's business, but it's also a massive boost to his power level in case one of the other dragon gods (or some other epic baddie) decides they want to take him out. He can defile the entire place and destroy all of that greenery to one-shot damned near anything.

[Myev]

I don‘t know the blighter class, but if you are willing to abandon it‘s fluff you might want to play it as a shadow druid. According to Baldurs Gate 2 (and 1 I guess), these are druids that drain power from nature, to better defend it.
Basically the warriors, while the „normal“ druids are more caretakers.

According to Baldurs Gate, the Shadow Druid Way is actually far less efficient, thus it could fit a foolish blighter.
Though it doesn’t fit with the pragmatic parasite type, you did mention.

(I would prefer competent Shadow Druids, since I like the concept. In that case I would probably combine the druidic avenger variant rule with the companion spirits from the Dungeon Master Guide II. The power of the companion spirits is the health of nature, so if the druid access or even drains it, it is mirrored in their environment and might take very long to recharge.)

[The Viscount]

Ok.

More explicitly: can a Blighter be a cold, pragmatical and rational exploiter instead of a laughing pyromaniac?

Of course. Blighter is rather sparse on description, and while it mentions that most are mad, it would certainly make sense for a reasonable and calculating Blighter to conserve resources so that they have access to as much land as possible to deforest. If you add on domains via something like contemplative, you might even grow you own plants to deforest. Blighter's don't have any code, so there's no rules to violate like there is with druid.

[Reversefigure4]

A Blighter who is sufficiently rational and pragmatic probably stays a Druid instead of becoming a Blighter in the first place. At the point where the guy is sustainably growing his own forest just to burn it down, rescues nature, saves forests, etc, he might as well just stay a Druid (an evil one, perhaps) - clearly, he respects the power of nature and sees it as a source of his own power, so... why become a Blighter and make his own life harder? It's easier to grow a forest than grow one, burn it down and grow one, burn it down repeatedly.

[noob]

A Blighter who is sufficiently rational and pragmatic probably stays a Druid instead of becoming a Blighter in the first place. At the point where the guy is sustainably growing his own forest just to burn it down, rescues nature, saves forests, etc, he might as well just stay a Druid (an evil one, perhaps) - clearly, he respects the power of nature and sees it as a source of his own power, so... why become a Blighter and make his own life harder? It's easier to grow a forest than grow one, burn it down and grow one, burn it down repeatedly.

because some druids believe in something called the cycle of rebirth?
It could be a druid sect about destroying and regrowing so that nature does not stagnate?

[Conradine]

A Blighter who is sufficiently rational and pragmatic probably stays a Druid instead of becoming a Blighter in the first place.

That require obedience.
Same reason because some choose to be Ur Priest instead of clerics.

[emeraldstreak]

Blighter are described as spiteful , insane individuals that delight in destroying forests and natural places.
Could a Blighter exists that do not hates nature but considers it a precious resource to be carefully exploited?

I mean, he knows natural places are his reserve of power, so he optimize his parasitism ( by taking only the energy he needs for his spells, using all the spells before recharging, casting spells only if really useful ) and actively prevents incidents that would cause that resorce to be depleted ( killing creatures that deliberately damage forests, stopping fires from spreading and so on ) not for love of nature but simply because he views it as his reserve of cash.

It's a plausible concept?

How about a Blighter who sees Life-Death circle as natural, but herself as incarnate of the Death side.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

because some druids believe in something called the cycle of rebirth?
It could be a druid sect about destroying and regrowing so that nature does not stagnate?

How about a Blighter who sees Life-Death circle as natural, but herself as incarnate of the Death side.

Unfortunately, blighters are slash-and-burn-and-salt-the-earth types. Any place defiled by them stays defiled unless magically cleansed.

[noob]

Unfortunately, blighters are slash-and-burn-and-salt-the-earth types. Any place defiled by them stays defiled unless magically cleansed.

which the defiler can do.(might need some optimisation however)

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Honestly, I think the idea behind the mechanics of the blighter would've been much better if blighters could gain spells normally, but they gain a massive power boost from defiling the land, instead of the current paradigm, especially if the defiling itself could be used as an incredibly powerful offensive attack or ablative defense against their foes (but with horrific consequences for the natural world around where that occurred). It'd be less mustache-twirling Disney villain and would allow for more of a morally dubious character archetype, with some real moral decisions that occasionally need to be made.

[jintoya]

ive played a blighter before, and currently i am a warlock/druid of the god of decay and autumn (its been interesting)

one thing id do with a blighter...and regularly do as my warlock, is when i run into a blighter, i turn them into a tree (its a special invocation i got early. allowing me to curse dying or helpless foes into instead, living as a part of the forest...usually i save it for those who harm nature as a whole, seeing as i largely deal in crops and balancing the life/death of plant life by hindering some, helping others...its been a ride.)

but what would a blighter do if a few years passes as a tree, and someone released them from the curse?....id say that its likely not long enough to brake them of their ways...but might have taught them to respect it a little more, i dont think its likely going to be as cut and dry as "im a blighter so....time to burn everything AGAIN!"
a spell that you might look into for a backstory is on page 128 of the spell compendium, it is called "Jungles Rapture" and is a 5th level spell, you could work something like that into a backstory, perhaps they crossed a god, perhaps they crossed a mid powered druid, but i think its not such a black-and-white "you must be this" situation, and i think unless it is setting specific, most DM's would allow you to have fun or explore the concept of a "gray area" Blighter.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

...perhaps they crossed a god, perhaps they crossed a mid powered druid

The fact that you equivocate those two things is...interesting.

[Crake]

That require obedience.
Same reason because some choose to be Ur Priest instead of clerics.

This isn't an equal comparison. Ur-priests are simply divine energy thieves, and almost anyone could become one. Blighters on the other hand specifically must be ex-druids. Becoming a druid in the first place, let alone reaching level 5 as is required to meet the pre-requisites, requires a fairly decent commitment to nature, and it must take something rather drastic to turn them away, they are literally referred to in their description as being to a druid what a black guard is to a paladin. I can't imagine a pragmatic person being able to make it that far amongst the ranks of the druids if their pragmatism involved defiling nature, after all, being a pragmatist essentially means that you care not for the means, as long as the outcome is as you like, but for a druid, defiling nature is quite the opposite of pragmatic, because preventing nature from being defiled is your desired outcome. Thus, it is clearly demonstrable that pragmatism as a druid does not lead down the path of the blighter, but rather more likely a NE druid, or possibly a CN one.

The blighter on the other hand defiles nature for their power. Now, if we consider that the blighter must have a goal of some sort, then unless this goal is in conflict with nature itself, the blighter could still have been a druid and pursued that goal, thus his defiling of nature is unnecessary, and thus he cannot respect it, for he is basically defiling nature out of choice rather than necessity. On the other hand, if the blighter's goal is specifically to destroy nature by defiling it, he must also not respect nature, because he is defiling it. This would be akin to defacing an enemy after you kill them, it's rather mutually exclusive with respect.

There is one circumstance where a blighter could still respect nature, despite defiling it. This is where the blighter's goal is in conflict with nature, but isn't specifically the destruction of nature. An example of this might be a druid who supports the spreading of urbanization. Urbanization is in direct conflict with nature, thus a druid who came to believe that it is something to be sought after would lose his powers, and could become a blighter, using his powers to further his goal, though i'll be honest, the blighter's skillset isn't really in support of this kind of a character, and something like an urban druid would be a much better representation of that. Honestly, I can't really think of a good character concept in which a blighter would respect nature that couldn't be better replicated by some other means.

[Tvtyrant]

There is more then one type of natural environment or process, I think it would be pretty easy to justify. Worshipping the changes brought about by mass extinction, or defending something that was kind of bad at competing in verdant environments.

"But you never thought about the Lichen, did you? They made the soil you survive on, and then you stole their lands you colonists!" Blighter shouts as he murders a forest.

[Crake]

There is more then one type of natural environment or process, I think it would be pretty easy to justify. Worshipping the changes brought about by mass extinction, or defending something that was kind of bad at competing in verdant environments.

"But you never thought about the Lichen, did you? They made the soil you survive on, and then you stole their lands you colonists!" Blighter shouts as he murders a forest.

Except blighters aren't about natural environments and processes. What you're describing is simply a flavour of NE druid. Blighters on the other hand aren't about destruction as a part of nature, they're about the destruction of nature. As someone else mentioned, when a blighter destroys an area, it doesn't just die, it's defiled, nothing can grow there until it is magically restored, and someone mentioned "which the blighter can do", but no, a blighter can't do it, restoring an area requires the casting of a hallow spell, which blighters are incapable of casting. So no, blighters don't fit anywhere into the natural environment or process.

[Tvtyrant]

Except blighters aren't about natural environments and processes. What you're describing is simply a flavour of NE druid. Blighters on the other hand aren't about destruction as a part of nature, they're about the destruction of nature. As someone else mentioned, when a blighter destroys an area, it doesn't just die, it's defiled, nothing can grow there until it is magically restored, and someone mentioned "which the blighter can do", but no, a blighter can't do it, restoring an area requires the casting of a hallow spell, which blighters are incapable of casting. So no, blighters don't fit anywhere into the natural environment or process.

I mean, mars is a natural environment and it is lifeless. It really depends on how far we want to stretch the concept of "nature."

Druids are basically aesthetic in nature (forgive the pun,) they really mean "free of humanoids interference" because otherwise they would be kicking down termite mounds and bird nests. Extending that to any lifeform is not that much of a stretch, any interference by life into nature could be seen as aesthetically displeasing.

[Crake]

I mean, mars is a natural environment and it is lifeless. It really depends on how far we want to stretch the concept of "nature."

Druids are basically aesthetic in nature (forgive the pun,) they really mean "free of humanoids interference" because otherwise they would be kicking down termite mounds and bird nests. Extending that to any lifeform is not that much of a stretch, any interference by life into nature could be seen as aesthetically displeasing.

Most people would take it along the lines of revereing "mother earth", so I don't think mars would really count (there's no "mother mars"). If anything, mars would be seen as what would happen without mother nature to protect and nurture us.

[Kish]

As other people have said, this question amounts to, "Could a blighter reject the core of the class's definition?" It's like asking, "Can a blackguard be good?" If the concept of loathing nature and dedicating your life to destroying it holds no value for you as a character concept, then there's no value to be found in the blighter class.

[Conradine]

Except blighters aren't about natural environments and processes. What you're describing is simply a flavour of NE druid. Blighters on the other hand aren't about destruction as a part of nature, they're about the destruction of nature. As someone else mentioned, when a blighter destroys an area, it doesn't just die, it's defiled, nothing can grow there until it is magically restored, and someone mentioned "which the blighter can do", but no, a blighter can't do it, restoring an area requires the casting of a hallow spell, which blighters are incapable of casting. So no, blighters don't fit anywhere into the natural environment or process.

Ok, probably the word I used ( "respect" ) is not what I meant to be.

The point is, a Blighter needs to defile a relatively small portion of land to get his powers, but could destroy a lot more.

Could a rational Blighter settle for the former? Act like a parasite of nature rather than a deliberate destroyer?

As other people have said, this question amounts to, "Could a blighter reject the core of the class's definition?" It's like asking, "Can a blackguard be good?"

The question is more akin to "Can a Blackguard use evil means and power only as tools to further his own interest, or he must actively seek to cause as much harm as possible?".

Ur-priests are simply divine energy thieves

Yep, I meant that. Can a Blighter be a mere thief of nature energy?

[Crake]

Ok, probably the word I used ( "respect" ) is not what I meant to be.

The point is, a Blighter needs to defile a relatively small portion of land to get his powers, but could destroy a lot more.

Could a rational Blighter settle for the former? Act like a parasite of nature rather than a deliberate destroyer?




The question is more akin to "Can a Blackguard use evil means and power only as tools to further his own interest, or he must actively seek to cause as much harm as possible?".




Yep, I meant that. Can a Blighter be a mere thief of nature energy?

When looked at like that, yeah, definitely. It would be akin to spending $100 on something you can buy for $50, if you view nature as your wallet. That said though, nature is BIG, so unless said blighter is immortal, I couldn't see a particular need to be conservative with the amount of nature you destroy.....

THAT said though.... I don't think you can opt to destroy a smaller portion of nature with deforestation. The size you destroy scales with your level, presumably because you need to feed off a larger portion of nature to fuel your higher spell slots, and since blighters can only deforest a maximum of once per day, and indeed, they MUST do it once per day if they wish to retain their spellcasting, the only time a blighter with your outlined point of view would hold back would be on days that they don't intend to cast any spells, and are happy to wander about without any spells, a very dangerous prospect when you likely have druids hunting you for defiling nature.

So looking at it from that perspective, that's not even an approach you could take if you wanted to. You defile a set amount based on your level daily, if you don't you lose spells, there is no option to deforest more or less.

[Conradine]

A 10th level Blighter must defile 20 feet per level radius around him to get his spells. 200 feet radius means more or less 3 acres destroyed ( 11.304 m2 ).

A fire in California destroys an average of more than 4.000 acres of forest.
That means, even refilling his spells every single day, a Blighter is still causing less than 1 / 1.000 of the damage he could bestow.

Not to mention that conduct is much safer since fire can be seen from huge distance, while a 3 acres hole in the middle of the wilderness is hardly noticeable.

[Kish]

The question is more akin to "Can a Blackguard use evil means and power only as tools to further his own interest, or he must actively seek to cause as much harm as possible?".

Yes, that works. And I'd give the same answer to that. A blackguard is conceptually about being as dedicated to evil as a paladin is to good; a viciously self-absorbed and ruthless heavy-armored-combatant is called "an evil fighter."

Similarly, a blighter might think "this will lead to more damage to the environment in the long run," but the second it becomes true for them to say, "I'm not actually dedicated to damaging the environment, this is just a source of power I've chosen," that's not a blighter.