D&D General Druid vs. Paladin - March Madness 2024 - Final Round!

[GuardianLurker]

Fair enough. Having played a 3.5 Artificer under a lenient, power-gamer GM, I can tell you that even with the brakes off, it takes careful preparation to get anywhere close to 100% coverage. (And boy did my character eat up gold.) So I'm familiar with the trade-offs for problem solving.

For a Wizard, one of their key challenges is being able to have the spells available when they're needed. It's not just having the spells in your spellbook, which can be a big enough challenge. It's being able to cast them when needed. None of the solutions for swapping spells is anything that can be done in combat - and that assumes you have a slot open. Most of a Wizard's problem solving will come from a stock of scrolls and wands with those useful-when-needed spells. Which require both prep time, and resources.

Your meta-point is still valid though. I will say as a counter-point is that it's extremely hard to both problem-solve for combat and non-combat situations in D&D. My artificer certainly didn't quite manage, and I can't imagine than any character in a less forgiving environment would come closer.

 

[Tonguez]

Fair enough. Having played a 3.5 Artificer under a lenient, power-gamer GM, I can tell you that even with the brakes off, it takes careful preparation to get anywhere close to 100% coverage. (And boy did my character eat up gold.) So I'm familiar with the trade-offs for problem solving.

For a Wizard, one of their key challenges is being able to have the spells available when they're needed. It's not just having the spells in your spellbook, which can be a big enough challenge. It's being able to cast them when needed. None of the solutions for swapping spells is anything that can be done in combat - and that assumes you have a slot open. Most of a Wizard's problem solving will come from a stock of scrolls and wands with those useful-when-needed spells. Which require both prep time, and resources.

Your meta-point is still valid though. I will say as a counter-point is that it's extremely hard to both problem-solve for combat and non-combat situations in D&D. My artificer certainly didn't quite manage, and I can't imagine than any character in a less forgiving environment would come closer.

That sounds like a good thing, a Wizard shouldnt be problem solving in both combat and non-combat and having them reliant on resources and planning (and luck) is the trade off

 

[CleverNickName]

That sounds like a good thing, a Wizard shouldnt be problem solver in combat and non-combat too and having them reliant on resources and planning (and luck) is the trade off

Agreed. This is an important design consideration for the wizard.

Ritual Casting really helps. Many of the wizard's utility spells (alarm, identify, detect magic, Leomund's Tiny Hut, water breathing) can be cast without spending a spell slot. They still have to select and prepare those spells to have them available for ritual casting, though, and that's where scrolls come in.

My players figured out a while ago (back in 3rd Edition) that scrolls and potions are the answer to the "oh no I don't have that spell prepared!" problem. A well-prepared group of adventurers will have a small stash of utility scrolls for things they can't/don't prepare everyday...spells like the ones above, but also knock, pass without trace, rope trick, and revivify. Spells you don't need every day, ritual or not.

 

[CreamCloud0]

For a poll on druid vs paladin this thread has already diverged to some interesting topics already

 

[Argyle King]

This match up prompted some thoughts for me.

I like Oath of the Ancients and the general vibe of a paladin to the "old gods" or primal forces.

Is there a way to take a few more steps on that path?

My initial thought was to swap something out of the paladin in exchange for the Totem barbarian's animal-related abilities.

I then started to think of spells which would allow partial shape-shifting or calling upon a spirit animal. So, instead of shifting into a bear, perhaps you invoke the spirit of the bear and enter a fighting stance that grants various bonuses based upon a particular animal. Mechanically, this might take the form of a Concentration spell that is loosely based on Enhance Ability.

Bear Stance would grant Paladin Level+CHA temp HP; advantage on Con checks for the paladin and adjacent allies, and.... maybe something else for as long as the paladin concentrates (up to Cha Modifier Hours). The temp HP do not regenerate, but they may be 'healed' as long as the stance is in effect.

Just a rough idea.

What would you swap out of the normal Paladin package for any of this?

 

[DrJawaPhD]

My group has a fighter, a cleric, and a rogue in it. So, yeah, people do play those.

I'm curious whether your group is mainly folks who started playing DnD long ago, that would fit my stereotype prediction that no one under 30 has every played a rogue, cleric, or wizard. Surely there are exceptions though so who knows

 

[ezo]

I'm curious whether your group is mainly folks who started playing DnD long ago, that would fit my stereotype prediction that no one under 30 has every played a rogue, cleric, or wizard. Surely there are exceptions though so who knows

In my two groups (15 people), two are 40+, two are in their early 30's, and 11 are in their early to mid 20's.

Of the CFRW classes, all have been played multiple times by the players in the 20's. Now, they aren't any more or less "popular" than any of the other eight classes in the PHB. IME, I think Bard is probably the least played class I've actually seen played.

 

[Nikosandros]

Ritual Casting really helps. Many of the wizard's utility spells (alarm, identify, detect magic, Leomund's Tiny Hut, water breathing) can be cast without spending a spell slot. They still have to select and prepare those spells to have them available for ritual casting, though, and that's where scrolls come in.

For wizards it is enough to have the spell in the spellbook.

My players figured out a while ago (back in 3rd Edition) that scrolls and potions are the answer to the "oh no I don't have that spell prepared!" problem. A well-prepared group of adventurers will have a small stash of utility scrolls for things they can't/don't prepare everyday...spells like the ones above, but also knock, pass without trace, rope trick, and revivify. Spells you don't need every day, ritual or not.

Yes, scrolls can be great for all those spells that you normally don't need but it is still great to have available.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Agreed. This is an important design consideration for the wizard.

Ritual Casting really helps. Many of the wizard's utility spells (alarm, identify, detect magic, Leomund's Tiny Hut, water breathing) can be cast without spending a spell slot. They still have to select and prepare those spells to have them available for ritual casting, though, and that's where scrolls come in.

My players figured out a while ago (back in 3rd Edition) that scrolls and potions are the answer to the "oh no I don't have that spell prepared!" problem. A well-prepared group of adventurers will have a small stash of utility scrolls for things they can't/don't prepare everyday...spells like the ones above, but also knock, pass without trace, rope trick, and revivify. Spells you don't need every day, ritual or not.

Though wouldn't it be nice if there were a sort of...separation? Like, if the Wizard did not have to sacrifice "can participate in the single most commonly-used and rule-intensive portion of the game" in order to fulfill its core mechanical conceit, the "I am the utility-belt woman with MacGuyver magic" part?

Say, for example, if rituals were separated from the spell slot system. Obviously they'd still need some limiters, but we could do that easily--they cost money instead. Wizards, being the supreme ritual casters by nature, would have a class feature that lets them ignore some of these costs, call them "ritual components" perhaps. Not like, "can cast any ritual you want at any time for free always," but enough cheap/free rituals that it truly feels like they're pulling out powerful Batman tricks.

I'm sure this is all crazy talk though. No D&D game could ever work that way.

 

[ichabod]

I'm curious whether your group is mainly folks who started playing DnD long ago, that would fit my stereotype prediction that no one under 30 has every played a rogue, cleric, or wizard. Surely there are exceptions though so who knows

Nah, they're younger people, 13 to 20s or 30s, who are new to D&D with this edition. There's another guy who is currently playing a paladin who has played another fighter in a previous campaign, and the woman playing the cleric played a rogue in that campaign. The only older guy I've had in that group played a barbarian.