Druids are not Hippies!

Funeris

First Post
Rackhir said:
Nature conservation has come about because we have the power now to damage and destroy the natural enviroment, to the point at which we can't survive in it. I have no problem envisioning a similar situation and attitude arising in a magically powered society. The old D&D setting Dark Sun, had magic basically being powered by drawing life from the natural enviroment. So you had casters separated into two groups Wasters (?) who drew on the life force reducing places to deserts and Preservers who tried to minimize or avoid damage to the enviroment from casting spells.

The tree hugging druid is only "6 Minutes Old" if you play them that way. Bad roleplaying and characterization are that however you go about justifying them.

Damn skippy.

If a druid is concerned with every life, every plant, every animal...than she should show concern over the welfare of any goblin as well. To not do so, qualifies as bad roleplaying and characterization.

Hippie druids are fine. Enigmatic druids are also fine. Megalomaniacal druids are also quite acceptable. Druids can wear any shade of personality, just as can a modern individual.

As long as the character is portrayed properly, all options are valid and desired. Variety is the spice of life, after all. If however the character falls into the trap of hypocricy, that may be more a fault of the player than the class or the stereotypical hippie druid.

Perhaps your problem doesn't lie with the idea of the hippie druid but the people you've seen or encountered playing said archetype?

~Fune
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Crothian

First Post
Funeris said:
If a druid is concerned with every life, every plant, every animal...than she should show concern over the welfare of any goblin as well. To not do so, qualifies as bad roleplaying and characterization.

Not if they are acting against each other. Goblins burn the forest and kill the animals. So, let the druid take them out and take out anything else that doesn't play nice with nature. Druids are not palaidns concerned with protecting all life, they are the protectors of nature.
 

Henry

Autoexreginated
I don't see a problem with a druid portrayed either way, because both are valid with fun to be had by all. In addition, I prefer some of the druidic sects in the Eberron Campaign; it's the first time I've seen a sourcebook devote attention to different druidic philosophies (though there's probably a d20 product out there I've missed):

The Ashbound: These are a more fantasy-ized "Hippy" druid than the stereotype. They consider any settlements larger than small communes to be an affront to the world, and their methods range from gently trying to educate civilized groups, to full-scale eco-terrorism.

The Children of Winter: These guys and gals see the current world as a "corrupt veil", with a glorious rebirth of nature just around the corner once this current world dies out. Their goal is to help it along a bit, and make it come early by exposing this world to rot and ruination as quickly as possible.

The Greenwardens:They are typical D&D druids, who try to help civilization and nature strike a balance. They're out there teaching people the proper way to gather firewood, how to rotate crops, relocating or killing large predators, etc. etc.

The Gatekeepers: These guys are concerned with aberrations and demons that plague the natural world. If it's an aberration, it's gotta go. Humans are natural, too, but a beholder is definitely not one of the gods' creatrues. :)

These give a whole new light to the eternal struggle of "how Green is my Druid?"
 

Funeris

First Post
Well, I suppose we have to now break the hippie druid up into different archetypal camps.

"The Anti-violence hippie druid" - Would not confront the Goblins physically at first. Would confront the Goblins diplomatically first...and barring suitable negotiations would ask for outside help....direct a party of lawful humanoids toward the rapists/murderers/maimers of humans/animals etc. After all, Goblins are living creatures, a part of nature...and even they have a right to life.

"The Protector of the Green hippie druid" - Sees humanity (and humanoid) life as a plague. Strike first, ask questions never. For the greater good (nature's protection), all threats must be dealt with quickly. This would be your extremist.

"Middle-of-the-Road hippie druid" - Seeks a diplomatic solution if possible, if not lays down the smack.

If you're going to run goblins as always aligned evilly (and I do not) then I would agree with your assessment that the goblins need to be smacked down.

But if you're playing the stereotypical "dope smoking, bunny loving, tree hugging hippie" that respects all life...well Goblins are a form of life and more importantly an aspect of nature. They may represent the "evil" (at least in western philosophy's view) aspect of existence...such as death and destruction, but these are necessary evils...destruction and death opens the way for new creation and new life. Hippie druids would know this.

But then I'm an ambiguous-alignment type of guy.

~Fune
 

Just to watch the DM turn an new shade of purple....

I've been tempted to build a druid and use his wildshape to turn into a hippopotamus.

That way when I get the munchies from my 'Herbal Relaxatives'.

I'm a "Hungry Hungry Hippie Hippo".

I'll even use dye to paint myself red & eat little white rice balls all day.

Figure the character will die from lightning bolt from the sky.
 


WayneLigon

Adventurer
Getting pretty sick and tired of hearing the same old 'modern idea' chestnut being trotted out once again. Who cares if it's a somewhat mix of modern ideas? In our world, we didn't have magic, and we didn't have things like Divine personifications of the Green coming to people and telling them 'It hurts when you do this, and here's how you can make it better for the both of us'. The reason we in this world didn't do it earlier was that we were ignorant of such things; we didn't have nature priests that could cast a spell and find out what the local ecosystem/spirits wanted to do.

The general take on Druids I use is this:

NG: They serve Nature. Man is a part of nature, as are his crops and fields. They actually work with farmers and orchard growers to make sure they use proper techniques that don't erode the soil unduly and show them how to safely deal with large amounts of concentrated animal waste. They bless the crops and animals, making sure they are healthy and strong. (This also puts them in good graces with the farmers; the farmers are more likely to listen to someone who ups the weight on his cattle, and do the extra work that the druid wants to see done).

They don't much like cities. Cities produce too much waste for the local ecosystem to absorb. They try to deal with it, by encouraging the city elders to spring for some means of dealing with the waste.

They try to curb roads being built where none are needed, and try to restrict building where it isn't needed. They try to make sure wildfires don't go out of control (since some fire is good for a forest), that too many of one type of animal doesn't dominate, etc; they are like a hand on the brakes, making sure everything rolls along at a smooth pace.

TN: These are the guys you have to watch out for. These druids don't much like intelligent creatures at all, at least the tool-using ones that shape nature to their desires rather than being shaped by it, and even the humans among them don't have a very human mindset. They are much more likely not to be human or humanoid themselves. They view any creature that tries to 'tame' nature with a distant disdain; they dislike humans and goblins alike. Elves they can deal with, since elves always take great care to built unobtrusive structures that blend in with nature, and show great reverence for it. Elves limiit their own numbers and don't multiply all out of control like the younger races. Halflings, too, they can usually get along with, as halflings move around a lot and take care not to leave a permanent mark on the area. But the elves and halflings still respect and fear them, because these druids aren't anyone's friend in much the same way that a thunderstorm or pit viper isn't anyones friend but can be dealt with if you are knowledgeable and lucky and willing to respect it.

They liked human better when they were cave dwelling hunter-gatherers and most TN druids want to see people not go past that stage. Farmers and folk near a druidic wood half-appreciate and half-fear the druids. They gather only fallen wood for fires, or do without; they farm in patches, rather than in furrows; they keep only a few animals, and those roam as they wish. Any meat they get, they have to hunt rather than raise. If they become too numerous, they send people away because they know if they do not, that a druid elder will come and cull the village down to a manageable size, like you do with any herd. These are your bloody-megalith-by-moonlight types. Hippies with huge scythes and savage wolverine companions.

I haven't worked out a great deal on evil druids. I usually see them as cut off from the divine power of nature itself and having turned to an evil forest-aspected spirit or minor god, or a spirit of disease and blight that is nature denied, or nature corrupted. There are not a lot of these at all, and they are hunted like dogs by both other druidic factions.
 
Last edited:


VirgilCaine

First Post
Grover Cleaveland said:
Of course druids aren't hippies. Hippies are far too modern a concept.

Druids are beatniks!

(Some are flappers).

"Babyface Nelson, perforate him!"

*Babyface opens up with the BAR*


Personally, I'm sick of it too. Good to see I'm not alone.

Personally:
NG: Humanocentric druid--don't chop all the trees down, idiot, it takes decades for them to grow back.
TN: Don't chop so many trees down, or else...
LN: It is not my place to question the judgement of nature.
CN: So what? The moon is pretty.
NE: Die evil loggers!


They try to curb roads being built where none are needed, and try to restrict building where it isn't needed.

How is this even going to happen very often without the labor-saving technologies of today?
If it takes lots of sweat and toil and such to move rock and timber and such to build roads and buildings, wouldn't everything built be needed (or at least planned for it to be used)?
 
Last edited:

Kesh

First Post
I've met at least one GM who says that anyone who plays a druid as anything but a violent eco-terrorist isn't playing the class right. o.o
 

Remove ads

Top