Wo only need the druid class!

[Prickly]

First of all I think they should get rid of "power sources". It's really too much of a gamist concept that at first look seems to have interesting potential, but after a while it forces the designers to feel gaps that don't need to be filled. Just identify strong character archetypes and make one class each, then the "source" of its power can and should be explained ad-hoc.



I say just forget about feeble concepts and focus on designing good traditional classes. Something like the Druid is definitely needed in the first PHB, while a Shaman is good for either an early supplement if they can make it fit a large enough array of concepts, from native american inspired shaman to oriental inspired shaman to african inspired shaman etc, or failing that then make multiple versions of it in different suitable campaign settings, but stuff like Warden and Seeker should really get the least priority.

Actually the concept of power sources existed more for story purposes than anything else.

The idea of the primal power source came from the developers asking the questions:
"What is nature magic? Why isn't the druid just a nature cleric?"

The answer the got and the story created around those questions resulted in the primal power source.

The reason the druid was split into the warden, shaman and druid classes is that the classic druid is a rather unfocused class that had a lot of different ablities (combat, spellcasting, shapechange, pet companion, animal summoning).
Sure they were there for a reason, but the designers tried to give the class more focus.

Now, really they should have been subclasses of the druid that shared some abilities (as the runepriest and invoker should have been cleric subclasses) but they only latched onto the idea of subclasses much later. mores the pity.

 

[dnlas]

I think it would be a good idea if the shapechanging and animal companion aspects of the druid would be more tied to the exploration and roleplay pillars of the game instead of being a combat thing.

A druid could turn into a mouse to sneak into enemy camps or a eagle to get the lay of the land.

I agree with that. maybe druid can only shapechanging 1~2 form(in many size). the power is from the spirit of animal they are familiar with.

Battle still a important things for druid. unlike bard, druid is not good at diplomacy(in PF and 4E), and they have things to protect (woods Nature world-balance etc.)

 

[Neonchameleon]

First of all I think they should get rid of "power sources". It's really too much of a gamist concept that at first look seems to have interesting potential, but after a while it forces the designers to feel gaps that don't need to be filled.
...
but stuff like Warden and Seeker should really get the least priority.

The Seeker isn't even a "fill in the gaps" class. We already had a primal controller (the Druid). Power sources are mostly narrative - and there's never been a purely martial controller, whereas there were two martial strikers in the PHB.

Now the Warden doesn't need to be that separate from the Primal Barbarian I'll grant. Although you might want to avoid Raging Wardens or Form Of Winter's Herald on a Barbarian for balance reasons. Conceptualy making a defender-barbarian is where the warden fits (and with the Shaman and the Druid being somewhere else).

 

[Neonchameleon]

Aside from playtesting DDN, i've only played 4e. 4e had 5 classes that use the primal power source, but with the way DDN looks to be going, we only need to keep the druid as a class. Just give the druids nature magic and shapeshifting and i think they would be different from anyother class out there.

The shaman could be like the theme "Magic user" and "Acolyte" for primal casters, eventually leading to the spirt stuff (like a spirit companion and talking with nature kind of thing)

Barbarian just needs to be a specialty. They could put the barbarian rage in there, along with things along the lines of the battle rager they made with Pennyarcade and PvP.

And you've just crippled the 4e Barbarian, splitting him in half. The 4e Barbarian could be a martial rager quite happily. But there were two other major league possibilities; the spirit-infused warrior who augmented himself by inviting powers beyond himself to infuse his body. And the warrior who was so metal that when he called to the heavens they answered with thunder and lightning.

The second one of these absolutley needs to be a class, although it can encompass the Barbarian and the Warden. it is absolutely primal. And the third can join with this class.

Also the 3.X Druid needs splitting. You have the nature-mage (very distinct from cleric or wizard - works with nature but commands rather than is a supplicant). And you have the shapeshifter. Both of these are worth a class in their own right.

Seekers......people who use hunting spirirts to make them better hunters. Throw that into the ranger class as an option to pick from. We dont need a seeker theme for sure

Agreed. Even most 4e fans think the seeker was a mistake (and, I believe, a refugee from the Ki source).

So we need at a minimum:

Druid/Shaman working with nature and spirits
Druid/Shapeshifter
Spirit Warrior (with most of the warden and half the barbarian)

And we've still lost the single guardian spirit guy from the shaman, and the Metal Barbarian. And part of the ranger.

 

[triqui]

I don't know what "primal" is. What is primal? Why does it need to be separate from divine?.

Because it doesnt come from a god

 

[triqui]

Then the DM is running the game poorly if they do not enforce that the player have that information ahead of time.

Then the gane stalls while the druid player goes through a ton of photocopied animals from the MM. Which is only slightly faster.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Further more it should be very hard to replace a dead animal companion. They don't just magically appear for a few rounds then go away they should be with the druid 24/7 and require feeding cleaning and should be cause for concern for the normal people of the world.

I really hate what they did to the druid in 3e and fervently pray that it doesn't happen again. I really think the druid should treat his animal companions like his children not as expendable cannon fodder.

I think the difficulty in replacing an animal should be adjudicated by the GM because the way the animal companion is treated is specific to the player, not the system.

 

[Gothikaiju]

Aside from playtesting DDN, i've only played 4e. 4e had 5 classes that use the primal power source, but with the way DDN looks to be going, we only need to keep the druid as a class. Just give the druids nature magic and shapeshifting and i think they would be different from anyother class out there.

The shaman could be like the theme "Magic user" and "Acolyte" for primal casters, eventually leading to the spirt stuff (like a spirit companion and talking with nature kind of thing)

Barbarian just needs to be a specialty. They could put the barbarian rage in there, along with things along the lines of the battle rager they made with Pennyarcade and PvP.

The warden would be a hard one (or atleast i can think of what to do with them.)

Although the ranger class isn't a "Primal" class i think we need them in DDN as their own class. Make them choice between melee and archery and give them some nature magic from the druid class. And dont forget the beast animal.

Seekers......people who use hunting spirirts to make them better hunters. Throw that into the ranger class as an option to pick from. We dont need a seeker theme for sure

Make the Warden a sub-class (tradition, scheme whatever) of Druid that removes Wild Shape/Animal Companion, and gives greater weapon proficiency, increased hit points/dice and a slight bonus to AC. Change all area affect spells to originating with (or adjacent to) the Warden and range spells to touch attacks ( or limit the warden to such damaging spells). Change buffs/heals to self-only.

This would duplicate, IMO, much of the flavor and play of a 4E Warden-- drawing on the power of Nature to both hinder enemies around the Warden, and to endure said enemies aggression.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I'll just say it again...

Druids -> should be 4e Druids, Shamans, and Wardens redone as a singular 5e class and just forget all the sub-class stuff. Just mold those three together and create a new Druid class from it.

One idea for a better Druid spells list would be to maybe convert some of the 4e Primal Powers of the 3 classes above and make them 5e Druid spells. Give the Druid completely different spells than the Cleric.

 

[Dausuul]

I think the druid should have a limited set of wild shape forms. You start out with a single alternate shape, and you can learn more over time, but you never get beyond maybe 3-5 options. It provides a nice way for individual druids to define themselves (when you need to fight, are you a tiger, or are you a bear?), and it cuts way down on the "analysis paralysis" effect.

First of all I think they should get rid of "power sources". It's really too much of a gamist concept that at first look seems to have interesting potential, but after a while it forces the designers to feel gaps that don't need to be filled. Just identify strong character archetypes and make one class each, then the "source" of its power can and should be explained ad-hoc.

A-freaking-men. The power sources were an interesting idea, but they got way too caught up in ticking all the boxes. Build to an archetype, not a power source.