D&D 5E Druid Spellcasting

[BobTheNob]

Ok, so looking at the Druid and particularly comparing him to the mage.

Druid in Dndn appears to be very caster oriented. No enhanced martial capability (poor to hit, do "deadly dice") but compared to the mage has some armor options, better weapon options and (slightly) better HP. So a very minor edge.

Does get shapechanging, which if you choose moon is quite potent, but if you dont your spell casting is even better. This is all countered by the mages schools. Maybe even-stevens, but I still think the druid has a slight one-up again.

Then Spells. Druid can pick ANY from available druid spell list, Mage has a limited spell book. Major win for the druid!

So, since the mage has given up SO much for the power of the spells he has access to, those spells are simply going to be significantly better right?

Then I read the spell list, particularly focusing on the 4th level list. The mage had 1 spell which the druid didnt : dimension door. Now I know there is plenty more to it than this one case, and plenty of spells that the mage has which the druid doesnt in other levels, but the same is true in reverse as well. I just read the druid lists and think to myself that a druid is great. (Which is an endorsement of the druid, I think its awesome compared to the 3.x)

Now they are different classes and would play differently, but ultimately, the mage gives up all other advantages just to have spells, and so is defined by his spells more than any other casters. I cant help but think that he should have access to shared spells at an earlier level that other classes.

For instance, Wall of fire. 4th level for for mage but 5th for druid?

Perfectly willing to be flamed (ironic wording!) as I havent played this playpacket and everything herein is speculative, but I was curious to see how yall felt on this.

 

[1of3]

For instance, Wall of fire. 4th level for for mage but 5th for druid?

That way lies madness. Id rather increase the automatic spells known per level for the wizard back to 2.

 

[Sage Genesis]

Druid in Dndn appears to be very caster oriented. No enhanced martial capability (poor to hit, do "deadly dice")

I urge you to take a look at the Dire beast forms that Moon Druids can get.

 

[GX.Sigma]

When you compare the Wizard to other spellcasters, I think the Wizard's edge should be:

• Has access to more spells
• Has access to spells that are more powerful
• Has access to spells that are more interesting

I think the Wizard spell list should contain every spell unless there's a good reason for it not to (Wizards shouldn't heal or provide buffs, but there's no reason a Wizard shouldn't be able to create a wall of stone).

 

[Sage Genesis]

Wizards shouldn't heal or provide buffs

Why?

I mean, I can sort of get the argument against healing "because that's how it always was", weak and technically inaccurate as it may be. But no buffs? What about Haste, (Bull's) Strength, and cleverly abused Polymorph spells?

 

[Sunseeker]

When you compare the Wizard to other spellcasters, I think the Wizard's edge should be:

• Has access to more spells
• Has access to spells that are more powerful
• Has access to spells that are more interesting

I think the Wizard spell list should contain every spell unless there's a good reason for it not to (Wizards shouldn't heal or provide buffs, but there's no reason a Wizard shouldn't be able to create a wall of stone).

But where's the drawback? I see: More spells. More powerful. More interesting(presumably more effects). This has traditionally been the path of the quadratic wizard which lead to casters dominating older editions of D&D. The drawbacks of "lightly armored" and "low HP" have never been taken seriously.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Why?

I mean, I can sort of get the argument against healing "because that's how it always was", weak and technically inaccurate as it may be. But no buffs? What about Haste, (Bull's) Strength, and cleverly abused Polymorph spells?

Good point. I was thinking about spells like bless, prayer, aid, etc.

But where's the drawback? I see: More spells. More powerful. More interesting(presumably more effects). This has traditionally been the path of the quadratic wizard which lead to casters dominating older editions of D&D. The drawbacks of "lightly armored" and "low HP" have never been taken seriously.

I mean compared to other casters (like Druids). Druids can cast spells and wild shape. Clerics can heal, channel divinity, and fight, but have more limited access to spell effects. Wizards only have spells, so they should be the best at spells.

 

[Sage Genesis]

I mean compared to other casters (like Druids). Druids can cast spells and wild shape. Clerics can heal, channel divinity, and fight, but have more limited access to spell effects. Wizards only have spells, so they should be the best at spells.

I think WotC sort of agrees with you but decided to tackle it a different way. Currently in 5e, Wizards get to choose a specific type of caster they want to be. This can give them resistances, higher saving throw DCs, and so on. Mind you, it's still a far cry from what Clerics and Druids get, but I think Wizards won't get better spells as such, I think they'll just get extra toys on top of their spells just like the rest does.

 

[gyor]

Wizards have spells and wizard tradition, illusionists can detect invisible creatures for example (which more rightly belong to the divanation school).

This will no doubt expand wider and weirder as they move beyond spell schools like evocation to stuff like War Wizards, Shiar, Beguilers and odder stuff.

 

[BobTheNob]

I urge you to take a look at the Dire beast forms that Moon Druids can get.

Absolutely granted. I was just talking about the fact that martial capability wasnt built in in a raw form as it was for cleric.