D&D 5E Advice on replacing druid shapeshifting?

[sunrisekid]

I was curious, because with the spellcasting that rangers get, the idea occurred to me that it might be possible to just merge the two classes, dropping the wildshape, and making druid a third subclass of ranger that focuses on casting spells.

Actually, this approach strikes me as much harder to houserule, though I prefer the vibe. I would be very interested in seeing how someone else comes up with an elegant approach along these lines.

Ironically I think I will probably just ban the nature domain cleric from my games; the class itself doesn't bother me, but the overlap with the druid does.

I’ve always done this. Frankly, the only reason I imagine stuff like this is in the rule books is to provide it for those players with that preference. (My take on the rulebooks is that it is a buffet, take what you like - and fortunately for me my players were all noobs with no sense of other ways of RPG gaming, so no opportunity for vocal disagreement ;-)

The good news is that the Druid's wildshape in 5e isn't very usable in combat … I would replace it with Channel Divinity with the Nature Domain property (whatever it is in the PHB).

This sounds like an easy fix too. If not terribly Druid-thematic as written (if that makes any sense), it at least provides a framework for the player, emphsizing the Druid-fluff while at the game table.

With any luck, none of my players will want to play a Druid before the inevitable expansion book that is sure to follow in a years time.

 

[Andor]

I’m the DM for our group and I prefer to run a grim, sword & sorcery style game. The shapeshifting druid is of a different feel and I’d like to disallow it but still want to keep players happy.

Really? Shapeshifting spell casters are a classic fantasy trope. 4e was an exception, and I have no idea what the 5d Druid spell list looks like, but in earlier editions with shape shifting, weather control, and funky spells like flaming sphere and good berries the Druid made a better Merlin that D&Ds wizard ever did.

For a S&S game I'd be more likely to reskin the druid as a wizard and drop the wizard then to ditch the druid.

But as I say, I don't know if that works in 5e as I haven't seen the spell list.

 

[Agamon]

What does one do about the druid's spellcasting ability if wild shape is too "high magic"?

If I wanted a grittier, low-magic game, I'd just ban all the spellcasting classes and sub-classes. Leave spells for the evil wizards and such.

 

[Sadrik]

I think you turn the class feature into a spell. Make it whatever level you deem appropriate. I don't think you feel that it simply should not exist I think you feel that it is too frequent in its use/utility. This one change would make the druid player scrutinize over his spells and wild shape may simply not make the cut. You could then swap in some class feature in the wild shapes place and the player would then feel like they gained versatility (still have wild shape accessible), and you win because it is not the always functioning magical effect that affects the campaign.

 

[Quartz]

How about using the Channel Divinity class feature to Turn Plants? There are lots of nasty plant species in various sourcebooks and Dragon and Dungeon articles, and for the extra lulz, you could have elves be affected!

 

[DEFCON 1]

Another question for you is whether it's the actually ability to change shape that you don't like (especially at a low level like 2), or is it that it's a "natural" ability of the druid? Because if it's the "natural ability" story of "wildshaping" that is what you don't like for your world (because it's too much like lycanthropy as you said), but the idea of a spellcasting druid isn't much of an issue... you could just change the natural druid ability "wildshape" into 1st level spell called "Wildshape" that the druid automatically gets to prepare in addition to his normal allotment of spells (just like clerics have with their domain spells. All the effects and rules are the same as the ability,,, except that it's a spell (and thus susceptible to countermagics or antimagic fields and such.) Thus, the story of how "Wildshape" is a part of the world is different, even if the mechanics are pretty much the same.

 

[Agamon]

How about using the Channel Divinity class feature to Turn Plants? There are lots of nasty plant species in various sourcebooks and Dragon and Dungeon articles, and for the extra lulz, you could have elves be affected!

Turn Plants...into salad!

At higher level, they turn into slaad.

 

[Gargoyle]

What does one do about the druid's spellcasting ability if wild shape is too "high magic"?

If I wanted a grittier, low-magic game, I'd just ban all the spellcasting classes and sub-classes. Leave spells for the evil wizards and such.

I think when one starts talking in terms of low magic and gritty, or high magic, it gets very subjective. Some people even say you should ban non-humans in such a campaign, others just feel a level cap system works. I wouldn't classify wild shape as any more high magic than anything else, but I can see where different people have very different opinions. One strength of 5e seems to be that it is very hackable, at least I hope it is.

 

[sunrisekid]

What does one do about the druid's spellcasting ability if wild shape is too "high magic"?

If I wanted a grittier, low-magic game, I'd just ban all the spellcasting classes and sub-classes. Leave spells for the evil wizards and such.

You make very good points. However, as the DM I am obliged to compromise on points that my players insist on - classic D&D wizards included, even if that trope runs counter to my Conan-esque nostalgia. While I tend to push hard on wizards-as-decadent-nihilists (that’s my Frazetti-inspired reading of Robert E. Howard) that goes only so far at the table, at least until a player pushes back with an idea that they want to run with. Which I respect because I like my players, but there are some character concepts that I simply can’t allow (eg, Halfling airbender monks, or freelove Druid squirrel-shifters - what can I say, my game is rated R for grown-ups only).

I think you turn the class feature into a spell. Make it whatever level you deem appropriate. I don't think you feel that it simply should not exist I think you feel that it is too frequent in its use/utility.

You catch my drift. Wizards cast Polymorph by level 7, so maybe the Druid does something similar at that level.

How about using the Channel Divinity class feature to Turn Plants? There are lots of nasty plant species in various sourcebooks and Dragon and Dungeon articles, and for the extra lulz, you could have elves be affected!

I seem to recall something from 3E along those lines. Clerics could “turn/command” certain categories of monsters, be it devils, aberrations, or even fey. I can easily imagine a Druid having that sort of influence over fey monsters or the like.

you could just change the natural druid ability "wildshape" into 1st level spell called "Wildshape" that the druid automatically gets to prepare in addition to his normal allotment of spells (just like clerics have with their domain spells. All the effects and rules are the same as the ability,,, except that it's a spell (and thus susceptible to countermagics or antimagic fields and such.)

This also makes for an easy fix, without clearly penalizing the player for being subjected to my arbitrary gaming preferences. (They might still be penalilzed but not obviously so.)

To be clear, I’m very happy with 5E so far and really appreciate everyone's feedback. But as with every edition, I mold the rules to better reflect the sort of game I like to play.

 

[Gargoyle]

Actually, this approach strikes me as much harder to houserule, though I prefer the vibe. I would be very interested in seeing how someone else comes up with an elegant approach along these lines.

I'll have a go at it. I think domain type spells are the way to go to add a spellcasting subclass.

Taking inspiration from the Nature cleric, I think for a Ranger with the Druid archetype, creating a druid domain spells list (modified to start at ranger level 3) would be easy to add to the ranger; you could model it after the Nature domain or even add to that spell list from the druid list. And then you could pick and choose what other abilities from the druid class's Circle of the Land abilities to give them at 3rd, 7th, 11th and 15th level, the levels that rangers get archetype abilities. I would just plug in 3rd: Bonus Cantrip, 7th: Natural Recovery (using ranger level), 11th: Nature's Ward, and 15th: Nature's Sanctuary, plus give them Circle Spells. Between the circle spells, domain spells, the druid cantrips and natural recovery, they would be decent casters, but never in a league with those who can cast higher level spells, which may be what you're going for.