D&D General Nature Clerics vs. Druids?

[Hexmage-EN]

Druids (and other Primal power source classes) in 4E had a pantheon of spirits they revered, ranging from local spirits of an area to Great Elders. I personally much prefer the idea of nature clerics being servants of a nature deity while druids revere a large number of spirits that could vary by location and what spell they're casting.

A few primal spirit examples:

• Black Land. Spirit of earth and it's capacity to nourish plants.
• Everflame. Spirit of wildfire as a source of destruction and renewal.
• Fate Weaver. Spirit of prophecy.
• Hunter of Winter. Spirit of the frozen wild.
• Primal Beast. A shapeshifting entity that embodies the wild shape ability.
• Grey Roarer. Spirit of the howling wind.
• World Serpent. Spirit of protection against extraplanar threats.

There were a lot more. Dark Sun 4E had unique ones, as well.

If you really want to you could flavor a druid in 5E as calling on spirits as they cast spells, as well as have local spirits manifest in various forms to speak to druids (intelligent beasts, fey, elementals, living druid spells, etc).

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Druids care about the Cycle, wherever it appears, however it manifests. They work to keep the wheel turning. It may turn in new directions with time; it may lurch or slow, but with Druid efforts it keeps turning nonetheless. The Cycle is impersonal; it doesn't exist the way Ioun or Bahamut do, as entities linked to but distinct from the concepts they embody. The Cycle may have proxies and representatives, such as ancestor spirits. It may greatly empower specific representatives, such as the spirit of an ancient forest or a great mountain. But ultimately, these things are either merely emblems that let us understand the greater, undifferentiated Nature, or transitory concentrations of power, like the crest of a wave or the flash of lightning. Becoming too attached to any individual manifestation or emblem prevents real understanding of the thing, the Cycle, being manifested or symbolized.

Clerics care about a Doctrine. It may be (usually is) the will of a deity or set of deities, or it may be personal faith. Either way, there is some set of specific values that the Cleric holds, which they do more than espouse (any old priest or devout person can do that). They do the terribly hard work of understanding that doctrine, and supporting others who follow it. They are shepherds and teachers.

And yes, this does mean that there's going to be a little similarity between "Cleric of Nature" (who, implicitly, holds nature-related values) and "Druid," but it's the reason and focus of their interests that differs. A Cleric of Nature has "faith in" Nature, so to speak, while a Druid need not have any faith per se but instead simply "knows" that the maintenance of Nature's continual self-renewal is necessary for whatever reason. It's the difference between knowing that loving relationships are important and need to be maintained even at personal cost, and believing that Love is a divine force that shapes existence. Both will likely engage in similar behavior (with sufficient abstraction), but the reason and intent are different.

(Two other comparisons are relevant here: Cleric vs Paladin, and Druid vs Shaman. Paladins are crusaders and standard-bearers, and tend more toward evangelism and rallying the faithful rather than ritualism and teaching the faithful. Shamans do focus on all those "transitory" manifestations and emblems, seeing the vast undifferentiated Nature as too vast, too undifferentiated, instead linking their territory and allies/people to the meaningful representations Nature provides. As WoW shamans put it, "All that is, is alive." These four distinctions--Paladin, Cleric, Druid, Shaman--all matter in the Arabian Nights style Dungeon World game I run, though the details are a bit more specific than the above.)

 

[Chaosmancer]

Power sources need to die in a fire.

A wizard fire example could have multiple power sources even if they're an arcane caster.

You don't need an arcane power source as such.

Same applies to clerics and Druids. Depends on the world.

You seem to be thinking of this too narrowly. Let me take a sorcerer for a second. Sorcerers use the Arcane Power Source.

BUT WAIT! What about Divine Soul Sorcerers? Does this mean all power sources are---

No, Divine Soul Sorcerers use the Divine Power Source. There is no need to go on a huge rant that Some sorcerers use different power sources, of course they do. And you could say that a Storm Soul Sorcerer is actually using a Primal power source.

But, what Primal does is it gives us a place for Druids, Rangers, Barbarians and other classes that did not fit well into Arcane or Divine. It tells us that the reason Druids aren't clerics, is because they are drawing on an entirely different source of power than a divine entity like a god.

Does it depend on the world? Yes, of course it does. Maybe wizards are divine, because they are empowered by the God of Magic.

But, actually having a categorical difference instead of "divine magic, but not like a clerics divine magic, it is different" is incredibly helpful.

 

[Zardnaar]

You seem to be thinking of this too narrowly. Let me take a sorcerer for a second. Sorcerers use the Arcane Power Source.

BUT WAIT! What about Divine Soul Sorcerers? Does this mean all power sources are---

No, Divine Soul Sorcerers use the Divine Power Source. There is no need to go on a huge rant that Some sorcerers use different power sources, of course they do. And you could say that a Storm Soul Sorcerer is actually using a Primal power source.

But, what Primal does is it gives us a place for Druids, Rangers, Barbarians and other classes that did not fit well into Arcane or Divine. It tells us that the reason Druids aren't clerics, is because they are drawing on an entirely different source of power than a divine entity like a god.

Does it depend on the world? Yes, of course it does. Maybe wizards are divine, because they are empowered by the God of Magic.

But, actually having a categorical difference instead of "divine magic, but not like a clerics divine magic, it is different" is incredibly helpful.

Problem was in 4E they decide to design a boring redundent class to make use of said power source.

The Sorcerer is an arcane caster but it's power can come from wherever.

Wizards anything not divine is probably fine and even that's debatable.

Barbarians don't need a power source. They're either tough or live in a magical world.

Druids could be divine, primal, spirit, whatever doesn't matter to much although it might on some world's.

 

[cbwjm]

My problem with the power sources in 4e was that each class only had a single power source. There were a few cleric and paladin powers that I recall thinking should have just been martial.

 

[Mecheon]

Barbarians don't need a power source. They're either tough or live in a magical world.

Barbarians being tied into that whole power source side of thing makes them stand out more and less of 'why aren't these just a sub-group of fighter?'

 

[Shiroiken]

I've generally viewed Nature Clerics as those focused on agriculture, fishing, logging, and other civilized activities. Druids, however, are focused on nature in the wild, untamed by civilization. Both have a great respect for nature, but are opposite sides of the same coin.

I'm currently playing a dwarf nature cleric. He grew up as a farmer for the clan, living near the surface where he could tend to the crops. This meant his family was of low caste, as while dwarves should understand the necessity of agriculture (especially for turning it into alcohol), they prefer to ignore it unless required.

 

[Minigiant]

Barbarians being tied into that whole power source side of thing makes them stand out more and less of 'why aren't these just a sub-group of fighter?'

Not really. Barbarians have their own narrative niche. Barbarians were tied to a power source because they were typecasted as berserkers and berserker is a shallow archetype if you don't add magic. The problem persists in 5e where every barbarian after Berserker rages magic out their anger skin.

Power sources were great. The issue was that every preessentials class was single power source with no cross powers.

 

[Aldarc]

4E had the "bright" idea of power sources. Dumbest idea ever.

Nah. Far far from the dumbest. If anything, it was a great idea that helped bring much-needed conceptual clarity to the classes.

It's why they made silly choices in 4E Darksun.

It's why they made great choices in 4E Darksun that outshone the original 2E setting.

Power sources need to die in a fire.

Power sources were great for tying the classes into the core concepts, themes, and magic of the D&D universe, and they should be brought back.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Well here you see the issue with mixing what is clearly two classes built from one 1) Catholic Crusader Orders and 2) Pre-Christian Pagan Celtic Priests, blurring the boundaries between them (ie, by awkwardly shoe-horning the first into worshipping pagan pantheons without removing any of the Catholic trappings), and then wondering why they start to tread on each other's toes.