A Gentleperson's Wager: Druids in the PHB1

Will Druids be in PHB1?



log in or register to remove this ad

the_myth said:
I've seen other people suggest this, but has anyone else considered some of the Druid and Bard being folded together?
that would be damn sexy i tell you. I summon the forces of nature with my flute or lute. That would be awesome.

Nifft said:
I think they will technically exist in the PHB, but I don't think they'll be in a format we recognize as a distinct 20-level Core class. IMHO they'll be either a PrC, or a Talent tree based off of whatever Cleric is called. :)

Cheers, -- N
I wouldn't mind if this was the case, as long as it is an option from level one, and is strongly potent with nature. Domains don't really make good druid substitutes in my opinion.
 
Last edited:

I really really hope that whenever they show up they'll be designed as controllers rather than leaders, and with sharply curtailed shapeshifting abilities. I want so badly to have a spellcaster-type class that turns the environment against its foes in a druid-themed way.
 


I got a pretty strong hunch they won't be there. The only place they've been mentioned so far, as near as I can tell is in that last planar article. And they sounded more like monsters than anything else.

Also, as I've said before, the theme with 4E seems to be the simplification/removal of "special-case" rule-sets. 3.X druids seem to qualify as a class full of said things.
 

I wish they are in the PHB1, but I guess they aren't.

edit: Also I think it's not very sensible to wish they drop they druid only for the motivation that "they were too strong in 3e", since obviously the balance can be completely changed now.
 


the_myth said:
I've seen other people suggest this, but has anyone else considered some of the Druid and Bard being folded together?

I can't see that at all. Although I've heard people argue that 'real' druids had a lot in common with 'real' bards, the fact is that in D&D there has never been any convergence between the two classes - druids have been resolutely divine and wild, bards resolutely arcane and urban.
 

Branduil said:
I don't think Druids really work as Clerics. The only real similarity is they both cast Divine spells.

On the other hand - why shouldn't they work as clerics? In 3e all you would need would be divine nature spells and a couple of appropriate domains (or introduce a wildshaping domain or something). Core 3e has clerics drawing their powers from their faith, not from a specific object, so druids could easily be relying upon their faith in a nature philosophy and not any specific deity.

They *could* be made to fit under the cleric umbrella - especially if we see class talent trees - although that doesn't mean that I'm necessarily advocating that they do become a type of cleric!

I've always liked distinct druids.
 

Plane Sailing said:
On the other hand - why shouldn't they work as clerics? In 3e all you would need would be divine nature spells and a couple of appropriate domains (or introduce a wildshaping domain or something). Core 3e has clerics drawing their powers from their faith, not from a specific object, so druids could easily be relying upon their faith in a nature philosophy and not any specific deity.

They *could* be made to fit under the cleric umbrella - especially if we see class talent trees - although that doesn't mean that I'm necessarily advocating that they do become a type of cleric!

I've always liked distinct druids.

Well, you could do that... but, I think Druids have a very distinct flavor compared to Clerics, not to mention Druids actually have a legitimate archetypal basis. And if they're similar to 3.x Druids, they don't even fill the same role as Clerics.
 

Remove ads

Top