A Gentleperson's Wager: Druids in the PHB1

[Li Shenron]

I would certainly be in favor to separate Druids and Clerics forever. For example, making it "official" that Druids have nothing to do with gods, and perhaps with even a certain contrast between deity-based religions and the druidic religion.

Druids also have too many possible concepts to be merged into someone else's class, and the idea of shoehorning all their abilities together (without a choice between them) was the thing that made Druids in 3e overloaded with too many powers.

 

[hopeless]

Druids in 4e

I have nothing against druids except I can also see no reason they aren't another type of cleric.
There's nothing to say they can't be in the 4e phb but if its truly intened to be generic then why would they?
If they're adding tieflings and the warlock class, why keep the druid?
Its something that has become more specialised over time and there's nothing to stop it becoming a prestige class as it was in the original d&d where neutral aligned clerics could become druids back then.

 

[fuindordm]

While druids could be a kind of cleric, their raison d'être is clearly different. I would deeply regret seeing them most of the usual clerical spells and restricting their particular flavor of magic to a small selection obtained from domains or talents. Furthermore, the core druid
spells are some of the most flavorful in the game--and I wouldn't want to see other classes
have access to them.

Wild shape wouldn't be hard to balance--just make them choose one shape every other level, and live with that choice forever. (The same fix that should be applied to poly self: one spell for each form is perfectly reasonable.) Or else use the PH2 shapeshifting version, which is OK too.

Druids have plenty of tradition and flavor. They have always been a popular class (unlike the 1e barbarian and bard, for example). They have plenty of unique abilities and spells to set them apart. The only reason I could see moving them to anther PH would be if they drew on a new power source (presumably Nature), but the ranger will be in PH1 so that doesn't seem likely.

The role of a priest is to serve human worshippers. The role of a druid is to preserve the balance of nature itself, even at the expense of humans. The two could not be less alike!

Give us our druid, please!!!

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

From everything I've heard this seems extremely unlikely. In a post here at EN World, it was confirmed that there were exactly 8 classes(and this post is AFTER the comment that there might be more). It's possible that changes, but I'm going to assume it's true unless someone says otherwise.

We know that Fighters, Wizards, Rogues, Clerics are in for sure. One of the playtest reports, I believe (even though it doesn't say for sure) is one of the groups running ONLY PHB1 stuff. In this playtest they mention rangers and warlords. Paladins are mentioned so many places (including having meetings about the paladin and fighter, comments about the paladin being a defender and about it being able to choose any alignment it wants), I believe it's basically confirmed.

So that leaves only one class space. At this point it seems likely that the last one is Warlock(comments about how having the Tiefling in the PHB1 gave them heavy incentive to include Warlock in there as well, and the recent blog about the fact that development for the Warlock is finished and they are working right now on its description).

That means that the nearly confirmed list of classes in the PHB1 is:

Fighter
Paladin
Warlord
Cleric
Wizard
Warlock
Rogue
Ranger

And due to the comment of at least one (if not multiple) designers that ALL the PHB classes from 3.5 would eventually be put into 4E, I don't believe the Druid will be rolled into the Cleric or the Bard at all. Nor will Barbarian be rolled into Fighter.

I have a feeling that the PHB2 will include the rest of the 3.5E classes from the PHB.

 

[Quartz]

I could live with Druids being Clerics with the Animal and Plant Domains.

BTW remember the note about the PHB increasing in size? Maybe they're putting in an extra class or two?

 

[Malhost Zormaeril]

Flush 'em, I say!

I was weaned on 2e Specialty Priests, so either we have a system for emulating that or every priest's a Cleric. No special-casing for Druids, if I have anything to say for it! (obviously, I don't )

It would be cool if we could have a Crusading Priest (current Cleric), a Civic Priest, a Mystic Priest and a Cloistered Priest. This way we could place the Druid as one of the specialisations of the Mystic Priest, controlling nature or somesuch. Of course, that's a bit too far out for D&D currently. Perhaps in 5e? Perhaps in a splatbook? Who knows...

 

[an_idol_mind]

Should I vote with what I hope will be the case, or what will actually be the case?

I hope druids will be in the Player's Handbook, as they are one of my favorite classes, and have been since I learned about D&D. However, given the fact that we've heard no information or real mention of them as of yet combined with the online grips about wild shape, I'm betting the class will get shoved into a future splatbook, along with the poor monk, bard, and possibly barbarian.

 

[Alnag]

No chance for Druid in PHB1. All seats are taken... remember 8 classes, two of each role...

I would say - see you in PHB2.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

In a post here at EN World, it was confirmed that there were exactly 8 classes(and this post is AFTER the comment that there might be more).

Yes, a lower level designer, Logan Bonner (No Offense I'm a 0-level designer) posted that.
And several days/weeks later, people higher than him in the food chain claimed the number wasn't set, and the PH just increased noticeably in size. Hmmm....

 

[GreatLemur]

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.

I'd dig this (because flexibility and modularity in character options are some of the most important things in an RPG system, as far as I'm concerned), but I don't think it looks likely. With all the talk we've seen of all 3e classes eventually coming back in 4e, and Illusionists and Necromancers becoming separate classes in their own rights, the new D&D does not seem to be moving towards more generic, broad-purpose classes.