Absolutely not If they exist or not is irrelevant to the comparison showing how much of the druid comes from the archetype. The problem you are overlooking is that the core class features are cranked down because the archetypes bring parts of the core class up to snuff & it would be unbalanced if they were all already on par with the core class features of the other classes.
It's great to claim that it's meaningful utility, but when that meaningful utility is so meaningful you can't even give examples it calls into question how meaningful it is in actual play. You talked about the ability to fly in wildshape. for an hour.. what exactly do you forsee it being capable of doing that one of these tiny cr0 flying creaturesin the hands of a wizard or something with find familiar
I'm not denying that there are not occasionally useful edge cases for wildshape on druids other than moon druids who have the base wildshape very similar to the "improved" one you have... I'm pointing out that you are vastly overestimating that value. Your "I might be able to see an argument for bumping the CR a bit, so it caps out around CR 3 instead of 2. But that's about it." comment shows a complete misunderstanding of just how different moon druids & other druids are. Without the healing & CR bump from combat wildshape it's just a ribbon that might very occasionally be useful. Without the spellcaster enhancing stuff the druid spell list is pretty much just a pool for combatwildshape's healing ability.
It's fine if you think druids should be a caster... but you need to make them a caster instead of improving a ribbon to still be a ribbon. If you want to improve wildshape it needs to be an improvement that understands they won't be casting while wildshaped & be improved accordingly.
Also yes.. Alice acting as mount so Bob can benefit from spiderclimb while he concentrates on invisibility in a location where nobody notices a giant spider roaming about is extremely contrived. Not only that but if Cindy is a drow sorcerer warlock wizard artificer or (peerviously) mountain/underdark land druids she could have carried bob the invisible gnome while spiderclimbing and had all the cool stuff sorcerer warlock wizard or artificer still has in your thing.
You, through no fault of your own, unfortunately used the spoiler for Find Familiar which will definitely be changed. We've been using this version for a while and it really hasn't changed much over the RAW one.
Also, you keep calling Wild Shape a "ribbon", it isn't, it is a feature. I dislike the term because it implies a useless feature, which it most certainly isn't. You think I am overestimating it, I think you are underestimating it. While your "these other characters can do it this way" is all good, the druid with wild shape can do more because it can now change its form multiple times with a single use.
Here's the beauty of it. You are the only one who has complained about it. No one else has chimed in or agreed, and fortunately this isn't for you, it is for me and my table. You've expressed your concern (which is appreciated, but...), I've noted it. I've stated how druids were a concern of mine and have other features that I might add. So, let's drop it for now, and please chime in when a revision is posted.
You, through no fault of your own, unfortunately used the spoiler for Find Familiar which will definitely be changed. We've been using this version for a while and it really hasn't changed much over the RAW one.
Also, you keep calling Wild Shape a "ribbon", it isn't, it is a feature. I dislike the term because it implies a useless feature, which it most certainly isn't. You think I am overestimating it, I think you are underestimating it. While your "these other characters can do it this way" is all good, the druid with wild shape can do more because it can now change its form multiple times with a single use.
Here's the beauty of it. You are the only one who has complained about it. No one else has chimed in or agreed, and fortunately this isn't for you, it is for me and my table. You've expressed your concern (which is appreciated, but...), I've noted it. I've stated how druids were a concern of mine and have other features that I might add. So, let's drop it for now, and please chime in when a revision is posted.
Druids are not a common class for various reasons & as a result a lot of people don't have much experience with them as a player or gm so it's not a surprise that people aren't discussing it with you. Correlation is definitely not causation you are implying there. You also completely ignored what alice the druid in spider form carrying your invisible elf in a situation where a giant spider would go unnoticed brings to the table when Cindy the drow sorcerer warlock wizard artificer or (previously) mountain/underdark land druids could spiderclimb & carry the invisible gnome sorcerer while having the stuff you add to all of those classes Cindy could have been. If your usefulness benchmark is "save a trip to the spider mount corral & maybe an animal handling check with one" it's a safe bet that you are overestimating the situations & value it brings to the table.
I've experimented with giving players toys that actually allow them to function together as mount & rider with shared benefits & such but it never seemed to work out as well as the excited players thought it would. Using wildshape to scout & negate the vast majority of the serious benefits you are attributing to wildshape is not something unique to your version just removes owl & makes some other minor changes.
You are clearly very attached to your work and seem to take a dim view of feedback. Like others have said, contratulations but it's not for me or my table & I regret pointing out a rater glaring problem.
You are clearly very attached to your work and seem to take a dim view of feedback. Like others have said, contratulations but it's not for me or my table & I regret pointing out a rater glaring problem.
And yet I have entertained everyone's feed back, including yours.
Simply because I don't agree with you doesn't not mean I have a dim view of feedback. You are simply pointing out a problem which you imagine exists-because you continue to compare my variant with RAW-but in fact doesn't. My druid is a simply a different beast.
And yet I have entertained everyone's feed back, including yours.
Simply because I don't agree with you doesn't not mean I have a dim view of feedback. You are simply pointing out a problem which you imagine exists-because you continue to compare my variant with RAW-but in fact doesn't. My druid is a simply a different beast.
Problem being the fact that your druid is misunderstanding how druid goes together & plays to the point that it's practically the equivalent of replacing barbarian UAD with an ability that improves longbow range by 5 feet & lets them shoot the longbow while prone without disadvantage.
It's fine to say "it's a different beast", but that beast needs to be something meaningful without contrived situations like the only one you were able to envision where spiderclimb is needed and nobody will notice a giant spider.
Problem being the fact that your druid is misunderstanding how druid goes together & plays to the point that it's practically the equivalent of replacing barbarian UAD with an ability that improves longbow range by 5 feet & lets them shoot the longbow while prone without disadvantage.
It's fine to say "it's a different beast", but that beast needs to be something meaningful without contrived situations like the only one you were able to envision where spiderclimb is needed and nobody will notice a giant spider.
