Clerics & Druids: musings

the Mighty Druid!

okay, here is my rant regarding WotC chopping up the idea of nature priests into Lycanthropic guys with the (way) overpowerful ability of changing your apearance at will (thank you A Thousand Faces, via level 13) with spells and a pet wolf. Plus, the weapons allowed in no way corresponds with real-life tales of druids (some druids are mentioned using bows etc (although the ironwood spell can make up for this)

Regarding specifics, i dont like the whole idea of Wild Shaping. This should ability should only be reserved for Bearsarks and Ulfhednar (two real-life Norse prestigue classes that follow the tales of Beserkers [a base class that i use in the stead of the Barbarian] who, while in a rage, can transform into fearsome wolves (the Ulfhednar) or bears (the Bearsarks). Other than that, The ability to change shape is a Lycanthropic ability, of which tales can be read about from all over the world (Were-boars from Greece, Loup-garou from France, and the hilarious Were-Hare from certain North American groups) Thus, to get a "true" druid class, one shouldn't look too long at the PHB druid.

obviously, i ahve been doing a bit of research, adn have found a few intersting details regarding druids. Most of this was found in "The Oxford Dictionary of Celtic Mythology" (i give it 2 thumbs up)
-There was a druid named Figol (of the Tuatha De Danaan [a race of tall, beautiful, light-haired people. they were warrios and magicains, and some have attributed their desciption with JRR Tolkiens concepts of "elves") who promised to "rain fire from the sky" to kill invading Fomorians (a race of giant. primordial, demonic raiders who came from the sea to invade. this definitively gives druids some major damage dealing spells, etc, adn helps to set the mood, for no-one crosses an angry druid :P
-Another mentionable was a Druid named Eliavres of whom was a Druid-Sorcerer (i think it sounds like a cool character concept)
-Feth Fiada was a Druid ability to summon a fog which made those under it undectable. I think that in gaming terms, you could start off with a basic ability (ie, undetechable Alignment while in the fog) then improve it (ie those within a radius, whose size [the radius's] depends on the caster levelof the druid [to clarify, any sound within this area is not transmitted outside the radius, so those even five feet away from the outside of this radius couldnt hear anyone inside it, adn also, when this ability is gained, could not detect alignments]) and eventually, invisibility (as per the spell, only within the radius, also the silence adn un. align, ability) also, a limit to the times one couls use this per day would be good.
-also, i should note, that Feth Fiada's also referred to magical veils that druids and, presumably, non-druids could don to gain the same ability as the actualy fog. Hello "Craft Wonderous Item"!!
-other noteables of Druids include the fact that they werent subject to taxes (if you haev those in your game) they were not required to do battle (sorry, the BAB just dropped to "poor"), had authority over divine worship (spellcasting, etc) they ran the show at sacrifices (it is noted that even human sacrifices might have occured) they were also judges of sorts (some skills there, like sense motive, etc) and they taught their sacred knowledge to pupils Furthermore, they were healers and were associated with mistletoe for that power adn the druids also considered it unlawful to build temples to the gods or to worship them within walls.

Essentually, a druid is a nature priest (or priestess, the order of the druids wasnt a sexist one) who has a few different abilities at his disposal.

so, the historically correct Druid Class would probably look something like this:

HD = d8
BAB = 1/2 HD (as Wizard)
FORT and WILL good, REF bad
Spells Per Day - as Druid, and they should be spontaneously cast (as a sorcerer)
NO spontaneous casting of "summon" spells.
Animal Companion should stay and Wild Empathy too
Purity of Body (Poisons) and Purity of Body (diseases) should be brought into game play
Keep Trackless Step (maybe usuable only within the Feth Fiada?, or maybe as is?)
bring in the Woodland Stride ability from the Ranger class
and have the Feth Fiada as a class ability, but note: this could become too powerful at higher levels, so dont allow players to cast "meteor swarm" (for ex) from with the confines of the Feth Fiada. If spells are cast within the Feth Fiada, then they should automatically fail, and the Feth Fiada is dispelled and cannot be summoned for another 24 hours. The idea is to be a bit steatly with this, adn times of use/day should help to balance use of this, but i havent yet made specifics.

Weapon and Armour Proficiency: Druid have proficency in all shields (except tower shields, non-metal only) light and medium armours (non-metal only) and (in no specific order) the Dagger, Club, Quarterstaff, Sling, Sickle, Scythe, Short and Long Bows, Greatclub, morningstar, darts, and any one-handed spears

-Nyaricus

as for class skills go for (6+INT mod)x4 at first level, and 6+Int mod at allother levels, and clas skills should be as follows: Climb, Concentration, Craft, Diplomacy (again, i call it Persuade in my world), Handle Animal, Heal, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (all sub-skills) (again, i call it Lore in my world), Listen, Profession, Ride, Sense Motive, Spellcraft, Spot, Survival, Swim and Use Rope.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

If you take away Heavy Armor from clerics, you might as well take away Medium Armor as well. The best normal medium armor is only one point better than the best light armor, and comes with much harsher penalties - speed is critical, especially for a healer. Mithril armor is the only thing redeeming Medium armor types.

I think that heavy armor and decent HD + weapons are important to clerics. In many cases playing a cleric, there seem to be no (or few) good spells to cast in combat, especially at lower levels. Beating people up has to be a viable option for those cases.
 


Jraynack said:
I haven't felt the need to change anything from the core rule books. As long as I can challenge my players, I don't not feel the need to restricted them. .

valid point, but the whole reason for this thread (and others) in the House Rules Section is that we DO feel the need to tweak a thing here or there. If you are fine with the base classes, thats cool man. this is just the wrong area to preach about hows WOTC is so great, etc.

Jraynack said:
As for the cleric - The heavy armor does them good as it allows them to be in the thick of it casting healing spells on fallen comrades or those about the fall. Casting spells in combat is a dangerous matter (attacks of opportunity, being a viable target) and with only 2 skill points per level (remember most clerics will have their main ability be Wisdom not in Int) it leaves them very little in way of putting ranks into Concentration..

okay, you are kinda running in two directions here, you complain that the cleric doesnt have enough ranks, but you leave it be. Why? why not give clerics 4 skills ranks a level, and maybe adding a few skills to the list? the whole point of house rules is to spread ideas, and maybe you should check out my take on the cleric (priest, as i call him) earlier in this thread. Also, think about the heavy armor that is implimented in D&D > > only the very strongest of the warriors back in the middles ages could use them, so why should a servent of a god, of whom casts spells, be running around in full plate? it simply doesnt fit the idea. and also, you can compensate but giving them other powers, etc, like i did.

Jraynack said:
Instead of restricting players look at ways you can challenge them more than you do now. I will say that any character is powerful when augmented to suit a particular game (I speak from many years of experience with plenty 17th+ clerics running about in my many campaigns) but as a DM it is your job to challenge them not to restricted them (I am in no way implying that you don't challenge your players since I have never played in one of your games - just look outside the box and throw a few curve balls at your players before tinkering with a well developed core class that has been playtested for a number of years).

okay, as for this man - simply, the whole idea of house ruiles is not to restrict, but to look outside the box. many of us are obviously in the opinion that WotC didnt do things "right" in some areas. So just think about what you are saying. you could potentually have alot of fun creating your own world and populating it with your own races, and your own customized classes. That is what i have done, and you always must keep in mind that A) balance is key in anything, B) you must have playability (why do you think that the dwarven fighter is so popular, and a Orc Wizard is not?), C) you have to set the tone. My campaign has been greatly inspired but Tolkien, so many elements of it are recognisable, and also, things that maybe were not represented by Tolkien (such as Druids and Priests) I try to have them inspired from the "true" archetype. Simply put, i dont like the idea of a healer runnig around in Full Plate, or in Breastplate, for that matter. D) you gotta have fun with it all. it sounds like you are a really good DM, and you dont just make monsters act like "meat targets." thats awesome, 'nuff said.

Jraynack said:
In the end, you are the DM and it is your game - but remember it is the players' game too.

You couldnt have said it better.
 

Jraynack said:
I haven't felt the need to change anything from the core rule books.
Bully for you. Many GMs have (as in, one heck of a lot).


Jraynack said:
As long as I can challenge my players, I don't not feel the need to restricted them.
Well, you see.. this is where it's just as well I'm over my previous irritability, eh? ;) Suffice to say, perhaps you should re-read some of the previous points, especially those pertaining to the need for, and desire to come up with balancing factors. It is not a matter of 'restriction', any more than a wizard having d4 HD, poor BAB and (generally) no armour need be a 'restriction' for players of that class, when one takes into account their obvious strengths (or balancing factors). I hope this puts my intent in a clearer light.


Jraynack said:
As for the cleric - The heavy armor does them good as it allows them to be in the thick of it casting healing spells on fallen comrades or those about the fall. Casting spells in combat is a dangerous matter (attacks of opportunity, being a viable target) and with only 2 skill points per level (remember most clerics will have their main ability be Wisdom not in Int) it leaves them very little in way of putting ranks into Concentration.
I will probably be giving them more skill points (along with other benefits), as I've indicated.


Jraynack said:
Instead of restricting players look at ways you can challenge them more than you do now. I will say that any character is powerful when augmented to suit a particular game (I speak from many years of experience with plenty 17th+ clerics running about in my many campaigns) but as a DM it is your job to challenge them not to restricted them (I am in no way implying that you don't challenge your players since I have never played in one of your games - just look outside the box and throw a few curve balls at your players before tinkering with a well developed core class that has been playtested for a number of years).
Right. Well. I respect the experience you claim, and I respect your right to the perspective you've communicated, but once again it's not restricting them. The characters (and their players, of course) are indeed having to cope with challenges of power, wits, strategy, ethics etc. on a regular basis. That isn't about to change, either. In fact, the status quo should remain *roughly* the same (except for the sake of Clerics' heavy armour - that was gone already), after these changes take effect: that's the whole idea.


Jraynack said:
In the end, you are the DM and it is your game - but remember it is the players' game too.
I appreciate the sentiment. In fact, I try to make it more the players' game than anything else. It's my highest priority. Secondarily, I like things to 'make sense', or 'click' (to me and the roleplayers I spend time with), which in terms of fantasy roleplaying is.. yes.. tricky at the best of times. Still, people try. Hence, the countless house rule threads on the net.



edit --- I didn't see the above post before posting this one myself. There was a fair pause between starting it and finishing it, because I had things to do in the middle there. Sorry for the doubling up of commentary, etc.
 
Last edited:

Nyaricus: Great stuff (the Cleric and Druid). I'm still fixated on the whole d6 HD & 3/4 BAB thing, myself, to better fit what I have in mind. But anyway, the research you've done has evidently paid off for your own purposes, in terms of both flavour and mechanics. Cool. :cool: And, as I've already said, it's great to see how others have changed (for example) a class that you're in the process of changing, yourself. Those points of reference are much appreciated. Me though, I'm trying to keep the Cleric (priest/ess) and Druid (also to be renamed) as adaptable as possible, so that they can be placed - with minimal changes, if any - in a variety of settings and campaigns.. much as I love Celtic flavour (and I do, muchly).


edit -- got your name wrong. sorry.
 
Last edited:

Aus_Snow said:
I'm still fixated on the whole d6 HD & 3/4 BAB thing, myself, to better fit what I have in mind.

yeah, i understand what you mean; i am coming from a much more literal take on the Priest and Druid Class, but i have also taken into consideration balance, of which is good as far as i can tell, i just gotta try em out in my Campaign Still

Aus_Snow said:
Me though, I'm trying to keep the Cleric (priest/ess) and Druid (also to be renamed) as adaptable as possible, so that they can be placed - with minimal changes, if any - in a variety of settings and campaigns.. much as I love Celtic flavour (and I do, muchly).

Thats completely fine, but i dunno, to me, its still very adaptable. clerics just dont run around bashing in tarraques skulls all day, they leave that to the Warrior classes. I actually think that my druid class is probably the most adaptable, i mean, the whole Feth Fiada thing is no more of an "odd" skill than the wildshape class ability. what it does do though is give the druid a less martial look, with out even looking at the BAB, because he would use his power to hide from foes (or maybe sneak in his friends to whack a den of goblins, etc)

finally, thanks for the feedback. its always appreciated. :D :D :D
 

Nifft said:
I have to admit there is another, subtler reason why I took away Cleric's heavy armor. I also told anyone wanting to play a Fighter or Paladin that the only excuses for Heavy armor are:

I took it away from everyone in my games-- Fighters get an extra bonus feat at 3rd level. I did it for two reasons: one, I simply do not think Heavy Armor was ever common enough to justify any class gaining it automatically, and two, I've noticed a lot of people wondering why nobody ever used Medium Armor. (One of the benefits of becoming a Paladin or Blackguard is the acquisition of Heavy Armor Proficiency.)

Back onto the main topic of the thread... I've been seriously considering replacing the PHB Cleric as default option with the Cloistered Cleric from Unearthed Arcana, since the Cleric seems to be the most scholarly and, well, cloistered of the divine casters. There's better ways to represent the holy knight, such as Paladin or even a level or two of Fighter mixed into your Cleric levels.
 

Korimyr the Rat said:
I took it away from everyone in my games . . . . . One of the benefits of becoming a Paladin or Blackguard is the acquisition of Heavy Armor Proficiency

i am kinda confused here . . . so no-one gets heavy armour prof, but pallys and their evil counterparts do? are you using prestigue pallys? just wondering
 

Nyaricus said:
i am kinda confused here . . . so no-one gets heavy armour prof, but pallys and their evil counterparts do? are you using prestigue pallys? just wondering

Yeah, I'm using prestige Paladins. I have a strong tendency to wanting mechanical things to be symmetrical, so either Blackguard (or some other evil Paladin) needed to be base or Paladin needed to be Prestige. I chose the latter.

Paladin and Blackguard both automatically gain Heavy Armor Proficiency; otherwise, it's something only Dwarves get for free. I also allow Paladins and Blackguards to ignore spell failure for their divine spells, because of another house rule of mine.

One of these days, I'm going to sit down and figure out what game I'm playing, because I'm not sure it's D&D anymore.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top