Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Laurefindel" data-source="post: 9099759" data-attributes="member: 67296">I'm not sure if I agree with your vision of druid/ranger/barbarian (but than again, I tend to view these thing differently than most), but I agree that they all draw more or less from the same power source. That's how I see primal magic; as an unrefined power source that exist within nature but isn't nature itself.Consequently, I don't see druids, rangers or barbarians to be "one with nature", at least not intrinsically. They can be, and it's probably easier for them to be "one with nature" than other characters, but primal is were they get their magic. They don't even need to like nature - they can despise it - but they tap from it to work their spells. A druid can be in tune with its world, try to gently tame its its energy, or try to dominate it. They differ from wizards in the way they work their magic; in the primary "ingredients" they use for it. Druid's magic source is more raw, extracted from nature (carefully or recklessly, depends on druid), and therefore their magic tends to me limited to natural and elemental themes. Wizard's magic is more refined, processed, manipulated, and the scope of their magic is broader even if they lost a few things in the translation (healing for one). Ranger's magic is one step removed, drawing primal energy from specific natural elements that contains it (whereas the herbalist would be two steps removed, using the primal energy of plants but without drawing it themselves)Barbarians are martial characters. Some subclass can draw on primal magic, not unlike a fighter's subclass can wield arcane magic, but there's no primal in the base class other than figurative imagery.</blockquote>

Verification