Druidic Avenger (UA) and animal companions trade-off

[shilsen]

Couple of questions:

1) Has anybody here used the Druidic Avenger variant from Unearthed Arcana (pg.51)? In short, the DA gives up the animal companion & the ability to spontaneously cast summon nature's ally spells in return for fast movement and the barbarian rage ability. If you've used it, could you tell me how it worked out in play? And if not, do you see any real problems with the variant?

2) The reason I'm asking is that I have a player who'll be running a druid without the ability to call an animal companion, and I'm thinking about providing a benefit to the character to make up for it. I'm thinking of either the barbarian's rage ability or the ability to spontaneously cast cure spells (the party could use a healer). Do you think it would be a decent tradeoff?

Opinions?

 

[rowport]

I am not sure about the spontaneous cure spells idea- assuming that he still keeps spontaneous summons- that might be a bit too good.

We have a Dwarven Druid Avenger/Scout in our current campaign. It seems to work just fine. We do joke that there is not an animal companion handy as cannon fodder... (All of my animal companions die quick and painful deaths, unfortunately..!) The Rage ability is certainly useful- especially when he wildshapes- but at only 1/day it is not overpowering. I suppose taking the Extra Rage feat might make it *very* useful, but then, you would be investing a feat to do it.

All in all, it seems just fine. And I like the "maverick lone ranger" feel about the class variant.

Also, remember to apply the penalty to Wild Empathy- that is one of the balancing class features.

 

[Nifft]

If your party lacks a Cleric, the spontaneous Cure thing might erase some meta-game annoyance and tension from the group, and that's a good thing for the players.

-- N

 

[Crothian]

if the druid is going to be the healer then it should be fine, but if he is just going to be the fighter type and rage supports just being a fighter type, I wouldn't go for it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Giving someone the power to spontaeneously cure is

NEVER

a boon to them. It just removes another reason for them to not turn all their spells into healing every day. And frankly, as a character, healing everyone else is the least interesting thing that you can be doing with spell slots. It's often the most tactically viable thing. It's often the only thing that stands between your party and death, but it never interferes with spotlight time, which is really the only intra-party measure of balance.

 

[moritheil]

I am not sure about the spontaneous cure spells idea- assuming that he still keeps spontaneous summons- that might be a bit too good.

He said explicitly above that the ability to spontaneously convert summons was lost.

Now, IMHO, this isn't worth it. If you want to heal the party all the time, be a cleric. If you want to play a druid, you shouldn't give up your ability to spont. summon, because that's the signature move for a druid in 3.5. You can easily justify taking Barb1/Dru X RP-wise; it makes for a rougher, coarser druid, and it gives you the enhanced movement, rage, and melee weapon profs.

A raging bear is a fun thing to be after you've used up all the spells you're willing to devote to an encounter, so I can see the appeal, but it's better to start Barb 1 instead of losing spont. summons.

 

[ARandomGod]

Giving someone the power to spontaeneously cure is

NEVER

a boon to them. It just removes another reason for them to not turn all their spells into healing every day. And frankly, as a character, healing everyone else is the least interesting thing that you can be doing with spell slots. It's often the most tactically viable thing. It's often the only thing that stands between your party and death, but it never interferes with spotlight time, which is really the only intra-party measure of balance.

Ha! See I've made that very statement several times. I'm glad to hear someone else express it. One time we didn't have a divine caster at all, and I gave the mage the ability to spontaniously convert his spells into cure spells. ... (using a special book he found and read, it included how to cast arcane healing). He swore me to secrecy and never used the ability.

Heh.

 

[shilsen]

Thanks for the responses.

What about the 2nd question in my first post, i.e. if instead of using the Druidic Avenger we simply have a druid who wants to give up the animal companion for some other benefit? Would giving the character the ability to spontaneously cast healing spells too (retaining the druid's spontaneous SNA ability) be a fair trade-off? As Saeviomagy and ARandomGod mentioned above, that's hardly giving extra power to the character.

Another option I was thinking of is giving the character one extra spell per day, which would be the spell on the Healing domain list (retaining the spontaneous SNA ability and not gaining any spontaneous healing). In my experience, a well-handled animal companion can be a serious asset to the group, so I'm trying to make sure that I provide something appropriately useful enough in exchange.

 

[satori01]

Rage 1/day is not a fair trade to an animal companion. I would give the Druid access to a single domain of appropriate druidic flavor,(elemental domains, plant, animal) and give him or her an extra domain slot like a cleric.

The biggest pitfall to an Animal Companion is its AC. If a Druid is willing to address that issue,(buffing spells, buying/enchanting barding, purchasing magic items for companion etc), the mid to high range Animal Companions can be quite good.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I like the Idea of granting the healing domain -
It address the problem of turning the druid into a straight cleric, and making him use all his spells for healing. It also helps fill the role of the party lacking a healer. I see 0 problems with it.