D&D 5E Druids power source for 5e

[the Jester]

Should Druid have Divine, Primal, Elemental, or mixed power source?

Personally I hope the term "power source" is never used as an in-game term again, at least like we saw it in 4e.

I'm fine with it as a mechanical term if it has some sort of meaning; if, for instance, there are things that have "resistance to all arcane damage". Otherwise, all it is is meaningless jargon.

 

[triqui]

Personally I hope the term "power source" is never used as an in-game term again, at least like we saw it in 4e.

I'm fine with it as a mechanical term if it has some sort of meaning; if, for instance, there are things that have "resistance to all arcane damage". Otherwise, all it is is meaningless jargon.

I agree, in 4e "power sources" didn't have any meaningful impact in gameplay. However, if you plan to do things like "resistance to arcane damage" you are going to need to add an extra keyword to all powers that do arcane damage, and some people already feel the game is cluttered with keywords. DDN, trying to appeal everybody, will probably not increase the number of keywords. And not all "arcane powers" do "arcane damage". An earthquake can be arcane created, but what damages you, iis the 500lb block of ceiling that is crushing your lunges.

 

[CM]

Despite all the wailing about power sources on forums, I'm going to guess about the most in-game reference they get in actual play is when someone detects magic and wants to know what type of caster created the effect...

For this usage, at least, I like being able to say "primal magic" or "arcane magic" rather than "a druid did it" or "a wizard did it"

Tempest in a tea kettle imo.

 

[Salamandyr]

I'm gonna go with "magic".

 

[mlund]

This can of worms has been open for decades now: divine magic vs. arcane magic vs. psionic power. Transparency was a serious technical issue, but power-sources for magic are even more of a hot button because they challenge the concept of ownership of power. Some people are really averse to the idea that they don't own their magic. If a patron deity frowns on your behavior you lose your cleric spells. If you double-cross your arch-fey patron suddenly you're not leveling in warlock anymore. You broke your Code of Conduct and now you're a Fighter who is missing a ton of feats.

Part of the power-mongering twink-appeal of the Wizard, Sorcerer, and the Psion is that you don't owe anyone anything. It's your power. If you want to be a chaotic "neutral" wanker and murder townspeople, kings, and deities nobody can take your super-powers away. You're just better and all the other players and NPCs can suck it. That mentality is part of the reason why people started freaking out at the idea of the Next sorcerer being transformed in form and personality - loss of control, having to pay a cost for power, etc.

The vague "primal" or "divine earth-mother" motif on the druid puts it closer to this free-range all-power, no-responsibility mold. If it is just a magical bunch of rock without the divine earth-mother personification, well, the planet is so ambivalent to cruelty, destruction, and selfishness it's basically a blank check. A personified planet-deity has an agenda and might (*gasp*) place some sort of restriction on how destructive and self-centered the PC can be.

- Marty Lund

 

[Steely_Dan]

I agree, in 4e "power sources" didn't have any meaningful impact in gameplay.

Except prerequisites for Feats and Paragon Paths.

But I am happy to see the ass-end of them, and "Roles".

 

[Gothikaiju]

This can of worms has been open for decades now: divine magic vs. arcane magic vs. psionic power. Transparency was a serious technical issue, but power-sources for magic are even more of a hot button because they challenge the concept of ownership of power. Some people are really averse to the idea that they don't own their magic. If a patron deity frowns on your behavior you lose your cleric spells. If you double-cross your arch-fey patron suddenly you're not leveling in warlock anymore. You broke your Code of Conduct and now you're a Fighter who is missing a ton of feats.

Part of the power-mongering twink-appeal of the Wizard, Sorcerer, and the Psion is that you don't owe anyone anything. It's your power. If you want to be a chaotic "neutral" wanker and murder townspeople, kings, and deities nobody can take your super-powers away. You're just better and all the other players and NPCs can suck it. That mentality is part of the reason why people started freaking out at the idea of the Next sorcerer being transformed in form and personality - loss of control, having to pay a cost for power, etc.

The vague "primal" or "divine earth-mother" motif on the druid puts it closer to this free-range all-power, no-responsibility mold. If it is just a magical bunch of rock without the divine earth-mother personification, well, the planet is so ambivalent to cruelty, destruction, and selfishness it's basically a blank check. A personified planet-deity has an agenda and might (*gasp*) place some sort of restriction on how destructive and self-centered the PC can be.

- Marty Lund

So, you are saying only the godly are moral, and only because of potential consequences?

I'm speaking of characters, of course.

 

[Lanefan]

So, you are saying only the godly are moral, and only because of potential consequences?

I'm speaking of characters, of course.

In the game setting it's much easier to hold divine types to their professed morals than it is anyone else. Anyone can be moral (or not) if they like.

Lanefan

 

[mlund]

In the game setting it's much easier to hold divine types to their professed morals than it is anyone else.

Morals shmorals - Tiamat and Lloth get to hand out divine magic spells at their whims, for pity's sake. Divine magic is basically assign on the basis of fealty and patronage. Even in a setting without personified deities these metaphysical ideals (good, evil, or indifferent) hand out and withhold boons from clerics. Cross your patron and you're cut off until you find another one.

Warlocks had similar issues. Sure, they could just steal what they wanted but at least they were on the radar if they started trying to siphon eldritch power from Cthulu, Asmodeus, or the Rose King without making a deal.

Wizards and Psions laughed at the other characters and their silly restrictions. They manifest power without restriction or consequence. Sure, they could make a powerful or deadly enemy, but nobody just says "You're cut off," when they go rogue. They own their power and that's what makes them better (and smarter) than you other putzes.

Having bloodline consequences in transformations for the sorcerer touched off a fire-storm because it moved sorcerers away from the "awesome wizards" category and towards the "non-wizard putzes with restrictions on their powers" category. Having a divine-source druid similarly moves them away from the "unrestricted power" column towards the "restricted power" column.

- Marty Lund

 

[Steely_Dan]

Morals are a thing you hang on a wall, and scruples are Russian money.