Fiery Dragon has Sword & Sorcery license?

[catsclaw227]

One option is to stat druids in monster format, and let DMs decide which Druid best suits their purpose, an official one or one like the Nature Priest in the APG. What do you think?

I think this is the right idea. Now we have two druids (APG and FH:FFS) and the upcoming druid in the PHB2. Who says that druids (NPC or PC) cannot be made of any of the three versions? A druid of Mormo in the Hornsaw may be more like FH:FFS, a druid or Mesos (very sorcery like) may be more like the APG one.

 

[JoeGKushner]

So nuke and pave to fit a la FR?

In a way, I sort of hope they go that route, as it would remove temptation for me.

That isn't what I said at all.

Druids aren't in the SRD.

Cry about it or work around it?

I'd rather see them work around it and build on the strengths of the setting. Druids, at least in almost every campaign I played in, were often the enemies, especially when they served the titans. As a GM, having them listed as monsters instead of a PC class would only make my job easier.

If having a specific class is a deal breaker for you... well, that's another story.

 

[catsclaw227]

Druids, at least in almost every campaign I played in, were often the enemies, especially when they served the titans. As a GM, having them listed as monsters instead of a PC class would only make my job easier.

This is a good point, but we did have a druid of Denev in one game I ran. But it's not a big deal, and in the campaign guide, it may not be necessary to create the druid class because it will be officially introduced in PHB II anyway.

Though, like I said, we have two druids now already anyway with APG and FH:FFS.

 

[Psion]

One option is to stat druids in monster format, and let DMs decide which Druid best suits their purpose, an official one or one like the Nature Priest in the APG. What do you think?

That sounds good to me. Not because it makes my life any easier (as I have no intention of playing 4e, Scarred Lands or no), but because it minimizes the intrusion of mechanics into the setting, maximizing the chance there will be some good setting material I can convert back to 3.5 or Pathfinder.

 

[Psion]

That isn't what I said at all.

Druids aren't in the SRD.

Cry about it or work around it?

I'd rather see them work around it and build on the strengths of the setting.

I rather think under 3e, making a positive and distinct role for druids WAS a strength of the setting (given things like Denev, Incarnates, and the fact that Druids had their own True Rituals.)

Druids, at least in almost every campaign I played in, were often the enemies, especially when they served the titans. As a GM, having them listed as monsters instead of a PC class would only make my job easier.

As for me, druids served well in protagonists roles. It's been my observation that druid is one of the preferred classes of my women gamers.

For druid players IMC, the fact that druid characters had a unique and interesting role in the world was a positive boon.

I'm sorry if I didn't get your meaning, but let me restate my point without presumption: if the setting is rewritten to de-emphasize druids in a protagonist role, that will play down a strength of the setting IMO.

 

[BryonD]

Druids aren't in the SRD.

Cry about it or work around it?

Option C perhaps?

If having a specific class is a deal breaker for you... well, that's another story.

Since we are talking about a predefined setting and a class that is a central part of it, implying it is unreasonable to expect the class presence is just as unfair as it would be if we were talking about not having options for Jedi in Star Wars.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I rather think under 3e, making a positive and distinct role for druids WAS a strength of the setting (given things like Denev, Incarnates, and the fact that Druids had their own True Rituals.)

Sure, it was ONE of the strengths of the setting. I don't see it happening so hope that they can work on the other strengths of the setting.

As for me, druids served well in protagonists roles. It's been my observation that druid is one of the preferred classes of my women gamers.

For druid players IMC, the fact that druid characters had a unique and interesting role in the world was a positive boon.

They do work great in those roles. But that role, by WoTC, has been closed. If people can't find new ways to use the other roles that already existed in the setting or the new roles, that could indeed be a problem.

I'm sorry if I didn't get your meaning, but let me restate my point without presumption: if the setting is rewritten to de-emphasize druids in a protagonist role, that will play down a strength of the setting IMO.

I agree in part. One of the strengths of the setting for players will be downplayed. For GMs, it will be upscaled as druids can now fill several roles.

Since we are talking about a predefined setting and a class that is a central part of it, implying it is unreasonable to expect the class presence is just as unfair as it would be if we were talking about not having options for Jedi in Star Wars.

I disagree to a point. In the original movie, we have one character as a jedi. Depending on which line of fiction or setting your going with, the jedi play a minor role, no role, or a major role.

The druids are far away from being jedi in my opinion.

 

[haaz]

I don't think that someone can publish a Scarred Lands book without a druid. I don't say that you can't play a SL game without a druid, but that a SL setting book must include druids. Either as a character class or as a monster.

The druids hold the power of the titans. Having no druid would mean (IMO), that the titans have no power. It would be as saying that there are no clerics.

So I don't know what Fiery Dragon will do (maybe wait for the PHB2 ?), but the SL 4E books must include druids, somewhere.

 

[avin]

I just want to see the CC preview.

 

[Jack99]

Any news on when the monster book will be available?