'low fantasy' vs Druids: need help!

[Herzog]

We're playing a, for lack of a better description, 'low fantasy' campaign.

This means no magic items, or maybe one or two for the entire party.
This means staying away from high profile spells like fireball.
This means no races other than human, no dragons, no aborrations, or any other creature not native to earth, with the possible exception of creatures of legend and myth, like vampires, a minotaur, etc. , but only one or two in the entire campaign.

Problem: while most of the characters have chosen a career as figher or barbarian, with one or at most two levels in a spellcasting class, and then taking care to select spells that can be explained in a low fantasy way, two of the characters chose Druid.

Problem:most of the powers and spells of the druid are relatively low fantasy, while the lack of magical item hurts them the least.

My question to this forum: Can you help the poor DM to find some way to challenge the (now 11th level) Druids without killing the rest of the party in a 'low fantasy' way?

Any ideas appreciated.

 

[Particle_Man]

Perhaps require the druids to take one non-druid level for every druid level?

Also, phb II has a nerfy replacement for the wild shape power.

 

[Herzog]

nerfing the druids is (probably) not going to happen.

we have already realised that (mundane) poisons no longer have any affect on them, an area that would otherwise be a good mundane replacement for spells.

So basically, we're looking for anything mundane/low fantasy that DOES affect (high level) druids... without being an insta-kill for the other characters.

 

[green slime]

nerfing the druids is (probably) not going to happen.

we have already realised that (mundane) poisons no longer have any affect on them, an area that would otherwise be a good mundane replacement for spells.

So basically, we're looking for anything mundane/low fantasy that DOES affect (high level) druids... without being an insta-kill for the other characters.

City adventures? Political adventures? Low level Undead (zombie plague?).

Given that the players themselves see the problem, and that it was kind of obvious (hmmm, very low magic world, and yet a full spell-casting class, ... which also has lots of bells and whistles, such as shape-changing), it seems that the best thing to do would be to start wrapping up the campaign. Trying to extensively constantly work around the capabilities of one or two characters is not going to be fun for either you, or the other players, in the long term, without changing the premise of low magic.

 

[Herzog]

I don't want to go through all the details, but let me give a bit more info to explain:

1. The campaign is a 'time' campaign. While we keep the same characters, after every adventure/mini-campaign we skipt to new incarnations of ourselves, a few hundred or even thousand years into the future. We started out as neantherthals, and have now arrived at 23 BC.
As the ages go by, more powerfull equipment (bows! swords! metal armor! and someday maybe even crossbows!) becomes available, as well as other options (writing! what a novel idea....)
Originally, only barbarian and Druid where allowed. In hindsight, the Druid was probably a bad idea. By now, everything but the Paladin and Wizard class is allowed.
2. Every adventure/mini-campaign is DM-ed by a different person, whose character is 'skipped' for that time-period, or who is put into the background.
3. We try to 'mimic' historic earth, as in we use real-world background or timelines to integrate into our own adventures (such as the conquering of europe by Julius Ceasar)

Some of the problems we now have are caused by the fact that we are not all on the same line. While some of us viewed the campaign as 'history as we know it but with magic', others intended to eventually get rid of magic altogether. The generic consensus now is that we attempt to use any magic available to our characters in a way that may be seen as historically consistent. (NB: wichcraft, druidic rites, manipulation of nature, mind-tricks, powders and/or poisons with 'special' effects, etc.)

However, as said, the latter is more easily accomplished for druidic spells (manipulate nature? sure! here's some brambles for you!) than, let's say, bard spells (the spell description says light springs out of my hand. how the **** am I going to explain that in a historically accurate manner)

Saying that the players of the Druid acknowledge the problem as well is maybe stretching it a bit. One of them does, and has purposely switched to a PrC right now that will no longer give him additional spells, and is very conservative with his spells and shapechange anyway. The other, however, doesn't seem to see the problem, and seems to think we are trying to punish her for playing a powerfull class. We've already had one disagreement stemming from this, and I'm afraid it's not going to be the last one.

O well, maybe you're all correct and we need to re-evaluate the entire campaign, maybe starting the next phase with non-magical classes.....

 

[Aus_Snow]

we need to re-evaluate the entire campaign, maybe starting the next phase with non-magical classes

Yep.

11th level Druids in that kind of campaign? Not good, IMO. You could just flat out remove all the full casters, and maybe Bards as well for good measure. . . or you could do as suggested above - that is, requiring a level of non-spellcaster for every level of spellcaster. It's simple, but many have found it to work pretty well, not least because spellcasters suffer awfully from multiclassing. Yay! They will still have powers as others could only dream, but will have to pay for the damn things, for a change. FWIW, I prefer the former solution, brutal as it might appear. And be, in fact.

Ahem. That's my perspective, for low magic campaigns anyhow. But then, I'm of the opinion that no edition of D&D is particularly well-suited to that style of game. They're simply not built that way, to put it bluntly. There is, luckily, a veritable plethora of alternatives out there, including several d20 variants if that's your poison. :shrug: But either way, good luck with it. In the end, whatever works for you all, and y'all feel comfortable with, naturally.

 

[Nimloth]

Imo

O well, maybe you're all correct and we need to re-evaluate the entire campaign, maybe starting the next phase with non-magical classes.....

It sounds like an interesting idea, but Dnd is not the best choice for this sort of historical/low-magic game, at least not without extensive modification/restriction/nerfing of the caster classes. If you take away magic from the world, you need to take it away from the pc's as well.

The other, however, doesn't seem to see the problem, and seems to think we are trying to punish her for playing a powerfull class. We've already had one disagreement stemming from this, and I'm afraid it's not going to be the last one.

Look at it from her point of view and I think you will agree that it does look like you are trying to punish her, even if you aren't. It is difficult to change in mid-campaign, so like so many others before me. Your best choice is to start over or maybe do a reset in another system.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I agree that in a low magic setting, you need to greatly pare back the power of full casters first.

How I'd do it (in part):

1) Make full casters use the half-caster progressions, albeit shifted down so that they actually have a spell or 2 at 1st level.

2) I'd meld the Sorcerer with the Bard.

3) Clerics would still get Domain spells & powers. I'd even consider giving them more domains & powers, and excise most of their other spellcasting, esp. if they keep their armor and weapon proficiencies.

4) The druid would retain many of their abilities, but instead of a vast spell list, would just have Domains & powers related to nature- Air, Animal, Earth, Fire, Water, Plant, and Weather.

5) In the alternative, you could make domain spells into daily powers, gaining additional uses of those powers as they level up.

But even if you do that, you HAVE to cut down on the spells/day for full casters.

 

[Particle_Man]

Another thought. As technology/civilization advances, nature the source of Druid power gets weaker. Maybe it takes a 7th level spell slot to cast a 6th level spell, etc. Maybe the DCs of saving throws get higher, or the damage caps get lower. Something like that.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I like the idea of every other level has to be in some other class for casters (I'd apply this to bards, but not paladins and rangers, they can barely cast already). Simple, and effective enough I think. Also severely pushes back the availability and power of wildshape. No size large forms till level 15, no wildshape at all till level 9.

Maybe ease up on multiclassing restrcitions if you do this, like get a "free" casting class of the player's choice that doesn't count for determining xp penalties.

EDIT: or, you could give them a pre-determined second favored class (in addition ot the first), based on race. I'll take a stab at it:

Human: Sorcerer (spontaneous and creative, adaptable)
Half-Elf: Bard (or Wizard to support the elven heritage, but race seems more bard-oriented)
Dwarf: Cleric (most heavily armed and armored of the casters, and most common one for dwarves by far)
Elf: Druid (Nature...)
Halfling: Really not sure. Probably Druid or Sorcerer. Bard if you think of them as Hobbits.
Gnome: Wizard (Or specifically Illusionist, if you want)
Orc/Half-orc: Sorcerer (Primitive grasp of magic use)