Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7112803" data-attributes="member: 5142">Maybe you have different experiences, but nature clerics and druids of the land play extraordinarily differently at my table. There is not much overlap in the spell lists between the <a href="https://5thsrd.org/spellcasting/spell_lists/cleric_spells/" target="_blank">cleric</a> and the <a href="https://5thsrd.org/spellcasting/spell_lists/druid_spells/" target="_blank">druid</a>, and the nature domain only adds a small smattering of the druid's spell list while also leaving out many of the more iconic and flavorful spells. The same was also true back in 3E.If you want the druid to shine, then why not rid ourselves of the redundant nature domain cleric? That inherently involves less cuts. It's the loss of a subclass verses the complete redesign of a class (and the redistribution of its powers across classes). Making the nature priest into the caster druid or &quot;nature caster,&quot; as is, would require changing the scope and impact of cleric domains far greater than they presently are. Furthermore, reducing the spellcasting of the druid to emphasize its shapeshifting does not actually reduce any redundancy; it just shifts the redundancy around. How would the spell selection, for example, differ between the proposed Nature Cleric and the Mearls' Druid? And if you are giving the whole &quot;scimitar and shield&quot; aesthetic to the nature cleric, then that means that the druid is losing its &quot;scimitar and shield&quot; aesthetic that it once had. In terms of class-attached flavor and tradition, that sort of loss should not be underestimated. I have explained elsewhere that I do not see the druid simply as a &quot;nature priest,&quot; at least in the context of D&amp;D, but as a primal spellcaster who represents a force of nature. Shapeshifting is a small sliver of that aspect, as it primarily involves animal ferocity, but the druid also encapsulates meteorological phenomenon, plants and fungi, and ecosystems. A nature cleric, IMHO, represents an aspect of nature via the lens of their deity's portfolio, whereas a druid represents nature in its raw totality.May your campaigns be blessed with many rapier-wielding paladins.Sincerely, Aldarc</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 7112803, member: 5142"] Maybe you have different experiences, but nature clerics and druids of the land play extraordinarily differently at my table. There is not much overlap in the spell lists between the [URL="https://5thsrd.org/spellcasting/spell_lists/cleric_spells/"]cleric[/URL] and the [URL="https://5thsrd.org/spellcasting/spell_lists/druid_spells/"]druid[/URL], and the nature domain only adds a small smattering of the druid's spell list while also leaving out many of the more iconic and flavorful spells. The same was also true back in 3E. If you want the druid to shine, then why not rid ourselves of the redundant nature domain cleric? That inherently involves less cuts. It's the loss of a subclass verses the complete redesign of a class (and the redistribution of its powers across classes). Making the nature priest into the caster druid or "nature caster," as is, would require changing the scope and impact of cleric domains far greater than they presently are. Furthermore, reducing the spellcasting of the druid to emphasize its shapeshifting does not actually reduce any redundancy; it just shifts the redundancy around. How would the spell selection, for example, differ between the proposed Nature Cleric and the Mearls' Druid? And if you are giving the whole "scimitar and shield" aesthetic to the nature cleric, then that means that the druid is losing its "scimitar and shield" aesthetic that it once had. In terms of class-attached flavor and tradition, that sort of loss should not be underestimated. I have explained elsewhere that I do not see the druid simply as a "nature priest," at least in the context of D&D, but as a primal spellcaster who represents a force of nature. Shapeshifting is a small sliver of that aspect, as it primarily involves animal ferocity, but the druid also encapsulates meteorological phenomenon, plants and fungi, and ecosystems. A nature cleric, IMHO, represents an aspect of nature via the lens of their deity's portfolio, whereas a druid represents nature in its raw totality. May your campaigns be blessed with many rapier-wielding paladins. Sincerely, Aldarc [/QUOTE]

Verification