Electric Wizard
First Post
One of my friends has spent years trying to get me into AD&D 2e. When I found out that a lot of the system canon is available online for free, I started looking into it.
A lot of it is pretty cool. The kits look like fun. Wizards and rangers seem really sick, and there's lots of inspirational fluff for players and DM's. What turns me off is how much the material extols nature's supposed goodness and purity. There's a huge amount of class kits dealing with "wild" types. All the ones I've read so far prohibit evil alignments, and many require characters to be good. The latter includes a kit for someone raised by wolves. Some kits even throw "noble savage" into their description. It wouldn't bother me so much if I could easily remove it, but I think the ideas are pushed so hard that they're ingrained in the classes and races.
Why am I ranting? To me, the idea of nature being benevolent in D&D is pretty ridiculous. Unless you make drastic changes, nature in D&D is terrifying. Look at the average encounter table. If you venture too far from the village palisade, you're likely to run into burrowing armored sharks, bug monsters that spit acid, dire wolves, wild boars, child-snatching eagles or centipedes as long as your arm. Feeling warm and fuzzy yet? That's just the fauna. Starvation, foraging and extreme weather rules in 2e are hardcore.
Even the fey creatures that 2e wants you to love could conquer the mortal world if they had an ounce of motivation. The nymph can kill anyone who happens to look at her. Or if she tones down her beauty, she just permanently blinds them. Almost all fey can turn invisible and/or use mind control. Treants can turn the forest into an army. I'd rather fight a dragon, thank you.
In my campaigns, nature isn't evil, but it's terrible and unforgiving. Villagers cast superstitious glances to the forests, mountains and deserts. They perform rituals in hope of appeasing the forces of life and death. Good-aligned druids, rangers and wardens are respected because they are seen as mediators between civilization and nature. Their neutral and evil counterparts mirror nature's callousness.
Do you feel me? Or do you disagree? How have you used nature in your campaigns?
A lot of it is pretty cool. The kits look like fun. Wizards and rangers seem really sick, and there's lots of inspirational fluff for players and DM's. What turns me off is how much the material extols nature's supposed goodness and purity. There's a huge amount of class kits dealing with "wild" types. All the ones I've read so far prohibit evil alignments, and many require characters to be good. The latter includes a kit for someone raised by wolves. Some kits even throw "noble savage" into their description. It wouldn't bother me so much if I could easily remove it, but I think the ideas are pushed so hard that they're ingrained in the classes and races.
Why am I ranting? To me, the idea of nature being benevolent in D&D is pretty ridiculous. Unless you make drastic changes, nature in D&D is terrifying. Look at the average encounter table. If you venture too far from the village palisade, you're likely to run into burrowing armored sharks, bug monsters that spit acid, dire wolves, wild boars, child-snatching eagles or centipedes as long as your arm. Feeling warm and fuzzy yet? That's just the fauna. Starvation, foraging and extreme weather rules in 2e are hardcore.
Even the fey creatures that 2e wants you to love could conquer the mortal world if they had an ounce of motivation. The nymph can kill anyone who happens to look at her. Or if she tones down her beauty, she just permanently blinds them. Almost all fey can turn invisible and/or use mind control. Treants can turn the forest into an army. I'd rather fight a dragon, thank you.
In my campaigns, nature isn't evil, but it's terrible and unforgiving. Villagers cast superstitious glances to the forests, mountains and deserts. They perform rituals in hope of appeasing the forces of life and death. Good-aligned druids, rangers and wardens are respected because they are seen as mediators between civilization and nature. Their neutral and evil counterparts mirror nature's callousness.
Do you feel me? Or do you disagree? How have you used nature in your campaigns?
Last edited:
