D&D (2024) New Wild Shape

[mellored]

Interesting. Nice symmetry.

There are several spells that would make good "forms".

Including investure of fire to be an elemental. (OK, it's a crap spell, but the idea is there)

 

[Remathilis]

But does it need to be full caster to do that?

What if it's the invocation model, and one of the choices is "Cast Wall of Thorns Once Per Short Rest" (or whatever the frequency is)?

Keep in mind that the druid in 1e was a full caster who couldn't change shape until 7th level, and the Basic D&D druid was a cleric that got additional druid spells but no shape shifting at all. To me, I'd rather give up wild shape than primal magic.

 

[mellored]

But does it need to be full caster to do that?

What if it's the invocation model, and one of the choices is "Cast Wall of Thorns Once Per Short Rest" (or whatever the frequency is)?

Sure.
And while your at it, combine it with spiked growth and plant growth, and have it scale.

A lot of spells are just higher versions of lower level spells, and that always seemed odd.

Not really sure what the primal spell list is going to do without a druid though. But meh.

 

[mellored]

Keep in mind that the druid in 1e was a full caster who couldn't change shape until 7th level, and the Basic D&D druid was a cleric that got additional druid spells but no shape shifting at all. To me, I'd rather give up wild shape than primal magic.

I do wonder if the "druid" in the movie will cast any spells, or only shape shift.

Shape shifting had definitely been a growing part of what a "druid" is.

 

[Chaosmancer]

While I agree with you on armoured (why so people get worked up about druids not being able to wear metal again? Is it a cleric thing?),

Not sure which angle you meant the question from, but this does tickle an annoyance of mine. Before I rant though, I do like the idea of just restricting the druid to Light Armor and calling it a day. That works perfectly fine.

I don't like the "no-metal" rule because it was incoherent (metal tools = fine, metal armor =/= fine), not a true balancing factor (you were encouraged to make non-metal armors that were just as good), not supported (there were no canonical non-magical armors in the rules) and deeply, deeply misunderstands (to my senses) what "nature" means.

This is actually a deep problem with the Druid and Ranger in general, in that "Nature" often means "Forest" to the designers and the community. But Nature is so much more than mere forests. Mountains, Underdark caves, deserts, the ocean floor, all of it. And that constantly bugs me with how trivially easy it would be to justify metal armors, but I'm locked into a forest mindset which supposedly prevents it.

And it isn't just this one thing (I remember ranting about stupid Ettercap lore that made spiders not nature) but it does irritate me.

 

[Captain Panda]

2. Scaled-back spellcasting. Whether that's 2/3 or 1/2 spellcaster, or maybe using the Warlock model, I don't know. But not full caster.

That one is straight up not going to happen. When I see suggestions like a Druid with no spells or half-caster Druid, I don't get it. Shouldn't feedback at least be in the ballpark of possibility? They have a full "Primal" spell list. They aren't going to scrap that, and Druids are literally the only full spellcaster who makes use of that full list.

 

[Remathilis]

I do wonder if the "druid" in the movie will cast any spells, or only shape shift.

Shape shifting had definitely been a growing part of what a "druid" is.

I wouldn't use the movie as a water line for that, because afaict, the bard and the paladin aren't exactly spellslinging either in that.

But I do agree that the thing that separates the druid from a nature cleric is wild shape and I don't think you can remove it from the class. I'm just saying in a tug of wars between full caster with limited shape changing and a shifter with some minor nature magic, I'm taking the former every time.

 

[Remathilis]

That one is straight up not going to happen. When I see suggestions like a Druid with no spells or half-caster Druid, I don't get it. Shouldn't feedback at least be in the ballpark of possibility? They have a full "Primal" spell list. They aren't going to scrap that, and Druids are literally the only full spellcaster who makes use of that full list.

You gotta remember the two universal truths of D&D spellcasting.

1. Most D&D players like spellcasting and having access to magic
2. Most Enworld posters hate spellcasting and would remove it from every class but the wizard and maybe the cleric if given a chance.

 

[Clint_L]

That one is straight up not going to happen. When I see suggestions like a Druid with no spells or half-caster Druid, I don't get it. Shouldn't feedback at least be in the ballpark of possibility? They have a full "Primal" spell list. They aren't going to scrap that, and Druids are literally the only full spellcaster who makes use of that full list.

Agreed. I start to tune out of discussions once they start getting into hypotheticals that just aren’t in the cards.

Druids are still going to be full casters who can shapeshift into animals. That is the core of their 5e identity.

 

[Bill Zebub]

That one is straight up not going to happen.

If that were a requirement for posting in this forum there would be nothing but OGL threads.

:-/