Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8950814" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Okay, do I need to say more than "Ranger" to explain why a design philosophy of being effective only in more niche situations is a poor design philosophy? Druid's already have plenty of tools to deal with the problems involving talking to animals, and all the suggested ribbon does is put forth the idea that Druids who just cast Speak with Animals are going to be less effective at talking to animals than Druids that use wildshape. And that, in my expeirence, won't make wildshape more appealing, because "speaking to animals" has never been a situation where I've had the druid roll difficult checks on persuasion or deception. Ding ding! You never need this ability, so why would giving this ability balance the class? You could give artificers advantage on social rolls against Constructs, and it wouldn't move the needle on the class's actual power or effectiveness, so why would we imagine this works for druids and animals? But the class can already do this. That is my point. Speak With Animals is plenty to give the druid the expectation that they can go and talk to animals and get them to do things. You don't need a "social manipulator" for the animal kingdom, because most animals are dumb and short-sighted and offering them some food or some shiny rock is plenty to get them to go and do something. I'm not saying the idea of the druid getting animals to work for them is a bad idea, I'm saying they already accomplish the goal without rolling, so why give them advantage on a roll they never make?</blockquote>

Verification