UPDATE: I don't like the name. I increasingly feel like it's simply the wrong fit for my vision of generic fantasy: no matter how many contexts it gets used in I don't feel like I can separate the name from its original context.
So I'm trying to think of alternatives. So far I've come up with "greenpriest" and "wildpriest".
(original post that was confusing: )
I'm not sure "druid" needs a rethink. I'm also not sure it doesn't, as I'm not a person who get affected either way.
But I increasingly feel like it's simply the wrong fit for my vision of generic fantasy: no matter how many contexts it gets used in I don't feel like I can separate the name from its original, historical context.
So I'm trying to think of alternatives. So far I've come up with "greenpriest" and "wildpriest".
(I probably do not want to use the word "shaman" as I'm worried that also has some real world connections I don't want to exploit.)
If I understand right, your concern is that Druid is too specific, too much connected to a historical or literal archetype, not generic enough.
I am afraid the same could be said about all classes except Fighter and Rogue.
OTOH the word Druid is actually not that specific as it seems. Just take a quick look at Wikipedia or your favourite paper encyclopedia and you can notice that between the fact that the original (or at least oldest) druids aren't exactly well-known, and the other fact that different sorts of self-appointed "druids" existed in different eras including today, you end up with quite a good range of druidic archetypes after all. You can (de)emphasize specific aspects to suit different fantasy settings. I think that even Asterix's druids are perfectly fine after all.
Besides, all the alternative names suggested so far sound much worse to me. I especially loath names in two-words form, they are such clichès used especially by mediocre game designers with limited vocabulary. But I dislike them also when used by major game designers, including magic-user and fighting-man (just to make it clear I am not a defender of everything just because it's traditional).
But I must say that shapechanging is probably a very D&D specific idea. I am not sure if there used to be real-world legends about druids turning into animals.
A subtle reason why shapechanging is so iconic is because it's a separate special ability and so it stands out. If it was just another spell on the druid's list, it would not have the same effect on the class image.
It's also something that started out as a very minor feature and grew over the editions - as you say, for the sake of uniqueness.
Taking on the form of beasts really belongs in shamanism. How shamanic the original druid belief system was we really don't know, since most of what we have comes from Roman historians, who wrote what they did (only one person in that wicker man, Lord Summerisle?!), rather than what they believed.
Merlin does quite a lot of shapeshifting in T.H. White's books, and the movie version probably had an influence on D&D.
A valid choice for his world!
The class name is there for 50 years and it will remain!
I’m a fan of creative world building, thus renaming Druid : Nature priest and for me, delete nature domain for cleric is an honest choice.
But I warn that sticking to close to historical facts may lead to dull and restrained building. DnD is full of sloppy borrowing from various tales, mythology and culture.
Don't have an answer about that yet. I guess it's fine but I haven't thought about it enough.
