Wo only need the druid class!

[Texicles]

I like druid, but not the 4E's one. 4E's wild shape is bad because I see no different between Bear and Penguin in 4E's wild shape.

Its not shapeshift just skinchange

Personally, I like the 4e druid best (for melee combat). I agree that it can be a little lacking in the flavor department with a unified abilities list for any animal. But, I also contend that the actual mechanical function of the Wild Shape Druid was a lot of fun and pretty well-balanced. I know that gameism and enjoyment of mechanical underpinnings are badwrongfun to many of the purists, but I liked it about 4e and hope to see 5e provide me with the option/ability to metagame like 4e or RP like 2e at will (cantrip now?).

Also, in regards to summoning, I said as much in another thread, but I think that summoned critters need to be kept in check for all classes, and Druids are no different.

 

[Minigiant]

I think the druid should go the specialization point route and let individual druid invest in this the various aspects of Druidism. Every druid could have primal conttoling spells, animal and spirit companions, wild shaping, and healing magic. But they are only fair strength at first and the druid must choose. What 3.X did wrong was have spells, wildshape, and companions as separate features and have them all increase at the same rate. What 4E did wrong was make them separate classes as the barbarian, druid, shaman, and warden.

What they should do is go back to the 3.X druid but FORCE the druid to choose which features increase and by how much. The druid can turn into a wolf and have a wolf companion but have crap for spells. Or the druid can summon flocks of eagles and lining but have an eagle companion that is too weak for combat and a pathetically short and limited wildshape. Or a wild shaping druid who can cast healing spells while tranformed but a weak spell list and companion.

But no bear summoning bears with bear buddies.

 

[The Shadow]

Now, nobody would describe me as a 4e fan. I'm not a hater, but it's just not my cup of tea.

But I think it's only fair that 5e should provide *some* reasonable way to translate over existing 4e classes and races. They don't have to all be classes, but they do need to be fighting styles, domains, specialties, traditions, whatever.

One of the huge dealbreakers about 4e for me, and for a lot of other people, was that the PHB1 was missing so very much stuff. No bard, no druid, no gnome, etc. (For someone who has loved playing gnomes in the past, that nasty "I'm a monster, rawr!" video added plenty of insult to injury.)

I see no reason why 4e fans should experience the same. I do recognize that there's only so many pages in the PHB, and it may not be possible to accommodate *all* of the 4e classes all at once, but:

1) It should definitely find space for the most popular ones, and

2) There should be a supplement covering the rest that comes out quickly.

It's just not right to invalidate people's cherished characters, providing no easy way to continue playing them.

 

[GreyICE]

Well at least we haven't seen a call to return to the 3.X "Godking" druid.

The problem is that Druids have worse identity issues than Clerics. They took Ranger's Animal Companion... and did it better than Rangers. They have an ability that could literally be its own class (Wild Shape) and they have spells.

The identity issues continued in 4E, even though they were a well balanced class. They were a Controller/Striker/Defender with some Leader powers tossed in, based solely on how they built their class. Every time someone says "each class had a role and they strictly followed it, they all played the same" I think about Druids and laugh. They could do anything.

But they couldn't do EVERYTHING.

I'm... I'm not sure there is a good way to capture this. Druid was the one class in Pathfinder that was intentionally and directly nerfed (not through spell list, not through feat removal, through direct attack on their core features) and they're STILL one of the most powerful classes in Pathfinder.

Really, there's at least three classes hiding in the Druid, and I'm not sure how to capture that in gameplay terms.

 

[john112364]

Personally, I liked the Trailblazer Game's solution to wild shape for the 3e Druid. Basically, you had a list of abilities that you always got when you shifted plus you could pick two or three extra abilities from a separate list. Basically you decided what abilities you gained from the change without needing an enormous list of creatures. For instance, if you wanted to be a bear, you would choose +2 Str, +2 Con and improved grab, if that's what you wanted your bear form to be able to do. And yes, I suppose you could easily min/max the list, but is that really any different than a fist full of potential creatures?

 

[tuxgeo]

I think the druid should have a limited set of wild shape forms. You start out with a single alternate shape, and you can learn more over time, but you never get beyond maybe 3-5 options. It provides a nice way for individual druids to define themselves (when you need to fight, are you a tiger, or are you a bear?), and it cuts way down on the "analysis paralysis" effect. . . .

[Emphasis added in quote.]
You're getting very close to a good druid there; and "a single alternate shape" might be a good place to start a Level-0 druid PC. However, there are going to be some players who want to start at Level 1 with two alternate forms instead of just one. (We know this, right?)

Perhaps the druid could have:
(1) limited spellcasting; and
(2) a choice of either:
- (a) wildshaping; or
- (b) summoning; or
- (c) animal companion; and
(3) one first-level augment or boost to either #1 or #2 .

That way, a druid could be a strong spellcaster with limited shaping/summoning/companion on the side; or be a limited spellcaster with strong shaping or strong summoning or strong companion on the side. You could cover a lot of people's different ideas with that scheme.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I read the thread title as what classes are left we "need".

I am actually shocked they released the Sorcerer and Warlock before the Bard, Druid, Monk, Paladin and Ranger.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Because it doesnt come from a god

But it comes from belief/faith/communing with a greater power, and is used by priests.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Then the gane stalls while the druid player goes through a ton of photocopied animals from the MM. Which is only slightly faster.

Then the DM is running the game poorly if they don't insist that the druid gets no longer than a normal turn in real time to pick his shape change. Seriously, it's just rude to make the other players sit, bored, while you read the book, especially if it happens repeatedly and it's avoidable with a bit of player prep.

Or you could go with my solution: the player picks an unchanging list of one creature per two levels that he can change into. That way the player gets familiar with the choices so he can choose quickly and the spell becomes a bit less powerful.

Another a system I used in a game with silver dragon PCs: the player gets to pick a set of creatures for his shape changing, the HD of which add up to his HD in his natural form. Frex, a 12 HD dragon might choose the options of a 4th level fighter, a 2 HD sea turtle, a 4 HD dire hawk, a 1 HD rat, and a 1 HD large spider. Pair this with a limited number of changes per day, including the changes back to natural form, and shape becomes a serious tactical choice, not an all purpose tool for solving everything.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

Why not look to the new Sorcerer as a source of inspiration for the new Druid class.

Let's say all Druids have links to different aspects of nature, but not all of nature. Maybe these links to nature come in the form of certain... I guess for lack of better terminology... Forms (insert better term if you have one).
~ these Forms... an example: Feline Form... the Druid gains a Wildshape to felines, gains Feline animal traits like nightvision and cats fall, gains cats grace spell ability, a boost to Dexterity, and later on can become different sizes, from housecats to gigantic Lions.
~ another Form: Tree Form... the Druid gains a Wildshape to plants and trees, basically like a Treant, gains the ability to heal through photosynthesis, able to teleport through trees, gains barkskin like abilities, and later on can grow into Gigantic walking Treants with the strength to wield giant freaking clubs.

Another ways to link Druids to Nature is through the land. Maybe make each Druid begin with an Affinity to a land type, and they gain powers through this link, while in the land type.

A third way is through an Element... Air, Earth, Fire, Water, Spirit, Dark, and gains spell-like powers through their element.

Imagine an Avian Form Druid with Air element powers... turn into a large eagle and fire lightning from your beak... or a Feline Form Druid with a special link to thee Spirit plane, summoning other Spirit forms and channeling powers through those Spirit forms.

Provide the tools, but make them choices... give Wildshape, but limit it. Give nature powers, but in some way make them more like an Affinity. Make Druids awesome but they have to specialize to gain their awesomeness.

Then no two Druids would ever be the same.