Does AD&D Really Need the Druid Class?

Remove all ads!

I just wanted to throw and opinion out and see what everyone has to say.

Anyway, in AD&D, why do need have a Druid class?

As far as I understand it, any Cleric of Eldath is pretty much a Druid! ... or for that matter a Cleric of Chauntea - since I don't think Clerics of Eldath can fight.

[ April 30, 2003, 12:48: Message edited by: Blackhawk ]

 

Yep.

Druids are way cooler than clerics.

 

Druids are just as unique as any other class. You might see a druid as a sort of cleric, but isn't than a paladin a sort of fighter and a sorcerer a kind of wizard. Druids have their own place among the classes and in my opinion, it is one of the best classes.

 

Druids are an important part of the system. They are not simply a type of cleric. While cleric are servants to a deity, druids are servants of nature. Even if you point to deities of nature it not the same as nature herself. Druids a part of classic fantasy writing and like the other classes in D&D they have an unique place in the rules.

 

How can anyone say "are druids even necesary?"?
Pure herecy. He should be burned at a stake!!


Sorry for the outburst but this really disturbed me. Druids are my favourite class you see.

But if they werent there at all who would protect the balance and nature????

A cleric would follow convictions of his god. Let's say that god is good. He fights evil and lets say defeats it and couses it to die out.
What would then be?
All goody-two-shoes walking around and a happy world. Whats interesting in that??
D&D would be ruined, the fun lost and it would be abandoned.


So you see what would happen? D&D would cease to exist soon after the banishment of druids. You wouldnt like that would you?

Therefore druids the're necessary for the survival of D&D.

 

A Cleric of Chauntea would have the same goals as a Druid - fight for nature and the "balance". There is no real difference between the two. We can call these priests "druids".

 

Yeah but a cleric of Chauntea would pray to his god for spells and not nature itself.

He'd wear heavy armor, use metal weapons and armor.

Do you imagine a cleric in a forest tending the animals? i know i dont.
I imagine a cleric in a church taking care of the fame of his god and wellfare of the people.

And you cant call any type of cleric no matter how close he is to nature or what his goals are a druid. The major part in being a druid is their culture and their oath they take when becoming one.

It's true i overeacted in my previous post but i really think druids are a unique class with much difference to clerics. Generaly people rather use clerics to an unknown reason to me.

And they're cool

 

Playing Devil's Advocate here: If you take away druids, there's still rangers to take care of nature.

 

Don't worry. I am getting close to committing AD&D blasphemy - no doubt people will get ticked!

I agree. I can't see a standard cleric hanging out in the woods and feeding chipmunks.

But, the specialized clerics certainly have different behaviors. I can't see a Cleric of Loviatar sitting in the library for hours on end like a Cleric of Oghma. Also, a Cleric of Malar would never live in a city. Instead, they would be in the same woods as a Druid, but with a bunch blood-thirsty hunters tearing apart the body of some poor woodland creature.

I checked the class restrictions for the different mythos, and the Druid and Cleric of Chauntea are almost identical:

Armor: Anything natural
Weapons: Club, sicle, dart, spear, dagger, scimitar, slings, staff
Requirements: Wis 12, Cha 15

The only difference is that Chauntea is Neutral Good and Druids are true neutral.

I think they need a Druid, but it should be a type of Cleric - just like an assassin is a type of thief.

 

There's still a difference:
-Druids can worship gods but mostly they do not. Clerics always do. Some druids do worship Chauntea. But some even view gods as a threat to nature.

-There are many types of druids depending on the enviroment (deserd, forest, gray, tundra,...).

-Druidic language

-Druidic oath

... Thats all i can think of right now. All this differs a druid from a cleric of Chauntea.


And if a druid would be a kit of clerics what would happen to kits of druids?
Would you be a "Cleric of Chauntea-Druid-avenger-forest" ?


If we put Druids under clerics as a kit why dont we put rangers, paladins and barbarians under fighter. They're all warriors.
Warriors, rogues, arcane spellcasters and divine spellcasters.
This way we could have only 4 classes and lots of sub-classes. All would be includedas if there were 12 classes as now.
But why isnt it so?
Becouse people thought there is too much difference between these to put them under one class alone as a kit. And they decided druids are unique andthat they cannot be stuffed as a kit cleric.
And so they are unique.

[ May 01, 2003, 12:14: Message edited by: Gothmog4230 ]

 

Not to forget the many kick ass skills they learn, like a thousand faces.