851 réponses à ce sujet

[rjshae]

Druids are certainly a lot more interesting to play in NWN2 than they were in BG2, so perhaps Cernd will prove an interesting pick.

[Dann-J]

Druids are certainly a lot more interesting to play in NWN2 than they were in BG2, so perhaps Cernd will prove an interesting pick.

 

Not being restricted to non-metal armour is a bonus - although it flies in the face of 3.5 rules.

 

Personally, I never understood why druids weren't supposed to use metal armour. Metal is mined from the earth (which druids have an affinity for), and metals that can be found in their native state (copper, gold, cold iron, etc) require no potentially polluting smelting process to extract them from ore. Yet apparently it's fine for a nature-loving druid to walk around draped in the skin of a dead animal, or to wear magically hardened wooden armour made by killing trees.

[Tchos]

Personally, I never understood why druids weren't supposed to use metal armour. Metal is mined from the earth (which druids have an affinity for), and metals that can be found in their native state (copper, gold, cold iron, etc) require no potentially polluting smelting process to extract them from ore. Yet apparently it's fine for a nature-loving druid to walk around draped in the skin of a dead animal, or to wear magically hardened wooden armour made by killing trees.

 

I've thought the same thing.  Totally agreed.  It's the appeal to nature, but specifically excluding certain natural things.

 

The Elder Scrolls wood elves went in another extreme direction and refuse to use anything made of wood, or to eat any plants (The Green Pact).

[Luminus]

Druids are certainly better in NwN2, even more so with Kaedrin's pack.
(Ember Guard Jaheira with a Dino here I come)

Not being restricted to non-metal armour is a bonus - although it flies in the face of 3.5 rules.

 

Personally, I never understood why druids weren't supposed to use metal armour. Metal is mined from the earth (which druids have an affinity for), and metals that can be found in their native state (copper, gold, cold iron, etc) require no potentially polluting smelting process to extract them from ore. Yet apparently it's fine for a nature-loving druid to walk around draped in the skin of a dead animal, or to wear magically hardened wooden armour made by killing trees.

The belief that Druids are hippies that are against any animal killing or tree-cutting is a common misconception.
What they are against is excessive killing of those for profit or sport.
They will kill animals for food and to cover/protect themselves and will cut down wood to make fires and make weapons.

Metal armor is also something that needs to be processed extensively and it's not organic/living.
Animal hides and wood are organic, they can be discarded and they will return to the earth, reinforcing that cycle of life.

Metal can corrode but it cannot be destroyed and absorbed by the earth, it is not organic and cannot return to the earth.
Therefore wearing something that was never alive (non-organic) and dead at all levels (no cells like wood or animal hides) with the inability to be absorbed by the earth, goes against their vows and philosophies.

Metal-working is also a product of civilization and industrialization. And Druids prefer to keep away from those and instead focus on living with nature.

About weapons, this philosophy doesn't apply. The weapons they use are symbolic.
The sickle is a tool of farming as well as gathering herbs.
The scimitar symbolizes the fangs of animals.
The spear is also a fishing tool and also a hunting tool.

Most of those come either from older editions, historical Celtic Druids, as well as serving as an RP flavor and balancing factor.

[Tchos]

But there are metals that do not require that kind of processing, as Dann showed.  And metals can in fact deteriorate, return to the Earth, and be converted to organic forms, and be absorbed by plants.

[Luminus]

But there are metals that do not require that kind of processing, as Dann showed.  And metals can in fact deteriorate, return to the Earth, and be converted to organic forms, and be absorbed by plants.

I am not sure (honestly) which metals can be turned into full, proper and functioning suits of armor without proper forging and smithing and which ones can be absorbed by the earth.

But as far as I'm aware of, the most common ones, cannot be absorbed by the earth since we keep finding rusty or other pieces of metal that were buried since ancient times.
I mean, even plastic can eventually be absorbed by the earth but it's not something you would consider environmentally friendly and organic, right?
I think this is the best example I have.

Compared to wood and animal skins, metal is less "natural" (as in, non-organic and cannot be absorbed by the earth as easily), as well as the process to make metal armor is also less natural (the civilization/industrialization) part.

With weapons, you could at least get some pieces of metal, melt them, hammer (or stone them) into shape and then sharpen them on rocks, before putting some leather around it and call it a working scimitar/spear/sickle.
And actually, you could make such weapons from glass or bone and serve the same function  gameplay-wise.

In the end, it's what I said, flavor. For the same reason Paladins need to be only Lawful Good and have a Code of Conduct that is functionally and gameplay-wise useless and restrict you because reasons.
And I like the fact that Druids have such restrictions and flavor to them. Otherwise they would just be a Cleric clone that turns into animals instead of having Domains and be a boring shifter type.

[Tchos]

Gold, silver, and some other metals can be found naturally in their metallic states, and were made into armour and weapons in ancient times, before forging and smithing (they can be simply hammered into shape, without need for heating).  They were the first metals to be used by humans for that purpose, because they're so easy to work with.

 

The rusted objects you mention -- the parts that are rusted away have returned to the Earth.  Rusting isn't the only way metals break down and get reabsorbed, but yes, you'll find many metals intact after millennia in areas where conditions are good for that metal's preservation, whereas in other environments you'll find metals breaking down very quickly.  Especially whenever mineral-rich waters (natural electrolysis) or organic acids (conversion to organic form) are present.  Metals are routinely made organic through natural processes, and many of them are necessary nutrients for life.  They're all part of the cycle.

[Luminus]

The point of wearing only natural armor is that they are easy to make without disrupting the earth too much (if at all, since dead animals are dead anyway to eat them or natural causes and wood can be regrown) and easy to return to it.
I think this is the reason some druids dislike typical dwarves since they disrupt the earth by the constant digging/mining to get ore (while animals do it for food or safety).
Not sure where I read the latter but I think it was one of the sourcebooks.

The point still stands, metal is not easy to have it returned to the earth compared to animal skins and wood or leaves. Or as easy to find, extract and create.

Anyway, this is getting off-topic and it's best left for another thread. Most things in DnD don't make 100% realistic sense and they're there for flavor/traditional/balance reasons. No reason to overthink about them.

[Dann-J]

And yet druids can wear crystal armour. Crystals are less likely to break down chemically than metals are.

 

Not to mention the hypocrisy of refusing to wear metal armour, but carrying around a big ol' steel scimitar. And what of studded leather? Surely those studs are made from metal.

 

I wonder where druids stand on wearing aurumvorax hide? It has a higher metal content than studded leather. Or gorgon plate armour, for that matter (even more metal).

[Luminus]

And yet druids can wear crystal armour. Crystals are less likely to break down chemically than metals are.

 

Not to mention the hypocrisy of refusing to wear metal armour, but carrying around a big ol' steel scimitar.

Like I said above, scimitars can be made from bone or other materials and even if it's steel, the shape symbolizes the claws/fangs of animals.
Their oaths prohibit them from wearing metal armor. Not weapons.

Once more, don't try to make sense of it, it's all symbolic/flavor/tradition. And symbolism never made any real sense.

[Tchos]

The point still stands, metal is not easy to have it returned to the earth compared to animal skins and wood or leaves. Or as easy to find, extract and create.

Anyway, this is getting off-topic and it's best left for another thread. Most things in DnD don't make 100% realistic sense and they're there for flavor/traditional/balance reasons. No reason to overthink about them.

 

Yes, it is off-topic.  I understand the points you're trying to make, and as flavour I suppose it'll have to do, but it's factually wrong, because you don't need to mine, nor smelt, nor disrupt the earth to use metals that were once used for these purposes, and metal is very easy to return to the earth -- as easy as plants and animals in the sea, for instance, and is naturally present everywhere, including within all living things.

[Luminus]

Yes, it is off-topic.  I understand the points you're trying to make, and as flavour I suppose it'll have to do, but it's factually wrong, because you don't need to mine, nor smelt, nor disrupt the earth to use metals that were once used for these purposes, and metal is very easy to return to the earth -- as easy as plants and animals in the sea, for instance, and is naturally present everywhere, including within all living things.

Those aren't my points exactly. Just trying to justify and make sense of the flavor of the class restrictions. The PHB never went into much detail about it so this is the closest to explaining their philosophies.
Unless a sourcebook goes into more detail.

If people disagree with them, they are free to change the lore/flavor in their modules/PWs/PnP Campaigns.
Personally, I like it and I prefer it to seeing or playing "nature-worshippers" in Full Plate from head to toe with a Tower Shield and a Morningstar in hand.

It's the theme they're trying to go for. Someone only wearing simple pieces of nature like typical tribal warriors.
For example, there's another unrealistic inconsistency: Arcanists unable to wear armor. There's no real explanation other than armor gets in the way, even if it's just a breastplate that doesn't block hand movements.
The reason is once again flavor. The classic image of a mage is one in robes (Gandalf, Saruman, Merlic etc), not heavy armor.

[Tchos]

I know, I get it.  If it's just that druids do this because they have these odd opinions about metal that don't actually correlate with the natural world, or that they've collectively made some oath for some reason, then there's nothing to dispute.  I sometimes have to work to make lore make sense, too (basically justifying errors made by the authors, usually), but not at the expense of saying that certain things don't occur in nature when they do.

[Luminus]

I know, I get it.  If it's just that druids do this because they have these odd opinions about metal that don't actually correlate with the natural world, or that they've collectively made some oath for some reason, then there's nothing to dispute.  I sometimes have to work to make lore make sense, too (basically justifying errors made by the authors, usually), but not at the expense of saying that certain things don't occur in nature when they do.

There are various explanations as to why they don't wear specifically metal armor, so I tried to make some sense of them based on things I've read etc.
The explanation could simply be: "We don't want to look and be like the ones that cut down forests to build cities, so we vowed to not follow their ways."

[Dann-J]

I suppose one good reason for a druid not to wear metal armour is so they can cast Call Lightning without risking self-harm.

[Dann-J]

It's the theme they're trying to go for. Someone only wearing simple pieces of nature like typical tribal warriors.
For example, there's another unrealistic inconsistency: Arcanists unable to wear armor. There's no real explanation other than armor gets in the way, even if it's just a breastplate that doesn't block hand movements.

 

So there are D&D rules that allow for arcanist tanks, such as the Still Spell feat, or specialising in verbal-only spells with no somatic components.

 

I agree with your point about breastplates. Surely a long-sleeved robe and a pair of bracers would restrict hand movements more? The official definition of a somatic component is:

 

A  measured and precise movement of the HAND. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.

 

Yet a robe-wearing wizard with a dagger in each hand can apparently cast better than a breastplate-wearing wizard with empty hands. And how exactly would a traditional staff-wielding wizard manage to cast at all? A staff is a two-handed weapon, after all.

[Luminus]

So there are D&D rules that allow for arcanist tanks, such as the Still Spell feat, or specialising in verbal-only spells with no somatic components.

 

I agree with your point about breastplates. Surely a long-sleeved robe and a pair of bracers would restrict hand movements more? The official definition of a somatic component is:

 

A  measured and precise movement of the HAND. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.

 

Yet a robe-wearing wizard with a dagger in each hand can apparently cast better than a breastplate-wearing wizard with empty hands. And how exactly would a traditional staff-wielding wizard manage to cast at all? A staff is a two-handed weapon, after all.

Yup, I know of the Still Spell and Automatic Still Spell or PrCs (Bladesinger) that allow casting in armor, or enchantments that lower Arcane Spell Failure etc.

Druids of Mielikki can also wear metal armor but only Light (like Rangers) but also Dragonhide Fullplate with a Dragonhide Tower Shield etc.
So go figure.

About the staff, it does say in the books that you could hold a two-handed weapon in one hand when you cast a spell (like a q-staff or greatsword), no problem.

[kamal_]

Because Gygax said so. And because of the historical concept of druids that he drew from. Same reason wizards are a no armor class, Merlin et al didnt wear armor.

There were some game balance reasons as well, as high level druids used to get various awesome powers like planewalking and the ability to survive on the elemental planes. Essentially they got epic feats before the idea of epic feats. They used to get more spells more quickly than clerics, with shorter casting times, and had a variety of offensive spells when clerics had very few offensive spells, plus most of the healing the clerics had (iirc they only lacked Ressurection out of the cure-> raise dead line)

[Luminus]

To get back on topic, speaking of Cernd, something I wanted to ask:
How will you handle the werewolf part of Cernd's kit?

Is it going to be a custom PrC?
A simple "spell-like" ability that evolves and is unique only to him?
A feat like Dinosaur Companion that disables/replaces animal Wild Shape for Werewolf form?
An alternate Wild Shape class feature like the Ranger's Weapon Styles?
A background trait/feat that can only be selected at character creation?
Or not touch it at all?

I think it would be really fun to be able to get something as CHARNAME to enable you to turn into a Werewolf and not be exclusive to Cernd.

[rjshae]

Since Cernd was a lycanthrope who was also a druid, perhaps the SRD rules for lycanthropic characters could be applied? Basically a couple of levels of Animal, +2 Wis, +2 natural armor, &c. Alternate form would be a little more difficult, but possibly a custom feat would work.

[Tchos]

A decent lycanthropy system (as well as vampirism system) that could be used for players or companions could certainly be done, though it would probably be a chore.

[kamal_]

I'd guess there are PW's with lycanthropy systems.

[Luminus]

The werewolf part is because of the Shapeshifter kit, not sure if his backstory explains it further but the kit description mentions that Shapeshifter Druids willingly subjected themselves to lycanthropy in order to master it.

"This druid has willingly allowed himself to become infected with Lycanthropy, but due to intense study and training he has the ability to control his affliction." -  http://www.gamebansh...hapeshifter.php

Charname can also pick the Shapeshifter kit and turn into a werewolf, it's not exclusive to Cernd.
So if it's done, it's would be better if it's done as part of the Druid class (feat/background/alternate class feature etc), not a new race or custom ability.
The bonuses should also reflect those in BG, not 3.5E. Since Shapeshifters can turn into Greater Werewolves later on.

[Arkalezth]

If the point is staying true to his original class/kit, then you could always replace the normal druid shapes with a werewolf model and maybe some different stats (as shifters don't get the normal shapes in BG2).

 

Then again, I think part of the point of the remake is to use 3.5 rules, so he could just be a basic 3.5 druid as well, or maybe some shifter PRC if Kaedrin's pack is implemented (nature warrior?).

[rjshae]

Since the focus of the kit is on the use of wild shape ability, perhaps he should just be given the Extra Wild Shape feat and leave it at that?