Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Daddy Man 03-04-06, 01:35 PM	Looking for people's opinions, or if this has already been discussed, please send me a link to that discussion. Thanks Question: Am I incorrect in thinking that the spells (when considering spells from PHB and Spell Compendium books only) GREATLY favors the Druid in spell casting firepower (especially at levels 1 - 3)? Especially spell casting spells that either do damage or require some sort of save (i.e "non buffing spells')? It doesn't even seem close....am I wrong? Background: I am consindering playing a character concept (divine casting "rouge-ish" character) with a custom prestige class that allows for full spell progression. I am not going to explain the whole prestige class here, but the key points is that no other "clerical / druid" abiliites will be gained by the class except for spell progression (ie. wild shape). Since my two highest skills were Dex and Wis I was looking concentrate on offensive spelllcasting spells that are "non-buffing." My DM does not allow Divine MetaMagic as well. And lastly I don't have to worry about being the "healer" since my DM does not allow healing of others unless they are of the same alignment as you (house rule.). Thanks for people's thoughts
Chimaera2000 03-05-06, 04:40 PM	I'm not that familiar with spells from the supplemental books. From the core books, druids tend to be better with blasting spells, but clerics tend to be considerably stronger in terms of overall spellcasting. In my opinion, of course.
Lotus Crane 03-05-06, 06:01 PM	I do think clerics are more powerful spellcasters overall. While druids have a wider range of direct damage, it's generally agreed that direct damage is the least effective and least necessary form of magic. Clerics have better utility, more buffs (because most druid buffs only target animals or plants), stronger healing, and more save-or-die spells.
Maraxus 03-05-06, 06:46 PM	How much this is "generally agreed", I' not that sure. Probably depends on how narrow you define the other "forms of magic". But then, In the case of the druid and blasting spells, this is quite right. Psionics and arcane casters can still do that better, so if you want it, take one of those. Overall, I'd agree, that the cleric is better, especially with the option to get some more spells from the domains. Buth the druid has his pros, too. Summon natures ally for example is overall better then summon monster.
Lotus Crane 03-05-06, 07:09 PM	Well, summon nature's ally is definately stronger in terms of the fighting/tanking ability of what you summon, especially if you have Augment Summoning, and/or Ashbound (which only affects summon nature's ally not summon monster). However, I find the supernatural and spell-like abilities of what you summon with summon monster nice in that you can effectively get multiple utility abilities from a single spell.
demroth 03-05-06, 10:38 PM	Druid spells can help as you will be able to rust bars, block doors, weaken structures, summon animals, handle almost any natural nature based challenge, and have spells to help with just about any creature type under the sun. Only outsiders could really pose a problem. Cleric spells can help buff you to insane levels of melee might, buff you so nothing can hurt you, remove curses, bestow curses, turn undead (with feats turning can be even more useful), domain abilities and spells, planar ally something to raise you when you die, summon outsiders and handle them when they step out of line. Two big differences.... Fighter dies horribly Cleric: I can fix this no problem. (Raise dead, resurrection, true resurrection, miracle) Druid: He's worm food. (or Reincarnate, bring him back as a squirrel) Which one do you think will make the group happy? :)