Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Delvor 10-29-05, 08:19 PM	How would you play an evil druid? Just cares about nature not people? Still despise undead and abberations... How would you play one?
Uberwoot 10-29-05, 09:19 PM	An evil druid would be most likely to be in awe of nature, seeking to emulate its most destructive forces: storms, earthquakes, and the like. She would revil in the power granted by being a druid, believing that it is her duty to cull the weak in order to better the species: it just so happens that the strongest are those who live in the wild, self-sufficient, without relying on the crutch of civilization for survival. She might thus avoid civilization at all costs (avoiding being tainted by such weakness), or alternatively have no problems entering cities to prey on their weaker members. She kills her civilized kin because they threaten the purity of nature and the strength of the race, and because she (and the wild life she represents) is stronger. She is a huntress.
nihility 10-29-05, 09:39 PM	I like the notion of "survival of the fittest" as a basis for an evil druid. Everything is food. Nothing has a right to exist. If you can kill something and use its life to become stronger, then you are perfectly justified in doing so. All that matters to you is you, and all that should matter to anything else is them. Kill anything if it helps you, avoid what you can't kill (until you get stronger), and make alliances solely for personal benefit.
General_Ridley 10-29-05, 10:36 PM	the Dragon God Garyx counts many evil druids as his supporters. He is a God of Destruction, and they seek to emulate the destructive forces in nature. Destruction is seen as a way to create a clean slate, so as to start anew. Destruction leads to regeneration, and nature shows us this. I like Garyx for this reason: he gives me a wonderful way to play an outspoken evil druid, and I can then renew things to suit my desires. you could view Aberrations as examples of nature from another world, viewing them not as abominations, but as something to be learned from.
Fithero 10-29-05, 11:29 PM	Just be as merciless as possible, animals themselves arnt actually evil, they just focus on survival and do what ever it takes, even if it means killing something good. Personally id just try and emulate an animal (meat eater of course) and act like it... or not, i dunno. Later
Otogi 10-30-05, 09:22 AM	An evil Druid focus on a specific aspect of nautre, perticualy death, disease, deacy, vermin and destruction. He may have a more open minded view in abberation, but have a powerful grudge agaist all that represnt the mockery of nature, the undead.
Setherial 10-31-05, 04:19 AM	I'd think you guys think way to extreme, A druid is always neutral just like nature is. The balance of nature is like poetry to him and should never be messed with. This is where his evil side kicks in. He doesn't forgive those who hunt for pleasure, he doesn't forgive those who chop down trees and slowly kill his forest, he doesn't forgive those who capture animals to train them as slaves... He'll show those who interfere with nature her true wrath, he'll unleash her full fury upon them without the mercy a good aligned druid might show after he thaught the violators a lesson. As long as you respect nature as he does this fellow will not harm you, he might ask you to leave as your civilized ways disturb the tranquility of his surroundings but don't make him into a crazed desease spreading machine of doom. A druid will always respect nature and as such his neutral side will always be one that can be reasoned with. If he crossed this line he'll stop to be a druid and becomes something else (like a blighter or something)...
erbmjw 10-31-05, 06:46 AM	I'm with Setherial on this one - an evil druid still loves nature - he just doesn't have any concern about how he protects it as long as he protects its ;) Introduce rats to the grain silos and then seed the farmer's fields with a set of nasty weeds before telling him to leave. When you tell the farmers to leave make sure to tell them that everything left behind must be burnt to the ground - and they must walk out only carrying what they can. No animals will be allowed to leave with them. Then when they have walked out after burning the farms they are leaving behind - set the wolves and bears on them - after all the predators have been hungry since the humans took over their hunting grounds.
Uberwoot 10-31-05, 11:51 AM	I will remind a previous poster that evil is, in fact, an extreme. ;) I'm pretty sure that the previous two posts describe a neutral druid- perhaps even a lawful neutral one. It suggests punishment for the encroacher, but tolerance of others- highly indicative of a code of conduct, rigidity only present in lawful characters. I believe an evil druid would tend more towards previous posts in the thread (including mine, even if that seems somewhat biased).
Nurgan_the_drunked 10-31-05, 12:15 PM	I think they're both valid. The character is still NE, if someone did such things for another cause, this would make them evil and a druid is more likely to do this for the cause of nature. A lawful druid would exact punishments, but not extreme, well thought out, and limited, trying to equate nature's laws. An evil druid could be one who exacts nature's wrath with no regard for how extreme or cruel they're being. There are many ways to be an evil druid, and those two types above are the most likely. A druid may also believe that nature's laws are that the strongest survive, and take what they will to survive. So, if he's strong enough to take from those innocent farmers he can. I may play an evil druid in a campaigh for archvillains (odd setup) soon. If you take it to the Vile extreme, they may get into the idea that creature only kill to hunt and eat. So after killing these loggers, it would be against nature's rule to leave them. Yum
erbmjw 10-31-05, 06:36 PM	Canabalistic druid ..... :D
Uberwoot 11-01-05, 01:26 AM	Not out of the question at all. The druid would see the natural order of things as kill to eat (with the twist that the druid must also kill to maintain the natural order). If she has a basic need (hunger) and the goal is readily available (that abberant human's corpse), then she would probably satisfy the goal unless it were personally distasteful to her (she doesn't like the taste of humans for some reason?).
Setherial 11-02-05, 02:56 AM	I will remind a previous poster that evil is, in fact, an extreme. ;) I'm pretty sure that the previous two posts describe a neutral druid- perhaps even a lawful neutral one. It suggests punishment for the encroacher, but tolerance of others- highly indicative of a code of conduct, rigidity only present in lawful characters. I believe an evil druid would tend more towards previous posts in the thread (including mine, even if that seems somewhat biased). I don't agree, evil is not an extreme. Dnd and Forgotten realms might have evolved to a stage where people think it is but it isn't. A shopkeeper who waters down his wine and sells it full price is evil, a rogue who cuts a purse is evil, a guard who takes a bribe to look the other way when drugs are smuggled in is evil... Neither of them is commiting evil in the extreme but they are hurting other people and that is morally wrong and as such an evil deed. One evil deed might not make a person evil but once you cross the line you will probably do it again. Running a game where every evil character is a crazy sociopath taking delight in torture, inflicting pain and worships evil gods is unrealistic and childish. It is childish because like a child you are looking at your fantasy world in black and white making it easy to judge. The game becomes a lot more intersting when the lines start to blur. It will be harder for mature players to kill the man who betrayed them if they find out he has a family he takes care of and was forced to do what he did because his family was starving and he needed the money rather then when that same mane has a snake head, practises necromancy and worships gods who dictate that all life should be destroyed.
eagleye 11-02-05, 04:00 AM	From the Slayers Guide to Gnolls: These maignant practitioners eschew contact with any others of their kind and are said to be the most evil and twisted of those who follow the druidic path. Bearing no love even for their wildsurroundings, these rapacious druids pervert and control the forces of nature to their own selfish ends. They tend to be utterly despised by many other druids who often seek them out to destroy the harmful effects they have upon the world. Even other druids of a diabolical bent treat them with extreme suspicion and distrus.