Tips for RPing a Druid [Archive] - Wizards Community

Tips for RPing a Druid [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
TrinityPower
06-22-06, 09:00 AM Ive never played a Druid before, figure on playing NG alignment, anyone have any pointers on their typical tempraments as a class? or just suggestions bout em in general?
Hav0k
06-23-06, 02:32 AM Well druids have a range in temperament just as much as any other class. They can be nice as can be, or absolutely hateful. One thing is for sure though, they care about nature. You mess with nature, specifically their part of it, and you're messing with them.

Now a friend of mine plays a druid in nearly every campaign we've done so far. His chosen temperament is very... zen-like to best put it. They are laid back and only fight when they have to. They find their zone when their amidst the forest, and take kindly to any animals.

As far as temperament goes, you can have the "mother theresa" type of druid, or you can have the ghengis khan. All that matters is what kind of temperament you want your druid to have.
Selnai
06-23-06, 04:28 PM Like the previous poster said, druids vary in attitude. IMO the most fun to play is the crazed nature lover. Mess w/ the forest, you going to get beat. It allows the DM to easily hook the players and makes for some fun defend the woods kind of fighting.
Stormbrand
06-23-06, 04:45 PM Think of a semi-celtic village priest concept. Start off thinking like a rustic cleric, but with a grove instead of a shrine. Then figure how he relates to the rest of the world - does he approve of urban faiths or does he view them as drawing folk away from nature?
moscatabaco76
06-24-06, 04:58 PM My Druid is a CN druid from Mulhorand. He's not a tree hugger as much as a cynic of civilization. He has little respect for norms and status. It's not like he doesn't observe them when necessary (survival is nature's first law, and humans are pack animals where manners are important), but he doesn't thing twice about feeding any would be muggers to his hyena companion. He doesn't think intelligence and tool using makes one animal that superior in comparison to another. More fit, maybe, but the life of an elf or an orc is not necessarily more (or less) holy than that of a horse or a dog. Again that doesn't mean that he'll sacrifice the entire party for a stag, or that he complains about eating meat, but he doesn't regard animals as inferior. He does respects and worship the forests, but thinks the desert is holier; by the simple fact that mankind is unable to tame it.

That's how I picture a CN druid anyway. If you're NG (most druids tend to be) think of yourself as a more extreme cleric of a nature goddess. While yours likely has higher respect for people and civilization than described above, he prolly has little use for luxury and waste, and sees animals and plants as kin.
gss_000
06-25-06, 07:18 PM I have recently started palying one in Living Greyhawk and the best starting point was asking myself, "Which season does my character associate with?" In other words, is he a spring, summer, autumn, or winter druid? If I thought about the characteristics of each season I could then match my character's attitude to that, ex spring = renewal, winter = death, fall = change, summer = vibrancy.

Also, ask yourself what is your feelings on civilization and the works of man. Is it an evil, a force that can be controlled, etc? What are your feelings on your animal companion? Is it a natural resource and while not to be abused, not somethin you attach yourself to since all things die and are reborn, or is it precious and amost like another party memeber (ie, are you a forest ranger or a "tree-hugging" environmentalist)?

As everyone so far has said, there is a wide range for you to choose from, but if you ask yourself some baic questions you can formulate the beginnings of a character that will get you through until your adventures start influencing your views.
Nived
07-05-06, 09:41 AM I love playing druids, and I've played some that have very different personalities and views. The laid back, sarcastic, optimistic helpful NG Gnome druid Nived who contrasts seriously with my dour, wry, practical, TN human Druid Osrick. Depends largely on worldview and alignment.

There are some fundimental questions that need to be asked.

Where does nature stop?
-That may be a silly question but its not. For some druids Humanoids, Goblinoids, Giants, basically any sentient being other than them and fey aren't part of their 'natural world view'. Wild animals, magical beasts, these aren't the monsters, people are; encroaching on natural places that need to be protected. Nevermind that you are people.
-This is a very typical druid cliche but it needs not be this way.
-Conversely there is a place for everything and everything in its place. Wolves run in packs, bison run in herds, bees make hives, ants make mounds, birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim, and humanoids gotta build cities. In this druidic worldview people are just as natural as anything else, as is agriculture, and city building. That a farmer dislodges animals from their habitat is natural, that the wolves whose range he's encroached upon hunt his livestock is natural, that the farmer tries to kill the wolves is natural... its just the way of things.

What do druids eat?
-Another point of contention. For some gamers it seems only right and natural that druids are vegitarians. Nature provides a bounty, the fruits, the nuts, the berries. No need to kill nature's creatures when nature provides. Certainly viable. For others however it seems perfectly natural that their druid be a hunter with a mountain man beard that hunts, kills, and eats meat. Not for sport, but for survival. Just as rabbits are food for the wolves so to do they sustain the druid.

The Natural Order vs The Law of the Jungle.
-While this might at first seem like a LN vs CN arguement its not. Think about it and you could put druids of any alignment on either side of this arguement.
-To take an above example, the farmer and the wolf, each plays their roles, there's a balance. Or conversely whoever is fittest (the hunter, or the protector of his charges) will win. But taken to a larger scale one must consider where his druid would stand. What if there is some sort of landrush of people who start clearcutting the forrest and driving the wolves out. On the one hand this could mean that the balance has been thrown off. The Natural Order has been interupted, and must be put back, in this senario the druid would try to stop expansion. On the other hand The Law of the Jungle mindset would say that that is the way of things, the wolves will move on, the stronger species has prevailed.
-Now turn the situation around. For whatever reason the wolf population has skyrocketed. Area farms are being decimated, livestock slaughtered in the barns while people lock themselves up at night. Again... has the natrual order been disrupted? Or is the Law of the Jungle taking effect. Something that must be considered.

The ethical delema, or "How to get the Paladin and the NG Druid to try to kill each other."
-A foolish child has ignored his father's warnings and has wandered off into the wood. Several hours later the child is as lost as lost can be and miles away from home. This has been a drought year and the creatures of the forrest are suffering. Hungry, nearly starving wolves pick up the child's scent. Now an instant before the wolves strike your druid happens upon the scene. What does he do?
-Typical good adventurer code would say save the child from the wolves... but a druid has more to consider.
-The wolves have done nothing WRONG, they are hungry, the child is food. This is pretty simple. The wolves are innocent. It is the child who has done wrong wandering miles into their territory. Wouldn't (as a typical adventurer, say our knightly paladin would) it be wrong to kill these wolves merely for trying to eat? Why is it wrong to eat a child but not a fawn? This is natural selection in its purest form, had the kid not been stupid he wouldn't be eaten.
-Still standing back and watching a pack of wolves kill and eat a child might be really against your druid's code of ethics. As an adult, even if the kid is not your race, you might feel the instinct to protect it. Is that not natural? Would it be wrong to follow.
-Now smart druids might try to save both. To speak to the wolves and get them to not eat the child without a fight. Still these wolves are STARVING, and making them pass up a free meal like the plump kid is going to mean they have to be fed some other way. In the end something has to die so they may live. Is you using 'detect animals' to find a deer and kill it for them a better solution? Really?

I provide no answers. I believe that any answer and any view on those scenarios stated above can and is "The right and druidic way." Whether you're fighting wolves, or setting fire to barns. The only important answer is the one you give. The one that is right for you and your character.
Murr-Quan Lord #2
07-05-06, 12:55 PM Technically speaking, killing a deer is not objectively wrong, or at least it's not nearly as wrong as killing a human child.

So while you may want to have moral dilemmas for your druid, if you've already decided to be Good-aligned you're going to have to take that into account. ^.^

A Good-aligned druid likely has his own spin on the whole "balance of nature" thing, just like an Evil-aligned druid is more likely to be cold-hearted and cruel.
Nived
07-05-06, 01:35 PM Killing in and of itself is not objectively wrong. It's ethically wrong. Druids can suffer from what I'd call the "Bambi's Mom" (or PETA) syndrome. Where they're not evil but they'd still care far more for animals than people.

The gung ho vegitarian who would still think they could be NG and let the kid die. Matter of opinion, though in the end only the DM's matter of opinion on alignment counts. (He desides if Holy Smite suddenly affects you.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TrinityPower 06-22-06, 09:00 AM	Ive never played a Druid before, figure on playing NG alignment, anyone have any pointers on their typical tempraments as a class? or just suggestions bout em in general?
Hav0k 06-23-06, 02:32 AM	Well druids have a range in temperament just as much as any other class. They can be nice as can be, or absolutely hateful. One thing is for sure though, they care about nature. You mess with nature, specifically their part of it, and you're messing with them. Now a friend of mine plays a druid in nearly every campaign we've done so far. His chosen temperament is very... zen-like to best put it. They are laid back and only fight when they have to. They find their zone when their amidst the forest, and take kindly to any animals. As far as temperament goes, you can have the "mother theresa" type of druid, or you can have the ghengis khan. All that matters is what kind of temperament you want your druid to have.
Selnai 06-23-06, 04:28 PM	Like the previous poster said, druids vary in attitude. IMO the most fun to play is the crazed nature lover. Mess w/ the forest, you going to get beat. It allows the DM to easily hook the players and makes for some fun defend the woods kind of fighting.
Stormbrand 06-23-06, 04:45 PM	Think of a semi-celtic village priest concept. Start off thinking like a rustic cleric, but with a grove instead of a shrine. Then figure how he relates to the rest of the world - does he approve of urban faiths or does he view them as drawing folk away from nature?
moscatabaco76 06-24-06, 04:58 PM	My Druid is a CN druid from Mulhorand. He's not a tree hugger as much as a cynic of civilization. He has little respect for norms and status. It's not like he doesn't observe them when necessary (survival is nature's first law, and humans are pack animals where manners are important), but he doesn't thing twice about feeding any would be muggers to his hyena companion. He doesn't think intelligence and tool using makes one animal that superior in comparison to another. More fit, maybe, but the life of an elf or an orc is not necessarily more (or less) holy than that of a horse or a dog. Again that doesn't mean that he'll sacrifice the entire party for a stag, or that he complains about eating meat, but he doesn't regard animals as inferior. He does respects and worship the forests, but thinks the desert is holier; by the simple fact that mankind is unable to tame it. That's how I picture a CN druid anyway. If you're NG (most druids tend to be) think of yourself as a more extreme cleric of a nature goddess. While yours likely has higher respect for people and civilization than described above, he prolly has little use for luxury and waste, and sees animals and plants as kin.
gss_000 06-25-06, 07:18 PM	I have recently started palying one in Living Greyhawk and the best starting point was asking myself, "Which season does my character associate with?" In other words, is he a spring, summer, autumn, or winter druid? If I thought about the characteristics of each season I could then match my character's attitude to that, ex spring = renewal, winter = death, fall = change, summer = vibrancy. Also, ask yourself what is your feelings on civilization and the works of man. Is it an evil, a force that can be controlled, etc? What are your feelings on your animal companion? Is it a natural resource and while not to be abused, not somethin you attach yourself to since all things die and are reborn, or is it precious and amost like another party memeber (ie, are you a forest ranger or a "tree-hugging" environmentalist)? As everyone so far has said, there is a wide range for you to choose from, but if you ask yourself some baic questions you can formulate the beginnings of a character that will get you through until your adventures start influencing your views.
Nived 07-05-06, 09:41 AM	I love playing druids, and I've played some that have very different personalities and views. The laid back, sarcastic, optimistic helpful NG Gnome druid Nived who contrasts seriously with my dour, wry, practical, TN human Druid Osrick. Depends largely on worldview and alignment. There are some fundimental questions that need to be asked. Where does nature stop? -That may be a silly question but its not. For some druids Humanoids, Goblinoids, Giants, basically any sentient being other than them and fey aren't part of their 'natural world view'. Wild animals, magical beasts, these aren't the monsters, people are; encroaching on natural places that need to be protected. Nevermind that you are people. -This is a very typical druid cliche but it needs not be this way. -Conversely there is a place for everything and everything in its place. Wolves run in packs, bison run in herds, bees make hives, ants make mounds, birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim, and humanoids gotta build cities. In this druidic worldview people are just as natural as anything else, as is agriculture, and city building. That a farmer dislodges animals from their habitat is natural, that the wolves whose range he's encroached upon hunt his livestock is natural, that the farmer tries to kill the wolves is natural... its just the way of things. What do druids eat? -Another point of contention. For some gamers it seems only right and natural that druids are vegitarians. Nature provides a bounty, the fruits, the nuts, the berries. No need to kill nature's creatures when nature provides. Certainly viable. For others however it seems perfectly natural that their druid be a hunter with a mountain man beard that hunts, kills, and eats meat. Not for sport, but for survival. Just as rabbits are food for the wolves so to do they sustain the druid. The Natural Order vs The Law of the Jungle. -While this might at first seem like a LN vs CN arguement its not. Think about it and you could put druids of any alignment on either side of this arguement. -To take an above example, the farmer and the wolf, each plays their roles, there's a balance. Or conversely whoever is fittest (the hunter, or the protector of his charges) will win. But taken to a larger scale one must consider where his druid would stand. What if there is some sort of landrush of people who start clearcutting the forrest and driving the wolves out. On the one hand this could mean that the balance has been thrown off. The Natural Order has been interupted, and must be put back, in this senario the druid would try to stop expansion. On the other hand The Law of the Jungle mindset would say that that is the way of things, the wolves will move on, the stronger species has prevailed. -Now turn the situation around. For whatever reason the wolf population has skyrocketed. Area farms are being decimated, livestock slaughtered in the barns while people lock themselves up at night. Again... has the natrual order been disrupted? Or is the Law of the Jungle taking effect. Something that must be considered. The ethical delema, or "How to get the Paladin and the NG Druid to try to kill each other." -A foolish child has ignored his father's warnings and has wandered off into the wood. Several hours later the child is as lost as lost can be and miles away from home. This has been a drought year and the creatures of the forrest are suffering. Hungry, nearly starving wolves pick up the child's scent. Now an instant before the wolves strike your druid happens upon the scene. What does he do? -Typical good adventurer code would say save the child from the wolves... but a druid has more to consider. -The wolves have done nothing WRONG, they are hungry, the child is food. This is pretty simple. The wolves are innocent. It is the child who has done wrong wandering miles into their territory. Wouldn't (as a typical adventurer, say our knightly paladin would) it be wrong to kill these wolves merely for trying to eat? Why is it wrong to eat a child but not a fawn? This is natural selection in its purest form, had the kid not been stupid he wouldn't be eaten. -Still standing back and watching a pack of wolves kill and eat a child might be really against your druid's code of ethics. As an adult, even if the kid is not your race, you might feel the instinct to protect it. Is that not natural? Would it be wrong to follow. -Now smart druids might try to save both. To speak to the wolves and get them to not eat the child without a fight. Still these wolves are STARVING, and making them pass up a free meal like the plump kid is going to mean they have to be fed some other way. In the end something has to die so they may live. Is you using 'detect animals' to find a deer and kill it for them a better solution? Really? I provide no answers. I believe that any answer and any view on those scenarios stated above can and is "The right and druidic way." Whether you're fighting wolves, or setting fire to barns. The only important answer is the one you give. The one that is right for you and your character.
Murr-Quan Lord #2 07-05-06, 12:55 PM	Technically speaking, killing a deer is not objectively wrong, or at least it's not nearly as wrong as killing a human child. So while you may want to have moral dilemmas for your druid, if you've already decided to be Good-aligned you're going to have to take that into account. ^.^ A Good-aligned druid likely has his own spin on the whole "balance of nature" thing, just like an Evil-aligned druid is more likely to be cold-hearted and cruel.
Nived 07-05-06, 01:35 PM	Killing in and of itself is not objectively wrong. It's ethically wrong. Druids can suffer from what I'd call the "Bambi's Mom" (or PETA) syndrome. Where they're not evil but they'd still care far more for animals than people. The gung ho vegitarian who would still think they could be NG and let the kid die. Matter of opinion, though in the end only the DM's matter of opinion on alignment counts. (He desides if Holy Smite suddenly affects you.)