Post/Author/DateTime	Post
sirfrancisdrake 01-19-06, 10:34 PM	hey all, one of my player wants to play a multiclassed druid/cleric, im starting him out at level 2(hes coming in late) and he has one level in each. the thing is, it seems to me that the druid/cleric is a sort of redundant build. They share alot of spells(at least in early levels), and in order to cast druid spells, he cant wear the sweet armor that the cleric is famous for. part of me wants him to just go ahead and do it, but another part of me thinks its a bad idea, but i dont want to trample all over his character. Any knowledge on the quality of this build? i can at least tell him the pros and cons of this one, and if you guys have any suggestions for alternate ones, im all ears. Mike
Rez 01-19-06, 10:46 PM	Druids: Well, they gain Wild Shape at level 5 which is a strong suit, are very good in surviving in natural climates, and get their spells from nature itself basically. They can use some weapons a cleric cannot. Unlike a cleric, they don't have to focus on domains or a specific deity usually (though Obad-Hai/Ehlonna/Corellon are probably the most chosen for Druids. They also are good with handle animal/and gain animal companions. Clerics: Can where all armor/shields. Gain bonuses from Domains. Cons of a cleric really are if they do something to anger their 'god' they can basically lose their powers. Its a odd combination but workable really. Perhaps he started off as a cleric of lets say Obad-Hai, travelling the world and decided to settle down. Met some rangers/druids and began to train with them... Its a interesting concept but cool too. Yeah, can't wear heavy armors or use metal weapons/armor but each has its own benefits that could work very well together. And with being good in nature, and able to turn/rebuke undead its a cool combo. Perhaps this character hates the undead viewing them as 'un-natural abominations' and wants to destroy evil undead and put them to rest, letting them return to 'nature' :)
DanjaNinja 01-19-06, 11:19 PM	Druid/Cleric doesn't seem like a good combination mechanics-wise; both are primarily spellcasters, and by splitting between the two he's going to quickly fall behind in spell levels. He won't necessarily be crippled, but at higher levels he won't be able to fill either the Druid or the Cleric role very well; he'll be an almost-fighter with lots of minor healing and a few miscellaneous abilities. Ask him what his character concept is. Does he have to have both classes, or could either one or the other fit the bill?
bholdr_mage 01-19-06, 11:31 PM	Its a interesting concept but cool too. Yeah, can't wear heavy armors or use metal weapons/armor but each has its own benefits that could work very well together. And with being good in nature, and able to turn/rebuke undead its a cool combo. Perhaps this character hates the undead viewing them as 'un-natural abominations' and wants to destroy evil undead and put them to rest, letting them return to 'nature' :) Actually, a druid 'can' use metal weapons. This was changed in the transition from 3.0 to 3.5. Thus, a player could be a fighter level 1 and turn to druid, being able to still use all those cool weapons he couldn't otherwise use. The druid restrictions are with metal armor. It never says he can't take a feat and use a dwarven urgosh or something. If the player likes the "nature" aspect of this combination, you might suggest it would be better to venerate someone (like ehlonna) with the nature domain. Thus, he can still wear his armor, love nature, and I believe there is a domain that lets him turn plant critters as well as undead. The combination of classes is kind of redundant, for he won't be able to cast second level spells until level 6 for both classes (if he took one every other level) He might have descent hit points, but won't have alot of damaging spells.
BW0222 01-20-06, 12:54 AM	Why wouldn't you wish him to try it? Hopefully, your campaign isn't so bad that one is forced to make the most optimal builds possible in order to survive or that the other players aren't seeing the campaign as a contest as to how can make the most powerful character. It's definitely not an optimal build. It certainly gives the character a lot of spells at lower levels. He'll be a great healing machine at lower-levels with a good range of spells, but obviously he'll suffer at higher levels when his lack of BAB, higher-level spells, and abilities will hurt. However, druid and cleric are already powerful classes, so it shouldn't be an issue if the player self-trims the power of the character. It should make balance and over-shadowing of other players less of an issue.
j_gunder 01-20-06, 01:24 AM	I agree with what BW0222 said. I don't see any reason why you can't let him play it, unless having a character with a sub-optimal build will suffer due to the difficulty of the campaign. In the end, he will look like a lot of busted Mystic Theurge builds...he will have an immense amount of low-level abilities, many of which will overlap (i.e., similar abilities received from both classes). His saves will be pretty good, he will be a horrible turner and it will take forever for him to gain decent wildshape abilities...but at level 6 he will be a buffing machine (for low-level buffs, anyway). At least wisdom is the primary ability for both classes. I can think of a worse situation..."Can I play a wizard/sorcerer?" I would just let the character know, especially if other players are playing single-class builds or synergistic builds that choosing that path early on will relegate him to the role of a utility character...with lots and lots of low-level abilities. If the campaign is not meant to take the PCs into epic levels, he should be alright, depending upon the difficulty of your campaign. Effective? No. Playable? Sure.
Andorxor 01-20-06, 01:51 AM	He should tell the player that this is a inefficent build,before allowing it. Maybe the player heard that druids and clerics are powerfull, and think that a combination of both is more powerfull.
Elemental_Elf 01-20-06, 03:39 AM	Advise him of the Spirit Shaman. They're essentially a Druid/Cleric that has Ghost Hate. They're fun and uniqe and combine many of the aspects your player wants. It's not the best build, compared to a straight Druid or straight Cleric BUT, it does offer its own unique Role Play oppertunities as well as being more of a sound build. But if he doesn't go for the SS, then by all means let him go for the Cleric/Druid. Also tell him that about 3 levels in Cleric and the rest in Druid gives him alot of potential power with out overly sacrifising power at higher levels.
fawr 01-20-06, 07:14 AM	A Druid/Cleric really sucks mechanically, and a nature cleric is so similar to a druid I'm wondering why such a role would be necessary anyway. I would try and find out why the player wants to play both, and then suggest one or the other depending on which suits their character better.
sirfrancisdrake 01-20-06, 02:17 PM	Hey thanks guys and gals, this was exactly what i wanted to hear. Its not that i dont want him to play whatever character he wants, far from it. I just wanted to know what he was getting himself into before he did it. that way i can advise him better. as far as his character concept goes, i dont think he really has one. He knew the party needed some healing magic, since he was coming into the campaign late, and in my eyes, he picked the two classes that had healing magic. i think it would be wise of me to ask him to write a short background, that way it would help both me and him solidfy his character. ill let him know what you guys said about the build, he says hes played alot before, but i dont think this is true, and this is mainly why i wanted to let him know these things. thanks people! Mike
Ignatius Metamorphic 01-20-06, 03:18 PM	This is a bad build. It's much worse than a mystic theurge. The player will get frustrated and not want to play the character. Let me explain. He will always be behind in caster levels. As the game goes on, this will become more and more of an issue. For example, at 10th level, he is casting 3rd level spells as a 5th level caster. A straight cleric (or druid) will be casting 5th level spells as a 10th level caster. The cleric/druid will find that enemies will always make their saving throws, he can't penetrate spell resistance, and his damage (or healing) will be sub-optimal. He'll have tons of spells, but none that are highly effective. And, he'll never get to cast them all. Although he will have lots of special abilities, none of them will work well. He'll only be able to wildshape once per day and only into a 5hd creature. He'll be able to turn undead, but not as well as a paladin. He'll be able to spontaneously cast cure and summon monster spells, but they will be weak. He'll have a leopard as an animal companion instead of a dire lion. Really, there is no upside. He would be far more effective (and happier) playing one class or the other. I would STRONGLY discourage the player from taking this concept. It would be like a player wanting to play an NPC class. It's just too weak to be fun. Ignatius
BW0222 01-20-06, 04:54 PM	Ignatius Metamorphic, >This is a bad build. It's much worse than a mystic theurge. The player will >get frustrated and not want to play the character. Do you know this person or the group his is playing with? Maybe the guy likes roleplaying. Maybe he can spend hours discussing religious and nature topics with NPCs. Maybe the rest of the party consists of multi-class folks also? Maybe his goal is to start a nature school. Maybe he is an intelligent player who will use his abilities to good effect. >Let me explain. >He will always be behind in caster levels. As the game goes on, this will >become more and more of an issue. For example, at 10th level, he is casting >3rd level spells as a 5th level caster. A straight cleric (or druid) will be >casting 5th level spells as a 10th level caster. The cleric/druid will find that >enemies will always make their saving throws, he can't penetrate spell >resistance, and his damage (or healing) will be sub-optimal. Nothing says he is going to progress the cleric and druid levels evenly. At 10th, he might be Cleric 1 / Druid 9, Cleric 3 / Druid 7, or Druid 1 / Cleric 1 / Ranger 8. Any of which is hardly so far behind an optimal build as to be unplayable. The guy is already striking me as pretty imaginative. However, so what if he goes Cleric 5 / Druid 5. He'd still have a ton of spells (8 1st, 6 2nd, and 4 3rd plus domain spells). Healing certainly isn't an issue. He has wildshape for scouting. His combat abilities aren't terrible. Tracking, survival, diplomacy, etc. so he should be able to contribute outside of combat. >He'll have tons of spells, but none that are highly effective. And, he'll never >get to cast them all. Why not? Maybe he takes lots of buff spells. Barkskin, bull's strength, magic circle, prayer, and bless. My high level casters routinely run out of lesser spells. And certainly he is going to make everyone's life easier at lower levels with massive numbers of spells. >Although he will have lots of special abilities, none of them will work well. >He'll only be able to wildshape once per day and only into a 5hd creature. >He'll be able to turn undead, but not as well as a paladin. He'll be able to >spontaneously cast cure and summon monster spells, but they will be weak. >He'll have a leopard as an animal companion instead of a dire lion. So... maybe he likes leopards. I've got a 9th-level PC with a dire skunk. Optimal, of course not... fun... you bet. >Really, there is no upside. He would be far more effective (and happier) >playing one class or the other. Since you know so much about what will make this person happy maybe you should name his PC for him? Sorry... Ignatius... you have no clue what will make this player happy. You have no idea what the campaign is like, what the other players are going to do with their characters, or how he might react if his character did end-up short on the power curve. Heck, maybe the group never reaches 10th or it takes them two years to do so. >I would STRONGLY discourage the player from taking this concept. It would >be like a player wanting to play an NPC class. It's just too weak to be fun. And I've played in many campaigns which allow or require NPCs classes. I'll let you in on a secret... DM's scale campaigns based on who the PCs are. If you have a Cleric/10, Fighter/10, Wizard/10, and Rogue/10, expect to be facing honest APL 9-11 combats, high DC traps, and powerful NPC casters. If you have a Bard/4 Wiz/6, Druid/3 Ranger/6, Wizard/5 Monk/5, and a Sorceror/3 Paladin/6, you'll end up with lesser encounters. The DM knows you are short of healing, you can't get past high-DC traps, and that you won't win any spell duels. In turn, she'll reduce the APLs of the combats to maybe 8 or 9, cut down on the CRs of the traps, and pay attention to opponents you'll face. If the DM does her job, the players will still have fun. Making the most obtimal build is pointless. The encounters won't get any easier if you have a party of four Druid/10s. The DM will just start tossing out higher APL combats. Nothing wrong with non-optimal builds. A good DM isn't going to penalize folks for trying something different. No point in discouraging him either.
Chobemaster 01-20-06, 05:07 PM	I wouldn't allow it regardless of the desirability of the builds, any more than I'd allow cleric of deity X to multiclass w/ cleric of deity Y. Let's not forget a class is more than a set of abilities gained at each level.
DanjaNinja 01-20-06, 05:30 PM	I wouldn't allow it regardless of the desirability of the builds, any more than I'd allow cleric of deity X to multiclass w/ cleric of deity Y. Let's not forget a class is more than a set of abilities gained at each level. Well, he could be a Druid and a Cleric of, say, Obad-Hai. There's no reason that couldn't work out.
Chobemaster 01-20-06, 05:33 PM	Well, he could be a Druid and a Cleric of, say, Obad-Hai. There's no reason that couldn't work out. I still wouldn't allow it. That's at least as different as Catholic and Protestant or Sunni and Shi'ia.
Bruunwald 01-20-06, 05:36 PM	The build actually has a great deal of potential. The thing is, it will require initiative and patience. Patience while he gets up high enough to start to use his more effective druidic abilities. Initiative, in that any character necessarily hindered as far as AC goes (and a druid will be), needs to act as early and as often as he can, until he can gain enough money to compensate with magical protections. But the same can be said for all sorts of spellcasters, multiclassed or not. So Improved Initiative and a high Dexterity will serve this guy well. Hit dice are good, both use the d8. You are limited by what the druid can use as a weapon, but a good old fashioned club can be used and easily changed into a shillelagh, via the spell. Couple that with the Strength domain and you have a very powerful combatant. I would advise a good alignment/deity, that way, he can keep cure spells in reserve, and dedicate his druid spells to more elemental and summoning stuff. There's no problem here with BAB progression, as the two classes use the same. Ditto saves. Better still, unlike some multiclass combos, spell power is determined by the same ability score (Wisdom), which means he is free to put his other good scores where he needs them most. I would advise making the character human. That nets him a bonus feat at 1st level, which he could use to take Practiced Spellcaster (see Complete Arcane and Complete Divine). This feat allows you to apply your other levels to your caster level, up to +4. It has limits: you can only apply the feat to one class when you choose it, so he'd have to eventually take it twice to get both classes up to speed. Also, it only improves level-dependent qualities of your spells from that class (duration, intensity, damage, caster level checks, etc.), it does not give you spells of a higher level. But it has been of immeasurable help to my warmage/fighter. I can't recommend it enough. I don't see a downside to the combination. I think anybody can point out what sucks about multiclassing, but those things would true with just about any multiclass combo. Any good build starts with accentuating the positive. Focusing on the benefits. The negatives are barriers to be hurtled and overcome, not signs he should give it up. And by the way, druids can worship the same deities clerics can. They have no list of dedicated deities. Being a druid in no way implies a lack of piety, or ties to things clergy might consider offensive (unless you want it to). Deities and Demigods lists several gods whose worshipers include clerics and druids both, and one could easily call such a multiclass combination a shaman in the truest sense.
RogerWilco 01-20-06, 05:39 PM	I would just tell him, that mechanics wise this is a very sub-optimal choice, and that at higher levels he might find that he'll be stuggling to be useful.
ressurrector 01-20-06, 05:42 PM	Suggest to him that he either is a straight druid, or a straight cleric with Nature/Animal/Plant domains. Ask him why he wants both classes, It might be he has no good reason. If he really wants to do it, let him.
DanjaNinja 01-20-06, 05:48 PM	And by the way, druids can worship the same deities clerics can. They have no list of dedicated deities. Being a druid in no way implies a lack of piety, or ties to things clergy might consider offensive (unless you want it to). Deities and Demigods lists several gods whose worshipers include clerics and druids both, and one could easily call such a multiclass combination a shaman in the truest sense. While I agree with you, I think what Chobemaster is arguing is that, while they might venerate the same thing, they do it (subtly) different ways. It would be like being both a Catholic and a Protestant priest at the same time.
Ignatius Metamorphic 01-20-06, 06:42 PM	Ignatius Metamorphic, >This is a bad build. It's much worse than a mystic theurge. The player will >get frustrated and not want to play the character. Do you know this person or the group his is playing with? Maybe the guy likes roleplaying. Maybe he can spend hours discussing religious and nature topics with NPCs. Maybe the rest of the party consists of multi-class folks also? Maybe his goal is to start a nature school. Maybe he is an intelligent player who will use his abilities to good effect. >Let me explain. >He will always be behind in caster levels. As the game goes on, this will >become more and more of an issue. For example, at 10th level, he is casting >3rd level spells as a 5th level caster. A straight cleric (or druid) will be >casting 5th level spells as a 10th level caster. The cleric/druid will find that >enemies will always make their saving throws, he can't penetrate spell >resistance, and his damage (or healing) will be sub-optimal. Nothing says he is going to progress the cleric and druid levels evenly. At 10th, he might be Cleric 1 / Druid 9, Cleric 3 / Druid 7, or Druid 1 / Cleric 1 / Ranger 8. Any of which is hardly so far behind an optimal build as to be unplayable. The guy is already striking me as pretty imaginative. However, so what if he goes Cleric 5 / Druid 5. He'd still have a ton of spells (8 1st, 6 2nd, and 4 3rd plus domain spells). Healing certainly isn't an issue. He has wildshape for scouting. His combat abilities aren't terrible. Tracking, survival, diplomacy, etc. so he should be able to contribute outside of combat. >He'll have tons of spells, but none that are highly effective. And, he'll never >get to cast them all. Why not? Maybe he takes lots of buff spells. Barkskin, bull's strength, magic circle, prayer, and bless. My high level casters routinely run out of lesser spells. And certainly he is going to make everyone's life easier at lower levels with massive numbers of spells. >Although he will have lots of special abilities, none of them will work well. >He'll only be able to wildshape once per day and only into a 5hd creature. >He'll be able to turn undead, but not as well as a paladin. He'll be able to >spontaneously cast cure and summon monster spells, but they will be weak. >He'll have a leopard as an animal companion instead of a dire lion. So... maybe he likes leopards. I've got a 9th-level PC with a dire skunk. Optimal, of course not... fun... you bet. >Really, there is no upside. He would be far more effective (and happier) >playing one class or the other. Since you know so much about what will make this person happy maybe you should name his PC for him? Sorry... Ignatius... you have no clue what will make this player happy. You have no idea what the campaign is like, what the other players are going to do with their characters, or how he might react if his character did end-up short on the power curve. Heck, maybe the group never reaches 10th or it takes them two years to do so. >I would STRONGLY discourage the player from taking this concept. It would >be like a player wanting to play an NPC class. It's just too weak to be fun. And I've played in many campaigns which allow or require NPCs classes. I'll let you in on a secret... DM's scale campaigns based on who the PCs are. If you have a Cleric/10, Fighter/10, Wizard/10, and Rogue/10, expect to be facing honest APL 9-11 combats, high DC traps, and powerful NPC casters. If you have a Bard/4 Wiz/6, Druid/3 Ranger/6, Wizard/5 Monk/5, and a Sorceror/3 Paladin/6, you'll end up with lesser encounters. The DM knows you are short of healing, you can't get past high-DC traps, and that you won't win any spell duels. In turn, she'll reduce the APLs of the combats to maybe 8 or 9, cut down on the CRs of the traps, and pay attention to opponents you'll face. If the DM does her job, the players will still have fun. Making the most obtimal build is pointless. The encounters won't get any easier if you have a party of four Druid/10s. The DM will just start tossing out higher APL combats. Nothing wrong with non-optimal builds. A good DM isn't going to penalize folks for trying something different. No point in discouraging him either. BW0222, You're right. I don't know what floats the player's boat. And I don't know all the details of the campaign. But, that's not what this thread is about. sirfrancisdrake asked what the pros and the cons of the build were. Assuming a standard D&D campaign this is a bad build. Yes, it could be okay in a deep-emmersion role-playing campaign. Yes, if all the other characters are multiclassed, this might be okay. Yes, some people find playing a crippled character interesting and exciting. Most don't. Letting an inexperienced player walk into this build thinking that're going to be effective is just cruel. They won't be. Ignatius
celtredleg 01-20-06, 07:54 PM	Also depends on how long the game is going to go. Lately I have had them crash around 10th for asorted RW reasons. If this is not meant to be a long term game, or they have a current problem with healing, this may do what they need.
cleric-templar 01-20-06, 08:18 PM	Sirfrancisdrake already thanked you guys, and went to the player with your opinions, why are you still arguing when the query poser probably isn't looking?
sirfrancisdrake 01-21-06, 01:37 AM	dont worry, im still reading this thread guys, and thanks for your input again! the game i run is about 65% hack, and 35% role-playing. i try to urge the guys to interact with the NPC's and when they do, the results are admirable. but they love a good fight. i havent played yet with the player in question, and i dont know him too too well( i know him from work, and he told me he liked D&D and we needed a 4th person so i invited him to join up). based on how the campaign is progressing so far, its gearing up to be pretty long, hopefully well past 10th level. At least i hope so, as long as noone moves away or anything. So letting the guy know that this build may not be the best choice, assuming he levels them equally, is pretty important, especially if he isnt doing as much as the other characters, i want it to be a balanced game, and i want everyone to have fun. And if picking this build causes him to have less fun down the road, i want him to know right now so we can avoid it. if he still wants to pick it, then im sure he'll have fun with any class, make a memorable character. And as far as the argument goes about A cleric/druid worshipping the same god being like Protestants and Catholics, id have to disagree. i dont think most gods care how you worhsip them, unless of course you are doing something against their laws or code or whatever. and druids can gain their power directly from nature anyway, which i think is pretty neat. Mike
DanjaNinja 01-21-06, 02:06 AM	And as far as the argument goes about A cleric/druid worshipping the same god being like Protestants and Catholics, id have to disagree. i dont think most gods care how you worhsip them, unless of course you are doing something against their laws or code or whatever. Well, I wouldn't think it would be a problem with the god in question, but rather the other worshippers. I mean, look at the animosity between Protestants and Catholics in real life. In a D&D world, however, where the gods more manifestly make their will known, I don't imagine there would be quite as many conflicts about the "best" way to worship a particular deity. Personally, I see Druids as fundamentally unorganized--they can worship a particular deity, but they derive their power from reverence of nature. As long as the ethos of the Druid and the deity didn't conflict, I'd allow it much the same as I would allow multiclassing into Fighter or Sorcerer.
sirfrancisdrake 01-21-06, 02:19 AM	Well, I wouldn't think it would be a problem with the god in question, but rather the other worshippers. I mean, look at the animosity between Protestants and Catholics in real life. In a D&D world, however, where the gods more manifestly make their will known, I don't imagine there would be quite as many conflicts about the "best" way to worship a particular deity. Personally, I see Druids as fundamentally unorganized--they can worship a particular deity, but they derive their power from reverence of nature. As long as the ethos of the Druid and the deity didn't conflict, I'd allow it much the same as I would allow multiclassing into Fighter or Sorcerer. that would actually be pretty cool in roleplaying terms. To have the cleric/druid be persecuted by other more narrow minded and orthodox worhsippers. Although being a druid they probably dont get to meet many other worshippers since theyre out in the wild, hugging trees and whatnot:) Mike
frostyusa 01-21-06, 05:48 AM	Ny wife wanted to do the same thing in our campaign, except that she was already 5th level Druid and wanted to multiclass at 6th. To some extent it was a party balance issue in that there were three weak healers (her, a Paladin and a Ranger who had just gotten her first spell) but no cleric. It was pointed out on the boards how retardedly powerful high level druids are and she decided to take Leadership as her 6th level feat, so she could recruit an NPC Cleric Cohort. Just a thought if your PC has a high enough Char to justify it.
BW0222 01-21-06, 01:55 PM	Ignatius, >Assuming a standard D&D campaign this is a bad build. There is no such thing as a standard D&D campaign. Everytime I meet a new player I get a new definition of standard. However, if you had to pick something... let's look at the RPGA events. Say Living Greyhawk or Living Arcanis. It has the most people playing under a common set of 'house' rules. Point-buy, banned spells, allowed feats and classes, heavy core rules, etc. The modules are fixed and there is a limited amount of DM descretion in scaling encounters. Under LG, arguably the most combat heavy of the campaigns, I've seen almost everything at the table. I'm DM'd barbarian/sorcerors, half-orc paladins, cleric/paladins, monk/sorcerors, rogue/wizard, etc., etc. They all work fine at the tables. I've got a bard/wizard and the character plays fine. Under LA, they alow NPCs classes - and folks do play aristocrats and adepts. I've certainly seen a sorts of sub-optimal combinations. My main character is a bard/wizard/cleric/p-class and at 12th has a +5 BAB. So? The character is still playable. Even under these campaigns, which are highly combat oriented, you don't need optimal builds to play your characters and certainly to have fun. >Yes, some people find playing a crippled character interesting and exciting. >Most don't. Again, you are speaking for masses of people you don't know. Try playing in the worlds largest campaigns -- LG or LA -- and I think you'll see that most folks aren't out to build the most optimal characters imaginable. Those who try unusual things often end up with highly fun and memorable characters to have at the table. ----------------------- Mike, >And as far as the argument goes about A cleric/druid worshipping the same >god being like Protestants and Catholics, id have to disagree. i dont think >most gods care how you worhsip them, unless of course you are doing >something against their laws or code or whatever. It's your campaign and your call. In the core rules it is certainly allowed that a druid who worships a specific god could take levels in cleric from the same god. It also allows for clerics to devote themselves to a "specific cause or divine power" -- nature, protection of a forest, etc. would all seem to qualify. Some settings have specific rules. Greyhawk says clerics must worship a specific god, but druids may also. Thus, a cleric/druid of Ehlonna, Obad-Hai, or etc. would certainly be ok. In Arcanis, there are gender restrictions -- Saluwe clerics must be female, druids male. However, a Yarris druid/cleric is fine. I don't buy the Catholic/Protestants either. I can't see what possible issues an Ehlonna cleric would have with an Ehlonna worshipping druid. At best, maybe the cleric spends more time in the villages running the shrines, while the druid spends more time out tending animals in the wilderness. I highly doubt if a high level druid came to a village shrine, that the local cleric would tell him to get lost. I could definitely see a lot of roleplaying reasons why a druid/cleric would be well respected by both groups. Knowledge (religion) and knowledge (planes) and some different spells might easily make the "druid" seem more devoted to the spirtual cause and different spells, handle animal, wild empathy, etc. might make the "cleric" more in touch with the nature aspects of the god to other clerics. Personally, if the player just keeps one of the classes to 1st, 2nd, or 3rd-level, they'll end up with a powerful and unique character. A cleric/1 druid/9 or even a druid/3 cleric/7 is still a powerful class. A few extra levels isn't a huge hit and is definitely made up by the fact that at the lower-levels, the character will be a healing and buffing machine, and that the classes by themselves are on the high-end of the power curve. I.e. a druid/7 or a cleric/7 joining a 10th-level party are by themselves a welcome and useful addition. Also, a number of divine p-classes and feats have knowledge (religion) and/or turning requirements. One level of cleric can be a good way of getting these for a druid. For example, cleric/druid/contemplative, cleric/druid/divine oracle, or using the divine power feat on druid spells, etc. I honestly wouldn't worry about him. He'll certainly pull his weight at lower levels and he has some time to begin focusing on one of the classes before he gets too far "behind" any of the other characters -- even if they focus on near optimal builds.