BECM Druids - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

BECM Druids

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
caeruleus
Jan 25, 2006 10:52:55 Have any of you played a druid with the Mentzer rules? I'm kinda wondering how it compares to a regular cleric.

A druid can't cast some cleric spells (those dealing with good and evil), but gains others available only to druids. So far so good.

But then they can only use items that made of materials that used to be alive (wood or leather). And they no longer can turn undead. Has anyone tried compensating them for this? Or do they play fine, even when retaining the same XP progression as the cleric?

Also, has anyone tried allowing PCs to be druids from 1st level? I don't see a problem with this. In fact, it would make more sense that they'd get training as a druid early on, rather than be trained as a regular cleric, and only later become a druid.
#2
weasel_fierce
Jan 25, 2006 12:23:38 At level 9, most likely, you will have had a chance to get a few choice magical items, so it shouldnt be too much of an issue.

I'd propably allow druids from level 1 too, or maybe level 2 (the first cleric level is kind of the apprentice level, with no spells or anything)
#3
havard
Jan 26, 2006 11:05:24 I see no reason not to allow Druids at 1st level. In fact I think it makes more sense to have them start there rather than after having been Clerics for 9 levels. I like the idea of High level Class Options (Druids, Paladins etc), but no the way it was handled. I'm wondering if the Druid isn't a bit weak compared to the Cleric though, extra spells or not...?

Håvard
#4
caeruleus
Jan 26, 2006 22:16:10
I like the idea of High level Class Options (Druids, Paladins etc), but no the way it was handled.

I like the idea too. I think it works great with the paladin (and avenger, and knight), but not so much the druid. I've been thinking of coming up with one to turn a fighter into a ranger. Something for the thief would also be cool.

I'm wondering if the Druid isn't a bit weak compared to the Cleric though, extra spells or not...?

A concern of mine, too. Tell me what you think of this. Rather than simply eliminate the ability to turn undead, perhaps replace it with an ability to charm animals? I suppose details would need to be worked out, but I haven't thought of that yet.
#5
weasel_fierce
Jan 26, 2006 22:55:59 "dawn of the emperors" had Foresters. They are basically elf-trained humans. Rules wise, they are like elves, except:

No infravision. Not immune to ghoul paralysis. Must have str and int 12.

Their main edge is that they are humans, and can both fight well AND do spells, thus presenting an element of surprise.
#6
zombiegleemax
Jan 27, 2006 6:04:00 I have used Druids from 1st level, but eventually I scrapped the class and replaced it with something else; druids in my campaign are more like magic users, but with a broader spell selection drawing from mage, claric, druid and fey (see the creature crucible) lists.
#7
caeruleus
Jan 27, 2006 9:59:39
"dawn of the emperors" had Foresters. They are basically elf-trained humans. Rules wise, they are like elves, except:

No infravision. Not immune to ghoul paralysis. Must have str and int 12.

Their main edge is that they are humans, and can both fight well AND do spells, thus presenting an element of surprise.

Not sure how this relates to druids, but it sounds interesting. Do they have the maximum level as elves?
#8
havard
Jan 29, 2006 13:10:44
A concern of mine, too. Tell me what you think of this. Rather than simply eliminate the ability to turn undead, perhaps replace it with an ability to charm animals? I suppose details would need to be worked out, but I haven't thought of that yet.

That is a pretty cool idea!
You could use the same table as that for turning undead. A T result means the animal will flee or just become calm and not bother the party. A D result will mean the animal(s) will have come under the Druids control, like a charm person spell.

Another idea would be to just give 1st levek druids an animal companion. Though it shouldnt be something as powerful as a wolf....

Håvard
#9
zombiegleemax
Jan 30, 2006 7:47:51
Have any of you played a druid with the Mentzer rules? I'm kinda wondering how it compares to a regular cleric.

Haven't played them since my PCs have never gotten to that level really. But I have used them as NPCs. They are weaker in some ways, as you note the armour restriction is a big one as well as the inability to turn undead. On the other hand, they have more powerful spells than the cleric.

All around they are a bit more vulnerable than the cleric, but have more powerful offensive capabilities.
#10
zombiegleemax
Feb 03, 2006 8:40:25
"dawn of the emperors" had Foresters. They are basically elf-trained humans. Rules wise, they are like elves, except:

No infravision. Not immune to ghoul paralysis. Must have str and int 12.

Their main edge is that they are humans, and can both fight well AND do spells, thus presenting an element of surprise.

Foresters also have an ability no true elf has: they can survive lycantropy and turn in some werebeast (look Creature Crucible 4).
So, what about a forester/werebear? A really lovable wood dweller ;)
#11
paigeoliver
Feb 07, 2006 2:12:01 Higher level thieves don't really need any options. It is around those levels where the thieve's skills transform from "useless near auto-fail" abilities into infallible near auto-pass abilities.
#12
zombiegleemax
Feb 08, 2006 10:01:45
Higher level thieves don't really need any options. It is around those levels where the thieve's skills transform from "useless near auto-fail" abilities into infallible near auto-pass abilities.

And of course with a hefty skill percentiles, you can try to do some nifty things at a penalty (want to climb across the ceiling? Sure, lets say a -30% penalty... want to try to rebuild the trap you just disarmed? Okeydokey, I'm sure I can come up with a mechanism based on your superhuman disarm traps...).
#13
havard
Feb 09, 2006 9:45:10
And of course with a hefty skill percentiles, you can try to do some nifty things at a penalty (want to climb across the ceiling? Sure, lets say a -30% penalty... want to try to rebuild the trap you just disarmed? Okeydokey, I'm sure I can come up with a mechanism based on your superhuman disarm traps...).

Ofcourse by this time, the rest of the group usually can duplicate these abilities through spells and magical items...

Håvard
#14
chatdemon
Feb 14, 2006 0:07:03
has anyone tried allowing PCs to be druids from 1st level? I don't see a problem with this. In fact, it would make more sense that they'd get training as a druid early on, rather than be trained as a regular cleric, and only later become a druid.

Bighara over at the Grognard's Tavern forum has posted a nice alternate Druid class that does just that:

http://grognardstavern.proboards29.com/index.cgi?board=yourbdndrcm
Check out the "Bighara's Homebrew Classes" thread.

He's got a couple other custom classes in that thread too, and they're all great material.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 caeruleus Jan 25, 2006 10:52:55	Have any of you played a druid with the Mentzer rules? I'm kinda wondering how it compares to a regular cleric. A druid can't cast some cleric spells (those dealing with good and evil), but gains others available only to druids. So far so good. But then they can only use items that made of materials that used to be alive (wood or leather). And they no longer can turn undead. Has anyone tried compensating them for this? Or do they play fine, even when retaining the same XP progression as the cleric? Also, has anyone tried allowing PCs to be druids from 1st level? I don't see a problem with this. In fact, it would make more sense that they'd get training as a druid early on, rather than be trained as a regular cleric, and only later become a druid.
#2 weasel_fierce Jan 25, 2006 12:23:38	At level 9, most likely, you will have had a chance to get a few choice magical items, so it shouldnt be too much of an issue. I'd propably allow druids from level 1 too, or maybe level 2 (the first cleric level is kind of the apprentice level, with no spells or anything)
#3 havard Jan 26, 2006 11:05:24	I see no reason not to allow Druids at 1st level. In fact I think it makes more sense to have them start there rather than after having been Clerics for 9 levels. I like the idea of High level Class Options (Druids, Paladins etc), but no the way it was handled. I'm wondering if the Druid isn't a bit weak compared to the Cleric though, extra spells or not...? Håvard
#4 caeruleus Jan 26, 2006 22:16:10	I like the idea of High level Class Options (Druids, Paladins etc), but no the way it was handled. I like the idea too. I think it works great with the paladin (and avenger, and knight), but not so much the druid. I've been thinking of coming up with one to turn a fighter into a ranger. Something for the thief would also be cool. I'm wondering if the Druid isn't a bit weak compared to the Cleric though, extra spells or not...? A concern of mine, too. Tell me what you think of this. Rather than simply eliminate the ability to turn undead, perhaps replace it with an ability to charm animals? I suppose details would need to be worked out, but I haven't thought of that yet.
#5 weasel_fierce Jan 26, 2006 22:55:59	"dawn of the emperors" had Foresters. They are basically elf-trained humans. Rules wise, they are like elves, except: No infravision. Not immune to ghoul paralysis. Must have str and int 12. Their main edge is that they are humans, and can both fight well AND do spells, thus presenting an element of surprise.
#6 zombiegleemax Jan 27, 2006 6:04:00	I have used Druids from 1st level, but eventually I scrapped the class and replaced it with something else; druids in my campaign are more like magic users, but with a broader spell selection drawing from mage, claric, druid and fey (see the creature crucible) lists.
#7 caeruleus Jan 27, 2006 9:59:39	"dawn of the emperors" had Foresters. They are basically elf-trained humans. Rules wise, they are like elves, except: No infravision. Not immune to ghoul paralysis. Must have str and int 12. Their main edge is that they are humans, and can both fight well AND do spells, thus presenting an element of surprise. Not sure how this relates to druids, but it sounds interesting. Do they have the maximum level as elves?
#8 havard Jan 29, 2006 13:10:44	A concern of mine, too. Tell me what you think of this. Rather than simply eliminate the ability to turn undead, perhaps replace it with an ability to charm animals? I suppose details would need to be worked out, but I haven't thought of that yet. That is a pretty cool idea! You could use the same table as that for turning undead. A T result means the animal will flee or just become calm and not bother the party. A D result will mean the animal(s) will have come under the Druids control, like a charm person spell. Another idea would be to just give 1st levek druids an animal companion. Though it shouldnt be something as powerful as a wolf.... Håvard
#9 zombiegleemax Jan 30, 2006 7:47:51	Have any of you played a druid with the Mentzer rules? I'm kinda wondering how it compares to a regular cleric. Haven't played them since my PCs have never gotten to that level really. But I have used them as NPCs. They are weaker in some ways, as you note the armour restriction is a big one as well as the inability to turn undead. On the other hand, they have more powerful spells than the cleric. All around they are a bit more vulnerable than the cleric, but have more powerful offensive capabilities.
#10 zombiegleemax Feb 03, 2006 8:40:25	"dawn of the emperors" had Foresters. They are basically elf-trained humans. Rules wise, they are like elves, except: No infravision. Not immune to ghoul paralysis. Must have str and int 12. Their main edge is that they are humans, and can both fight well AND do spells, thus presenting an element of surprise. Foresters also have an ability no true elf has: they can survive lycantropy and turn in some werebeast (look Creature Crucible 4). So, what about a forester/werebear? A really lovable wood dweller ;)
#11 paigeoliver Feb 07, 2006 2:12:01	Higher level thieves don't really need any options. It is around those levels where the thieve's skills transform from "useless near auto-fail" abilities into infallible near auto-pass abilities.
#12 zombiegleemax Feb 08, 2006 10:01:45	Higher level thieves don't really need any options. It is around those levels where the thieve's skills transform from "useless near auto-fail" abilities into infallible near auto-pass abilities. And of course with a hefty skill percentiles, you can try to do some nifty things at a penalty (want to climb across the ceiling? Sure, lets say a -30% penalty... want to try to rebuild the trap you just disarmed? Okeydokey, I'm sure I can come up with a mechanism based on your superhuman disarm traps...).
#13 havard Feb 09, 2006 9:45:10	And of course with a hefty skill percentiles, you can try to do some nifty things at a penalty (want to climb across the ceiling? Sure, lets say a -30% penalty... want to try to rebuild the trap you just disarmed? Okeydokey, I'm sure I can come up with a mechanism based on your superhuman disarm traps...). Ofcourse by this time, the rest of the group usually can duplicate these abilities through spells and magical items... Håvard
#14 chatdemon Feb 14, 2006 0:07:03	has anyone tried allowing PCs to be druids from 1st level? I don't see a problem with this. In fact, it would make more sense that they'd get training as a druid early on, rather than be trained as a regular cleric, and only later become a druid. Bighara over at the Grognard's Tavern forum has posted a nice alternate Druid class that does just that: http://grognardstavern.proboards29.com/index.cgi?board=yourbdndrcm Check out the "Bighara's Homebrew Classes" thread. He's got a couple other custom classes in that thread too, and they're all great material.