[3.5] Druid vs Cleric, which is "better"?

[eggynack]

@Eggy, your observation of how a typical debate is built on the fallacy that you can assume the form of a Zodar that only occurs 00.003% of the time in probability. What I mean is "the target of a polymorph spell takes on all the statistics and special abilities of an average member of the assumed form" per the Polymorph Subschool's expanded text and Shapechange's notation of none-unique isn't contrary so you have to follow both of those specifications. At any given Encounter on any given day with any given Zodar, there is a three hundred and sixty four chance to one that it's unable to use it's Wish ability because it's already used it, or in other words statically speaking your average Zodar cannot use it's Wish ability in a given Encounter unless it's specifically be inactive or nonexistent because the DM invented it ten seconds ago, which sounds pretty unique now doesn't it?

This isn't a statistics thing, but a lack of specificity thing. You are becoming a generic zodar, the one from the statblock, and gaining its fancy wish ability. You can't specifically become a zodar without wish any more than you can become one specifically with wish, because you can't become a specific creature. Instead, you're assuming this murky form, which confers specific capabilities. The argument, then, is whether the timer is tied to the druid, or to the form.

But even built on that ASS-U-ption you can see all the errors it creates, the pointless bickering back and forth on language debates which are in turn based on ignore entire sentences of rule's text and the further debates and complications it creates. And for what? As I already mentioned, if continued leads down the path of causation that if Shapechange allows you to become a new individual on each usage than using it would mean everything using Mr Druid as the target isn't targeting the new Zodar. You lose more than you'd gain if everyone magically decided to side that it's possible. Free Wishes was a thing ten levels ago and if a Druid really wanted to have the option it'd consider dipping something like Contemplative or something for Planar Binding/Ally and actually using a choice that is fully supported by the rules and can actually be proven to be true. >.>

I half agree and half disagree. I agree it's stupid. This is one of the less interesting crazy semantic debates, primarily because it exists in that semi-ambiguous shape altering space where nothing ever goes anywhere. I disagree, however, with your stated crazy impact. You gain specifically what shape change says you gain, and lose what it says you lose, and spells operate how they operate. You're not fully assuming the form of this arbitrary zodar. You're fully assuming the form of this arbitrary creature for the purpose of Su's, and not at all for the purpose of what spells are on you. But yeah, the point of that post was that I've heard this whole thing a billion times and it's not great.

[DDchampion]

I just love how the "druids are better" supporters are lowering themselves to "My druid needs a zillion splatbooks to try to keep up with a core cleric" and "Splatbook support still can't make the druid win, now I'll arbitarly start banning cleric core spells! Also the cleric can never cast sanctified spells, gets zero domains while the druid has every prc, domain and feat in existence simultaneously plus sanctified all spells!".

It's a pretty nice Christmas present I got from this thread.

What's next, all clerics count as having their eyes gouged out, hands sliced off and tongues cut plus 0 PB for stats, while the druid starts with Divine Rank 20?

If shapechange cheese is allowed, then you bet any cleric with half a brain will pick a domain that unlocks it. They have another free domain to pick from anyway.

And if wish loops are allowed, then the cleric can pull it off earlier and easier and in more ways than the druid. So doesn't matter if Zodar shapechange allows it, cleric already pulled it a crapload of levels ago. If the cleric ways of unlocking free wishes are being banned, I see no reason why the druid shouldn't also get his slower wish trick banned.

[eggynack]

I just love how the "druids are better" supporters are lowering themselves to "My druid needs a zillion splatbooks to try to keep up with a core cleric" and "Splatbook support still can't make the druid win, now I'll arbitarly start banning cleric core spells! Also the cleric can never cast sanctified spells, gets zero domains while the druid has every prc, domain and feat in existence simultaneously plus sanctified all spells!".

Use whatever books you want, though I'd advise staying outside of dragon magazines cause that's when I start using kingdoms of kalamar stuff (and dragon stuff, to a lesser extent). To be honest though, druids probably get more from sanctified spells than clerics, even with the cleric's superior ability to cast them. Druids use animate with the spirit to pretend they have lesser planar ally, but clerics don't have to pretend. Same goes with luminous armor allowing the druid to fake a cleric's armor proficiency.

Same may apply to feats, where I think that aberration wild shape is close to the best thing out there. And actually, given that cleric prestige classes seem so often oriented around giving domains, and that druid prestige classes often do the same, and that clerics naturally get domains while druids don't, it seems possible that druid prestige classes are actually better, even discounting stuff like planar shepherd.

Anyway, point is, I've been arguing against Kaelik because he doesn't represent all druid supporters. I think that druids stand up well against clerics, even in a broad environment. Or, rather, I think they're better than them, specifically from level one to somewhere around ten. After that, cleric spells start getting crazy, and druid spells start getting worse (relative to the spell slot used). In other words, I think something pretty close to what I thought at the beginning.

If shapechange cheese is allowed, then you bet any cleric with half a brain will pick a domain that unlocks it. They have another free domain to pick from anyway.

Go ahead. I'd advise against it though. If you have shapechange, then you're already past the singularity, and anything with a good 9th is already basically doing the same pool of stupid crap. Makes this stuff kinda pointless, in my opinion, but other folk seem to want to discuss it a lot. All you're really doing by taking a shapechange domain is limiting your access to other domains, and thus putting the cleric in a worse position overall. Incidentally, what would be your second domain? Or if I've persuaded you away from your stance, your domain set? Making those kindsa choices would probably help things progress. I could probably make some druid choices too, if you think that'd be helpful, though it's worthy of note that basic druid class features aren't solidified in the same way. I'd be fine with putting together a basic druid feat list, but it'd be weird to have that without one for the cleric.

[Soft Insanity]

Use whatever books you want, though I'd advise staying outside of dragon magazines cause that's when I start using kingdoms of kalamar stuff (and dragon stuff, to a lesser extent).

Same may apply to feats, where I think that aberration wild shape is close to the best thing out there.

Aberration wild shape is a comparative joke compared to Reserves of Strength.  In fact, every feat except for Leadership is (even that is debatable tho).  I've been playing in an Epic game and the strongest thing I have written on my sheet is Reserves of Strength which is amazing considering 3rd party was allowed (just not book of immortals stuff).  That strongest thing includes epic spellcasting btw (which is a permission game, but still worth having).  Imho, the cleric can make better (easier at least) use of Reserves of Strength, and it's important enough that cleric therefor gets my vote for stronger class mechanically.

That said, druid is entirely more fun to play from personal experience.  So druid is "better" where it matters.

[Kaelik]

1) If no one cares and you still posted, what's that make you?
Also, the overarching point is Cleric vs Druid and the Cleric wins through a ten level or greater advantage making this fundamentally a strawman.

Except that Druids can also get infinite wishes at level 3, so your claim that the Cleric gets infinite wishes ten levels early is complete bullshit.

3) "assume the form of any single nonunique creature"
Funny how pushing Ctrl+B can change how a message reads doesn't it?

So... you think that Shapechange doesn't allow you to become a new creature each round? A Black Dragon and a Green Dragon are different unique creatures. If you claim that the "single" applies to all forms across the entire casting of the spell, rather than just the number of creatures you can be at a given time, then you are intellectually committed to the position that Shapechange doesn't allow you to change shape every round, even though it explicitly does.

Once you admit that a single casting of shapechange turns you into a Green Dragon and a Black Dragon, it follows logically that you can turn into two different Zodar.

Also you forgot "This spell functions like polymorph,", which is important because Polymorph is based off Alter Self which
"You can freely designate the new form’s minor physical qualities (such as hair color, hair texture, and skin color) within the normal ranges for a creature of that kind. The new form’s significant physical qualities (such as height, weight, and gender) are also under your control, but they must fall within the norms for the new form’s kind. You are effectively disguised as an average member of the new form’s race. If you use this spell to create a disguise, you get a +10 bonus on your Disguise check."
What this passage says is choosing a wolf with black hair or a wolf with gray hair is the exact same form.  And you seem to think that there are multiple Zodar forms, be it for the reasons of one for each minute characteristic or usage of Su/SLAs, available to choose when there is rule text that directly implies otherwise.

Except you know, that the Shapechange text supersedes that, and specifically says that you can assume the form of "any single nonunique creature" So if Jim the Zodar and Bob the Zodar are both single nonunique creatures, then you can assume their form. That is literally the only possible non bullshit reading of what the word "any" means.

Also, you're forgetting Shapechange has the Polymorph Subschool. The Spell description can override the School, but anything unmentioned is still inherited. Including the breakdown explanation that the caster takes on the form's statistics & special abilities. Which doesn't at all say the caster becomes a new individual or inherits a new individualism from changing his form which is what you think it does. And it's not implied in any of the shape-altering Spells, not even the Greater/Etheral Doppelgangers and they literally copy the entire memory and skills of their available forms.

You seem to be arguing that the Zodar's use limitation, which is specifically attached to the Zodar form, somehow coheres to you individually, preventing you from using it again. This is still just as wrong as when I pointed out it was wrong with the Black Dragon/Green Dragon breath weapon example, and you still have presented not even a fraction of an iota of an argument for why you think this is true.

Which is technically a good thing because if we followed your interpretation then upon casting Shapechange to become a new individualized Zodar then you'd lose the benefits of say Mind Blank because you are an entirely different individual than the Spell was cast on. Your ruling would further go on to affect on ton of stuff like Magical Locations (the new form never visited those places!), Teamwork benefits, Spell buffs, reputation (see cityscape), and even loss of Divine Spells (you may keep 'spellcasting' but Obad-Hai didn't grant New_Zodar any Spells and New_Zodar didn't pray and prepare anything either) and while that'd really help the Cleric side of the argument by nerfing the crap out of any Druid that using a shape-changing effect, I can't help but think you are just fucking retarded and shouting stupid crap without actually thinking about any of it first.

This is such a pile of nonsense that I genuinely wonder why you typed it or what you even though you were saying. Saying that use limit abilities of a form you shapechange into are tied to the form you shapechange to and don't magically track you across different forms is not even remotely odd. It is the obvious thing that every five year old could pick up by reading the spell. When you are a Black Dragon who breathes on people, and then you become a different Dragon who breathes on people, your breath weapon isn't still on cooldown, because you left the form that had a breath weapon and became a different dragon with a different breath weapon with an unrelated cooldown.

[Kaelik]

I just love how the "druids are better" supporters are lowering themselves to "My druid needs a zillion splatbooks to try to keep up with a core cleric" and "Splatbook support still can't make the druid win, now I'll arbitrarily start banning cleric core spells! Also the cleric can never cast sanctified spells, gets zero domains while the druid has every prc, domain and feat in existence simultaneously plus sanctified all spells!".

Uh... Can I buy pot from you, because you are clearly very into drugs?

Let's see, so far the splatbooks for Druids I mentioned are "Well if you are casting Shapechange, you probably want to turn into monsters, Well if you are using DMM Persist, the Druid is probably going to get that too (even from the same book), Well if you are using absurd Calling Magic, the Druid will probably use that too." Yeah, totally just swimming in splatbooks. I mean yeah, the SpC also makes Druids and Clerics both better. But I'm not even sure anyone has mentioned SpC spells. Since Cleric supporters are too busy talking about Mirror Mephits.

But yes, I'm going to assume for the sake of argument that your DM doesn't let you use calling magic to have an infinite army of outsiders of greater CR than you. I'm also going to assume your DM doesn't allow you to use Wish to wish for items of Wish, or items that have XP costs in the millions that you don't have to pay. That's not because I'm banning Cleric spells, thats because I am talking about ways you can actually play the game, instead of ways that immediately break down and result in nonsense.

I'm not sure who objected to or even suggested that sanctified spells were an issue. But yes, name two domains, I'll let you cast all the spells from those two domains. The problem is that Cleric supporters inherently name 46 domains when making spell comparisons because they like to imagine what some clerics are theoretically capable of, rather than what a specific Cleric you might actually play can do.

If shapechange cheese is allowed, then you bet any cleric with half a brain will pick a domain that unlocks it. They have another free domain to pick from anyway.

Well, since so far the cheese in question is "casting Shapechange at all" I'm going to say, probably not. See, the thing is, if you aren't level 17, the Animal Domain is pretty fucking shit. So if you are playing one of the 99.99999% of characters who will never see 9th level spells at all, even if your DM would have allowed Shapechange to be cast, you still probably won't have the Animal Domain, because why would you, when you can pick a Domain that doesn't suck at your current level.

And if wish loops are allowed, then the cleric can pull it off earlier and easier and in more ways than the druid. So doesn't matter if Zodar shapechange allows it, cleric already pulled it a crapload of levels ago. If the cleric ways of unlocking free wishes are being banned, I see no reason why the druid shouldn't also get his slower wish trick banned.

Well... no, not at all. If the Cleric is allowed to use Miracle to do the things Miracle does that are not Broken at level 17, then the Druid might be allowed to use the spell Wish at level 17 to do the things that are not broken. So for example, imitate level 8 Wizard spells.

If on the otherhand the Cleric is allowed to use sacrifice spell bullshit to get a Wish at level 3, then the Druid can just buy a candle of invocation at level 3, and also get some wishes, and wish for a Staff of infinite wishes.

So if no one is allowed to break the game, then they are on pretty even footing at level 17, and if people are allowed to break the game, then they are still on equal footing at level 3 when they both break the game. (And also, the Cleric probably doesn't want to waste his time on Sacrifice spell bullshit, because he could just buy a Candle of Invocation). And that's my point, having "earlier" or "more possible ways" to break the game is super fucking meaningless, because any class can just be an Elf, put a bunch of points in Profession  (Farmer) write in their backstory that they farmed for 300 years, and then buy a Candle of Invocation at level 1. And no one will ever care, because the things you can do to break the game have no bearing on playing the game.

Since it is at least possible for DMM Persist games to be played, I bring it up as, if your DM allows DMM Persist, the Cleric is probably stronger because the overwhelming number of short duration stacking buffs probably allows a Cleric Archer to outclass a Druids slightly better save or lose/die spells and better DCs. But if your DM doesn't allow DMM Persist, the Druid is stronger. But if your DM doesn't allow DMM Persist, but does allow you to "adventure" from your mansion while 100 Glabrezu's do all the work for you... well, 1) that's silly, because he should just allow DMM Persist if that is his balance point, and 2) Then both the Cleric and the Druid can and will generate an army of 100 Glabrezu's to do their adventuring, and the only difference is that the Cleric spends his time resting in a sweet Cathedral he built with Wall of Stone and Stoneshape and the Druid lives in a sweet Treehouse he built using Plant Growth, probably some splat spells that make trees grow bigger or grow as Ironwood or some shit, and WoodShape.

[Soft Insanity]

And that's my point, having "earlier" or "more possible ways" to break the game is super fucking meaningless, because any class can just be an Elf, put a bunch of points in Profession  (Farmer) write in their backstory that they farmed for 300 years, and then buy a Candle of Invocation at level 1.

You're getting into that gray area where "the rules don't say I can't so therefor I can."

[Kaelik]

And that's my point, having "earlier" or "more possible ways" to break the game is super fucking meaningless, because any class can just be an Elf, put a bunch of points in Profession  (Farmer) write in their backstory that they farmed for 300 years, and then buy a Candle of Invocation at level 1.

You're getting into that gray area where "the rules don't say I can't so therefor I can."

I'm pretty sure "Buying Candles of invocation" and "We as a party decided to make profession farmer checks for 300 years" Are totally things people can just do under the rules. No one does them, because they break the game, but they are both definitely things you can do.

[Soft Insanity]

I'm pretty sure "Buying Candles of invocation" and "We as a party decided to make profession farmer checks for 300 years" Are totally things people can just do under the rules. No one does them, because they break the game, but they are both definitely things you can do.

Candles of invocation require me, as the dm, to give you access to cities right away.  You decide to take it easy and farm for 300 years even tho I set the game to a start date where heroes are required, not farmers.  It's hard to farm in cities.  Congratulations, I as a DM thank you for making the exact opposite choices from what an actual powergamer would make.  The fact that I didn't have to change anything only adds insult to injury, and this would hardly qualify as 1. bad dming 2. using unbeatable obstacles 3. not playing to the spirit of the game.  Truly powerful things in d&d go over the head of the DM imho.

I only have a problem with your examples, not your overall point.  Comparing Druid to Cleric is totally subjective in the long run, even sans cheese.

[KellKheraptis]

I'm pretty sure "Buying Candles of invocation" and "We as a party decided to make profession farmer checks for 300 years" Are totally things people can just do under the rules. No one does them, because they break the game, but they are both definitely things you can do.

Candles of invocation require me, as the dm, to give you access to cities right away.  You decide to take it easy and farm for 300 years even tho I set the game to a start date where heroes are required, not farmers.  It's hard to farm in cities.  Congratulations, I as a DM thank you for making the exact opposite choices from what an actual powergamer would make.  The fact that I didn't have to change anything only adds insult to injury, and this would hardly qualify as 1. bad dming 2. using unbeatable obstacles 3. not playing to the spirit of the game.  Truly powerful things in d&d go over the head of the DM imho.

I only have a problem with your examples, not your overall point.  Comparing Druid to Cleric is totally subjective in the long run, even sans cheese.

Subjective until reaching the pinnacle PrCs at least.  The generally accepted pedestal of druid PrCs, the Planar Shepherd, is unequivocally shut down by an AMF, along with most things, which is the hallmark trick of the pedestal of Cleric power, the Dweomerkeeper (though really any Initiate of Mystra can pull off the persistent AMF force field - DK's just do it a lot better).

Also as a side note, if said DK were to persist AMF using Supernatural Spell, it would require a psionic character to kill it on Faerun, as Faerun's psi-magic transparency is different and the Twice-Betrayer Slayer dispel method wouldn't work (can't dispel Su).

Everything else leading up to that is class-specific (as in one class or the other has an easier time of it, as I can pretty much get any trick on either of them given enough fucking around with spells/feats/ACFs) and subjective, basically comparing apple pie to German chocolate cake (or enter two awesome desserts to substitute if you don't like apples or chocolate).

Which also really only means that at the end of the day, the only thing below Pun-pun grade that can mop the floor reliably with either of them, or a TBS for that matter, is a TBS grade psion/wilder/ardent/erudite (but then we already knew this...any of the big 4 manifesters become functionally better Wizards with a means of changing power selection).

Guess I'll have to stat that thing out after all...again

[Soft Insanity]

Guess I'll have to stat that thing out after all...again

Just be careful, epic spells are epic for a reason (mainly because they allow you to just make stuff up).  AMF, even psionic AMF can't do much against them.  Without epic, due to the nearly 100% overlap between most T-1 classes, it's virtually impossible to compare them.  Except possibly stp where transparency is important as you mentioned.

My Mythal makes me immune to everything magic and psionic for instance (yay magic mantle).  It even technically makes me immune to epic level magic/psionics, if it's read a certain way.  The question then becomes "why play?"  My answer is simple "I'm a fan of Saitama."  DM's answer "fiat fiat fiat".

[KellKheraptis]

Guess I'll have to stat that thing out after all...again

Just be careful, epic spells are epic for a reason (mainly because they allow you to just make stuff up).  AMF, even psionic AMF can't do much against them.  Without epic, due to the nearly 100% overlap between most T-1 classes, it's virtually impossible to compare them.  Except possibly stp where transparency is important as you mentioned.

My Mythal makes me immune to everything magic and psionic for instance (yay magic mantle).  It even technically makes me immune to epic level magic/psionics, if it's read a certain way.  The question then becomes "why play?"  My answer is simple "I'm a fan of Saitama."  DM's answer "fiat fiat fiat".

Who said anything about epic   This will be a 20 level build, and no mythals involved.  Also, note that at the end of the day, it's relatively easy for either a Cleric or a Druid to play pseudo-Erudite just like a Wizard, with the right domain selection (Planar Touchstone anyone?) >.>

[eggynack]

Aberration wild shape is a comparative joke compared to Reserves of Strength.  In fact, every feat except for Leadership is (even that is debatable tho).  I've been playing in an Epic game and the strongest thing I have written on my sheet is Reserves of Strength which is amazing considering 3rd party was allowed (just not book of immortals stuff).  That strongest thing includes epic spellcasting btw (which is a permission game, but still worth having).  Imho, the cleric can make better (easier at least) use of Reserves of Strength, and it's important enough that cleric therefor gets my vote for stronger class mechanically.

What're you doing with reserves that's so much crazier than aberration wild shape?

Except you know, that the Shapechange text supersedes that, and specifically says that you can assume the form of "any single nonunique creature" So if Jim the Zodar and Bob the Zodar are both single nonunique creatures, then you can assume their form. That is literally the only possible non bullshit reading of what the word "any" means.

The problem with that claim is the term "non-unique". Bob the zodar, or more generically, some zodar that specifically has its wish and which is distinct from that zodar from before, seems like too unique a form.

I'm pretty sure "Buying Candles of invocation" and "We as a party decided to make profession farmer checks for 300 years" Are totally things people can just do under the rules. No one does them, because they break the game, but they are both definitely things you can do.

Buying the candle is fine. Starting the game with more money than is dictated by the explicit starting gold rules, whether by farming or some other method, is not. If you want money from profession, then you're going to need to start the game, and then farm from there, not just write that you happen to have stacks of extra GP.

[SorO_Lost]

This isn't a statistics thing, but a lack of specificity thing. You are becoming a generic zodar, the one from the statblock, and gaining its fancy wish ability.

*sigh* I suppose in the spirit of the Holidays I should say thanks for subconsciously agreeing with me.

What I mean is, the rules say you become an average & non-unique Zodar, but those descriptive terms as admitted by your own writing style do not support your preferred outcome. So you instinctively alter terminology, from average & non-unique to generic, to better suit things. In other words, the word "average" in according to your own written style is not a term that can be used to describe the thing that you wished it meant.

I just love how the "druids are better" supporters are lowering themselves to "My druid needs a zillion splatbooks to try to keep up with a core cleric" and "Splatbook support still can't make the druid win, now I'll arbitarly start banning cleric core spells! Also the cleric can never cast sanctified spells, gets zero domains while the druid has every prc, domain and feat in existence simultaneously plus sanctified all spells!".

That's a given element in all vs threads, the inferior side has to trivialize or nerf the superior side's attributes in order to feel better about them selves, pretty much like any negative campaign ad you've seen this year.

Really, the best way to read this threads is to take a step back and look at things. Like me and Eggy has it's own deals, I know he shifted measurement lines a lot and I'm sure I probably throw out a fallacy or two that I didn't catch but the root of it, and even Kaelik's whining about Schrodinger's domains, are all based on the Druid people creating a specific Druid build and then hating how the Cleric can choose to become better.

Like take the Pro-Druid's examples, you must have Aberrant Wild Shape and you must be a Planar Druid. This means every Druid they have spoke of is a the specific type of build that took Aberrant Blood or Singer/Bringer Initiate in their 1st & 3rd level Feat slots, then the Wild Shape Feat in their 6th. Deep down I think Eggy knows this which is why he never really pressed Greenbound, he'd have to lock in his Racial Option (like using human) or use the UA's DM-required-to-approve rules that pretty much just hand out free Feats and he's a little reluctant to get there. They both are walking the line of using a specific Druid build in order to make a point against a very undefined and generic Cleric. If you've every read anything about Teirs or vs threads, you'd know that specific builds prove very little.

But there is a reserve side to the coin. They get pissed when something they mention is shot down by one of the Cleric's options so they try something else and get shot down by another option. Maybe it is frustrating, but the take away point is the Cleric has a lot of options, and when he employs them to a specific field he's better than even a specific Druid build can perform in the same area. Versatility is key, and the fact is you can make a party of Clerics and each one is different, but you can't do that with a Druid. They have so few useful options that there is a very clear path to build the "best" and they are oblivious to that fact. I mean hell, right out of Eggy's own mouth when I was listing all the Druid content he missed, it's just not good enough to be worth talking about.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Too much eggnog.

Edit - missed this

What're you doing with reserves that's so much crazier than aberration wild shape?

A: Pretty much anything, it breaks the die cap of the Spell. Imagine a 100HD limit on Shapechange Alter Self and you're holding the Epic Level Handbook in one hand for inspiration of what it can do and go from there looking for what it can do. It's a very powerful Feat when it's put in the hands of someone who knows, or is actually willing to research, a bit about the Spells offered in the game.

Edit 2 - Also this

You're getting into that gray area where "the rules don't say I can't so therefor I can."

In D&D there is very much an entry on this.

As long as you know the rules, the players need be concerned only with their characters and how they react to what happens to them in the game. Have players tell you what they want their characters to do, and translate that into game terms for them. Teach them how the rules work when they need to learn them, on a case by case basis. For example, if the player of a wizard wants to cast a spell or the player of a fighter wants to attack, the player tells you what the character is attempting. Then you tell the player which modifier or modifiers to add to the roll of a d20, and what happens as a result. After a few times, the player will know what to do without asking.

In other words, no matter what you want to do there needs to be something in the rule structure, either officially or houserules, that allow you to do it.

The entire concept you don't comes from players that have never read the DMG and would extensively probably be very terrible DMs with poor judging skills.

[Kaelik]

even Kaelik's whining about Schrodinger's domains, are all based on the Druid people creating a specific Druid build and then hating how the Cleric can choose to become better.

Like take the Pro-Druid's examples, you must have Aberrant Wild Shape and you must be a Planar Druid. This means every Druid they have spoke of is a the specific type of build that took Aberrant Blood or Singer/Bringer Initiate in their 1st & 3rd level Feat slots, then the Wild Shape Feat in their 6th. Deep down I think Eggy knows this which is why he never really pressed Greenbound, he'd have to lock in his Racial Option (like using human) or use the UA's DM-required-to-approve rules that pretty much just hand out free Feats and he's a little reluctant to get there. They both are walking the line of using a specific Druid build in order to make a point against a very undefined and generic Cleric. If you've every read anything about Teirs or vs threads, you'd know that specific builds prove very little.

But there is a reserve side to the coin. They get pissed when something they mention is shot down by one of the Cleric's options so they try something else and get shot down by another option. Maybe it is frustrating, but the take away point is the Cleric has a lot of options, and when he employs them to a specific field he's better than even a specific Druid build can perform in the same area. Versatility is key, and the fact is you can make a party of Clerics and each one is different, but you can't do that with a Druid. They have so few useful options that there is a very clear path to build the "best" and they are oblivious to that fact. I mean hell, right out of Eggy's own mouth when I was listing all the Druid content he missed, it's just not good enough to be worth talking about.

Yeah, remember all those times I used a specific Druid build in comparing the Druid spell list to the Cleric spell list? Like that time I insisted the Druid had Planar Shepard, and that time I insisted he had Abberant Shape. Because only specific Druids have access to the entire Druid list, not every Druid.

Look, I get it, one time you read someone else explaining some cute ways to break the game, so you decided that class power is determined by adding up who had the most of them, but if you are too fucking drunk to be able to distinguish between different posters, so you throw blanket really dumb generalizations, maybe you should just wait until you aren't drunk to post so you can stop being an idiot and go back to being a liar.

[eggynack]

*sigh* I suppose in the spirit of the Holidays I should say thanks for subconsciously agreeing with me.

What I mean is, the rules say you become an average & non-unique Zodar, but those descriptive terms as admitted by your own writing style do not support your preferred outcome. So you instinctively alter terminology, from average & non-unique to generic, to better suit things. In other words, the word "average" in according to your own written style is not a term that can be used to describe the thing that you wished it meant.

Just as I added generic, so too did you add average. All there really is is non-unique, and that in my opinion demands that you use the statblock rather than any sort of individual creature.

Like take the Pro-Druid's examples, you must have Aberrant Wild Shape and you must be a Planar Druid. This means every Druid they have spoke of is a the specific type of build that took Aberrant Blood or Singer/Bringer Initiate in their 1st & 3rd level Feat slots, then the Wild Shape Feat in their 6th. Deep down I think Eggy knows this which is why he never really pressed Greenbound, he'd have to lock in his Racial Option (like using human) or use the UA's DM-required-to-approve rules that pretty much just hand out free Feats and he's a little reluctant to get there. They both are walking the line of using a specific Druid build in order to make a point against a very undefined and generic Cleric. If you've every read anything about Teirs or vs threads, you'd know that specific builds prove very little.

I didn't push greenbound because I don't really like it much, despite its power. Same goes for planar shepherd, actually. The latter especially is definitely one of my shallower regions of knowledge where druid stuff is concerned. Still, you can toss in one of the two if ya want. Probably the initiate feat at first, then blood at third, natural spell 6th, aberration at 9th, rashemi at 12th, and maybe some initiate feat or something else of interest in those last two slots. For build, I usually like something with that holt warden/contemplative setup, and if ya wanna go more cheesy you can put some effort into hathran (thought that definitely eats feats).

I've been vague more because we haven't really been talking build much, more than because I can't or won't. Granted, even that description above has its gaps, but I could do more if you want. Maybe toss in the whole half-orc deal for some early beef and summoning power. Realistically though, there are quite a few ways to put together an optimal druid. They probably won't be as good as the aberration one I've been talking about, but you can pick one out of a few of those form adding feats, and one out of the big summoning feats, and maybe a companion feat if you're interested.

But there is a reserve side to the coin. They get pissed when something they mention is shot down by one of the Cleric's options so they try something else and get shot down by another option. Maybe it is frustrating, but the take away point is the Cleric has a lot of options, and when he employs them to a specific field he's better than even a specific Druid build can perform in the same area. Versatility is key, and the fact is you can make a party of Clerics and each one is different, but you can't do that with a Druid. They have so few useful options that there is a very clear path to build the "best" and they are oblivious to that fact. I mean hell, right out of Eggy's own mouth when I was listing all the Druid content he missed, it's just not good enough to be worth talking about.

I don't think that's an especially fair assertion. Druids have a good pile of crap options, but there's more than one way to build a druid. And, critically, the few best options are just ridiculously good. I actually have in the past described what a four character party of druids would look like, each character defined as focusing on a different major druid class feature. Don't remember the exact specifics, but it's a doable thing. If I'm harping on one plan, it's more because I think it's the best plan than because it's the only one. I guess we could do the thing where the cleric ditches a lot of his best stuff, and the druid goes the heavy exalted route, but it doesn't seem that indicative of the mechanics of really high level play to me.

A: Pretty much anything, it breaks the die cap of the Spell. Imagine a 100HD limit on Shapechange Alter Self and you're holding the Epic Level Handbook in one hand for inspiration of what it can do and go from there looking for what it can do. It's a very powerful Feat when it's put in the hands of someone who knows, or is actually willing to research, a bit about the Spells offered in the game.

Sounds strong, but where are you going from there? Alter self has pretty specific parameters of what it's capable of granting. I mean, I'm sure you can do some really good stuff, but it'd be nice to see some specific ramifications. You're not getting any of the serious extraordinary special qualities or attacks, and you're definitely not getting Su's or Sa's.

Edit: And, for the record, I haven't said that the theoretical druid is taking any specific feats outside of aberration wild shape and natural spell, but I also haven't really used any feats outside of those. Yeah, there was that planar shepherd thing, but that was just the high caliber thing I use when things get a bit too TO. I wouldn't really use it in a game, and while I could use it in a build, it probably wouldn't be with aberration wild shape. I mean, planar shepherd is typically going to be your source of form adding stuff anyway in such a build. It just feels a bit overly critical to poke at the undefined nature of the build when nothing I'm doing relies on the build being defined.

[Soft Insanity]

Sounds strong, but where are you going from there? Alter self has pretty specific parameters of what it's capable of granting. I mean, I'm sure you can do some really good stuff, but it'd be nice to see some specific ramifications. You're not getting any of the serious extraordinary special qualities or attacks, and you're definitely not getting Su's or Sa's.

Here's the thing...he mentioned ONE spell (well technically 2).  Now, go through the entire cleric spell list and you'll start to understand why abberation wildshape can't hold a candle to the might that is reserves of strength.  Nearly any spell that gets a "pass" in a handbook for example only gets that rating because it caps.  The druid list has some of these spells, but the cleric list is dominated by them.  Comparing the two feats is unfair, however, as one affects entire spell lists, and the other just allows you to take on a few forms (albeit powerful ones).  The reason I chose to bring it up is, if it's allowed, it ultimately decides who is strongest mechanically by virtue of what it does.  I'm gonna even go so far as to say that's not my opinion, but fact.  It turns the already superior spell list of the cleric into something beyond reason.

[eggynack]

Here's the thing...he mentioned ONE spell (well technically 2).  Now, go through the entire cleric spell list and you'll start to understand why abberation wildshape can't hold a candle to the might that is reserves of strength.  Nearly any spell that gets a "pass" in a handbook for example only gets that rating because it caps.  The druid list has some of these spells, but the cleric list is dominated by them.  Comparing the two feats is unfair, however, as one affects entire spell lists, and the other just allows you to take on a few forms (albeit powerful ones).  The reason I chose to bring it up is, if it's allowed, it ultimately decides who is strongest mechanically by virtue of what it does.  I'm gonna even go so far as to say that's not my opinion, but fact.  It turns the already superior spell list of the cleric into something beyond reason.

I'd assume there's some good stuff for it. But, y'know, what is it? I wouldn't really want a list of every spell impacted by it, but some highlights would be neat.

[DDchampion]

I'm pretty sure "Buying Candles of invocation" and "We as a party decided to make profession farmer checks for 300 years" Are totally things people can just do under the rules. No one does them, because they break the game, but they are both definitely things you can do.

So, where do you draw the line at "break the game"? Because on the last page you were claiming that the druid is better because he can use shapechange and then on top of that turns into a Zodar for free wishes. But when pointed out that the cleric can do that better and earlier, you suddenly changed your mind to OP cheese stuff being a bad thing. While also supporting planar sheperd aberrant wildshape druids.

I can agree with a "let's not used borked stuff", but then the limits must be the same for both cleric and druid.

Meanwhile, druid has shapechange, core cleric has both shapechange and gate before prcs/feats/tricks. Gate, like planar ally and whatnot, are still pretty boss spells even if free wishes are banned. Outsiders are still superior to animals.

Which reminds me, yet another significant cleric advantage is that they can pick whatever belief they want, while druids are always bound to respect nature. Whatever that means is somewhat open to interpretation, but still by RAW the druid must hug trees and be a hippy to keep his powers, but the cleric only needs to respect whatever they write on their sheet, offering a lot more RP potential.

I've been always surprised people make such a fuss about the paladin code, but nobody complains about every druid technically needing to worry about the natural world' balance.

[eggynack]

I've been always surprised people make such a fuss about the paladin code, but nobody complains about every druid technically needing to worry about the natural world' balance.

Well, the paladin code demands an extremely specific set of standards that are quite difficult to meet. Druids just get some nature connection, one which can be explicitly broken by a few really easy to avoid things, and which doesn't seem breakable by just being not especially reverential towards nature. If we were just going by the flavor of the paladin, no one would make a fuss about it either. It's because of the code aspect, rather than from where the power is derived, that people have problems.