[3.5] Do Druids Suck?

[Captain Karzak]

ahem. To clarify I was wondering if PHB-II variant Druids who use Shapeshift instead of wildshape are bad? [PHB II, p. 39-41]

I am the DM for a game, and I decreed that all druids in my game had to use Shapeshift. My druid player has put forth some reasonable concerns about the long-term viability of the class due to the Shapeshift rules. I though I might ask the knowledgeable readership of these boards for their assessment.

His chief concern is that he will have piss-poor saves, low hp, and low physical attributes (excepting strength).

If you find these concerns to be valid and serious enough to affect viability, what mechanical remedies do you suggest. Like how should I re-write the Shapeshift ability?

[Sinfire Titan]

It is indeed a step down from Wild Shape, but it will not make the Druid suck. It merely makes it 1.5 classes instead of 3 classes.

If he is worried about his stats, he really needs to look into proper Buffs like Bite of the Were-X. His saves can be bolstered quite nicely by spells, and his HP should be good because he's going to have an emphasis on his Con score thanks to being a Druid.

In other words, he's not familiar with the Druid class to know what to do when he can't use Wildshape.

[Halinn]

The shapeshift ability is a more balanced replacement for wildshape. Don't rewrite that part.
The part I personally don't like about it is the fact that it replaces your animal companion as well. Barring some standouts (fleshraker dinosaur, dire tortoise), it's not that amazing a class feature (compared to the cleric's divine metamagic or the wizard's spell list)

[Mooncrow]

What is the rest of the party like?   If the rest are also tier 1 powerhouses, then yeah, you do need to look at re-writing it.  Though, tacking the animal companion back in would probably be enough for viability, if not parity. 

If the rest of the party is tier 2-3, then the shapeshift druid is probably about right power-wise, even if I do hate how it actually plays. 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Does shapeshift include wildshaping goddamned moronic "everything melds, NO EXCEPTIONS" errata bs?  If it does, consider houseruling it back to how it originally worked.  And yeah, getting companion back doesn't bother me, either.  Other than that it's still a fine class feature, though obviously worse than wildshape.  I also don't really see the harm in allowing Natural Spell feat to work with it...

[Captain Karzak]

Some clarifications.

I don't use the Spell Compendium. So no Bite of the Were-X spells. No Resistance spells. No Conviction, etc.

I allow druids to cast spontaneously off of the entire PHB druid spell list. They also know a single additional spell per caster level that they can select from the following sourcebooks:

PHB-II
It's Cold Outside
It's Hot Outside
It's Wet Outside

Although the PHB-II requires Shapeshift druids to give up their animal companion, I allowed them to have one at 1/2 progression (like a Ranger).

The other two party members are a Swordsage and a Blackguard. They are all level 5. I re-wrote the blackguard into a base class, well sort of.

Offensively I've allowed advised the druid's player to abuse the hell out of Evards Menacing Tentacles and Produce Flame. Combined with Shapeshifting into Predator Form, and his natural abilities as Shifter with Razorclaw shifting, he can pump out 5 attacks per round (including Razorclaw claw attacks) which carry a damage bonus of 1d6 + 5 fire (produce flame) backed by a 20 strength (14 base + 4 from Predator Form + 2 from Razorclaw shifting). So his offence isn't ass. At least not against things that lack fire resistance.

[phaedrusxy]

WTF... and he's complaining? The other guys are the ones who should be complaining... The druid should have been like 3 separate classes, anyway (a caster, a pet class, and a shapeshifter). As-is, the PHB druid is way too powerful, compared to anything except maybe a well-played cleric or wizard (or artificer/archivist).

[Captain Karzak]

I wouldn't say he's complaining.

He is worried about the long-term viability of a class that cannot make use of stat-boosting items or cloaks of resistance in a game that does not allow all of the crazy spells that allow you to make saves on any roll of a 2 or higher and does not allow most of the items that allow you to keep re-rolling until you get that 2+.

I do intend to be fairly liberal with handing out Inherent stat bonuses because there is a (heavily house-ruled) Wish Economy. That won't be happening until levels 11+ though.

[Unbeliever]

It's certainly a step down, but I like its rules a whole lot more.  The only things that he can legitimately complain about are (1) losing the Animal Companion and (2) no spellcasting.  The second one, in particular, has always made me hesitate to replace wildshape wish shapeshifting -- I don't like the idea of a class feature that turns off the main other class feature of the class.  I'd either get rid of that clause or allow natural spellcasting to work with it.

Given the other characters in the party, I would suggest you do the above and give them shapeshifting OR an animal companion.  A half-rate animal companion isn't even a class feature to speak of, it's flavor text.  This would allow him to choose what kind of druid he wants to be:  up front or in the back. 

P.S.:  why on earth don't you use the Spell Compendium?

[Unbeliever]

...
He is worried about the long-term viability of a class that cannot make use of stat-boosting items or cloaks of resistance in a game that does not allow all of the crazy spells that allow you to make saves on any roll of a 2 or higher and does not allow most of the items that allow you to keep re-rolling until you get that 2+.
...

I think he has a fair point.  The "no gear" clause only leads people to circumvent it, and I think leads to far more headaches than it's worth.  He could try and get around it by shapeshifting, then putting gear on and stuff, but that seems to negate the shapeshift ACF's appeal.  Given that shapeshift is reasonably balanced on it's own, why not just excise that clause?  You're already homebrewing and house ruling as it is.

[StreamOfTheSky]

...
He is worried about the long-term viability of a class that cannot make use of stat-boosting items or cloaks of resistance in a game that does not allow all of the crazy spells that allow you to make saves on any roll of a 2 or higher and does not allow most of the items that allow you to keep re-rolling until you get that 2+.
...

I think he has a fair point.  The "no gear" clause only leads people to circumvent it, and I think leads to far more headaches than it's worth.  He could try and get around it by shapeshifting, then putting gear on and stuff, but that seems to negate the shapeshift ACF's appeal.  Given that shapeshift is reasonably balanced on it's own, why not just excise that clause?  You're already homebrewing and house ruling as it is.

I agree.  That rule was always fricking stupid and unnecessary, and needing to dress himself after changing each time completely negates the entire purpose of at will swift action shapechanging.  And not being able to wear magic items is NOT viable by mid levels, I agree with him there.

[zugschef]

choose 2 out of 3 (wildshape, spellcasting, animal companion).

[Mooncrow]

Odds are pretty good that without the Spell Compendium buffs and the miserably reduced shapechanging, it won't take long for him to be going full caster all the time.  Which is still fine given the rest of the party.  If he's interested in the flavor of shapechanging, he could go with Shifter for race - it may not be super helpful, but at least he won't lose 90% of his power when he shifts. 

[Kasz]

I'd really recommend using the magic item compendium and spell compendium, with a few exceptions they're quite well balanced books... when compared to other books in 3.5 at least.

The other thing would be to allow Wilding Clasps from... ugh either MotW or Magic Item Compendium or both... long story short though they're 4,000gp and can attach to weapon / armour / worn item and allow the item to be used whilst in wildshape.

I mean if those two options were there the Druid would have access to wilding clasps and a range of spells which would leave him with nothing to complain about compared to a swordsage or blackguard.

Obviously the Blackguard is homebrew but I assume it's about the same strength as a Paladin. The Swordsage is a tier 3, the Paladin is a tier 5. Now if you've buffed the Blackguard a bit with homebrew maaaybe it'd get to tier 3. (unless you're using Cleric as a base but you didn't mention it so I'll assume no higher than tier 3.)

So you've got two tier 3 melee fighters and a slightly nerfed Druid. The Druid has shapechange for laying down a reasonable beatdown in melee, if he had access to bite of the X and buffs like that calling him tier 3 for shapechange melee wouldn't be out of the question in my opinion... versitile because he can adapt to forms with flight, swim or burrow if needed. On top of that the Druid gets a pet which is just as good as the Tier 4 Ranger's pet. Then we get to the spellcasting.

You've limited the spell selection a little, as opposed to "every druid spell ever written" which is the case for RAW Druids, limiting the books allowed limits the spells known of course. Whilst limiting this isn't unreasonable and doesn't really effect the spell casting capability of the Druid.
Spontaneously casting ANY spell he knows however is amazing... just making him a powerhouse magically. I mean compare this to the Sorc and Wiz
Wizard T1 - knows a similar amount of spells (ie. LOTS) but has to prepare them.
Sorceror T2 - knows a small selection of spells (ie. like 4/5 per CL without cheese) but can spontanously cast them.
Druid also has the same spell amounts per day as the wizard, so less castings per day than a sorc, but spontaneous from a much bigger list
The sheer flexibility makes this spellcasting Tier 1 or at least 1.5 imo, it's outright stronger than wizards T1 casting, but Druid's divine spells are in my opinion a little weaker... but that just depends on selection I guess.

So is your (T1 caster, T3 melee, T4 pet) Druid weaker than your T3 fighters? Nope... might he shapechange without wilding clasp and get save or died or destroyed? Possibly without the compendiums.
Is he viable? I would worry more about the blackguard.

At least that's how I see it.

[RobbyPants]

Personally, I'd allow magical items to function when you shapeshift, unless they require manipulation (weapons, wands, and such). As others have already mentioned, you can get around it by stripping, shifting, and getting dressed again. The only downside to this is the shapeshift variant lets you shift as a swift action, and that's really handy in combat. I've played a shapeshift druid before, and I'd often shift into predator form just to pick up an extra 20' of movement for the round, or to boost my AC at lower levels.

[Captain Karzak]

So is your (T1 caster, T3 melee, T4 pet) Druid weaker than your T3 fighters? Nope... might he shapechange without wilding clasp and get save or died or destroyed? Possibly without the compendiums.
Is he viable? I would worry more about the blackguard.

At least that's how I see it.

Yeah that was my goal - Top grade spontaneous spellcasting stacked with middling melee capability (including the pet's contribution). I want something that achieves vastly less power than the typical Wildshaped + Natural spell druid, while still being "viable."

The compromise we've been using so far is that any stat-boosting items continue to function while Shapeshifted, and all shapeshift forms provide a flat resistance bonus on all saves of +1/3 druid levels. This would be in place of any of the small, piecemeal save bonuses (usually only to Fort) listed in the description of each form.



The blackguard is just a mechanical experiment. It's still only 10 levels long over which it gains full BAB, d10 HD, 6 skillpoints per level, charisma to saves, some useless smite good attempts, 4 sneak attack dice, 4 levels of spells,  casts spontaneously and automatically knows all spells on the meager list provided in it's DMG entry, and casts all spells that normally have a casting time of a standard action or less as a swift action. There's also a rage mechanic at higher levels to boost meleeing when spells are running low. It's far more powerful than the PHB Paladin. So far results have been comparable to the Swordsage.

[Unbeliever]

...
The compromise we've been using so far is that any stat-boosting items continue to function while Shapeshifted, and all shapeshift forms provide a flat resistance bonus on all saves of +1/3 druid levels. This would be in place of any of the small, piecemeal save bonuses (usually only to Fort) listed in the description of each form.
...

This just seems a lot more work to me than "use magic items" while Shapeshifted.  Perhaps with the hands limitation provided above, perhaps not.  I just think there a whole lot easier ways to balance things than the way you are going for.

P.S.:  @the Blackguard that sounds intriguing to me.  The one thing about Paladins/Blackguards that has always bugged me is how rarely they get to use their abilities.  I'd prefer a lot more frequent smites, or just to get rid of it.  Likewise, I think they need more spells per day.  If I've got like 3 per day I hardly want to bother writing them down.

[Captain Karzak]

This just seems a lot more work to me than "use magic items" while Shapeshifted.  Perhaps with the hands limitation provided above, perhaps not.  I just think there a whole lot easier ways to balance things than the way you are going for.

Yeah that's true. I'll probably just do what Robbypants suggested and save myself a bunch of work.

I have another question though:

When you guys allow all or most sourcebooks, are you still able to use the monster manuals as the main source of serious opposition for the PC's? Or do you find that the only thing that can challenge the PC's ends up being custom-built NPC's who exploit all the same spells and equipment as the PC's?

[ariasderros]

This just seems a lot more work to me than "use magic items" while Shapeshifted.  Perhaps with the hands limitation provided above, perhaps not.  I just think there a whole lot easier ways to balance things than the way you are going for.

Yeah that's true. I'll probably just do what Robbypants suggested and save myself a bunch of work.

I have another question though:

When you guys allow all or most sourcebooks, are you still able to use the monster manuals as the main source of serious opposition for the PC's? Or do you find that the only thing that can challenge the PC's ends up being custom-built NPC's who exploit all the same spells and equipment as the PC's?

In my experience, the more sources you allow the PC's, the more customized they will be. The more customized they are, the more you'll have to do to keep up.

So, No. Not generally. There are powerful monsters in those books, there just aren't enough to be a consistent challenge throughout a campaign.

But, you aren't limited to just customizing your NPC's.

The more the sources you allow your players, the more you need that guide IMHO.

[phaedrusxy]

When you guys allow all or most sourcebooks, are you still able to use the monster manuals as the main source of serious opposition for the PC's? Or do you find that the only thing that can challenge the PC's ends up being custom-built NPC's who exploit all the same spells and equipment as the PC's?

I generally give the monsters a few magic items to help trick them out, customize their feats (Steadfast Determination = Who're you calling weak-willed, bitch?), and maybe add a useful class level or two (martial adept class levels are especially cheese-tastic when added to high-HD, low-CR monsters).

I allow just about anything, including a lot of homebrew. The only things I wind up banning or heavily house-ruling are a bunch of core spells (Polymorph, et al) and a handful of specific things from splatbooks (Thought Bottle, etc).