I can't get excited about playing a druid. I've tried building a few as I've actually always really loved the concept behind druids but in 5e, I'm just not enthused about it. I'm not sure exactly what it is but nothing 'clicks' for me with it.
Given the recent dev update and druids being on the bottom of classes and subclasses, I'm now thinking I'm not alone in this. What's your opinion of the 5e druid?
I think it depends on the player. In our current campaign, the person playing a Druid is playing them almost like a naturalist from the 1700s, minus the stereotypical obsession with dissection. Their Druid is obsessed with finding new animals and studying them. In our last campaign, the person playing a Druid played them as a tactical nature wizard, using their familiar to deliver spells and create impediments for our enemies.
In general, I just can't get into playing a druid, I've had a couple of different players who had different ideas about the druid.
I have had a player run a moon druid and he loved it.
Another player, like me, has created a druid, looked at the sheet, and then rolled something else. He just didn't feel the class as something he wanted to play.
I feel like I should enjoy it, they have great spell lists, the have great utility in wild shape (you don't even need to be a moon druid to make good use of wide shape). Even a land druid can be fairly good in melee if required (at least at lower levels). Combining backgrounds with the class, I feel like I can come up with some great stories for a druid but when it comes right down to it, I just can't get into them.
My opinion about the 5th edition druid is that it's awesome, like all the other 5th edition classes.
And also that my opinion of druids doesn't actually matter all that much because I'm probably never going to play one (primarily on account of being a player in a campaign, rather than the DM, exceedingly rarely), and the opinions that the big-wigs should care about are those of players that want to play or are already playing druids - because trying to make druids appealing to a player that is into wizards and sorcerers or fighters and barbarians isn't likely to produce the desired results.
I'm curious what the reason is that druids aren't liked as much as other classes (on basis of the dndbeyond stats) as i actually enjoy playing druids a lot. I usually play circle of the moon druids and they have a very nice progression from being a tank to crowd control (with a little dps) and healer.
Never had a game where i would say that my druid wasn't able to provide a good action during clutch situations.
Going through my personal experiences so far i'd list the druid in the top 3 classes i'd like to play.
1. Warlock/Rogue Face 2. Druid (/Barbarian) Support 3. Barbarian (/Fighter) DPS Meatshield
I adoooore druids in 5e. I've played Druid three times in different campaigns, and most of my players have played them as well. I think Druids are a little more complex than a large number of other classes, making them harder to break into, but they are really flexible and if you figure out how to get what you want out of it, you can be the best at whatever you choose.
I played a Druid to level 10, circle of the moon, and he was a lot of fun. I will say there were times though that my spellcasting felt very restricted as far as damage went, so if there was a situation where Wildshapes had ran out before a short rest I was usually very support oriented. Don't get me wrong, that was fun in it's own right, but I could see someone who wanted to see this force of nature come rolling through being a little underwhelmed.
I think the other issue might be just a matter of relating to the archetype. Lots of folks can come up with examples of fighters, barbarians, clerics, rogues, etc from movies, video games, and books. Druids on the other hand don't seem to have as many front and center appearances in pop culture. They are usually NPC's or kept out of the spotlight in my experience. Just a thought really.
My current favorite character is a Circle of the Land (Forest) Druid. He focuses on plants, rather than animals, and has the disposition of a kind, friendly stoner ("herbalism kit"). I think of him as sort of a nature wizard more than anything, really. And since I normally gravitate to Wizards as the Intelligence-based casters, this works well for me. In combat, he carries out support functions, including healing (natch) and crowd control with spells like entangle and spike growth.
I'd also like to use the Circle of the Spores at some point, as a "good" necromancer sort.
I really like playing up the body horror of the druids shape change feature (Think Jeff Goldblum in The Fly or Dr Suresh from the show Heroes). If your character lacks motivation some good resources from a character standpoint are Marvel’s Swamp Thing, or DC’s Poison Ivy or even the movie Dances With Wolves.
If you want inspiration on how to wax poetic about nature, check out old footage of Marty Stouffer’s Wild America or Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin. Or if you want a more cosmic approach to druidcraft Carl Sagan speeches and Bill Nye have done tons of great interviews and there’s a show called NOVA that might help there as well.
My current favorite character is a Circle of the Land (Forest) Druid. He focuses on plants, rather than animals, and has the disposition of a kind, friendly stoner ("herbalism kit"). I think of him as sort of a nature wizard more than anything, really.
This is actually my biggest issue with the druid in 5e. It's just a nature wizard. That the sub-class of the moon druid dominates the class to the point of redefining it and making its other core components merely support structures for the concept is the exception that proves the rule.
The core class features of the druid suffer much in the same way as the ranger whereby they're so ill-defined, nebulous and functionally lacking that they rely heavily on the subclass features to pick up the slack. Think of the rogue core class features; these are fundamentally defining structures. Same with the fighter, or the paladin, or the cleric or the wizard. But the druid is just a nature wizard with mostly crappy spell selections and only a few standouts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
That's certainly a valid opinion! But in the PHB, since there are only two Druid subclasses, we could reinterpret the fact that the Circle of the Moon "redefines" the core class by instead saying that the two core subclasses vary widely in playstyle. Personally, I think that's a positive: when I started playing my forest druid, my daughter played a moon druid who preferred to turn into a giant goat most of the time.
I haven't played with the subclasses from XGE yet, so it's possible they feel like variants of the Circle of the Land. But in my opinion, being a "nature wizard" that plays more like a Cleric in terms of its spellcasting isn't a bad thing. (Idle thought: how different is a Nature Cleric?)
I haven't played with the subclasses from XGE yet, so it's possible they feel like variants of the Circle of the Land.
Depends on what you mean by "variations of Circle of the Land" - all three are dedicated spellcasters, all drawing from the same list of spells. Circle of Dream is the healing-focused druid, Circle of the Shepherd focuses on enhanced summons, while Circle of the Land tends to focus on, well, terrains and controlling/exploring them. Now, Circle of the Land can function as a general spellcaster archetype, and if you felt that it could heal and summon well enough, no need of specialized subclasses, yes, they're just variations. If you see them as different playstyles as evoker, illusionist and necromancer feel to me, then no, they're not variations of each other.
(Idle thought: how different is a Nature Cleric?)
Very. Nature clerics get a very small handful of abilities that let them deal with plants and animals, and a reaction ability to defend against elemental damage. Everything else is pure cleric. There's no turning into animals for exploring, there's no signature Entangle or Faerie Fire spells, there's very little in the way of controlling the terrain, there's no Conjure Beast / Fey magic. Nature clerics are still going to be reaching for Spiritual Weapon, Flame Strike, Guiding Bolt, etc. Nature clerics still want to wade into combat and hit people with Divine Strike, whereas druids will either Wild Shape or cantrip.
The long and short of it is that, when all is said and done, the base cleric and druid are different enough that subclasses don't change that.
The only reason that I don't play druids is because I like warlocks and monks more. If I played in 2 campaigns instead of 1 campaign I'd probably play a druid in one of them, the class itself is a ton of fun! But I enjoy other classes more so I play the other classes instead.
I like the concept, though I died hard twice in Ravenloft so am a bit on the fence. I like the idea, although I think I'd prefer to play a different class on the few occasions where I get to play rather than DM!
When I read that druids are at the bottom percentile of played classes in 5e I was actually surprised. I think a lot of players are turned off when looking at the druid table and seeing that they don't get class features consistently at every level when compared to other classes like rogue for example. However, when compared to other spellcasters in D&D the druid table progression doesn't seem that far off (mainly focusing on class features).
Being spellcasters, druids are presented with loads of spell options (that change from day to day) and depending on your circle the dynamic of playing with that can totally change. So there's a lot of freedom in that sense and your options aren't as streamlined as other classes. In my experience, druids feel very "open-ended" and that's what I love about them.
I've personally have had a blast playing a druid in my Tomb of Annihilation campaign. Rolen Dankleaf (my lvl 5 Wood Elf CoM druid), has helped my party endure a lot of the brutal day-to-day survival in that campaign (Goodberry has come in so clutch).
I've discovered that in 5e, the Druid appears to be the most powerful and versatile class due to:
Shapechange: Moon Druid forms tend to be overly powerful in early levels, and the plethora of options keeps it interesting. Plus: they can suck up damage that you don't have to heal (allowing them to Tank very effectively).
Conjure Animals: same as above, but even more of them. Indeed, eight creatures (like horses, wolves, or really practically anything) can be very overpowering, and certainly keeps you busy rolling dice.
Healing: Healing Word awakens downed buddies with just a bonus action, while dozens of Goodberries (cast yesterday, so they don't apply against your current spellslots) keeps them topped off. And don't even get me started on Healing Spirit (assuming your DM allows it).
Information Gathering: Speak with Animals or Plants allows you to be the social one, even when there are no NPC's around.
Transport: conjure eight Giant Owls, Giant Bats, Horses or Seahorses to transport your party. Or you could become a mount (or wagon puller) yourself.
Utility: ritually cast Water Breathing each day on your party. Cast Pass Without a Trace so they can all sneak. Polymorph one of them into a Giant Ape or T-Rex. Cast Guidance constantly out of combat.
If you want to enjoy playing a druid, prepare conjure animals and throw them at your enemies. its as simple as that. just bring ing hiant owls, flying snakes, giant poisonous snakes and wolves and your good.
My third level party consists of an Eldritch Knight, a feylock, a elemental monk (using a revised rule set), a divinationist, and a lore bard and me a moon druid. The roles I"m currently filling are:
off tank
scout
tracker
woodland survivalist
off healer
back up crowd control
emergency heals
lie detector
melee damage
spell damage
I am not able to do all these things at once, but I am doing at least three in any battle or RP situation. Druids are many things, and they're never the best at anything, but if you're bored playing a druid, you should be looking harder for things to do.
I can't get excited about playing a druid. I've tried building a few as I've actually always really loved the concept behind druids but in 5e, I'm just not enthused about it. I'm not sure exactly what it is but nothing 'clicks' for me with it.
Given the recent dev update and druids being on the bottom of classes and subclasses, I'm now thinking I'm not alone in this. What's your opinion of the 5e druid?
IDK, isn't every class boring? Fighters "just" hit stuff with weapons. Wizards "just" cast spells. Barbarians are just dumb fighters and Bards are just musical wizard-rogues.
It's about what you want to do. Maybe you don't think turning into a bear is fun. That's fine. That doesn't meant that there's anything objectively boring about a character capable of magically transforming themselves into a bear. I think druids are great. Tons of support magic, best healing in the game between Healing Spiritand Goodberry, best "pet"/summoner class, and shape shifting. Plenty of things to like!
They might not shine for offensive spell casting ability, but if that's why you're getting into Druid, I can see why you'd be bored. There's tons of great RP options to be had, and the class kit offers things that nobody else has, so it's just a preference thing.
Just got through playing a Druid through Curse of Strahd which is not the best environment for a druid, but playing it as an angry druid was a lot of fun! Circle of the Moon Druid 4/Ranger 5. Was a great do it all kinda character and hope I get the chance to play out to Druid 15. Other than that with the new subclass options there's a lot going for them in my opinion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I can't get excited about playing a druid. I've tried building a few as I've actually always really loved the concept behind druids but in 5e, I'm just not enthused about it. I'm not sure exactly what it is but nothing 'clicks' for me with it.
Given the recent dev update and druids being on the bottom of classes and subclasses, I'm now thinking I'm not alone in this. What's your opinion of the 5e druid?
I think it depends on the player. In our current campaign, the person playing a Druid is playing them almost like a naturalist from the 1700s, minus the stereotypical obsession with dissection. Their Druid is obsessed with finding new animals and studying them. In our last campaign, the person playing a Druid played them as a tactical nature wizard, using their familiar to deliver spells and create impediments for our enemies.
-- Arms are for hugging The Dandy Warhols --
In general, I just can't get into playing a druid, I've had a couple of different players who had different ideas about the druid.
I feel like I should enjoy it, they have great spell lists, the have great utility in wild shape (you don't even need to be a moon druid to make good use of wide shape). Even a land druid can be fairly good in melee if required (at least at lower levels). Combining backgrounds with the class, I feel like I can come up with some great stories for a druid but when it comes right down to it, I just can't get into them.
My opinion about the 5th edition druid is that it's awesome, like all the other 5th edition classes.
And also that my opinion of druids doesn't actually matter all that much because I'm probably never going to play one (primarily on account of being a player in a campaign, rather than the DM, exceedingly rarely), and the opinions that the big-wigs should care about are those of players that want to play or are already playing druids - because trying to make druids appealing to a player that is into wizards and sorcerers or fighters and barbarians isn't likely to produce the desired results.
I'm curious what the reason is that druids aren't liked as much as other classes (on basis of the dndbeyond stats) as i actually enjoy playing druids a lot. I usually play circle of the moon druids and they have a very nice progression from being a tank to crowd control (with a little dps) and healer.
Never had a game where i would say that my druid wasn't able to provide a good action during clutch situations.
Going through my personal experiences so far i'd list the druid in the top 3 classes i'd like to play.
1. Warlock/Rogue Face
2. Druid (/Barbarian) Support
3. Barbarian (/Fighter) DPS Meatshield
I adoooore druids in 5e. I've played Druid three times in different campaigns, and most of my players have played them as well. I think Druids are a little more complex than a large number of other classes, making them harder to break into, but they are really flexible and if you figure out how to get what you want out of it, you can be the best at whatever you choose.
I played a Druid to level 10, circle of the moon, and he was a lot of fun. I will say there were times though that my spellcasting felt very restricted as far as damage went, so if there was a situation where Wildshapes had ran out before a short rest I was usually very support oriented. Don't get me wrong, that was fun in it's own right, but I could see someone who wanted to see this force of nature come rolling through being a little underwhelmed.
I think the other issue might be just a matter of relating to the archetype. Lots of folks can come up with examples of fighters, barbarians, clerics, rogues, etc from movies, video games, and books. Druids on the other hand don't seem to have as many front and center appearances in pop culture. They are usually NPC's or kept out of the spotlight in my experience. Just a thought really.
My current favorite character is a Circle of the Land (Forest) Druid. He focuses on plants, rather than animals, and has the disposition of a kind, friendly stoner ("herbalism kit"). I think of him as sort of a nature wizard more than anything, really. And since I normally gravitate to Wizards as the Intelligence-based casters, this works well for me. In combat, he carries out support functions, including healing (natch) and crowd control with spells like entangle and spike growth.
I'd also like to use the Circle of the Spores at some point, as a "good" necromancer sort.
I really like playing up the body horror of the druids shape change feature (Think Jeff Goldblum in The Fly or Dr Suresh from the show Heroes). If your character lacks motivation some good resources from a character standpoint are Marvel’s Swamp Thing, or DC’s Poison Ivy or even the movie Dances With Wolves.
If you want inspiration on how to wax poetic about nature, check out old footage of Marty Stouffer’s Wild America or Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin. Or if you want a more cosmic approach to druidcraft Carl Sagan speeches and Bill Nye have done tons of great interviews and there’s a show called NOVA that might help there as well.
Hope this helps.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
That's certainly a valid opinion! But in the PHB, since there are only two Druid subclasses, we could reinterpret the fact that the Circle of the Moon "redefines" the core class by instead saying that the two core subclasses vary widely in playstyle. Personally, I think that's a positive: when I started playing my forest druid, my daughter played a moon druid who preferred to turn into a giant goat most of the time.
I haven't played with the subclasses from XGE yet, so it's possible they feel like variants of the Circle of the Land. But in my opinion, being a "nature wizard" that plays more like a Cleric in terms of its spellcasting isn't a bad thing. (Idle thought: how different is a Nature Cleric?)
Depends on what you mean by "variations of Circle of the Land" - all three are dedicated spellcasters, all drawing from the same list of spells. Circle of Dream is the healing-focused druid, Circle of the Shepherd focuses on enhanced summons, while Circle of the Land tends to focus on, well, terrains and controlling/exploring them. Now, Circle of the Land can function as a general spellcaster archetype, and if you felt that it could heal and summon well enough, no need of specialized subclasses, yes, they're just variations. If you see them as different playstyles as evoker, illusionist and necromancer feel to me, then no, they're not variations of each other.
The only reason that I don't play druids is because I like warlocks and monks more. If I played in 2 campaigns instead of 1 campaign I'd probably play a druid in one of them, the class itself is a ton of fun! But I enjoy other classes more so I play the other classes instead.
Professional computer geek
I like the concept, though I died hard twice in Ravenloft so am a bit on the fence. I like the idea, although I think I'd prefer to play a different class on the few occasions where I get to play rather than DM!
Southampton Guild of Roleplayers
My YouTube (C&C Welcome!)
When I read that druids are at the bottom percentile of played classes in 5e I was actually surprised. I think a lot of players are turned off when looking at the druid table and seeing that they don't get class features consistently at every level when compared to other classes like rogue for example. However, when compared to other spellcasters in D&D the druid table progression doesn't seem that far off (mainly focusing on class features).
Being spellcasters, druids are presented with loads of spell options (that change from day to day) and depending on your circle the dynamic of playing with that can totally change. So there's a lot of freedom in that sense and your options aren't as streamlined as other classes. In my experience, druids feel very "open-ended" and that's what I love about them.
I've personally have had a blast playing a druid in my Tomb of Annihilation campaign. Rolen Dankleaf (my lvl 5 Wood Elf CoM druid), has helped my party endure a lot of the brutal day-to-day survival in that campaign (Goodberry has come in so clutch).
I've discovered that in 5e, the Druid appears to be the most powerful and versatile class due to:
If you want to enjoy playing a druid, prepare conjure animals and throw them at your enemies. its as simple as that. just bring ing hiant owls, flying snakes, giant poisonous snakes and wolves and your good.
My third level party consists of an Eldritch Knight, a feylock, a elemental monk (using a revised rule set), a divinationist, and a lore bard and me a moon druid. The roles I"m currently filling are:
I am not able to do all these things at once, but I am doing at least three in any battle or RP situation. Druids are many things, and they're never the best at anything, but if you're bored playing a druid, you should be looking harder for things to do.
It's about what you want to do. Maybe you don't think turning into a bear is fun. That's fine. That doesn't meant that there's anything objectively boring about a character capable of magically transforming themselves into a bear. I think druids are great. Tons of support magic, best healing in the game between Healing Spiritand Goodberry, best "pet"/summoner class, and shape shifting. Plenty of things to like!
They might not shine for offensive spell casting ability, but if that's why you're getting into Druid, I can see why you'd be bored. There's tons of great RP options to be had, and the class kit offers things that nobody else has, so it's just a preference thing.
Just got through playing a Druid through Curse of Strahd which is not the best environment for a druid, but playing it as an angry druid was a lot of fun! Circle of the Moon Druid 4/Ranger 5. Was a great do it all kinda character and hope I get the chance to play out to Druid 15. Other than that with the new subclass options there's a lot going for them in my opinion.