This is one of the only two major problems I've had with 5e since it came out. My other problem is that Druids remain the most vastly disproportionately overpowered class compared to all other classes, as it has been since 3e.
What??? Hardly...that would be the Bard, Swashbuckler, or the Wizard. I never knew anyone to play bards back in the day, now they're everywhere. There are almost no legendary or artifacts for druids, very few druid magic items or weapons at all. Their spell list is ok, animal shapes got weaker in 5e... a CR 2 really? I do like some of the summoning spells but but you're not scaring anyone off the battlefield. I always liked druids but feel they've always been under powered. I played 1e and some 2e, but no 3e or 4e.
I had to take this to a new thread.
Like Hebruhammer, I've been playing since 1e. (Technically since before 1e: I played the forerunners TFT, Melee & Wizard before Gygaxx hired Jim Ward as the first employee of Tactical Studies Rules.)
With the game originally you were a fighter, magic-user (c.f. wizard,) or Cleric. Clerics-as divine crusaders they really were fighters with a little less combat prowess and a lot of non damage dealing spells- to compensate for their slightly reduced combat abilities.
Then the game came out of the box. They added thieves, as a nod to Bilbo Baggins, and its subclass Assassin as well as Monks since ninjas and kung-fu were really popular in the U.S. in the 1970s. (Note that in 1e the term subclass just referred to which tables to consult, each was really what we now consider a separate class.) Then they added a few hybrid classes because some people wanted to multiclass, but some DMs didn't want to deal with the confusion of different xp & hit tables.
The paladin (fighter subclass) was introduced as a half fighter/half cleric. The druid (cleric subclass) was introduced as a compromise between Magic-user and Cleric (less fighter than cleric and less wizard than cleric but more damage dealing spells than cleric.) The ranger (fighter subclass) half fighter/half druid with a little thief thrown in,) was added with a nod to Tolkien's Aragorn.
The bard was introduced as what we would later refer to as the original prestige class. You had to have a minimum of 15 character levels and 4 stats at 15+ to even think about becoming a bard.
Over the following three editions we've seen a lot of changes, picked up the sorcerer and warlock, seen a LOT of charts and ridiculously complicated calculations. In deference to the Devs, they all were always trying to provide a better product.
Fast forward to 5e->
All classes are on the same page for xp advancement and hit bonus by level. Fighters combat advantage is reflected in multiple attacks. Thieves (and Paladins) have fewer opportunities to hit but when they do they get good damage add ons. Then you've got your spell casters-11 total in the PH including subclasses.
A default caster only gets 1 action a round, typically a spell or 1 attack. Warlocks, as always, are governed by special rules, but they have so few slots it balances out. Paladins and Rangers retain the original half caster status reflected in their slot gain. Eldrich Knights and Arcane Tricksters as 1/3rd casters also have their caster status reflected in their slot gain. Clerics can under certain circumstances or against certain enemies do spell damage comparable to a Wizard or Sorcerer of the same level, but there are more cases when they don't. The majority of their spells remain non damage dealing. (36% of their spells are abjurations, divination or illusions- not counting all their non damage dealing spells in other schools.) Clerics also have the most restrictive cantrip list. Wizards have Oh so many spells, but take away their spellbooks and they might as well be bottlewashers. Sorcerers have fewer spell options than wizards, but that balances out the wizard book dependency. Bards are more versatile than most other casters, but if they can get access to the big bang spells, they don't get many of them.
Which brings me to the Druid. 100% caster, 100% fighter AND can shape shift to a variety of shapes and sizes. (e.g. a 9th level moon druid can change into a sparrow, fly over a ship, then turn into an Ankylosaurus-CR 3 Huge beast to drop and sink the ship. The damage he takes is soaked by the beast form.) Druids exclusively have access to spells far more powerful than other spell classes at the same level. They can make a magical weapon at level 1 with a cantrip that doesn't require concentration, as compared to wizards who have to be 3rd level or paladin which has to be 5th level to cast the inferior 2nd level "magic weapon" spell which does require concentration.
Thier spell list includes the best of both wizard and Cleric, with additional combat spells like flaming blade and moonbeam.
On top of their spell abilities, their starting armor proficiency is second only to fighters and paladins, and they have access to twice the number of weapons that sorcerers & wizards do.
I like the Concept of the druid, but IMO the 5e druid needs to be split into 3 separate classes. Let the land druid keep the full spell list, lose armor and half the weapons, wild shape uses measured in minutes with no size change, moon druid keep wild shape measured in hours, half weapons & armor, 1/3 slot gain as per ek&at, combat or 'life and death' druid with. Full combat abilities, slot gain per paladin/ranger and wild shape limited to senses lasting rounds. Applications of circle subclasses depending on which type of druid focus.
Re Hebruhammer's comparison: swashbuckers, really? The no disengage requirement feature anyone can get with the mobility feat and their special exception for sneak attack only applies if they attack a target alone while it's standing more than 5' away from its allies.
I agree but in part because I feel in a roleplaying game, it's really more about how many choices Druids get. Need someone to spy on a bandit or noble? Bird or rat form!
It would be difficult to limit them without Druid player's just feeling shafted and majorly changing a whole class.
I've always felt the more "plain" classes need some more oomph. I think D&D should really do more with Backgrounds in how they support characters in having more "breadth" of "off-the-wall" options.
I agree but in part because I feel in a roleplaying game, it's really more about how many choices Druids get. Need someone to spy on a bandit or noble? Bird or rat form!
As a DM, may I introduce you to the concept of cats or snakes? Or any other creature that may find a bird or rat tasty?
In the previous example, ok they are a bird, now they are an ankylosaurus. Ankylosaurus being CR 3 means that they are a 9th level druid, and they still only get 2 changes per rest. That means the anylosaurus sinks with the ship and drowns, Or they revert to humanoid form while underwater and would have to potentially cast water breathing, which almost nobody has water breathing prepared.
Players can, and will, attempt to get away with anything they possibly can. Yes, the druid has a lot of leeway for an imaginative player to potentially run rampant. A DM should encourage the part about being imaginative, but reigning it in when things get a little out of hand.
Druids are very, very, very powerful, especially Moon Druids. There are ways to be nature based characters without being druids, and fulfilling specific roles in the game, but Moon Druids simultaneously fills almost all of them. If you need a healer, be a moon druid, take cure wounds and goodberry. If you need a melee combatant, be a moon druid. If you want to be a tank, be a moon druid. If you want to be a blasty nature spellcaster, be a moon druid and wait until you're low on hit points to cast spells, or cast spells before wild shaping, and then you can be a blaster and tank and melee combatant at the same time. If you want to be a ranged character, be a Stars Druid. If you want to be a rogue, be a druid, and turn into a rat, frog, spider, anything that wouldn't be suspicious.
Druids are OP. They should be not so OP, but to nerf them would be to call upon the wrath of the D&D community, so they're never getting nerfed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Their spell list isn't all that awesome in my personal opinion. There are some gems to be sure at lower levels but not a lot of flexibility in terms of damage types available. Also their armor proficiency sucks, only up to hide armor with normal materials. If the dm is willing to give them exotic materials for their armor it's not so bad, but baseline it sucks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I concur that it's very unlikely that we'll ever see a druid nerf in 5e. I can only hope we'll see one in the golden anniversary edition (Ge.)
Until then, I will continue to limit druids to 1st level in my campaigns (because I dislike the wild shape mechanic so much,) and try not to complain when i run into them in other people's campaigns.
Druids are powerful, as are the other classes you listed, just at different times. At level 2 a moon druid is by far the most powerful class in the game without a doubt. After that, they drop in power until 11, then a spike with elemental shape and then taper off until 20 again. The designs of the classes are not linear nor are they supposed to be. There are peaks and valleys in every class and they are very different from class to class. I for one applaud that and think it is genius. If you think a Druid is the most powerful class from 1-20 you are sorely mistaken. It's great to see a different party member shine at different intervals during their rise in level and power. That level 2 Druid was feeling awesome but when he hit 10 the party Barbarian is soaking up quadruple the damage and doing massive damage at the same time all while the Druid is relegated to casting as it's wild shapes are far inferior.
I never understood why everyone thinks that wizards are OP, certainly they are a good utility class but they are not as powerful as druids, clerics and bards.
I don't see anything in a Druids that make them overwhelming, I think they're possibly underappreciated, but looking at the number of dice druids can roll, it's about the same as everyone else. I think their power level is in line with clerics.
That sparrow into Ankylosaurus maneuver, that made me laugh. That's great, I imagine that could solve some pretty early scenarios, but I doubt a beholder or a dragon or anything with legendary saves would succumb to those shenanigans. It could though! Definitely a great way to start or end a fight! And for the sake of non-druid players: if you take excessive damage in beast form, it will carry over to your own HP. Taking and receiving 20d6 bludgeoning can still have negative consequences... especially if the scenario would allow the receiving end to make a DEX save, and you could potentially deal 20d6 to just yourself
I mean in the armor proficiency comparison... there's Fighter/Paladin at the top, but after that you should put Clerics in there with Forge/War/Twilight/Life. And don't forget about Ranger or hexblade either... and barbarians and monks don't even use armor, but they certainly can have better armor class then druids.
Limiting druids to 1st level, that's just ... terrible. Someone should really convince you not to do that. There's nothing that you've mentioned that can't be done by other classes.
This sounds like you read the druid class, decided it was OP, and have never actually seen one in play. They are only OP in the fictional scenarios in your mind. Anyone could easily describe the Bard in a similar way - you only address it as a spellcaster when it also can fill pretty much any role. Ditto with Paladin.
So what if a level 9 druid could sink a ship? A level 9 wizard could do the same with Immolation. A level 9 rogue could sneak onboard and sabotage it from within. Hell, a level 9 bard could just convince the crew to give it to them. Heroes can do heroics things, man. Druids are cool, and amongst the people that actually dig into the nitty-gritty of the rules they don't even make the top 3 for strongest class.
And you're going to need to be a lot more specific about how they get the best spells compared to other classes at that level because I literally can't think of a single example and have never heard that from anyone.
The only issue with druids is when they get very high in level around 17 and spam Wild Shape. But if your a DM that knows what their doing it shouldn't be a problem. Every Class is like that. It seems to me you just don't like the idea if characters using magic.
This sounds like you read the druid class, decided it was OP, and have never actually seen one in play. They are only OP in the fictional scenarios in your mind. Anyone could easily describe the Bard in a similar way - you only address it as a spellcaster when it also can fill pretty much any role. Ditto with Paladin.
So what if a level 9 druid could sink a ship? A level 9 wizard could do the same with Immolation. A level 9 rogue could sneak onboard and sabotage it from within. Hell, a level 9 bard could just convince the crew to give it to them. Heroes can do heroics things, man. Druids are cool, and amongst the people that actually dig into the nitty-gritty of the rules they don't even make the top 3 for strongest class.
And you're going to need to be a lot more specific about how they get the best spells compared to other classes at that level because I literally can't think of a single example and have never heard that from anyone.
Agreed. I’m playing a Moon Druid right now and he’s 7th level and while he’s powerful he is far from the most powerful member of the party. He’s very flexible and he looks powerful on paper, but he’s limited to one action per round the same as every other class and he has to maintain Concentration on his best spells the same way wizards do.
If you look back at my original post you'll note I did refer to specific spells, or at least a few of them.
As for casting, again, compared to other casters they don't have a compensating balance restriction- clerics have few damage spells, warlocks have few slots, sorcerers have fewer choice, wizards have book limit- and druids have none of those balancing factors.
In wild shape they gain additional save proficiencies on top of their own, and if the beast has multiattack, the character gains multiple attacks a round.
Then there's the elemental wild shape for moon druids at 10th level. How does that make any sense? That should go with an elemental patron warlock, not a druid. If anything they should get either dire shape or metis(hybrid) form.
I don't know why I'm wasting my breath. There's nothing I can say that will convince you of what's obvious to anyone who can make unbiased judgement. Those of you who've been playing this overpowered class have investment bias and simply can't see the imbalance.
I have played as a druid. I've played as all the classes in all editions. How many other classes have you played?
I agree with you, they are broken. I have never played a druid. I have had druids and Moon druids play in my campaigns before, and I as the impartial DM know that they are much more powerful and versatile than most of the other players. Druids have no spell restrictions. A lot of subclasses have added prepared spells. Moon Druids can have way more hit points effectively than the Bear Totem Barbarian.
Players who play druids are biased, because they don't truly notice how much more powerful they are than the other players. DMs have a bias-free standpoint on player power.
Druids are overpowered, but will never be nerfed, or it will invoke the wrath of all the people who have played them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Druids are definitely powerful, especially at specific levels. But... some of the things you say really confuse me.
100% fighter/100% cleric? Maybe, if you're being extremely generous - but not at the same time. At best, Druids can do things like hold a Flaming Sphere while they shift to a combat form, but a single Flaming Sphere isn't exactly a stellar trick. Once they get summons it gets better, but if those spells are problematic I know where the problem is, and it isn't the Druid. It's the spell that lets you add sixteen more die rolls to your turn. Remove summons from the equation, which is very easy to do as a DM by just insisting that you pick the creature so they can't always go for the super optimal nonsense setup, and those spells are suddenly pretty poor compared to the typical Cleric Spirit Weapon/Guardian combination. Even then - this comment really only applies to the Moon Druid. To be sure Moonies are probably the most common and most powerful Druids, but if you have this problem - it's aimed at a subclass, not the Druid as a whole.
Their spell list is also, outside of their summon options, frankly very bad. I've played Druids into the teens a couple times now, and frankly... their spell selections are *not* good. Shillelagh does D8+Wis damage per attack. Unless I'm dipping into an extra attack class, that's... marginally better than the Wizard's Firebolt. Figure a 15 base wis and a +Wis race, D8+3 is two points of damage better, on average, than a straight D10. Except the Wizard gets to lob his shots from 120 feet away. And if I'm actually taking a melee cantrip as a Druid, I'm not convinced I should be taking Shillelagh over Primal Savagery. I do 2 more damage in my early levels, then ~3 damage less from 5th level onwards, and drastically less if I'm somehow still using a cantrip in melee at the higher levels. The same is true when comparing this cantrip to what the Wizard gets, since Firebolt scales just like Savagery - once you hit 5th level, Shillelagh is the *weakest* battle cantrip, instead of the strongest.
A similar point is true of Flame Blade, but frankly that spell isn't even... good. You do 3d6 damage on a hit. At levels 3 and 4 that doesn't compare extremely well to the Cleric just casting Spiritual Weapon - the Weapon does 3 less damage, but that means the Cleric's action only has to be worth 3 points to break even. And that's at exactly those two levels. At 5+, Flame Blade's damage is actually less, on average, than the D10 cantrips (and of course Clerics get a D12 cantrip, to just rub salt in that wound). Flaming Sphere is often a better use of the Druid's time, but that spell is available to Wizard's too, and isn't notably different from the Cleric's Spiritual Weapon in expected damage. Heat Metal would probably be the best example of 'Druid bias' in spell lists, as its damage is slightly higher than Flaming Sphere's, but its damage is also more contextual so a slightly higher output makes sense.
Moonbeam is somewhat similar. It's a very powerful spell for its level... against enemies who don't move. If they sit in the area and also let you bombard them with your action-based attack, whatever that may be, then yes - it outdamages most any other second-level spell in the game (notably - by about 3 points of damage. It's still not exactly earth-shattering). If, however, they move, Moonbeam's damage compares very closely to Flame Blade, which is to say... not great.
As for armor and weapon proficiencies, Druids are just worse Clerics in that regard, so it's hard to call them particularly powerful in that area when they're playing second fiddle and are also not a class that realistically cares about either of those things. I think I've made a weapon attack with a Druid once.
I can certainly agree that Druids - or at least, Moon Druids - are among the most powerful classes, and at very specific levels (exactly 2-4) the most powerful class. But then there are a lot of classes that are very powerful at specific levels and also fairly strong overall (for the obvious - literally all the full casters). However, their power really doesn't come from the things you've pointed out; their spell list is definitely the worst of all full casters. Their power comes first from the extreme flexibility of wild shape as a problem-solving tool and second from the obnoxiousness that is wild shape providing two extra layers of hit points, which was meant to be compensated for by the poor AC of wild shape forms but that plan... failed badly. But the stuff you talked about, their spell list and their ability to be a fighter and cleric simultaneously? Nah. Not even close.
"Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)" do you know how few armors are not made of metal? Padded, Leather, and Hide. Studded leather even has quite a bit of metal, and so I have never allowed Studded Leather on a Druid. So they are absolutely behind there, and without war caster, they can use that magic weapon OR a shield, not both, and cast, as their hands are full. By the time you get to dragon hide armors, It wont matter they can use better, since everyone will have fancy items by then. Likewise, even if you multiclass with fighter, the no metal restriction applies.
Secondly, the best wizard spells are absolutely not on the druid list, especially moon druid. If your talknig pure damage, only wildfire (a UA variant) gets fireball, which is literally listed as OP for its level based on the pure damage dice it gets. It gets close to wizard levels of damage, and close to cleric levels of support, but its list is very specifically missing many of the go to OP options. It has some but not what those other classes get. Also it seems that every "good" druid spell needs concentration to use, meaning stepping on a needle and getting 1 damage can cause you to lose the spell... an issue I have with a lot of "OP" classes in this game, as people forget concentration is a thing. Sure A single big bad swinging once for 20 damage is unlikely to make my war caster fail... but 20 cr0 bats biting me might make a spell like haste go poof.
As Kestral287 pointed out, the bid issue with druids, especially moon druids is the ammount of damage they can tank. Wildshape and get a hundred hp, then your back to normal full hp, then wild shape again for another hundred "temp hp" (not actually temp hp, but you get my point). Every time people say druid is OP what they really mean is Moon Druid Wild shape is OP. As printed, Rules as written, druid is otherwise a top shelf, but not grossly OP class.
Bard is literally the most versatile class in the game. It doesn't do damage well, using some pretty precious resources to get access to solid damage picks, but its ability to control and support is unmatched.
Wizard is good at two things, and rarely the same time, battlefield control or area damage. Other classes (Warlock for instance) absolutely are better at single target damage. And I could argue that Bard is still the better controller, maknig wizard strong, but in limited ways.
Warlock is my pick tho for absolute most OP caster, and it has nothing to do with EB keeping up with fighter damage. When you get down to it, Rod of the Pact Keeper is by far the best caster item in the game bar none but some legendairy (late game) items, and its for something most people overlook: Its bonus applies to your spell save DC's. That lvl 3, 18cha Changing Bard trying to cast hold person would only get 8+2+4= 14 save DC, but if they were a warlock with even a +1 RotPK its now a 15.... no other caster has access to bonus to save DC's like warlock. That bonus also applies to EB, but wait, theres more, add in a Wand of the War Mage, which stacks rules as written with the Rod, and now EB gets double bonus.
Even late game, you could get +3 from rod, +3 from wand, and get +3 to spell save DC's and +6 to your EB, scortching ray, and other spell attacks.... that's a really powerful buff that is hard to replicate otherwise (I think there might be 1 other item that gives a bonus of +2 to spell save DC's, but I am not looking it up right now).
Druid is the most OP Tank, and is not an OP caster.
I have played as a druid. I've played as all the classes in all editions. How many other classes have you played?
I'm gonna just put it out there that maybe your play style just lends to the Druid class more than the others. I have only played a Druid to tier 3, but I have played a Wizard all the way to 20 and every other class to tier 3 as well except Ranger. They are all overpowered at certain levels compared to one another.
Even late game, you could get +3 from rod, +3 from wand, and get +3 to spell save DC's and +6 to your EB, scortching ray, and other spell attacks.... that's a really powerful buff that is hard to replicate otherwise (I think there might be 1 other item that gives a bonus of +2 to spell save DC's, but I am not looking it up right now).
The Robe of the Archmagi. Sets your unarmored base AC to 15, gives you advantage on saving throws against spells, and ups your save DC by 2. Notably, it's legendary Somewhat notable as well for your purposes is the Staff of Power, which ups your spell attack rolls by +2 alongside its AC and saving throws buffs and carrying a large number of fairly relevant spells within. Or the Staff of the Magi, though it's another legendary item, also gives a spell attack roll bonus alongside a bunch of other benefits.
Also notable to the main purpose of the conversation: all of those items are restricted to sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards. Druids get locked out of most good caster-oriented magic items while having very few unique or semi-unique options of their own. The Staff of the Woodlands is very funny, with its at-will Pass Without A Trace and its ~once per day Awaken, but it's not inherently powerful outside of letting the party pretend to all be Rogues.
Even late game, you could get +3 from rod, +3 from wand, and get +3 to spell save DC's and +6 to your EB, scortching ray, and other spell attacks.... that's a really powerful buff that is hard to replicate otherwise (I think there might be 1 other item that gives a bonus of +2 to spell save DC's, but I am not looking it up right now).
The Robe of the Archmagi. Sets your unarmored base AC to 15, gives you advantage on saving throws against spells, and ups your save DC by 2. Notably, it's legendary Somewhat notable as well for your purposes is the Staff of Power, which ups your spell attack rolls by +2 alongside its AC and saving throws buffs and carrying a large number of fairly relevant spells within. Or the Staff of the Magi, though it's another legendary item, also gives a spell attack roll bonus alongside a bunch of other benefits.
Also notable to the main purpose of the conversation: all of those items are restricted to sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards. Druids get locked out of most good caster-oriented magic items while having very few unique or semi-unique options of their own. The Staff of the Woodlands is very funny, with its at-will Pass Without A Trace and its ~once per day Awaken, but it's not inherently powerful outside of letting the party pretend to all be Rogues.
Awesome.... I was sure I had seen 1 or 2 that were up there in rarity, but couldn't for the life of me remember what they were offhand.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I had to take this to a new thread.
Like Hebruhammer, I've been playing since 1e. (Technically since before 1e: I played the forerunners TFT, Melee & Wizard before Gygaxx hired Jim Ward as the first employee of Tactical Studies Rules.)
With the game originally you were a fighter, magic-user (c.f. wizard,) or Cleric. Clerics-as divine crusaders they really were fighters with a little less combat prowess and a lot of non damage dealing spells- to compensate for their slightly reduced combat abilities.
Then the game came out of the box. They added thieves, as a nod to Bilbo Baggins, and its subclass Assassin as well as Monks since ninjas and kung-fu were really popular in the U.S. in the 1970s. (Note that in 1e the term subclass just referred to which tables to consult, each was really what we now consider a separate class.) Then they added a few hybrid classes because some people wanted to multiclass, but some DMs didn't want to deal with the confusion of different xp & hit tables.
The paladin (fighter subclass) was introduced as a half fighter/half cleric. The druid (cleric subclass) was introduced as a compromise between Magic-user and Cleric (less fighter than cleric and less wizard than cleric but more damage dealing spells than cleric.) The ranger (fighter subclass) half fighter/half druid with a little thief thrown in,) was added with a nod to Tolkien's Aragorn.
The bard was introduced as what we would later refer to as the original prestige class. You had to have a minimum of 15 character levels and 4 stats at 15+ to even think about becoming a bard.
Over the following three editions we've seen a lot of changes, picked up the sorcerer and warlock, seen a LOT of charts and ridiculously complicated calculations. In deference to the Devs, they all were always trying to provide a better product.
Fast forward to 5e->
All classes are on the same page for xp advancement and hit bonus by level. Fighters combat advantage is reflected in multiple attacks. Thieves (and Paladins) have fewer opportunities to hit but when they do they get good damage add ons. Then you've got your spell casters-11 total in the PH including subclasses.
A default caster only gets 1 action a round, typically a spell or 1 attack. Warlocks, as always, are governed by special rules, but they have so few slots it balances out. Paladins and Rangers retain the original half caster status reflected in their slot gain. Eldrich Knights and Arcane Tricksters as 1/3rd casters also have their caster status reflected in their slot gain. Clerics can under certain circumstances or against certain enemies do spell damage comparable to a Wizard or Sorcerer of the same level, but there are more cases when they don't. The majority of their spells remain non damage dealing. (36% of their spells are abjurations, divination or illusions- not counting all their non damage dealing spells in other schools.) Clerics also have the most restrictive cantrip list. Wizards have Oh so many spells, but take away their spellbooks and they might as well be bottlewashers. Sorcerers have fewer spell options than wizards, but that balances out the wizard book dependency. Bards are more versatile than most other casters, but if they can get access to the big bang spells, they don't get many of them.
Which brings me to the Druid. 100% caster, 100% fighter AND can shape shift to a variety of shapes and sizes. (e.g. a 9th level moon druid can change into a sparrow, fly over a ship, then turn into an Ankylosaurus-CR 3 Huge beast to drop and sink the ship. The damage he takes is soaked by the beast form.) Druids exclusively have access to spells far more powerful than other spell classes at the same level. They can make a magical weapon at level 1 with a cantrip that doesn't require concentration, as compared to wizards who have to be 3rd level or paladin which has to be 5th level to cast the inferior 2nd level "magic weapon" spell which does require concentration.
Thier spell list includes the best of both wizard and Cleric, with additional combat spells like flaming blade and moonbeam.
On top of their spell abilities, their starting armor proficiency is second only to fighters and paladins, and they have access to twice the number of weapons that sorcerers & wizards do.
I like the Concept of the druid, but IMO the 5e druid needs to be split into 3 separate classes. Let the land druid keep the full spell list, lose armor and half the weapons, wild shape uses measured in minutes with no size change, moon druid keep wild shape measured in hours, half weapons & armor, 1/3 slot gain as per ek&at, combat or 'life and death' druid with. Full combat abilities, slot gain per paladin/ranger and wild shape limited to senses lasting rounds. Applications of circle subclasses depending on which type of druid focus.
Re Hebruhammer's comparison: swashbuckers, really? The no disengage requirement feature anyone can get with the mobility feat and their special exception for sneak attack only applies if they attack a target alone while it's standing more than 5' away from its allies.
I agree but in part because I feel in a roleplaying game, it's really more about how many choices Druids get. Need someone to spy on a bandit or noble? Bird or rat form!
It would be difficult to limit them without Druid player's just feeling shafted and majorly changing a whole class.
I've always felt the more "plain" classes need some more oomph. I think D&D should really do more with Backgrounds in how they support characters in having more "breadth" of "off-the-wall" options.
As a DM, may I introduce you to the concept of cats or snakes? Or any other creature that may find a bird or rat tasty?
In the previous example, ok they are a bird, now they are an ankylosaurus. Ankylosaurus being CR 3 means that they are a 9th level druid, and they still only get 2 changes per rest. That means the anylosaurus sinks with the ship and drowns, Or they revert to humanoid form while underwater and would have to potentially cast water breathing, which almost nobody has water breathing prepared.
Players can, and will, attempt to get away with anything they possibly can. Yes, the druid has a lot of leeway for an imaginative player to potentially run rampant. A DM should encourage the part about being imaginative, but reigning it in when things get a little out of hand.
Druids are very, very, very powerful, especially Moon Druids. There are ways to be nature based characters without being druids, and fulfilling specific roles in the game, but Moon Druids simultaneously fills almost all of them. If you need a healer, be a moon druid, take cure wounds and goodberry. If you need a melee combatant, be a moon druid. If you want to be a tank, be a moon druid. If you want to be a blasty nature spellcaster, be a moon druid and wait until you're low on hit points to cast spells, or cast spells before wild shaping, and then you can be a blaster and tank and melee combatant at the same time. If you want to be a ranged character, be a Stars Druid. If you want to be a rogue, be a druid, and turn into a rat, frog, spider, anything that wouldn't be suspicious.
Druids are OP. They should be not so OP, but to nerf them would be to call upon the wrath of the D&D community, so they're never getting nerfed.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Their spell list isn't all that awesome in my personal opinion. There are some gems to be sure at lower levels but not a lot of flexibility in terms of damage types available. Also their armor proficiency sucks, only up to hide armor with normal materials. If the dm is willing to give them exotic materials for their armor it's not so bad, but baseline it sucks.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I concur that it's very unlikely that we'll ever see a druid nerf in 5e. I can only hope we'll see one in the golden anniversary edition (Ge.)
Until then, I will continue to limit druids to 1st level in my campaigns (because I dislike the wild shape mechanic so much,) and try not to complain when i run into them in other people's campaigns.
Druids are powerful, as are the other classes you listed, just at different times. At level 2 a moon druid is by far the most powerful class in the game without a doubt. After that, they drop in power until 11, then a spike with elemental shape and then taper off until 20 again. The designs of the classes are not linear nor are they supposed to be. There are peaks and valleys in every class and they are very different from class to class. I for one applaud that and think it is genius. If you think a Druid is the most powerful class from 1-20 you are sorely mistaken. It's great to see a different party member shine at different intervals during their rise in level and power. That level 2 Druid was feeling awesome but when he hit 10 the party Barbarian is soaking up quadruple the damage and doing massive damage at the same time all while the Druid is relegated to casting as it's wild shapes are far inferior.
I never understood why everyone thinks that wizards are OP, certainly they are a good utility class but they are not as powerful as druids, clerics and bards.
I don't see anything in a Druids that make them overwhelming, I think they're possibly underappreciated, but looking at the number of dice druids can roll, it's about the same as everyone else. I think their power level is in line with clerics.
That sparrow into Ankylosaurus maneuver, that made me laugh. That's great, I imagine that could solve some pretty early scenarios, but I doubt a beholder or a dragon or anything with legendary saves would succumb to those shenanigans. It could though! Definitely a great way to start or end a fight! And for the sake of non-druid players: if you take excessive damage in beast form, it will carry over to your own HP. Taking and receiving 20d6 bludgeoning can still have negative consequences... especially if the scenario would allow the receiving end to make a DEX save, and you could potentially deal 20d6 to just yourself
I mean in the armor proficiency comparison... there's Fighter/Paladin at the top, but after that you should put Clerics in there with Forge/War/Twilight/Life. And don't forget about Ranger or hexblade either... and barbarians and monks don't even use armor, but they certainly can have better armor class then druids.
Limiting druids to 1st level, that's just ... terrible. Someone should really convince you not to do that. There's nothing that you've mentioned that can't be done by other classes.
This sounds like you read the druid class, decided it was OP, and have never actually seen one in play. They are only OP in the fictional scenarios in your mind. Anyone could easily describe the Bard in a similar way - you only address it as a spellcaster when it also can fill pretty much any role. Ditto with Paladin.
So what if a level 9 druid could sink a ship? A level 9 wizard could do the same with Immolation. A level 9 rogue could sneak onboard and sabotage it from within. Hell, a level 9 bard could just convince the crew to give it to them. Heroes can do heroics things, man. Druids are cool, and amongst the people that actually dig into the nitty-gritty of the rules they don't even make the top 3 for strongest class.
And you're going to need to be a lot more specific about how they get the best spells compared to other classes at that level because I literally can't think of a single example and have never heard that from anyone.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
The only issue with druids is when they get very high in level around 17 and spam Wild Shape. But if your a DM that knows what their doing it shouldn't be a problem. Every Class is like that. It seems to me you just don't like the idea if characters using magic.
Agreed. I’m playing a Moon Druid right now and he’s 7th level and while he’s powerful he is far from the most powerful member of the party. He’s very flexible and he looks powerful on paper, but he’s limited to one action per round the same as every other class and he has to maintain Concentration on his best spells the same way wizards do.
Professional computer geek
If you look back at my original post you'll note I did refer to specific spells, or at least a few of them.
As for casting, again, compared to other casters they don't have a compensating balance restriction- clerics have few damage spells, warlocks have few slots, sorcerers have fewer choice, wizards have book limit- and druids have none of those balancing factors.
In wild shape they gain additional save proficiencies on top of their own, and if the beast has multiattack, the character gains multiple attacks a round.
Then there's the elemental wild shape for moon druids at 10th level. How does that make any sense? That should go with an elemental patron warlock, not a druid. If anything they should get either dire shape or metis(hybrid) form.
I don't know why I'm wasting my breath. There's nothing I can say that will convince you of what's obvious to anyone who can make unbiased judgement. Those of you who've been playing this overpowered class have investment bias and simply can't see the imbalance.
I have played as a druid. I've played as all the classes in all editions. How many other classes have you played?
I have to apologize. I am sorry. I've been frustrated on homebrew and I'm venting here.
I agree with you, they are broken. I have never played a druid. I have had druids and Moon druids play in my campaigns before, and I as the impartial DM know that they are much more powerful and versatile than most of the other players. Druids have no spell restrictions. A lot of subclasses have added prepared spells. Moon Druids can have way more hit points effectively than the Bear Totem Barbarian.
Players who play druids are biased, because they don't truly notice how much more powerful they are than the other players. DMs have a bias-free standpoint on player power.
Druids are overpowered, but will never be nerfed, or it will invoke the wrath of all the people who have played them.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Druids are definitely powerful, especially at specific levels. But... some of the things you say really confuse me.
100% fighter/100% cleric? Maybe, if you're being extremely generous - but not at the same time. At best, Druids can do things like hold a Flaming Sphere while they shift to a combat form, but a single Flaming Sphere isn't exactly a stellar trick. Once they get summons it gets better, but if those spells are problematic I know where the problem is, and it isn't the Druid. It's the spell that lets you add sixteen more die rolls to your turn. Remove summons from the equation, which is very easy to do as a DM by just insisting that you pick the creature so they can't always go for the super optimal nonsense setup, and those spells are suddenly pretty poor compared to the typical Cleric Spirit Weapon/Guardian combination. Even then - this comment really only applies to the Moon Druid. To be sure Moonies are probably the most common and most powerful Druids, but if you have this problem - it's aimed at a subclass, not the Druid as a whole.
Their spell list is also, outside of their summon options, frankly very bad. I've played Druids into the teens a couple times now, and frankly... their spell selections are *not* good. Shillelagh does D8+Wis damage per attack. Unless I'm dipping into an extra attack class, that's... marginally better than the Wizard's Firebolt. Figure a 15 base wis and a +Wis race, D8+3 is two points of damage better, on average, than a straight D10. Except the Wizard gets to lob his shots from 120 feet away. And if I'm actually taking a melee cantrip as a Druid, I'm not convinced I should be taking Shillelagh over Primal Savagery. I do 2 more damage in my early levels, then ~3 damage less from 5th level onwards, and drastically less if I'm somehow still using a cantrip in melee at the higher levels. The same is true when comparing this cantrip to what the Wizard gets, since Firebolt scales just like Savagery - once you hit 5th level, Shillelagh is the *weakest* battle cantrip, instead of the strongest.
A similar point is true of Flame Blade, but frankly that spell isn't even... good. You do 3d6 damage on a hit. At levels 3 and 4 that doesn't compare extremely well to the Cleric just casting Spiritual Weapon - the Weapon does 3 less damage, but that means the Cleric's action only has to be worth 3 points to break even. And that's at exactly those two levels. At 5+, Flame Blade's damage is actually less, on average, than the D10 cantrips (and of course Clerics get a D12 cantrip, to just rub salt in that wound). Flaming Sphere is often a better use of the Druid's time, but that spell is available to Wizard's too, and isn't notably different from the Cleric's Spiritual Weapon in expected damage. Heat Metal would probably be the best example of 'Druid bias' in spell lists, as its damage is slightly higher than Flaming Sphere's, but its damage is also more contextual so a slightly higher output makes sense.
Moonbeam is somewhat similar. It's a very powerful spell for its level... against enemies who don't move. If they sit in the area and also let you bombard them with your action-based attack, whatever that may be, then yes - it outdamages most any other second-level spell in the game (notably - by about 3 points of damage. It's still not exactly earth-shattering). If, however, they move, Moonbeam's damage compares very closely to Flame Blade, which is to say... not great.
As for armor and weapon proficiencies, Druids are just worse Clerics in that regard, so it's hard to call them particularly powerful in that area when they're playing second fiddle and are also not a class that realistically cares about either of those things. I think I've made a weapon attack with a Druid once.
I can certainly agree that Druids - or at least, Moon Druids - are among the most powerful classes, and at very specific levels (exactly 2-4) the most powerful class. But then there are a lot of classes that are very powerful at specific levels and also fairly strong overall (for the obvious - literally all the full casters). However, their power really doesn't come from the things you've pointed out; their spell list is definitely the worst of all full casters. Their power comes first from the extreme flexibility of wild shape as a problem-solving tool and second from the obnoxiousness that is wild shape providing two extra layers of hit points, which was meant to be compensated for by the poor AC of wild shape forms but that plan... failed badly. But the stuff you talked about, their spell list and their ability to be a fighter and cleric simultaneously? Nah. Not even close.
"Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)" do you know how few armors are not made of metal? Padded, Leather, and Hide. Studded leather even has quite a bit of metal, and so I have never allowed Studded Leather on a Druid. So they are absolutely behind there, and without war caster, they can use that magic weapon OR a shield, not both, and cast, as their hands are full. By the time you get to dragon hide armors, It wont matter they can use better, since everyone will have fancy items by then. Likewise, even if you multiclass with fighter, the no metal restriction applies.
Secondly, the best wizard spells are absolutely not on the druid list, especially moon druid. If your talknig pure damage, only wildfire (a UA variant) gets fireball, which is literally listed as OP for its level based on the pure damage dice it gets. It gets close to wizard levels of damage, and close to cleric levels of support, but its list is very specifically missing many of the go to OP options. It has some but not what those other classes get. Also it seems that every "good" druid spell needs concentration to use, meaning stepping on a needle and getting 1 damage can cause you to lose the spell... an issue I have with a lot of "OP" classes in this game, as people forget concentration is a thing. Sure A single big bad swinging once for 20 damage is unlikely to make my war caster fail... but 20 cr0 bats biting me might make a spell like haste go poof.
As Kestral287 pointed out, the bid issue with druids, especially moon druids is the ammount of damage they can tank. Wildshape and get a hundred hp, then your back to normal full hp, then wild shape again for another hundred "temp hp" (not actually temp hp, but you get my point). Every time people say druid is OP what they really mean is Moon Druid Wild shape is OP. As printed, Rules as written, druid is otherwise a top shelf, but not grossly OP class.
Bard is literally the most versatile class in the game. It doesn't do damage well, using some pretty precious resources to get access to solid damage picks, but its ability to control and support is unmatched.
Wizard is good at two things, and rarely the same time, battlefield control or area damage. Other classes (Warlock for instance) absolutely are better at single target damage. And I could argue that Bard is still the better controller, maknig wizard strong, but in limited ways.
Warlock is my pick tho for absolute most OP caster, and it has nothing to do with EB keeping up with fighter damage. When you get down to it, Rod of the Pact Keeper is by far the best caster item in the game bar none but some legendairy (late game) items, and its for something most people overlook: Its bonus applies to your spell save DC's. That lvl 3, 18cha Changing Bard trying to cast hold person would only get 8+2+4= 14 save DC, but if they were a warlock with even a +1 RotPK its now a 15.... no other caster has access to bonus to save DC's like warlock. That bonus also applies to EB, but wait, theres more, add in a Wand of the War Mage, which stacks rules as written with the Rod, and now EB gets double bonus.
Even late game, you could get +3 from rod, +3 from wand, and get +3 to spell save DC's and +6 to your EB, scortching ray, and other spell attacks.... that's a really powerful buff that is hard to replicate otherwise (I think there might be 1 other item that gives a bonus of +2 to spell save DC's, but I am not looking it up right now).
Druid is the most OP Tank, and is not an OP caster.
I'm gonna just put it out there that maybe your play style just lends to the Druid class more than the others. I have only played a Druid to tier 3, but I have played a Wizard all the way to 20 and every other class to tier 3 as well except Ranger. They are all overpowered at certain levels compared to one another.
The Robe of the Archmagi. Sets your unarmored base AC to 15, gives you advantage on saving throws against spells, and ups your save DC by 2. Notably, it's legendary Somewhat notable as well for your purposes is the Staff of Power, which ups your spell attack rolls by +2 alongside its AC and saving throws buffs and carrying a large number of fairly relevant spells within. Or the Staff of the Magi, though it's another legendary item, also gives a spell attack roll bonus alongside a bunch of other benefits.
Also notable to the main purpose of the conversation: all of those items are restricted to sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards. Druids get locked out of most good caster-oriented magic items while having very few unique or semi-unique options of their own. The Staff of the Woodlands is very funny, with its at-will Pass Without A Trace and its ~once per day Awaken, but it's not inherently powerful outside of letting the party pretend to all be Rogues.
Awesome.... I was sure I had seen 1 or 2 that were up there in rarity, but couldn't for the life of me remember what they were offhand.