Are Druids worth it?

Remove all ads!

Without any overpowered shapeshifting mods, in a power-orientated party, is a Druid even worth having?

If you need a combat orientated healer, is a Cleric a better choice?

I'm now starting to doubt even using a Druid in my party.

 

Druids are extremely powerfull in the offensive spell region if my memmory serves me well! Ive used druids to quite a good effect! Had a party with 2 and the game got a bit easy. But thats just me! Not everyone plays the same but at least give a druid a try, and let them get to a good high level to see some real power!

 

I haven't played one, as I changed my druid into a cleric in the last moment, wanting spontaneous casting of healing spells, but it looks like druids can be very powerful.

If you're into such characters, you could try a Lawful Neutral druid/monk/ranger, getting your WIS bonus added to AC if wearing no armour, as well as free dual-wielding in light armour, which you are going to benefit from because you won't be wearing armour as a monk/druid. Finesse, two short swords.

Or you could try a fighter(4)/druid(x). Remember how Jaheira pwned?

 

The main reason for having a druid are their summon elemental spells unlike the mage conjure elementalspells where they have to battle the elemental for control, the elemental appears and does your bidding immediately. I always have a cleric and a druid in my parties for a balanced feel to a game. They also last for Turns per levle rather than rounds per level.

 

DarkStrider, you're thinking of BG2 now.

I think druid's are okay, save for one thing: Their pace of getting new wild shapes is bugged. Even if they're supposed to get a new shape available, they'll only get it once they get an extra "wild shape / day." This means you'll get some of the elemental shapes several levels later than supposed to.

 

I think a good Druid build might be a Ranger 1/Barbarian 2/Druid X.

The Ranger gives you dual-weilding, Barbarian gives Rage and Uncanny Dodge, and the Druid handles the rest.

I'm just not sure which way to go.

Sometimes I think I should ditch the Barbarian or Ranger levels (I feel that I need one of them) to have an effective character.

 

My advice would be to ditch one of them, hard to say which. My preference would be to ditch both and focus on the druid levels.

 

I would say ditch the barb. levels and go for one level of ranger and then only druid levels

 

I was thinking that I probably will never dual weild, so maybe I'll just go with an elven Druid, or a Human Druid with one level of Fighter instead of Ranger (I'll get more Bow feats right away this way).

 

or the infamous monk, druid. wisdom bonus to armor, sick.

 

I thought about the Monk/Druid, but I reckon I'll run into some Leather armor that will be better than my WIS bonus can provide.

If I'm wrong, please correct me... I think a Monk 1/Druid is a neat build (but I'd miss using a bow, which I get with my Drow Druid).

 

Why couldn't you use a bow? 1 Monk level would not be enough to use fists with any serious effect.

 

Acrux, because neither the Druid class nor the Monk class grant proficiency with the bow. I did look it up, and as long as the game follows the P&P version, Monks are given proficiency in the Crossbow.

I think I've settled on what I'm going to play now:

A Human Monk 1/Druid X

I'll do my first level as a Monk, then switch over.

 

*comments removed*

Sorry, misread that last post.

 

iirc armour and sheild bonuses do not affect you when shapechanged. At that time the Monk Wis bonus to AC will automatically apply. The Monk level is only used while shapechanged, and the original shapes aren't that bad so you would use them in the game.

As far as Bows are concerned, make your Druid an Elf/Elf-subrace. Those guys automatically get Long Sword and Bow proficiencies.

Too bad its either Barb or Monk mix-in. Forget taking the Ranger level.

 

I've decided to go with the crossbow proficiency the Monk class grants, Shrikant, and chose Human as her race. If I went with any kind of Elf, I would be taking a huge XP penalty, which isn't worth it IMHO (if I wanted a Bow that badly, I'd just take a feat for it).

 

I'm soloing a druid (Barbarian 1 Rogue 2 Oghma 1 Druid 11) it's a powerful character and it's altogether enjoyable. I've chosen Oghma to be able to use identify and I'm wondering whether or not I'll add a level of Bard later on to use Bard only items. I've chosen Rogue instead of Monk because I'm soloing (both classes get evasion) and Rogue allows this character to be NE, which will be handy some day.

 

A Studded Leather Armour +5 gives 8 AC, doesn't it? It would be difficult to have that sort of WIS bonus. At least 26 WIS. You need 20 WIS for level 9 spells, anyway, but the remaining 6 could perhaps be spent on CON (+3 HP per level from 6 CON), STR (you need to deliver some damage, not just hit, and you'd better be able to carry your stuff) or even DEX (after all, leather armour leaves a lot of room for DEX bonus). So it does look like a good idea and it definitely has potential, but I'm not sure if the advantage over a standard druid is so significant (a monk level also helps saves and gives you Evasion, BTW). Or over a dual-wielding ranger(1)/druid(x). Or a fighter(4)/druid with some enhanced melee presence.

 

IMO monks are best as pure class.

 

I think you should either go all monk, or take a one level dip for the Evasion, Saving Throws (+2 to all!), and AC bonus (if you don't plan on wearing armor).