Why are druids still a thing?

POST MORE DROODS

Quasi-magic ki of monks, sorry.

Droods?

...

I DON'T SEE ANY FUCKING LEAVES OR SHIT

THAT AIN'T DROODS

FINE DROOD THREAD

...

...

...

Can I get evil druids?

...

I was out of friendly ones, so sure, but I only have a couple.

...

eee druiddddsss

...

The one thing I like about druids is how mysterious they are

You would think there would be a lot more druids focused on death since its such a crucial part of nature.
I think I'm going to write up a druidic death cult that wants everything to die so it can renew.

It's not an uncommon theme. Honestly, it's probably the third most common druid archetype behind wild, bestial druid and peaceful, plant-themed druid.

>"Its nature, I ain't gotta explain shit."

nah, i want to see some vermin and pestelence druids. Where are the disese ridden rat druids? Where are the inset druids that brind famin and destruction where ever they go. Nautre is a freaky thing that holds no punches back, we need more freaky druids

I want to see a civilized druid who views civilization as part of nature, and tries to balance it. That is, dresses in robes, walks and talks like a human being, lives in a fucking house, but advises nobility on ecological concerns and helps oversee crop rotation and conservation efforts.

Following on these a bit; I've always liked the idea of an urban druid.

A druid who focuses on the microcosms that exist in our walls and under our floors.

Roaches, rats, pidgeons, lichens, mushrooms, and other vermin or nuisances.

sooo, you want a druid that is part of the green party?

I said acts like a human being.

sure, as long as he doesnt meddle in big boy politics

>green party not meddling in big boy politics
you must be american, you do know that in europe the greens are usually a very influnsial party? Just look at austria

I'll make the distinction that generally barbarians are generally considered to be individuals who channel primal emotions in combat and who are very well versed in outdoorsmanship, which sufficiently distinguishes them from normal melee fighters becuase of how they fight and how they live.

The real closest real world equivalent to barbarians, Norse Berserker, had their own classification apart from other warriors because they practiced combat diffrently. In many ways they were closer to shamans than they were to warriors, and they did some shit that normal people didn't do.

I know it's Wikipedia, but this quote puts what would happen when a Breserker went into a "rage" in perspective pretty nicely.

"The actual fit of madness the berserker experienced was referred to as berserkergang ("going berserk"). This condition has been described as follows: This fury, which was called berserkergang, occurred not only in the heat of battle, but also during laborious work. Men who were thus seized performed things which otherwise seemed impossible for human power. This condition is said to have begun with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and chill in the body, and then the face swelled and changed its colour. With this was connected a great hot-headedness, which at last gave over into a great rage, under which they howled as wild animals, bit the edge of their shields, and cut down everything they met without discriminating between friend or foe. When this condition ceased, a great dulling of the mind and feebleness followed, which could last for one or several days."

Basically they would trance out somehow, either through some sort of meditation or by some sort of mind altering substance, maybe both. The result was that they would apparently transcend their normal limits, the strength barrier and the pain barrier would effectively be ignored and they would basically lose their minds until they passed out from exhaustion and slept it off for a few days

>I'll make the distinction that generally barbarians are generally considered to be individuals who channel primal emotions in combat and who are very well versed in outdoorsmanship, which sufficiently distinguishes them from normal melee fighters becuase of how they fight and how they live.
That's all fluff and flavor. The only thing that makes barbarians barbarians is the rage mechanic.

nah, ex-yu
I know they're influental, i hate the though.
But let's not derail this druid thread

>why are druids still a thing

To quote Leeky Windstaff, "I'm a druid, I have class features that are more powerful than your entire class!"

I think you missed the word, generally. As in, that's the way they are generally portrayed in the systems I've played. Your results may vary.

Regardless that wasn't even the main point of my post, but whatever.

So long as a class has it's own gimmick I don't really care if it seems less open ended conceptually. Ki and raging qualify by my standards (though not by much). I kind of wish they made pets the normal thing for rangers in 5e instead of just one of the archetypes though since there's already a half casting divine magic dude

Right, but that portrayal isn't their mechanical shtick. You can make a character of any class who lives in the manner of a norseman.

To clarify: rage fits perfectly fine as an archetype-style feature, all the other innawoods stuff gets in the way as often as it's core, just like the Buddhism parts of the monk class.

what is the druid religion?

Christianity, they worship the treenity.

>Drood thread
>Not jpg. of drood being kicked in the nuts by melee PC and yelling at the viewer by the excruciating pain.

This is not my Veeky Forums

Over here they're a bloody joke. And ironically, advocate using a shit-ton of planes for "humanitarianism" and advocate shutting down nuclear plants and instead import coal and shit because that's more green.
They're drooling retards.

I can't stop laughing at the idea of a guy going berserk on the farm.

>holy shit, Snorri, calm down! it's just hay!
>FUCK PLANTS HRAAAAAAAGH

...

gud caster/martial mix with an interesting theme

Huntress wizard was a ranger, not a druid.

They're a neutral flavored class halfway between wizard and cleric, what's not to like?

Hehehehe

Old Faith maybe, or any god of nature from PHB

Some kind of "everything in nature has a spirit and I'm their caretaker" philosophy, not focusing on deities at all, would work as well, no?

Pathfinder has an archetype called Urban Druid, but it might not be what you want.

>Bone Gnawer theurge

Animism.

Berserkers didn't actually go berserk outside of stories, questionably accurate accounts, and presumably accurate accounts of people being mad about something that happens either before or during a battle.

In most of the Norse legends people who were "going berserk" proceed to be relatively composed immediately afterwards to the point that they sometimes engaged in pre-battle diplomacy. Fights are scary, people do all sorts of weird shit to hype themselves up. Biting your shield is more intimidating than biting your arm.

Berserker was more of an occupation, a nominated champion of anyone who wanted to legally settle a dispute with a fight without actually having to do the fighting themselves. Therefore the vast majority of non-official berserkers were probably everyone's big cousin Jorvik. The official ones were the dudes who could afford to wear a bearskin and were presumably pretty good at their job. They also worked as bodyguards on and off the battlefield.

Strangely enough several of the most famous berserkers were early Christians converts.

They were defense attorneys with swords.

Crop rotation is absolutely shit for the biosphere and has no long-term benefits for a society. Agriculture was a mistake.

Changing IPs.

>going so far as to reference the shield biting

Hello user, i watch lindybeige too.

Not the user you responded to, but I've read about berserkers biting their shields and I've never watched anything from lindybeige.

>Shit Bjorn how are we gonna pull this stump, none of us have a horse
> don't worry, Ragnar's got this
> the hell is Ragnar gonna d-
>FUUUKING STUUUUMMMP, YOU ARE BIG, THAT MEANS YOU HAVE BIG ROOTS. RIP AND TEAR, RIP AND TEAR YOUR ROOTS, RRAAAUUUGH.

Oh, well you might like him. He's fairly knowledgeable about a fair few topics and even does a few tabletop videos.

youtube.com/watch?v=PBUGQkpk3RE

Is the video in question about berserkers. Though i forgot he did the whole "comedy skit" thing a little too much in this video. In the beginning anyways.

>He's fairly knowledgeable about a fair few topics

No, he isn't.
He's knowledgeable about exactly two subjects: lindyhop dancing and his subjective LARPing experience.
Everything else he completely pulls out of his ass and his tabletop videos are the most vile turds he's pulled out yet.

This is the kind of thing I've always wanted. Less classes, more subclass type choices.

Name one other class for which "BEARS" is a valid and usable solution on a regular basis.

Less bird/mammal focused druids in general would be good.

I want Drood armour, well the mark 2 version at least

Shit, he dances lindy hop and roleplayes? We are a plague!

Yes. But I think a big problem with that would be messing with progression, especially if you start with something basic. Kind of a big deal for class-and-level systems. You'd have to make chargen for higher-level characters even easier.

What about a system where each level literally is a class?

Fluff-wise, what's the difference between a druid and a shaman in a setting with deities as absentees/non-entities?

Both call upon spirits of nature to grant then powers, revering the great white wolf or the spirit in the weeping willow that gives them the secrets of the land. They control the weather with the aid of powers not their own, or summon blights to sicken their enemies and kill their crops.

Is druidism just a more refined, hierarchical form of shamanism with more rules and secrecy, or is it the same job with a leafy green coat of paint?

I love the concept of a magical hermit that turns their back on society and embraces nature.

Niche as all fucking get-out and vastly incompatible with the majority of role-playing which involves at least a little social-ness as there is a party involved.

But I ALWAYS fucking HATE the god-damn polymorph/shapechange rules. Always. They all suck balls.

Shamans deal with mortal spirits, ghosts, and nature-related spirits that are directly generally benign/benevolently interested in mortal affairs (usually totems). They also banish/bind spirits.

Druids deal with nature spirits, especially those that don't seem to give a fuck about the well being of mortals, or are outright hostile towards them. Druids never seem to banish/bind spirits. They also deal a lot more with plants, animals, and weather.

I'd be inclined to lump Druidism under a general "priest/spiritualist" class whose focus is on nature. A "shaman" would be the priest/spiritualist who is more interested in ghosts, divination, and the boundary between life and death.

Good for the yield, though

bumping for green tits

it's really hard to say since druidism and shamanism are both very loosely defined in the real world so you can't really pin down what either is

the difference i guess is that shamanism is a medicinal lpractice on paper and druidism is uh

uh

>Barbarians
>Monks
>Rangers

>bad
>still believing this meme

I could understand the misconception of believing the negative hype around Monks and Rangers, but Barbarians? What are you, light speed retarded?

Green Party Druids tow the line for Permaculture+Food Forests, and composting both plant and human wastes.

"Through 'Local Resilience' initiatives and biomimicry in industry, with a sustainable relationship with Nature. this fine nation can grow to be a fertile and thriving Human Ecosystem!"

I'd fund it