Discussing Druids     

The druids were fairly mysterious leaders in ancient Celtic culture.  What most people know about druids is that they built Stonehenge, a "fact" that is untrue.  They might also know about Getafix, the druid from the Asterix comics, who brews a magical strength potion for his village in Gaul, the northern part of France inhabited by Celtic tribes.  Oak trees and mistletoe probably also come to mind.  Druids as mystics and prophets appear in legends.  Take all of these things, facts and myth, and mix them together, and you get D&D druids:  secretive clerics that are followers and protectors of nature and have mystical abilities.

Druids in early D&D were most known for the limitations placed on the character class.  They could wear no metal armor and could use no metal weapons.  Additionally, they had to be True Neutral in alignment, seeking balance above all things.  A fascinating part of the druid class that hasn't really stuck with D&D is that, originally, only a certain number of high level druids existed.  Meaning that your character might have to challenge high ranking druids in order to level up!

By Third Edition, druids still could not wear metal armor, but only had to be partially Neutral (due, in part, to the Forgotten Realms use of warring groups of good and evil druids).  They also gained the ability to shapeshift, previously only available as a spell.  The wild shape ability was interesting, but resulted in a major problem for druids:  their ability to cast spells while in animal form was severely limited.  A feat to address this, Natural Spell, was added in a supplement to Third Edition that became almost mandatory for any druid who wanted to use wild shape.

Also in Third Edition, druidic magic became focused on summoning animals and elementals to fight with them in combat.  The summoning rules were problematic, to say the least.  Not only did it require players and the gamemaster to juggle a lot of stat blocks, but the animals would only show up for a few rounds and then disappear.  My extended rant on summoning will have to wait until a later post, but the short version is this:  In a system that uses hit points as a major player resource, you have to rely on the self-preservation instincts of the players.  They do not want their characters to get too low on hit points, because it risks death.  Thus, the tone of the story, the tactics used by players, and the roleplaying of their characters all change based on how many hit points they have left.  When you introduce into this mix a source of hit points (a summoned creature) where there is no risk in expending those hit points, you essentially break this carefully balanced system.  In addition to creating a lot of bookkeeping, the summoning rules change the way that the game plays, substantially.  That said, the opposite issue comes into play with another feature of the druids, the animal companion...

Pets, Mounts, Familiars, and Animal Companions

I have a reputation as a tough, but fair gamemaster.  Players know that their characters might die in my games.  And it is my hope that risk makes the game more exciting and interesting and challenging.  I have even, on occasion, had total party kills.  But do you know what I have never done deliberately?  Kill their pet.  I'm a pretty firm believer that in the fantasy genre (as opposed to the horror genre, where all bets are off), pet killing is a non-starter.  Maybe you run your fantasy games dialed to a darker, Game of Thrones sort of tone, and that is totally fine!  But the majority of fantasy stories that modern D&D seeks to emulate tend to avoid pet killing.  This presents a problem for the game master.  On the one hand you have lots of indiscriminate killing of monsters and even "bad guy" animals (rats, wolves, owlbears, etc.)  But on the other hand, you kill the wizard's familiar and they will throw a fit.  You kill the druid's animal companion (which always seems to be a tiger, for some reason?) and the players will not enjoy the game.

So here's the situation that arises:  A low to mid-level druid has summoned a nature's ally, an animal.  The druid also has an animal companion.  The druid can shape change into an animal with wild shape.  These three animals all have radically different statistics, attacks, and abilities, and will act in different ways.  One of them, the summoned animal, is entirely expendable.  One, the animal companion, is not.  And the player character is themselves the third.  From the perspective of the game master, the story begins to break down, because the stakes are simply not the same, depending on which animal is being threatened.  From the perspective of the other players, the druid is "broken" because they have three times the number of actions as everyone else, and often three times the power level.

What is the solution to dealing with pets?  Pathfinder has taken the approach of making pets as much like summoned creatures as possible, as well as giving players the option to eliminate them.  Druids, rangers, paladins, and wizards now have the option to get alternate abilities, rather than getting an animal companion, warhorse, or familiar, respectively.  Warhorses can be summoned and dismissed at will.  Familiars can be replaced within a week, and no longer cost the wizard permanent hit point loss if they are killed.  But these solutions that do little to address the underlying story problem:  many players want pets as permanent companions for their character, and they do not want these pets to be in danger, despite being less powerful than the typical party member.

Three Approaches to Animals in the Game

Some of you may be reading this with personal experience concerning these types of problems.  Some of you, on the other hand, may never have thought about it much, and see the potential loss of an animal companion as just another part of the game.  Some might not mind such a loss, as long as it contributes to interesting storytelling (see John Wick).  When running a game, it is always a good idea to set expectations for the players, as well as hearing from them what they expect from you.  Here are three ways to handle animals that both address some of the game balance issues with the druid, as well as determining whether animal death is something that you want in your game.

Animals as Abilities:  Under this approach, an animal companion of any sort is a class ability first and foremost, and should get its own component.  Depending on how important the animal is to your character's concept, it could be a primary component, like a cavalier's warhorse, or a tertiary component, like a wizard's familiar.  The rules should support the story result that no animal companion will die unless the player dies (although they could be seriously injured or incapacitated). Game balance is addressed by the fact that you have to use one of your components to acquire the companion.

Animals as Cohorts:  The Leadership feat allows your character to have an NPC follower who has pledged their loyalty as a squire or apprentice or such.  The Monstrous Companion feat allows you to take an animal companion that is a magical beast, instead of a human NPC.  Either way, this places "ownership" of the animal more in the hands of the gamemaster than the player.  The rules should support the story result that such companions are as "protected" as normal NPCs are, which is to say, not at all.  In addition, animals may leave because of poor treatment by the player.  This approach will work best in games that have less combat, as party size could easily double in number if everyone has taken Leadership.

Animals as Flavor:  When I discussed charm spells in my prior post, I noted that the same spell or ability could be used with different flavors, to keep consistency with the character's concept.  In the same way, an animal companion could be used as flavor for a variety of abilities that the character already has.  A wizard's mage hand could actually be a small monkey familiar.  A high Perception skill could be the hawk that always sits on the shoulder of the druid.  A venomous snake under this approach becomes the functional equivalent of a poisoned blade.  The rules should support the story result that any action taken by the animal merely duplicates and takes the place of an ability that the character already has.  Thus, these animals can never be directly attacked.  This is a less realistic approach, but one that emulates the fantasy genre quite well.  In addition, it is the easiest to implement for the game master.

If you are interested in the first method, animals as abilities, next post will contain a draft component to duplicate the animal companion class abilities of the druid, ranger, wizard, and paladin!

This blog is funded by my Patreon! All proceeds are donated toward making gaming a more fun and more diverse place! Thank you so much to all my Patrons! https://www.patreon.com/openhouserule

Building a Spellcaster    

Spells and spellcasting take up an enormous portion of the rules of any D&D product.  It certainly isn't the only way to create a comprehensive magic system (see Ars Magica, for example), but D&D and Pathfinder insist on having each and every potential magical action described, in detail, each with its own rules.  This is not necessarily a bad thing!  D&D has at its core a tactical combat game.  Designing a magic system with the breadth of the entire fantasy genre, that can be applied to the very narrow focus of tactical combat, is a fairly astounding feat.  For those of us who love the D&D magic system, even the parts that we sometimes hate, it is an integral part of the game.

That said, it has become so incredibly huge that it is barely workable for experienced players, much less for new players.  Consider, for example, the number of charts in just the core Pathfinder rules that deal with the number of spells that a character either casts or learns per caster level:  there are ten of them.

In addition, spellcasting hasn't really caught up with the evolution of the rest of the system.  No where is that more clear than in the multiclass rules.  Once you decide to be a spellcaster, anything that you do that takes you away from that specific spellcasting class is going to make your character substantially less powerful.  A fighter/barbarian, or fighter/ranger is a perfectly acceptable path, but a sorcerer/wizard is simply not.  (As an aside, I had a player play a sorcerer/wizard in one of my campaigns, and he was an excellent character.  This is not to besmirch the concept at all, just the way that the rules support that concept.)

In case it wasn't clear by now, it is my intention for these house rules to eliminate the need for multiclassing.  And I believe that Pathfinder has made moves in that direction as well.  For example, the hybrid classes essentially do what I am doing, but in a much more limited way: they combine the components of two classes together, so that you can level up in both at the same time.  The Arcanist, for example, is Pathfinder's solution to the sorcerer/wizard problem.

Why is this important for story? The short answer is, it isn't directly important, but the ways that it indirectly impacts the story add up to a big difference.  First, simpler rules allow new players to feel more welcome.  Having new players feel welcome leads to a table with more diverse viewpoints and experiences, which leads to better story.  Second, having spellcasting be an addable (and removable) component allows the gamemaster to easily turn the dial on how much magic they want in their campaign.  Eventually, this blog will turn to the subject of gamemastering, and how class components can be set up for particular genres of fantasy.  It may be that you want spellcasting to be a rare, but powerful thing.  An easy way to accomplish this is to eliminate Secondary and Tertiary Spellcasting, and only allow it to be a Primary component.  Or, alternatively, you may want magic to be pervasive, but not as powerful.  Doing the opposite, and allowing Tertiary Spellcasting only will accomplish this.  Rules that support genre will, in turn, support good story.  Third, streamlined spellcasting rules make the game go faster.  It means that a larger amount of the time that you have to sit down and play the game can go toward advancing the story, rather than fiddling with rules and looking things up.

Spellcaster

Requirements:  none (but see restrictions below)

Hit Dice:  no change

Skills:  Spellcasters gain the following class skills:  Knowledge (arcana), Spellcraft, Use Magic Device

Base Attack Bonus:  no change

Saving Throws: Spellcasters advance quickly in Will saving throws.

Additional Spells:  see below

Special Abilities:  Spellcasters are able to prepare and cast magic spells.  Preparing spells requires the spellcaster to be well-rested (eight hours of rest), and to spend one hour of preparation time in a relatively peaceful environment.  Note that other class components may provide additional restrictions or advantages in preparing and casting spells.

Spells Per Day:  Spellcasters can generally cast at least two spells per day of the highest spell level that they can cast, at least three spells per day of the second highest spell level that they can cast, and four spells per day for all other spell levels.  They begin able to cast only first level spells or lower.  They gain access to a new level of spell every two character levels.  When they do not gain access to a new spell level (on even numbered levels), they instead gain an additional spell for every level that then can cast at, to a maximum of four.  Their progression thus looks like this (apologies, as Blogger doesn't seem to be able to do tables):

Character     Spell Level
Level           0             1st           2nd         3rd         4th

1                  3             2
2                  4             3
3                  4             3             2
4                  4             4             3
5                  4             4             3             2
6                  4             4             4             3
7                  4             4             4             3             2
8                  4             4             4             3             3

Spells Known:  Spellcasters know a number of spells equal to twice the number of spells that they can cast.  They can choose from this list when preparing their spells to cast.  For example, if a spellcaster can cast two second-level spells, three first-level spells, and four zero-level spells per day, they will have four second-level spells, six first-level spells, and eight zero-level spells in their repertoire to choose from.

Special Restrictions:  All Spellcasters must choose one of the following restrictions below.  Secondary Spellcasters must choose two restrictions, and Tertiary Spellcasters must choose three.

• Delayed Spellcasting:  Instead of being able to cast spells at first level, spellcasters with this restriction do not begin to learn to cast spells until they are fourth level.  At that point, they continue to learn at the normal rate, reducing their character level by three for the purposes of spells and spellcasting).
• Limited Spell List:  Initially, all spellcasters gain access to the same list of spells.  They will also gain access to additional spells through other class components.  However, spellcasters who take this restriction cannot learn some of the more powerful spells available.  A breakdown of individual spells and how to create spell lists for your campaign is the subject of a later post.
• Required Item:  In order to prepare and cast spells, the caster must have a particular unique item available.  Note that this restriction cannot be taken if the spellcaster does not have to prepare spells (due to an ability from another class component).  The eschew materials feat does not remove the requirement to have this item.
• Slow Learning:  Spellcasters with this restriction know half the number of spells that they can cast per day (rounded up), instead of twice that number.  Note that this restriction cannot be taken if the spellcaster has a way to learn more than the usual number of spells (due to an ability from another class component).
• Slow Progress:  Spellcasters with this restriction gain access to a new level of spell every three character levels, instead of every two character levels.  If desired, this restriction can be taken twice.  Spellcasters who do so gain access to a new level of spell every four character levels.

Existing Spellcasting Classes

How does this look for our existing spellcasting classes?  Currently, we have three Primary Spellcaster classes:  druid, wizard, and sorcerer.  While all have Primary Spellcaster, they are distinguished by their other components and also by the special restrictions that they have chosen.  Druids have the special restriction of Limited Spell List, which removes some of the traditional "wizard only" spells such as magic missile, but druids can still gain additional spells to add to their list from their other components.  Wizards will have Secondary Scholar component, which will give them access to many more potentially known spells, but at the cost of having to scribe them into their spellbook.  Their restriction is Required Item: Spellbook.  Sorcerers have a Secondary Bloodline component which will give them an increased number of spells per day, as well as giving them access to a more spells for their list based on their birthright.  They will also have a component that removes the requirement for preparing spells in advance, making them more versatile casters.  Their restriction could either by Slow Learning or Slow Progress, but I strongly prefer giving them Slow Learning.   In comparison to current Pathfinder rules, this will mean they have a few less spells to cast, but will gain new levels of spells at the same time as wizards do.

Our cleric and bard have Secondary Spellcaster components.  Clerics take the restrictions of Limited Spell List and Required Item, which is their holy symbol.  They can then gain additional spells from their Primary Healer component, as well as from their Domain component.  Bards currently have the restrictions Limited Spell List and Slow Progress.  They share a component with sorcerer that will enable them to not need to prepare spells in advance.

Finally paladins and rangers have Tertiary Spellcaster components.  Assuming they are not traded out for something else, they will have the limitations of Delayed Spellcasting, Limited Spell List, and Slow Progress.

Next up is the Jack-of-all-Trades, but Master-of-None, the Bard!

This blog is funded by my Patreon! All proceeds are donated toward making gaming a more fun and more diverse place! Thank you so much to all my Patrons! https://www.patreon.com/openhouserules