Skip to content

Un-loved Druids need more class-specific items

ginger_hammerginger_hammer Member Posts: 160
Does anyone else think that Druids are one of the least used classes as they generaly aren't as good as they should be? I'm thinking with classes like Bards they have plenty of kit only used by them (horns, harps, etc), but nothing springs to mind that is Druid-specific. Are they going to add in something like unique armor or two handed staffs? If there were more druid only items I would be much more inclinded to be one or at least include one in my party.
Post edited by ginger_hammer on
«13

Comments

  • ryuken87ryuken87 Member Posts: 563
    Druid kits are really good in BG1.
  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    I doubt kits will keep their bg2 power.. Probably will be nerfed to the ground. nonetheless it looks promising.
  • ginger_hammerginger_hammer Member Posts: 160
    I was thinking more along the lines of druid only equipment.
  • BrudeBrude Member Posts: 560
    More clubs!
  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    Well, Druids will be able

    -wear Drizzts scimitars, the best weapons in the game.
    -wear Ankheg armor which was rulebreakingly changed to be better in bg:ee for no particular reason.
    -access to unique shapeshift forms, duh.
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    Roller12 said:


    -wear Ankheg armor which was rulebreakingly changed to be better in bg:ee for no particular reason.

    The old Ankheg armor was the one that actually broke rules.
  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    edited October 2012
    Tanthalas said:

    Roller12 said:


    -wear Ankheg armor which was rulebreakingly changed to be better in bg:ee for no particular reason.

    The old Ankheg armor was the one that actually broke rules.
    Really, why? edit: i mean what rule did it break.

  • ginger_hammerginger_hammer Member Posts: 160
    Wasn't it classified as magical when it should be non-magical?
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738

    Wasn't it classified as magical when it should be non-magical?

  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    Tanthalas said:

    Wasn't it classified as magical when it should be non-magical?


    There is no such rule in BG. Which page in the manual states this.
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    @Roller12

    I'm pretty sure that the manual doesn't mention every single non-magical item and every single magical item, so that's a pretty weak argument.
  • DemivrgvsDemivrgvs Member Posts: 315
    Brude said:

    More clubs!

    Well, in theory there was the Root of the Problem club in BG1. They simply "forgot" to place it somewhere. :D

    Afaik Ankheg armor IS magical, else its base AC would not be so good (1). A non-magical Ankheg armor should have an AC equal to a non-magical Plate Armor (3). The advantage of the special material isn't a crazy +2 bonus to AC (which would make it better than Adamantine), but a much lower weight (thus lower STR requirement) and the fact Druids can use it (similar story for Ironwood equipmet).

  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    @Tanthalas
    >I'm pretty sure that the manual doesn't mention every single non-magical item and every single magical item, so that's a pretty weak argument.

    Exactly, so i am wondering where does the mentioned rule comes from, which states "bg1 ankheg armor breaks rules". Because if it isnt mentioned, its working as intended, unless ofc there is a plausible reason.
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    The plausible reason is that nothing in the Ankheg armor's description mentions it being magical. I even think that it doesn't even have a lore value (unlike magical items).
  • sandmanCCLsandmanCCL Member Posts: 1,389
    Druids are amazing in BG1. It's BG2 they star to lose steam, and even then only because of the nonsensical leap between 14 and 15.

    The spells they are adding due to the BG2 engine alone is incentive to bring one over a cleric. Druids reach 5th level spells while Clerics do not. Most of the spells druids lose out on are stuff to combat high level undead (vampires and such), which isn't really needed in BG1. The other things they lose out on are steroid spells and while it is a bummer to lose out on Draw Upon Holy Might, you should still be able to make due.

    When you compare equipment, both can use Ankheg armor so they are mostly on par as far as armor is concerned. The only +3 weapon they can use that Druids can't is cursed, and the other is quarterstaff. Druids can at least use Frostbrand off Drizzt.
  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    edited October 2012
    @Tanthalas
    Doesnt have to, its over the top AC value is a dead giveaway. If it has no lore value, and it doesnt, which, considering this armor isnt dropped anywhere in bg1 to my knowledge, isnt a surprising oversight. Then the fix would be to add lore value, not to alter armor balance relative to each other. Do you really consider it a sufficient reason, rule even?

    Description of a chainmail +1 "Chain mail is made of interlocking metal rings. It is always worn over a layer of padded fabric or soft leather to prevent chafing and lessen the impact of blows." No magic here too.
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    edited October 2012
    @Roller12

    You can find an Ankheg armor in Nashkel.

    As for the Chainmail +1, its called a Chainmail +1 and has a lore value.
  • ginger_hammerginger_hammer Member Posts: 160
    Doesn't the +1 denote its magical property?
  • sandmanCCLsandmanCCL Member Posts: 1,389

    Doesn't the +1 denote its magical property?

    Yes.

    Roller12 still has a point though. Ankheg Armor is simply Plate Mail at reduced weight. But, it has 1 AC. That suggests it's actually Ankheg Armor +2, just unlisted.

  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    If you want magic items usable by druids, how about adding a Ring of Shooting Stars, Staff of the Woodlands and some of the Figurines of Wondrous Power? I am sure they would all be interesting for druids to use.
  • ZafiroZafiro Member Posts: 436
    I had a screenshot showing Jaheira with -17 AC from items found in the Cloakwoods; just silly.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    There are also items in the Complete Book of Druids. The Ring of the Hierophant allows the Druid to communicate with any elementals, and to assume the form of an elemental of 12 HD, but only one of each type in a month.

    Heartwood Cudgel. This club, made from the heartwood of an oak, is a club +1— club +2 in a
    druid’s hands. XP value: 500.

    Mistletoe Dart. The body and tip of this dart are fashioned from enchanted mistletoe. Magical
    armor, shields, or rings give no bonus protection against it; for example, a person wearing chain mail
    +4 would have AC 5, not AC 1. Darts, while not innately poisonous, can be coated with any venom.
    Characters usually find these darts in groups of 2 to 8 (2d4). XP value: 50 each.

    Antlered Helm. This metal-reinforced leather helm, adorned with a stag’s antlers, allows the
    wearer to run like a deer, with a base movement rate of 18. Moreover, stags and deer see, hear, and
    smell wearers of an antlered helm as if they were stags, and react accordingly. This power makes the
    item very useful for hunting. XP value: 800.

    Cloak of the Beasts. This plain brown cloak bears patches of many different animal skins. A
    character who speaks a word of command while wearing it instantly becomes transformed into a
    random animal for 1d6 hours. The cloak and the person’s other clothing become part of the new
    form.
    The type of animal varies with each use of the cloak’s power—roll 1d100 on the reincarnate
    spell table (PH, p. 235), rerolling any nonanimal result. The nature of the change is identical to a
    druidic shapechange, except that wearers have no control over which animal form they take on and
    cannot change back until the enchantment wears off.
    Upon returning to normal, the wearer regains 10% to 60% of any lost hit points (10d6). The
    cloak cannot be used again until 12 hours pass. XP value: 1,000.

    Swarm Queen’s Crown. This dread item resembles a gold tiara set with a piece of amber
    encasing an insect—usually a queen bee. The crown has a value of 2,000 gp.
    With a command word, a user’s body mutates into a human-shaped mass of stinging, venomous
    wasps, bees, and spiders: a miniature, living creeping doom. The user’s new “body” contains 10
    insects per hit point. For example, a character with 10 hit points becomes a mass of 100 insects.
    The user attacks by touching someone (a normal attack roll). After a hit, the user decides how
    many insects sting or bite the victim. Either 10, 20, or 30 insects may swarm over a victim per
    attack; for every 10 insects that hit, the victim loses 1d10 hit points, and the wearer of the crown
    loses 1 hp—each insect dies after its attack. So, a character may inflict up to 3d10 points of damage
    per attack at the cost of 3 hp.
    While in insect form, the user has a move of 3, but can climb walls and ceilings. The user
    cannot employ any weapons, spells, magical items, tools, or armor. The swarm, which has AC 0,
    suffers no damage from piercing weapons (P), 1 point of damage from slashing weapons (S), and
    half damage from bludgeoning weapons (B). Magical bonuses and fire inflict full damage. Every
    point of damage to the wearer kills 10 insects. The user remains transformed as long as desired, but
    the crown can be used only once per day. XP value: 4,000

    Or a salve that protects you against the insect plague spell...
  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    @Tanthalas
    Thats what i said initially. The armor is made illegal for purely cosmetic reasons. However, i do agree, the descriptions could be made more uniform. The problem here isnt the armor, the problem here is that cosmetics took precedence over mechanics and game balance, and thats a very bad sign for anything Overhaul Games is gonna produce on their own.

    @ginger_hammer
    Other scale armors dont have +x in their descriptions either.

  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    @Roller12

    Actually, what you said initially was that we broke the rules to make the Ankheg armor non-magical, when its the original that broke rules.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @Roller12 You do realize the original stat block for Ankhegs included stats for armor made from their shells? I do believe that is what @Tanthalas is talking about- making the armor in the game more like its pen and paper version.
  • Roller12Roller12 Member Posts: 437
    @LadyRhian
    The p&p version is non magical AC2.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    @roller Yes, Non-magical is what they were fixing. I read the bug report file. It was mistakenly coded as magical when it wasn't. I think they fixed the AC1 thing as well, but I don't exactly remember (it was a month or two ago that I read it.)
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    The AC change is something pending.
  • LadyRhianLadyRhian Member Posts: 14,694
    Thanks, @Tanthalas! I thought they had already fixed it, but I must have misremembered!
Sign In or Register to comment.