Spells that cured effects instead of just hit points originally belonged to the Necromantic sphere, which druids could not access. Most of them were moved to the Healing sphere in later 2e expansions. Restoration/Energy Drain was left in the Necromantic sphere, because it was more about life energy than healing.
It's all about access to spell spheres, which are basically mage schools for priests. In PnP, each type of priest got access to different spell spheres; so a priest of Talos got special spell access that the normal cleric did not; no priest could use them all. Basically, the kits in BG were not kits, but totally different class builds, akin to druids. Druids only have access to the healing sphere, which gives them cure wounds, but do not have access to the necromantic sphere (which includes all resurrection spells as well as restoration, as @Jouni said.) As for a non-technical answer, there is not really a good one, but I like @scriver 's explanation the best. Also, to be extremely nitpicky, the dandwiki is all 3.5 source rules, so it isn't the best resource for reference when talking about 2e. Not that it really matters.
They get access to resurrection and restoration spells in 3ed onwards right?
Unless they do is some supplements I am not aware of, Druids don't get Raise Dead or Resurrection in 3.5. I have it on hearsay that they do in 4th Ed, but they don't in 5th.
Druids get access to Lesser Restoration in 3.5, but not the Greater variant. In 5th ed they have both.
These are all good answers up here, but there is a simple one, the druid class isn't meant to be a full healer class, thus they don't get access to all healing goodies.
Not that I often play clerics as full healers, either, mind you, I'm more fond of other domains and the like, but still, clerics were designed with healing in mind.
Considering that adnd classes are based on history and legend, we have a lot of tales of priests ressurecting the dead, but as far as I know we have no legends of druids doing the same.
Druids in DnD have pretty much always been a combination of Mage and Cleric. They get more offensive spells than the Cleric, but don't get access to as many healing spells. They also don't get as many offensive spells as the Mage but have some healing. They are not as tanky as a Cleric but they are more than the Mage, before spells.
If you give them Resurrection and Restoration, then why would you pick a Cleric? It's like asking why they don't get Wish or Time Stop.
Unfortunately, in BG, they haven't been realized as good as they could have and their spells are limited. Icewind Dale made a better job with them and 3.5E made them absolutely amazing.
Each class should fill a role, or do that role slightly differently. It's also like asking why Rangers don't get Lay on Hands or why Bards cannot disable traps.
@Archaos druid seemed sufficiently close to cleric to me and I was also unable to understand why, from a fluff point of view, they didn't have restoration and raise dead (circle of life fluff explains the latter).
Fluff for fluff, then, perhaps in their neutrality and nature-focused minds, druids believe that you either survive the infection and become stronger, or you die from it. Survival of the fittest, what is more natural than that?
Nature can sustain and nurture life (goodberry) but calling back, creating or strengthening a sentient spirit (restoration, raise dead etc.) is strictly a job for greater gods like those clerics worship. Only they have the essential spark for creating a sentient humanoid life.
Then there is the Reincarnate spell, but it is a work around for druids, to bypass that restriction. It has a circle of life theme, grass die so the antelope can live, antelope dies so the lion can live, etc. A druid can place a soul into any part of this circle, seemingly chosen at random, but in nature even random looking things often have a purpose. Also it is about the balance. A person who has used his gift of intellect and pyschial abilities for evil deeds may struggle as a slug in his next life for penance. etc.
Ofcourse bg gives druids mass raise hla, which is a goof IMHO. Druids should get elemental prince summonings exclusively and clerics should get mass raise/heal things exclusively. Also, by that point, with rods of resurrection and planetar summons, mass raise dead is not really that hot.
This is my gripe with bg, to make it more player friendly, they made it so that everyone can use scrolls of restoration, (even greater restoration scrolls in SoD!) and rods of ressurection, so a cleric is not mandatory. Healing potions are also so plenty I almost have more than I need at any given moment. A cleric is a luxury, not an essential. A druid's special spells like call lightning, iron skins, insect plague, summon elementals are unequally superiour and no one else can employ them.
Thanks for the well thought out replies, especially @lunar
Would I be right in thinking that negative plane protection and death ward should not be druid spells either?
All this causes me to change my existing understanding of druids somewhat, as I'd always seen them as a cleric alternative, when in fact they lose some pretty important stuff... Lack of restoration being the biggest issue for me.
That's actually a good lesson to learn. While Sorcerers and Wizards can get off being seen as "similar enough," Clerics and Druids are very different. Maybe not as different as their "martial equivalents," Paladins and Rangers, but different none-the-less.
It brings up a definite role play issue for me. I've always gravitated towards the old faith, nature, balance etc, but with no way to directly counter the evils of the lower planes, it suddenly seems somewhat limiting...
While a Cleric might be more geared towards healing the damage of evil beings, or trying to turn them back, a Druid has a more... direct method of dealing with anything that threatens nature. Drop lightning on it. And it's a reason I've come to enjoy the Avenger kit, as it gives the druid more offensive options.
Nature isn't nice or passive, after all. It's fierce, wild, feral, aggressive.
Don't druids get negative plane protection spell in bg? I think they do, but can not check atm. At least they have a defense against the negative energy and undead, however feeble. In IWD also there was the moonlight wall spell IIRC that does more damage to undead as well, ditto for sunscorch and sunray spells:staple and quite powerful undead blasters.
If push comes to shove, a druid can summon lots of (giant) animals and fierce elementals to drown out the negative energy of a vampire. The monster will drain the animals, but nature is abundant, rich and self-sustaining, the more animals that die, the more will be born as long as the balance is maintained. Nature always finds a way to birth life even in the harshest conditions. Even in the driest of deserts, coldest north, or the dark, icy waters of the deep oceans, where the pressure/lack of light/and cold may seem to make living impossible, there is life, a testimony to the power and perseverence of nature. The animals that die in the struggle against an undead menace, is just a drop in the ocean-a small sacrifice. Eventually the druid and allies can overpower the darkness and the nature will rejoice once again. It always does.
Those who think that nature always wins against the forces of death should read about Hobarth, the priest of Bhaal, and the Heart of Kazgaroth in Douglas Niles' "Moonshae"...
Comments
If I remember correctly they RP have access to the Reincarnate spell though.
That´d would certanly add silly dynamics to a playthrough...
Why shouldn't druids get restoration though?
As for a non-technical answer, there is not really a good one, but I like @scriver 's explanation the best.
Also, to be extremely nitpicky, the dandwiki is all 3.5 source rules, so it isn't the best resource for reference when talking about 2e. Not that it really matters.
@jesterdesu - No. Even in 3E, Druids still only had Reincarnate.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spellLists/druidSpells.htm
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Druid_Spell_List
Druids get access to Lesser Restoration in 3.5, but not the Greater variant. In 5th ed they have both.
Not that I often play clerics as full healers, either, mind you, I'm more fond of other domains and the like, but still, clerics were designed with healing in mind.
I'll see myself out.
They get more offensive spells than the Cleric, but don't get access to as many healing spells.
They also don't get as many offensive spells as the Mage but have some healing.
They are not as tanky as a Cleric but they are more than the Mage, before spells.
If you give them Resurrection and Restoration, then why would you pick a Cleric?
It's like asking why they don't get Wish or Time Stop.
Unfortunately, in BG, they haven't been realized as good as they could have and their spells are limited.
Icewind Dale made a better job with them and 3.5E made them absolutely amazing.
Each class should fill a role, or do that role slightly differently.
It's also like asking why Rangers don't get Lay on Hands or why Bards cannot disable traps.
I was looking beyond the obvious roles.
Then there is the Reincarnate spell, but it is a work around for druids, to bypass that restriction. It has a circle of life theme, grass die so the antelope can live, antelope dies so the lion can live, etc. A druid can place a soul into any part of this circle, seemingly chosen at random, but in nature even random looking things often have a purpose. Also it is about the balance. A person who has used his gift of intellect and pyschial abilities for evil deeds may struggle as a slug in his next life for penance. etc.
Ofcourse bg gives druids mass raise hla, which is a goof IMHO. Druids should get elemental prince summonings exclusively and clerics should get mass raise/heal things exclusively. Also, by that point, with rods of resurrection and planetar summons, mass raise dead is not really that hot.
This is my gripe with bg, to make it more player friendly, they made it so that everyone can use scrolls of restoration, (even greater restoration scrolls in SoD!) and rods of ressurection, so a cleric is not mandatory. Healing potions are also so plenty I almost have more than I need at any given moment. A cleric is a luxury, not an essential. A druid's special spells like call lightning, iron skins, insect plague, summon elementals are unequally superiour and no one else can employ them.
Would I be right in thinking that negative plane protection and death ward should not be druid spells either?
All this causes me to change my existing understanding of druids somewhat, as I'd always seen them as a cleric alternative, when in fact they lose some pretty important stuff... Lack of restoration being the biggest issue for me.
Nature isn't nice or passive, after all. It's fierce, wild, feral, aggressive.
I'm sure I'm more a druid at heart but it sucks to learn of such a major Achilles heal
If push comes to shove, a druid can summon lots of (giant) animals and fierce elementals to drown out the negative energy of a vampire. The monster will drain the animals, but nature is abundant, rich and self-sustaining, the more animals that die, the more will be born as long as the balance is maintained. Nature always finds a way to birth life even in the harshest conditions. Even in the driest of deserts, coldest north, or the dark, icy waters of the deep oceans, where the pressure/lack of light/and cold may seem to make living impossible, there is life, a testimony to the power and perseverence of nature. The animals that die in the struggle against an undead menace, is just a drop in the ocean-a small sacrifice. Eventually the druid and allies can overpower the darkness and the nature will rejoice once again. It always does.
I suppose that makes sense and it definitely seems very druid like. Though it makes me realise that a druid can seem a bit callous.