AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

I understand that for a Shifter who keeps his Druid abilities, the undead forms are forbidden; does that apply to any of the other forms? Construct, Outsider, etc?

I think perhaps you mean a Druid who has learned more advanced methods of shifting, opposed to a shifter who keeps their druid abilities since mechanically you cant give up druid abilities.

In my experience with D&D, I don't know of any druidic deity that would allow undead shapes, even evil druidic deities have -some- standards to separate them from a regular evil deity. As for the construct, outsider and other shapes... they should be fine so long as you aren't using them to break any of the druidic oaths/creeds/etc and fall from the graces of your deity.

Use Undead shapes at your own risk. Be ready to have one hell of a good reason to use the shape you're using for any DM that might see you. Personally, I can honestly think of zero but maybe you thought of something I haven't. Same goes for Aberrations mind, though I can think of a good reason or two for using one of the shapes that would be okay in my book.

Just remember that there are no other types of creatures Druids hate more than Undead and Aberrations. Lots of people tend to forget about the Aberration hate.

http://dndtools.eu/feats/lords-of-madne ... -shape--9/

On the subject of Aberration shapes and druids, from Lords of Madness. Basically thus; the ones who don't view aberrations with disgust are the exceptions, but they can and do exist without breaking any general Druid rules (I can't, of course, comment towards specific Gods, nor do I have the authority to say this is how it is on Amia/FR).

I can't find any material that might support a Druid that uses Undead Shapes. There's a PrC called Blighter in Masters of the Wild, but they're kinda like anti-Druids. This isn't to say that the material does not exist, but I'm not familiar with it and can't find it.

Gunz wrote:

Use Undead shapes at your own risk. Be ready to have one hell of a good reason to use the shape you're using for any DM that might see you. Personally, I can honestly think of zero but maybe you thought of something I haven't. Same goes for Aberrations mind, though I can think of a good reason or two for using one of the shapes that would be okay in my book.

Just remember that there are no other types of creatures Druids hate more than Undead and Aberrations. Lots of people tend to forget about the Aberration hate.

I do understand about druids' antipathy toward undead and aberrations. My question was about the other forms, such as outsiders and constructs; are any of them treated with the same disdain? And about aberrations, the only shifter form that I'm aware is an aberration is the mindflayer. I would expect that's crossed off the list for a druid/shifter. Are there other aberrations shapes, and specifically one that's acceptable to a druid? That nugget was a surprise. I'm not really up on my monster lore.

Shifters also have access to the Drider form, which is an aberration and would most likely be equally loathed. On the topic of outsiders and constructs, it gets a little more complex. Druids typically dislike Constructs and their use, as creating a construct requires enslaving an elemental spirit in almost all cases. A druid/shifter might avoid the use of construct forms as a result, but I would consider it less of an issue than the use of undead or aberration form. In regard to Outsiders, I think thats largely a decision for the individual. I'm not sure what the druidic stance on outsiders is meant to be, but I've noted druids that have had no issues with them and ones that have in equal number on Amia.

That's a bit general for constructs and does not equal the same thing. As far as constructs go, the Shifter is not enslaving any sort of spirit to become a construct, only the Shifters own lifeforce is used, so can it be called enslavement and thus contrary to the principles that prohibit such?

Ettercaps are also abberations.

As far as constructs, both my druids refuse to tolerate constructs if they enslave elementals (some contructs actually don't, like druidic constructs and some guardian constructs, ask permission or use another force), and wouldn't use the construct shape, but don't really have big issues with others using the shapes.

Outsiders don't belong on the material plane, as far as my druids are concerned. Neither of them would use outsider shape, and find it distasteful for others to use them. Except maybe the Azer.

Uhhh, considering you can play outsider druid (genasi and whatnot), I wouldn't see a problem with outsider shapes. But I guess opinion on that differs from druid to druid.

.... hang on... are folks saying that an epic shifter/druid shouldn't use outsider nor construct shapes?

An outsider or construct isn't exactly part of the natural balance, but then, it's not as much of a blatant, egregious offense to the laws of nature as is an aberration or undead. I'd agree with what seems to be the general consensus: it would be up to the individual druid or the local variation of druidic culture to decide whether those shapes are ok. In other words, go ask Malandria.

Remal wrote:

Uhhh, considering you can play outsider druid (genasi and whatnot), I wouldn't see a problem with outsider shapes. But I guess opinion on that differs from druid to druid.

Can't really use this defense, as one could make a Lawful Good Llothite drow druid since its just mechanics... the basis here is D&D lore not NWN mechanics

Lizzie wrote:

An outsider or construct isn't exactly part of the natural balance, but then, it's not as much of a blatant, egregious offense to the laws of nature as is an aberration or undead. I'd agree with what seems to be the general consensus: it would be up to the individual druid or the local variation of druidic culture to decide whether those shapes are ok. In other words, go ask Malandria.

hmm I might have to sadly rebuild with this discovery. My intention was to keep all the druids happy with my 10 druid/20 shifter build. Maybe a dragon shape will be worth it being its the most "natural" of all the shapes.

a goodly druid using a chromatic dragon shape?!? BLASPHEMY!!! BURN THE INFIDEL!!!!

<_< Kidding aside, It would be awesome if the color choices for shifted dragon/wyrmling shapes was based off your alignment, good = metallic, evil = chromatic and neutral gets a toss choice when they first shift into a dragon shape

WinterBlaze wrote:

a goodly druid using a chromatic dragon shape?!? BLASPHEMY!!! BURN THE INFIDEL!!!!

<_< Kidding aside, It would be awesome if the color choices for shifted dragon/wyrmling shapes was based off your alignment, good = metallic, evil = chromatic and neutral gets a toss choice when they first shift into a dragon shape

Lol there really is no winning for shifters

but this would be pretty cool. You could go for a prismatic dragon shape as a nuetral alignment.

The limitations with a prismatic is that or shadow dragon for the only non-metallic/chromatic ones in the NWN module... at least that I know of

Though it would be awesome to have some Planar or arcane or epic dragons... would love being able to shift into a Time dragon or song dragon...

Bravo21 wrote:

That's a bit general for constructs and does not equal the same thing. As far as constructs go, the Shifter is not enslaving any sort of spirit to become a construct, only the Shifters own lifeforce is used, so can it be called enslavement and thus contrary to the principles that prohibit such?

You're right that the Shifter isn't actively enslaving an elemental spirit, but that doesn't necessarily alter the view that an individual may hold over the form. Technically, a druid/shifter assuming an undead form isn't raising the dead or enslaving a dead spirit either, but the form itself is still abhorrent to them. The important thing to consider is, how does the individual druid/shifter feel about constructs and outsiders, and perhaps more importantly, how do they feel about assuming a shape that suggests that they approve of those things, whether they actually do or not.

WinterBlaze wrote:

Remal wrote:

Uhhh, considering you can play outsider druid (genasi and whatnot), I wouldn't see a problem with outsider shapes. But I guess opinion on that differs from druid to druid.

Can't really use this defense, as one could make a Lawful Good Llothite drow druid since its just mechanics... the basis here is D&D lore not NWN mechanics

As an example, how exactly would that work since a druid, drow or not, cannot be Lawful Good? The mechanics, especially alignment, do in fact have some bearing upon druidic lore as it constrains one from the extreme ends of the alignment spectrum. That being said, the story of the character leading up to being a lawful good drow druid would surely be more interesting than a drow paladin of Corellon.

The point was that the mechanics of the game allow for things that the lore doesn't (or shouldn't). And it's an entirely valid point. You could roll up a druid and type "Velsharoon" into its deity field. There's nothing mechanically stopping you from doing that. Saying that "the game allows me to do this" is not an argument that adequately responds to a question about FR lore.

Bravo21 wrote:

WinterBlaze wrote:

Remal wrote:

Uhhh, considering you can play outsider druid (genasi and whatnot), I wouldn't see a problem with outsider shapes. But I guess opinion on that differs from druid to druid.

Can't really use this defense, as one could make a Lawful Good Llothite drow druid since its just mechanics... the basis here is D&D lore not NWN mechanics

As an example, how exactly would that work since a druid, drow or not, cannot be Lawful Good? The mechanics, especially alignment, do in fact have some bearing upon druidic lore as it constrains one from the extreme ends of the alignment spectrum. That being said, the story of the character leading up to being a lawful good drow druid would surely be more interesting than a drow paladin of Corellon.

The same way the alignment of a character can be changed after its creation... DM's can alter it or theres also NPCs that can be scripted to change it.

Though upon initial creation yeah, I understand your point. I could have used a different example.

One of the problems with NWN is Shifter is supposed to be a PrC for any class that has natural shapeshifting, but NWN only has it for Druid

Manarethan wrote:

You're right that the Shifter isn't actively enslaving an elemental spirit, but that doesn't necessarily alter the view that an individual may hold over the form. Technically, a druid/shifter assuming an undead form isn't raising the dead or enslaving a dead spirit either, but the form itself is still abhorrent to them. The important thing to consider is, how does the individual druid/shifter feel about constructs and outsiders, and perhaps more importantly, how do they feel about assuming a shape that suggests that they approve of those things, whether they actually do or not.

This gets at the heart of the matter I was wondering about. Trying to reconcile a druid's reverence and devotion to "the balance" with the fact that a shifter isn't actually -becoming- an undead or an outsider or a construct, just assuming their form, yet that form represents a creature that a druid abhors. It's an interesting conflict for a druid/shifter...do the ends justify the means?

Thanks for the discussion.

Is there not an element of needing to have a certain understanding of a critter in order to be able to turn into it? You have to study it, and so on...

And these particular critters are so abhorrent to Druids that they can't really get under their skin...?

-Cloak-and-Dagger- wrote:

Is there not an element of needing to have a certain understanding of a critter in order to be able to turn into it? You have to study it, and so on...

I dislike the notion that epic feats just pop into your dome after killing X amount of orcs, or pressing Y liters of apple juice in Bendir Dale. The way I see it, in order to learn a form, especially as powerful as an undead or a construct, you should definitely need to meditate and study the subject. A "mainstream" druid would never even consider it, but an opportunistic, or a curious shifter probably would. Druids loathe all things unnatural, and the undead certainly fall into that category. Constructs aren't exactly from the nature since they're creations made by men (Or some other entities!), artificial creatures, if you will.

Sorry for the late response. I'm currently a very very busy bee.

There are more Aberration shapes in NWN than Mindflayer, yep. Some have been named already. In default NWN, this is the list of Aberration skins (not all are shifter shapes by default, mind): http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Aberrations

Constructs and Outsiders are very likely often looked down on or even hated by Druids, but feelings toward those creatures depend on the individual Druid.

I just found this thread while drifting around the forums. Its an interesting topic but i personally agree that its based on on the druids view of said forms, even if those around them may not agree or be upset with certain forms.

I have to use my shifter, Crystalitharion (i really need to change his name what was i thinking so long ago). He is a malarite, he is about the hunt and survival and since he isnt part of any druidic circle or organization he doesnt feel beholden to any organizational ways or dogmas. He is a hunter, each of the forms gives him various ways and tools to hunt and survive, he does what ever is nessicary. I play him as abit of a sensate as well because one one thinks about it the experience of say hunting your pray as a manticore in the wilds is vastly different then stalking your pray through the city as say a kobold or lizardman.

Just my two cents.

If he doesn't feel beholden to any druidic dogmas then he simply is just a pure shifter. Who can still follow a god (in this case Malar) but simply isn't a druid. Hence no druidic blessings for him.

What I don't get, is why haven't abberations and undead been worked over to be something entirely different on Amia? Why is it even possible to shift into a Mindflayer when, mechanically the only way to be a Shifter is by going the druid route? And what if one is playing a pure shifter? Is it then illegal to use druid spells, or am I mistaken here?

You're allowed to take 5 Druid levels as the prerequisite for shifter, anything more than that and you'll need to provide druidic style RP with it, afaik.

The rule is this.

Druid shifter no forbidden forms
Pure shifter no druid spells or companion. Also no more then 5 druid levels.

Only options unless you convert with rp, and then the rules still apply.

Edit: not sure about converting actually just an idea I just had

We also do allow the druid levels accounted for something else provided it is fitting. We have for example in the past allowed the druid levels symbolize shaman levels. And hence the spells beeing of shamanic nature and not druidic nature.

Do druids have a problem with deathless creatures? Because with a DC request druids could maybe change the undead to deathless, and then use the shapes. Just thinking out loud.

Its an outsider and in my experience they don't like them

Deathless aren't Outsiders, they're a separate creature type that's not represented in NWN. But, I still think a druid would have a problem with them, in all likelihood. Druids don't oppose undead because they're evil or because they draw on negative energy; they oppose undead because they're removed from the natural circle of balance. They've made a mockery of the natural order of things, in which every creature is supposed to be born, live out its life as a creature of its kind was meant to, and then die, returning its energy and anima to nature. Deathless and undead are equally in violation of all that.

If we're talking about the Deathless I found a template for, they seem to be pretty straightforwardly undead. They're just a specific variety of undead. And what Lizzie said: if it's once lived and was part of the natural cycle, but is no more, then druids don't like it.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Deathless_ ... emplate%29

(No idea if that's what we're talking about, or even canon.)

The version of Deathless I'm familiar with is the one from the Eberron setting, which is basically just undead powered by positive energy instead of negative, so they don't have the tendency towards evil that undead do. Which wouldn't be relevant to a druid, I think.

Other versions of Deathless are apparently just "even more undead than regular undead," like the one you linked to. Which I can't imagine would make a druid any more sympathetic.

IronAngel wrote:

If we're talking about the Deathless I found a template for, they seem to be pretty straightforwardly undead. They're just a specific variety of undead. And what Lizzie said: if it's once lived and was part of the natural cycle, but is no more, then druids don't like it.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Deathless_ ... emplate%29

(No idea if that's what we're talking about, or even canon.)

It's found in Book of Exalted Deeds.

Deathless describes creatures that have died but returned to a kind of spiritual life. They are similar in many ways to both living creatures and undead. However, while undead represent a mockery of life and a violation of the natural order of life and death, the deathless merely stave off the inevitability of death for a short time in order to accomplish a righteous purpose. While undead draw their power from the Negative Energy plane, the deathless are strongly tied the Positive Energy plane, the birthplace of all souls. In fact, the deathless are little more than disincarnate souls, sometimes wrapped in material flesh, often incorporeal and hardly more substantial than a soul in its purest state.

Yeah that is the deathless I mean't. I just figured that since they were staving off death one could be a deathless fighter (though a reskin would be required I imagine) and druids would be less upset because they weren't a true undead. On a sidenote the Repose domain summon says deathless but also states outsider...I assume for scripting purposes.

treant13 wrote:

Do druids have a problem with deathless creatures? Because with a DC request druids could maybe change the undead to deathless, and then use the shapes. Just thinking out loud.

Back to your question...as I was looking over the Deathless, they seem stat/effectwise more like a golem in some key aspects but afew minor of the undead.

"Unlike undead the deathless are subjct to energy drain,like living creatures deathless are harmed by negative energy and healed by positive energy."
thats alot more like a golem then a undead

"Deathless are effected by "undeath to death.""
Undead

"spells that have a greater than normal effect against undead creatures-including chill touch,magic stone,searing light,sunbeam,sunburst and wall of fire do not have these enhanced effects against deathless"

that would then lead me to focus on it being more akin to a reskined golem form then a undead.

Deathless probably depends largely on the druid and whether or not they understand what the deathless actually is.
Some may be okay, or even barely tolerant, of such things. Others might be rigidly against. One's patron deity might also influence their stance. And there's probably a lot who don't even know the distinction, and many who wouldn't care if they did.

Druid/Shifter and forbidden forms

Who is online