Looking at the weapons available to druids and other healers, I noticed the Shaman can use spears and the Cleric can use hammers but druids can only use the common "healer" weapons which they will always be in competetions with other healers for. Is the druid going to get a weapon like a sword or something that the other healers can't compete for?
I probably can't see my self running around with anything but a staff. Maybe even a short staff and small shield at most. In my mind druids that stray or even go dark use deadlier weapons. Plus, I would feel it pretty hard to use a sword made from iron, and leather straps. Because you know the leather came from something you proudly could have been friends with ( talking from a druidic point of view of course)
Yes, I second the great disappointment of being stuck with the standard common healer weapons. Give druids the Scimiters or duel weild short sword anything that doesn't make us look like the only healer class that was forgotten when making healers unique from each other in melee offensive weapons and abilities when soloing or doing easy content as a second/backup healer and not needing to heal much in a group. As someone with a 5 year old, their will be times that i need to jump up at any time to take care of him, feed him, ect. and can't group effectively. Nothaving a weapon different from other healers and priests also means that druids will always be getting the short end of the stick when dividing up loot since clerics and shaman will be rolling for/asking for good staff weapons while claiming their special healers weapons for themselves as the druid can't use them anyway. Unless they add druid only to a good portion of the healer basic weapons so that other healers can't roll for them. Still concerned like others for the ability to defend ourselves from melee attackers when traveling the wilderness.
From everything we've been shown so far, neither Shaman nor Druid have a single offensive melee ability. While you will auto-attack with a melee weapon in between using your abilities, Druid damage should easily be well over 90% by magic, whether solo or in a group. I can understand wanting different weapons for the 'flavor' of your character and yes, Druid is certainly down near the bottom of the list for variety there - as are Enchanter, Summoner and Monk. But as far as actual killing, adding another weapon type or two won't really make a significant difference.
The Druid class page on the current site is very short on listing offensive abilities, but the old site gave us a much larger sample of them for Druid. Those abilities can still be seen on the Wiki and there are quite a few of them. While there's no guarantee that the abilities on the wiki will be in at release, I seriously doubt that VR took away ALL the class abilities that didn't make it to the new class pages when they switched to the new website recently. They just standardized page format, which shortened the lists. I believe that the larger lists we had in the past are a good indication of what was intended for each class, even if any specific ability might be changed or eliminated.
Here is the Druid Abilites page on Wiki
As far as competition for weapons goes, there's no reason not to expect that the RATE at which various weapons drop as loot will be proportional to the number of classes that can use a given weapon. I.E. there are 7 classes that can use a Quarter Staff and one class that can use a Long Bow. So I expect to see 7 times as many Quarter Staves in loot as Long Bows.
When it comes to defense, I guess that's all in one's perspective. To me, Healers have arguably the best defense one can have. Druid can keep HoTs on himself while soloing, as well as spot heals. Druid has a variety of damage shields. He can buff himself with extra armor class, or extra health regeneration, or -if all else fails - a speed buff to 'Run Away!!'. Finally, at some point in leveling, he will be able to teleport away from danger.
I think you'll be pleased with the abilities that Druid has, based on the current image of him that we have. (Oh yes, I'll be playing one as well)
I'm curious about what the Druid will wield in the off-hand slot.
There's nothing obvious on the class page like a focus type item.
The Shaman is also listed without anything obvious, but in the recent stream we saw the Shaman able to use shields again and on the shield tooltips it showed Warrior, Paladin, Cleric, Shaman only.
The current class description doesn't list a shield or scimitar for the Druid (although it did in one of the previous revs). I know the original inspiration for the Druid came from Dungeons & Dragons, in which the Druid could wield a scimitar (which made absolutely no sense because they weren't allowed to use anything else metal).
I'm fine with the Druid not weilding any weapons and in fact think it would actually be very cool (and iconic) to have visual effects for the druid instead of weapons. (Similar to Essence of Dol 'red glow effect') in EQ. Having them wielding raw elements in their hands like crackling lighting or wriggling vines.
If no 'special item' like a tome or some other artifact is created for the Druid's offhand, then I hope VR lets them use 'arcane shields' like the DPS Casters. Light Leather is still pretty squishy.
A magic-using Healer, dual wielding melee weapons would look even MORE immersion breaking to me than watching Galdalf fight the Balrog with a freaking sword!
@Jothany - In hopes of both returning immersion of LoTR for you, and providing some cannon: Gandalf weilded a sword because he actually wasn't a human wizard as you think in modern RPGs or MMOs. The wizards of middle earth were divine beings (Istari in Gandalf's case) in disguise as robe wearing sorcerers wielding staves - his powers were divine and not arcane; So although Gygax received most of his inspiration for D&D from Tolkien, the D&D Wizard is nothing like Gandolf or Sarumon, although the Druid is "relatively" more akin to Radaghast IMO; I have heard that D&D had a lot of influence on Brad's inspiration for EQ too.
With that said, I can however agree that a dual weilding Druid would be immersion breaking to me - I would just use a different analogy :)
As I said, I'm hoping for some partical effect while they clutch a stone or harness an element.
Well I appreciate the info about Gandalf, I din't know that much 'depth' about him or LoTR in general. And probably a bit less about the history of D&D, though I played it some back in the P&P days.
However I do know a bit of history in general, and the concept of wizards/mages/magic users as warriors who don't use physical strength or prowess is pretty much the most widely encountered form of them in my experience. I don't know the finer differences between 'Divine' power and 'Arcane' power, but either way IMO his power is in the strenth of his will and mind, and the depth of his knowledge. Not in the muscles of his arm or the sharpness of his sword.
Happily, this was just a minor complaint that didn't in any way keep me from thoroughly enjoying all of the books years ago and all of the movies (more than once) in recent years.
However, if my Druid has bird poop running down the side of his head, I am truly gonna be pissed!
:D
LMAO - I hear you... I don't even want to play the Druid if I'm forced to wear feathers, tree bark and antlers (WoW Druid)... let alone look like Radagast :D
Add: I really don't like the feather & bark clad halfling as the current Druid mascot on the page. I really really hate that concept (similar to bird poop for me lol)
Add: I'd like to see the Druid look more like the Monk to be honest. Wear some pants and sandals made from spider silk and otherwise wear tattoos or body paint; Be at one with nature and ditch the animal hide clothing (which requires killing animals) and the wooden weapons/bark armor which requires stripping trees. You would think the Druid would be more inclined to use metal weapons (if they needed a weapon at all) because they are made from minerals that don't require killing anything that was once alive... but whatever -shrug-
The "Shaman" should be the ones clad in feathers and bones...
Darch said:Add: I'd like to see the Druid look more like the Monk to be honest. Wear some pants and sandals made from spider silk and otherwise wear tattoos or body paint; Be at one with nature and ditch the animal hide clothing (which requires killing animals) and the wooden weapons/bark armor which requires stripping trees. You would think the Druid would be more inclined to use metal weapons (if they needed a weapon at all) because they are made from minerals that don't require killing anything that was once alive... but whatever -shrug-
The druid isn't some kind of save all the animals and trees diehard though...
Our Druids are about the cycles of nature, the dance between predator and prey. Their powers draw from the forces of nature, like Lightning, Earthquakes, Wildfires, as well as the restorative and transformative sides of Nature. Think of them less as paragons of peace and some ideal of what Nature could or should be, and rather as reflecting what Nature is.
@Iksar - "natural predatros" don't wear their prey's skin and antlers or dress up in tree bark and other creature's feathers, so your entire point is mute.
In fact, chopping up animals and trees with knives and saws is about as unnatural as it gets...
I hate to disagree with ya Darch, but the hunter-gatherer peoples that were our ancestors for a hundred thousand years or so before agriculture was invented were certainly natural predators. And they used every part of the animals they killed for food. They were honoring the 'gift' from Nature of the animal they killed by not wasting any part of it. They used just about every bit of the animals they killed. Wore their skins, used their sinews as thread to make the clothing, used their bones, claws, teeth, entrails, blood, brains (to tan the hides). And even made ceremonial crowns out of antlers. Their descendants do it to this day.
Also, historical Druids ate meat (as did almost every known tribe of early human beings). So a Druid wouldn't have to kill an animal "just" to get its skin, antler, feathers etc. They would have plenty of those available as a by-product of feeding themselves. They would consider it a "sin" to throw away those parts and JUST eat the meat.
Darch said:@Iksar - "natural predatros" don't wear their prey's skin and antlers or dress up in tree bark and other creature's feathers, so your entire point is mute.
In fact, chopping up animals and trees with knives and saws is about as unnatural as it gets...
Jothany hit it on the head, part of the cycle of nature and dance between predator and prey includes culling/death/destruction and then recycling. Things must die and go back to earth; heards must be culled, plants and lands burned, the cycles of nature.
@Iksar, @Jothany - Good points. But I actually think you are referring to "Shaman" when speaking to human (tribal) predatory natures. The celtic Druids had a lot of popular misconceptions about being wild/savage and were actually very civilized and nothing more than religious leaders that often wore cloth robes/gowns.
Take Native American tropes/stereotypes for instance... they used every bit of their kills for food, tools and clothing; They had Shaman - not Druids. (And they didn't wear chainmail...)
Add: But to your points, utilizing every part of the animal is "natural" "for us" (but then you could argue that using weapons to hunt is natural... or wearing armor made from mined minerals... where and why is that line drawn?). Is it natural simply because we do it as a species... or because it's done by other animals and actual "nature"
Add2: I also quoted "natural predator" to exclude mankind... because we have no natural weapons and must use tools to kill or other actual predators to hep us hunt.
I am referring to what VR has said about and how they have presented their druid. How these words are used or their history in the real world don't matter next to that. Even if going off real world history the classes mostly fit: little is known about druids other than they mostly lived in nature, were priests that often lived in forests/caves away from people, and the name has something to do with oak trees, while shaman were people believed to interact with the spirit world who would direct spiritual energy for healing or other things.
Agreed @Iksar. I'm just defending (and trying to rationalize) the OP's point about weapon use of the healers, and why the druid "appears" to be the odd one out compared to the others. I agree that it "appears" to be unfair, and the only way to justify the Druid not being able to weild shields or better weapons (in my opinioin) is if they have some other special item that benefits them moreso than others.
Branches can fall off trees from a storm, and deadwood / driftwood can be found naturally also.
In the same way, animals die naturally, I'd see no issue with a Druid using antlers, claws and the hides of animals that have already died and repurposing them as part of their attunement to the natural world.
Nature also needs to be managed sometimes too, this could mean chopping down a tree that has become dangerous or diseased, or culling some animals whose numbers are becoming excessive.
Ezrael said:Branches can fall off trees from a storm, and deadwood / driftwood can be found naturally also.
In the same way, animals die naturally, I'd see no issue with a Druid using antlers, claws and the hides of animals that have already died and repurposing them as part of their attunement to the natural world.
Nature also needs to be managed sometimes too, this could mean chopping down a tree that has become dangerous or diseased, or culling some animals whose numbers are becoming excessive.
I can also see them asking the trees for their wood to use as a weapon, or singing the wood out of them. Balance and repurpose. Take only what's needed, giving back when possible. Thats the kind of thinking i have for it. Vague I know. =P