Druids of Malar
I think what he means is. Druids of Malar are still druids and there are the more darker beasts that would bond and join up with malarite rangers/druids. Worgs and wyverns and such. More than just malarites hunt animals for sports. I think it would make sense for them to have animal empathy just use it on an animal that would fit the Malarite faith though.
I am but a tree te da lee lee
Likely an oversight from when they were changed from clerics to druids in keeping with the 3rd edition revolution.
If Chaunteans and Mielikkan druids get animal empathy, then so should the Malarite ones. Druids are druids, and all get the same skill set. It just needs to be added in, much like there needs to be a shapechange teacher available now for said druids.
If Chaunteans and Mielikkan druids get animal empathy, then so should the Malarite ones. Druids are druids, and all get the same skill set. It just needs to be added in, much like there needs to be a shapechange teacher available now for said druids.
"There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men."
Kregor - Ranger of Tangled Trees
Rozor - Lady Luck's Duelist
Tygen - Ranger-Bard of Mielikki
Kregor - Ranger of Tangled Trees
Rozor - Lady Luck's Duelist
Tygen - Ranger-Bard of Mielikki
This would probably only work if "animal empathy" became a sanctuary-like ability..
A Dire Wolf in FK would likely attack immediately. If you want a like-minded animal to be able to be tamed, there should be a check for evil-aligned PCs upon entering the rooms with such 'animals.'
But, either way, they should still have the skill IMO. There's no reason to nerf them any more than simply being a Druid.
A Dire Wolf in FK would likely attack immediately. If you want a like-minded animal to be able to be tamed, there should be a check for evil-aligned PCs upon entering the rooms with such 'animals.'
But, either way, they should still have the skill IMO. There's no reason to nerf them any more than simply being a Druid.
This land shall come to the God who knows the answer to War. -Ninety-Nine Nights
-
Horace
- Sword Grand Master
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 2:22 am
- Location: Ankeny, Iowa
- Contact:
Why not just give them a faith only vendor who sells very strong evil predatory minions. Then they can have "animal empathy" with these neat looking strong minions of unimaginable evil and all the other animals in the animal kingdom can rightfully still hate them.
I think the problem is where in FK we made almost hybrids between clerics and druids...which isn't bad. But when it's done that way there should probably be a balance for whatever is taken away from them...maybe being able to use metal weapons or something.
Those are my two options I came up with.
I think the problem is where in FK we made almost hybrids between clerics and druids...which isn't bad. But when it's done that way there should probably be a balance for whatever is taken away from them...maybe being able to use metal weapons or something.
Those are my two options I came up with.
Listen up! People pay good money to see this movie! When they go out to a theater they want cold sodas, hot popcorn, and no monsters in the projection booth! Do I have to come up there myself? Do you think the Gremsters can stand up to the Hulkster?
I honestly see no reason to keep Animal Empathy from them.
I could go into a whole dissertation on the dichotomy of Malarites vs. their Chauntean/Mielikkan counterparts, but I think I'd beat the issue saying too much. That, and it makes it easier for some to be able to vilify the Malarite by boxing him into this "destroy the forest" mentality that's a common, and it seems, actively encouraged misconception of the faith.
In short, Malarites are not on a mission to destroy nature... and the little piece in the ranger quest that has the segment to track down a Malarite who supposedly has this active intention to do so does not truly convey the intent of a Malarite. Malarites believe themselves to be the rightful stewards of the forest. They represent the savage, predatory side of nature, but they represent nature, nonetheless. They are not ANTI-nature. Try to argue with Danten once or twice, and you'll see the perfect presentation of the Malarite mindset. They believe the forest belongs to the fierce predators, the ones with the strength to survive, if a species doesn't survive them, then they feel no loss, because it means they weren't strong enough. They won't chop down a tree any sooner than a Mielikkan, but they will kill a logger without warning if he encroaches on their turf, then wear their skin as a trophy. It's anathema to a Mielikkan, or Chauntean, but quite frankly, many city folk would be hard-pressed to see much difference between a druid of Jannath or one of Malar.
To artificially box them into different shaped packages and limit skillsets between druids of different faiths, simply to make a more pronounced distinction, doesn't really do justice for the players who should frankly be given the opportunity to roleplay themselves correctly. No different than when we used to only allow Tormish and Ilmateri clerics to cast restoration, and only Lovites and whatever else to cast Harm. Just like clerics are still clerics, druids are still druids. And the druids on FK are nerfed in their power enough from the D&D druid that to start a debate over giving them something like Animal Empathy frankly is silly.
I seriously doubt that a Malarite player would be using their animal empathy to befriend a little fuzzy squirrel. But I would easily see them befriending one of the bears or wolves that roam about the forest freely. They are predators, so is a Malarite, they are kindred spirits.
I could go into a whole dissertation on the dichotomy of Malarites vs. their Chauntean/Mielikkan counterparts, but I think I'd beat the issue saying too much. That, and it makes it easier for some to be able to vilify the Malarite by boxing him into this "destroy the forest" mentality that's a common, and it seems, actively encouraged misconception of the faith.
In short, Malarites are not on a mission to destroy nature... and the little piece in the ranger quest that has the segment to track down a Malarite who supposedly has this active intention to do so does not truly convey the intent of a Malarite. Malarites believe themselves to be the rightful stewards of the forest. They represent the savage, predatory side of nature, but they represent nature, nonetheless. They are not ANTI-nature. Try to argue with Danten once or twice, and you'll see the perfect presentation of the Malarite mindset. They believe the forest belongs to the fierce predators, the ones with the strength to survive, if a species doesn't survive them, then they feel no loss, because it means they weren't strong enough. They won't chop down a tree any sooner than a Mielikkan, but they will kill a logger without warning if he encroaches on their turf, then wear their skin as a trophy. It's anathema to a Mielikkan, or Chauntean, but quite frankly, many city folk would be hard-pressed to see much difference between a druid of Jannath or one of Malar.
To artificially box them into different shaped packages and limit skillsets between druids of different faiths, simply to make a more pronounced distinction, doesn't really do justice for the players who should frankly be given the opportunity to roleplay themselves correctly. No different than when we used to only allow Tormish and Ilmateri clerics to cast restoration, and only Lovites and whatever else to cast Harm. Just like clerics are still clerics, druids are still druids. And the druids on FK are nerfed in their power enough from the D&D druid that to start a debate over giving them something like Animal Empathy frankly is silly.
I seriously doubt that a Malarite player would be using their animal empathy to befriend a little fuzzy squirrel. But I would easily see them befriending one of the bears or wolves that roam about the forest freely. They are predators, so is a Malarite, they are kindred spirits.
"There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men."
Kregor - Ranger of Tangled Trees
Rozor - Lady Luck's Duelist
Tygen - Ranger-Bard of Mielikki
Kregor - Ranger of Tangled Trees
Rozor - Lady Luck's Duelist
Tygen - Ranger-Bard of Mielikki
God, I've waited for someone to say the things Kregor is saying for so long - on a lot of the points he touched. The Malarite issue, the druid issues themselves, and the fact that yeah, there are differences, but they aren't that drastic.
I definitely think that druids of Malar should have the animal empathy skill - the idea of a vendor is alright with me for various reasons, one of those being the current non-value of a druid's animal companion - they could be made stronger for vendors, comparable to how they are in DnD (they actually do make a difference), but I think the skill should be fixed proper.
I definitely think that druids of Malar should have the animal empathy skill - the idea of a vendor is alright with me for various reasons, one of those being the current non-value of a druid's animal companion - they could be made stronger for vendors, comparable to how they are in DnD (they actually do make a difference), but I think the skill should be fixed proper.
-
Mouat
- Sword Master
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:45 pm
- Location: Northern Forests near Luskan.
Let us not forget about the killer rabbits... beware the killer rabbits for they will hunt you down.
To be honest, as a non-FR person. I did not know a lot of what Kregor said to be true of Malarites. If what he says is true, then I guess druids of malar should get similar common skills/prayers as other druids.
To be honest, as a non-FR person. I did not know a lot of what Kregor said to be true of Malarites. If what he says is true, then I guess druids of malar should get similar common skills/prayers as other druids.
This quote actually made me laugh. Not just computer laugh, but really chuckle aloud. I can only assume it had the same affect on Kregor's player. Trust me, he's been saying this for a LONG time.God, I've waited for someone to say the things Kregor is saying for so long
Lathander,
Commander of Creativity
Commander of Creativity
Re: Druids of Malar
Okay, this is an older thread, but I saw no resolution to it, so I thought I'd give it a bump and my own 2 cents (sorry, didn't have change for the pennies).
Okay, so.. where a regular druid might be able to influence animals based on their 'kinship' to them, Malar druids would influence them based on being like an animal themself.. specifically a predatory one. Weaker animals will recognize a stronger predator, and this will affect their reaction.. in this case, the Malar druid would simply convnce the animal that it didn't mean it harm, by doing the exact opposite of what his impulses would tell him. <.< Then, once he got what he wanted from the animal, if the goal was short term, the Malar druid could walk up and break the creature's neck.. (Gasp, an evil character betraying their 'word' or 'bond'? Perish the thought!)Those Wacky guys at WotC wrote, courtesy of http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm wrote: Wild Empathy (Ex)
A druid can improve the attitude of an animal. This ability functions just like a Diplomacy check made to improve the attitude of a person. The druid rolls 1d20 and adds her druid level and her Charisma modifier to determine the wild empathy check result.
The typical domestic animal has a starting attitude of indifferent, while wild animals are usually unfriendly.
To use wild empathy, the druid and the animal must be able to study each other, which means that they must be within 30 feet of one another under normal conditions. Generally, influencing an animal in this way takes 1 minute but, as with influencing people, it might take more or less time.
A druid can also use this ability to influence a magical beast with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2, but she takes a -4 penalty on the check.