Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Druid roleplay and quest decisions

What choices make the most sense when playing as a druid?

1. The refugee quest in the Grove, the option to kill Kaga is still available, what to do in this case? Kill her and get exp points? And what will happen if we convince her not to side with the druids of shadows, will the quest be counted anyway or will it fail?

2. Owlbear's Lair: Is it more logical for a druid not to kill the beast at all and not send absolute neophytes there? Or can you lure them there and convince the bear to attack them? What to choose? I don't need a spear, I'm only interested in the exp points for the quest.

3. Quest with the theft of the statue of Silvanus, there is an opportunity to steal it even after the unique phrase that it is a sacred symbol. And after the refusal, Mol says that we do not have balls to do that. Would it be better to just not take the quest?

Well, you can make your own call, and if I were you I’d not worry about XP. There’s plenty of opportunity in Early Access to achieve maximum level without taking particular approaches to these quests.

Personally, on these questions:

(1) In my druid playthrough I convinced Kagha to turn away from the Shadow Druids, which is a viable way of completing the quest. But some druids might equally decide that she is turning against nature by attempting the Rite of Thorns and kill her if they can’t stop her, particularly if they’re not aware of outside influence. Or they might decide she’s right to protect the grove and side with her against the tieflings.
(2) An Owlbear isn’t strictly speaking an animal in the Forgotten Realms and is classed as a monster I believe. So some druids might decide to treat it as an animal and leave it alone, or hearing about the fact it’s been injured might go to try to help it at which point, depending on the dice, they might be forced to kill it in self-defence or just to back off and leave it. Others might see it as unnatural and kill it as a result. With respect to Edowin’s disciples, I’ve always found they hang well back, so I don’t think there’s a chance for a peaceful resolution with the Owlbear that has them die at its hands.
(3) Accepting the quest to steal the idol for Mol does seem a difficult decision for any druid, so personally I would forego that. A druid might decide to steal the idol because they don’t think those particular druids can be trusted with it, but then giving it to either Gale or Mol wouldn’t feel right to me, so I’d just be stuck with it. But again, it’s your RP and you can do whatever you like!

If I decide to convice her against shadow druids and accept the quest of her assasination, will i received exp and gauntlents from Zevlor?

I was playing with a friend who was playing a Druid in Multiplayer. We were NOT doing an RP run and he tends to be on the chaotic side (heavily) - but when we got to the Shattered Sanctum with Halsin he elected to "throw rocks at the caged bear with the Goblins"

Even for me I found that shocking. I had to ask him how he justified behaving that way as a Druid and he couldn't give me an answer.

I felt that at some point you just can't point to your CN alignment and use it as an excuse. I don't even think a CE Druid would do that.

It made me think about how there isn't an "Oathbreaker" for Druids, and that maybe there should be.

Granted he was drunk, but still.

You’ll get the gauntlets from Zevlor, yes, for resolving the situation in a way that lets the tieflings stay. And I assume XP though I’ve never paid attention to that.

Given I never play multiplayer I guess I haven’t earned an opinion, but somehow it feels as though there’s more obligation to be able to justify choices when playing with others than in single player. And I grant this would be a tough one. Perhaps if the druid didn’t think the stones would actually hurt the bear, just get him angry enough to break out of his cage? Still a huge stretch.

And yes, for druids and clerics (and possibly even rangers) it feels as though we need to commit to playing characters within certain boundaries, at least if we care about RP at all, given the game doesn’t have a mechanic for oathbreaker equivalents. I guess if we get multiclassing then we can just select a different class and progress in that instead, but that wouldn’t explain how we continue to access the divine powers we already had access to.

1. Given that we don't know which sort of circle MC is from, siding both with and against Kagha shouldn't be a problem.

However, there is a special reward only gainable through her death, and a different special reward only achieveable if you redeem her.

2. I couldn't bring myself to harm it with my druid, *but* druids don't normally consider monstrosities animals. You can do either again.

3. I don't think this sort of thing is easily RP able unless you have a chaotic evil character, or some very special backstory.

Druids get their magic from the gods (though they don't necessarily know it). Silvanus is one such god. Druids don't normally want to harm those. Or another good/neutral aligned circle, for that matter...

Exactly! Nothing currently prevents a Cleric of Sylvanus or Lathander from murdering the entire continent. Or a Druid from doing the same. I am a huge fan of the Oathbreaker system - no doubt it will get fine-tuned before release but the idea of being in a class that requires you follow certain guidelines is to me, an interesting and fun RP challenge. Although obviously tricky to implement, but not impossible.

And we have seen they have a system for re-leveling a character with a new subclass. Cleric would be easy, you get forced to pick one of the dark Gods like Tempus, Shar, or Bane. Druid is tricky though...there isn't any kind of Druid that turns against nature that I know of - but maybe in that case you become a Cleric of a Dark God instead.

Fun!

In 3.5 and earlier editions, druids were actually restricted to the neutral alignment axis, and would lose their Druid powers if they ever lost their neutral alignment. Chaotic neutral is a valid choice, but the way most people seem to view CN as the "lol, so random!" alignment is the real problem. Alignment restriction hasn't been a thing since 3.5, so most of that conflict possibility has been put into RP.

EDIT:
Druids who turn against the land are forced to re-level with Circle of the Blighted as their subclass.

1. I usually try to redeem Kagha. Druids don't usually take life needlessly. Plus it feels really in character to have what is basically a philosophical debate with her over the druidic teachings that she clings to so fervently. She is purposefully twisting her own god's teachings to justify an act that goes against her true convictions because she's afraid. Showing her the error in her interpretation and resolving the conflict via words feels very druidy.

Of course a more aggressive "survival of the fittest" druid might decide that a lengthy debate won't solve anything and prefer just to take her life in a contest of might. Druids are not necessarily pacifists. They aren't even necessarily kind.

2. The Owlbear is not a natural creature. It was made by a crazy wizard and is a threat to the actual environment that it exists in, similar to an invasive species. Killing it is a very druidic thing to do because in taking its life you're preserving the stability of the local ecosystem to which it does not belong. Killing the cub would also align with druidic teachings because while it is an innocent life it cannot do otherwise but grow into just as destructive a force as its mother was. This is part of the whole "druids aren't necessarily kind" bit above. The standard druidic alignment is neutral, not good. A neutral character will do something that may be morally wrong for what they consider to be a greater overall good.

3. The only reason I can see a druid stealing the idol is to stop the ritual if the attempt to stop Kagha fails. Beyond that, it's a sacred druidic relic that belongs to this circle. Stealing sacred artifacts from your fellow druid is generally considered "A dick move".

According to the Forgotten Realms wiki there’s some in-universe debate about where Owlbears actually came from. Though even if they were created by the gods or came from the Feywild that still that doesn’t negate the fact that they’re extremely destructive so I definitely agree it’s an acceptable druid action to decide culling is the best option.

Shadow Druids are your darker Druids (CN even). It’s easy to role play as one even though you may not become an official one.

1: Never confront Kagha about her helping the Shadow Druids. I would highly recommend finding all the clues about her deal with the Shadow Druids.
2: Halsin has shown his weakness by allowing the goblins to despoil the area his grove was to protect. Instead they hide like the prey they are. He has forfeited his right of leadership. A new loin will have to lead the pride.
3: Clear the goblin camp out and Kagha will take care of the rest and close the grove off by finishing the spell.

With the Shadow Druids now in charge, MAYBE (if Larian deems it) they will show up in a later act and give you the option to join the Cloakwood Circle.

Kick!!!!😜

New multiplayer rule for your list: Don’t throw rocks at bears!


Don’t kill owlbears! They are adorable! You will also be able to wild shape into an owlbear later.

Removing Kagha by force should not be too much of a headache. Because it seems to be canon that she became a Shadow Druid:
https://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=563162

Of course, you can also spare her and have Halsin banish her. She could be one of several characters you could meet again later.

Not bad, but I feel it doesn't quite cover throwing rocks at bears. I mean, that's just evil.

Oh, interesting. That would align well with what can happen to the grove if things don’t go well there, and perhaps even with the Shadow Curse, so it feels as though there should be some way to connect a class like that to the Forgotten Realms lore even if it was originally developed for Critical Role. I guess there are various reasons why it wouldn’t be practical to incorporate, but I could see it being a fun divergent path for a druid if it were.


But yes, inclusion of a class like that wouldn’t absolve a druid of just acting like a dick and not like a druid at all. I don’t see it as high priority to better accommodate this kind of play - in general I’m of the view that if roleplay is important to you, then you should pick a class you’re happy to roleplay in the first place - but do agree it would be a nice-to-have feature. I’d be okay with a druid or cleric who lost the favour of nature/their deity just losing all their class and spell abilities until they could find an appropriate arch-druid or temple and then get the opportunity to repent and reswear (or swear to a different god) or be forced to choose a different class.

The thing is that a shadow Druid doesn’t have any issues killing off a “fellow” Druid that doesn’t agree or take to their extreme tenants. There are ample enough clues that the imprisioned bear is Halsin. A Shadow aligned Druid would likely throw those rocks and expect him to attack back. Using the other Gabos as cannon fodder to weaken him before you make the final strike. Letting Halsin live will negate Kagha’s attempts at converting the grove.

I think this illustrates the problem of trying to have a computer game as opposed to a human DM manage adherence to a class, as we’ve already seen with the paladin. There are going to be relatively few occasions where simply doing something is going to clearly break any covenants without taking into consideration why. I do very much hope that we’ll get more opportunity to express our motivations in game in the full release as I feel that’s often lacking currently, but I’m not sure it would be enough to allow the game to make uncontroversial decisions about when the player had gone too far. I certainly won’t blame Larian for saving themselves the headache, and reserving their efforts on this front for the class to which oaths are the most important.