lore behind Druids and Shamans as they exist in EQ2 -- two curious questions

[dalaorn_eq2]

<div></div>Just something I've thought about.  Why are druids set up as a neutral class in EQ2, such that the Overlord allows these tree-huggers within his city walls?  From my understanding they've always been traditionally "goodie", or am I mistaken?And, on another note, considering Norrath's playable civilizations are more "modern" than they were in EQOA and EQLive-- that is, both major civilizations your toons start in are bustling cities whose cultures I would think are far removed from the influence of what you might call their "primitive" predecessor cultures, why are Shamans still in the game as a playable class?  Shamans made sense when races had their own civilizations, the primitive ones still far away from the sprawling places.  My best guess is that shamans are the only way for some races (even though anyone can be a shaman now, but let's forget about that detail to simplify things) to pass down their folklore and legend from generation to generation, when said races would traditionally rather <i>not</i> use bards to carry that task -- Iksars, Trolls, and Ogres for example.<span></span>Is there present-day ingame lore on Wardens and Furies, and Mystics and Defilers, that smooths out these curiosities into something believable as to why these healer classes exist where and how they currently exist?  I'm guessing maybe their subclass quests at lv 18/19/whatever had a bit of that, but after LU19 I'm not sure if that dialogue can be revisited again.<div></div>

[Cusashorn]

<div>Actually druids have always been considered a neutral class in most forms of fantasy.</div><div> </div><div>Just because they focus around nature doesn't mean they can't be corrupted and evil. When was the last time a tornado ripped through your house?</div><div> </div><div> </div><div>Hello? Hurricane Katrina?</div><div> </div><div> </div><div>Please stop me when you get the hint.</div><div> </div><div> </div><div> </div><div>As for shamans.... Well both the druid and shaman classes in this game in general have no lore behind them. There's no plausible reason for them to exist in a bustling city except that being able to use and control the spirits themselves is another boundry that goes beyond nature and magic.</div>

[lillin]

<div>Unkempt druids were kinda nasty if i remember right, in that i mean they didnt like the good druids of kelethin and such.</div><div> </div><div>But just think about it this way....... Druids and shamans even in our reality many centuries ago were persecuted for thier beliefs in different gods and such.  Many people who are persecuted will go where ever they can survive and worship in reasonable peace.  In eq1 druids could only be played by good alligned races while shamans could be played by trolls and iksar.</div><div> </div><div>Also remember this world has just went through a big event.  Big rocks came down and went boom.  In times of such peril even the coldest of hearts will reach out to those who seek help.  Maybe for a reason =)</div>

[ncrawler]

For me(not sure this add up whit true lore, but why I belive they stil arund)Druids... Both city need the forces of natur arund em to be controled and used for the porptus of protecting there city. even LUcan understand this. so a druid is not only good, they yes protecte land of all but some in the way of peace otehrs in the way of war. SO they still fit in both city if you as me.Shaman... Yes a primtive priste they was but evoled they have. in the world of presante day teh gods are goon and not much to do. ofcures cleriecs and crusiders still belive in em but most commond men has seem to forgot em. what they dont have forgot is there famley that died in battel, something the shaman can bring em. a  mystice is given the power of the lost, and can make the dead abit closer to does that has lost em, then agen a difelier takes what he need to bring more power to him self and his ally from the dead, they use the power of whats lost so the once that are are can go futer.I wuld say both of em mix well in the world as it is, evven there rolls has been change.but I agree not all races shuld be abel to be all classes, some classes are more suitabel for a wood elf then a high elf and so on.and also dream taht one point some of the old town wil be rebuild maybe undercontrol how the once that rull today or only by pay tributed to the major cityes. maybe next expanansion we see 2 of the old city adn they get player "build" whit a life event wuld been awsome<div></div>

[SisterTheresa]

<div></div><blockquote><p></p><hr><p>ncrawler wrote:<snip></p><p><font color="#ffff00">but I agree not all races should be able to be all classes, some classes are more suitable for a wood elf than a high elf and so on.</font><snip></p><div></div><hr></blockquote><p><font size="2" face="Comic Sans MS">That was the premise of EQ1, but they wanted to change that for EQ2.  I think that is what brought a lot of people when the game came out.  I mean, in EQ1 people complained that if Gnomes could be Necros why not ShadowKnights?  Took a while but they put them in.  Same with Halfling and Rangers.</font></p><p><font size="2" face="Comic Sans MS">As for Druids and Shamans ... without trying to start a debate, I personally think that anything can be neutral.  What I mean is, just because someone is a Shaman doesn't mean they use that ability to do all good.</font></p>

[vinterskugge]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>lillin wrote:<div>In eq1 druids could only be played by good alligned races while shamans could be played by trolls and iksar.</div><hr></blockquote>Barbarians and Iksar could be shamans, and I think Frogloks could too.

[Cusashorn]

<div>Shamans were played by the less civilized races. Barbarians, Frogloks, Trolls, Ogres, and Iksar.</div>

[Pyrrhx]

<div></div><div>Why are druids set up as a neutral class in EQ2?</div><div> </div><blockquote dir="ltr"><div>All about balance.  Sometimes ya gotta burn a forest down to get it to grow... It's all about maintaining nature's delicate balance.</div><div> </div></blockquote><div>why are Shamans still in the game as a playable class?</div><div> </div><blockquote dir="ltr"><div>If you consider that even in NYC some people practice~ Santeria, Hoodoo, and other various folk practices~ the idea that some people practice shamanism isn't so far fetched. </div></blockquote>

[Trepan]

When the magic from the Gods left the world, I'd think that the Shaman would have come into their own.   Gods come and go, but family is family.   Great uncle Bob is still dead, but he's also still your great Uncle.   Shaman still had spirits they could call on when all other forms of power were faltering and dying.And its not just ancestors that Shaman deal with.  It is the spirit of THINGS.   Rivers have spirits.  Trees have spirits.  Mountains, valleys, and yes even CITIES have spirits.   The bigger the city, the more a shaman is needed to help each facet of that entity learn to cope with the rest of it.<div></div>

[TaleraRis]

Trepan hit it on the head. Shamans were the ones who dealt with spirits. Spirits aren't necessarily good or evil all the time. Sometimes they're just spirits. Shamans were the EQ Live link to a race's ancestors, so I can see where they would still be important now.Shamans in general were typically neutral. The frogloks under Mith Marr were mostly concerned with ancestor worship. And the barbarians held ancestor worship high, plus their shamans worshiped a neutral entity, the Tribunal.  Even with the evil-aligned shamans like trolls and ogres theirs was much more a talent that permeated all the land, rather than taking a side.The same goes with some druids in EQ Live. Tunare's were good, of course, and might not be welcome in an evil city like Freeport. But Karana's druid weren't necessarily all goodness and light. They worshiped the god of storms, which is again something of a rather more neutral bent. Storms can be good and beneficial, making land fertile and lush, or they can be destructive.<div></div>