PDA

View Full Version : Limiting Wild Shape?



Woodsman
2009-07-22, 11:26 AM
Basically, the idea was to limit the number of animals a druid can wild shape into, but not by HD. The idea was they gained one every druid level (after getting wild shape, so a lv 20 druid would have 16, lv 19 would have 15, etc.), they have to be able to wild shape into it, and it cannot exceed their HD (as normal).

It's just an idea, I'm not sure if it's a good one or a bad one. An attempt at trying to lessen the brokenness of wild shape, I'll call it.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-07-22, 11:49 AM
Well, most druids have one or two combat forms they rely on and one or two utility forms, changing into others only if necessary, so this would limit their ability to pull weird abilities out of thin air but not necessarily their combat or sneaking ability. It could work if you combined it with a "must personally encounter wild shape form" clause, but that's a bit too swingy for good balance.

Random832
2009-07-22, 11:55 AM
Technically, "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with." is RAW - so you could require a Knowledge: Nature check. That just means they'll max the skill and add the form out of combat so they can take ten, but it's a start.

Starscream
2009-07-22, 12:10 PM
Yeah, most druids only need a few forms. A couple of good combat ones, something that flies, swims and burrows, and you're pretty much set.

AstralFire
2009-07-22, 12:17 PM
Basically, the idea was to limit the number of animals a druid can wild shape into, but not by HD. The idea was they gained one every druid level (after getting wild shape, so a lv 20 druid would have 16, lv 19 would have 15, etc.), they have to be able to wild shape into it, and it cannot exceed their HD (as normal).

It's just an idea, I'm not sure if it's a good one or a bad one. An attempt at trying to lessen the brokenness of wild shape, I'll call it.

Any particular reason you're not going to use the PHB II variant?

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-07-22, 12:24 PM
Generally a Druid will want:
Charger form(big cat/triceratops)
Bruiser/grappler form(Bear/crocodile)
Water form(croc)
Scouting flyer(bird)
combat flyer(dire bird/bat)
Indoor scout(cat/rat/dog)

Limiting the number of forms is going to cut down on access to the more estoric options, but all that really means is that you face the same overpowered lightning-spitting animal in combat for about 5 levels, rather than a different one occasionally because the player was in the mood for a new way of stomping encounters.

woodenbandman
2009-07-22, 12:27 PM
Wildshape is BANNED. BANNED, do you hear me?

Really though the choice between wildshape and spells should be one that every druid makes. They either get wildshape OR Spells, not both. And ditch those broken spells on the list.

Actually, you know what? Just use Spirit Shaman (CDiv) as a replacement for the druid class. Done.

Woodsman
2009-07-22, 12:37 PM
I prefer the Shapeshifting variant, but this is just an idea I had.

evil-frosty
2009-07-22, 12:44 PM
You could use the 2nd edition version of wildshape. Where you get to pick one bird, one reptile and one mammal. Then one more for any category they choose. So for instance they could have for their shapes a hawk, gecko, bear and then maybe a wolf. It severely limits how many shapes they get and might make them think carefully about what they choose.

Woodsman
2009-07-22, 12:46 PM
That's more akin to the shapeshifter variant from PHB II.

Rhiannon87
2009-07-22, 12:47 PM
I'd enforce the "can only wildshape into a creature they're familiar with" thing pretty strictly. When I played a MoMF druid, my DM ruled that I had to have seen the creature to wildshape into it. Considering where my character was from (northern forest/plains areas), this limited my choices somewhat... but as I adventured, I encountered new creatures, and was able to turn into them. Making the "familiar with" thing based on knowledge (nature) works mechanically, I guess, but it's kind of asking for abuse. If you really want to limit it, enforce some RP and backstory.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-07-22, 12:49 PM
You could use the 2nd edition version of wildshape. Where you get to pick one bird, one reptile and one mammal. Then one more for any category they choose. So for instance they could have for their shapes a hawk, gecko, bear and then maybe a wolf. It severely limits how many shapes they get and might make them think carefully about what they choose.Dire (big cat), Dire Eagle, Giant Crocodile. Form 4 to taste. You've reduced flavor of druids, cutout a few options, but in-combat they're going to be just as effective.

Woodsman
2009-07-22, 12:53 PM
If you really want to limit it, enforce some RP and backstory.

Now that's my style. I'm not afraid to say "Give me a good reason" for a player's actions OOC. Often times when I ask this, they stop and say "Nevermind."

Oslecamo
2009-07-22, 12:53 PM
Dire (big cat), Dire Eagle, Giant Crocodile. Form 4 to taste. You've reduced flavor of druids, cutout a few options, but in-combat they're going to be just as effective.

Actually, since a druid won't be going to turn into a dire anything any time soon, their combat power got a big hit untill higher levels.

Anyway, best is to simply the DM discuss a balanced fauna with the druid player, and have the druid only have acess from that fauna, since it's the only one he'll be familiar with, having grown on it.

JonestheSpy
2009-07-22, 12:54 PM
I'd enforce the "can only wildshape into a creature they're familiar with" thing pretty strictly. When I played a MoMF druid, my DM ruled that I had to have seen the creature to wildshape into it. Considering where my character was from (northern forest/plains areas), this limited my choices somewhat... but as I adventured, I encountered new creatures, and was able to turn into them. Making the "familiar with" thing based on knowledge (nature) works mechanically, I guess, but it's kind of asking for abuse. If you really want to limit it, enforce some RP and backstory.

Really, that's all you have to do. Especially if you - quite logically - assume that 'familiar' means 'has some actual knowledge about how said animal is put together', not just encountered in combat once (though if the druid took the time for study and dissection of a slain unfamiliar animal, that should definitely qualify).

Just because dinosuars are listed as possibilities doesn't mean they should be auotmatic - escecially those munchkiny later-MM edition ones.

AstralFire
2009-07-22, 01:45 PM
Now that's my style. I'm not afraid to say "Give me a good reason" for a player's actions OOC. Often times when I ask this, they stop and say "Nevermind."

I'm rather blessed in that my PCs always have a good RP reason for when they do something like this.

I think the fact that I open up interest threads for campaigns doubly emphasizing RP and the fact that I both know how to optimize and spend a lot of houserules on killing cheese tends to attract PCs of a similar stripe.

daggaz
2009-07-22, 01:54 PM
I ran a game where the only decent player was a munchkin as well, and he picked druid as his class.

I told him from the start, no problem, but..

1) There is no such thing as natural spell.

2) You must be very familiar with a creature to wild shape into it. Write me up a good backstory, and Ill toss you a few forms to start with based on your "upbringing," but any additions have to have been personally encountered. No rolling knowledge nature checks. You find it, you watch it, you study it, (fighting it will give a bonus) and you can make a wisdom check to see if you have garnered enough knowledge to make the transformation.

It worked pretty good and he was by far the dominant party member, but alas the group melted right when things were going to get interesting.

I think my favorite part was when he surprised the tuckers kobolds by casting sleet storm in their tunnels and then switched into a crocodile to chomp at their fleshy bits as they were washed past him.. He didnt know since that was our last session, but I gave him kudos bonus xp for that one.

AstralFire
2009-07-22, 01:58 PM
If he's a 'decent player', then he's an optimizer or powergamer, not a munchkin. While definitions for all of these vary, it's generally accepted that a munchkin is someone who has little redeeming value as a player in any way.

RTGoodman
2009-07-22, 01:58 PM
Here's a big problem with the "must be familiar with the animal" rule - spontaneous conversion of summon nature's ally spells.

As soon as he hits 5th level, a Druid can spend the day summoning critters, probably 8-10 a day. (Probably 4 from the 1st-level list (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonNaturesAllyI.htm), if he isn't familiar with them, 3 from the 2nd-level list (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonNaturesAllyII.htm), and 2 from the 3rd-level list (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonNaturesAllyIII.htm), assuming bonus spells from high Wis.)

Given a week (can be done "off-screen" I suppose if you enforce training times), he can know most of the most commonly used forms (lion, crocodile, dire bat, black bear, and so on).

daggaz
2009-07-22, 02:00 PM
If he's a 'decent player', then he's an optimizer or powergamer, not a munchkin. While definitions for all of these vary, it's generally accepted that a munchkin is someone who has little redeeming value as a player in any way.

well yeah ok this isnt exactly the place to get into either a) your definitions or b) how exactly my friend fits them or not.. .so yeah thanks tho for the input. I will write that down for all future use I can assure you.

@rtg0092 Heh thats funny, thats exactly the fist thing he brought up. I just said no. No because the whole point is to limit the ability, but if you really really want some fluff to explain it, well then the summoned monsters act differently, almost as if they were under your control, and the magic behind actually changing forms requires a very natural, some would say druidic knowledge of the creature in its most natural and normal environment and behaviors. The munchkin in him squirmed, but he accepted it for balance reasons.

Ridureyu
2009-07-22, 02:12 PM
Perhaps it might be a good idea to limit Wild Shape, or at least talk with the player before he picks a new form. I mean...


Level 7 - Druid 5/Master of Many Forms 2

Wild Shape, Assume Supernatural Ability, Aberration Blood, Aberration Wild Shape

BECOME A BEHOLDER!!!

paddyfool
2009-07-22, 02:20 PM
Making Natural Spell a +2 Metamagic helps too - it isn't necessary to outright ban it.

daggaz
2009-07-22, 02:21 PM
Heh... I cringe at anything that includes pieces of PunPun in its build... you just know its meant to be over the top as written. Master of Many Forms... eeeesh!

Woodsman
2009-07-22, 02:23 PM
Hey, when I smell cheese, I'll release the dire rats. not on the characters, but the players, the puny first-level commoners. :smalltongue:

I'm not afraid to use every resource at my disposal to send a hint. Especially Spell Compendium. Antimagic Ray...

I mean, I've run into (as a player) an Undead dual-wielding Maximized Black Blades of Destruction. Of course, it was epic, but still, it was crazy.

And of course, I'll have a perfectly legit IC reason. Aberrations are killed on sight in the world (My world. Needs a homebrew thread, I should think), so Aberration Wild Shape isn't necessarily a good idea.

That, and they could only become a Gauth at lv 7. HD restrictions, mate.

JellyPooga
2009-07-22, 02:23 PM
Heh... I cringe at anything that includes pieces of PunPun in its build... you just know its meant to be over the top as written. Master of Many Forms... eeeesh!

What's wrong with MoMF? Sure it's breakable, but then so is everything (more or less)...I always thought it quite a balanced PrC myself...

daggaz
2009-07-22, 02:27 PM
What's wrong with MoMF? Sure it's breakable, but then so is everything (more or less)...I always thought it quite a balanced PrC myself...

Nothing is _wrong_ with it, per say.. its just a PrC that is focused almost exclusively around one of the most overpowered and breakable mechanics in the whole game, namely superior shape changing. So as soon as you see this, you have to accept the fact that the game must be high powered for it not to be completely overpowered, and you have to be very careful that it still isnt pushed into the realms of God-destroying-gouda.

Woodsman
2009-07-22, 02:36 PM
Striking some of the aspects of MoMF (Shifter's Speech, Fast Wild Shape, Evershifting Form) could make it better, but it's still pretty powerful.

I'd honestly like to try the class, but not to break the game. I'm not a munchkin; I'm in it to have fun with myself and others.

AstralFire
2009-07-22, 02:39 PM
Shifting (like most supernatural power) is really, really easy to uncheese if you're playing just 'to be cool' - when I was new to 3.0, the druid actually seemed terribly weak (even with Natural Spell, first released in Masters of the Wild) because my first instinct was to shapeshift into -birds-. I found myself very underwhelmed with my combat performance as a result. :smallamused: Everything was birds - I had no interest in summon nature's ally because, well, another bird or 1d4+1 of them weren't all that good.

Gnaeus
2009-07-22, 02:45 PM
Why would you NERF MoMF? Thats rediculous!

MoMF is WEAKER than Druid 20. Weaker by, oh, the difference between 5th level and 9th level spells. Also weaker by the difference between a pet tiger and a pet T-Rex. And you have to take 2 useless feats to even enter it! A MoMF can't do much of anything, with all 10 levels of the class, that a core druid can't do at level 17, and he is way behind in all other areas.

Unless you are also heavily nerfing Druid, Wizard, Cleric, Sorcerer, and all the other Tier 1 and 2 classes, taking stuff away from MoMF makes no sense at all. If I wanted to balance it, I would take away the entry requirements, and thank the player for not taking the route that leads to 9th level spells.

Woodsman
2009-07-22, 02:49 PM
Yeah, I noticed that right after making the post. It is 9th level spell combos that break the game (I believe).

Shapechange, of course, requires 1,500 gp each time. The feats are a bit pointless, though. Well Alertness is.

Ridureyu
2009-07-22, 02:56 PM
Of course, what's unsaid is the REASON for becoming an Eye Tyrant. I wouldn't use it to dominate combat, or break the game, or "Win" at D&D. I would choose to become a Beholder when:


1. Talking with the King.

2. Ordering a drink from the bar wench.

3. In an inn room with the bar wench.

4. Helping at the orphanage.

5. In the middle of the Temple of Pelor, right after saying, "And if what I say is not true, may Pelor strike me AARRRGGGHBLABLABLABLAAAAAAAA!!"

Gnaeus
2009-07-22, 03:36 PM
Yeah, I noticed that right after making the post. It is 9th level spell combos that break the game (I believe).

I think most people would agree with that.


Shapechange, of course, requires 1,500 gp each time. The feats are a bit pointless, though. Well Alertness is.

1. Thats a focus, not a material component. You just have to own the circlet. Even if it were a per cast cost, it is still cheaper than a 5th level scroll. He should more than make up for that in the first encounter.

2. An 18th level druid, with a rod of metamagic (extend) casts shapechange that lasts 6 hours. He only has to cast it once per adventuring day. If he wants to go non-core in his cheese, he goes Cleric1/Druid 19 and casts Shapechange (persisted from Divine metamagic) first thing every morning.

3. Even without the shapechange, there is nothing MoMF can do that matches the druid 20 wildshaping into an air elemental and hovering over his enemies casting 9th level spells.

Rhiannon87
2009-07-22, 09:36 PM
Perhaps it might be a good idea to limit Wild Shape, or at least talk with the player before he picks a new form. I mean...


Level 7 - Druid 5/Master of Many Forms 2

Wild Shape, Assume Supernatural Ability, Aberration Blood, Aberration Wild Shape

BECOME A BEHOLDER!!!

As I recall, you get the ability to turn into aberrations as an MoMF at 6th level of the PrC. My druid wanted to turn into a beholder, but that whole "familiar with the creature" thing bit me in the @$$. There was no logical argument for my character ever having SEEN one; thus, no beholder eye-ray fun for me. Sigh.

aje8
2009-07-22, 09:54 PM
For the record MoMF is generally considered weak compared to straight Druid 20. Beaten to the punch.

In fact one of the ideas I would suggest for druid would be at lv. 5 pick EITHER regular druid progression w/o wildshape or MoMF progression.

Pun-Pun is a kobold paladin 1. Not a MoMF.

Ungvar
2009-07-24, 11:10 PM
Why does anyone want to limit Wildshape? That's the thing that makes the Druid different!! Take that away, and he's just a cleric of Mother Nature. There are plenty of ways to balance it out. Slow down spell level progression, take away all the direct damage spells from his spell-list, employ the Natural Spell metamagic change that was mentioned above.

And limiting the forms of wildshape is just going to encourage the focus on combat. I'm playing a Druid 9/MoMF 2 right now, and the best thing about it is the ability to be sort of a super doppleganger. When you want to determine the plans of an enemy warlord, it's pure sweetness to wildshape into the form of his own dog, and wag your tail as you overhear him laying it all out for his commanders.

grautry
2009-07-24, 11:45 PM
Strictly enforcing familiarity with the animal doesn't really work.

1. Knowledge: Nature that is effectively superhuman for a mid-level druid. If that doesn't work:
2. Summon Nature's Ally Lists, as mentioned. For animals unavailable on the list:
3. MM2 gives you a method for purchasing a warbeast animal(which is biologically no different than base animals, the only difference is that it's exceptionally well-bred and well trained). If magic items are available for purchase in your games then you have no excuse not to give players the opportunity to purchase whatever animal they wish.

It has some cost, true(50gp/HD if less than 3 HD, 100 gp + 75/HD for 4+) but he'll just purchase whatever animal he wants to have.

The only thing you'll really accomplish is - as has been mentioned - reducing the coolness and the flavour of the druid. You won't change a thing about the power of Wildshape.

Saph
2009-07-25, 01:16 AM
Limit Wildshape to no dinosaurs and Core only and call it a day. This also cuts down on the DM's workload so that he doesn't have to look up the Dire Okapi in Monster Folio VII just because the Druid's player wanted the special "Okapi Sense" ability that it gets.

Note that even with those restrictions, the druid is still very, very good, but manageable. If you want to seriously limit the druid's power, just use the PHB II Shapeshift variant.

- Saph

mcl01
2009-07-25, 01:29 AM
As mentioned earlier, the quickest fix I believe is the Shapeshifting Variant in PHBII. Vastly simplifies WS and makes it less abusable.

AstralFire
2009-07-25, 08:29 AM
I believe Woodsman's aware of the variant, he was trying to see what could be done to salvage the original(ish, since Wild Shape's base mechanic is Alter Self, not polymorph anymore) mechanic.

Mr.Moron
2009-07-25, 08:37 AM
Leave things otherwise alone, and change the durations.

Small/Tiny = 1min/Level
Medium = 1round/level
Large = 1round/2 levels
Huge/Plant/Elemental = 1 round/4levels

Strike Natural spell from the feat list.

Ungvar
2009-07-25, 08:49 AM
Limit Wildshape to no dinosaurs and Core only and call it a day. This also cuts down on the DM's workload so that he doesn't have to look up the Dire Okapi in Monster Folio VII just because the Druid's player wanted the special "Okapi Sense" ability that it gets.

Note that even with those restrictions, the druid is still very, very good, but manageable. If you want to seriously limit the druid's power, just use the PHB II Shapeshift variant.

- Saph

The DM is already screwing himself up big-time if he's the one looking up form stats for the player. If the player wants a form, the player does the research. In fact, another good way of limiting wildshape would be to rule that the player has to fill out a complete character sheet (aside from stuff like inventory) for every form he wants to use. Simple laziness will itself be an effective restraint on the player's form repertoire.

And as an aside, druids don't get the senses of the animals they wildshape into. I think it's ridiculous, but if you become a bat, you still don't get the blindsense.

AstralFire
2009-07-25, 08:53 AM
The DM is already screwing himself up big-time if he's the one looking up form stats for the player. If the player wants a form, the player does the research. In fact, another good way of limiting wildshape would be to rule that the player has to fill out a complete character sheet (aside from stuff like inventory) for every form he wants to use. Simple laziness will itself be an effective restraint on the player's form repertoire.

And as an aside, druids don't get the senses of the animals they wildshape into. I think it's ridiculous, but if you become a bat, you still don't get the blindsense.

There are feats to get around the latter issue.

For the former part, by 'look up' he didn't mean 'hunt down the best stats' (though I often do this for my players, as many are not optimizers) he meant 'read for yourself', which I think every DM should do, so they don't get a nasty surprise. And you'd be surprised just how industrious people can be to get a power boost sometime... copying a sheet down straight from the MM and adding in your own Base Attack will not take long.

Glyde
2009-07-25, 09:15 AM
If its a dinosaur and there are no dinosaurs, you can't turn into a dinosaur.

Ungvar
2009-07-25, 09:45 AM
There are feats to get around the latter issue.

For the former part, by 'look up' he didn't mean 'hunt down the best stats' (though I often do this for my players, as many are not optimizers) he meant 'read for yourself', which I think every DM should do, so they don't get a nasty surprise. And you'd be surprised just how industrious people can be to get a power boost sometime... copying a sheet down straight from the MM and adding in your own Base Attack will not take long.

There's a spell that gives you the senses of the animal you become, Enhanced Wild Shape, but I don't know of any feat that gives you the senses of the animal you become, unless you mean Exhalted Wildshape.

And I understood he didn't mean hunt down the best stats for the player. I'm saying, if the player says he wildshapes into a dire ocelot, he has to have all the stats for the DM to see right then. He shouldn't be telling the DM, "I'm a Dire Ocelot now, you can find out what I can do if you go to X page of Y book".

Copying 1 sheet of the MM is no sweat. Copying 5 sheets is not so bad. Copying 10 sheets is reasonable. Copying 20+ sheets really starts getting tiresome. That's what I mean about it being self-limiting.

The variety of wildshape is what makes it interesting. If you limit it, players will just choose combat forms, and they won't think about creative, roleplaying ways to use it.

AstralFire
2009-07-25, 09:48 AM
The people who really want powerful combat forms only need to copy a handful at most to begin with if they did their research, is the issue.

IMO, there's no real good universally applicable way to limit core Wild Shape without just holding the player to not being a jerk. Which usually worked for me. Last time I ran D&D, I used the pHB2 variant though.

Ungvar
2009-07-25, 10:07 AM
If the player is copying down a handful of the really powerful forms he wants, I guess I just don't see the problem with that. They make their copies, the DM looks them over, and that's that. If there's a specific form in Savage Races of Faerun Monster Folio 6.5 that the DM feels is unbalancing, just don't allow it. Say it doesn't exist in your world.

Also, another way to limit wildshape is to say you can't assume the same form twice in one day.

AstralFire
2009-07-25, 10:09 AM
I'd say all that ends up doing is hurting the "OOH THAT WAS AN AWESOME MONSTER I WANNA TURN INTO I- ooh, what does THIS megafauna do?" druids and doing nothing to actually limit the power of an optimizing druid, which is the intent of the OP.

grautry
2009-07-25, 10:34 AM
If the player is copying down a handful of the really powerful forms he wants, I guess I just don't see the problem with that. They make their copies, the DM looks them over, and that's that. If there's a specific form in Savage Races of Faerun Monster Folio 6.5 that the DM feels is unbalancing, just don't allow it. Say it doesn't exist in your world.

Also, another way to limit wildshape is to say you can't assume the same form twice in one day.

Once again, that won't really change much. Straight from druid handbook, best forms around level ~8-12:

Grappling:
- Brown bear.
- Dire lion.

Charger:
- Sabre-tooth lion. Can be rare.
- Dire tiger.

Trampler forms - those, admittedly are the rare ones.

Defensive:
- Dire Bat.
- Legendary eagle.
- Treant.

Aerial:
- Dire bat.
- Dire eagle.

Aquatic:
- Polar bear.
- Giant octopus. Could be rare I suppose.
etc. I could list more forms but you can just look it up.

The point I'm trying to make is that for almost every conceivable application of wildshape, you can find multiple and fairly common forms that you can turn into. Even if each one isn't absolutely, perfectly optimized to the last +1, they will still be very, very strong.

So really, neither of your proposals "fixes" wildshape.

If you want to limit wildshape then just go for the PHBII variant. Though one thing that always made me laugh about this one though is that they called it an "Alternative Class Feature" with a straight face, when it's really a huge nerf(get a weaker wildshape and cough up your animal companion and spellcasting in forms, sign up now!).

But, if you want to limit wildshape, that's the way to go. Though I at least wouldn't deny the druid his animal companion.

Ungvar
2009-07-25, 06:35 PM
I know there are powerful forms, but they're only REALLY powerful because the druid is also a spellcaster. All those creatures you listed? None are above a CR 8, and most are CR 4 or below.

I think our difference is that you think wildshape needs to be fixed mechanically, and I don't. Sure, there are things a DM can insist upon to prevent the player from giving him homework, but wildshape itself is fine. If you think the druid is overpowered because of the combination of wildshape and being a full caster, I'd say that fine, fix the overpowered druid by messing with the spellcasting, not the wildshape. Limiting the wildshape is just making the druid more like a cleric, and if you wanted to be more like a cleric, be a cleric.

Here's a hypothetical: Imagine a Druid 15 faces off against a Druid 5/ Master of Many Forms 10. Who do you think is going to win? The full Druid with his fully powered Animal Companion and his 8 levels of spells are going to TOAST the Druid/MoMF in whatever form he takes. The full Druid wouldn't even need to using his own wildshape.

Wildshape isn't overpowered, spellcasting is.

And are you sure the Druid Handbook is right that those forms are all for Level 8-12? The Treant is a Huge plant, and Druids don't get huge until 15th level. The the Dire Tiger is a 16 HD, animal, so that's level 16. Only way to get those before is with items or PrCs

Ungvar
2009-07-25, 06:44 PM
I'd say all that ends up doing is hurting the "OOH THAT WAS AN AWESOME MONSTER I WANNA TURN INTO I- ooh, what does THIS megafauna do?" druids and doing nothing to actually limit the power of an optimizing druid, which is the intent of the OP.

I guess I'm just trying to change the general perception that wildshape is overpowered, and needs to be toned down. A Dire Bear wouldn't be a challenge to higher level monsters. It's when the Dire Bear is airwalking, buffing himself, calling down lighting, and baleful polymorphing that he becomes a heavy hitter.

Limiting wildshape limits what makes the druid different from other casters. You CAN give up spellcasting instead, is all I'm saying.

Eldariel
2009-07-26, 09:29 AM
I guess I'm just trying to change the general perception that wildshape is overpowered, and needs to be toned down. A Dire Bear wouldn't be a challenge to higher level monsters. It's when the Dire Bear is airwalking, buffing himself, calling down lighting, and baleful polymorphing that he becomes a heavy hitter.

One other big problem is, Wildshape has broken mechanics. It means you can ignore two of your stats entirely and one of your stats partially, making a 1/1/14/ Druid almost as good as an 18/18/14 Druid.

Martial types need to pick up huge Str from level 1 and put their level-ups to it to keep it up to the level, while Druid just keeps picking bigger and stronger Wildshape-forms, getting all that for free. Like, it's possible for a Fighter to get Str 26 by level 8 (you gotta be Orc, get a +2 item, start with 8 and put both your level-ups to Str) and Large (Enlarge Person, Permanencied by an NPC - buffs the Str to 28), but a Druid doesn't need to do anything to reach the same number. And then Druid can have enchantment bonus on top of that.

The Wildshape/Bite of the X-mechanics of giving a numeric enchantment boost instead of replacing a stat function far better as they mean a Druid needs to invest in his physicals to be a killing machine. It's still a question of whether having all modes of movement, huge natural armor, speed increases, pounce, etc. at your fingertips for hours/day with one ability is too good, but at least that change forces Druids interested in fighting beyond level 5 to pick up related stats and care for physicals instead of just getting all those abilities for free regardless of magic gear and stats due to a class feature.


Note that this is less of an issue in high stat games, but as obviously few games go over 4d6b3 or 32pb, this is relevant.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 11:53 AM
One other big problem is, Wildshape has broken mechanics. It means you can ignore two of your stats entirely and one of your stats partially, making a 1/1/14/ Druid almost as good as an 18/18/14 Druid.

If the DM is allowing anything close to that kind of point buy, he doesn't care a whit about balance anyway.


Martial types need to pick up huge Str from level 1 and put their level-ups to it to keep it up to the level, while Druid just keeps picking bigger and stronger Wildshape-forms, getting all that for free. Like, it's possible for a Fighter to get Str 26 by level 8 (you gotta be Orc, get a +2 item, start with 8 and put both your level-ups to Str) and Large (Enlarge Person, Permanencied by an NPC - buffs the Str to 28), but a Druid doesn't need to do anything to reach the same number. And then Druid can have enchantment bonus on top of that.

There's a lot more to combat than just strength. Druids have a 3/4 BAB, and a lower hit die than many martial types. They also don't have any other combat specific class abilities like rage or bonus feats or martial maneuvers. Druids do get the special attacks of the form, but those are far more limited than what martial types can choose from.

And animal ACs are not that great, much worse than a heavily armored fighter, especially at higher levels. Sure, the Druid can cast barkskin and get wild armor, but those depend on spellcasting (in the first case, the spellcasting of the druid, in the second, the spellcasting of the armor enchanter). The DM can rule that barkskin only functions on the recipient's natural form, and that wild armor doesn't exist. Bam! Problem solved.

Plus, martial types (almost always) fight with weapons. Weapons with progressively more powerful magical enchantments. The weapons of a wildshape form are not magical. Sure, they can get magic fang'd, silvered claws'd, etc., but that's another case of spells making the form more powerful.


The Wildshape/Bite of the X-mechanics of giving a numeric enchantment boost instead of replacing a stat function far better as they mean a Druid needs to invest in his physicals to be a killing machine. It's still a question of whether having all modes of movement, huge natural armor, speed increases, pounce, etc. at your fingertips for hours/day with one ability is too good, but at least that change forces Druids interested in fighting beyond level 5 to pick up related stats and care for physicals instead of just getting all those abilities for free regardless of magic gear and stats due to a class feature.

By RAW, the Bite of the X spells stack with the stats gained in Wildshape. Wildshape gives you the stats of the new form, it's not a bonus, it's a replacement. The Bite of the X spells confer enhancement bonuses. So the druid that uses the Bite line of spells still doesn't have to invest in STR or DEX. And yes, that makes for one really powerful character. But again, that's because the Bite spells are themselves overpowered. The DM worried about them can simply rule they don't exist.

People look at wildshape and say it's too powerful, but they're only looking at one part of the equation.

It's like if x + y = too much, and everyone is insisting that x (wildshaping) needs to be decreased. Well, why isn't also possible that y (spellcasting) could be scaled back instead?

Eldariel
2009-07-26, 01:32 PM
If the DM is allowing anything close to that kind of point buy, he doesn't care a whit about balance anyway.

You totally missed the point. The point is that a character with 1 Str shouldn't be the frontline melee warrior. The fact that Wildshape enables you to be one anyways is not fair compared to the other classes. The fact that it replaces Dex is even worse.

Due to Wildshape, a Druid only has 4 attributes on his stat sheet while the rest of the characters have 6. That just fundamentally breaks the point buy- and the roll system. Of course those stats don't come up in point buy but that has nothing to do with anything. Those stats are just the extreme examples of what the problem is all about. It should matter for an Str-focused melee type whether your Str is 1 or 18.


There's a lot more to combat than just strength. Druids have a 3/4 BAB, and a lower hit die than many martial types. They also don't have any other combat specific class abilities like rage or bonus feats or martial maneuvers. Druids do get the special attacks of the form, but those are far more limited than what martial types can choose from.

So? That doesn't make having 26 Str in a non-warrior character who put his 8 in Str any more fair. That's the unfair part - a Druid can be great Fighter with 0 investment. As to the issues you brought up:
- 3/4 BAB is mitigated by the fact that the forms you use for combat have multiple natural weapons and BAB doesn't grant you iteratives for those so you'll have just as many attacks as the warrior (generally having the additionals at higher bonus too) and you can use spells (say, Str boosters) to match the Fighters' highest To Hit scores.
- Sure, he doesn't have maneuvers or feats or Rage, but he can get comparable stat buffs from magic and his Wildshape forms already generate whatever feat he needs for whichever tactic he plans on using for any given situation. Pounce, Improved Grab, Poison and such are hard for most melee types to come by with anyways. I'm not going to argue that Warrior wouldn't have more developed options, but Druid has enough to get by for the basis of any given combat style due to the animals having those same abilities.
- Druid might only get some stuff in any given form, but on the other hand has many forms to choose from. Fighters have a hard time switching out their feats and even adepts are heavily limited in how much switching around they can do with their maneuvers. However, this is all besides the point - Wildshape breaks fundamental rules of the game (everyone having 6 stats of varying relevance) which is the principal problem.


And animal ACs are not that great, much worse than a heavily armored fighter, especially at higher levels. Sure, the Druid can cast barkskin and get wild armor, but those depend on spellcasting (in the first case, the spellcasting of the druid, in the second, the spellcasting of the armor enchanter). The DM can rule that barkskin only functions on the recipient's natural form, and that wild armor doesn't exist. Bam! Problem solved.

Yeah, if you deny Druid magic items and spellcasting you can make Wildshape fair, but that's mostly due to how magic item-focused D&D is. If you don't ban Clasped items and putting on items after Shifting and Wild Armor, you're still left with problematically strong crap compared to Fighters.


By RAW, the Bite of the X spells stack with the stats gained in Wildshape. Wildshape gives you the stats of the new form, it's not a bonus, it's a replacement. The Bite of the X spells confer enhancement bonuses. So the druid that uses the Bite line of spells still doesn't have to invest in STR or DEX. And yes, that makes for one really powerful character. But again, that's because the Bite spells are themselves overpowered. The DM worried about them can simply rule they don't exist.

What does this have to do with anything? Obviously Wildshape replaces your scores, that's the whole problem.


People look at wildshape and say it's too powerful, but they're only looking at one part of the equation.

Yes, Wildshape's power is considerably compounded by Druid being spellcaster and Wildshape Ranger is merely very strong, but that doesn't change the problem with Wildshape that it breaks the game rules much like Polymorph simply giving you something you shouldn't have.

If Wildshape worked more like the Bite-line and Shapeshift (while still maintaining the individuality of each form), it'd have the potential to be fair. As it stands, even if you scale back the numbers to make it work out, it's still a fundamental rule breaker and continues to be such as long as it enables a character with 0 investment in combat to be a capable combatant.

I have no problems with you getting something for something, but Wildshape gives you something for nothing. And for the record, I agree with you that spellcasting is still Druid's most powerful ability. I however don't agree that it makes Wildshape "Ok" as written.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 02:55 PM
You totally missed the point. The point is that a character with 1 Str shouldn't be the frontline melee warrior. The fact that Wildshape enables you to be one anyways is not fair compared to the other classes. The fact that it replaces Dex is even worse.

Not at all, my point is that characters w/ STR 1 shouldn't be allowed by the DM. They are totally unrealistic characters, even for a fantasy setting. You're letting the possibility of some uber-munchkining provide cause for nerfing a whole class ability. Don't nerf the class ability, disallow the munchkining.


Due to Wildshape, a Druid only has 4 attributes on his stat sheet while the rest of the characters have 6. That just fundamentally breaks the point buy- and the roll system. Of course those stats don't come up in point buy but that has nothing to do with anything. Those stats are just the extreme examples of what the problem is all about. It should matter for an Str-focused melee type whether your Str is 1 or 18.

It doesn't break anything: have minimum required stats for STR and DEX if you're using point buy. Say that you have to buy at least an 8 in each stat. Druids don't pop from the womb with wildshape, and even when they reach 5th level and get it, they still only have one use for one hour. If you're letting your player get away w/ 1s in anything, that's your failure as a DM. Because even if you're starting a campaign at level 15, there's no way a STR and DEX 1 druid would have survived long enough to make it that far. And if you're rolling with dice, how on earth are you going to roll a 1 with at least 3d6???

And you are VASTLY overestimating the importance of all six stats for the other classes. Every class has dump stats, even the monk.


So? That doesn't make having 26 Str in a non-warrior character who put his 8 in Str any more fair. That's the unfair part - a Druid can be great Fighter with 0 investment.

Wrong. The druid would have to also invest in buffing spells and magic armor/items to compete w/ a martial type. No, he doesn't have to put his 18 in STR and his 14 in DEX, but those are most definitely not the only investments needed to be a credible combatant. Every buff spell he prepares for himself is one less slot he can use on Vigor, or Warp Wood, or Speak to Animals, or Flamestrike and on and on.


As to the issues you brought up:
- 3/4 BAB is mitigated by the fact that the forms you use for combat have multiple natural weapons and BAB doesn't grant you iteratives for those so you'll have just as many attacks as the warrior (generally having the additionals at higher bonus too) and you can use spells (say, Str boosters) to match the Fighters' highest To Hit scores.

You might have multiple attacks, and you might not, depending on the form. Dire Bear? Sure. Dire Wolf? Nope. And again you mention that you can use spells to augment the To Hit, and again I point out that you can simply rule that selected stat buffing spells don't work on forms other than your natural form.


- Sure, he doesn't have maneuvers or feats or Rage, but he can get comparable stat buffs from magic and his Wildshape forms already generate whatever feat he needs for whichever tactic he plans on using for any given situation. Pounce, Improved Grab, Poison and such are hard for most melee types to come by with anyways. I'm not going to argue that Warrior wouldn't have more developed options, but Druid has enough to get by for the basis of any given combat style due to the animals having those same abilities.
- Druid might only get some stuff in any given form, but on the other hand has many forms to choose from. Fighters have a hard time switching out their feats and even adepts are heavily limited in how much switching around they can do with their maneuvers. However, this is all besides the point - Wildshape breaks fundamental rules of the game (everyone having 6 stats of varying relevance) which is the principal problem.

The druid still has 6 stats of varying relevance. You have to be an 8th level druid before you can spend all 24 hours of the day in wildshape. So while you're not in wildshape, that STR and DEX absolutely matters. And if you created an immobile weakling, you're as helpless as a newborn. Any DM worth his screen would choose THAT time to have the monsters attack.

And even at level 8 and above, it's not always a good idea to begin a day in wildshape unless you KNOW it's the best for what you're going to be doing that day. You're uses of wildshape are still limited.


Yeah, if you deny Druid magic items and spellcasting you can make Wildshape fair, but that's mostly due to how magic item-focused D&D is. If you don't ban Clasped items and putting on items after Shifting and Wild Armor, you're still left with problematically strong crap compared to Fighters.

That's my whole point! D&D is MAGIC focused. That's why fairness doesn't even enter into the picture. Is the power of a 15th level fighter fairly balanced w/ a 15th level wizard? Absolutely not.

And there's no way a druid would be able to afford all the differently sized items that would fit all the differently sized and shaped forms he has. And since he likely can't even put the stuff he does have on by himself, that's another limitation.


What does this have to do with anything? Obviously Wildshape replaces your scores, that's the whole problem.

It has to do with this from your previous post:


The Wildshape/Bite of the X-mechanics of giving a numeric enchantment boost instead of replacing a stat function far better as they mean a Druid needs to invest in his physicals to be a killing machine.

You seem here to be saying the combination of wildshape and using the Bite spells give an enchantment (sic) boost. I was clearing that up, if you were under that impression.




Yes, Wildshape's power is considerably compounded by Druid being spellcaster and Wildshape Ranger is merely very strong, but that doesn't change the problem with Wildshape that it breaks the game rules much like Polymorph simply giving you something you shouldn't have.

If Wildshape worked more like the Bite-line and Shapeshift (while still maintaining the individuality of each form), it'd have the potential to be fair. As it stands, even if you scale back the numbers to make it work out, it's still a fundamental rule breaker and continues to be such as long as it enables a character with 0 investment in combat to be a capable combatant.

I have no problems with you getting something for something, but Wildshape gives you something for nothing. And for the record, I agree with you that spellcasting is still Druid's most powerful ability. I however don't agree that it makes Wildshape "Ok" as written.

D&D isn't fair. Period. There is no equality among the classes. Not so long as magic is in the picture. Wildshape does not give you "something for nothing". You took Druid levels to get that, at least 5 of them. You burn a use of your limited wildshapes to obtain the benefits of one particular form at a time, not the abilities of your whole menagerie at once.

And for the record, I never said that because spellcasting is the Druid's most powerful ability, that makes wildshaping "ok" as written. I said that wildshape is ok as written, and if you want to make the druid less powerful overall, so he doesn't make the PC fighter's player unhappy, then you can tone down the druid's ACTUAL most powerful ability instead, and leave wildshape alone.

So do you agree that by some combination of limiting the spells a druid can cast, and what items/armor he can use while wildshaped, at that point wildshape as written can be ok?

Eldariel
2009-07-26, 03:12 PM
Not at all, my point is that characters w/ STR 1 shouldn't be allowed by the DM. They are totally unrealistic characters, even for a fantasy setting. You're letting the possibility of some uber-munchkining provide cause for nerfing a whole class ability. Don't nerf the class ability, disallow the munchkining.

You're clinging to trivialities here. Str 3 is a possible result from 4d6b3 and still just as unfair. Str 8 being a strong melee Fighter is still unfair.


It doesn't break anything: have minimum required stats for STR and DEX if you're using point buy. Say that you have to buy at least an 8 in each stat. Druids don't pop from the womb with wildshape, and even when they reach 5th level and get it, they still only have one use for one hour. If you're letting your player get away w/ 1s in anything, that's your failure as a DM. Because even if you're starting a campaign at level 15, there's no way a STR and DEX 1 druid would have survived long enough to make it that far. And if you're rolling with dice, how on earth are you going to roll a 1 with at least 3d6???

...fine, make it 3, make it 8, none of that changes the point. You're arguing off the point here.


And you are VASTLY overestimating the importance of all six stats for the other classes. Every class has dump stats, even the monk.

Sure, and a Druid doing all roles in combat has 4 of them. Even the Wizard and the Cleric need the auxillary stats to a degree especially if multiroling in Dex/Cha/Str.


Wrong. The druid would have to also invest in buffing spells and magic armor/items to compete w/ a martial type. No, he doesn't have to put his 18 in STR and his 14 in DEX, but those are most definitely not the only investments needed to be a credible combatant. Every buff spell he prepares for himself is one less slot he can use on Vigor, or Warp Wood, or Speak to Animals, or Flamestrike and on and on.

"Wrong" is such a blunt term to use in such a semantic question. Sure, he has to buy some gear but he'd probably have that anyways, just for defensive purposes 'cause he doesn't have the illusionary/teleportation based defenses accessible to a Wizard. And spells...you're kidding, right?


You might have multiple attacks, and you might not, depending on the form. Dire Bear? Sure. Dire Wolf? Nope. And again you mention that you can use spells to augment the To Hit, and again I point out that you can simply rule that selected stat buffing spells don't work on forms other than your natural form.

Trivial.


The druid still has 6 stats of varying relevance. You have to be an 8th level druid before you can spend all 24 hours of the day in wildshape. So while you're not in wildshape, that STR and DEX absolutely matters. And if you created an immobile weakling, you're as helpless as a newborn. Any DM worth his screen would choose THAT time to have the monsters attack.

No DM should metagame to that degree; if enemies have no ways of scouting on the party and just happen on them, that should happen on a random time, not when the party is at its weakest, and if they are scouting on the party, that's party's defensive error that enables it. But yeah, you'll be Wildshaped the whole adventuring day on 7, and most on 6 - Extended Rope Trick makes the night ambushes unlikely. Also, this doesn't change anything.


And even at level 8 and above, it's not always a good idea to begin a day in wildshape unless you KNOW it's the best for what you're going to be doing that day. You're uses of wildshape are still limited.

Sure.


That's my whole point! D&D is MAGIC focused. That's why fairness doesn't even enter into the picture. Is the power of a 15th level fighter fairly balanced w/ a 15th level wizard? Absolutely not.

So because the game is unfair, we shouldn't fix the unfair parts?


And there's no way a druid would be able to afford all the differently sized items that would fit all the differently sized and shaped forms he has. And since he likely can't even put the stuff he does have on by himself, that's another limitation.

Monk's Belt doesn't really care about anything but size. Wild Armor melds. After that, it's just few stat buffs and spells and he's done. So yeah, you'll have to go with slightly lesser stat buff items if you plan on shifting a lot in combat.


You seem here to be saying the combination of wildshape and using the Bite spells give an enchantment (sic) boost. I was clearing that up, if you were under that impression.

I was referring to the change I suggested for Wildshape to function like Bites do now.


D&D isn't fair. Period. There is no equality among the classes. Not so long as magic is in the picture. Wildshape does not give you "something for nothing". You took Druid levels to get that, at least 5 of them. You burn a use of your limited wildshapes to obtain the benefits of one particular form at a time, not the abilities of your whole menagerie at once.

Meaningless.


And for the record, I never said that because spellcasting is the Druid's most powerful ability, that makes wildshaping "ok" as written. I said that wildshape is ok as written, and if you want to make the druid less powerful overall, so he doesn't make the PC fighter's player unhappy, then you can tone down the druid's ACTUAL most powerful ability instead, and leave wildshape alone.

Alright.


So do you agree that by some combination of limiting the spells a druid can cast, and what items/armor he can use while wildshaped, at that point wildshape as written can be ok?

You can make it not overshadow other characters and you can make it suck, yes. But as long as it overwrites your previous stats, it breaks rules that shouldn't be broken (and are only broken by it and the Polymorph-line). I also see no reason to allow Wildshape as written when it's so easy to just use enchantment bonuses instead making it a lot more fair and getting rid of 2 dump stats (they still aren't high priority even for combat Druid, but a low point buy Druid is then hurt at least as much as the Cleric).

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 04:51 PM
You're clinging to trivialities here. Str 3 is a possible result from 4d6b3 and still just as unfair. Str 8 being a strong melee Fighter is still unfair.

That's argument by simple assertion. I've been trying to show you that the relevant comparison is total combat effectiveness, of which initial and ability-score-increase investment in STR is but a part.


...fine, make it 3, make it 8, none of that changes the point. You're arguing off the point here.

No, I was arguing against points you raised. If you now concede the points, then I accept that.


Sure, and a Druid doing all roles in combat has 4 of them. Even the Wizard and the Cleric need the auxillary stats to a degree especially if multiroling in Dex/Cha/Str.

D&D is not pure combat. Again, I pointed out how, in fact, STR and DEX of his natural form actually DO matter to a druid. And every class has certain stats that go rarely, if ever, used in combat.



"Wrong" is such a blunt term to use in such a semantic question. Sure, he has to buy some gear but he'd probably have that anyways, just for defensive purposes 'cause he doesn't have the illusionary/teleportation based defenses accessible to a Wizard. And spells...you're kidding, right?

It's neither semantic, nor a question. You made a claim that was demonstrably false. You seem to recognize that. And if you don't see a limited daily supply of spells as a resource that must be managed and allocated with care, then we're even further apart than I thought. A fighter can swing his sword as many times as he wants, for as long as he wants. There is no time limit. He has an unlimited supply. That's part of what his fighter level bought him. But a druid's Bull's Strength spell is of only minutes/level duration. If he uses the only one he's prepared when the party is fighting the kobold ambush, he might be regretting it when later in the day they face the Barbarian Bugbear troop.


Trivial.

Really? A one word response? That is an unsupported negation, and I can only assume it's because you can't support it. So, moving on...


No DM should metagame to that degree; if enemies have no ways of scouting on the party and just happen on them, that should happen on a random time, not when the party is at its weakest, and if they are scouting on the party, that's party's defensive error that enables it. But yeah, you'll be Wildshaped the whole adventuring day on 7, and most on 6 - Extended Rope Trick makes the night ambushes unlikely. Also, this doesn't change anything.

If a player is playing a STR 1 DEX 1 character, the DM should absolutely metagame that way. And the fact that you admit that there is a party defensive error, is an implicit recognition that yes, a STR1, DEX1 druid really would be limiting himself. But then, you have admitted that a couple of times now in this post.

Also, Rope Trick isn't a Druid spell, so if your arcanist doesn't have it, or if for some reason you don't have an arcanist at all, you don't have that option. And besides, what if you're having an audience with the King, and you have to be in human form? What happens if you're attacked then?

Or better yet, what about when you're in an Anti-Magic Field?

Sure.


So because the game is unfair, we shouldn't fix the unfair parts?

No, you shouldn't screw up the cool parts in the effort to make the game fair. You can "fix" the druid w/o even touching wildshape.




Monk's Belt doesn't really care about anything but size. Wild Armor melds. After that, it's just few stat buffs and spells and he's done. So yeah, you'll have to go with slightly lesser stat buff items if you plan on shifting a lot in combat.

As a druid, you change size all the freaking time. I'm not just talking about size categories, either. Just because a Dire Bear and a Dire Eagle are both Large sized, do you think they both could wear the same belt? No way are their girth's even close to each other.

But my actual point is that you CAN ban wildling clasps and wild armor.



I was referring to the change I suggested for Wildshape to function like Bites do now.

I see.


Meaningless.

Please reference my response to your previous one-word rebuttal.



You can make it not overshadow other characters and you can make it suck, yes. But as long as it overwrites your previous stats, it breaks rules that shouldn't be broken (and are only broken by it and the Polymorph-line). I also see no reason to allow Wildshape as written when it's so easy to just use enchantment bonuses instead making it a lot more fair and getting rid of 2 dump stats (they still aren't high priority even for combat Druid, but a low point buy Druid is then hurt at least as much as the Cleric).

Wildshape absolutely breaks no D&D rules whatsoever. You seem to write "it breaks rules" when what you actually mean is "I don't like it". It's perfectly valid to have those preferences, but it's not valid to expect others to treat your personal preferences as if they are the equivalent of rules. That only works if you're the DM.

I've been giving you the reason to allow wildshape as written: because it's cool, and different, and your players may enjoy doing it. I cannot fathom, nor will I speculate, why you don't think that's not an excellent reason, much less a reason at all.

SinsI
2009-07-26, 04:58 PM
I'd require the Druid to intimately know the animal form he wants to assume - meaning something like several weeks of living together/nearby, and you have to do a daily "handle animal" check; after each week you do a knowledge check to see if you've studied that animal enough, with +1 cumulative bonus for each week passed.
The animals he met before the beggining of the adventure would be pretty limited - in a normal environment the Druid will only have a Brown bear form, various wolf/wolverine/eagle forms, and - if he has elf background - a Treant.
All the rest he has to encounter - and become familiar with - during the course of adventure.

That way, DM can freely control his Wild Shape power level.

quick_comment
2009-07-26, 05:17 PM
I'd require the Druid to intimately know the animal form he wants to assume

Id require the druid's player to explain to us in great detail how exactly he knew he initmately.

If he can get through it without blushing, he can assume the form.

Eldariel
2009-07-26, 05:44 PM
That's argument by simple assertion. I've been trying to show you that the relevant comparison is total combat effectiveness, of which initial and ability-score-increase investment in STR is but a part.

No, I was arguing against points you raised. If you now concede the points, then I accept that.

No you're not. You're saying "1 is not a realistic number", which is totally missing the point. Therefore I'm not wasting any more time on this until you either address my point or concede it.


D&D is not pure combat. Again, I pointed out how, in fact, STR and DEX of his natural form actually DO matter to a druid. And every class has certain stats that go rarely, if ever, used in combat.

Sigh, I feel like I'm hammering my head to a wall here. You just keep repeating yourself no matter what I say. The fundamental problem is that the Druid's ability scores are replaced. That's the issue. You buy 6 stats, but you can remove 2 of them.

Be it ability drain, skill check, stat checks or whatever, it's not a trivial matter - even the "dump stats" matter to a degree for every class...except the Druid.


It's neither semantic, nor a question. You made a claim that was demonstrably false. You seem to recognize that. And if you don't see a limited daily supply of spells as a resource that must be managed and allocated with care, then we're even further apart than I thought. A fighter can swing his sword as many times as he wants, for as long as he wants. There is no time limit. He has an unlimited supply. That's part of what his fighter level bought him. But a druid's Bull's Strength spell is of only minutes/level duration. If he uses the only one he's prepared when the party is fighting the kobold ambush, he might be regretting it when later in the day they face the Barbarian Bugbear troop.

Spells are a temporary investment that you can change on a whim. Attributes are a permanent investment. That's the principal difference here; when Druid wants to be a good Fighter, he burns few recurring temporary resources (and frankly, even unbuffed a Druid is a fair Fighter, and given a Lesser Metamagic Rod of Chain, he might just be able to get the buffs for free while buffing his AC) while basically any other class has to invest starting attributes to this end.


Really? A one word response? That is an unsupported negation, and I can only assume it's because you can't support it. So, moving on...

Not wasting time when you keep straying off the point. We're discussing whether Druid's Wildshape as written is too good, not which forms he should be picking to perform comparably to Fighter in combat.


Also, Rope Trick isn't a Druid spell, so if your arcanist doesn't have it, or if for some reason you don't have an arcanist at all, you don't have that option. And besides, what if you're having an audience with the King, and you have to be in human form? What happens if you're attacked then?

*shrug* Sure, there are scenarios where Druid is in his human form, and he's not the Fighter in those scenarios unless he burns an action to shift, but that doesn't change the combat prowess while he's fighting, which is what I was talking about.


Or better yet, what about when you're in an Anti-Magic Field?

What's your point? That there are scenarios where the Druid is not comparable to the Fighter?


No, you shouldn't screw up the cool parts in the effort to make the game fair. You can "fix" the druid w/o even touching wildshape.

Yeah, and how does changing few numeric factors with Wildshape screw it up?


As a druid, you change size all the freaking time. I'm not just talking about size categories, either. Just because a Dire Bear and a Dire Eagle are both Large sized, do you think they both could wear the same belt? No way are their girth's even close to each other.

But my actual point is that you CAN ban wildling clasps and wild armor.

Sure. Is that the best way to go about it though?


Please reference my response to your previous one-word rebuttal.

It's a quick way of telling you to stop straying off the point.


Wildshape absolutely breaks no D&D rules whatsoever. You seem to write "it breaks rules" when what you actually mean is "I don't like it". It's perfectly valid to have those preferences, but it's not valid to expect others to treat your personal preferences as if they are the equivalent of rules. That only works if you're the DM.

I've been giving you the reason to allow wildshape as written: because it's cool, and different, and your players may enjoy doing it. I cannot fathom, nor will I speculate, why you don't think that's not an excellent reason, much less a reason at all.

I love Wildshape. I can't fathom what makes you think otherwise; because I think it's broken as written? What I don't like is how it enables Druid to mostly ignore two stats on character creation. That's frankly completely unnecessary and easy to change.

Gnaeus
2009-07-26, 06:00 PM
D&D is not pure combat. Again, I pointed out how, in fact, STR and DEX of his natural form actually DO matter to a druid. And every class has certain stats that go rarely, if ever, used in combat.

If a player is playing a STR 1 DEX 1 character, the DM should absolutely metagame that way. And the fact that you admit that there is a party defensive error, is an implicit recognition that yes, a STR1, DEX1 druid really would be limiting himself.

Really, you are just wrong. A Str 3 Dex 3 druid is a perfectly playable character after level 5. He has no problems that aren't easily surmountable with moderately intelligent play. He is VASTLY better than a fighter with 3s in any 2 stats, or even a fighter with average stats.


No, you shouldn't screw up the cool parts in the effort to make the game fair. You can "fix" the druid w/o even touching wildshape.

You know what that is called? Wildshape variant ranger. It seems that if you reduce Druid casting to almost nothing, and nerf their animal companion, you still wind up with a character who outperforms your fighter. Amazing.


As a druid, you change size all the freaking time. I'm not just talking about size categories, either. Just because a Dire Bear and a Dire Eagle are both Large sized, do you think they both could wear the same belt? No way are their girth's even close to each other.

This is so wrong its funny. You think my 4 foot tall, 250 pound dwarf and my slim willowy elf have the same girth? They are both medium. Simple answer, all magic items except arms/armor resize to fit wearer.


I've been giving you the reason to allow wildshape as written: because it's cool, and different, and your players may enjoy doing it. I cannot fathom, nor will I speculate, why you don't think that's not an excellent reason, much less a reason at all.

This part is actually right. Wildshape is a fun system. The shapechange druid isn't bad because it is a nerf to druid awesomeness, which it is, it is bad because it removes all the versatility of the ability, making it into nothing but a combat tactic.

SinsI
2009-07-26, 07:14 PM
Id require the druid's player to explain to us in great detail how exactly he knew he initmately.

If he can get through it without blushing, he can assume the form.
:smallbiggrin:
I didn't even thought of interpreting it that way. Must be a Tsukiko-kind of druid - she also really, really loves undead.:smallsmile:
But this way of "getting familiar" automatically rules out abuse of that Nature's Ally spell - you are only seeing the summoned animals for several rounds, and to get to know them you need to accumulate several days of study.

As for the disbalance problem of replacing druid's physical stats with those of his new form - how about adding his bonuses/penalties from his human form to his animal stats? Weak druid wildshapes into a weak bear, strong and agile one wildshapes into a powerful and nimble animal...

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 07:21 PM
That's just kind of an inverse of the PHB II variant to begin with, anyway.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 07:53 PM
No you're not. You're saying "1 is not a realistic number", which is totally missing the point. Therefore I'm not wasting any more time on this until you either address my point or concede it.

I'm saying the hypothetical you're using to demonstrate the brokenness of an ability requires as a prerequisite a completely unrealistic scenario that invalidates it's usefulness as a hypothetical.



Sigh, I feel like I'm hammering my head to a wall here. You just keep repeating yourself no matter what I say. The fundamental problem is that the Druid's ability scores are replaced. That's the issue. You buy 6 stats, but you can remove 2 of them.

I keep repeating myself because you keep repeating your assertions w/ rebuttable support, or no support at all. I've given you several scenarios where you CAN'T just "remove 2" of the stats.


Be it ability drain, skill check, stat checks or whatever, it's not a trivial matter - even the "dump stats" matter to a degree for every class...except the Druid.

This is just wrong. I've given you examples when STR and DEX do matter. Sure, it's not as often as when STR and DEX matter to a fighter, but how often does a fighter really use CHA in a fight?


Spells are a temporary investment that you can change on a whim. Attributes are a permanent investment. That's the principal difference here; when Druid wants to be a good Fighter, he burns few recurring temporary resources (and frankly, even unbuffed a Druid is a fair Fighter, and given a Lesser Metamagic Rod of Chain, he might just be able to get the buffs for free while buffing his AC) while basically any other class has to invest starting attributes to this end.

So we're talking about permanent vs. temporary investment? Thanks for informing me. Spells can't be changed on a whim, but you do pick them every day. But those druid levels you took to gain the spellcasting ability ARE permanent. And for the life of me, I can't understand why you keep bringing up how buff spells can help the druid, when you adamantly refuse to consider limiting the benefit the druid derives from spells as a means of "fixing" wildshape.




Not wasting time when you keep straying off the point. We're discussing whether Druid's Wildshape as written is too good, not which forms he should be picking to perform comparably to Fighter in combat.

Not off point at all. You claimed that the druid's multiple attacks due to a form's multiple natural weapons offset the fighter's increased BAB. I pointed out that the druid, depending on the form, may or may not have multiple natural attacks, thus lessening to some extent that offset. If you don't want me to address one of your points, don't bring it up.




*shrug* Sure, there are scenarios where Druid is in his human form, and he's not the Fighter in those scenarios unless he burns an action to shift, but that doesn't change the combat prowess while he's fighting, which is what I was talking about.

And I'm saying that because the druid doesn't spend his entire time fighting, very low STR and DEX really can prove to be real detriments to his character, and why making them total dump stats is not a good idea. Like you said, attribute selection is a permanent thing, so you're stuck with it ALL the time, not just in combat.


What's your point? That there are scenarios where the Druid is not comparable to the Fighter?

My point is that these scenarios are why no player wanting to go through a campaign as a druid would make total dump stats of STR and DEX. Which refutes your central claim that a druid's wildshape allows him to do just that.



Yeah, and how does changing few numeric factors with Wildshape screw it up?

OK, so you seem in previous posts to be saying that if wildshape functioned like the Bite of the X spells, it would be fine, right? Those spells are 1 round/level versus 1 hour/level for wildshape. If you make that change, then you eliminate a ton of the cool things you can do as a druid while wildshaped. You can't act as a scout, becoming an unobtrusive monkey to have a look around the grounds of the evil jungle lord. You don't have enough time. You couldn't impersonate the evil warlord's horse, and buck him off at a crucial time during a battle, causing him to lose command of his army. Again, not enough time. You can't become a mangy mutt to sneak into the enemy army encampment to find the kidnapped princess.

Basically, you turn what is an ability with a wide variety of uses into a combat only ability. That, and it's just cool to walk around as a bear, or slither around as a snake, or fly around as an eagle. That's why it would screw it up.


Sure. Is that the best way to go about it though?

It is if your player thinks running around as a lion, snarling and pouncing on everything, or soaring high about the earth as an eagle sounds really cool, and he's willing to take some handicaps.


It's a quick way of telling you to stop straying off the point.

And mine is a quick way of telling you that I didn't stray off the point, but actually addressed something you posted.


I love Wildshape. I can't fathom what makes you think otherwise; because I think it's broken as written? What I don't like is how it enables Druid to mostly ignore two stats on character creation. That's frankly completely unnecessary and easy to change.

I think otherwise because you have spent all these posts arguing that it, as written, is broken and unfair and needs to change. It's like telling your wife: "Honey, I absolutely adore you, but I really want to make some major changes in your fundamental personality."

And I've been making many points, that demonstrate why a druid CAN'T mostly ignore two stats during character creation. If you really think that's the problem w/ the druid, then give the class a prereq of natural form STR 13 and DEX 13 to use wildshape. Or set the bar wherever you like.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 08:38 PM
Really, you are just wrong. A Str 3 Dex 3 druid is a perfectly playable character after level 5. He has no problems that aren't easily surmountable with moderately intelligent play. He is VASTLY better than a fighter with 3s in any 2 stats, or even a fighter with average stats.

I never said that such a character wasn't playable. But he does have problems, which I've pointed out. And no realistic druid would ever GET to level 5 with those numbers. Let's say you can fight at full effectiveness with up to a heavy load. A character w/ STR 3 has a heavy load of 30 lbs. Studded Leather, a light wooden shield, and a club get you up to 26 pounds. We'll use the other four pounds for all the other equipment you want to carry with you. (that packmule animal companion is starting to look good)

So that +4 to AC will even out the -4 you get for your DEX penalty, to give you a total of 10. Congrats, you're as protected as an ordinary naked man.

Offensively, you can cast shillelagh on the club to give you a plus 1 to hit, so that you're swinging at a robust -3 to hit, 2d6 - 4 dmg. But don't worry, by 4th level you'll be all the way back up to +0 to hit!

You're totally right, you can cope with these stats just fine if you play intelligently. Namely, if you never leave the tallest tree in your grove.




You know what that is called? Wildshape variant ranger. It seems that if you reduce Druid casting to almost nothing, and nerf their animal companion, you still wind up with a character who outperforms your fighter. Amazing.

You don't have to nerf it to almost nothing. Druids get a lot of cool non-combat spells he could keep and just give up the combat ones. Wood warp comes immediately to mind. And you know what? Eldariel would presumably have just as much of a problem w/ the Wildshape Ranger, since he insists that the wildshape as currently written is broken. Amazing.




This is so wrong its funny. You think my 4 foot tall, 250 pound dwarf and my slim willowy elf have the same girth? They are both medium. Simple answer, all magic items except arms/armor resize to fit wearer.

250 pound dwarf vs. 150 pound elf = factor of 1.67x

8000 pound Dire bear vs. 650 Dire Eagle = factor of over 10x

Doesn't seem quite the same to me, but ok.

From SRD:

When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

There may be rare exceptions, especially with racial specific items.

These would be some of those rare exceptions. If you think the monk's belt your tiny viper form (possibly) uses could be the same one your huge earth elemental form uses, then that's your call. I've never played with a DM that would allow that, though. And you as a DM wouldn't have to allow it.


This part is actually right. Wildshape is a fun system. The shapechange druid isn't bad because it is a nerf to druid awesomeness, which it is, it is bad because it removes all the versatility of the ability, making it into nothing but a combat tactic.

Which is EXACTLY the point I've been making. Over and over. And over.

Eldariel
2009-07-26, 08:51 PM
I'm saying the hypothetical you're using to demonstrate the brokenness of an ability requires as a prerequisite a completely unrealistic scenario that invalidates it's usefulness as a hypothetical.

Which is again trivial since it's an example. That said, ability damage/drain ensures that Str 1 Druids can exist. But really, discuss the point, not the numbers that have nothing to do with anything.


This is just wrong. I've given you examples when STR and DEX do matter. Sure, it's not as often as when STR and DEX matter to a fighter, but how often does a fighter really use CHA in a fight?

*shrug* Whenever he's hit by Charm-type effect, for one. Whenever he uses Intimidate for another. Whenever he's hit by Cha-damage type effect in addition.


So we're talking about permanent vs. temporary investment? Thanks for informing me. Spells can't be changed on a whim, but you do pick them every day. But those druid levels you took to gain the spellcasting ability ARE permanent. And for the life of me, I can't understand why you keep bringing up how buff spells can help the druid, when you adamantly refuse to consider limiting the benefit the druid derives from spells as a means of "fixing" wildshape.

...if you don't get why I'm saying what I'm saying, all this conversation has been for naught. You haven't understood a single word of what I've said which also explains clinging to trivialities and discussing examples used to illustrate points over the points themselves.


Not off point at all. You claimed that the druid's multiple attacks due to a form's multiple natural weapons offset the fighter's increased BAB. I pointed out that the druid, depending on the form, may or may not have multiple natural attacks, thus lessening to some extent that offset. If you don't want me to address one of your points, don't bring it up.

It didn't need addressing and it still stands. In combat, a Druid is generally going to use a form with multiple natural attacks simply because they are more effective. Sure, forms with one attack exist but aside from scenarios where Tripping equals pretty much winning, it won't be a principal combat form specifically due to the lack of multiple attacks.


And I'm saying that because the druid doesn't spend his entire time fighting, very low STR and DEX really can prove to be real detriments to his character, and why making them total dump stats is not a good idea. Like you said, attribute selection is a permanent thing, so you're stuck with it ALL the time, not just in combat.

Yes yes yes, but that has nothing to do with Wildshape enabling a Druid to fight like a Fighter without investing one attribute point in it. Sure, 3s in both will hurt to some degree (mostly carrying capacity and surprises, really; Str and Dex have little significance in social settings), but they don't stop you from fighting like the Fighter with 18 in Str and 14 in Dex.


My point is that these scenarios are why no player wanting to go through a campaign as a druid would make total dump stats of STR and DEX. Which refutes your central claim that a druid's wildshape allows him to do just that.

And yet you fail to refute anything since it's totally doable; just because you'll have slightly worse AC and Initiative in a surprise situation and because you can carry slightly less doesn't vindicate putting the 3 you rolled into mentals, and isn't enough reason to buy over 8 Str and mayhap 10-12 Dex for a low-level character on a low pb (22-25).

You seem to think that if a low stat has a chance of being relevant, you can't pull off that low stat or something, which just isn't true. It might be slightly inconveniencing at some points, but the Druid still cheats the pb system and thus is really the only class that is just fine on a 22pb.


OK, so you seem in previous posts to be saying that if wildshape functioned like the Bite of the X spells, it would be fine, right? Those spells are 1 round/level versus 1 hour/level for wildshape. If you make that change, then you eliminate a ton of the cool things you can do as a druid while wildshaped. You can't act as a scout, becoming an unobtrusive monkey to have a look around the grounds of the evil jungle lord. You don't have enough time. You couldn't impersonate the evil warlord's horse, and buck him off at a crucial time during a battle, causing him to lose command of his army. Again, not enough time. You can't become a mangy mutt to sneak into the enemy army encampment to find the kidnapped princess.

I was referring to the whole "enchantment bonus"-thingy as should be apparent from my first post on the subject. Durations and such are trivial. For reference, from the post you started this reply hell on:

The Wildshape/Bite of the X-mechanics of giving a numeric enchantment boost instead of replacing a stat function far better as they mean a Druid needs to invest in his physicals to be a killing machine.

As you might notice, I make no mention of duration there.


Basically, you turn what is an ability with a wide variety of uses into a combat only ability. That, and it's just cool to walk around as a bear, or slither around as a snake, or fly around as an eagle. That's why it would screw it up.

Well, that clarifies where the disconnect was. You think I want to change more than I do.


And mine is a quick way of telling you that I didn't stray off the point, but actually addressed something you posted.

You strayed off the point. You started talking about D&D fairness and such, which isn't even tangentially related to the discussion. And in the other point you assumed the Druid would be fighting in a form with only one attack often enough to think about it, which is an assumption not worth addressing.

I'm saving time and trying to keep the discussion focused by skimming over points that aren't connected to the actual discussion and the ones that make weird or not-consideration-worthy assumptions.


I think otherwise because you have spent all these posts arguing that it, as written, is broken and unfair and needs to change. It's like telling your wife: "Honey, I absolutely adore you, but I really want to make some major changes in your fundamental personality."

...no, I'm saying that "I love the look of that girl; if only she had the personality to match, we'd be married!" Wildshape is a great idea, but the execution leaves something to be desired having powerlevel and functionality issues.


And I've been making many points, that demonstrate why a druid CAN'T mostly ignore two stats during character creation. If you really think that's the problem w/ the druid, then give the class a prereq of natural form STR 13 and DEX 13 to use wildshape. Or set the bar wherever you like.

Or just, y'know, do what I suggested before. Or some such. No reason to add some weird, arbitrary limitations and excessive houserules when the simple means to fix the system exist within comparable effects.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 10:20 PM
Which is again trivial since it's an example. That said, ability damage/drain ensures that Str 1 Druids can exist. But really, discuss the point, not the numbers that have nothing to do with anything.

If you really think it's trivial, stop bringing it up. But you can't do that, because in the very next sentence, you do it again. And you do so in a way that actually is completely beside the point.

Ability damage/drain ensures that STR 1 Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins, etc. can "exist". So it does nothing to make your case that STR 1 druids can get by.

In fact, a druid w/ STR 1 that got hit by even one measly point of STR damage is out of the fight. Same for DEX. Imagine losing to a freaking tiny centipede!

And the numbers have EVERYTHING to do with your argument!!! Your whole argument is that being a good fighter w/ STR 8 as opposed to STR 18 is unfair. Do you not see the numbers there?




*shrug* Whenever he's hit by Charm-type effect, for one. Whenever he uses Intimidate for another. Whenever he's hit by Cha-damage type effect in addition.

In other words, only rarely, in certain circumstances. Which also happens to be when a druid needs his natural form STR and DEX to be at least respectable.



...if you don't get why I'm saying what I'm saying, all this conversation has been for naught. You haven't understood a single word of what I've said which also explains clinging to trivialities and discussing examples used to illustrate points over the points themselves.

Amazingly, I'm starting to think YOU don't even know why you're saying what you're saying. Which probably explains why you keep thinking I'm missing your point.


It didn't need addressing and it still stands. In combat, a Druid is generally going to use a form with multiple natural attacks simply because they are more effective. Sure, forms with one attack exist but aside from scenarios where Tripping equals pretty much winning, it won't be a principal combat form specifically due to the lack of multiple attacks.

"It didn't need addressing"? Are you serious? You realize that I was the one addressing your point, meaning I was answering it, right? You make an argument, and I give a rebuttal. That's what "addressing" means. That's how debate happens. If claims aren't addressed, you just have pointless argument by assertion... which seems awfully like your general debate style.

It's true that multi-natural weapon forms are usually the best, but that's not always the case. In a previous post, you listed poison as a special attack that druids can get that help offset their relative paucity of combat abilities compared to the more martial types. But the vast majority of forms that have a poison attack have only the one attack, which also poisons. So there's a trade-off, and you have to choose.

Also, aside from giant octopus and squid, most aquatic forms have only one attack.



"Yes yes yes, but that has nothing to do with Wildshape enabling a Druid to fight like a Fighter without investing one attribute point in it. Sure, 3s in both will hurt to some degree (mostly carrying capacity and surprises, really; Str and Dex have little significance in social settings), but they don't stop you from fighting like the Fighter with 18 in Str and 14 in Dex."

But combat is not the sum total of what happens in a D&D game! Overall, the total combat and non-combat benefits of dumping 3s in STR and DEX are outweighed by the total drawbacks, making it a really poor choice for a player to make in character creation, which is why they don't do it.



And yet you fail to refute anything since it's totally doable; just because you'll have slightly worse AC and Initiative in a surprise situation and because you can carry slightly less doesn't vindicate putting the 3 you rolled into mentals, and isn't enough reason to buy over 8 Str and mayhap 10-12 Dex for a low-level character on a low pb (22-25).

It's "doable" if you roll two 3s and have no choice. And STR 8 DEX 10-12 is not at all unusual for a character's two least important stats. There are tons of Wizards w/ STR 10, CHA 8, Sorcerers w/ STR 8, INT 10-12, Fighters w/ INT 10-12, CHA 8. So all of the sudden, your argument that the druid can pay attention to 4 stats and ignore 2 goes up in smoke.


You seem to think that if a low stat has a chance of being relevant, you can't pull off that low stat or something, which just isn't true. It might be slightly inconveniencing at some points, but the Druid still cheats the pb system and thus is really the only class that is just fine on a 22pb.

Actually, I don't think that at all. I think it's possible to pull it off, but makes life so difficult for your character you would only go that route if you wanted a challenge. Particularly for stats as low as 3.


I was referring to the whole "enchantment bonus"-thingy as should be apparent from my first post on the subject. Durations and such are trivial. For reference, from the post you started this reply hell on:

Are you freaking kidding me? "Durations and such are trivial"?! When you write "trivial", do you actually mean "essential to evaluating the power of a spell or ability"? Because something "trivial" would be for me to note that it is "enhancement bonus", not "enchantment bonus". THAT doesn't matter. Durations do. Superbigtime. They are non-trivial to the extreme.



As you might notice, I make no mention of duration there.

You're right, you don't. I did misread that part.



Well, that clarifies where the disconnect was. You think I want to change more than I do.

That's true. If you just want to make wildshape give enhancement bonuses, that only reduces their combat ability, not their versatility.


You strayed off the point. You started talking about D&D fairness and such, which isn't even tangentially related to the discussion. And in the other point you assumed the Druid would be fighting in a form with only one attack often enough to think about it, which is an assumption not worth addressing.

When you write "isn't even tangentially related to the discussion", do you actually mean "gets right to the heart of the matter of the discussion"?

Because here is a quote from your second response to me:


You totally missed the point. The point is that a character with 1 Str shouldn't be the frontline melee warrior. The fact that Wildshape enables you to be one anyways is not fair compared to the other classes. The fact that it replaces Dex is even worse.

Those italics are in your original post, by the way. Do you normally pepper your posts italicized claims that don't even have tangential relation to the (alleged) point you're trying to make? You might want to reconsider that tactic, because it makes it really hard to understand you and reply to your actual points.

And yes, sometimes you will be using a form w/ three attacks (plus possible rakes), sometimes one attack, sometimes two, and sometimes eight. It changes.


I'm saving time and trying to keep the discussion focused by skimming over points that aren't connected to the actual discussion and the ones that make weird or not-consideration-worthy assumptions.

Dude, there's nothing time-saving about this thread.


..no, I'm saying that "I love the look of that girl; if only she had the personality to match, we'd be married!" Wildshape is a great idea, but the execution leaves something to be desired having powerlevel and functionality issues.

Or maybe you're hearing that I love that girl and want to marry her as she is, but you insist that she has to change to suit your desires before I can marry her. Wildshape is only overpowered to the degree it augmented by and combined with other magic. Change the other magic, not the wildshape.


Or just, y'know, do what I suggested before. Or some such. No reason to add some weird, arbitrary limitations and excessive houserules when the simple means to fix the system exist within comparable effects.

Or accomplish the same thing by doing that. That is a simple and effective resolution.

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 10:25 PM
It is easier to alter wildshape at a fundamental level - even to propose a more complex system than that in PHB II, which I would be in favor of in order to allow more 'utility' forms - than it is to pare down spells. The number of spells in core alone are simply staggering and are as much content as the average casual homebrewer puts out in a year, maybe. Additionally, every DM's solution to them is different, and if you switch groups a lot, much harder to remember and use at the drop of a hat.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 11:01 PM
I'll add one caveat that if Wildshape gives enhancement bonuses, you'd need to decide what effect the gain in CON yields. If it functions like a normal enhancement bonus, you all of the sudden have another potential dump stat that can be in the 8-10 range. It wouldn't be difficult, just rule that in this one particular case, a lesser enhancement bonus (ie, bear's endurance) is used for HP increase instead of the greater enhancement bonus (the CON of an actual bear).

Or you could say the Wildshape just doesn't change CON at all, just STR and DEX.

AstralFire
2009-07-26, 11:17 PM
The popular PHB II variant does not adjust Con at all.

However, if you're a frontliner and your stats are dependent upon your humanoid stats in any way, none of those three stats can ever be a dump stat. You can deprioritize them relative to one another a bit depending on just how much of a boost they give, but short of something insane like a +10 boost from level 1 that increases to +20 or something, they cannot become dump stats.

Ungvar
2009-07-26, 11:54 PM
Well, let's say that the simplest way to turn wildshape into an enhancement bonus conferring ability is to say that you get a bonus equal to the STR, DEX, and CON of the MM entry version of the creature, minus 10 (the average for humans).

So a brown bear w/ STR/DEX/CON of 27/13/19 would give bonuses of +17/+3/+9. Conversely, a normal housecat with STR/DEX/CON of 3/15/10 would give -7/+5/+0. So far, so good. If HP changes the way it normally does with enhancement bonuses to CON, then that +9 to CON would make up for a ton of neglect of your natural form CON. You could put your 8 in CON, and still have plenty of HP in combat when it shoots up to 17. For most druids who expect to be heavily involved in combat, 17 would be a CON score they'd love to have. In fact it would probably be more likely to be a dump stat than STR or DEX. CON's main contribution is to HP, but druids, through non-enhancement bonus cure and vigor spells, have much greater resources to keep that high. But increasing STR and DEX would be relatively harder.

I'd bet that a druid under this scenario would more into DEX during creation, as the really high STR forms typically aren't that special in the DEX department. (better than the average human, but not better than the average monster).

As for the shapeshift variant of phb ii, you DEX isn't adjusted either. I haven't played it, but I think I'd prefer the wider variety of forms offered by wildshape. The shapeshift variant only gives you one non-combat form: the aerial.

Origomar
2009-07-26, 11:59 PM
Honestly an idea that you could make is that the champain world or part of the world you are in is only familiar with certain animals, so there is no possible way a druid would be able to transform into certain animals because in a sense they dont exist.

AstralFire
2009-07-27, 12:51 AM
As for the shapeshift variant of phb ii, you DEX isn't adjusted either. I haven't played it, but I think I'd prefer the wider variety of forms offered by wildshape. The shapeshift variant only gives you one non-combat form: the aerial.

The lack of variety is its only downside, imo, and it's easily rectified with homebrew (and such an oversight should have been caught). I'd do it, but I don't play 3E anymore. I just talk about it because everyone else here does. :smalltongue:

Eldariel
2009-07-27, 07:54 AM
If you really think it's trivial, stop bringing it up. But you can't do that, because in the very next sentence, you do it again. And you do so in a way that actually is completely beside the point.

It's because I mentioned before that you aren't addressing the point. It didn't seem like you understood what I meant so I'm clarifying. The difference is trivial, but I need to make you understand that.


Ability damage/drain ensures that STR 1 Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins, etc. can "exist". So it does nothing to make your case that STR 1 druids can get by.

In fact, a druid w/ STR 1 that got hit by even one measly point of STR damage is out of the fight. Same for DEX. Imagine losing to a freaking tiny centipede!

Wildshaped, he won't have that problem again. The whole reason I mentioned this though is because you so insistently claim that "If DM allows Str 1 characters, he has no concept of balance" or stuff like that, which is trivial but still wrong.


And the numbers have EVERYTHING to do with your argument!!! Your whole argument is that being a good fighter w/ STR 8 as opposed to STR 18 is unfair. Do you not see the numbers there?

The precise numbers don't matter for the sake of the discussion since we're talking in general about no-focus no-resource type performing like the focused character expending all his resources on fighting. How hard is that to grasp, really?


In other words, only rarely, in certain circumstances. Which also happens to be when a druid needs his natural form STR and DEX to be at least respectable.

Sure, Cha is a dump stat for a combat-related anything (Druid can dump it too, FYI) because it doesn't have many consequences in combat. That's because the things Charisma affects come up mostly in social situations. The things Str and Dex affect come up basically only in combat. Being a good combatant with no effort with horrible Dex and Str is wrong.


"It didn't need addressing"? Are you serious? You realize that I was the one addressing your point, meaning I was answering it, right? You make an argument, and I give a rebuttal. That's what "addressing" means. That's how debate happens. If claims aren't addressed, you just have pointless argument by assertion... which seems awfully like your general debate style.

Look, in a debate you have one central point and all arguments should revolve around that central point. Many of your arguments drift off the point and have little relevance to the central point thus making them trivial with regards to the actual discussion. They also tend to deal with small things and not really address the point they are written in response to.

Maybe "save time" is the wrong phrasing, but there's no reason to start talking about the average kiloprice of cheese when we discuss Wildshape being potentially broken.


It's true that multi-natural weapon forms are usually the best, but that's not always the case. In a previous post, you listed poison as a special attack that druids can get that help offset their relative paucity of combat abilities compared to the more martial types. But the vast majority of forms that have a poison attack have only the one attack, which also poisons. So there's a trade-off, and you have to choose.

Also, aside from giant octopus and squid, most aquatic forms have only one attack.

*shrug* Use Waterbreathing and Polar Bear if you want to have an aquatic brawler. And Poison is just one in the array of abilities.


But combat is not the sum total of what happens in a D&D game! Overall, the total combat and non-combat benefits of dumping 3s in STR and DEX are outweighed by the total drawbacks, making it a really poor choice for a player to make in character creation, which is why they don't do it.

...Str 3 means you have a poor carrying capacity, Dex 3 (and Str) affects some skill checks that you won't be exactly making too often when not Wildshaped (especially since they're cross-class). Those are the impact they have out of combat. How horrible.


It's "doable" if you roll two 3s and have no choice. And STR 8 DEX 10-12 is not at all unusual for a character's two least important stats. There are tons of Wizards w/ STR 10, CHA 8, Sorcerers w/ STR 8, INT 10-12, Fighters w/ INT 10-12, CHA 8. So all of the sudden, your argument that the druid can pay attention to 4 stats and ignore 2 goes up in smoke.

He can ignore 4 stats. Two of them just aren't on his character sheet 'cause he gets those stats from his animal form, which is what I've been talking about all along. Unfortunately you can't go under 8 in point buy without racial penalty; although I've seen plenty of 7 Str, 8 Dex Middle-Aged Druids.


Actually, I don't think that at all. I think it's possible to pull it off, but makes life so difficult for your character you would only go that route if you wanted a challenge. Particularly for stats as low as 3.

Fine, think what you want. It's really immaterial at this point.


Are you freaking kidding me? "Durations and such are trivial"?! When you write "trivial", do you actually mean "essential to evaluating the power of a spell or ability"? Because something "trivial" would be for me to note that it is "enhancement bonus", not "enchantment bonus". THAT doesn't matter. Durations do. Superbigtime. They are non-trivial to the extreme.

...the sentence means: "I was suggesting a change to make Wildshape's stat changing mechanics to match Bite-line's mechanics without regard for Bite-line's duration because Bite-line's duration has no relevance with regards to how to fix Wildshape."


When you write "isn't even tangentially related to the discussion", do you actually mean "gets right to the heart of the matter of the discussion"?

Because here is a quote from your second response to me:

Those italics are in your original post, by the way. Do you normally pepper your posts italicized claims that don't even have tangential relation to the (alleged) point you're trying to make? You might want to reconsider that tactic, because it makes it really hard to understand you and reply to your actual points.

...I think I said this a few times, but again: Str 1 isn't the point, a Druid with no stats for frontlining being a frontliner is. Str 1 is just an extreme example of what exactly is the root problem by my argument.


And yes, sometimes you will be using a form w/ three attacks (plus possible rakes), sometimes one attack, sometimes two, and sometimes eight. It changes.

I don't see why you'd want to fight in a form with only one attack given option, but whatever.


Or maybe you're hearing that I love that girl and want to marry her as she is, but you insist that she has to change to suit your desires before I can marry her. Wildshape is only overpowered to the degree it augmented by and combined with other magic. Change the other magic, not the wildshape.

Ok, this particular metaphora doesn't work... You have yet to give one reason not to make this change to Wildshape.


Or accomplish the same thing by doing that. That is a simple and effective resolution.

Not elegant or logical though. If changing things, I'd prefer to find the best way of doing it, which is why I don't like the idea of making arbitrary limitations and which is why I'd definitely change the part where Wildshape REPLACES ability scores.



The lack of variety is its only downside, imo, and it's easily rectified with homebrew (and such an oversight should have been caught). I'd do it, but I don't play 3E anymore. I just talk about it because everyone else here does. :smalltongue:

Well, the change suggested for Wildshape here pretty much does exactly that; you maintain the individuality of the various forms while still only getting enchantment bonuses and mayhap some of the special abilities, meaning the base stats matter and you can't further buff up from the form's base stats.

Gnaeus
2009-07-27, 08:06 AM
I never said that such a character wasn't playable. But he does have problems, which I've pointed out. And no realistic druid would ever GET to level 5 with those numbers. Let's say you can fight at full effectiveness with up to a heavy load. A character w/ STR 3 has a heavy load of 30 lbs. Studded Leather, a light wooden shield, and a club get you up to 26 pounds. We'll use the other four pounds for all the other equipment you want to carry with you. (that packmule animal companion is starting to look good)

So that +4 to AC will even out the -4 you get for your DEX penalty, to give you a total of 10. Congrats, you're as protected as an ordinary naked man.

Offensively, you can cast shillelagh on the club to give you a plus 1 to hit, so that you're swinging at a robust -3 to hit, 2d6 - 4 dmg. But don't worry, by 4th level you'll be all the way back up to +0 to hit!

You're totally right, you can cope with these stats just fine if you play intelligently. Namely, if you never leave the tallest tree in your grove.

I understand the problem now. You have never seen a well played druid, and do not understand its power. I have played a Str 6, Dex 8 druid, from 1-15, and I would have happily taken lower Str and Dex if the point buy system we were using had allowed it. You can drop your Str and Dex into the toilet and still be your parties MVP with a druid.

1. You have an animal companion who is at least as good as most characters in the party from levels 1-4. You send him up to attack. You stand in the back, next to the wizard. Yes, the wizard has 3-8 points higher AC than you do, (You have about 9, 10+2 leather armor +1 small size -4 dex, he has about 16, 10+2 dex +4 if his mage armor is up) but you have double his hit points, and neither one of you plans to be in melee combat.

2. You don't memorize Shillelagh or Produce Flame. You do crowd control with entangle or obscuring mist, or you heal with cure light wounds or lesser vigor, or you use offensive spells like Snakes Swiftness, Flaming Sphere, or Summon monster, or give stat buffs. If you want to melee, you cast aspect of the wolf, and just like wild shape, you are suddenly about as good as the fighters for 10 minutes/level. Level 1-3 parties have very short adventuring days.

With your first 750 gp (or less if your dm allows partially charged wand buys) you buy an wand of cure light wounds or lesser vigor. Your second buys a wand of snakes swiftness. Now you are doing exactly as much melee damage as your parties best fighter, you can cure as well as the cleric. Your pet is still laying out damage, you have other spells memorized for utility, and the fighter hasn't even earned enough gold to buy a +1 weapon yet.

Edit: Thats assuming you have to pay full price for your cure wand. Many parties regard healing wands as a party item and are willing to cover all or part of the cost.

3. You wear leather armor (8 pounds if you are a gnome) and carry 2 wands. Everything else goes in saddlebags on your mount. Thats a light load.

Now if you want to know how a wildshape ranger with those stats reaches level 5, I have no idea. My guess is that he hopes for a campaign with a higher starting level, or comes in with a new player or to replace a fallen PC after the party has reached level 5.


250 pound dwarf vs. 150 pound elf = factor of 1.67x

8000 pound Dire bear vs. 650 Dire Eagle = factor of over 10x

Doesn't seem quite the same to me, but ok.

From SRD:

These would be some of those rare exceptions. If you think the monk's belt your tiny viper form (possibly) uses could be the same one your huge earth elemental form uses, then that's your call. I've never played with a DM that would allow that, though. And you as a DM wouldn't have to allow it.
.

No bigger difference than Stone Giant to Pixie. The DMG indicates that clothing type items can generally be worn by anything with the slot, because they are adjustable or magically resize. It specifically mentions that even being of a different size category doesn't matter ("your character shouldn't be penalized for being a halfling"). The exception that it gives deals with races that don't want anyone else to be able to use their items. Make sure your monks belt isn't made by drow and, per the rules, you should be OK.

Gnaeus
2009-07-27, 10:58 AM
Well, let's say that the simplest way to turn wildshape into an enhancement bonus conferring ability is to say that you get a bonus equal to the STR, DEX, and CON of the MM entry version of the creature, minus 10 (the average for humans).

There is an easier way. Pathfinder makes wildshape mimic the Beast Form spell.

Tiny=+4 Dex, -2 Str +1 NA
Small=+2 Dex +1 NA
Medium=+2 Str +2 NA
Large=+4 Str -2 Dex +4 NA

You also gain some movement forms, attack forms, and sensory bonuses as listed in the spell description if the animal in question has those abilities.

Its a similar idea to yours, but a little less combat powerful, with a little less math.

Ungvar
2009-07-27, 08:33 PM
It's because I mentioned before that you aren't addressing the point. It didn't seem like you understood what I meant so I'm clarifying. The difference is trivial, but I need to make you understand that.

Examples given in support of an argument are never "trivial". Claims made w/o supporting evidence are nothing more than bare assertions. I think on some level you realize this, which is why you kept trying to salvage your example.



Wildshaped, he won't have that problem again. The whole reason I mentioned this though is because you so insistently claim that "If DM allows Str 1 characters, he has no concept of balance" or stuff like that, which is trivial but still wrong.

If he gets knocked to STR or DEX 0, there's a good chance he gets coup de grace'd the next round. The point is it's an extreme handicap. And if a DM allows a player to take a STR and DEX of 1, and doesn't ever make him deal with the adverse consequences of that decision, then yes, the DM is not worried a bit about the PCs being "balanced".


The precise numbers don't matter for the sake of the discussion since we're talking in general about no-focus no-resource type performing like the focused character expending all his resources on fighting. How hard is that to grasp, really?

Actually, the precise numbers matter greatly, because the focus and resources you're discussing are represented by numbers. The precise numbers tell us precisely how much they are focusing on a stat, and how many resources they're devoting to it. Your argument is that the Druid can devote "no resources" to STR and DEX, and I'm showing you how that's wrong.




Sure, Cha is a dump stat for a combat-related anything (Druid can dump it too, FYI) because it doesn't have many consequences in combat. That's because the things Charisma affects come up mostly in social situations. The things Str and Dex affect come up basically only in combat. Being a good combatant with no effort with horrible Dex and Str is wrong.

STR and DEX only come up in combat? Aside from when you have to use Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Open Lock, Ride, Sleight of Hand, Swim, Tumble or Use Rope, I guess you're right. Seriously, there are TONS of times when STR and DEX come into play outside of combat. Like every time you're walking anywhere. Or if you have to carry something. Or if you set off a trap.

That's why you can't dump these stats to the degree you're arguing is possible. You do have to put effort into it, in all the ways that I've given in previous posts.


Look, in a debate you have one central point and all arguments should revolve around that central point. Many of your arguments drift off the point and have little relevance to the central point thus making them trivial with regards to the actual discussion. They also tend to deal with small things and not really address the point they are written in response to.

No, they deal with points you bring up to support your central argument. They don't drift one whit. You seem to want to make supporting arguments and have me just accept them unchallenged. Because when I do challenge them, you respond by telling me that it's trivial and off point. That's not debate, that's sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "Nah! Nah! Nah! I'm Right, You're Wrong!"



*shrug* Use Waterbreathing and Polar Bear if you want to have an aquatic brawler. And Poison is just one in the array of abilities.

I didn't ask how to have an aquatic brawler. And I don't want to do that, because I'm not a munchkin. And I assume that you're admitting now that if you want to use Poison, you aren't going to have multiple attacks. No wait! You can just use Girallon's Blessing, and Presto! Multiple attacks! But wait, if you used Girallon's Blessing on a Waterbreathing'd Polar Bear and get 5 attacks! Hmmm... but still no poison. *Snap* I've got it! Become a Polar Bear, cast Water Breathing and Girallon's Blessing, then at the beginning of a fight cast Snakebite! Now you've got a bite attack, three claw attacks and a venomous snake bite attack!

...I don't need lessons in powergaming.




...Str 3 means you have a poor carrying capacity, Dex 3 (and Str) affects some skill checks that you won't be exactly making too often when not Wildshaped (especially since they're cross-class). Those are the impact they have out of combat. How horrible.

In the first game I ever ran, the first obstacle the party had to face was a small creek too wide to step across, and flowing too fast to wade. They didn't have any rope, so they couldn't tie each other together for safety. They had to jump across. Your druid would have failed that jump check, would have failed the DEX check to grab a treeroot, would have failed the STR check to hold on even if you did grab it, would have failed the Swim check to make it to the other side, and would have drowned.

If you really think that those stats are rarely used outside of combat, then you simply must be used to heavy, combat only games. You should kick your DM in the D20s.


He can ignore 4 stats. Two of them just aren't on his character sheet 'cause he gets those stats from his animal form, which is what I've been talking about all along. Unfortunately you can't go under 8 in point buy without racial penalty; although I've seen plenty of 7 Str, 8 Dex Middle-Aged Druids.

So instead of ignoring 2 stats, now the Druid can ignore 4 stats? This is what is known as "doubling down". Eventually you're going to say the druid can ignore all 6 stats.

...and then you're going to say that you play with a 7th stat: Comeliness, and say that with "A Thousand Faces", the druid can ignore all 7 stats!

But seriously, STR 7 and DEX 8 is a far cry from 3/3 and especially 1/1. A light load for that 7/8 character is already a heavy load for the 3/3 guy. 7/8 presents some challenges, but nothing close to the alternatives.



Fine, think what you want. It's really immaterial at this point.

If it's immaterial, why are you still posting responses?


...the sentence means: "I was suggesting a change to make Wildshape's stat changing mechanics to match Bite-line's mechanics without regard for Bite-line's duration because Bite-line's duration has no relevance with regards to how to fix Wildshape."

Yeah, I get what you're trying to say. But "trivial" still isn't the right word. This would actually be the correct time (for the first time) to use "beside the point". That phrase would actually apply here. "Trivial" doesn't, which is why those one word answers are so tricky.


...I think I said this a few times, but again: Str 1 isn't the point, a Druid with no stats for frontlining being a frontliner is. Str 1 is just an extreme example of what exactly is the root problem by my argument.

And here is where you completely miss the point. You had claimed that the argument wasn't about fairness, and I showed you a quote of yours in which you complain very specifically that it IS about fairness.

Do you understand that? Do you understand that in one post, you say wildshape is unfair, and then when I address your claim, you completely contradict yourself saying it's not about fairness?


I don't see why you'd want to fight in a form with only one attack given option, but whatever.

Maybe you like alligators? Maybe you like sharks? Maybe you like wolves? Maybe you're not a munchkin?


Ok, this particular metaphora doesn't work... You have yet to give one reason not to make this change to Wildshape.

Other than that a lot of people like wildshape as it is? They don't count, huh?


Not elegant or logical though. If changing things, I'd prefer to find the best way of doing it, which is why I don't like the idea of making arbitrary limitations and which is why I'd definitely change the part where Wildshape REPLACES ability scores.

Do you realize that I was agreeing with you there? I was saying you had a good idea.



Well, the change suggested for Wildshape here pretty much does exactly that; you maintain the individuality of the various forms while still only getting enchantment bonuses and mayhap some of the special abilities, meaning the base stats matter and you can't further buff up from the form's base stats.

I know. I was agreeing with you on this.

Eldariel
2009-07-27, 09:41 PM
Examples given in support of an argument are never "trivial". Claims made w/o supporting evidence are nothing more than bare assertions. I think on some level you realize this, which is why you kept trying to salvage your example.

Ok, let's see here:

One other big problem is, Wildshape has broken mechanics. It means you can ignore two of your stats entirely and one of your stats partially, making a 1/1/14/ Druid almost as good as an 18/18/14 Druid.

If we change the "1/1/14" to "Low Str & Dex" and "18/18/14" to "High Str & Dex", none of the message is lost but your complaint with regards to unnatural stat arrays is invalid. Therefore we can conclude that the exact numbers are in no ways central to the point and thus you should not cling to them but instead address the point of low Str & Dex and high Str & Dex Druids having precious little difference with regards to efficiency as frontliners (which you are doing below - thank you - but that's a very specific situation you keep bringing up so I'm still not inclined to call it a relevant difference).


If he gets knocked to STR or DEX 0, there's a good chance he gets coup de grace'd the next round. The point is it's an extreme handicap. And if a DM allows a player to take a STR and DEX of 1, and doesn't ever make him deal with the adverse consequences of that decision, then yes, the DM is not worried a bit about the PCs being "balanced".

How often do you expect him to fight outside Wildshape? How often do you expect for him to face Str/Dex-debilitating effects in those fights? How often do you expect him to be hit and fail his saves by the said effects in the said fights? Needs to be quite the sequence of coincidences for that to happen.


Actually, the precise numbers matter greatly, because the focus and resources you're discussing are represented by numbers. The precise numbers tell us precisely how much they are focusing on a stat, and how many resources they're devoting to it. Your argument is that the Druid can devote "no resources" to STR and DEX, and I'm showing you how that's wrong.

But his combat prowess doesn't change if he doesn't devote resources in those stats. That's my original argument on this subject this chimera of an argument sprouted from.


STR and DEX only come up in combat? Aside from when you have to use Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Open Lock, Ride, Sleight of Hand, Swim, Tumble or Use Rope, I guess you're right. Seriously, there are TONS of times when STR and DEX come into play outside of combat. Like every time you're walking anywhere. Or if you have to carry something. Or if you set off a trap.

How often do you roll those in a social situation where you can't use Wildshape?


That's why you can't dump these stats to the degree you're arguing is possible. You do have to put effort into it, in all the ways that I've given in previous posts.

I still disagree. A savvy player, given the ability to remain the adventuring day in Wildshape, can make do with 1 Str and 1 Dex. Sure, you'll have to be careful of poisons targeting those stats when not Wildshaped, but you have to be careful of those anyways. And you don't do acrobatics in social situation, but as a Druid you aren't doing that anyways. I've simply never seen a scenario where the problems you're bringing up would materialize and cause actual issues and I cannot imagine a campaign where they would on a consistent basis (outside Str 1 carrying capacity, which is obviously incredibly annoying and a great reason to move around in Wildshape...but you'll do that anyways whenever possible).


No, they deal with points you bring up to support your central argument. They don't drift one whit. You seem to want to make supporting arguments and have me just accept them unchallenged. Because when I do challenge them, you respond by telling me that it's trivial and off point. That's not debate, that's sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "Nah! Nah! Nah! I'm Right, You're Wrong!"

Because the counterarguments you've made really don't disprove any of the points. Which is again why there's no point in discussing them with regards to the central argument. In an academic argument, both sides present a certain number of points for their side of the story.

Then the points are then discussed, but they aren't argued indefinitely and to small sidetracks or discussions that deal with portions of portions of supporting arguments and aren't enough to discredit said arguments no matter which way they go. This should apply to internet debates just the same - we can either focus on the main argument and keep the discussion on it and the surrounding factors or we can drift into portions of the supporting factors that don't matter enough to sway the main argument one way or the other anyways.

I'm trying to go with the former because the latter means the actual point is lost and we discuss things that don't really impact our conclusions in the end, which is why I'm striving to ignore things that have no direct relevance to Wildshape's present mechanics' optimality.


I didn't ask how to have an aquatic brawler. And I don't want to do that, because I'm not a munchkin. And I assume that you're admitting now that if you want to use Poison, you aren't going to have multiple attacks. No wait! You can just use Girallon's Blessing, and Presto! Multiple attacks! But wait, if you used Girallon's Blessing on a Waterbreathing'd Polar Bear and get 5 attacks! Hmmm... but still no poison. *Snap* I've got it! Become a Polar Bear, cast Water Breathing and Girallon's Blessing, then at the beginning of a fight cast Snakebite! Now you've got a bite attack, three claw attacks and a venomous snake bite attack!

...I don't need lessons in powergaming.

Few dinosaurs have multiple attacks with poison. I recall some serpents had multiple attacks too. But ultimately, poison is just one ability in the vast pool of options available. If you need fighting power and can't find a multiattack form with poisons, you don't use poisons for that particular fight. If you instead face an opponent especially vulnerable to poisons, chances are you don't need multiple attacks to take it down quick enough.


In the first game I ever ran, the first obstacle the party had to face was a small creek too wide to step across, and flowing too fast to wade. They didn't have any rope, so they couldn't tie each other together for safety. They had to jump across. Your druid would have failed that jump check, would have failed the DEX check to grab a treeroot, would have failed the STR check to hold on even if you did grab it, would have failed the Swim check to make it to the other side, and would have drowned.

No, he would have been in his overland wildshape mode, whichever it is (Deinonychus, Leopard, Brown Bear, something to that effect), and made the check just as fine as everyone else. He might also have been flying on his animal companion (for example Dire Bat on level 4) or just...y'know, had the rope ('cause seriously, who goes adventuring without a rope?).

If it's so low level you don't have Wildshape, of course I'm not advocating playing a Druid with 1 Str and 1 Dex without Wildshape - I specifically directed the argument at a problem generated by Wildshape and thus it applies only once Wildshape becomes available.


If you really think that those stats are rarely used outside of combat, then you simply must be used to heavy, combat only games. You should kick your DM in the D20s.

Social =/= Out of combat. You can be Wildshaped out of combat.


So instead of ignoring 2 stats, now the Druid can ignore 4 stats? This is what is known as "doubling down". Eventually you're going to say the druid can ignore all 6 stats.

No, Druid doesn't need 4 stats any more than the Fighter needs his Charisma. He can ignore 2, but he doesn't need 4. That's the fundamental difference between Fighter ignoring his Charisma and Druid ignoring his Str and Dex; the Druid actually replaces the stats with those of his Wildshape-form, while the Fighter merely lives with poor Charisma. The Druid doesn't have poor Str and Dex most of the time; the Fighter still has a poor Charisma.

But yes, the Druid can afford to dump 4 stats if necessary only packing Wis & Con; he has enough skills to get by with 8 Int and he doesn't need to go for the skills that use Charisma and Str and Dex are replaced by Wildshape.


...and then you're going to say that you play with a 7th stat: Comeliness, and say that with "A Thousand Faces", the druid can ignore all 7 stats!

Or not.


But seriously, STR 7 and DEX 8 is a far cry from 3/3 and especially 1/1. A light load for that 7/8 character is already a heavy load for the 3/3 guy. 7/8 presents some challenges, but nothing close to the alternatives.

And the Druid still has the same combat prowess most of the time thanks to Wildshape. Not my fault point buy doesn't allow dropping your Str down to 3 to increase other stats (being Venerable would work if not for Constitution).


If it's immaterial, why are you still posting responses?

Because you've commented on my understanding of what I'm saying on multiple points provoking responses for personal reasons and because I like to finish discussions until some kind of understanding is reached (which I feel we have on the primary point).

Since I'm replying to your posts, I'll still address all the things I think we haven't reached an understanding on and all the things I think you're misunderstanding me on since that advances my goal of reaching a consensus on the matter. Some points are also simple replies to your questions or clarifications on what I mean where it seems necessary.


Yeah, I get what you're trying to say. But "trivial" still isn't the right word. This would actually be the correct time (for the first time) to use "beside the point". That phrase would actually apply here. "Trivial" doesn't, which is why those one word answers are so tricky.

triv⋅i⋅al
  /ˈtrɪviəl/ triv-ee-uhl] Show IPA

–adjective
1. of very little importance or value; insignificant: [/i]Don't bother me with trivial matters.[/i]

"Trivial" does appear accurate enough in the context of "trivial with regards to this discussion".


And here is where you completely miss the point. You had claimed that the argument wasn't about fairness, and I showed you a quote of yours in which you complain very specifically that it IS about fairness.

Do you understand that? Do you understand that in one post, you say wildshape is unfair, and then when I address your claim, you completely contradict yourself saying it's not about fairness?

I can see where you'd get the idea, but the fairness of D&D in general is not a requirement for an attempt to make Druid's Wildshape fair and require a similar investment compared to the melee types' combat capability.

The former addresses the whole system while the latter addresses one very specific point in the said system. D&D might not be fair as written, but that doesn't make making portions of it fair any less valuable a pursuit.

In fact, by changing enough pieces in the puzzle, the whole works out eventually - this is one of those pieces and just because it and a thousand others aren't fair right now doesn't mean that's how it should be.


Maybe you like alligators? Maybe you like sharks? Maybe you like wolves? Maybe you're not a munchkin?

*shrug* Certain forms are better for combat than others. As long as we maintain their individuality, that's going to remain a fact. If you fight in Wildshape with your life on the line, chances are you'll make the decision on which form to use thinking first and foremost of what gives your bunch the best chance of coming out of there alive and second your personal fondness of any given animal.

It's little consolation that you died as a Wolf when really liking Wolves if you died because you shifted into one instead of a form that would've been up to the task at hands. Pick the choice you like the best out of equals; not some vastly inferior form just 'cause "I refuse to think of my survival!" unless that's your character's entire shtick and your playgroup is ok with him probably getting them killed eventually.


Other than that a lot of people like wildshape as it is? They don't count, huh?

I don't really see why they wouldn't like the changed Wildshape just as much.


Do you realize that I was agreeing with you there? I was saying you had a good idea.

I know. I was agreeing with you on this.

Maybe the tone of the rest of your post lead me astray here. I'm glad we're agreed on the most important point at least and I apologize for misunderstanding you there.

Ungvar
2009-07-27, 09:57 PM
I understand the problem now. You have never seen a well played druid, and do not understand its power. I have played a Str 6, Dex 8 druid, from 1-15, and I would have happily taken lower Str and Dex if the point buy system we were using had allowed it. You can drop your Str and Dex into the toilet and still be your parties MVP with a druid.

I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I've seen or understand. You're experience w/ a 6/8 guy has no relevance to the discussion about 3/3 or 1/1.


1. You have an animal companion who is at least as good as most characters in the party from levels 1-4. You send him up to attack. You stand in the back, next to the wizard. Yes, the wizard has 3-8 points higher AC than you do, (You have about 9, 10+2 leather armor +1 small size -4 dex, he has about 16, 10+2 dex +4 if his mage armor is up) but you have double his hit points, and neither one of you plans to be in melee combat.

And then something hits your party from behind, because the bad guys either don't know they're only supposed to attack from one direction, or they're so mean that they don't care.


2. You don't memorize Shillelagh or Produce Flame. You do crowd control with entangle or obscuring mist, or you heal with cure light wounds or lesser vigor, or you use offensive spells like Snakes Swiftness, Flaming Sphere, or Summon monster, or give stat buffs. If you want to melee, you cast aspect of the wolf, and just like wild shape, you are suddenly about as good as the fighters for 10 minutes/level. Level 1-3 parties have very short adventuring days.

As heartbreaking as it is for a druid, you're not always close enough to nature to make Entangle useful. Sure it's great out on the trail, but it does nothing in a dungeon. Obscuring Mist controls your own party as well as it does controlling enemy crowds. Obscuring Mist is an avoid combat or a get out of combat spell, not a combat spell. Healing HP is boring, and you'll probably be using all of your healing on yourself, because your pitiful AC is going mean you will be shedding HP like a winter coat. Flaming Sphere can't help you until 3rd level, and even then, it and Summon Nature's Ally (not Monster) only last a few rounds. Snake's Swiftness is an extremely crappy spell, so I'm going to assume you mean Mass Snake's Swiftness. That's a useful spell, but besides being 2nd level, it also just helps you for one round.

After that, you're back to cowering in near complete helplessness and uselessness.

As for Aspect of the Wolf, I didn't mention that because it's basically a limited, shorter duration version of wildshape. Eldariel's whole argument is that replacing stats is broken. I'll grant you it is the ONE way that you can hope to survive. Better pray you're not in a core-only campaign.


With your first 750 gp (or less if your dm allows partially charged wand buys) you buy an wand of cure light wounds or lesser vigor. Your second buys a wand of snakes swiftness. Now you are doing exactly as much melee damage as your parties best fighter, you can cure as well as the cleric. Your pet is still laying out damage, you have other spells memorized for utility, and the fighter hasn't even earned enough gold to buy a +1 weapon yet.

You're spamming your snakes swiftness wand, because you can't do much of anything else in combat, and you burn through all 50 charges in a couple of levels. You can't really cure in combat, because you can't dare get close enough to the actual fighting. The fighter does have a masterwork weapon, one that isn't limited by charges.


Edit: Thats assuming you have to pay full price for your cure wand. Many parties regard healing wands as a party item and are willing to cover all or part of the cost.

As many times as you'll be using the cure/vigor wand on yourself, you'll probably be required to pay for at least half of it.


3. You wear leather armor (8 pounds if you are a gnome) and carry 2 wands. Everything else goes in saddlebags on your mount. Thats a light load.

It's a light load until you take a single point of STR damage. You are one centipede bite away from immobility. And you are one Shadow's average touch from death. And all those myriad of spells and whatnot that can cause you fatigue? Congrats, your 15 lb leather armor now buries you under it's weight.

My point is, you are too close to being completely helpless for this build to be valid.

And all of this is just combat. Character death might normally happen in combat, but that's not the only time the danger exists. With that abysmal DEX, and the druid's poor reflex saves, you won't be making any reflex saves to avoid traps or natural hazards like landslides. You'd better never go near any body of water, because you have zero chance of being able to reliably swim.




No bigger difference than Stone Giant to Pixie. The DMG indicates that clothing type items can generally be worn by anything with the slot, because they are adjustable or magically resize. It specifically mentions that even being of a different size category doesn't matter ("your character shouldn't be penalized for being a halfling"). The exception that it gives deals with races that don't want anyone else to be able to use their items. Make sure your monks belt isn't made by drow and, per the rules, you should be OK.

The operative word there is "generally". And the exception they note is modified by the word "especially". Meaning that the rare exceptions, by RAW, specifically aren't limited to racial specific items.

Ungvar
2009-07-27, 11:40 PM
Ok, let's see here:


If we change the "1/1/14" to "Low Str & Dex" and "18/18/14" to "High Str & Dex", none of the message is lost but your complaint with regards to unnatural stat arrays is invalid. Therefore we can conclude that the exact numbers are in no ways central to the point and thus you should not cling to them but instead address the point of low Str & Dex and high Str & Dex Druids having precious little difference with regards to efficiency as frontliners (which you are doing below - thank you - but that's a very specific situation you keep bringing up so I'm still not inclined to call it a relevant difference).

I kept bringing it up because you kept bringing it up. 1/1/14 would be "almost non-existent STR and DEX", not merely "low". That's a quantitative difference of a sufficient magnitude to be a qualitative difference.


How often do you expect him to fight outside Wildshape? How often do you expect for him to face Str/Dex-debilitating effects in those fights? How often do you expect him to be hit and fail his saves by the said effects in the said fights? Needs to be quite the sequence of coincidences for that to happen.

For the first four levels, I expect him to always be fighting outside of wildshape. Fatigue is a pretty common STR and DEX debilitating effect, and if your guy is wearing any armor at all, it buries him.



But his combat prowess doesn't change if he doesn't devote resources in those stats. That's my original argument on this subject this chimera of an argument sprouted from.

It does for the first 4 levels when he doesn't have wildshape. And occaisionally thereafter when the unforeseen happens and he has to fight with his uses exhausted.


How often do you roll those in a social situation where you can't use Wildshape?

Do you mean a non-combat situation? You can roll them pretty often in the first 4 levels before wildshape.



I still disagree. A savvy player, given the ability to remain the adventuring day in Wildshape, can make do with 1 Str and 1 Dex. Sure, you'll have to be careful of poisons targeting those stats when not Wildshaped, but you have to be careful of those anyways. And you don't do acrobatics in social situation, but as a Druid you aren't doing that anyways. I've simply never seen a scenario where the problems you're bringing up would materialize and cause actual issues and I cannot imagine a campaign where they would on a consistent basis (outside Str 1 carrying capacity, which is obviously incredibly annoying and a great reason to move around in Wildshape...but you'll do that anyways whenever possible).

Again, it's a given that for the first 4 levels, you aren't ever in wildshape. Those levels kill you. And even when you do have wildshape, there's no hard and fast "adventuring day". Enemies don't attack whenever it's convenient for you. And there are plenty of times you do acrobatics outside of combat. You Hide and Move Silently usually to AVOID combat. You might Climb a city wall to open the door for besiegers. You might have to jump across a broken bridge to escape a Balrog.


Because the counterarguments you've made really don't disprove any of the points. Which is again why there's no point in discussing them with regards to the central argument. In an academic argument, both sides present a certain number of points for their side of the story.

Then the points are then discussed, but they aren't argued indefinitely and to small sidetracks or discussions that deal with portions of portions of supporting arguments and aren't enough to discredit said arguments no matter which way they go. This should apply to internet debates just the same - we can either focus on the main argument and keep the discussion on it and the surrounding factors or we can drift into portions of the supporting factors that don't matter enough to sway the main argument one way or the other anyways.

I'm trying to go with the former because the latter means the actual point is lost and we discuss things that don't really impact our conclusions in the end, which is why I'm striving to ignore things that have no direct relevance to Wildshape's present mechanics' optimality.

For every part of every post of mine, my comment directly addressed one of your own quotes, and was germane to the point you were making.

At this point, we are simply going to have to agree to disagree on the question of whether I have been "discussing" your points vs. arguing indefinitely of small sidetracks concerning portions squared etc.


Few dinosaurs have multiple attacks with poison. I recall some serpents had multiple attacks too. But ultimately, poison is just one ability in the vast pool of options available. If you need fighting power and can't find a multiattack form with poisons, you don't use poisons for that particular fight. If you instead face an opponent especially vulnerable to poisons, chances are you don't need multiple attacks to take it down quick enough.

My point was that poison is an option, but a limited one. So when you brought poison up in the first place to show that the druid has all these options, I wanted to point that out.


No, he would have been in his overland wildshape mode, whichever it is (Deinonychus, Leopard, Brown Bear, something to that effect), and made the check just as fine as everyone else. He might also have been flying on his animal companion (for example Dire Bat on level 4)

For his first four levels, he isn't in any wildshape. That's when he's wishing he hadn't given himself an almost nonexistent STR and DEX. For the first three levels, he would likewise be out of luck.


or just...y'know, had the rope ('cause seriously, who goes adventuring without a rope?).

People who have just escaped a band of gnolls and are trying to make it back to the town to warn of the impending attack.



If it's so low level you don't have Wildshape, of course I'm not advocating playing a Druid with 1 Str and 1 Dex without Wildshape - I specifically directed the argument at a problem generated by Wildshape and thus it applies only once Wildshape becomes available.

And I'm saying that thinking realistically, a 1/1 druid would not make it to 5th level. So as a DM, I would never allow that, even if we're starting at 5th level.


Social =/= Out of combat. You can be Wildshaped out of combat.

And again, my whole point was that for levels 1-4, there IS no wildshape.


No, Druid doesn't need 4 stats any more than the Fighter needs his Charisma. He can ignore 2, but he doesn't need 4. That's the fundamental difference between Fighter ignoring his Charisma and Druid ignoring his Str and Dex; the Druid actually replaces the stats with those of his Wildshape-form, while the Fighter merely lives with poor Charisma. The Druid doesn't have poor Str and Dex most of the time; the Fighter still has a poor Charisma.

The distinction you draw between "can ignore" and "doesn't need" is very unclear. A fighter can get by w/ a CHA of 1, a druid will have major troubles w/ STR/DEX 1/1. If you mean the druid can get by with 8s or maybe 6s, then I'd agree. But I don't know whether you'd call that "ignoring" or "not needing"


But yes, the Druid can afford to dump 4 stats if necessary only packing Wis & Con; he has enough skills to get by with 8 Int and he doesn't need to go for the skills that use Charisma and Str and Dex are replaced by Wildshape.

If you're saying the druid can pump up his WIS and CON, and put 8s in everything else, I'd agree that's doable. And yes, when he gets wildshape, he really starts to power up.





And the Druid still has the same combat prowess most of the time thanks to Wildshape. Not my fault point buy doesn't allow dropping your Str down to 3 to increase other stats (being Venerable would work if not for Constitution).

My point, which you didn't address, is that the 3/3 or 1/1 druid (however he got those stats-maybe his DM uses unrestricted point buy) is in a much different position than the 7/8 druid. Because those early levels are too much of a burden.



Because you've commented on my understanding of what I'm saying on multiple points provoking responses for personal reasons and because I like to finish discussions until some kind of understanding is reached (which I feel we have on the primary point).

Since I'm replying to your posts, I'll still address all the things I think we haven't reached an understanding on and all the things I think you're misunderstanding me on since that advances my goal of reaching a consensus on the matter. Some points are also simple replies to your questions or clarifications on what I mean where it seems necessary.

Then by that definition, what I think is not immaterial.


triv⋅i⋅al
  /ˈtrɪviəl/ triv-ee-uhl] Show IPA

–adjective
1. of very little importance or value; insignificant: [/i]Don't bother me with trivial matters.[/i]

"Trivial" does appear accurate enough in the context of "trivial with regards to this discussion".

It is an extremely inapt word for the context in which you use it. You may decide to continue using it, as I now know what you mean when you do, but it detracts from, rather than adds to, the understanding of your point.

And when you use it as a single word sentence, your meaning is even more obscure.



I can see where you'd get the idea, but the fairness of D&D in general is not a requirement for an attempt to make Druid's Wildshape fair and require a similar investment compared to the melee types' combat capability.

The former addresses the whole system while the latter addresses one very specific point in the said system. D&D might not be fair as written, but that doesn't make making portions of it fair any less valuable a pursuit.

In fact, by changing enough pieces in the puzzle, the whole works out eventually - this is one of those pieces and just because it and a thousand others aren't fair right now doesn't mean that's how it should be.

I never said that the effort to make D&D more fair wasn't valid. I was arguing that the most fundamental unfairness of D&D, and also the unfairness that makes wildshape overpowered (if you think it is) is spellcasting. And that you should address that source of unfairness, and not fundamentally change wildshape.

Though I agree, making wildshape give enhancement bonuses would be fine. I'd even say that not giving the druid the form's CON would be fine, too.



*shrug* Certain forms are better for combat than others. As long as we maintain their individuality, that's going to remain a fact. If you fight in Wildshape with your life on the line, chances are you'll make the decision on which form to use thinking first and foremost of what gives your bunch the best chance of coming out of there alive and second your personal fondness of any given animal.

It's little consolation that you died as a Wolf when really liking Wolves if you died because you shifted into one instead of a form that would've been up to the task at hands. Pick the choice you like the best out of equals; not some vastly inferior form just 'cause "I refuse to think of my survival!" unless that's your character's entire shtick and your playgroup is ok with him probably getting them killed eventually.

Not every fight is a fight in which you're in mortal danger. And just because a form is not the most optimal doesn't mean it's not good in a fight. And the point of D&D is to have fun, with no risk of actual death. People make sub-optimal choices for fun.



I don't really see why they wouldn't like the changed Wildshape just as much.

Maybe they're the kind of player who always wants to go with the best, most effective option. Wildshape as written is better and more effective. I personally would be fine with either one.


Maybe the tone of the rest of your post lead me astray here. I'm glad we're agreed on the most important point at least and I apologize for misunderstanding you there.

Really, no apology necessary. Though it is very polite of you to give one. Misunderstanding and the internet go hand in hand. An example of that was my own misunderstanding of what you were proposing re: wildshape and the Bite spells.

Well, I think I'm about finished with this discussion. I think there are still some things on which we disagree, but I too am glad that we did find at least one point (a major one), that wildshape as enhancement bonus granter is good but not brokenly so.

Gnaeus
2009-07-28, 08:36 AM
I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I've seen or understand. You're experience w/ a 6/8 guy has no relevance to the discussion about 3/3 or 1/1.

Well, I know that you think that low level druid combat ability depends on Shillelagh and that a druid with bad stats would need to cower in a tree so you do not understand effective druid play.


And then something hits your party from behind, because the bad guys either don't know they're only supposed to attack from one direction, or they're so mean that they don't care.

Then you withdraw to behind your fighters. You are no more fragile than your party's wizard or sorcerer, who has a better AC but half your hit points.


As heartbreaking as it is for a druid, you're not always close enough to nature to make Entangle useful. Sure it's great out on the trail, but it does nothing in a dungeon. Obscuring Mist controls your own party as well as it does controlling enemy crowds. Obscuring Mist is an avoid combat or a get out of combat spell, not a combat spell.

You memorize entangle only when you think it is going to be useful. Obscuring mist can be a very effective combat spell depending on your party. It shuts down ranged characters and casters while allowing close fighters to keep fighting. That has obvious combat implications.


Healing HP is boring,

Awwww. So we are going to have some boring combats because we cant OMGWTFPWN every combat at every level.


and you'll probably be using all of your healing on yourself, because your pitiful AC is going mean you will be shedding HP like a winter coat.

You seem to fail to understand that you aren't a front line fighter.


Flaming Sphere can't help you until 3rd level, and even then, it and Summon Nature's Ally (not Monster) only last a few rounds.

Yeah, I made a typo. Sorry. Low level combats rarely last very long.


Snake's Swiftness is an extremely crappy spell, so I'm going to assume you mean Mass Snake's Swiftness.

Wrong. Snakes Swiftness lets you do the damage of your party's best fighter. Thats usually either your pet, for some damage + a trip attempt, or a high strength fighter with a 2 handed weapon. Say 2d6+4 with + 4 to hit in a first level party, better if you have a barbarian, much better when the Power Attack comes into play. Thats well above the curve for a ranged combat spell at first or second level. (for you it's ranged, you are standing 20 feet behind the fighter when you cast it)


That's a useful spell, but besides being 2nd level, it also just helps you for one round.

Having every fighter in your party, including your pet, attack again is usually equal to several rounds worth of damage with your silly stick if you have a melee heavy party. Otherwise you memorize something else.


After that, you're back to cowering in near complete helplessness and uselessness.

No druid with any stats should ever be cowering in complete uselessness. This kind of statement is why I don't think you understand the class. Even if you WERE to be out of useful stuff to do, standing in the back, going total defense, you still have a pet who is the equal of most low level combat types taking the fight to the enemy. Compare a 3/3 (Str/Dex) Level 1 druid out of spells, with a 12/12 cleric out of spells. The druid's pet alone will do more damage, with more HP, and a better to hit, than the cleric with his mace, or many members of your party.


As for Aspect of the Wolf, I didn't mention that because it's basically a limited, shorter duration version of wildshape. Eldariel's whole argument is that replacing stats is broken. I'll grant you it is the ONE way that you can hope to survive. Better pray you're not in a core-only campaign.

It isn't the ONE way to survive, it is only one way, but an effective one. As I have pointed out, you have a wide variety of options, if you are thinking and using spells effectively. You didn't mention the combat usefulness of buffs, of which you have many at your disposal. And I haven't exhausted the druid's options. Charm animal, Chill or Heat Metal, Warp Wood, Summon Swarm, Sandblast, Wall of Smoke, Winter Chill, Binding Winds, Frost Breath, Heartfire, Winters Embrace, Creeping Cold, Briar Web. These are all combat spells, level 1 or 2, PH or SpC, that don't require attack rolls. If you can't be effective without hitting things with your stick, you don't understand druid.


You're spamming your snakes swiftness wand, because you can't do much of anything else in combat, and you burn through all 50 charges in a couple of levels. You can't really cure in combat, because you can't dare get close enough to the actual fighting. The fighter does have a masterwork weapon, one that isn't limited by charges.

1. You have lots of things you can do in combat.
2. If you are in a dungeon (because you said you can't entangle, remember) you can stand 5 feet behind your fighters who are blocking a corridor, blinging them with a cure wand every round.
3. Aww, man! you mean that at level 4 I am going to have to shell out another 750 gp for another wand, or buy the better second level version? The horror!
4. Great! I want the fighter to have an awesome weapon. After all, I am using his damage as my primary attack. After I buy my wands maybe I can loan him some cash. He needs it more than I do. I don't want him getting jealous at the awesomeness that is druid.


As many times as you'll be using the cure/vigor wand on yourself, you'll probably be required to pay for at least half of it.

O.K. I would have been willing to pay for all of it. You just don't usually have to.


It's a light load until you take a single point of STR damage. You are one centipede bite away from immobility. And you are one Shadow's average touch from death. And all those myriad of spells and whatnot that can cause you fatigue? Congrats, your 15 lb leather armor now buries you under it's weight.

You have the best fort save in the party. Centipedes don't terrify you.
My build was small. Its 8 pound leather armor only drops it to heavy of fatigued.
Shadows are a danger. You do have to hope that your DM doesn't hit you with them for a couple of levels. There's probably one or two other CR appropriate monsters you would also be better off avoiding.


And all of this is just combat. Character death might normally happen in combat, but that's not the only time the danger exists. With that abysmal DEX, and the druid's poor reflex saves, you won't be making any reflex saves to avoid traps or natural hazards like landslides. You'd better never go near any body of water, because you have zero chance of being able to reliably swim.

You have a better chance of swimming than the fighter or the cleric in their heavy armor. You survive longer underwater because of your better con. Unlike them, you can summon a porpoise to push you to shore.

Not too many reflex save or dies at level 1-3. You still have twice as many HP as your squishier partymates, so if it is a damage trap you shouldn't be concerned.

Eldariel
2009-07-28, 08:52 AM
*snip*

Yeah, I was focusing my arguments on the time Wildshape is available; I figured if we're talking about Wildshape's impact on the Druid, the levels when Wildshape is not available aren't relevant to the discussion at hands. Of course I wouldn't play a Druid with Dex 1 starting from level 1, and Str 1 would suck too.

On those levels, the 6/8 would be much bearable and I'd rather want something to the effect of 6/14 or so; before Wildshape comes in, those stats definitely have their relevance and if wanting to actually do melee fighting, you'll need the Str too. Once Wildshape comes into picture though, that changes.


But I tend to agree, I think this discussion has run its course.

Person_Man
2009-07-28, 09:48 AM
As others have mentioned, the PHBII or Pathfinder variants both work well. I've also used a variant where the Druid can turn into any animal or natural creature they want (such as most Fey, with no size limit, but they retain the HD limit and they revert to their original form if they take damage. That prevents them from abusing it in combat, but gives them a free hand to use it for roleplaying purposes.

Ungvar
2009-07-28, 09:52 PM
Well, I know that you think that low level druid combat ability depends on Shillelagh and that a druid with bad stats would need to cower in a tree so you do not understand effective druid play.

Well, you're right in that your druid wouldn't be able to climb that tree in the first place


Then you withdraw to behind your fighters. You are no more fragile than your party's wizard or sorcerer, who has a better AC but half your hit points.

You can't always withdraw. If you're attacked by superior numbers in an open field, you might have several enemies attacking each party member. And if one decides to grapple you, you are absolute toast. Much worse than a wizard



You memorize entangle only when you think it is going to be useful. Obscuring mist can be a very effective combat spell depending on your party. It shuts down ranged characters and casters while allowing close fighters to keep fighting. That has obvious combat implications.

Smart enemies just retreat outside of the obscuring mist and wait to attack again when you emerge. And your party ranger and casters aren't going to be too happy when you "help" out the fighters.


Awwww. So we are going to have some boring combats because we cant OMGWTFPWN every combat at every level.

No, because if I wanted to spend the majority of my combats healing, I'd be a cleric.


You seem to fail to understand that you aren't a front line fighter.

You seem to fail to understand how much of a bind your pitiful AC is going to put you in, regardless of how much your enemies observe the Marquis of Queensbury's rules of combat.


Yeah, I made a typo. Sorry. Low level combats rarely last very long.

They last much longer than the duration of those round/level spells.


Wrong. Snakes Swiftness lets you do the damage of your party's best fighter. Thats usually either your pet, for some damage + a trip attempt, or a high strength fighter with a 2 handed weapon. Say 2d6+4 with + 4 to hit in a first level party, better if you have a barbarian, much better when the Power Attack comes into play. Thats well above the curve for a ranged combat spell at first or second level. (for you it's ranged, you are standing 20 feet behind the fighter when you cast it)

You do it once. And that's it. That means with your bonus spell, if you fill up on SSnake, you have all of two rounds for an entire day that your druid will be doing something during battle. At second level, you have three rounds of effectiveness. Even at first level, your SNA is better because not only will it give you one attack, but the enemy might waste an attack on your summon. At 2nd level and above, it just gets worse.


Having every fighter in your party, including your pet, attack again is usually equal to several rounds worth of damage with your silly stick if you have a melee heavy party. Otherwise you memorize something else.

Yes, I said that it's a good spell. But it's one round. And when you're out of spells, you are MUCH WORSE than the wizard, who can at least shoot his crossbow when he's out of spells, and have a non-terrible chance of contributing.


No druid with any stats should ever be cowering in complete uselessness. This kind of statement is why I don't think you understand the class. Even if you WERE to be out of useful stuff to do, standing in the back, going total defense, you still have a pet who is the equal of most low level combat types taking the fight to the enemy. Compare a 3/3 (Str/Dex) Level 1 druid out of spells, with a 12/12 cleric out of spells. The druid's pet alone will do more damage, with more HP, and a better to hit, than the cleric with his mace, or many members of your party.

If you're going to use your Animal Companion as a "frontline" fighter, you're going to have to devote at least one, maybe both your spells to vigor when you're first level. Assuming you have a wolf Animal Companion, his 14 AC is going to be much less than a battle cleric, who can fight defensively or use total defense if he needs to.


It isn't the ONE way to survive, it is only one way, but an effective one. As I have pointed out, you have a wide variety of options, if you are thinking and using spells effectively. You didn't mention the combat usefulness of buffs, of which you have many at your disposal. And I haven't exhausted the druid's options. Charm animal, Chill or Heat Metal, Warp Wood, Summon Swarm, Sandblast, Wall of Smoke, Winter Chill, Binding Winds, Frost Breath, Heartfire, Winters Embrace, Creeping Cold, Briar Web. These are all combat spells, level 1 or 2, PH or SpC, that don't require attack rolls. If you can't be effective without hitting things with your stick, you don't understand druid. [/quote]

Charm is good. Sandblast is a desperation/defensive spell for you, because it's a 10' radius burst centered on you, and if anything is that close to you, you're in trouble. Winter Chill and Frost Breath are one round and you're done.

Heartfire, Binding Winds, Chill/Heat Metal, Warp Wood, Summon Swarm, Winter's Embrace, Creeping Cold are all 2nd level, unavailable until 3rd level.

I never said the druid couldn't contribute. But the more spells you devote to offense or utility, the less you keep to bolster your defense, and you are set up so that you can't withstand more than a few rounds of being the target of an enemy. You'll fire off your spells and then die.


1. You have lots of things you can do in combat.

For two-three rounds a day!


2. If you are in a dungeon (because you said you can't entangle, remember) you can stand 5 feet behind your fighters who are blocking a corridor, blinging them with a cure wand every round.

Just stay out of all the rooms in the dungeon, because they can't block all directions. Come to think of it, you'd better hope you never get hit from both sides in a dungeon corridor, either. But nah, that never happens.


3. Aww, man! you mean that at level 4 I am going to have to shell out another 750 gp for another wand, or buy the better second level version? The horror!

At level 4, your former party members are laying flowers at your grave because you sadly didn't have enough gold to buy one at level 1.


4. Great! I want the fighter to have an awesome weapon. After all, I am using his damage as my primary attack. After I buy my wands maybe I can loan him some cash. He needs it more than I do. I don't want him getting jealous at the awesomeness that is druid.

You need all money you can save to scribe scrolls if you do happen to live past the first level or two.






You have the best fort save in the party. Centipedes don't terrify you.

Assuming your CON is 18, you have a Fort save of +6 to +8 for the first four levels. That may be the best of the party, but none of the rest of the party is at risk of total immobility from one hit. Centipedes, Spiders, Giant wasps should scare the bejeebers out of you. They will be hitting you often, and you are one poor roll away from being a goner.


My build was small. Its 8 pound leather armor only drops it to heavy of fatigued.

So now it's a build? Does that mean you're conceding that medium sized druids wouldn't work? What's your grapple modifier, -8? Now that I think about it, don't ever go near any rivers, because you have no chance against a crocodile.


Shadows are a danger. You do have to hope that your DM doesn't hit you with them for a couple of levels. There's probably one or two other CR appropriate monsters you would also be better off avoiding.

Metagaming munchkin characters fight metagaming munchkin monsters.




You have a better chance of swimming than the fighter or the cleric in their heavy armor. You survive longer underwater because of your better con. Unlike them, you can summon a porpoise to push you to shore.

They can take their armor off before they go for a swim. If they fall off a boat, they have a decent chance of using a dagger to cut through the armor fastenings. You, however, are completely boned. You're not going to be summoning any porpoises while you're under water. That's a full round action, and there's no way you can swim and cast at the same time.


Not too many reflex save or dies at level 1-3. You still have twice as many HP as your squishier partymates, so if it is a damage trap you shouldn't be concerned.

If it's a poison trap, and it's a STR or DEX poison trap, you should be really concerned.

There are just a thousand of obstacles and hazards that are easily surmountable or survivable by a reasonable character, but become enormous challenges or deadly dangers for a 3/3 character, and more so for a 1/1 character. You might be able to survive if your DM is a softy who never makes you face the consequences of your chosen Achilles Heel. But to do so means you don't play anything close to what a druid should be.

That's my position, and we'll have to agree to disagree. If you make another post, I will read it though, so you will have the last word.