preventing wild shape shenanigans

[Popertop]

there's a clause in the PHB where it states that in order for a druid to take the form of a creature, it has to be familiar with that creature's form (if it doesn't outright state this it's very close).

have any of you ever tried to limit a druid by enforcing this?

what does a druid being familiar with an animal mean to you?

[Talya]

there's a clause in the PHB where it states that in order for a druid to take the form of a creature, it has to be familiar with that creature's form (if it doesn't outright state this it's very close).

have any of you ever tried to limit a druid by enforcing this?

what does a druid being familiar with an animal mean to you?

It means your forcing the druid to max out Knowledge (nature).

[Morbis Meh]

Funny, I am about to play a druid so I kind of have to clear that with my DM; however, if I were the DM I would discuss with the player what they could do based upon the world they were in and the backstory of the character. If there was a certain form they wanted to take I would make an encounter with said beast so they could familiarize themselves with it. Hope this helps!

[Curmudgeon]

The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with. I agree that seeing a creature live is the best way for the Druid to become familiar with that form. And a Knowledge (Nature) check is required to know what type of animal that is.

[mikej]

Generally, the DM can go anyway with this one.

I have always been under the impression you need to have actuall first hand experience watching the animal, or interactive with it. Knowledge ( Nature ) check could be used to find out some details of it. It would be silly to have a Druid see a crudely drawn picture of a Polar Bear in his/her tropical jungle setting and be able to Wildshape into such animal.

[TroubleBrewing]

That's the usual way I play it.

One player went so far as to keep track of the animals she was familiar with, in the event that one of them slipped her mind in an emergency.

[olentu]

Me I generally just say whatever to avoid having to deal with all the shenanigans involved with having to physically interact with the animal to know about it. I really don't want to deal with just how well you need to know the animal (sight, touch, dissection, complete memory download, eat its liver), the amount of time spent, possibly clipping backstories, sidequests for forms, a list of all forms known by every druid encountered if I allow sharing with other druids (this can get huge if one considers how long some druids may have lived), the same list for every caster that can cast any shapechanging magic again assuming that sharing is acceptable, every monster ever encountered in the case of variant wildshapes, a complete list of every animal I have put in any place ever for random encounter rolls, and so forth.

[Talya]

Not to mention that time spent playing does not represent every second of the druid's life up to this point. Even a level 1 druid has lived in the wild for possibly years. How do you account for what animals he should already be familiar with?

[Elric VIII]

Not to mention that time spent playing does not represent every second of the druid's life up to this point. Even a level 1 druid has lived in the wild for possibly years. How do you account for what animals he should already be familiar with?

But is a level 1 Druid familiar with anything of any real power?

I find it hard to believe that a level 1 Druid would be familiar with, for instance, a complete complement of dire animals and dinosaurs. Getting familiar with some things seems like it could be dangerous.



I'm going to run a campaign where a player wants to play a Druid and I'm having him pick a climate to be familiar with and letting him choose from among native animals. I will also probobly allow him to gain additionsl familiarity over the course of the campaign via quests, et al.

[The Glyphstone]

...A level 1 druid can't Wild Shape anyways.

[Elric VIII]

...A level 1 druid can't Wild Shape anyways.

I think the assumption was that they are familiar with the animals so that as soon as they gain the ability to wildshape they have options.

[Divide by Zero]

There's being familiar with an animal, and then there's being familiar with an animal :smallwink:

[The Glyphstone]

I think the assumption was that they are familiar with the animals so that as soon as they gain the ability to wildshape they have options.

That makes more sense.

I think the only acceptable answer is "talk between player and DM". The player being automatically "familiar" with a hundred different forms is jsut as much "shenanigans" as it is for the DM to restrict the druid from using Wild Shape at all because they're not "familiar" with any animals for arbitrary definition X of 'familiar'.

[Talya]

But is a level 1 Druid familiar with anything of any real power?

I find it hard to believe that a level 1 Druid would be familiar with, for instance, a complete complement of dire animals and dinosaurs. Getting familiar with some things seems like it could be dangerous.



Despite their ability in D&D to utterly demolish the average commoner...or even warrior...an eagle is not a thing of real power, just as an example. There are dozens of animal forms a druid might know by the time they can wildshape without ever encountering it in game. It's just a case where the DM needs to use some discretion. If the druid wildshapes into a bear? That's probably not unreasonable. They aren't even aggressive to humanoids most of the time. But the druid wildshapes into a fleshraker dinosaur? You've gotta question how he's familiar.

[Elric VIII]

Despite their ability in D&D to utterly demolish the average commoner...or even warrior...an eagle is not a thing of real power, just as an example. There are dozens of animal forms a druid might know by the time they can wildshape without ever encountering it in game. It's just a case where the DM needs to use some discretion. If the druid wildshapes into a bear? That's probably not unreasonable. They aren't even aggressive to humanoids most of the time. But the druid wildshapes into a fleshraker dinosaur? You've gotta question how he's familiar.

Normal/commonplace animals are definately alright, but if the player tried to put the fleshraker into his backstory, I would be rather skeptical about the reason.

[Curmudgeon]

I rarely, if ever, allow any mechanical benefit from a character back story. (The only exception is if it pegs them to a particular region for a regional feat.) Gaining a list of powerful in-game forms to use? Never.

[Xetheral]

I usually permit a druid to be familiar with, and thus able to wildshape into, any animal listed in the Animals chapter of the MM, or that likely would be found there if the animal had a d&d write-up.

Everything else, including dinosaurs, needs to have either been encountered in the course of the campaign or somehow be (reasonably) connected to the druid's backstory (such as a non-incidental history of being a dwarven triceratops trainer as mentioned in Arms and Equipment, for example).

To somewhat compensate for this fairly restrictive interpretation that bars many of the fantasy options, I try to allow a lot of latitude for creative wildshaping into terrestrial animals (and sometimes vermin) that aren't mentioned in the sourcebooks. I fondly remember the moment in one of my early 3.0 games when the enemy Mindflayer suddenly found himself with four tentacles wrapped around a Portuguese Man o' War.

[Seerow]

Personally I like the Animorphs route, and make it so you have to have found/touched the creature at some point after gaining the ability to wild shape.

But maybe I'm just biased.

[Cog]

There's being familiar with an animal, and then there's being familiar with an animal :smallwink:
I'm going to assume you mean levels in Sorc or Wiz here. It's better for my sanity.

[Philistine]

Alternatively, suggest the player look at the Shapeshift ACF in PHB2.

[Tvtyrant]

If I was a Druid under these conditions I would probably go find a pool of water and then summon each creature on my list each time I get another set of Summon Natures Ally to at least give me a baseline for forms.

[Coidzor]

But the druid wildshapes into a fleshraker dinosaur? You've gotta question how he's familiar.

:smallconfused: If one were the kind of DM to care about that in the first place, one would have already gone over whether dinosaurs are extant in the world and home region of the character.



OP, if you're really worried about wild shape shenanigans you'll either need to A. forbid the druid from going off on his own while wildshaped and doing shenanigans (Or, heck, forbid all of the party spellcasters from doing shenanigans) or B. get rid of Natural Spell/switch to the Shapeshift variant.

[Boci]

Normal/commonplace animals are definately alright, but if the player tried to put the fleshraker into his backstory, I would be rather skeptical about the reason.

"My character knows that one day she may be able to take the form of wild creatures and in anticipation of this has already begun studying the forms most favoured by his mentor,". Would that work?

As for using the words familiar to limit wildshape, it just stinks of a DM saying "I'm worried about your power level but don't have the guts to dicuss it openly, so I'm going to use an vague word in the ability discription and call it RAW".

[Tvtyrant]

"My character knows that one day she may be able to take the form of wild creatures and in anticipation of this has already begun studying the forms most favoured by his mentor,". Would that work?

As for using the words familiar to limit wildshape, it just stinks of a DM saying "I'm worried about your power level but don't have the guts to dicuss it openly, so I'm going to use an vague word in the ability discription and call it RAW".

As opposed to the thousands of times the players do that? RAW is RAW, and early entry shenanigans are just as silly as limiting a Druid to "familiar" forms.

[Coidzor]

As opposed to the thousands of times the players do that? RAW is RAW, and early entry shenanigans are just as silly as limiting a Druid to "familiar" forms.

You got a problem with early entry, don't let early entry. :smalltongue: Once we're talking DMing shop, it is sillier because micromanaging Druid's familiar forms to any real extent just creates extra work that only serves to be annoying to both sides, banning early entry is... laughably easy, simple, and straightforward and free of effort beyond saying a handful of words.

[Boci]

As opposed to the thousands of times the players do that?

And where did I say that wasn't a problem?


RAW is RAW, and early entry shenanigans are just as silly as limiting a Druid to "familiar" forms.

So where's the RAW on what constitues familarity? What if I had a pet? What if I autopsied one? Saw it once hunting in its natural habitate?

[ericgrau]

Given that even knowledge checks only give you a few tidbits about a creature I'd say witnessing the animal rather than merely knowing about it is fair. Though I'd give half of the non-dire animals as background freebies depending on where the druid came from.

[Godskook]

I'm currently running a game using Rich's polymorph rules as a 'base', and I gotta say, it goes a long way towards fixing the issues with polymorph, to the point that my Rogue 1/Druid 5 has a hard time fighting the spotlight away from his party members, including a Warblade, Wizard/Crusader, Crusader, Swift Hunter, and newly added Swordsage.

[Munchkin-Masher]

I am under the impression that this rule shouldn't be enforced if the druid is taking levels in Master of Many Forms.

It's pretty unreasonable to expect the druid to be familiar with all manner of Abominations, Monstrous humanoid and all sorts of other things.

[Curmudgeon]

I am under the impression that this rule shouldn't be enforced if the druid is taking levels in Master of Many Forms.

It's pretty unreasonable to expect the druid to be familiar with all manner of Abominations, Monstrous humanoid and all sorts of other things.
Why? It's Master of Many Forms, not Master of All Forms. Every encounter with a new creature type should be an opportunity for the Druid/MoMF character to learn something new. If you just allow the player to flip through all the Monster Manuals and other books you'll be cheating them of that opportunity for discovery. You'll also be taking away the reason for quests to see new types of creatures, which is a good plot hook for the DM.

Why remove the fun?

[Serpentine]

have any of you ever tried to limit a druid by enforcing this?I didn't do it quite so much to "limit" a Druid, as because it made sense to me, but yes. All a Druid's forms must be something they've at least come into contact with before. When I had a Druid join in an American-themed continent, he had the choice of American animals. If he wanted a non-American animal, he needed to have a very good reason for it in his back-story.
Conversely, when a previoius Druid from Europe-themed continent came to this American continent, she was able to then choose American animals.
It might be relevant that I limit my Druids to one animal form of each type, with the option to change them at each new level.

what does a druid being familiar with an animal mean to you?Fighting it, coming into close contact with it, and/or being able to study it for a reasonably extended amount of time.

[Munchkin-Masher]

Why? It's Master of Many Forms, not Master of All Forms. Every encounter with a new creature type should be an opportunity for the Druid/MoMF character to learn something new. If you just allow the player to flip through all the Monster Manuals and other books you'll be cheating them of that opportunity for discovery. You'll also be taking away the reason for quests to see new types of creatures, which is a good plot hook for the DM.

Why remove the fun?

Because there a really Really good chance that by the time the druid hits level 7 and has 2 levels of MoMF that he won't have seen a single giant, thus making that class feature completely useless, unless the DM is willing to structure an encounter around the druid, and he might not be.

If you only allow "familiar" creatures then Master of Many Forms quickly becomes an entirely useless PrC, unless you allow the Druid to become "familiar" with creatures through knowledge checks, which i guess could work, but it also seems pretty arbitrary.

[Curmudgeon]

Because there a really Really good chance that by the time the druid hits level 7 and has 2 levels of MoMF that he won't have seen a single giant, thus making that class feature completely useless, unless the DM is willing to structure an encounter around the druid, and he might not be.
Hill Giants are CR 7. When the Druid/MoMF hits level 7 they may not have seen any Giants yet, but they're very likely to before their next level (13.33 encounters).

I see absolutely no reason to grant a huge catalog of powerful forms to a character, against the stated rules requiring familiarity, just because you think some particular DM may make encountering various creature types difficult. That would be an issue with that individual DM, not the rules.

[agahii]

If I was a druid and had that restriction I would have every druid I meet wild-shape for me into their best forms until I was familiar with all of the best ones. I would also have that I did this in druid school as part of my back story.

[Serpentine]

If I was a druid and had that restriction I would have every druid I meet wild-shape for me into their best forms until I was familiar with all of the best ones. I would also have that I did this in druid school as part of my back story.I'm not sure I'd allow that. Maybe if the other Druid got a really good Knowledge (nature) and Perform check to actually act properly like the real animal would, but it's still not actually the animal. They just look like it.

[Talya]

I'm hard pressed to weep for a druid who's DM is strict about wildshape form familiarity. Oh my, how will they survive?


Master of Many Forms is a bit different, since the class is entirely dependant on shapeshifting. I'd say a strict DM would also be obliged to throw them goodies like lots of extra very low level encounters with useful forms for them.

[Eric Tolle]

Obviously we're dealing with the "just say no" school of refereeing here. So if the GM wants to exert his power over the players, I say just save some effort and ban druids entirely. Druids have far too many ways to challenge the GM's control, and really, you don't want to neglect slapping down the rest of the party by having to focus on managing one character.

[Coidzor]

Why? It's Master of Many Forms, not Master of All Forms. Every encounter with a new creature type should be an opportunity for the Druid/MoMF character to learn something new. If you just allow the player to flip through all the Monster Manuals and other books you'll be cheating them of that opportunity for discovery. You'll also be taking away the reason for quests to see new types of creatures, which is a good plot hook for the DM.

Why remove the fun?

Because most DMs that would restrict such things so completely and totally won't want to ruin or derail their campaigns by allowing those kinds of sidequests. :smallconfused:

It just really seems like it would be playing against type for a DM that is restrictive to the point of not allowing common animals to be known to the druid to allow the druid/MoMF to go on sidequests to expand their repetoire, because the reason they're not familiar with more animals is because the DM doesn't want them ABLE to be turning into many things.


These sorts of threads are generally not about being reasonable so much as seeming reasonable while finding ways to prevent the druid from being Tier 1 by cutting off everything of Wild Shape that the DM can make appear like a reasonable move so that the player never wises up to the DM's true motive. I don't know if that's the case for this particular iteration of the thread, but the way several people have reacted to it shows that this idea is still floating around.

That's why the Shapeshift variant exists, you'll let the Druid have something without having to worry about all those forms you hate as a DM or Natural Spell.


I'm not sure I'd allow that. Maybe if the other Druid got a really good Knowledge (nature) and Perform check to actually act properly like the real animal would, but it's still not actually the animal. They just look like it.

Physically they are the animal from what I recall of the rules, and ruling in that way just shows one's real motive which is bad if one hadn't shown one's real motive from the get go.

The player is making an effort and if gaining animal forms is difficult enough that the player goes to the trouble of thinking up the strategy, then it's about the same thing as a wizard bartering with another, friendly wizard for access to their spellbook or to share spells with one another.

It seems like the player trying to play along with the situation as presented even if it's not necessarily the DM's reality. The sort of thinking about the game that should generally be rewarded rather than stifled.

[Leon]

have any of you ever tried to limit a druid by enforcing this?

what does a druid being familiar with an animal mean to you?

By encountering one living in its natural habitat undisturbed.

Never had it bother me as i have never been bothered with using Wildshape, its just another class feature that i can swap out for something more interesting and useful.

[Talya]

I maintain that the wording on "familiar with" is vague so that the DM has total control over what the player can wildshape into. Ubiquitous creatures like bears, birds, felines, canines...most DMs aren't going to bat an eyelash at them. It's there to prevent druid players from thumbing through manuals looking for that exact statisticly best creature for every situation.

[Coidzor]

I maintain that the wording on "familiar with" is vague so that the DM has total control over what the player can wildshape into.

The DM has total control over a lot of things. It's still a faux pas to exercise their power in certain ways.


It might be relevant that I limit my Druids to one animal form of each type, with the option to change them at each new level.

What do you mean by type here?

[Diamondeye]

If I was a druid and had that restriction I would have every druid I meet wild-shape for me into their best forms until I was familiar with all of the best ones. I would also have that I did this in druid school as part of my back story.

If you tried that when I was the DM, you'd be told A) seeing another druid in the form doesn't make you familiar B) re-write your backstory and C) quit worrying o much about having the "best" forms; picking a theme and being consistent with it is likely to get you a lot farther with me than trying to evade a restriction with backstory.

If that wasn't acceptable, you'd be shown the door. Generally, I find that people who try to evade a restriction and don't like it when they're told "no" are more trouble than they're worth as players.

[Coidzor]

IGenerally, I find that people who try to evade a restriction and don't like it when they're told "no" are more trouble than they're worth as players.

Do you never play with friends at all then?

[Elric VIII]

As for using the words familiar to limit wildshape, it just stinks of a DM saying "I'm worried about your power level but don't have the guts to dicuss it openly, so I'm going to use an vague word in the ability discription and call it RAW".

It's more of the idea of having an agreement between us regarding a powerful class feature. In fact, I have directly told the player that I will be using it as a power-limiting factor, so there's really no avoidance there. Although I can see some DMs simply not discussing it with the player before slapping the limitation on the class.

[Coidzor]

Although I can see some DMs simply not discussing it with the player before slapping the limitation on the class.

From what I've seen of past incarnations of the thread, I'd have to replace some with most, because people just don't like talking for some strange reason. :/

[Solaris]

Do you never play with friends at all then?

It's not when I play with friends that I have this problem, it's when I play with people who aren't friends outside the game.
Sorry, I don't have friends of the sort who think it's fun to screw up something I've worked on.

Personally, I like the idea of the druid having to spend a month (at least!) studying the animal in its natural habitat, learning it, how it moves, how it acts, and maybe even some exercises like kung-fu as a study aid for it.

[Boci]

Personally, I like the idea of the druid having to spend a month (at least!) studying the animal in its natural habitat, learning it, how it moves, how it acts, and maybe even some exercises like kung-fu as a study aid for it.

Just pray the rest of the party does as well.

[Coidzor]

Personally, I like the idea of the druid having to spend a month (at least!) studying the animal in its natural habitat, learning it, how it moves, how it acts, and maybe even some exercises like kung-fu as a study aid for it.

...What kind of game affords that kind of luxury to not do anything else? :smallconfused:

I mean, if you give that kind of downtime regularly, artificer players must love you.

[Talya]

My rule of thumb would be, "no looking through books to find specific examples of the best possible stat block you can find for any given situation." You should be able to describe in a very general way what you want to turn into and have it valid. Assuming a druid has a passing familiarity with dinosaurs in general, "I become a medium-sized bipedal carnivorous dinosaur" is appropriate. "I wildshape into a fleshraker dinosaur" is not. Obviously, direct familiarity (as in, "i've encountered this specific creature without shenanigans") can circumvent this. For relatively common creature types, feel free to be specific, you've probably encountered them.

[SuperFerret]

Because there a really Really good chance that by the time the druid hits level 7 and has 2 levels of MoMF that he won't have seen a single giant, thus making that class feature completely useless, unless the DM is willing to structure an encounter around the druid, and he might not be.

Orges are CR 3(?) Giants, Trolls are CR 5(?), and a Hill Giant at CR 7 seems like a good "boss" monster for a lower level adventure (where the giant bullies smaller humanoids into following him).

[olentu]

My rule of thumb would be, "no looking through books to find specific examples of the best possible stat block you can find for any given situation." You should be able to describe in a very general way what you want to turn into and have it valid. Assuming a druid has a passing familiarity with dinosaurs in general, "I become a medium-sized bipedal carnivorous dinosaur" is appropriate. "I wildshape into a fleshraker dinosaur" is not. Obviously, direct familiarity (as in, "i've encountered this specific creature without shenanigans") can circumvent this. For relatively common creature types, feel free to be specific, you've probably encountered them.

So then do you roll randomly from all dinosaurs that fit that description every time the druid wildshapes.

[JonestheSpy]

Obviously we're dealing with the "just say no" school of refereeing here. So if the GM wants to exert his power over the players, I say just save some effort and ban druids entirely. Druids have far too many ways to challenge the GM's control, and really, you don't want to neglect slapping down the rest of the party by having to focus on managing one character.

Ah, the "There's no mechanical rule defining this exactly, so a DM using their best judgment is a big meanie" school of thought (see every discussion of Rope Trick).

Anyway, Serpentine's view makes the most sense to me - druids are 'familiar' with the animals that are found in the environment they live in. How they would become familiar of new animals in-game is trickier - perhaps they'd have to spend time around a new animal then make a Knowledge (Nature) check to see if they get it right; the longer time they spend - or the greater the similarity with animals they already know - the lower the DC.

[Coidzor]

Anyway, Serpentine's view makes the most sense to me - druids are 'familiar' with the animals that are found in the environment they live in. How they would become familiar of new animals in-game is trickier - perhaps they'd have to spend time around a new animal then make a Knowledge (Nature) check to see if they get it right; the longer time they spend - or the greater the similarity with animals they already know - the lower the DC.

Even that is more reasonable than most of the proposed solutions which were that the druid had to do that in game for all of the animals they would have already been familiar with just growing up and training to become a druid.

[visigani]

ACTUALLY...


Here's a "homebrew" rule that might work well based on the rather ambiguous fluff text.


The Druid must "bond" with the spirit of the animal... either by eating it, slaying it, ritually burying (or some other rite) a long time companion of that species. Essentially, they must have some sort of meaningful interaction with the creature.

They then perform a ritual over that creatures corpse (or place of recent death) and bond with the spirit of that animal.

In order to bond with the creature they must pay an amount of XP equal to what they would have earned had they slain the creature (in the event they had not) or they do not gain the awarded experience points in the event they do slay the creature.

A druid may bond with as many creatures as she has points of wisdom modifier.

In the case of elementals or plant creatures she must consume (inhale in the case of air elementals, inhale smoke in the event of fire elementals, or drink in the case of water elementals) some portion of the elemental or its chosen element while performing the ritual over its body. Simply slaying the element is not enough.

She need not bond with creatures of her own type in order to wild shape into them.

[Gametime]

I think any amount of restrictiveness or permissiveness is fine so long as the player and DM talk it out first. Something that depends so heavily on judgement calls can't really be resolved by blanket rules; as long as both parties are good with dialogue and don't insist on making it into a binding contract, there shouldn't be a problem.

Really, this seems like a bigger issue for wildshape rangers. Druids can lose wildshape entirely and still be effective spellcasters with a built-in pet beatstick. Wildshape rangers need it to be useful and, more importantly, fun.

[Talya]

ACTUALLY...


Here's a "homebrew" rule that might work well based on the rather ambiguous fluff text.


The Druid must "bond" with the spirit of the animal... either by eating it, slaying it, ritually burying (or some other rite) a long time companion of that species.

This feels vaguely like a Lunar Exalt.

[The Shadowmind]

If we are going by vague RAW, then the rule of"The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with"

Then the limit would only apply to animals, and not plants and elements, and for the Master of Many Forms who doesn't focus on animals would be fine.

Nerfing the MoMF after the player already voluntarily gave up top tier spellcasting seems needless cruel and prevents the player from using most of their class features.

[OverdrivePrime]

I generally go with the player's backstory. If they're a desert druid, they're familiar with desert creatures. If they're a mountain druid, they're familiar with mountain creatures.
Shifting into a form that's not native to your backstory turf means you need to have spent a minimum of 10 minutes observing the creature at some point during the game. First time you change into a new form requires a knowledge check.

Anyone trying to shapeshift into a dinosaur gets the heaviest dice bag in the room upside the chops.

(As much as I liked Ka-Zar, my worlds do not have a Savage Land.)

[visigani]

This feels vaguely like a Lunar Exalt.

Never heard of it.

[Talya]

Never heard of it.

You'd need to leave the 3e/3.5e/d20 forum to hear about it. It's White Wolf.

[Ungvar]

Speaking of Wild Shape RAW, the Rules Compendium changed the text of the class feature, ditching the "familiar" wording entirely:


...The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid has seen or could reasonably know about

Obviously there's still room for interpretation here, but it seems to me that this limitation is MUCH LESS restrictive than the previous formulation of the rule. Which makes sense to me. If you have player who is combing through the rule books to find new forms, it could be that he's a powergamer, or it could be that he thinks wild shaping is really fun. The game designers probably thought the same, and didn't want to so severely limit the use of a marquee class feature.

As a DM, you should not want to clamp down on something a player is having fun with unless there is no alternative. I realize druids are formidable, but if the aspect of the druid that the player enjoys is wild shaping, try to work with them on that. There are tons of ways you can limit the spellcasting of the druid, which is really the class feature that makes them so powerful.

[Serpentine]

Physically they are the animal from what I recall of the rules, and ruling in that way just shows one's real motive which is bad if one hadn't shown one's real motive from the get go.What "real motive"? Having it make sense to me within my game world? :smallconfused:
As I've said several times: if you can convince me that it makes sense for your character, I'll probably allow it. I could be convinced that having another Druid turn into an animal for the purpose of becoming familiar with it makes sense, but my first reaction is that it does not. And it's not as if Druids are at a disadvantage from the outset, anyway, nor that they don't have any options ("I turn into a pigeon and survey the wildlife of this area", how terribly inconvenient).

What do you mean by type here?You know, each size category, elemental, etc. Each one listed in the Druid block. But Druids are something I like to fiddle around with, so I'm happy to negotiate over them - I might be willing to change the Wildshape to one bird form, one mammal, one reptile, and so on, or work something out if they want to have a specific theme.

[samster712]

I have a question here:

So one of the coolest feats in my opinion is "frozen wild shape" if I am in a random world that isn't frostfell, does that mean I can't use that feat to turn into any "cold" forms like urskan?

Also...along that same line, I feel that a 12 headed cryohydra and a 1 headed cryohydra are extremely similar (similar fighting styles and such) and only have a difference of heads. Now if a party had an encounter with a 1 headed cryohydra and had a significantly high Knowledge (nature) to know about 12-headed cryohydra, would you rule that the druid could now transform into any appropriate numbered head cryohydra? The reason this would be useful is because the party would not have to face a 12 headed cryohydra to turn into one (a difference of CR of 6 and 13)

[Coidzor]

What "real motive"? Having it make sense to me within my game world? :smallconfused:

I've learned from examples IRL and from this board to never trust things that follow a DM talking about things making sense in their game world. Mostly because it has a strange tendency to correspond with forbidding things that would make the DM have to think about something for longer than the two seconds it takes them to say no and be a lie anyway when the things being objected to fit perfectly well with the DMs actual stated conception of the world.

So, think less your personal motives as Serpentine and more any other hypothetical DM... or, indeed, any of the other DMs that have posted here.

The motives, as the words of those holding them have expressed themselves, do not appear to be so much about making sense in a given game world as being either afraid of wild shape breaking the campaign or letting the druid become too powerful when there's already a nerf that comes highly recommended and from WOTC no less.


As I've said several times: if you can convince me that it makes sense for your character, I'll probably allow it. I could be convinced that having another Druid turn into an animal for the purpose of becoming familiar with it makes sense, but my first reaction is that it does not.

Ok then. Why?


You know, each size category, elemental, etc. Each one listed in the Druid block. But Druids are something I like to fiddle around with, so I'm happy to negotiate over them - I might be willing to change the Wildshape to one bird form, one mammal, one reptile, and so on, or work something out if they want to have a specific theme.

That's kind of an odd progression. :smallconfused: How did you come up with it?

[visigani]

This feels vaguely like a Lunar Exalt.

That's just crazy talk.

[Serpentine]

Ok then. Why?Because for all it looks like a duck, maybe even quacks like a duck, it isn't a duck, just a Druid dressed like one. It doesn't think like the animal, it doesn't act like the animal, it doesn't live like the animal. It isn't the animal.
As I said, I could possibly be convinced to allow it with a successful Perform check to imitate its natural behaviour, and a Knowledge (nature) check to get that behaviour right. I would probably be convinced if it was accompanied by a detailed lesson on the biology and behaviour of the animal, with the Druid's Wildshape as an illustration of it. But I wouldn't allow it straight off the bat without any qualifiers at all.

That's kind of an odd progression. :smallconfused: How did you come up with it?Uh... From the Druid block, as I said :smallconfused:
At 5th level, a Druid can turn into any Small or Medium animal. They can turn into any Large animal at 8th, Tiny at 11th, Huge at 15th, at 12th plant creatures, at 16th any Small, Medium or Large elemental, and at 20th level any Huge elemental.
My Druids, at 5th level, can turn into a single Small or Medium animal, one Large at 8th, and so on, the form remaining the same every wildshape. Their choices of single creatures can be changed when they level up, and it must be an animal they have had an opportunity to study.
As I said, if they wanted to tweak the way their Druid wildshapes, I'm more than happy to negotiate on it.
Note that when my party Druid turned up in the new continent, I said at the time of levelling up that she could be familiar with pretty much any animal found in this sort of habitat on this continent. I don't expect them to narrate every single thing the character does for two months...

[olentu]

You know one thing that seems a bit strange as a requirement is the necessity that the druid must know the secret and inner workings of the mind of the animal. I mean it is not like the druid is forced to act in kind. Not to mention the problem of how domesticated is too domesticated. Are dogs invalid forms since they have been domesticated. Does one need to find a feral dog. Do animals that have been displaced and managed to change their behavior count as natural. If one trains a bear does it stop counting as a valid form. Does the druid need to do a statistical analysis of all the animals in a significantly large population to determine how the average member of that population acts. Does the druid need to avoid any contact with the animal since contact can change the animals behavior due the the outside influence of the druid disrupting the untouched natural environment.

And that is not to mention intelligent forms that can vary from one extreme to the other. E.g. if one only knows a crazy member of the class of creature can one transform into that creature.

[Serpentine]

Where does it say they can't wildshape into a domestic animal? :smallconfused:
I mean, if all you'd ever seen was a pomeranian I wouldn't let you turn into a wolf, but you could certainly turn into a pomeranian if you wanted to.

[olentu]

Where does it say they can't wildshape into a domestic animal? :smallconfused:

Oh that is the question I am wondering about. If one must intimately know the natural behaviors of an animal does domestication make the animal invalid and thus one must find an untouched feral version of the animal to study. There have been several people who have expressed a view about the naturalness of the environment or behaviors of the animal in question and I am wondering how natural is natural enough.

[Amphetryon]

Out of curiosity, do folks impose the same 'familiarity' restriction on SNA and Summon Monster? A 3rd level Druid can summon Hippogriffs, for example, but it's entirely likely that s/he's never seen one while adventuring.

If you restrict one in this way and not the other, what's the rationale, and what's to prevent summoning from creating 'familiarity'? If you do restrict both in this way, what's the rationale? The summoning spells lack the 'familiarity' clause, AFAIK.

[Serpentine]

Because a Summon spell doesn't (usually?) create something out of nothing. It calls something that already exists, and aside from maybe needing to know the name of it or a vague idea of what it looks like perhaps, the caster doesn't need to know anything else about it.
For Wildshape, on the other hand, they're physically changing their bodies into this new form.

As an aside, I quite like the idea of characters summoning specific individual creatures.

[Amphetryon]

Because a Summon spell doesn't (usually?) create something out of nothing. It calls something that already exists, and aside from maybe needing to know the name of it or a vague idea of what it looks like perhaps, the caster doesn't need to know anything else about it.
For Wildshape, on the other hand, they're physically changing their bodies into this new form.

As an aside, I quite like the idea of characters summoning specific individual creatures.

But the transmogrification effect of Wild Shape isn't creating something out of nothing either. . . .

[Serpentine]

It's changing your body into something it's not. I don't see why it's unreasonable to expect the Druid to have at least some sort of template to base it on. Hell, I wouldn't find it all that unreasonable to houserule in the Animorphs "you have to touch it first to get its DNA" - although I wouldn't, if only for logistical reasons.

[Coidzor]

Uh... From the Druid block, as I said :smallconfused:
At 5th level, a Druid can turn into any Small or Medium animal.

So "any" just directly translated into "one," for you then? Because that's what I was asking, not what you just explained which I understood very easily after the first time you said it.


Because for all it looks like a duck, maybe even quacks like a duck, it isn't a duck, just a Druid dressed like one.


For Wildshape, on the other hand, they're physically changing their bodies into this new form.

Well, which is it then, the druids physically changing their bodies or playing dress up?


It doesn't think like the animal, it doesn't act like the animal, it doesn't live like the animal.

Why is this necessary to you though? The druid doesn't have to make a check like a Binder does to avoid acting on the natural inclinations of the animal form it takes.

[Serpentine]

I'm not sure what you're saying, not least because you seemed to be confused over my original explanation.
I changed "any" to "one", yes. The progression stays the same.

[Coidzor]

I'm not sure what you're saying, not least because you seemed to be confused over my original explanation.
I changed "any" to "one", yes. The progression stays the same.

Your "original explanation" was not an explanation. You just said "Type," and I asked for clarification. Then you clarified and I understood that.

So I asked how you came up with this and why.

[Serpentine]

I explained it after that :smalltongue:
I dunno. A combination of a way to nerf Druids slightly, and adding some extra flavour.

[SuperFerret]

If I was a druid and had that restriction I would have every druid I meet wild-shape for me into their best forms until I was familiar with all of the best ones. I would also have that I did this in druid school as part of my back story.

Not every druid would be willing to share, some will no doubt have a different opinion of "best", and "druid school"? Really?

[olentu]

Not every druid would be willing to share, some will no doubt have a different opinion of "best", and "druid school"? Really?

Well they have to learn druidic somewhere and what better place then druid school.

[Solaris]

Just pray the rest of the party does as well.

They require nontrivial amounts of time spent training to go up in levels.


...What kind of game affords that kind of luxury to not do anything else? :smallconfused:

I mean, if you give that kind of downtime regularly, artificer players must love you.

Good thing it's not Eberron. I don't have artificers in my game.

[SuperFerret]

Well they have to learn druidic somewhere and what better place then druid school.

I don't like the idea of wizard school, but even if you buy into arcane magic being taught in a sterile curriculum as opposed to the intimate nature of an apprenticeship, surely something as primal as being a druid needs to be a one on one learning experience.

[Coidzor]

surely something as primal as being a druid needs to be a one on one learning experience.

Why? A master can keep and teach several apprentices.

[Serpentine]

2cp: The precurser to my current campaign started in a full-blown Adventurer's Academy <.<

[NNescio]

2cp: The precurser to my current campaign started in a full-blown Adventurer's Academy <.<

Classes include Combat 101: Initiative and You, C-110A: Attacks of Opportunity, and the dreaded C-212BS: Grappling with Grappling Rules.

[Serpentine]

One of the characters was giving a lecture on... something to do with religion, cuz he got a much better Knowledge (religion) check than the actual professor. Then he was interupted by the Wizard "sneaking" in, wearing chainmail armour, after shenanigans involving accidentally punching a marshall in the face, and walking into the ladies' baths. And then he decided to "sneak" out the window.

edit: Oh, and it was Montgomery Snake's Elevated Academy for Adventurers.

[NNescio]

One of the characters was giving a lecture on... something to do with religion, cuz he got a much better Knowledge (religion) check than the actual professor. Then he was interupted by the Wizard "sneaking" in, wearing chainmail armour, after shenanigans involving accidentally punching a marshall in the face, and walking into the ladies' baths. And then he decided to "sneak" out the window.

edit: Oh, and it was Montgomery Snake's Elevated Academy for Adventurers.

"Mr. Wizardton, that's the best live demonstration of 'Soc 121-E: How Not To Be A Rogue' that I have ever seen. It's a pity that you are going to leave us so soon. A pity." - Chancellor Snarkoff von Schadenfreude

[Serpentine]

Yeeeeaaaaah. That character ended up being whisked off by a mindflayer for to being nommed, but managed to smash his fancy-pants magic staff first, destroying the beast and finding himself on Mechanus before a couple of vandal demons.
And that's how he made his exit.