Beast type?

[Venger]

I've seen this referred to a couple of times in 3.0 books. it appears to be a different type from either animal or magical beast. what're the differences?

[Rift_Wolf]

I've seen this referred to a couple of times in 3.0 books. it appears to be a different type from either animal or magical beast. what're the differences?

The beast type was for animals that don't exist on earth anymore, or never have. Dinosaurs, dire beasts, that sort of thing, if I recall correctly. I'm not sure why the differentiation, maybe certain spells wouldn't work (So you couldn't enlarge/awaken beasts as easily as regular animals), but they got rid of it in 3.5; if you're updating something to 3.5, treat beasts as animals.

[Urpriest]

It was a 3.0 thing, as said. Basically if your creature has no magical powers then it isn't a magical beast.

Minor correction to the above: some beasts become animals, others become magical beasts. Generally if a beast has Int>2 it becomes a magical beast, otherwise it becomes an animal. There are exceptions, though, and you really ought to simply use the updated version of whatever beast you're looking at.

[eggs]

"Beast: A beast is a nonhistorical, vertebrate creature with a reasonably normal anatomy and no magical or unusual abilities. Beasts have Intelligence scores of 1 or 2. Unless noted otherwise, beasts have low-light vision and darkvision with a range of 60 feet."

You probably wouldn't carry the Type characteristics over to 3.5, but there's the description from the 3.0 SRD.

Actually, now I want to see if there are some weird implications to the "vertebrate" qualifier...

[Eldan]

The vertebrate qualifier, I'm reasonably sure, is also in 3.5, for animals. Invertebrates are usually vermin. Except for, weirdly enough, the Octopus.

[Amphetryon]

The vertebrate qualifier, I'm reasonably sure, is also in 3.5, for animals. Invertebrates are usually vermin. Except for, weirdly enough, the Octopus.

Well, I've seen some nature shows that make me question whether Octopi might have INT > 2, so they may have just cause to not list Octopi as Vermin. (Standard disclaimers about getting Reality in your Fantasy may apply).

[Eldan]

Psh. If we are starting to get into that, I'd say Chimpanzees should also have an intelligence of around 4. What with manufacturing weapons, planning for the future, using currency, going to war and understanding language.

[KillianHawkeye]

I've seen this referred to a couple of times in 3.0 books. it appears to be a different type from either animal or magical beast. what're the differences?

IIRC beasts had a higher HD than animals, and possibly a better BAB progression.

[legomaster00156]

Psh. If we are starting to get into that, I'd say Chimpanzees should also have an intelligence of around 4. What with manufacturing weapons, planning for the future, using currency, going to war and understanding language.

Making them as intelligent as the average Orc Barbarian. :smallbiggrin:

[Answerer]

Psh. If we are starting to get into that, I'd say Chimpanzees should also have an intelligence of around 4. What with manufacturing weapons, planning for the future, using currency, going to war and understanding language.
I don't disagree with the 4, but I would caution about throwing around the "planning for the future" claim – that one is extremely recent, from only one research group, and has garnered a fair bit of skepticism from others in the field. Until more studies have been done (preferably confirmations by other groups), it's not entirely appropriate to bandy that one about.

Not that this has stopped popular science media, but then little does.

[Andorax]

Short answer then...outdated 3.0 type, folded into Animal and Magical Beast, depending (mostly) on intelligence.

Triva aside: Shapechanger used to be a 3.0 type as well. Now it's a subtype, and things with that type are now folded into whatever seemed to be a best fit.

[Venger]

Short answer then...outdated 3.0 type, folded into Animal and Magical Beast, depending (mostly) on intelligence.

Triva aside: Shapechanger used to be a 3.0 type as well. Now it's a subtype, and things with that type are now folded into whatever seemed to be a best fit.

I'd meant to ask about that too. what were the characteristics of the shapeshifter type? I know it's a subtype in 3.5.

[eggs]

Horked out of the 3.0 SRD:
"Shapechanger: This type of creature has a stable body but can assume other forms. Unless noted otherwise, shapechangers have darkvision with a range of 60 feet.
Hit Die: d8
Attack Bonus: Total HDx3/4 (as cleric)
Good Saving Throws: Fortitude, Reflex, Will
Skill Points: +1 per extra HD
Feats: +1 per 4 extra HD"

[Telok]

Also dinosaurs and dire animals were beasts. It prevented some small measure of druid shenanigans.

[Urpriest]

Also dinosaurs and dire animals were beasts. It prevented some small measure of druid shenanigans.

Dire Animals were still animals. But yeah, Dinos were beasts.