what are good large forms for druids? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Phaederkiel

2013-01-29, 05:31 PM

Depends on what you want to do. Check out this thread (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19868802/Druid_Handbook_revived).

unfortunately, that thread is heavily out-of-date. It partly still lists the con some animals have, and so on.

I need either an offensive form which surpasses the fleshraker (with his massive to jump bonus, etc) or is really defensive (and not dependent on a high HP),
or has some really cool abilities.

Dire tortoise has all this, but is too high lvl. We are at lvl 8 / 9

Srasy

2013-01-29, 08:19 PM

"Cave Triceratops (MiniHB) - The first form where you can try the Triceratops Shuffle. Charge a foe (doing double damage because of Powerful Charge), then Trample that foe and move away as part of the Trample move. Then charge again, and repeat. This isn't the best charger or trampler, but the combination is killer.
Dire Lion - The benchmark charger form, with Improved Grab on the side. Pounce on an enemy, grapple, and tear them apart. (Then again, though, if you think you can win the grapple easily, Fleshraker might still be a better choice.)
Megaraptor Dinosaur (MM errata) - This is harder-hitting than Dire Lion and doesn't rely on Rakes to deal damage (and is thus better in a toe-to-toe fight), but it doesn't grapple. Use it for charging and fighting foes you couldn't grapple anyway.
Rhinoceros - WHAM. One big nasty hit, especially when charging but even in a toe-to-toe fight.
Smilodon (Sabre-Toothed Tiger) (Frost) - This is a marginal improvement on the Dire Lion. It has x3 critical on its bite, its best attack is primary, and its claw attacks can start a grapple). That said, you're unlikely to notice the difference between the two in practice.
Cave Tyrannosaurus (MiniHB) - Grapple check: +11 - Not quite as hardhitting as Polar Bear, but this is your first form with Swallow Whole (which only works on Small or smaller foes, mind).
Cave Anklyosaurus (MiniHB) - AC 24, Con 21 - Ridiculously high AC for this level, as well as decent attacks and effective trample.
Dire Bat - AC 20, Con 17 - This will be pretty much your only core defensive form for most of your career, if you don't have any access to non-core choices. AC 20, with touch AC 15, goes a long way."
Brown/Polar Bear - Grapple check: +12 - The quintessential grappler form, with strong attacks, fair AC, and a great grapple check. The bears are versatile enough to fight a crowd, then grab a tough foe and tear it apart in a grapple. (Choose Polar if you want to min-max every tiny bit; the two are identical with regard to Wild Shape save for the Polar Bear's swim speed.)"
copypasta'd from Druid Handbook also remeber you keep your bab as an animal

Phaederkiel

2013-01-29, 09:34 PM

the problem with this handbook still is, that the critters are partly selected for having nice HP, when in the meanwhile HP stay yours.

TuggyNE

2013-01-30, 02:40 AM

the problem with this handbook still is, that the critters are partly selected for having nice HP, when in the meanwhile HP stay yours.

Nothing that Srasy quoted mentions HP as a significant factor, so just assume they're more or less average unless otherwise mentioned?

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 03:44 AM

The general rule is "look in the D section of the Monster Manuals." In this case, I'd go with the Dire Ape, since it lets you wield weapons.

JaronK

No it doesn't. Wild shape gives you the abilities of an untrianed animal of that type. So parrot forms can't speak, and ape forms can't use weapons.

Yes, I know some real world apes can use tools. But D&D apes are not real world apes.

Deophaun

2013-01-30, 06:11 AM

No it doesn't. Wild shape gives you the abilities of an untrianed animal of that type. So parrot forms can't speak, and ape forms can't use weapons.

A druid loses her ability to speak while in animal form because she is limited to the sounds that a normal, untrained animal can make, but she can communicate normally with other animals of the same general grouping as her new form. (The normal sound a wild parrot makes is a squawk, so changing to this form does not permit speech.)
Unless wielding a weapon qualifies as a "sound," there is nothing in the wild shape entry that precludes a druid in the form of a dire ape from wielding a weapon if a dire ape could do so with training.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 06:15 AM

Unless wielding a weapon qualifies as a "sound," there is nothing in the wild shape entry that precludes a druid in the form of a dire ape from wielding a weapon if a dire ape could do so with training.

Show me a published example of an advanced dire ape wielding weapons, and I'll eat my hat. It's not a training issue, it's a manual dexterity issue (nb manual dexterity != the Dexterity ability score).

Deophaun

2013-01-30, 06:21 AM

Show me a published example of an advanced dire ape wielding weapons, and I'll eat my hat. It's not a training issue, it's a manual dexterity issue (nb manual dexterity != the Dexterity ability score).
Then that should have been your objection, instead of some non-existent clause about having only the abilities of an untrained animal. Regardless, why must I bother to show you any such thing? The presence or absence of such an example would do nothing to contradict anything I said.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 06:33 AM

Then that should have been your objection, instead of some non-existent clause about having only the abilities of an untrained animal. Regardless, why must I bother to show you any such thing? The presence or absence of such an example would do nothing to contradict anything I said.

Oh? Show me the rule that says they can use weapons. Alternately, show me a specific RAW that indicates that dire wolves can't use weapons.

fwiw, reading the rules carefully, I can see nothing that prevents a druid wild-shaped into a cave lion from using a quarterstaff. Which is, frankly, stupid. I sincerely hope I have missed something there.

Deophaun

2013-01-30, 06:40 AM

Oh? Show me the rule that says they can use weapons. Alternately, show me a specific RAW that indicates that dire wolves can't use weapons.
Again, why should I? What would such a thing prove or disprove about any statement I've made? I could as well demand you show me the RAW where fireball turns its targets into badgers.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 06:49 AM

Again, why should I? What would such a thing prove or disprove about any statement I've made? I could as well demand you show me the RAW where fireball turns its targets into badgers.

Thanks for the straw man fallacy. I'm not the one making the unreasonable claim.

Mithril Leaf

2013-01-30, 06:56 AM

Alternate form, the basis of Wild shape. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm)

Alternate form says you can use gear that the new form can wear or carry.
Any gear worn or carried by the creature that can’t be worn or carried in its new form instead falls to the ground in its space. If the creature changes size, any gear it wears or carries that can be worn or carried in its new form changes size to match the new size. (Nonhumanoid-shaped creatures can’t wear armor designed for humanoid-shaped creatures, and vice versa.) Gear returns to normal size if dropped.

Apes are humanoid shaped.

Deophaun

2013-01-30, 07:01 AM

Thanks for the straw man fallacy. I'm not the one making the unreasonable claim.
I don't think you know what a straw man is, nor have you been able to point out what claim I've made that has been unreasonable. You are the one asking me for random rules citations that have nothing to do with anything I've posted.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 07:04 AM

Alternate form, the basis of Wild shape. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm)

Alternate form says you can use gear that the new form can wear or carry.

Apes are humanoid shaped.

RAW says apes are of the Animal type, not the Humanoid type. Humanoid is not defined in any other way in the game. If they were actually humanoids, you couldn't wildshape into them, since that isn't a valid form for wildshape (short of obscure feats I suppose) at any level.

"Humanoid shaped" is not a game term, and RAW doesn't specifically note apes as having it or (for example) cave lions as not having it; in effect apes and cave lions are by RAW indistinguishable in terms of whether or not they have "humanoid shaped" as a property. If you wish to argue natural language definitions instead of game terms, I would like to note that humanoid shape does not imply anything about manual dexterity.

Darrin

2013-01-30, 07:13 AM

It's not a training issue, it's a manual dexterity issue (nb manual dexterity != the Dexterity ability score).

"Manual dexterity" being a requirement to wield weapons is never mentioned anywhere in the rules. Actually, from a rules standpoint, Str is more important to wield melee weapons than Dex. Are you trying to tell me that a human with a Str 3 and a Dex 3 can wield a melee weapon but an ape with a Str 21 and a Dex 15 can't because he has "less" manual dexterity?

Hands are never mentioned as a requirement, either, although they are mentioned as required for casting spells with somatic components. Which creatures have "hands" and which don't isn't defined anywhere, we kinda have to call those as we see 'em.

A more reasonable argument would be that animals are not proficient with melee weapons, and in most cases an ape (dire or otherwise) is going to hit more often and do more damage with his claws and bite than he would with a club. Even if he had proficiency with simple weapons, he'd still do more damage with claw/claw/bite. Some creature types are proficient with various types of weapons, but animals are only proficient with their natural attacks.

However, a druid in wildshape keeps all his class abilities, which includes weapon proficiencies. Thus in ape form, a druid would still be proficient with the melee weapons he'd normally be proficient with.

Mithril Leaf

2013-01-30, 07:18 AM

RAW says apes are of the Animal type, not the Humanoid type. Humanoid is not defined in any other way in the game. If they were actually humanoids, you couldn't wildshape into them, since that isn't a valid form for wildshape (short of obscure feats I suppose) at any level.

"Humanoid shaped" is not a game term, and RAW doesn't specifically note apes as having it or (for example) cave lions as not having it; in effect apes and cave lions are by RAW indistinguishable in terms of whether or not they have "humanoid shaped" as a property. If you wish to argue natural language definitions instead of game terms, I would like to note that humanoid shape does not imply anything about manual dexterity.

Mind Flayers are abberations and thus not humanoids as well. Would you argue they can't use weapons? They have appendages that would allow them to manipulate tools in such as way that they can learn to use weaponry. Apes possess the same, and have been found to use tools in real life.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 07:26 AM

Mind Flayers are abberations and thus not humanoids as well. Would you argue they can't use weapons? They have appendages that would allow them to manipulate tools in such as way that they can learn to use weaponry. Apes possess the same, and have been found to use tools in real life.

Mind flayers have been specifically defined in the game as able to use weapons. Dire apes have not.

DEMON

2013-01-30, 07:55 AM

Mithril Leaf

2013-01-30, 08:10 AM

Mind flayers have been specifically defined in the game as able to use weapons. Dire apes have not.

Where (in core) is that defined to be the case?

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 08:20 AM

You don't need them to be defined as such for the purposes of wild shape. You keep your own proficiences from your class levels, so that is not the issue here. The only problem would be the opposable thumbs the aforementioned Dire Wolf lacks. Dire Ape, on the other hand, has these and thus allows you to wield weapons (or just grap other items, for that matter) in a dire ape form.

If you don't need a creature to be specifically defined as able to wield weapons for the purpose of wild shape, then a cave lion is just as suitable as a dire ape for purposes of weapon-wielding capability. Neither are specifically defined as able (or not able) to use weapons by RAW. Both have "hands".

It's been noted that some cats use tools (http://cats.about.com/od/behaviortraining/a/cattools.htm) and have opposable thumbs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydactyl_cats), if you want to use common English rather than game term definitions. It's a personal anecdote, my my late pet cat was able to hold a small stick in his right front paw.

Which is, of course, ridiculous from a game immersion point of view.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 08:25 AM

Where (in core) is that defined to be the case?

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20011208

I'm afb right now, so I can't check the monster manual profiles. But that wotc page seems a pretty clear example of an officially stated mind flayer with weapon usage built in.

Show me an officially stated dire ape with built-in weapon usage and I will cheerfully concede.

Mithril Leaf

2013-01-30, 08:40 AM

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20011208

I'm afb right now, so I can't check the monster manual profiles. But that wotc page seems a pretty clear example of an officially stated mind flayer with weapon usage built in.

Show me an officially stated dire ape with built-in weapon usage and I will cheerfully concede.

I cede that there is indeed evidence of a mind flayer using weapons. Minds flayers are more frequently stated with class levels so it's easy to find a nice example. That Mind Flayer has class levels. In the default monster stat block they never mention the ability to use weapons.

hymer

2013-01-30, 08:51 AM

I'm mostly with Ashtagon on this. I don't like the idea of animals using weapons without a good explanation. I'll just add that Dire Apes are size large, while the average druid is medium, so there may be trouble using just any weapon.
That said, in Dungeon 131 (page 33) there's an awakened dire ape ranger using a bow and a greatclub. It's Dungeon and it's an awakened dire ape for what it's worth. As you might expect, I don't like it.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 09:02 AM

Strictly as an aside, although research has indeed shown tool use in a variety of animals, higher primates (great apes) are the only ones who have both hands (or limbs capable of some kind of manipulation) and used tools created entirely from non-made-made components.

However, further research has also shown that great apes (aside from humans, which are technically also great apes) are either unable to or choose not to aim at a moving target with a tool. Even the "termite fishing" does not actually involve a moving target; the ape simply places a stick in a known termite hole and waits before extracting the stick again.

http://www.cicasp.pri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/people/tetsuro-matsuzawa
http://www.zoo.org/wpzpdf/education/teacher_packets/apes/behavior.pdf

So there is no real-world reason to believe that an ape would be able to use a weapon to hit an opponent moving at a speed a human (or other great ape) could reasonably achieve. In the real world, the ability to track a moving object and interact with it using a tool seems to be a uniquely human achievement.

Yes, I'm aware of the chimpanzee machine gun video. But look carefully, and you'll see the chimp wasn't doing anything more than holding it in the same way it might hold a big stick. It wasn't actually aiming at any point, nor had it managed to manipulate the trigger. The gunfire effects were added post-production. The way it was holding the gun, the recoil would have unbalanced the chimpanzee.

Mithril Leaf

2013-01-30, 09:21 AM

Alright, if someone else wants to keep up the argument, go ahead, but I can't be bothered anymore. Congratulations, you win.

DEMON

2013-01-30, 09:54 AM

Alright, if someone else wants to keep up the argument, go ahead, but I can't be bothered anymore. Congratulations, you win.

I'll give it one more shot. Though I'm not trying to convince Ashtagon any more, he's fully entitled to his opinion and we should just agree to disagree. Though I'll still provide some more arguments for the bystanders.

That said, in Dungeon 131 (page 33) there's an awakened dire ape ranger using a bow and a greatclub. It's Dungeon and it's an awakened dire ape for what it's worth. As you might expect, I don't like it.

The fact that it's awakened does not change a thing, considering that when wild shaped you keep your mental attributes anyway and Awaken only changes those not the animals physical attributes (granted it changes the creature's type but that is irrelevant for this matter).

We're not saying that an average Dire Ape should be using tools, we're saying that it's body structure allows it to do so and when you change your appearance to such an animal (with a wild shape), you should be able to use these tools.

If you don't need a creature to be specifically defined as able to wield weapons for the purpose of wild shape, then a cave lion is just as suitable as a dire ape for purposes of weapon-wielding capability. Neither are specifically defined as able (or not able) to use weapons by RAW. Both have "hands".

Neither has "hands" but a primate has appendages much more suitable for grasping/holding tools.

[QUOTE=Ashtagon]It's been noted that some cats use tools and have opposable thumbs, if you want to use common English rather than game term definitions. It's a personal anecdote, my my late pet cat was able to hold a small stick in his right front paw.

Never heard of polydactylism before, but according to that article you linked to, it's a kind of mutation, an anomalia, which doesn't seem to me like an average specimen of its kind.

There's also a difference between holding a stick in it's front paw and using a tool in a wieldly manner. Though it should be no problem for a Druid in big cat form, to pull on a handle of a door to open said door, for example... Just as it should be possible for the druid to take a club and smack an ogre with it when in the form of an Ape... You should be limited with the cat's physical abilities and your own skills/inteligence/whatever, not the other way around.

Lord Il Palazzo

2013-01-30, 10:02 AM

I think the bigger question than the proficiencies of the subtype is the proficiencies of the druid. Alternate form says "The creature retains the type and subtype of its original form" so the question of whether or not a creature of the animal type can use a weapon doesn't seem to matter; a druid's still a humanoid even when he's an ape.

A druid is proficient with certain weapons (quarterstaff, club, etc.) based on their class. Does anything in the wild shape/alternate form text say the creature loses its weapon proficiencies when it changes? I can't find anything that says it does and the lycanthrope monster entry gives several examples of monsters using manufactured weapons in their alternate (hybrid) form.

As for forms, bats tend to have pretty good dex and thus AC for their HD if I recall correctly (not to mention the whole flying thing). The dire bat's a bit beneath you at 4 HD, but check out the Desmodu bats in MM2. I don't have my books with me but I know the hunting bat is a good medium flier; the others may be similarly good for their HD.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 10:04 AM

Lord Il Palazzo

2013-01-30, 10:16 AM

By this logic, you can wildshape into a giant eagle (or dire bat) and wield a quarterstaff.No. By this logic the rules as written allow it but the rules only go so far, common sense has to take if from there. As written, outsiders are proficient with all martial weapons, but you don't really see hell hounds with greatswords very much.

Ashtagon

2013-01-30, 10:22 AM

No. By this logic the rules as written allow it but the rules only go so far, common sense has to take if from there. As written, outsiders are proficient with all martial weapons, but you don't really see hell hounds with greatswords very much.

Shame. I was half-hoping to convince my GM to let my 12th level druid wildshape into a gazebo and then attack with a gazebo while summoning gazebos :smalltongue:

Okay, so we are now on common sense. Hmm, my common sense tells me a dire ape cannot wield weapons. Apparently your common sense tells you they can.

We seem to have reached an impasse.

Since RACSD has failed, dare we raise the spectre of RAI?

Lord Il Palazzo

2013-01-30, 10:28 AM

Okay, so we are now on common sense. Hmm, my common sense tells me a dire ape cannot wield weapons. Apparently your common sense tells you they can.

We seem to have reached an impasse.Which is the whole reason the game has a DM. Different people interpret things differently; thus a specific person is given the last say in that kind of case. We aren't going to get anywhere arguing subjective interpretations back and forth so we might as well agree to disagree and leave it at "talk to your DM and see how it works in your game" which is the only actually useful answer here. (It's not like the OP could go into his game and say "Of course I can/can't do it! Some strangers on the internet said so!" and have it carry any weight.)

Togo

2013-01-30, 10:35 AM

The idea that Dire Apes can weild weapons is a very popular common sense ruling. It is, however, a house rule, and there is absolutely no RAW support for it whatsoever. There is nothing in either the druid entry, or the Dire Ape entry, or in any WoTC published material, to suggest that Dire Apes have any more ability to weild weapons or wear armour than any other animal.

I'd further note that a Dire Ape isn't a gorilla. It has claws, and is a throwback to the original 1st edition Carniverous Ape, a monster inspired from Victorian legends, which has no real-world analogue.

Fleshraker is an excellent form, with 5 attacks on a charge, plus trip, plus grapple plus an excellent AC. Against big monsters with improved grab you will fair poorly, and against DR lots of attacks isn't what you want. I'd consider the bears and the rhino as better choices respectively. Note that the rhino's horn attack is str*1.5, as per a two-handed weapon, which may be useful if you have strength bonuses from other sources.

Lord Il Palazzo

2013-01-30, 10:50 AM

[QUOTE=Togo;14620802]I'd further note that a Dire Ape isn't a gorilla. It has claws, and is a throwback to the original 1st edition Carniverous Ape, a monster inspired from Victorian legends, which has no real-world analogue.[/qoute]A valid point, but having claws doesn't automatically mean you can't wield weapons. Check out the werebear hybrid form (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lycanthrope.htm#werebear) that has a claw/claw/bite routine, but also uses a greataxe. There are a few other examples (troll hunter (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lycanthrope.htm#werebear), xill (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/xill.htm), etc.) but the point is that having or not having claws doesn't really have anything to do with using weapons.

And with that, I'm out of this argument. As I said, it's going to go nowhere and has no real purpose. (It is an internet argument after all.) Points exist on both sides. If you want an answer that means anything for you, ask your DM.

Tiniere

2013-01-30, 10:55 AM

If you don't need a creature to be specifically defined as able to wield weapons for the purpose of wild shape, then a cave lion is just as suitable as a dire ape for purposes of weapon-wielding capability. Neither are specifically defined as able (or not able) to use weapons by RAW. Both have "hands".

It's been noted that some cats use tools (http://cats.about.com/od/behaviortraining/a/cattools.htm) and have opposable thumbs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydactyl_cats), if you want to use common English rather than game term definitions. It's a personal anecdote, my my late pet cat was able to hold a small stick in his right front paw.

Which is, of course, ridiculous from a game immersion point of view.

Above emphasis mine.

I agree partially on both sides of the discussion, but the counter evidence presented here is not accurate. Cats do not have opposable thumbs, not even by common english dictum. Their "thumbs" cannot oppose all the other digits on the limb in the same way that a human or great ape can. However, the idea of an ape's grip not being able to handle a weapon is fairly sound. Apes use a "power grip" that involves palming an item and then grasping it with the fingers, this makes them handle and manipulate items in a different way compared to humans (and presumably by extension humanoid creatures with human-like hands).

Again, does this extend to our imaginary fantasy world? I have no idea, that's up to the DM & group you game with. I was just tossing around biology facts for fun.

Onto suggestions then! I would throw my lot in with the bear forms for versatility & the triceratops because the charge+trample combination is really just lovely. Mind, I've seen it come back to bite druids (& rangers) who had an animal(or themself) charge an enemy who was readying a brace weapon because they expected the charge from that kind of animal. But other than that predictability factor it has some nice damage potential and I'd advise it.

I believe there's a large shark form? that can be used for underwater situations, I think it has a sort of keen scent as well, lets you detect violence from far away even in dark or murky water. But at least it has a decent swim speed!
Edited for no Keen Scent

Lord Il Palazzo

2013-01-30, 11:12 AM

I believe there's a large shark form? that can be used for underwater situations, I think it has a sort of keen scent as well, lets you detect violence from far away even in dark or murky water.Core sharks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shark.htm) come in medium (3 HD), large (7HD) and huge (10 HD). (Dire sharks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/direShark.htm) exist, but at 18 HD they aren't too helpful here.)

Be careful, with wild shape (via alternate form) you don't get special qualities like keen scent that come from your new form. It might be possible with a feat or something but I'll leave that for someone who knows better than I to say.

Metahuman1

2013-01-30, 11:14 AM

So, yeah, good animal forms that are large sized?

Tiniere

2013-01-30, 11:15 AM

Core sharks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shark.htm) come in medium (3 HD), large (7HD) and huge (10 HD). (Dire sharks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/direShark.htm) exist, but at 18 HD they aren't too helpful here.)

Be careful, with wild shape (via alternate form) you don't get special qualities like keen scent that come from your new form. It might be possible with a feat or something but I'll leave that for someone who knows better than I to say.

Damn, in all these years I've NEVER realised that, I am very sorry for my poorly founded advice!

Thank you for correcting my mistake, milord!

Lord Il Palazzo

2013-01-30, 01:40 PM

Damn, in all these years I've NEVER realised that, I am very sorry for my poorly founded advice!

Thank you for correcting my mistake, milord!No problem and I'm actually sorry to have to point that limitation out; playing the other way is so much cooler and more intuitive. ("It's dark. I'll become a bat!") I only noticed the limitation after my group had played it the other way for a while.

Since you do get extraordinary special attacks, you might as well focus on those.
Fleshraker has been mentioned and is awesome with its pounce, rake and poison, with good dex and natural armor for AC. A tiger is bigger and can do more straight damage (for when you don't think the poison is likely to help) but has lower AC and speed.

Various flavors of bear and crocodile can be good for the improved grab and good grapple modifiers.

It's not great overall, but maybe you could find a use for a dire boar form; with the ferocity special attack, it continues fighting even while dying or disabled (like at negative HP). It's probably not a good idea (especially with low dexterity and AC) but maybe you can find a creative use for it.

flare'90

2013-01-30, 02:21 PM

Core sharks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shark.htm) come in medium (3 HD), large (7HD) and huge (10 HD). (Dire sharks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/direShark.htm) exist, but at 18 HD they aren't too helpful here.)

Be careful, with wild shape (via alternate form) you don't get special qualities like keen scent that come from your new form. It might be possible with a feat or something but I'll leave that for someone who knows better than I to say.

I believe that you can use Enhanced Wild Shape from Spell Compendium to gain these qualities