Druid/warshaper questions. Help please.

[Thewaitingman]

1. Is a druid allowed to take the improved natural attack feat? If yes how exactly does that work? Does he choose which attack he'll boost each time he shapeshifts?

2. Can a warshaper use Morphic weapons more than once? If yes how does that work? what's the limit and how do you calculate his attacks and bonuses?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

1. Yes, but you have to specify which natural weapon you improve when taking the feat. You can take Improved Natural Attack: Claws, and any form you take with a claw attack gets it improved. This is largely irrelevant though due to...

2. There is no specified limit to how often you can use Morphic Weapons, or how many times it can affect a given natural weapon. You can use it to grow a bite, two claws, a gore, a tail swipe, two wing attacks, a million tentacle attacks, etc. You can then use it to boost the damage of each of those attacks which you already have, and unlimited number of times, so they deal nigh-infinite damage per hit. Don't do this.

For calculating the bonuses for natural weapons, it's pretty easy. Your primary attack (usually either a bite or two claws) gets your full attack bonus and full Str bonus to damage. All of your other attacks, no matter what they are, get that same attack bonus -5 (or -2 with multiattack), and only half your Str bonus to damage.

At the end of the day, a single-classed Druid is going to be a stronger character than one that takes Warshaper levels.

[Thewaitingman]

The way you say it you make it sound like it's a broken ability, and I'm afraid a pc in my campaign really wants to play a warshaper. If it is indeed that broken, how would you balance it? Make him use only natural attacks he has access to? And how many of them would be usable at any given time?
I love the character concept but this ability really makes no sense

[Urpriest]

The way you say it you make it sound like it's a broken ability, and I'm afraid a pc in my campaign really wants to play a warshaper. If it is indeed that broken, how would you balance it? Make him use only natural attacks he has access to? And how many of them would be usable at any given time?
I love the character concept but this ability really makes no sense

There are a couple different ways to balance Warshaper. I'd advise you pick one based on what you feel works for your campaign.

1. You can either enhance one weapon, or make one new weapon. As soon as you make or enhance a new one, the previous one fades. This is the harshest restriction, but one of the more intuitive ones, and it seems more like what they actually intended.

2. You have a certain limit on the number of attacks you can get out of Warshaper. Perhaps it's class level, or some other scaling number. Somewhat finicky, and takes work to choose a good progression, but probably the most useful option without being broken.

3. You can only enhance weapons that you already had without Warshaper (so you can create new weapons and enhance old weapons, but you can't enhance new weapons). This one can be combined with the others, and also feels like how the RAI was supposed to work.

4. You can only make one weapon of any given type, and the only types available are those in the table in the MM. This is the one with the most support in the text of the ability. It might be more attacks than you want though, and without combining it with #3 you still get to enhance all of them. Plus, it creates the silly situation where you only get one claw, one slam, one tentacle, etc., despite them being typically found in pairs.

[Tar Palantir]

The way you say it you make it sound like it's a broken ability, and I'm afraid a pc in my campaign really wants to play a warshaper. If it is indeed that broken, how would you balance it? Make him use only natural attacks he has access to? And how many of them would be usable at any given time?
I love the character concept but this ability really makes no sense

I usually houserule it as you can grow one additional natural attack of your choice, and all of your other natural attacks deal damage as though they were one size larger than usual. Useful, but much more reasonable.

[Thewaitingman]

Ok let's say I combine some of those rules, for example allowing him only one boost at a time at first and then progressing. What about the multi-attack feat? Is he allowed to take that?

[Urpriest]

Ok let's say I combine some of those rules, for example allowing him only one boost at a time at first and then progressing. What about the multi-attack feat? Is he allowed to take that?

As long as some of his forms have three natural attacks, and he can be in that form at level-up, he can take Multi-Attack.

[Fouredged Sword]

It is not unreasonable to allow a character to take a feat that has a prereq he meet most or even some of the time.

IE
A psiwar who spams expansion getting knockback is not unheard of.
A ring of evasion has been sited as a way around some PRC prereqs for some classes.

You loose access to the feat when you don't meet the prereqs. If you have 3 natural attacks, your secondary attacks are at -2, but loose one and the second attack reverts to -5.

[ddude987]

Instead of gimping warshaper can't you have a mmutual trust eith your players? "Dont abuse this class and I wont throw a dmg in your face and send a force dragon at you." That's how a campaign I was previoisly in was handeled and it worked out well.

[Snowbluff]

You can use it to grow a bite, two claws, a gore, a tail swipe, two wing attacks, a million tentacle attacks, etc. You can then use it to boost the damage of each of those attacks which you already have, and unlimited number of times, so they deal nigh-infinite damage per hit. Don't do this.

Another reading is that if you already have the weapon type, that weapon grows one category. Without extrapolation, there is also a limit on how large the weapons can grow as well (Colossal). RAW, the effects of this ability are debatable.

[Fouredged Sword]

Some of us function better with clear guidelines of what denotes abuse and use as intended. Not to say that some groups can function with just a nod towards RAI and be fine, others feel the need for clear communication between players and DM.

[Thewaitingman]

Instead of gimping warshaper can't you have a mmutual trust eith your players? "Dont abuse this class and I wont throw a dmg in your face and send a force dragon at you." That's how a campaign I was previoisly in was handeled and it worked out well.

No, there's no communication problem whatsoever. It's just that, as it has been noted above, there rules should have been more precise about stuff like this. The morphic weapon ability has a million interpretations. It has a not-so-nostalgic SWSAGA feel to it..

[Fouredged Sword]

I prefer to stick the stacking effect rules on it. IE, it can only apply once. You can use it again, but the first effect fades.

[Immabozo]

As far as feats are concerned, you have missed a small and easy to miss fact. Skills and feats are extraordinary abilities. Level 7 Master of Many Forms, or the Extraordinary Wildshape spell from SpC gives you all the extraordinary qualities. So, most multi armed creatures have multi attack, so now you have it whenever it is appropriate.

Not to mention the huge variety of feats and skills available to you! Now your scouting form is SO useful for scouting. Your various forms just became even more useful.

[Urpriest]

As far as feats are concerned, you have missed a small and easy to miss fact. Skills and feats are extraordinary abilities. Level 7 Master of Many Forms, or the Extraordinary Wildshape spell from SpC gives you all the extraordinary qualities. So, most multi armed creatures have multi attack, so now you have it whenever it is appropriate.

Not to mention the huge variety of feats and skills available to you! Now your scouting form is SO useful for scouting. Your various forms just became even more useful.

Feats aren't obviously special attacks or special qualities, though, so there's no way to know whether you need Enhanced Wildshape for them or not.

[Immabozo]

Feats aren't obviously special attacks or special qualities, though, so there's no way to know whether you need Enhanced Wildshape for them or not.

Doesn't matter, they are extra ordinary abilities. Enhanced Wildshape and level 7 of MoMF both give all extraordinary abilities of a form.

[Urpriest]

Doesn't matter, they are extra ordinary abilities. Enhanced Wildshape and level 7 of MoMF both give all extraordinary abilities of a form.

In the case of Enhanced Wildshape, though, what if it gets dispelled? Do you lose the feats or not?

[Immabozo]

In the case of Enhanced Wildshape, though, what if it gets dispelled? Do you lose the feats or not?

I would say yes. The duration is 1 hour/level and it only effects your new form until you shift out of it, or the spell duration expires. So I would say that if it gets dispelled, the advantage goes away, cause the magic doesn't change the form, but is in effect the whole time.

However, I would also say the spellcraft DC to identify that would be insane.

[Urpriest]

I would say yes. The duration is 1 hour/level and it only effects your new form until you shift out of it, or the spell duration expires. So I would say that if it gets dispelled, the advantage goes away, cause the magic doesn't change the form, but is in effect the whole time.

However, I would also say the spellcraft DC to identify that would be insane.

But if the feats are Extraordinary Special Attacks, you would keep them. So how do you know they are lost?

[Immabozo]

But if the feats are Extraordinary Special Attacks, you would keep them. So how do you know they are lost?

I wouldn't say any feats are extaordinary attacks, cause all feats and all skills are extraordinary abilities, not attacks. Even if it is an attack related feat, it modifies or improves an attack, but is still an ability that improves it, requiring the attack to exist, first, before the feat is taken.

So I would rule that they all come with the spell and then leave with the spell

[Urpriest]

I wouldn't say any feats are extaordinary attacks, cause all feats and all skills are extraordinary abilities, not attacks. Even if it is an attack related feat, it modifies or improves an attack, but is still an ability that improves it, requiring the attack to exist, first, before the feat is taken.

So I would rule that they all come with the spell and then leave with the spell

All Extraordinary Abilities are either Extraordinary Attacks or Extraordinary Qualities. The two categories cover the entire space.

And what you would rule is irrelevant. You're arguing that getting feats is RAW. That means, RAW, they must be either Extraordinary Attacks or Extraordinary Qualities, and RAW you need to know which in order to use them.

[Immabozo]

All Extraordinary Abilities are either Extraordinary Attacks or Extraordinary Qualities. The two categories cover the entire space.

And what you would rule is irrelevant. You're arguing that getting feats is RAW. That means, RAW, they must be either Extraordinary Attacks or Extraordinary Qualities, and RAW you need to know which in order to use them.

Extraordinary Qualities, sorry for using the wrong term

[Chronos]

Master of Many Forms doesn't give you all of the form's extraordinary abilities, just its extraordinary special qualities (druid wildshape already covers the extraordinary special attacks). Neither feats nor skills are ever listed under "Special attacks" nor "special qualities", so you don't get them.

[Urpriest]

Master of Many Forms doesn't give you all of the form's extraordinary abilities, just its extraordinary special qualities (druid wildshape already covers the extraordinary special attacks). Neither feats nor skills are ever listed under "Special attacks" nor "special qualities", so you don't get them.

On the other hand, Racial Bonus Feats and Racial Skill Bonuses are Extraordinary Special Qualities, according to the FAQ. But bonus only.

[Immabozo]

Master of Many Forms doesn't give you all of the form's extraordinary abilities, just its extraordinary special qualities (druid wildshape already covers the extraordinary special attacks). Neither feats nor skills are ever listed under "Special attacks" nor "special qualities", so you don't get them.

hmmm, I wonder where I read this then. I guess they have their own category of "feats" and "skills", dont they?

[Thewaitingman]

Are the extrodinary/supernatural abilities/quilities analyzed anywhere? cos I lost you there.

[Urpriest]

Are the extrodinary/supernatural abilities/quilities analyzed anywhere? cos I lost you there.

Depends. What do you mean by Analyzed?

[Thewaitingman]

I've come across these definitions quite a few times but I've only found them useful when the rules are staring right in the face, for example polymorph-like spells. I don't understand or use them in places like the one you've mentioned. Feats are extrordinary abilities?

[Immabozo]

I've come across these definitions quite a few times but I've only found them useful when the rules are staring right in the face, for example polymorph-like spells. I don't understand or use them in places like the one you've mentioned. Feats are extrordinary abilities?

Racial feats are, like a bear's improved grab, a bird's flying by attack, etc. But a fighter's (for example, not saying you could take the form of a fighter) bonus feats are not, or that's what was said.

I swear I read somewhere that they all are extraordinary abilities, but I am not sure where I read that and it is unverified.

[Chronos]

Special attacks are things listed on the "Special attacks" line of a creature's statblock. Likewise, special qualities are things listed on the "Special qualities" line. If an SA or SQ is listed as (ex), then it's an extraordinary special attack or extraordinary special ability, respectively.

All feats are extraordinary abilities, unless noted otherwise. I don't know of any fighter bonus feats that are noted otherwise, but there might be one or two somewhere or another.

[Immabozo]

All feats are extraordinary abilities, unless noted otherwise. I don't know of any fighter bonus feats that are noted otherwise, but there might be one or two somewhere or another.

I thought so, I guess I had the reasoning mixed up because its been a while since I read it. What book is that in?