Wildshape is confusing!

[M@XIM]

Okay so I waited for natural spell to even begin looking at Wildshape. Now I realize I should have studied this more. I looked at the recommendations for forms and I was leaning toward something that flies like the desmodu hunting bat so I could focus on my spell casting. I keep getting conflicting information on what abilities the druid would get etc. Like the bat. I would assume you'd get blindsense. Why else be a bat? Some sources say you can't use it. Can anyone explain what really carries over?

Also form recommendations are appreciated. I'd prefer to be a stealth spell casting animal. I'm a level 6 druid.

[eggynack]

You do not gain blindsight, at least not without some method of picking up Ex abilities (think enhance wild shape). What you do get is a 60 foot (good) flight speed, which is just about as good as it gets for awhile, as well as the bat's natural armor, strength, dexterity, AC, trip attack, natural weapon, and the constitution for all non-HP purposes. The reason you want to be a bat is because of the flight, the armor, and the dexterity. 20 AC is massive, especially when 17 of it is touch AC, and you get a +7 to initiative, which is also massive. These are things you want as a druid. As for the flight, both the speed and maneuverability are great. Good gets you hover, and hover lets you float in one spot and summon stuff. I don't think any other flight form has good until 8th level. So, desmodu hunting bats are good. Really really good. Consider picking up enhance wild shape (SpC, 82) when you're 7th level for the blindsight, and add one of the better vision modes in the game onto the equation. It's all pretty amazing.

Edit: By the by, this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm) is a list of stuff you get from wild shape, if you were unaware.

[M@XIM]

You do not gain blindsight, at least not without some method of picking up Ex abilities (think enhance wild shape). What you do get is a 60 foot (good) flight speed, which is just about as good as it gets for awhile, as well as the bat's natural armor, strength, dexterity, AC, trip attack, natural weapon, and the constitution for all non-HP purposes. The reason you want to be a bat is because of the flight, the armor, and the dexterity. 20 AC is massive, especially when 17 of it is touch AC, and you get a +7 to initiative, which is also massive. These are things you want as a druid. As for the flight, both the speed and maneuverability are great. Good gets you hover, and hover lets you float in one spot and summon stuff. I don't think any other flight form has good until 8th level. So, desmodu hunting bats are good. Really really good. Consider picking up enhance wild shape (SpC, 82) when you're 7th level for the blindsight, and add one of the better vision modes in the game onto the equation. It's all pretty amazing.

Edit: By the by, this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm) is a list of stuff you get from wild shape, if you were unaware.


So my stats as a Desmodu Hunting Bat would be?
HP: Doesn't Change from what I have now
AC: Inherit Bat: 20 (=7 Dex. +3natural) Touch=17, Flat=13
Initiative: +7 (inherit from Bat)
Attacks: Bite +10 attack (1d6+3) +Spells via Natural Spell
Abilities: Bat Str15, Dex24, Con13/My Int,Wis,Cha
Skills: I'm confused here. The bat has a +16Hide +14 Listen +19 Move Silently and +14 Spot. +4 of the Hide Bonus is racial, +8 of the Spot and Listen are racial- Do I only get the racial bonus'?
Ex. I can use Trip and Scent
I keep my feats/don't inherit the bat's feats
I don't inherit the Bat's Saves, but I can use its modifiers to boost my own/

Is this right? Am I missing anything?

Sorry if this is repetitive, I just want to make sure I get it right..

[Pilo]

Almost :
Your reflexes and fortitudes saves change because instead of your statistics, you use the one given by the form. (So ref = druid base + bat dex mod, fort = druid base + bat con mod, will = druid base + druid wis mod)

[Diarmuid]

If you had something like Wild armor, or wildlings clasp to put on your armor, then things like that would apply as well.

Similarly, for initiative you're not getting a flag initiative modifier replacement, rather the dex modification to init is boosted to +7. If you had improved initiative, your init mod would be +11.

Other things to keep in mind are your bonuses to saves ( cloak if resistance), stats (periapt of wisdom), etc are all gone in your new form unless you take the time to remove them, and re-apply them (assuming your new form could wear/use them), or if you take other precautions (wild armor/wildlings clasp as mentioned earlier).

[Urpriest]

So my stats as a Desmodu Hunting Bat would be?
HP: Doesn't Change from what I have now
AC: Inherit Bat: 20 (=7 Dex. +3natural) Touch=17, Flat=13
Initiative: +7 (inherit from Bat)
Attacks: Bite +10 attack (1d6+3) +Spells via Natural Spell
Abilities: Bat Str15, Dex24, Con13/My Int,Wis,Cha
Skills: I'm confused here. The bat has a +16Hide +14 Listen +19 Move Silently and +14 Spot. +4 of the Hide Bonus is racial, +8 of the Spot and Listen are racial- Do I only get the racial bonus'?
Ex. I can use Trip and Scent
I keep my feats/don't inherit the bat's feats
I don't inherit the Bat's Saves, but I can use its modifiers to boost my own/

Is this right? Am I missing anything?

Sorry if this is repetitive, I just want to make sure I get it right..

These are all wrong, either in the details or in the concepts.

First, read my Monster Handbook. If you're going to play a Druid, you need to understand how monsters work, and it's fairly clear you don't.

The big thing to remember here is that you get some racial traits, never features of hit dice. Think about the elf race in the PHB. Elf doesn't have hp, doesn't have an AC, doesn't have attacks. Rather, elf modifies Con. In general, races and forms modify, or replace base stats like ability scores. They never replace whole lines of your statblock.

So for example, you don't get the bat's AC. Instead, you get the bat's natural armor bonus, the bat's size, and the bat's Dex. That means you do indeed get +7 Dex, +0 size modifier, and +3 natural, for AC 20, but only if you aren't wearing armor, or benefiting from other AC buffs. If you were wearing +1 Wild Leather Armor, for example, you'd also have +3 AC from the armor, and so on. The bat's AC doesn't replace yours, instead some of its modifiers apply to your AC instead of your old ones. This may yield the same result, but it's an important distinction. The same is true of Initiative, for the same reason.

Because of that, the Attacks line is totally different. Getting the bat's natural weapons is just like getting a fighter's sword: you get the weapon, not the attack bonus behind it. Again, if you don't know how natural weapons work, that's something you need to read up on. The relevant gist here is that the bat's Bite attack deals 1d6 damage, plus 1.5 times Str mod (you can work this out by looking at the number for the bat, and guess it by the fact that most monsters with only one attack get 1.5 times Str to damage). So while your damage will be 1d6+3 unless you've got Str buffs, your attack bonus would be only your BAB plus your Str mod, plus any other relevant buffs you've got. You don't get the bat's Weapon Finesse.

That raises another point: Monster Manual II is a book from D&D 3.0. When you use a book from 3.0, you need to use the update booklet, as many monsters were changed between 3.0 and 3.5. If you look there, you'll see that Weapon Finesse is no longer a bonus feat. The skills are also completely different.

So yeah, you definitely don't get the bat's skill ranks. You don't get the racial bonuses either: they're not extraordinary special attacks. They might be extraordinary special qualities, in which case there's a spell called Enhance Wild Shape that can give them to you...but this is a somewhat controversial subject, and you'll need to ask your DM. The only thing here you get from normal Wild Shape is the bat's ability score modifiers from physical scores, since its physical ability scores replace your own.

Scent is also not a Special Attack, so there's no reason you should think that you would get it. Trip is, so you get that.

[eggynack]

Apart from what other folks mentioned, you would not get scent. It's a special quality, and you don't get those from wild shape. I don't think you get the monster's racial skill bonuses either, but I've never been quite as sure on that one. Just keep your base skills, except apply the new ability score modifiers instead of the old ones. Also, your to hit is off, because the bat's +10 is derived from weapon finesse. You'd just use your normal to hit, adjusted for the bat's 15 strength. Bite of the wererat (SpC, 28) can get you weapon finesse for rounds/level, along with some pretty good bonuses, but you don't really need any sort of face beating for the form to be good. It's something you definitely can do, if you want, but it shouldn't be your first plan.

Edit: I have, perhaps, never experienced such a thorough swordsaging. The swordsage haunts me, down narrow and winding passages, stalking within the shadows on the corners of my vision. I fear, sometimes, that I will never be free.

[Karnith]

I don't think you get the monster's racial skill bonuses either, but I've never been quite as sure on that one.
Pre-errata, you would have, because Wild Shape used to be based on Polymorph. Now that Wild Shape is based on Alternate Form, though, you don't.

[M@XIM]

Thanks to everyone especially Urpriest for the help.

Though I kind of feel verbally slapped now (no offense taken)O_O
If I knew what I was asking, I wouldn't be asking lol. I'm new to D&D and many of the guides seem to conflict with one another when it comes to certain Druid info. I appreciate you detailing everything out for me.

[Elderand]

Thanks to everyone especially Urpriest for the help.

Though I kind of feel verbally slapped now (no offense taken)O_O
If I knew what I was asking, I wouldn't be asking lol. I'm new to D&D and many of the guides seem to conflict with one another when it comes to certain Druid info. I appreciate you detailing everything out for me.

This is 3.5, it makes some real life legal framework look like children's maze at the back of boxes of cereals.

[aeauseth]

Wildshape is also a Supernatural ability, which is suppressed when you enter an antimagic field.

Consider your fighting a beholder and you've wildshaped into a dire bat. Your flying around and the beholder hits you with his antimagic eye, poof your not a dire bat anymore. Weird huh?

I'd have to say that Wildshape is one of the more difficult and confusing class abilities. I suggest you have some 3.5 cards prepped with your alternate forms handy for the common shapes you plan to use.

[Urpriest]

Thanks to everyone especially Urpriest for the help.

Though I kind of feel verbally slapped now (no offense taken)O_O
If I knew what I was asking, I wouldn't be asking lol. I'm new to D&D and many of the guides seem to conflict with one another when it comes to certain Druid info. I appreciate you detailing everything out for me.

Yeah, sorry if I came off that way. Part of the reason I wrote the Monster Handbook was to vent some steam about this sort of thing, so I could just link it rather than get annoyed at new people asking questions. It only works so well, unfortunately. :smallwink:

Really, it's a matter of getting the deep principles behind the rules, which the base books don't really cover explicitly: the idea of HD as representing what your character knows, other things representing your character's body, and how they interact. It's subtle, but not getting that and trying to work with the monster rules is like trying to do algebra without fully getting what a variable is: lots of people try to do it (if you're skeptical about the algebra example, you've never taught college physics :smallyuk:) but you really need it to do anything real.

[M@XIM]

Offtopic, but random question.

Is there a way to cast a spell through an animal companion or another player? I was thinking that there will be opportunities where this could be extremely useful.. I know you can share buffs, but I'm curious if there is a feat or something that might allow more.

[bekeleven]

Offtopic, but random question.

Is there a way to cast a spell through an animal companion or another player? I was thinking that there will be opportunities where this could be extremely useful.. I know you can share buffs, but I'm curious if there is a feat or something that might allow more.

Short answer: No.

Long answer: There are a few ways to do it - arcane hierophant comes to mind - but they're niche and generally require investment.

[Bronk]

Well, you do share spells with your animal companion, so if you cast a spell that affects yourself, it also affects the companion. If you cast a spell that causes you to manifest magical effects, it causes your companion to do the same. Produce Flame, a first level druid spell, is a good example of this... cast it, and you will both be able to throw fire around. At later levels, Stormrage is a good bet, allowing you and your companion to fly, be immune to missiles and shoot electricity out of your eyes.

[Diarmuid]

Familiars can do it to some extent I believe as well.

[M@XIM]

Well, you do share spells with your animal companion, so if you cast a spell that affects yourself, it also affects the companion. If you cast a spell that causes you to manifest magical effects, it causes your companion to do the same. Produce Flame, a first level druid spell, is a good example of this... cast it, and you will both be able to throw fire around. At later levels, Stormrage is a good bet, allowing you and your companion to fly, be immune to missiles and shoot electricity out of your eyes.

So you're saying that for a spell like Produce Flame that both my animal companion and myself could attack with the spell? Would it happen simultaneously or?

[Coidzor]

So you're saying that for a spell like Produce Flame that both my animal companion and myself could attack with the spell? Would it happen simultaneously or?

When you cast the spell, both you and the animal companion may benefit from it at the same time. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#shareSpells)

IIRC, in 3.5 it's never specified if your animal companion acts on your initiative count/turn or not. If they act on your turn it's effectively simultaneously, but they can use their own actions independently of the druid's actions, so the druid could move and throw the fire from produce flame whereas the companion could throw the fire from produce flame and then move. Or stay where it is.

I don't think even Pathfinder specified it.

[Bronk]

Yup, Coidzor posted the rule in question. After that, how easy it is to play depends on the DM...

First, how he interprets how far apart you can get. The rule says that the companion has to be within 5 feet of the druid when the spell is cast, and can't move further than 5 feet away or the spell is lost. However, it doesn't say what happens if it's the druid who moves. This is easier to deal with if one is riding the other (druid on horse or hawk on druid's shoulder). Or, I suppose, if you guys act simultaneously, which I don't think is how it works, but would solve a lot of problems. Oh, or you could just stay still... you know, you can also use this trick to turn both of you into trees with the 'tree shape' spell (which would look pretty cool flinging fire).

The other issue is how closely you stick to the rules about instructing your companion. Technically you teach it 'tricks' with the 'handle animal' skill, and then have it perform the tricks with an easy DC10 check. In this case, the 'attack' trick should be fine, but if your DM doesn't approve, maybe you can work something out. If he/she let's you mostly choose the companion's actions, that's even better.

Oh, and familiars do get the same ability, but they can also deliver touch spells for the caster and learn their own spells as spell like abilities at epic levels.

[Urpriest]

In terms of Initiative, the animal companion is its own creature and thus gets its own Initiative, though it can delay to your turn if it wants to. The exception is if you're Riding it, mounts and riders share their turns.

In general, your animal companion is your loyal ally, so you don't need to give it commands to do basic stuff like fight those who attack you or stay by your side. You do need to give it commands to do things it wouldn't ordinarily do. The Handle Animal skill has a list of tricks. As mentioned, you can teach it up to its Int times 3 in tricks with the Handle Animal skill, and you get bonus tricks from the Animal Companion table that you don't have to train it in. You can get it to do any of those things with a free action and a DC Handle Animal 10 check (you get a +4 bonus from it being your animal companion, and since it's a free action you can try multiple times in a round if your DM lets you), while getting it to do tricks it doesn't know takes a DC 25 check and a move action.

[Morphie]

Regarding this issue of the Animal Companion, I also have a question, if the OP doesn't mind the off-topic:
If I'm a small druid riding a dog and tell it to attack should I make a skill check for fighting with warhorse (or, in this case, "wardog") - Ride DC10 - or should I use the handle animal skill check (DC 10 as well) to make the animal companion perform a trick he knows?

[Evandar]

This is the first time I've looked over Druid spell sharing and it sounds like casting Polymorph would turn your animal companion into a weapon of mass destruction.

[Bronk]

Unfortunately, I don't think the rules cover just using the 'attack' trick then hanging on as best you can as your mount moves around and does it's thing, not even if the mount is bound to you or even a sentient creature. I think that would be a great mechanic and certainly would make sense if the rider wasn't attacking.

Luckily, the 'Handle Animal' skill covers upgrading a mount for combat riding. It takes 6 weeks of training for a regular animal or 3 weeks for a riding animal, they have to know the 'attack, come, defend, down, guard and heel' tricks, and then you make a DC20 skill check. If you worry about making the check, hire some in game ranch hands to 'aid another' for a while and take ten. Once that is done attacking while mounted is a free action ride check DC10.

As for the sharing spells and the polymorph spell... Well, druids don't normally get that spell, but if they did happen to have it from another class they could definitely both change form. They do eventually get the more powerful 'shapechange' spell...

Any spell that you cast on yourself is shared by either your animal companion or your familiar or both, if you have them. Cast 'produce flame' or 'call lightning' as a druid, and suddenly you both cast it. Cast 'transport via plants' as a druid or 'teleport' with arcane, and your critters also cast it and can touch additional creatures beyond your own limit! It's a good trick to remember.

[Evandar]

I'm not sure why I typed polymorph when I meant shapechange. (I only picked the spell because of Darth Vaarsuvius.)

The Call Lightning thing just seems... well, the class seems immensely strong, to say the least.

[Person_Man]

I would strongly suggest that you just pick 3ish animal forms (one or two for combat, one for flight, one for scouting), and write up separate character sheets for each of them. Then show them to your DM, and make sure he's ok with it as well.

You could also consider the Pathfinder Druid or Wildshape Ranger. Either of which would be a weaker option. But they would be a lot less book keeping. You might also want to consider trading away your Animal Companion for some other alternate class feature or racial substitution level. Again, they tend to be weaker, but it's less to manage.

[eggynack]

Any spell that you cast on yourself is shared by either your animal companion or your familiar or both, if you have them. Cast 'produce flame' or 'call lightning' as a druid, and suddenly you both cast it. Cast 'transport via plants' as a druid or 'teleport' with arcane, and your critters also cast it and can touch additional creatures beyond your own limit! It's a good trick to remember.
I don't think that call lightning works for this, as it's not a spell you're casting on yourself. Produce flame makes sense, because the attack spells are traveling through the conduit of what is effectively a buff spell, but call lightning has no such claim.

[M@XIM]

I don't think that call lightning works for this, as it's not a spell you're casting on yourself. Produce flame makes sense, because the attack spells are traveling through the conduit of what is effectively a buff spell, but call lightning has no such claim.

While I would love for call lightning to work like this.. it seems that it would be way too good to be true.. Especially, under stormy conditions.. 2x 3d10 (under stormy conditions) O_O Doing this at level 6 would make a Druid seem a bit more OP than commonly believed.

Any other spells like Produce Flame that would work this way? that are more offensive than buff?

[RaviStrife]

While I would love for call lightning to work like this.. it seems that it would be way too good to be true.. Especially, under stormy conditions.. 2x 3d10 (under stormy conditions) O_O Doing this at level 6 would make a Druid seem a bit more OP than commonly believed.

Any other spells like Produce Flame that would work this way? that are more offensive than buff?

Flame blade springs to mind, for one.

Can't really hold a candle to a wizard polymorphing both himself and his familiar into a 7 headed pyrohydra, though.

[Prime32]

would make a Druid seem a bit more OP than commonly believed.
Commonly believed? (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0346.html) :smalltongue:


Can't really hold a candle to a wizard polymorphing both himself and his familiar into a 7 headed pyrohydra, though.Share mental pinnacle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/spells/mentalPinnacle.htm) with your familiar without affecting yourself.

[Bronk]

While I don't agree with Eggynack about 'call lightning' (it is a spell that, when cast, affects you, and 'share spells' works for spells cast on yourself), I would say to always run these things by your DM first. A surprised DM isn't always a happy DM.

With that in mind, druids don't get many purely offensive spells, but here are a few additional ones that would work with share spells.

Level one: Produce Flame (flings wee balls of fire)
Level two: Flame Blade (more powerful melee fire)
Level three: Fire Wings (even more powerful melee fire) and Call Lightning
Level four: Stars of Arvandor (damaging stars show up that you can fling, has same casting style as Call Lightning)
Level 5: Fires of Purity (a lot more powerful melee fire) and Call Lightning Storm (more powerful Call Lightning)
Level 6: Sunbeam (can shoot beams of sunlight, same casting style as Call Lightning)
Level 8: Stormrage (eyes shoot electricity beams)


Also, going back to the original questions about Wildshape, if you want to do a bit of extra paperwork you can use advanced animal forms as you gain druid levels, since you are limited only by using animals that don't have templates, with HD less than or equal to your own, and size restrictions based on your druid level. Many animals have advanced forms dependent only on their HD.

For example, a regular wolf is 3HD and Medium size. An advanced wolf of 4 through 6HD is large size. A level 8 druid who could wildshape into large creatures could become a wolf whose body is that of the more advanced 6HD wolf (wolves don't advance further than that). So, if you like a particular form, it can be useful to you for longer (for battle, for instance).

[eggynack]

While I don't agree with Eggynack about 'call lightning' (it is a spell that, when cast, affects you, and 'share spells' works for spells cast on yourself), I would say to always run these things by your DM first. A surprised DM isn't always a happy DM.
It doesn't affect you. That's the problem. Call lightning isn't a buff that lets you call lightning. It's just a spell effect that you can concentrate on to produce lightning. The effect, unlike the one in produce flame, is one that is effectively disconnected from you.

[Urpriest]

Also, going back to the original questions about Wildshape, if you want to do a bit of extra paperwork you can use advanced animal forms as you gain druid levels, since you are limited only by using animals that don't have templates, with HD less than or equal to your own, and size restrictions based on your druid level. Many animals have advanced forms dependent only on their HD.

For example, a regular wolf is 3HD and Medium size. An advanced wolf of 4 through 6HD is large size. A level 8 druid who could wildshape into large creatures could become a wolf whose body is that of the more advanced 6HD wolf (wolves don't advance further than that). So, if you like a particular form, it can be useful to you for longer (for battle, for instance).

This...really shouldn't be an option. I can't find anything against it, but it would also allow you to, for example, turn into something that was the recipient of an instantaneous spell effect (for example, a Master of Many Forms turning into a giant victim of Return to Nature). In general, allowing forms not "typical of their kind" has all sorts of negative implications.

[eggynack]

This...really shouldn't be an option. I can't find anything against it, but it would also allow you to, for example, turn into something that was the recipient of an instantaneous spell effect (for example, a Master of Many Forms turning into a giant victim of Return to Nature). In general, allowing forms not "typical of their kind" has all sorts of negative implications.
Yeah, it sounds pretty off to me too. I did a quick search to post a rebuttal, but I too came up empty. It's a pretty weird little rule hole.

[Bronk]

I agree, it is weird. I originally found the idea on the forums here. Still, a regular tiger goes from large to huge at 13HD while a dire tiger becomes huge at 33HD. It's still up to the DM, especially the advancement of the animal itself.

I'm not sure about the Master of Many Forms though... the issues there would have to be worked out while updating it from 3.0 to 3.5.

[Coidzor]

I agree, it is weird. I originally found the idea on the forums here. Still, a regular tiger goes from large to huge at 13HD while a dire tiger becomes huge at 33HD. It's still up to the DM, especially the advancement of the animal itself.

I'm not sure about the Master of Many Forms though... the issues there would have to be worked out while updating it from 3.0 to 3.5.

I've seen *some* discussion of the subject, but the last time was a goodly while ago and it was an aside within the greater discussion of whether one could select an animal companion with advanced HD.

Master of Many Forms is 3.5 :smallconfused: Shifter was 3.0, but gets superceded by Master of Many Forms. Or if it doesn't actually get superceded was intended to be superceded by.

[Pickford]

M@XIM: I'd recommend buying the MM and putting in your legwork ahead of time figuring out what the stats/changes are when using Wildshape so you have a few go-to forms pre-kitted. This way you don't slow down the game flipping through books/notes when all you really want to do is turn into something that will fit through the window on the ledge 50' in the air.

RavielStrife:

Flame blade springs to mind, for one.

Can't really hold a candle to a wizard polymorphing both himself and his familiar into a 7 headed pyrohydra, though.

Flame Blade isn't cast on yourself, polymorph can be. Produce Flame, also fails this test, as it is not cast upon the Druid.

[M@XIM]

M@XIM: I'd recommend buying the MM and putting in your legwork ahead of time figuring out what the stats/changes are when using Wildshape so you have a few go-to forms pre-kitted. This way you don't slow down the game flipping through books/notes when all you really want to do is turn into something that will fit through the window on the ledge 50' in the air.

RavielStrife:


Flame Blade isn't cast on yourself, polymorph can be. Produce Flame, also fails this test, as it is not cast upon the Druid.


Yeah I've been doing this with the DM.. Though he allowed me to use Wildshape in a much simpler way and I'm able to use my animal's skills and blindsight (120ft) Which means when we played last I was silent and hidden the whole time and could essentially find/spot anything. Combined with Call Lightning and Greenflame.. well let's just say I cleaned up things quite nicely.

[aeauseth]

Share Spells (Ex)
At the druid’s option, she may have any spell (but not any spell-like ability) she casts upon herself also affect her animal companion. The animal companion must be within 5 feet of her at the time of casting to receive the benefit. If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the animal companion if the companion moves farther than 5 feet away and will not affect the animal again, even if it returns to the druid before the duration expires.

Spell's like Call Lightning (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/callLightning.htm) and Flame Blade (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/flameBlade.htm) can not be shared with your animal companion, because YOU are not the target.

Only spells like Cure Light Wounds (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/cureLightWounds.htm) (you are the target of the touch), Freedom of Movement (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/freedomOfMovement.htm) (you are the target), etc can be shared with your animal companion.

[Bronk]

Yes, cast 'upon herself', which is not a game term, just an instruction that spells you cast on yourself are shared. It doesn't restrict it to touch, personal and so on. Spells like call lightning don't specify a target, but the spell affects the caster... the caster has cast the spell upon him or her self. Which is then shared.

M@xim, I'm glad you've come up with something that works with your DM! It sounds like your game is pretty awesome.

[eggynack]

Spells like call lightning don't specify a target, but the spell affects the caster... the caster has cast the spell upon him or her self. Which is then shared.
I get produce flame, because it's directly giving you a flame in the palm of your hand, and can thus be considered a buff spell, but where does call lightning indicate that it's affecting the caster at all? I can't really see anything in the text that shows that.

[Karnith]

Yes, cast 'upon herself', which is not a game term, just an instruction that spells you cast on yourself are shared. It doesn't restrict it to touch, personal and so on.Spells that are cast on creatures or objects have a target line in their spell descriptions (the other options being effects or areas). These are the spells that you may share with an animal companion, because you actually cast them on yourself (assuming that you are a valid target, of course). Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#targetorTargets):

Target or Targets
Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
EDIT: Also, some area spells work (e.g. Bless, with "Area: The caster and all allies within a 50-ft. burst, centered on the caster"), though given the distance restrictions on shared spell it's of limited benefit.

Spells like call lightning don't specify a target, but the spell affects the caster... the caster has cast the spell upon him or her self. Which is then shared.No, spells like Call Lightning create an effect; they don't target, you don't cast them on yourself, and you therefore can't share the spell effect. Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#effect):

Effect
Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present.

You must designate the location where these things are to appear, either by seeing it or defining it. Range determines how far away an effect can appear, but if the effect is mobile it can move regardless of the spell’s range.

[eggynack]

Spells that are cast on creatures or objects have a target line in their spell descriptions. These are the spells that you may share with an animal companion, because you actually cast them on yourself. Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#targetorTargets):
So, what's your stance on produce flame? The effect is directly connected to you, which might constitute a spell that's cast on yourself. It feels a bit like a gray area to me.

[Karnith]

So, what's your stance on produce flame? The effect is directly connected to you, which might constitute a spell that's cast on yourself. It feels a bit like a gray area to me.
You don't cast Produce Flame upon yourself (which sounds painful). You cast it to create a flame in your hand that you have some control over, a bit like the Orb of X spells. Also, as a spell with an Effect line, it is explicitly not cast on a creature ("... create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present"). Ergo you can't share it with your animal companion.

[eggynack]

You don't cast Produce Flame upon yourself (which sounds painful); Produce Flame creates flame in your hand that you have some control over, a bit like the Orb of X spells. Also, as a spell with an Effect line, it is explicitly not cast on a creature ("create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present"). Ergo, you don't cast it on yourself, and you can't share it with your animal companion.
That's a reasonable interpretation. I'm not sure that it's the only interpretation, or necessarily the correct one, but it's definitely a reasonable one.

[Pickford]

That's a reasonable interpretation. I'm not sure that it's the only interpretation, or necessarily the correct one, but it's definitely a reasonable one.

The spell doesn't target the caster, as such it is not interpretation.

[eggynack]

The spell doesn't target the caster, as such it is not interpretation.
You would be absolutely correct if share spells specifically said "target". "Cast upon", however, isn't so defined a term. Karnith's quote about targets implies that targeting necessarily means cast upon, but there is no inverse proof that cast upon necessarily means targeting. Thus, you are only maybe correct.

[M@XIM]

I wonder how many topics there are like this with no exact answer. Too many holes heh.

[nedz]

I wonder how many topics there are like this with no exact answer. Too many holes heh.

Lots, check the link in my signature.

[M@XIM]

Lots, check the link in my signature.
Mind blown