[3.5] wild shape max HD

[Raezeman]

so i have a question about the maximum HD of the animal a druid can wild shape in. The new form's HD can't exceed the character's druid level, but can you wild shape into something with less HD, but use the improving monsters - increase hit dice rules from monster manual to bump the HP up to maximum allowed level?

for example:
-level 5 druid can wild shape into small or medium animal with maximum 5 HD.
-Hyena, monter manual 1, entry states medium animal, 2 HD.
According to the advancement, improving HD to 4 or 5 would make the hyane large, so that's definitely no go, but improving it to 3 HD would result in a creature that is in check with all the wild shape rules. So can this druid wild shape into this 3 HD hyena, or only in the 2 HD version as described literally in the monster manual?

[cakellene]

Not sure how it would make a difference. Abilities and stats would be same for 2 HD and 3 HD.

[eggynack]

My general stance is that you're not allowed to take those forms, but I'm not aware of any rule that disallows it. Unlike the animal companion ability, which specifies that the animal must be typical for its kind, the wild shape rules, which draw from the alternate form rules, only disallow taking templated forms.

Edit:
Not sure how it would make a difference. Abilities and stats would be same for 2 HD and 3 HD.
Perhaps in this case, but certainly not in all cases.

[hymer]

increase hit dice rules from monster manual to bump the HP up to maximum allowed level?

Just for clarity: You retain your own hit points when you wild shape, even so far as to ignore any difference in constitution.

[sleepyphoenixx]

There's no explicit ruling concerning that afaik.
Apart from size it doesn't really matter since all boni you'd get from higher animal HD are replaced by your own HD anyway.

[eggynack]

Apart from size it doesn't really matter since all boni you'd get from higher animal HD are replaced by your own HD anyway.
Well, pretty much, yeah. I'm pretty sure that there're some high powered advanced animal options, despite the limited scope of the changes, but I haven't done any research into it because of my seemingly unsupported position that it doesn't work. Thus, I might be mistaken on that count.

[Raezeman]

Ah yes, i overlooked the 'your hit points, bab and base save bonuses remain the same' part. So i guess it doesn't actually matter at all. Sorry for the bother people.

[eggynack]

Ah yes, i overlooked the 'your hit points, bab and base save bonuses remain the same' part. So i guess it doesn't actually matter at all. Sorry for the bother people.
Well, yeah, if that's all you're looking for then this won't really help. However, I think you underestimate the potential that advancement possesses. Consider something like a fleshraker dinosaur. It's a great medium beat stick form, but consider its potential when you use the 9-12 HD large version. One of the biggest limiting factors on the fleshraker is that their leaping pounce attack routine can only be so effective when it's strapped to a medium body. Now, with a large body, "same size or smaller" scales up to large foes, and the grapple and trip mods are significantly increased. In this fashion, advancing the fleshraker creates a wild shape form that is potentially stronger than other large options, and even if it isn't necessarily the best option, it's still an option that offers unique abilities to the druid's wild shape arsenal. That's just me applying approximately a minute of thought to how this could be useful, and there's definite potential with more research. It's not really research I have any intention of doing though, cause I don't really think it works.

[Raezeman]

However, I think you underestimate the potential that advancement possesses.
True again. So, would you allow it, as a DM, possible backed up by rules, or say no no, MM entry or nothing at all.

[eggynack]

True again. So, would you allow it, as a DM, possible backed up by rules, or say no no, MM entry or nothing at all.
As I've noted, it's a thing I would likely say no to. It feels oddly like taking the form of an animal with levels, which makes little sense. Alternatively, it feels a lot like taking a templated form, which is definitely not allowed, or something of some kind. Honestly, I don't have that much justification for my position on this one, so it could see acceptance by some. Ultimately, it's a thing which I don't really know the consequences of, and figuring out those consequences would probably take a good deal of work.

[Kennisiou]

Doesn't the RAW in wildshape (or like rules compendium or something) say that you wildshape into a standard version of the creature you want to emulate? And that you can control certain basic things like gender and appearance but you can't do stuff like create scars or missing limbs or anything like that?

[eggynack]

Doesn't the RAW in wildshape (or like rules compendium or something) say that you wildshape into a standard version of the creature you want to emulate? And that you can control certain basic things like gender and appearance but you can't do stuff like create scars or missing limbs or anything like that?
I think you're thinking of alter self, which forms the basis for polymorph, which originally formed the basis for wild shape. That spell contains a rule alike to what you're discussing. However, wild shape was subsequently errata'd to be based on alternate form, for which I've never seen such a rule.

[Necroticplague]

Note that if you can wildshape into a fey, the ability to advance HD is more relevant. Redcaps have a wierd progression where they never go up in size, but gain better stats and DR for every couple HD, so you could end up with some idiot who looks like an evil garden gnome being stronger than the giant your fighting. This is a relatively grey area of the rules, since it never mentions it either way, so my standard response is to always ask the DM I plan on running the momf with during chargen.

[eggynack]

Huh. I was just checking the rules compendium for evidence against this (which I didn't find), and I found this: "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid has seen or could reasonably know about." That's a lot more clear than familiarity, and it means that a basic knowledge check should actually work. I mean, it's what people were generally using before, but whether it could actually be defined as familiarity was a pretty divisive topic. Nifty.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Huh. I was just checking the rules compendium for evidence against this (which I didn't find), and I found this: "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid has seen or could reasonably know about." That's a lot more clear than familiarity, and it means that a basic knowledge check should actually work. I mean, it's what people were generally using before, but whether it could actually be defined as familiarity was a pretty divisive topic. Nifty.

That's how it should be handled imo. The other way i have seen is "you can only use animals you have personally seen and i'll make sure you never fight anything strong" which is rather annoying as a player.
If the DM doesn't want you to use a specific form (hello fleshraker :smallwink:) he should just say so before the game.

[eggynack]

That's how it should be handled imo. The other way i have seen is "you can only use animals you have personally seen and i'll make sure you never fight anything strong" which is rather annoying as a player.
If the DM doesn't want you to use a specific form (hello fleshraker :smallwink:) he should just say so before the game.
Yeah, and the best part (really obviously not the best part, cause the other part provides roughly infinite access) is that that rule clarifies the fact that just seeing the animal in question is a sufficient condition for wild shape, which means that summoning creatures that you want to wild shape into is a good plan. I'm pretty sure that it's trivial to get enough knowledge (nature) to keep up with creatures perfectly though. I love it when I find stuff in the rules compendium that solves long standing rules disputes. I think the last one I found was, "an antimagic area doesn't block line of effect."

[Zanos]

Well, yeah, if that's all you're looking for then this won't really help. However, I think you underestimate the potential that advancement possesses. Consider something like a fleshraker dinosaur. It's a great medium beat stick form, but consider its potential when you use the 9-12 HD large version. One of the biggest limiting factors on the fleshraker is that their leaping pounce attack routine can only be so effective when it's strapped to a medium body. Now, with a large body, "same size or smaller" scales up to large foes, and the grapple and trip mods are significantly increased. In this fashion, advancing the fleshraker creates a wild shape form that is potentially stronger than other large options, and even if it isn't necessarily the best option, it's still an option that offers unique abilities to the druid's wild shape arsenal. That's just me applying approximately a minute of thought to how this could be useful, and there's definite potential with more research. It's not really research I have any intention of doing though, cause I don't really think it works.

Wouldn't advancing HD into the next size category trigger the "advancing creatures size categories" rule? IIRC +8 Str, +4 Con, and -2 Dex per size category, with assorted natural armor and reach adjustments.

[eggynack]

Wouldn't advancing HD into the next size category trigger the "advancing creatures size categories" rule? IIRC +8 Str, +4 Con, and -2 Dex per size category, with assorted natural armor and reach adjustments.
Seems highly probable. A +8 in strength, in addition to the other stuff, has a high likelihood of pushing large fleshrakers above most large melee options (here defined as forms you'd get before huge, cause there're some medium animals with high HD), if not all of them. So, yeah, this is a bit on the ridiculous side of the spectrum.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Seems highly probable. A +8 in strength, in addition to the other stuff, has a high likelihood of pushing large fleshrakers above most large melee options (here defined as forms you'd get before huge, cause there're some medium animals with high HD), if not all of them. So, yeah, this is a bit on the ridiculous side of the spectrum.

That has a lot more to do with the fleshraker than with the size increase though.
I've looked through my books but couldn't find any clarification, so i guess it's up to the DM.

[eggynack]

That has a lot more to do with the fleshraker than with the size increase though.
Well, yes and no. The fleshraker is currently just about the best medium beat stick option in the game, and possibly the only one that makes medium face punching a viable option at all. However when druids get large forms, the fleshraker is no longer at the top of the list. Without venomfire, you'd likely be better off just picking up one of the newly accessible large forms, because they can use various combat maneuvers with much greater efficiency, and they often deal more damage.

This changes things though. With advancement in place, the fleshraker goes from being the best medium form and a just alright large form, to being quite possibly the best in both situations. Large size was missing a fleshraker, and now it has one. I doubt that this is the only case where this is true, either. For example, I'm pretty sure that a large advanced desmodu hunting bat would be somewhat better than a normal desmodu guard bat.


I've looked through my books but couldn't find any clarification, so i guess it's up to the DM.
Sounds about right.

[sleepyphoenixx]

It's not like you can't get a size increase in Wild Shape if you want one. I'd allow it on a case by case basis, depending on the general power level of the campaign.
It's not like it would break anything that's not already broken if Fleshrakers & Venomfire are already in the game.:smallbiggrin:

[eggynack]

It's not like you can't get a size increase in Wild Shape if you want one.
Perhaps, but they generally take investment, and then you have to evaluate everything with that investment in mind. Thus, you end up comparing large fleshrakers to, say, huge bears, and it all ends up mathing out in pretty much the same way it did before. It's a relevant factor, no matter how you slice it.


It's not like it would break anything that's not already broken if Fleshrakers & Venomfire are already in the game.:smallbiggrin:
I think there's some room between fleshraker and venomfire on the big list of crazy druid stuff, and fleshrakers without venomfire aren't particularly broken so much as they are very strong. With venomfire, size is likely a rather irrelevant factor, and fleshraker would be one of the best forms at large size, with or without advancement.

[Grayson01]

Venomfire SC and what level?

[eggynack]

Venomfire SC and what level?
It's in serpent kingdoms, page 158, and it's a third level spell. As for its impact, for hours/level it causes each venom using attack of the creature in question to deal 1d6 acid damage/level, completely uncapped. A fleshraker has three attacks each round that does poison damage. Utterly ridiculous.

[hymer]

It's not like you can't get a size increase in Wild Shape if you want one.

Are we talking about using Belt of Growth, or what's in your mind here? Just curious.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Are we talking about using Belt of Growth, or what's in your mind here? Just curious.

Belt of Growth, Ring of Expansion, Enlarge Person (via potion, scroll, wizard buddy or Arcane Hierophant), Hidden Talent:Expansion, Contemplative dip for the Strength domain (Righteus Might)... There are a lot of options to increase size.

[hymer]

Right. Thanks for spelling it out!

[bekeleven]

For the record, advancing forms for wild shaping was banned at some point, but I can't find an FAQ entry for it. It enters a very odd situation in which you are rewarded for using crappier animals.

The SRD is silent on the matter, I agree.

[Togo]

The option to turn into advanced monsters makes wild shape slightly more powerful, since you get far more viable options per level. However, it make a much larger difference if you have options to turn into other creatures types.

[eggynack]

The option to turn into advanced monsters makes wild shape slightly more powerful, since you get far more viable options per level. However, it make a much larger difference if you have options to turn into other creatures types.
Well, yeah, at least if you're talking about one of the good creature types. Overall, I'd call this a decent amount more than slightly more powerful, and I'd probably take the ability to assume advanced forms over a couple of the alternative druid wild shape options. This seems better than the humanoid forms you get from fangshields druid substitution levels (CV, 40), for example, and this probably isn't too far off of the various methods of acquiring vermin forms. This is reasonably powerful, in other words, especially as you're presumably getting it for free.

[Flickerdart]

Huh. I was just checking the rules compendium for evidence against this (which I didn't find), and I found this: "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid has seen or could reasonably know about." That's a lot more clear than familiarity, and it means that a basic knowledge check should actually work. I mean, it's what people were generally using before, but whether it could actually be defined as familiarity was a pretty divisive topic. Nifty.No, no. It's even better than a knowledge check, because it doesn't actually require your druid to know about the animal in question. It must only be reasonable that he could know about it, and know about it. So if it's plausible that someone told the druid at one point in his life "man those fleshrakers down south are vicious sots" he can turn into one.

[eggynack]

No, no. It's even better than a knowledge check, because it doesn't actually require your druid to know about the animal in question. It must only be reasonable that he could know about it, and know about it. So if it's plausible that someone told the druid at one point in his life "man those fleshrakers down south are vicious sots" he can turn into one.
DM: Does your druid know about fleshrakers?
Player: Well, he knows of fleshrakers. Does that count?

So, yeah, this seems to resolve the issue, at least to my satisfaction. This is definitely more clear cut than the ever-vexing "familiarity," whether you require a high knowledge roll, or just some guy talking about animals. Notably, if your interpretation turns out true, one way to get forms could be getting every trained party member to roll your knowledge rolls for you. However you end up working it out, getting forms should be trivial.

[Bronk]

For the record, advancing forms for wild shaping was banned at some point, but I can't find an FAQ entry for it. It enters a very odd situation in which you are rewarded for using crappier animals.

If there really is such a ruling, I'd like to know more about it. Has anyone else heard of this?

[Togo]

If there really is such a ruling, I'd like to know more about it. Has anyone else heard of this?

Nothing definitive.

In the absence of a definitive ruling, what it comes down to is what an advanced monster is. If it's just a larger and more impressive variation of the same creature, then fair enough. If it's a different species being represented with a stat line that just happens to be derived from a similar sort of creatuure, then knowing the basic creature wouldn't help in knowing the variant.

Personally I just limit druids to turning into creatures native to the local area or those they've met personally. That gives them plenty of choice, works well, and gives them an excuse to adventure.

[MeeposFire]

One major advantage for MOST tables for not allowing advancing HD forms is that it adds even more time to the already long list of stuff that a wild shape using character needs to have on hand. Wild shape characters take up a lot of paperwork OR cause you to have lots of books on hand with a need to keep them ready for the stats. This would add even more options and decisions to the already large pool to start with. Most tables would probably find it slowing down their game more which I think logistically is not worth the benefit.

However for some tables where these sort of options could be very welcome and needed this could be a good plan. Good rule of thumb if your group is already being slowed down by frequent issues with wild shape then this would be a bad idea.


This is actually one of the big reasons for why they created the shapeshift alternate ability since while it is less flexible it gives you a quick and powerful enough option that saves a lot of paper and book space. No need to comb books for so many optoins.

Paradoxically we could use this advanced HD idea to save space IF you used it to insure that you pick only a hand full of forms and then use advancement to keep them useful as you level (large fleshraker-huge fleshraker-etc even though I know it does not have that in the entry just using it as an example). If you did that then you could possibly save time rather than increase it but for most groups I would expect a slow down if allowing this especially since it may require more work to figure out the stats.

[Bronk]

I agree. Also, it always helps to have druids have their wildshape forms written out and ready to use instead of digging out a book then trying to apply BAB changes, CON changes to fort saves and whatever magic is going on, all on the fly.

[eggynack]

I agree. Also, it always helps to have druids have their wildshape forms written out and ready to use instead of digging out a book then trying to apply BAB changes, CON changes to fort saves and whatever magic is going on, all on the fly.
Yeah, you end up with a lot of character sheets as a druid. It's also probably a good idea to have sheets for summons, especially if they're being modified by feats, and definitely an animal companion sheet.