Aberration Wildshape

[FocusWolf413]

I have the feats to gain supernatural abilities when wildshaped. What's the best nonbeholder aberration to wildshape into? I have 21HD to work with.

[Cosi]

This is in no sense comprehensive, but these are some decent choices.

In the SRD:
-Aboleth Enslave (you can use shapechange and awaken to jack up the save DC)
-Choker Quickness for better casting (who said 3.0 haste was broken?)
-Thought Slayer's gaze kills people (another CHA based DC)

There's some other stuff that's situationally useful (for example, the Cloaker's shadow powers, or the Psion-Killer's dispel psionics if your game has transparency). Also, I'd have to look it up, but Choker form may stack super well with shapechange into a Chronotryn.

In the Fiend Folio:
-Black Ethergaunts are immune to 6th level or lower arcane spells
-It's Ex rather than Su, but Ocularons regenerate from anything that isn't Silver or Keen, and most monsters do not have weapons which are Silver or Keen

In the MMII:
-The Julajimus seems decent, good stealth with rabbit polymorph and if you critstack your claws properly you can get some nice stunning action
-You wanna turn people into Meenlocks? That ability is apparently Su

Not really on topic, but the Spellweaver's Spellweaving is Ex, which means you can stack it with shapechange and cast absurd numbers of spells every round. The MMIII's Odopi is a nice choice, having "hundreds" of arms.

In the MMIII:
-The various Mindshredders (Zenthal is best) deal WIS damage, which lets you kill ... whichever monsters have low WIS
-The Rot Reaver Necrothane can make and command a decent pile of undead, and is immune to energy drain

That's all for now. There are templates that turn creatures into Aberrations, which may be of interest depending on how Wildshape defines available forms. Also, I assume there is an aberration out there which can eat people's brains for some permanent advantage.

Out of question, is there a reason you aren't using shapechange, which is better (read: substantially easier to abuse)?

EDIT: The MMV has a couple that are decent. The Ethereal Defiler has a teleportation lock and the Thoon Elder Brain acts twice (also gets a better mind blast).

[Hiro Quester]

Eggynack's Druid Guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LUJYY1XBEw0gqsdwhLjTzg33a_fHPaKqmMT36dQ1mfU)has an excellent review of aberration forms and their different advantages.

[Cosi]

Eggynack's Druid Guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LUJYY1XBEw0gqsdwhLjTzg33a_fHPaKqmMT36dQ1mfU)has an excellent review of aberration forms and their different advantages.

First, that guide is way too long. No one needs an entire paragraph about the wonders of the Barracuda form, or to explain that the Deathkiss Beholderkin is an attrition form. Eggynack needs to go over that whole guide while keeping in mind the Shakpearean adage "brevity is the soul of wit". Or in this case, producing a usable handbook.

Second, even though that guide is absurdly long it (as far as I can tell) misses out on a bunch of questions that are super important. The rules for changing form in 3e are incredibly complicated (as much or more so as the rules for using the Matrix in Shadowrun), and there are a bunch of actual rules questions you need to answer before you evaluate how things work. These questions are not talked about at all.

There's no mention of inheritance debates about templated form legality, or the effect of stacking alter self, Wild Shape, and shapechange in various orders. It talks about "bear versus bat", but never so much as mentions wolf fu and octopus fu (the Deathkiss entry indicates that Eggynack believes in octopus fu, but it would be nice to get that in the open as well as whatever rules citations he has for it).

A lot of work went into researching that guide, but I can't help but think more work should have gone into designing it. I would probably not use it, as it is in almost all cases going to be simpler to just look up monsters and see if they have anything cool going on.

[Hiro Quester]

It's a resource you can choose to use or not.

If I write it I might have designed it differently, sure. But I didn't, and Eggy did. And I appreciate the generosity of effort and time he put into crafting it for the community.

While it may not be perfect, there are many specific questions--like this one on useful Abberation forms-- that the guide can be very helpful in answering.


Edit: it's not a replacement for extensive searching through Monster Manuals. But eggy has already done such a search. And his results can be a good quick reference, or guide to focus a closer search, for many purposes.

I appreciate a bit more weight on detail over brevity. And I consult it often when making decisions about the Druid I'm playing nowadays. YMMV.

[Cosi]

It's a resource you can choose to use or not.

Things don't improve if you ignore things that are bad. They improve if you criticize things which are bad and suggest ways in which those things can improve. For example, Wild Shape forms should probably look something like this:

A Critter (STR/DEX/CON/Attacks/Movement)

Then some notes about it having a sweet ability for a charger or whatever, if that applies. Sort by HD and size, and then you have something that is usable and brief.

Also, I personally don't see the point of writing out entries for bad choices, unless you think those are trap options (i.e. people try to play Fighters, and should be told why that is bad) or the option has some niche use (i.e. fireball is kind of a turd as a combat spell, but sometimes you do want to light a punch of random stuff on fire). So all the entires where Eggynack spends a paragraph explaining why things are bad should go.


While it may not be perfect, there are many specific questions--like this one on useful Abberation forms-- that the guide can be very helpful in answering.

I honestly don't see how reading the paragraph Eggynack writes about the overall abilities of the Darktentacles or the Ethergaunts is better than just reading the book entries of those things, except that it is all in one place. Especially because his entries don't seem all that focused on what you care about.

Lets talk about the Ethergaunt specifically. It has a bunch of abilities you might want to get. Like Enslave (which I think you should get from the Aboleth, as that one has a CHA DC which you can jack up with awaken cheese), spellcasting, and immunity to spells. You might expect that an entry for turning into an Ethergaunt would take a stance on whether you get spellcasting, or if the immunity to spells is a thing you care about.

However, what Eggynack chooses to spend two paragraphs on is using the Ethergaunt's senses (which are a special snowflake kind of perception because D&D authors wouldn't know restraint if it bit them in the taint) to avoid getting ambushed by people with Darkstalker. That's certainly a thing you can do, but it does not strike me as a particularly important part of what people care about when turning into Ethergaunts.


I appreciate a bit more weight on detail over brevity. And I consult it often when making decisions about the Druid I'm playing nowadays. YMMV.

Detail, yes. An entire paragraph dedicated to explaining that bombardment is over-leveled, no.

[FocusWolf413]

This is in no sense comprehensive, but these are some decent choices.

In the SRD:
-Aboleth Enslave (you can use shapechange and awaken to jack up the save DC)
-Choker Quickness for better casting (who said 3.0 haste was broken?)
-Thought Slayer's gaze kills people (another CHA based DC)

There's some other stuff that's situationally useful (for example, the Cloaker's shadow powers, or the Psion-Killer's dispel psionics if your game has transparency). Also, I'd have to look it up, but Choker form may stack super well with shapechange into a Chronotryn.

In the Fiend Folio:
-Black Ethergaunts are immune to 6th level or lower arcane spells
-It's Ex rather than Su, but Ocularons regenerate from anything that isn't Silver or Keen, and most monsters do not have weapons which are Silver or Keen

In the MMII:
-The Julajimus seems decent, good stealth with rabbit polymorph and if you critstack your claws properly you can get some nice stunning action
-You wanna turn people into Meenlocks? That ability is apparently Su

Not really on topic, but the Spellweaver's Spellweaving is Ex, which means you can stack it with shapechange and cast absurd numbers of spells every round. The MMIII's Odopi is a nice choice, having "hundreds" of arms.

In the MMIII:
-The various Mindshredders (Zenthal is best) deal WIS damage, which lets you kill ... whichever monsters have low WIS
-The Rot Reaver Necrothane can make and command a decent pile of undead, and is immune to energy drain

That's all for now. There are templates that turn creatures into Aberrations, which may be of interest depending on how Wildshape defines available forms. Also, I assume there is an aberration out there which can eat people's brains for some permanent advantage.

Out of question, is there a reason you aren't using shapechange, which is better (read: substantially easier to abuse)?

EDIT: The MMV has a couple that are decent. The Ethereal Defiler has a teleportation lock and the Thoon Elder Brain acts twice (also gets a better mind blast).



Those are all wonderful. I was leaning towards black ethergaunt before, but I just wanted to know about my options. Chokers and Ocularons look like really good choices too.
There's an enemy that uses a lot of shenanigans with extremely high caster level dispels, so it's just easier for me to use wildshape. Also, those spell slots are needed for planar bubbles, wish, and gate.




Eggynack's Druid Guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LUJYY1XBEw0gqsdwhLjTzg33a_fHPaKqmMT36dQ1mfU)has an excellent review of aberration forms and their different advantages.


I'll take a look, but I don't have a ton of free time. Thanks.




Things don't improve if you ignore things that are bad. They improve if you criticize things which are bad and suggest ways in which those things can improve. For example, Wild Shape forms should probably look something like this:

A Critter (STR/DEX/CON/Attacks/Movement)

Then some notes about it having a sweet ability for a charger or whatever, if that applies. Sort by HD and size, and then you have something that is usable and brief.

Also, I personally don't see the point of writing out entries for bad choices, unless you think those are trap options (i.e. people try to play Fighters, and should be told why that is bad) or the option has some niche use (i.e. fireball is kind of a turd as a combat spell, but sometimes you do want to light a punch of random stuff on fire). So all the entires where Eggynack spends a paragraph explaining why things are bad should go.



I honestly don't see how reading the paragraph Eggynack writes about the overall abilities of the Darktentacles or the Ethergaunts is better than just reading the book entries of those things, except that it is all in one place. Especially because his entries don't seem all that focused on what you care about.

Lets talk about the Ethergaunt specifically. It has a bunch of abilities you might want to get. Like Enslave (which I think you should get from the Aboleth, as that one has a CHA DC which you can jack up with awaken cheese), spellcasting, and immunity to spells. You might expect that an entry for turning into an Ethergaunt would take a stance on whether you get spellcasting, or if the immunity to spells is a thing you care about.

However, what Eggynack chooses to spend two paragraphs on is using the Ethergaunt's senses (which are a special snowflake kind of perception because D&D authors wouldn't know restraint if it bit them in the taint) to avoid getting ambushed by people with Darkstalker. That's certainly a thing you can do, but it does not strike me as a particularly important part of what people care about when turning into Ethergaunts.



Detail, yes. An entire paragraph dedicated to explaining that bombardment is over-leveled, no.



Let's keep it friendly, alright? It's understandable that you don't like his guide because of its length, but it's still a damn good guide. Eggynack put a lot of work into it.

[eggynack]

First, that guide is way too long. No one needs an entire paragraph about the wonders of the Barracuda form, or to explain that the Deathkiss Beholderkin is an attrition form. Eggynack needs to go over that whole guide while keeping in mind the Shakpearean adage "brevity is the soul of wit". Or in this case, producing a usable handbook.
I admit that my style does tend towards the verbose. But, at the same time, my goal in producing the guide was to make the kinda thing that I'd want to read. Something that'd tell you everything you'd plausibly want to know about a given topic, whether it be barracudas or aberration form, and, critically, something that'd actually be fun and interesting to read as opposed to the incredibly bare bones style of past druid handbooks. I agree that concision is a thing that should be sought, but that's really true only up to the point where removing words doesn't remove information. While my description of the barracuda may be long, I'm of the opinion that every sentence adds something new to the reader's understanding (a thing which tends to be true for the descriptions, aside from some of the conclusion sentences which play a different structural role).


Second, even though that guide is absurdly long it (as far as I can tell) misses out on a bunch of questions that are super important. The rules for changing form in 3e are incredibly complicated (as much or more so as the rules for using the Matrix in Shadowrun), and there are a bunch of actual rules questions you need to answer before you evaluate how things work. These questions are not talked about at all.
I have a couple listed in the FAQ, but while there are certainly oddities to form altering, I don't think they cause problems in the general case.


There's no mention of inheritance debates about templated form legality, or the effect of stacking alter self, Wild Shape, and shapechange in various orders.
I'm not really sure how templated forms enter into discussion of wild shape. Seems pretty straightforward that you just can't use them. I guess that using various form altering abilities has some fringe confusing elements, but it seems kinda simple, and I'm not sure why anyone would care how those things interact. You don't even have alter self, and if you did, there wouldn't be much point to using it on top of wild shape. Shapechange, meanwhile, is strong enough that there is also not much point to using wild shape over it. I don't think there's an ordering where you get to keep cool wild shape abilities like dire tortoise stuff while also being a zodar.


It talks about "bear versus bat", but never so much as mentions wolf fu and octopus fu (the Deathkiss entry indicates that Eggynack believes in octopus fu, but it would be nice to get that in the open as well as whatever rules citations he has for it).
Those things you're talking about are really just subsets of bat style combat. The bear isn't simply about grappling, but is instead a broad categorization of anything that tends towards the offensive. Bear style and bat style effectively partition most wild shape forms in this manner, with things outside of that setup being more about simply utility than about combat interactions.


A lot of work went into researching that guide, but I can't help but think more work should have gone into designing it. I would probably not use it, as it is in almost all cases going to be simpler to just look up monsters and see if they have anything cool going on.
That seems unlikely. It took me a very very long time to get all of the wild shape forms into the handbook. It would take me much less time to find a good wild shape form in the handbook, even within certain parameters. Consider that writing the whole thing took a couple of years, and that reading it in its entirety would take a lot less than that. Sure, research time was only one part of that time, but I think the point still stands.


Also, I personally don't see the point of writing out entries for bad choices, unless you think those are trap options (i.e. people try to play Fighters, and should be told why that is bad) or the option has some niche use (i.e. fireball is kind of a turd as a combat spell, but sometimes you do want to light a punch of random stuff on fire). So all the entires where Eggynack spends a paragraph explaining why things are bad should go.
That actually does define my handbook philosophy in most cases. As I note in my rating guide, red is generally for trap options. However, there are some non-traps that I discuss, and that I do because I find them interesting, or because they have some valuable unique utility, or because they're part of a section (mostly just initiate feats and ACF's) where it just made sense to me to list all available options. I can think of plenty of things that are bad for druids which are not in the guide. Like, y'know, the vast majority of wild feats.


Lets talk about the Ethergaunt specifically. It has a bunch of abilities you might want to get. Like Enslave (which I think you should get from the Aboleth, as that one has a CHA DC which you can jack up with awaken cheese), spellcasting, and immunity to spells. You might expect that an entry for turning into an Ethergaunt would take a stance on whether you get spellcasting, or if the immunity to spells is a thing you care about.
The aberration section ignores supernatural abilities, because I don't think they are necessary to make aberration forms amazing. You spend a whole feat just getting one of them, and it's really not worth it in the vast majority of cases. Beholder is close to being an exception, so I have it mentioned specifically under assume supernatural ability, but I think you're usually better off ignoring that stuff. You may be correct on one thing, though, that I should have an FAQ thing addressing the fact that you probably don't get spellcasting from wild shape forms.


However, what Eggynack chooses to spend two paragraphs on is using the Ethergaunt's senses (which are a special snowflake kind of perception because D&D authors wouldn't know restraint if it bit them in the taint) to avoid getting ambushed by people with Darkstalker. That's certainly a thing you can do, but it does not strike me as a particularly important part of what people care about when turning into Ethergaunts.
Following as a corollary from the above, total vision is basically the only ability you get from ethergaunts. In this claimed context, it's just about the only thing people care about when turning into an ethergaunt. And, more to the point, it's the entire reason I have them as an entry, and were it not an ability then the form wouldn't be mentioned at all.

Anyway, for the above reasons, I actually wouldn't recommend use of my handbook for this particular purpose. The supernatural abilities of aberrations are nearly entirely outside of the scope of the handbook. I'm not really sure how exactly you're getting all of these supernatural abilities, however, as assume supernatural ability only grants access to a single ability, and the implication of your post is that you're getting a large number.

Edit: Added the entry in the FAQ. First, thanks, cause that section really needs more stuff. Second, muahaha, your every action only makes the handbook grow longer. Watch as it slowly consumes you and everyone you love. There is only the handbook.

[Cosi]

On topic, OP should strongly consider Multitasking (extra partial action for each pair of arms) and Odopi form (hundreds of arms) to break the game into small pieces by casting all his spells in one round. Or just attacking a hundred times.

Eggynack: You should probably mention that (or the "tame" version with an Octopus) somewhere in your guide.


I admit that my style does tend towards the verbose.

Your discussion of bombardment (an 8th level blasting spell that is obviously bad because it is a blasting spell that is 8th level) is 252 words. The Spell Compendium long-form description of bombardment is only 183 words. You have personally written more than any other living human about that spell, and your conclusion is that it's probably not worth it.


While my description of the barracuda may be long, I'm of the opinion that every sentence adds something new to the reader's understanding (a thing which tends to be true for the descriptions, aside from some of the conclusion sentences which play a different structural role).

Not to be rude, but when I'm looking to turn into things, I'd like to know things like physical stats or natural attacks more than how it fits into your schema for evaluating Wild Shape strategies. Also, citing it as similar to something you are going to describe in the future is a really poor layout choice. You should describe that thing as similar to the Barracuda.


I have a couple listed in the FAQ, but while there are certainly oddities to form altering, I don't think they cause problems in the general case.

The oddities in this case are that the rules for how Wild Shape works (and hence the forms into which one might wish to Wild Shape) are scattered across the Player's Handbook (which defines Wild Shape and polymorph), the Players Handbook II (which defines the Polymorph subschool), the Rules Compendium (which sums, with IIRC some additions of its own, the changes to form changing), the errata to those documents, the FAQ*, some Sage Advice "rulings"*, and the relevant Rules of the Game article*. That's not "some oddities", that's an essentially total revision to what Wild Shape does depending on what books you own and what online articles you bother to check.

*: It is debatable as to whether these sources apply.


I'm not really sure how templated forms enter into discussion of wild shape. Seems pretty straightforward that you just can't use them.

I don't think they do with the current version of Wild Shape (which is, IIRC, a citation to Alternate Form). But the original Wild Shape (the one written in the 3.5 PHB) cites to polymorph. The argument is (I can link you a longer discussion if you want), that when polymorph defines its own set of allowed forms it overrides the restrictions alter self places on allowed forms. Therefore, because polymorph allows a Humanoid to transform into an Ooze (which alter self does not, as Ooze is a different type from Humanoid), it also allows a Humanoid to transform into a Paragon Ooze.

That sort of thing certainly deserves to be mentioned, as it rather obviously changes how Wild Shape is used quite radically.


Shapechange, meanwhile, is strong enough that there is also not much point to using wild shape over it. I don't think there's an ordering where you get to keep cool wild shape abilities like dire tortoise stuff while also being a zodar.

I would have to look stuff up. I'm pretty sure there's no reason to go Wild Shape -> shapechange, as any Ex ability you get from Wild Shape is just something you can put into your shapechange pile. Going shapechange -> Wild Shape might get you some cool abilities on a form more suited for combat. Maybe try and get Choker Quickness and Chronotyryn Dual Actions. The point is that there might be something there, and you should certainly at least discuss it.


Those things you're talking about are really just subsets of bat style combat.

Uh, no. The Dire Wolf Fu/Octopus Fu isn't about how you approach using Wild Shape, it's about what happens when you get a pile of natural attacks from form changing. Do you get to use your cool bite + trip combo with your iterative attacks (Dire Wolf Fu) or do you get the entire attack routine of your new form, onto which you can stack a bunch of buffs (Octopus Fu). One of those is true, and which one is effects your choices rather substantially. Your writings on the Deathkiss indicate that you're assuming Octoupus Fu, but you should make that clear (also, if there are rules somewhere which clear that up, you should have a citation).

EDIT: For clarity, it should be pointed out you have to turn into a Giant Octopus, which gets distinct tentacle attacks. The little one just gets one attack with "arms".

[eggynack]

Eggynack: You should probably mention that (or the "tame" version with an Octopus) somewhere in your guide.
Seems plausible. Cost is a bit prohibitive, but the impact is high.



Your discussion of bombardment (an 8th level blasting spell that is obviously bad because it is a blasting spell that is 8th level) is 252 words. The Spell Compendium long-form description of bombardment is only 183 words. You have personally written more than any other living human about that spell, and your conclusion is that it's probably not worth it.
It's a complicated spell. There's some interesting utility that wasn't previously available, and it wouldn't necessarily be awful if not for broader scale availability of effects that deny bombardment's SoL nature. The question of whether a spell is overleveled seems like it'd be relatively easy on the surface, but it becomes a lot more complex when dealing with high leveled druid spells because of the general weakness of those spells. Simply saying, "Yeah, this isn't much better than the 5th level version," isn't enough, because it still might be better than other available options. The fact of the matter is that some rather small changes to the spell would make it quite usable, if not necessarily good.



Not to be rude, but when I'm looking to turn into things, I'd like to know things like physical stats or natural attacks more than how it fits into your schema for evaluating Wild Shape strategies.
I think I have most of that information in a general sense in the first section of each entry. It's not perfect, but I think you wind up knowing about what you need to know.


Also, citing it as similar to something you are going to describe in the future is a really poor layout choice. You should describe that thing as similar to the Barracuda.
I agree in part. The reason it wound up that way is because that's the order that I wrote the entries, and I acknowledge that the way the comparison ordering worked out isn't ideal. However, in that case and many like it, the creature that comes later is decidedly the more iconic creature of the type. Using the obscure barracuda as the base creature tells you significantly less than using the well known shark.



The oddities in this case are that the rules for how Wild Shape works (and hence the forms into which one might wish to Wild Shape) are scattered across the Player's Handbook (which defines Wild Shape and polymorph), the Players Handbook II (which defines the Polymorph subschool), the Rules Compendium (which sums, with IIRC some additions of its own, the changes to form changing), the errata to those documents, the FAQ*, some Sage Advice "rulings"*, and the relevant Rules of the Game article*. That's not "some oddities", that's an essentially total revision to what Wild Shape does depending on what books you own and what online articles you bother to check.

*: It is debatable as to whether these sources apply.
Where wild shape is defined is quite complex. What it actually does is, well, it's not simple, but it's relatively simple. All of that stuff you listed is integrated into the entries, insofar as it determines what I say that each form gives. I dunno that there's much point to telling people how to figure out that fiddly stuff independently. Wild shape may change if you ignore certain rules, but if you ignore certain rules then you just aren't playing by the rules. The handbook inevitably doesn't cover instances of the game which fall outside the rules.


I don't think they do with the current version of Wild Shape (which is, IIRC, a citation to Alternate Form). But the original Wild Shape (the one written in the 3.5 PHB) cites to polymorph. The argument is (I can link you a longer discussion if you want), that when polymorph defines its own set of allowed forms it overrides the restrictions alter self places on allowed forms. Therefore, because polymorph allows a Humanoid to transform into an Ooze (which alter self does not, as Ooze is a different type from Humanoid), it also allows a Humanoid to transform into a Paragon Ooze.

That sort of thing certainly deserves to be mentioned, as it rather obviously changes how Wild Shape is used quite radically.
Why would I care about a version of wild shape that no longer applies? I care about the wild shape that is, the one defined concretely by the errata, not the wild shape that is not.



I would have to look stuff up. I'm pretty sure there's no reason to go Wild Shape -> shapechange, as any Ex ability you get from Wild Shape is just something you can put into your shapechange pile. Going shapechange -> Wild Shape might get you some cool abilities on a form more suited for combat. Maybe try and get Choker Quickness and Chronotyryn Dual Actions. The point is that there might be something there, and you should certainly at least discuss it.

Might be worth looking into, I suppose. Still, my entry on shapechange is necessarily pretty much the opposite of all encompassing. I don't know if there's much point to optimizing the thing when you're already past the singularity.

Uh, no. The Dire Wolf Fu/Octopus Fu isn't about how you approach using Wild Shape, it's about what happens when you get a pile of natural attacks from form changing. Do you get to use your cool bite + trip combo with your iterative attacks (Dire Wolf Fu) or do you get the entire attack routine of your new form, onto which you can stack a bunch of buffs (Octopus Fu). One of those is true, and which one is effects your choices rather substantially. Your writings on the Deathkiss indicate that you're assuming Octoupus Fu, but you should make that clear (also, if there are rules somewhere which clear that up, you should have a citation).

I'm not really sure where you're getting iterative attacks here, but even if you have them, they don't work on iteratives, cause iteratives work only with your bite attack. I don't think there's a way to get two bite attacks. I think there're ways to get some unarmed strikes in there, but those aren't all that great, and are kinda independent of your natural weapon stack.

[FocusWolf413]

I would appreciate it if you guys took this argument to a new thread. This thread is not supposed to be about what's a good handbook and what isn't. This thread is about good nonaberration beholders NONBEHOLDER ABERRATIONS to wildshape into.

For the record, Eggynack, I love your handbook. I read it a while ago and it was a fun read.

I have a question about black ethergaunts: If you change into a black ethergaunt, do you gain their spellcasting?

EDIT: I'm a dunce

[Cosi]

I would appreciate it if you guys took this argument to a new thread. This thread is not supposed to be about what's a good handbook and what isn't. This thread is about good nonaberration beholders to wildshape into.

Fair enough. I've reply to Eggynack in the Handbook thread.


I have a question about black ethergaunts: If you change into a black ethergaunt, do you gain their spellcasting?

It's ambiguous enough that you (or your DM) can rule no. Alternate Form (which the current version of Wild Shape cites to) says that you get "extraordinary special attacks". The Ethergaunt's "Spells" ability is a Special Attack, but it is not (necessarily) extraordinary. I think some creatures have Ex spellcasting (stuff in the MMV IIRC), but those guys are not Aberrations, so it's kind of moot.

[eggynack]

I would appreciate it if you guys took this argument to a new thread. This thread is not supposed to be about what's a good handbook and what isn't. This thread is about good nonaberration beholders to wildshape into.
Fair enough. The actual handbook would probably be as good a place as any, and likely better than most. This does seem to be more a discussion of my handbook than handbook philosophy.

As for the main question, still not sure where Su is coming from exactly.


For the record, Eggynack, I love your handbook. I read it a while ago and it was a fun read.
Thanks.

I have a question abrout black ethergaunts: If you change into a black ethergaunt, do you gain their spellcasting?
That is unfortunately a bit of an open question as regards ability types. The core question being whether casting is Ex or natural, or perhaps some third thing. Ex would potentially allow it where no other answer would.

[FocusWolf413]

As for the main question, still not sure where Su is coming from exactly.


It's the enhanced wildshape thing.

[Necroticplague]

I have a question about black ethergaunts: If you change into a black ethergaunt, do you gain their spellcasting?

Nope. Wild Shape is a type of Alternate Form. For Alternate Form, you get


The creature gains the natural weapons, natural armor, movement modes, and extraordinary special attacks of its new form.
The creature retains the special qualities of its original form. It does not gain any special qualities of its new form.
The creature retains the spell-like abilities and supernatural attacks of its old form (except for breath weapons and gaze attacks). It does not gain the spell-like abilities or supernatural attacks of its new form.
The creature gains the physical ability scores (Str, Dex, Con) of its new form. It retains the mental ability scores (Int, Wis, Cha) of its original form. Apply any changed physical ability score modifiers in all appropriate areas with one exception: the creature retains the hit points of its original form despite any change to its Constitution.
Except as described elsewhere, the creature retains all other game statistics of its original form, including (but not necessarily limited to) HD, hit points, skill ranks, feats, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses

I bolded the list of everything you actually get from your new form, except for the important last line. Spells, while a special attack, are not an Extraordinary special attack, so you don't get it (instead, it's a Natural ability [since it's not defined as EX, SU, PLA or SLA]). It's also very clearly not any of the other things Alternate Form (and thus, Wild Shape) grant. Not a natural weapon, natural armor, movement mode, or physical ability score. Thus, it's not something you get from your new form.

[Cosi]

It's the enhanced wildshape thing.

That grants Ex abilities, as far as I can tell.

Very little grants Su abilities from new forms. IIRC, it's basically shapechange and Planar Shepherd's Planar Wild Shape.

[eggynack]

Indeed, and it's also a spell rather than a feat. Long story short my handbook now returns to relevance, cause it has a crazy detailed listing of Ex abilities for aberrations.

[sleepyphoenixx]

That grants Ex abilities, as far as I can tell.

Very little grants Su abilities from new forms. IIRC, it's basically shapechange and Planar Shepherd's Planar Wild Shape.

Dragon Wild Shape, Exalted Wild Shape and Magical Beast Wild Shape all grant (Su) abilities, though the latter is epic-only.
Aside from ASA some races with psi-like abilities also easily qualify for Metamorphic Transfer, which can be better than ASA depending on what abilities you want.

[Beheld]

I would have to look stuff up. I'm pretty sure there's no reason to go Wild Shape -> shapechange, as any Ex ability you get from Wild Shape is just something you can put into your shapechange pile. Going shapechange -> Wild Shape might get you some cool abilities on a form more suited for combat. Maybe try and get Choker Quickness and Chronotyryn Dual Actions. The point is that there might be something there, and you should certainly at least discuss it.

Actually, if you have Shapechange at all, you want to go: Elemental Wildshape > Shapechange, because Elemental Wildshape gives feats, something nothing else does, so you can get "Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Flyby Attack, Improved InitiativeB, Weapon FinesseB" For free, and apply them to some other form that benefits more from Combat Reflexes or Flyby Attack.