5e Druids, do they need houseruling?

[VertDeLion]

We've recently added a new player to our campaign, starting him off as a 10th level Moon Druid. Since we have had no encounters with Druids so far, and our GM wanted me to help issue some boosts and custom feats/spells to bring him up to level with us, I not only read up the class and monster manual, but I took the liberty of writing up a complete list for our new player of all the creatures he can turn into, sorted by alphabet and CR, with health and AC scores for reference.

I also looked into several different forums and homebrew sites to see what they think about homebrew druid skills, and what I noticed was that a lot of them found the base druid in 5e to be inherently strong/broken. The two big points I got was
~There is no downside to being dropped to 0 health in creature form
~Using the Wild Shape basically gives you a free shield. At level 20, with the use of this feature increasing from 2 to infinity, this can effectively give you infinite health.

I thought up a couple rules to control the druid, but I'm worried if the restrictions are too harsh? Are they fair? What do you think about Druid power levels, and how do you manage them if you do?

~Health for animal forms start at their median health as seen on the animal charts, and can go no higher than their maximum value. The health of your Wild Shapes come from a shared pool. This health pool is equal to nine times your Druid level, plus your Constitution score. Your health pool is restored upon taking a long rest.
~Drinking potions while in your normal form restores that much health to your pool as well. Any other form of healing to your normal form restores half that much to your pool as well.
~When you are reduced to 0 hit points in animal form, your revert back to normal and take the excess damage as usual. However, that animal form is no longer accessible until you finish a long rest, or 24 hours have passed, whichever comes first.

I was planning on giving our druid some buffs to a couple creatures or give him access to normally inaccessible transformations as compensation, but I'm waiting until we play a couple games so I can gauge his play style and what exactly he wants his character to be.

[Giant2005]

I actually think you might be being a little too generous on the hit points. 9 per level is more than a Barbarian gets, and that is in addition to the Druid's normal hp pool. I'd nerf that down a lot more.
As for compensation, simply remove the limit on how often Wildshape can be used - there is no point in having two limits on the ability and the hp limit will suffice. It will make the class a lot more fun too, so the player will actually be grateful instead of being annoyed by the nerfs.

[Eldamar]

Why does the Druid need a boost to be on the same level as the rest of the party?

[NewDM]

Why does the Druid need a boost to be on the same level as the rest of the party?

They don't. That was the OPs point. They did research and found that the Druid if anything is over powered.

[Eldamar]

They don't. That was the OPs point. They did research and found that the Druid if anything is over powered.

OH! I completely misread.

If you'd like restrictions, here's a bit I employ in my games.


You gain additional forms by spending one hour studying a living animal and making a DC 15 + CR Wisdom Check. Pass and you learn to wild shape into this animal. Fail and you take force damage equal to the animal’s CR in d8s. (Ex. An owlbear is CR 2. DC 17 to transform into one. Failure means 2d8 force damage.) If you fail a check, you may not attempt the check again for 7 days. No feature, bonus, or ability can be used to aid this check. (Ex. Bardic Inspiration, Inspiration, Guidance, etc.)

[Grod_The_Giant]

So basically you're adding a total hp/day limit?

My understanding was that a big issue with the moon druid is that it starts out too strong, but it's forms soon start to lag.

[Kryx]

In my experience moon druids are a bag of hp that does very ltitle damage and is outclassed by polymorph.

There should, imo, be a way to channel spells energy into better damaging forms (without as much HP).

[hymer]

My understanding was that a big issue with the moon druid is that it starts out too strong, but it's forms soon start to lag.

This is my understanding, too. The moon druids need to remember that they are full spellcasters. If they absolutely must keep their wild shapes combat competitive, there are multiclass options that can help a lot. But the moon druid can just single-class and be flexible with all the tools at their disposal; use minor action shifts into bags of hit points that can fly, dig, crawl and earth-glide. But your main strength is now spells, which you can't use with a bag of hit points over you until level 17.

If any house rules are needed for moon druids, it's at levels 2-4, and perhaps level 20. Anything else is trying fix a feature, not a bug.

[Grod_The_Giant]

This is my understanding, too. The moon druids need to remember that they are full spellcasters. If they absolutely must keep their wild shapes combat competitive, there are multiclass options that can help a lot. But the moon druid can just single-class and be flexible with all the tools at their disposal; use minor action shifts into bags of hit points that can fly, dig, crawl and earth-glide. But your main strength is now spells, which you can't use with a bag of hit points over you until level 17.

If any house rules are needed for moon druids, it's at levels 2-4, and perhaps level 20. Anything else is trying fix a feature, not a bug.
I dunno, if anything "this ability is anti-synergistic" seems like a bigger bug than "this ability is OP." If you wanted to be a caster with utility shapeshifting you'd have gone Land Druid. My thought is to keep the 1/3 CR limit constant, but upgrade Primal Strike somehow. Preferably, I think, in a way that mixes their magic in. Expend spell slots to get bonuses like more damage, more attacks, more movement, more AC, stuff like that, maybe?

[hymer]

I dunno, if anything "this ability is anti-synergistic" seems like a bigger bug than "this ability is OP."

You just pick which you want at any given moment, like a warrior switching between weapons. The barbarian's proficiency in medium armour doesn't synergize with Unarmored Defense, but I don't suppose you'd call that a bug? You use your stack of hp to go nee-nah at opponents thinking they get to squish a squishie. Or you use its movement to go elsewhere. In the meantime, your preferred spell is doing your work for you (whether damage over time, crippling BC and/or debuff or conjured minions), while the enemy is making no dent in your hp.

You can cast your spell, switch to whatever form you like, and then move with an unusual movement mode (or just a really fast one) to a safe(r) spot, all in your own turn. How is that not synergy?

[tieren]

We've recently added a new player to our campaign, starting him off as a 10th level Moon Druid. Since we have had no encounters with Druids so far, and our GM wanted me to help issue some boosts and custom feats/spells to bring him up to level with us, I not only read up the class and monster manual, but I took the liberty of writing up a complete list for our new player of all the creatures he can turn into, sorted by alphabet and CR, with health and AC scores for reference.

I also looked into several different forums and homebrew sites to see what they think about homebrew druid skills, and what I noticed was that a lot of them found the base druid in 5e to be inherently strong/broken. The two big points I got was
~There is no downside to being dropped to 0 health in creature form
~Using the Wild Shape basically gives you a free shield. At level 20, with the use of this feature increasing from 2 to infinity, this can effectively give you infinite health.

I thought up a couple rules to control the druid, but I'm worried if the restrictions are too harsh? Are they fair? What do you think about Druid power levels, and how do you manage them if you do?

~Health for animal forms start at their median health as seen on the animal charts, and can go no higher than their maximum value. The health of your Wild Shapes come from a shared pool. This health pool is equal to nine times your Druid level, plus your Constitution score. Your health pool is restored upon taking a long rest.
~Drinking potions while in your normal form restores that much health to your pool as well. Any other form of healing to your normal form restores half that much to your pool as well.
~When you are reduced to 0 hit points in animal form, your revert back to normal and take the excess damage as usual. However, that animal form is no longer accessible until you finish a long rest, or 24 hours have passed, whichever comes first.

I was planning on giving our druid some buffs to a couple creatures or give him access to normally inaccessible transformations as compensation, but I'm waiting until we play a couple games so I can gauge his play style and what exactly he wants his character to be.

I really don't think the druids need the kind of homebrewing you are suggesting.

Now right at level 10 is when they get elemental forms I believe so they may seem really strong for a little bit. But the 2 shifts per short rest is plenty enough of a limit as it is. If you are worried about what will happen when he reaches level 20, wait and make a change then (if you go that far).

Try just playing it until you have more experience and see what kind of changes may be necessary..

[Dr. Cliché]

If you'd like restrictions, here's a bit I employ in my games.

Why do they take damage if they fail?

[Blue Lantern]

You just pick which you want at any given moment, like a warrior switching between weapons. The barbarian's proficiency in medium armour doesn't synergize with Unarmored Defense, but I don't suppose you'd call that a bug? You use your stack of hp to go nee-nah at opponents thinking they get to squish a squishie. Or you use its movement to go elsewhere. In the meantime, your preferred spell is doing your work for you (whether damage over time, crippling BC and/or debuff or conjured minions), while the enemy is making no dent in your hp.

You can cast your spell, switch to whatever form you like, and then move with an unusual movement mode (or just a really fast one) to a safe(r) spot, all in your own turn. How is that not synergy?

Perfectly agree, not all class features have to be synergistic, sometimes is nice to have different options.

As for teh OP, maybe you could give a couple of session of tying without houserules to see how thing go, then if there is a problem you can pinpoint better what it is and act accordingly.

[sxmedicus]

There's a post by me were I dabble onto this problem of the druid
D&D 5e 2-player combo: The Direwolf Riding Knight

The paladin levels let him Smite, heal his Rider too

[Democratus]

Why do they take damage if they fail?

Agreed.

And why wouldn't it be Psychic damage? Does the animal cast a Magic Missile at them?

[Segev]

I would, personally, not try house-ruling it until you've played with it at least 2 sessions in-game, because every table is going to be a little bit different and yours has never played with a Moon Druid before. So it would be hard to tell what your changes were doing to the balance compared to the baseline.

[Eldamar]

Why do they take damage if they fail?


Agreed.

And why wouldn't it be Psychic damage? Does the animal cast a Magic Missile at them?

To represent the result of them attempting to transform their body and failing. They messed up trying to change their anatomy and are forced back into their natural state.

[SharkForce]

the only change i would really recommend:

the capstone gives unlimited uses of the regular druid wild shape (ie moon druid higher CR limits and elmental form options are not available).

if i had an unlimited amount of time and resources, i'd probably try to find a way to smooth out the progression of wild shape somehow as well. but ultimately, it's a bit bumpy but it's only really a problem at levels 2-4 and 20. 2-4 goes by really quickly, and the change i suggested above fixes level 20 if you're going to actually be playing it for an extended period of time.

beyond that, don't think of wild shape as being something you do to turn yourself into a full-blown warrior. if it did that, it would be horrendously broken OP (and at levels 2-4 it pretty much does just that, which is why it's OP at those levels). your wild shape form is to give you some added toughness and a replacement for your cantrip. you should not be expecting your wild shape form only to be enough to get through an encounter unless you would have considered going through the entire combat using only cantrips.

[Dr. Cliché]

To represent the result of them attempting to transform their body and failing. They messed up trying to change their anatomy and are forced back into their natural state.

Doesn't make sense to me, to be honest.

Mostly because it doesn't seem to mesh at all with the rules for Wild Shape.

It would make more sense if a Druid could try and overexert themselves to take the shape of a higher CR beast (maybe even a monstrosity), but risking damage in the process. Or if there was some risk to Wild Shaping in general. (Anyone else wish there was?)

As it is, it's a binary process (either you can transform or you can't, there's no middle-ground or trying and failing), and a completely risk-free one.

I think it would make more sense to just have the guy lose a use of Wild Shape, rather than taking damage. Just seems more in keeping with the spirit of the ability.

Also feels like breaking Grod's law, but that's another matter.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Does the animal cast a Magic Missile at them?

That would be pretty cool.

"Try to steal MY shape, would you? Steal THIS!" *fzap* *run away doing dumb squirrely things*

[VertDeLion]

I actually think you might be being a little too generous on the hit points. 9 per level is more than a Barbarian gets, and that is in addition to the Druid's normal hp pool. I'd nerf that down a lot more.
As for compensation, simply remove the limit on how often Wildshape can be used - there is no point in having two limits on the ability and the hp limit will suffice. It will make the class a lot more fun too, so the player will actually be grateful instead of being annoyed by the nerfs.

I tried creating a pool that allowed him to shift his two shapes without difficulty, but if he did two shapes with obscenely high health, it would give some sort of penalty. The pool was based off the median health of the creatures accessible to him at the level.
For example, with the (9xlvl +CON) equation, right now he has a pool of 102 animal health. He has access to the Winter Wolf form (75 hit points), killer whale form (90) and ankylosaurus, assuming our GM lets him see a dinosaur for some reason (68)
So say we enter combat and he goes Winter Wolf and gets knocked down, he'll only have 27 health left in his pool to shapeshift, almost like a "bloodied" option. Not to mention that while in his shapes he can use his bonus action to heal himself as well.


So basically you're adding a total hp/day limit?

My understanding was that a big issue with the moon druid is that it starts out too strong, but it's forms soon start to lag.

I was looking at that, and yes, that's why I want to keep an eye on what he can transform into. Our D&D campaign was hell for me to balance and readjust because our GM was giving out free feats, bonuses, and custom spells like tissue paper samples outside a Japanese love motel.
As our druid was going to get used to his character, and learning what shapes he likes and what-not, I was going to give him the option of picking five shapes and making it 'signature animals' and creating custom sheets for them, empowering them above the monster manual's dictation. I was also thinking about letting him turn into a dragon at some point; a balanced dragon, with the cost of exhaustion and what-not.

[dejarnjc]

I tried creating a pool that allowed him to shift his two shapes without difficulty, but if he did two shapes with obscenely high health, it would give some sort of penalty. The pool was based off the median health of the creatures accessible to him at the level.
For example, with the (9xlvl +CON) equation, right now he has a pool of 102 animal health. He has access to the Winter Wolf form (75 hit points), killer whale form (90) and ankylosaurus, assuming our GM lets him see a dinosaur for some reason (68)
So say we enter combat and he goes Winter Wolf and gets knocked down, he'll only have 27 health left in his pool to shapeshift, almost like a "bloodied" option. Not to mention that while in his shapes he can use his bonus action to heal himself as well.

Just a FYI but druids can't turn into a winter wolf. If you believe they can then I can see why you would think they need to be nerfed. They can only turn into Beasts and the CR5 elementals (water, fire, earth, air). The beast forms, to be honest, aren't even the best option for combat after level 4 as a druid's spells will generally be much more effective. At level 10 they get a boost but it's pretty short-lived.


*Winter wolves are monstrosities not beasts

[Socratov]

Just a FYI but druids can't turn into a winter wolf. If you believe they can then I can see why you would think they need to be nerfed. They can only turn into Beasts and the CR5 elementals (water, fire, earth, air). The beast forms, to be honest, aren't even the best option for combat after level 4 as a druid's spells will generally be much more effective. At level 10 they get a boost but it's pretty short-lived.


*Winter wolves are monstrosities not beasts

Exactly this. Druids start out strong, but wither over time as their spells pick up, but not quite as great as sorcerers, but their animal forms aren't exactly cutting it anymore. If anything, you should't worry about it all too much.

[uraniumrooster]

Moon Druids have a weird spiky power curve.

At level 2 they're ridiculous, probably the best tank class at that level, but they rapidly get outpaced by the other melee classes, and by level 5 tend to lag behind. At 10, they get another spike when they get to jump from CR 3 Beast shapes straight to CR 5 Elementals. But, these start to taper off pretty quickly again in the teens, and there are few high-CR Beast shapes to make up for it. The limitation on casting spells is a severe impediment for a full-progression casting class, which gets partially alleviated when they get Beast Spells (they remain somewhat limited, but it's not bad). Then, of course, at 20 they get the well documented capstone that turns them into a sack of infinite HPs.

I honestly don't think they need house-ruling. If you plan on going all the way to 20, then you could nerf their capstone a bit... maybe rule that the Druid gets one level of exhaustion every time they change their form beyond the first? It wouldn't have much effect on a Druid lower than 20th level, but it would prevent abuse of the infinite wildshapes (at least, not without racking up penalties).

[busterswd]

Quick and dirty Moon Druid Wildshape fix:

Level 2: CR 1/2 max.

Level 4: CR 1 Max

Level 6: CR 2, proceed as normal.

[Saggo]

This is my understanding, too. The moon druids need to remember that they are full spellcasters. If they absolutely must keep their wild shapes combat competitive, there are multiclass options that can help a lot. But the moon druid can just single-class and be flexible with all the tools at their disposal; use minor action shifts into bags of hit points that can fly, dig, crawl and earth-glide. But your main strength is now spells, which you can't use with a bag of hit points over you until level 17.

If any house rules are needed for moon druids, it's at levels 2-4, and perhaps level 20. Anything else is trying fix a feature, not a bug.

I never bought into the idea that Moon Druid's Wildshape should be required to have limited DPR because he's a full caster.

It's the only archetype for a combat shapeshifter, it should be competitive DPR. And it should be competitive as a single class, if only because at the very least multiclassing is an optional rule. But that's opinion on class paradigm.

More objectively, you could increase Moon Druid DPR to be within the same magnitude* as classes like Paladin or Monk, or even Fighter and Barbarian, and not upset the balance between classes. Wildshaping, and Moon Druid by extension, has enough built in checks and balances to allow for it. This only broken/removed for levels 18, 19, and 20.

When you're in a wildshape form, you don't have access to your full level spellcasting. And when you're in form, you're limited to the options that form has, whereas a full martial or half caster will have their full archetype behind them. And with only 2 charges, you have to ration your Wildshapes. Should you use a form for utility or drop form from damage or to cast spells, you're now effectively a weaker Land Druid for the rest of the encounter or the next one.

If we take the idea to the logical extreme and let a Moon Druid be as versatile as a full caster archetype and as strong as a full martial, they're still limited in what options they can bring to bare at any given moment due to form restrictions and rationing charges. This is obviously not the golden idea, but it shows that there's plenty of room for Wildshape DPR to grow to fit the combat shapeshifter role.** It's not an argument that DPR should be increased, just an argument that it can be increased. (The argument that is should be increased is that there is no other combat shapeshifter to pick from.)

* Not as good as or better, just within some viable percentage of their range.
** Only true for their first 17 levels.

[busterswd]

I never bought into the idea that Moon Druid's Wildshape should be required to have limited DPR because he's a full caster.

It's the only archetype for a combat shapeshifter, it should be competitive DPR. And it should be competitive as a single class, if only because at the very least multiclassing is an optional rule. But that's opinion on class paradigm.

More objectively, you could increase Moon Druid DPR to be within the same magnitude* as classes like Paladin or Monk, or even Fighter and Barbarian, and not upset the balance between classes. Wildshaping, and Moon Druid by extension, has enough built in checks and balances to allow for it. This only broken/removed for levels 18, 19, and 20.

When you're in a wildshape form, you don't have access to your full level spellcasting. And when you're in form, you're limited to the options that form has, whereas a full martial or half caster will have their full archetype behind them. And with only 2 charges, you have to ration your Wildshapes. Should you use a form for utility or drop form from damage or to cast spells, you're now effectively a weaker Land Druid for the rest of the encounter or the next one.

If we take the idea to the logical extreme and let a Moon Druid be as versatile as a full caster archetype and as strong as a full martial, they're still limited in what options they can bring to bare at any given moment due to form restrictions and rationing charges. This is obviously not the golden idea, but it shows that there's plenty of room for Wildshape DPR to grow to fit the combat shapeshifter role.** It's not an argument that DPR should be increased, just an argument that it can be increased. (The argument that is should be increased is that there is no other combat shapeshifter to pick from.)

* Not as good as or better, just within some viable percentage of their range.
** Only true for their first 17 levels.

Versatility and resources are a form of power, though. Being able to fill whatever role you want at whatever time you want is part of what made casters so oppressive in 3.5. Plus, the 2 shifts recharge every short rest, so it's not like the Moon Druids are strapped for shifts.

And the new caster paradigm is generally 1 concentration spell up at a time; a Moon Druid with proper feat support loses very little by casting a spell, shifting, wading into melee, and concentrating while mauling. Concentrating on a high level spell while being able to do full melee DPR is a bit out of touch with what other classes can do. This is compounded by the Druid spell list containing some of the best early/mid level concentration spells available.

It's a combination of how casting works in this edition, and how robust semi optimized melee DPR is, that make the idea of combining the two a little unsavory for me. And to be completely honest, Wildshape's progression has always struck me more as a poorly tested afterthought, not something Wizards actually took the time to balance.

[Blue Lantern]

And to be completely honest, Wildshape's progression has always struck me more as a poorly tested afterthought, not something Wizards actually took the time to balance.

Sadly that seem to be the case for almost half class abilities, especially at later levels.
It is pretty obvious that some classes are better refined (fighter, wizard, cleric and rogue, strangely enough the ones that could be playtested since the start) while other were rushed and much more raw.

[Kryx]

Versatility and resources are a form of power, though. Being able to fill whatever role you want at whatever time you want is part of what made casters so oppressive in 3.5.
Sure, then let the druid burn all his spell slots to have a decent wild shape after 4. Because it's pretty unusable besides soaking HP and the normal wild shape uses (utility).

It's trash 5+.

[Vogonjeltz]

We've recently added a new player to our campaign, starting him off as a 10th level Moon Druid. Since we have had no encounters with Druids so far, and our GM wanted me to help issue some boosts and custom feats/spells to bring him up to level with us, I not only read up the class and monster manual, but I took the liberty of writing up a complete list for our new player of all the creatures he can turn into, sorted by alphabet and CR, with health and AC scores for reference.

I also looked into several different forums and homebrew sites to see what they think about homebrew druid skills, and what I noticed was that a lot of them found the base druid in 5e to be inherently strong/broken. The two big points I got was
~There is no downside to being dropped to 0 health in creature form
~Using the Wild Shape basically gives you a free shield. At level 20, with the use of this feature increasing from 2 to infinity, this can effectively give you infinite health.

I thought up a couple rules to control the druid, but I'm worried if the restrictions are too harsh? Are they fair? What do you think about Druid power levels, and how do you manage them if you do?

~Health for animal forms start at their median health as seen on the animal charts, and can go no higher than their maximum value. The health of your Wild Shapes come from a shared pool. This health pool is equal to nine times your Druid level, plus your Constitution score. Your health pool is restored upon taking a long rest.
~Drinking potions while in your normal form restores that much health to your pool as well. Any other form of healing to your normal form restores half that much to your pool as well.
~When you are reduced to 0 hit points in animal form, your revert back to normal and take the excess damage as usual. However, that animal form is no longer accessible until you finish a long rest, or 24 hours have passed, whichever comes first.

I was planning on giving our druid some buffs to a couple creatures or give him access to normally inaccessible transformations as compensation, but I'm waiting until we play a couple games so I can gauge his play style and what exactly he wants his character to be.

Wild Shape limits the Druid to forms of creatures they have seen before.

So, you might want to address with the DM what animals this Druid has actually seen, since it's very likely to not be all animals everywhere in existence.

Archdruid is good, but because you only get one bonus action (and it requires a bonus action to shift out to your Normal Form so that you can then shift back into Beast Shape), it's not terribly powerful.

I wouldn't nerf them that badly (especially the third bullet) considering they're already limited to the forms they've seen. That seems like a big nerf to fun more than anything else (especially as there are at least 2 creatures of comparative power levels for most every CR)

[Quintessence]

Quick and dirty Moon Druid Wildshape fix:

Level 2: CR 1/2 max.

Level 4: CR 1 Max

Level 6: CR 2, proceed as normal.

Should rename that to "quick and dirty way to deter anyone from picking moon druid"

[busterswd]

Sure, then let the druid burn all his spell slots to have a decent wild shape after 4. Because it's pretty unusable besides soaking HP and the normal wild shape uses (utility).

It's trash 5+.

That was in response to the quoted poster suggesting a Moon Druid should retain full casting on top of having competitive melee DPR. I'd be all for having a wildshape that wasn't a bag of HP, but the full casting is too good to leave untouched if you buffed Wildshape.



Should rename that to "quick and dirty way to deter anyone from picking moon druid"
How so? You still have multiattack at level 2 and 3, and a 38 HP buffer (as opposed to a 68) per short rest. You still have bonus action shifting, and elemental wildshapes. All that does is make level 2 and 3 not invalidate every other party member you have.

[Socratov]

That was in response to the quoted poster suggesting a Moon Druid should retain full casting on top of having competitive melee DPR. I'd be all for having a wildshape that wasn't a bag of HP, but the full casting is too good to leave untouched if you buffed Wildshape.



How so? You still have multiattack at level 2 and 3, and a 38 HP buffer (as opposed to a 68) per short rest. You still have bonus action shifting, and elemental wildshapes. All that does is make level 2 and 3 not invalidate every other party member you have.

eh, no, bear is cr1 so only from 4th onwards. From lvl 5 and onwards moon druid is just a lesser land druid.

[busterswd]

eh, no, bear is cr1 so only from 4th onwards. From lvl 5 and onwards moon druid is just a lesser land druid.

Black Bear is 1/2. It's not as strong as Brown Bear, but then again, Brown Bear is WAY too good for that level. I also disagree that it's a lesser Land Druid. Bonus Action Wildshape is a VERY strong defensive caster feature, and you get little gems like Giant Constrictor Snake, which don't do a ton of damage, but have a lot of utility.

[Quintessence]

That was in response to the quoted poster suggesting a Moon Druid should retain full casting on top of having competitive melee DPR. I'd be all for having a wildshape that wasn't a bag of HP, but the full casting is too good to leave untouched if you buffed Wildshape.



How so? You still have multiattack at level 2 and 3, and a 38 HP buffer (as opposed to a 68) per short rest. You still have bonus action shifting, and elemental wildshapes. All that does is make level 2 and 3 not invalidate every other party member you have.

Instead it invalidates the moon druid's class feature :/

[busterswd]

Instead it invalidates the moon druid's class feature :/

How is changing Wildshape for TWO levels, and still being better than most other classes for those two levels, invalidating the class feature?

[Saggo]

Versatility and resources are a form of power, though.
Of course they are, that wasn't in question. And its power is limited for Moon Druid by how much versatility you can use at a given moment and how often you can use it. You're not a full caster while you're wildshaped.


Plus, the 2 shifts recharge every short rest, so it's not like the Moon Druids are strapped for shifts.
If the DM is properly administrates short rests, it's perfectly limiting. At even just 2 encounters between short rests, any use of Wildshape beyond one combat use per encounter means you don't get it for the next encounter. That can easily account for half or more of a day's combat. For a combat shapeshifter, that's a very big deal.


And the new caster paradigm is generally 1 concentration spell up at a time; a Moon Druid with proper feat support loses very little by casting a spell, shifting, wading into melee, and concentrating while mauling.
Eldritch Knights gets more feat support, more DPR, and arguably better concentration options, with natural Con Proficiency. Moon Druids are further penalized, since losing concentration means no longer have a self buff or dropping form to rebuff and thus wasting a charge. The argument is immaterial, though, since it's better to have someone else concentrate if you're wading into melee, regardless of what class you are.


That was in response to the quoted poster suggesting a Moon Druid should retain full casting on top of having competitive melee DPR. I'd be all for having a wildshape that wasn't a bag of HP, but the full casting is too good to leave untouched if you buffed Wildshape.
You missed the part where I made a distinction between could and should. The argument is and is only you can improve Moon Druid DPR by an order of magnitude and not upset balance between classes. How and by how much, and for that matter trying to quantify versatility, is outside the purview of the argument.

[lperkins2]

The one issue with druids (moon or otherwise) is the essentially lack of penalty for 'dying' while transformed. It isn't a problem of balance, or even a mechanical problem at all really, it causes a problem with rollplaying and encounter crafting.

Creature (including PCs) generally dislike pain. They will go to great lengths to avoid pain, even doing things which are counter to their best interest (hence why torture can be effective). Of course, when a PC hurts, the player doesn't, often, the player doesn't even really care. 'Sure I'll hold my hand in the fire to intimidate the enemies, it'll only do a few HP of damage.' Of course, a good DM will make the player roll some sort of check for something so obviously painful, but when it's not so obvious, the player is generally given a free pass to do things that are likely to prove incredibly painful to their character. It is generally assumed that the possibility of PC death will temper the player's actions.

This is where wildshape is a problem, the druid goes from having around 10HP at level 1, to 36HP as a level 2 giant lizard and also gaining a decent climb speed. Balance-wise, it's not terrible, since he'll have an AC of 12, so basically just a meat wall, other animals will generally be a better choice. But if you're dealing with something with a high probability of hitting anyway, you create the ludicrous situation of the druid choosing the animal with the most HP to just stand there and take the abuse.

It's a bigger issue outside of combat, where it's easy to think 'I have twice as many HP as anyone else in the party, anything that can even knock me out of my beast form would outright kill the spellcaster, the DM wouldn't include an insta-death trap would he?' Which leaves the encounter creation in a bad place: either include traps that will outright kill the wizard if he's the one unlucky enough to find them, or the rest of the party can sit back and let the druid do the searching, knowing he's essentially unkillable.

I can think of a couple of good solutions for the problem, neither one of which makes a huge difference to the overall power of the druid, and both of which should discourage the druid from treating wildshape as a free pool of extra HP.

The first is to have part of the damage 'leak through' to the druid's body. I'm not sure what portion to suggest, and I suspect it would require playtesting, but as a dart-on-the-wall figure, I'd go 50%. Have the damage that comes off the druid's HP pool not come off the creature's HP pool, so he'll be able to stay wildshaped a bit longer. So long as he stays wildshaped, the state of his 'native' HP pool doesn't matter (it can even go negative), but when he reverts (willingly or otherwise), he gets the HP remaining in his 'native' pool. If that's negative, treat it like it was all delivered from a single blow, possibly triggering the overdamage rules (thereby allowing the trope where you win the battle but die from wounds received after you calm down).

The second solution would be to add a penalty for being forced out of creature form. Nethack would apply the remaining damage against your HP total, permanently reducing it. That's a little extreme, considering getting knocked to 0 HP in 5e is almost meaningless anyway, but applying it as CON damage or reducing the HP maximum until a long rest might work well (I think someone mentioned applying exhaustion), again it would need playtesting to figure out the proper amount of penalty.

[busterswd]

Of course they are, that wasn't in question. And its power is limited for Moon Druid by how much versatility you can use at a given moment and how often you can use it. You're not a full caster while you're wildshaped.


You missed the part where I made a distinction between could and should. The argument is and is only you can improve Moon Druid DPR by an order of magnitude and not upset balance between classes. How and by how much, and for that matter trying to quantify versatility, is outside the purview of the argument.
Basically, the premise of your post is that because a Moon Druid isn't always a full caster while Wildshaped, you can ignore the other end. You can't look at things like that in a vaccum, though. The Druid's spell progression by itself is enough to get the Druid through a full adventuring day. Giving them an additional viable resource on top of that would put them head and shoulders above most other classes.



If the DM is properly administrates short rests, it's perfectly limiting. At even just 2 encounters between short rests, any use of Wildshape beyond one combat use per encounter means you don't get it for the next encounter. That can easily account for half or more of a day's combat. For a combat shapeshifter, that's a very big deal.
Good thing they have summons, buffs, polymorph, and other various ways of solving encounters.

Also, this was in reference to them hypothetically having a much stronger melee form. Wildshape can easily last between encounters. Yes, there would be times where you'd have to break it early, but there'd also be times where you'd be fine without dipping into your spells for 2-3 fights.



Eldritch Knights gets more feat support, more DPR, and arguably better concentration options, with natural Con Proficiency. Moon Druids are further penalized, since losing concentration means no longer have a self buff or dropping form to rebuff and thus wasting a charge. The argument is immaterial, though, since it's better to have someone else concentrate if you're wading into melee, regardless of what class you are.
Moon Druids are competitive for feat support; they are very, very stat independent. High Wisdom is nice, but anything beyond that is gravy. Eldritch Knights also have a 1/3 caster progression. Moon Druids get things sooner, get to use them more often, and generally have concentration spells well worth sustaining. Although I'm not quite sure why you brought up EKs, to be honest; from what I understand, your argument is saying giving a full caster (close to) full melee is OK, as long as you can't use them simultaneously. EKs don't fit that paradigm.


I think we agree that the melee capability of Moon Druids isn't up to snuff as it stands, but most people who actually played the class would agree on that point. The difference is, you are vastly underestimating how good the spell list is, and overstating how much of an inconvenience Wildshape is to casting.

[Vogonjeltz]

Black Bear is 1/2. It's not as strong as Brown Bear, but then again, Brown Bear is WAY too good for that level. I also disagree that it's a lesser Land Druid. Bonus Action Wildshape is a VERY strong defensive caster feature, and you get little gems like Giant Constrictor Snake, which don't do a ton of damage, but have a lot of utility.

If your Druid has seen those animals of course.

[hymer]

I never bought into the idea that Moon Druid's Wildshape should be required to have limited DPR because he's a full caster.

It's the only archetype for a combat shapeshifter, it should be competitive DPR. And it should be competitive as a single class, if only because at the very least multiclassing is an optional rule. But that's opinion on class paradigm.

There is certainly room for a warrior-shapeshifter. But rather than house-ruling the moon druid's current position (sort of shapeshifter-caster to the land druid's shapeshifter-caster) out of existence, I'd come up with a new class, or a prestige class, to allow this concept a mechanical place in my home campaigns.

[Gort]

Moon Druids have a weird spiky power curve.

At level 2 they're ridiculous, probably the best tank class at that level, but they rapidly get outpaced by the other melee classes, and by level 5 tend to lag behind. At 10, they get another spike when they get to jump from CR 3 Beast shapes straight to CR 5 Elementals. But, these start to taper off pretty quickly again in the teens, and there are few high-CR Beast shapes to make up for it. The limitation on casting spells is a severe impediment for a full-progression casting class, which gets partially alleviated when they get Beast Spells (they remain somewhat limited, but it's not bad). Then, of course, at 20 they get the well documented capstone that turns them into a sack of infinite HPs.

I honestly don't think they need house-ruling. If you plan on going all the way to 20, then you could nerf their capstone a bit... maybe rule that the Druid gets one level of exhaustion every time they change their form beyond the first? It wouldn't have much effect on a Druid lower than 20th level, but it would prevent abuse of the infinite wildshapes (at least, not without racking up penalties).

Yes they have some levels where they are good. But really they have issues all the way through. Their to hit numbers are low, their armour class is always low. Sure enormous amounts of hit points. But if you start using secondary effects that trigger when hit then they don't look very good at all. I consider druid flexible and good damage soaks, not over powered. It can be played very well and intelligently - in the same way that a good illusionist is excellent, but a mediocre one is a waste of space.

For me the biggest issue is their inability to speak while in wild shape form as this silences one player and quickly becomes no fun. That is what I found I needed to fix - by providing an item to do just that.

The other thing - there is always a bigger crocodile. I found that I needed to provide a few more higher CR beasts. Not a big deal. After level 10 they will probably always want the elementals.

[Dr. Cliché]

The one issue with druids (moon or otherwise) is the essentially lack of penalty for 'dying' while transformed. It isn't a problem of balance, or even a mechanical problem at all really, it causes a problem with rollplaying and encounter crafting.

Creature (including PCs) generally dislike pain. They will go to great lengths to avoid pain, even doing things which are counter to their best interest (hence why torture can be effective). Of course, when a PC hurts, the player doesn't, often, the player doesn't even really care. 'Sure I'll hold my hand in the fire to intimidate the enemies, it'll only do a few HP of damage.' Of course, a good DM will make the player roll some sort of check for something so obviously painful, but when it's not so obvious, the player is generally given a free pass to do things that are likely to prove incredibly painful to their character. It is generally assumed that the possibility of PC death will temper the player's actions.

This is where wildshape is a problem, the druid goes from having around 10HP at level 1, to 36HP as a level 2 giant lizard and also gaining a decent climb speed. Balance-wise, it's not terrible, since he'll have an AC of 12, so basically just a meat wall, other animals will generally be a better choice. But if you're dealing with something with a high probability of hitting anyway, you create the ludicrous situation of the druid choosing the animal with the most HP to just stand there and take the abuse.

Honestly, this is a problem with hp in general.

It's a bit like the old thing of someone pointing a crossbow at a fighter's head.
"Stop or I'll shoot!" says the man.
"Go ahead," replies the fighter. "I've got 80 hit points."



The first is to have part of the damage 'leak through' to the druid's body. I'm not sure what portion to suggest, and I suspect it would require playtesting, but as a dart-on-the-wall figure, I'd go 50%. Have the damage that comes off the druid's HP pool not come off the creature's HP pool, so he'll be able to stay wildshaped a bit longer. So long as he stays wildshaped, the state of his 'native' HP pool doesn't matter (it can even go negative), but when he reverts (willingly or otherwise), he gets the HP remaining in his 'native' pool. If that's negative, treat it like it was all delivered from a single blow, possibly triggering the overdamage rules (thereby allowing the trope where you win the battle but die from wounds received after you calm down).

What if instead, Wild Shaping gave the Moon Druid temporary hp based on the hp of the animal he transforms into.

So, he has a buffer of hp whilst transformed, but can still suffer real injury if he takes too much damage.



The second solution would be to add a penalty for being forced out of creature form. Nethack would apply the remaining damage against your HP total, permanently reducing it. That's a little extreme, considering getting knocked to 0 HP in 5e is almost meaningless anyway, but applying it as CON damage or reducing the HP maximum until a long rest might work well (I think someone mentioned applying exhaustion), again it would need playtesting to figure out the proper amount of penalty.

Out of interest, am I the only one who'd like Wild Shaping to be a bit more . . . icky? To me, it just feels a bit too clean and risk-free. I'd like something a bit more visceral and savage, with some actual risk.

Am I just weird like that? :smalltongue:

[lperkins2]

Honestly, this is a problem with hp in general.

It's a bit like the old thing of someone pointing a crossbow at a fighter's head.
"Stop or I'll shoot!" says the man.
"Go ahead," replies the fighter. "I've got 80 hit points."


Aye, this is usually why I use a critical hit table for extra effects on that kind of attack. HP basically becomes how much pain you can take before passing out, and death is determined entirely by a critical hit table. In the case of the crossbow pointed at your head, if it hits, you'll quite likely die.




What if instead, Wild Shaping gave the Moon Druid temporary hp based on the hp of the animal he transforms into.

So, he has a buffer of hp whilst transformed, but can still suffer real injury if he takes too much damage.


That's sorta the way it works, with excess damage being applied to the druids HP, except the amount of bonus HP is absurd.



Out of interest, am I the only one who'd like Wild Shaping to be a bit more . . . icky? To me, it just feels a bit too clean and risk-free. I'd like something a bit more visceral and savage, with some actual risk.

Am I just weird like that? :smalltongue:

That's the general idea I was going for with the druid taking damage to his 'true form' while wildshaped, could even have the amount of damage taken by the 'true form' vs the 'wildshape form' be determined randomly and secretly by the DM, so the player won't know exactly how much it will hurt when he transforms back...

[Dr. Cliché]

Aye, this is usually why I use a critical hit table for extra effects on that kind of attack. HP basically becomes how much pain you can take before passing out, and death is determined entirely by a critical hit table. In the case of the crossbow pointed at your head, if it hits, you'll quite likely die.

That's a good idea.



That's sorta the way it works, with excess damage being applied to the druids HP, except the amount of bonus HP is absurd.

Hmm, true.

Maybe have temporary hp equal to half the animal's hp?



That's the general idea I was going for with the druid taking damage to his 'true form' while wildshaped, could even have the amount of damage taken by the 'true form' vs the 'wildshape form' be determined randomly and secretly by the DM, so the player won't know exactly how much it will hurt when he transforms back...

Hah! I like that a druid who's taken a lot of damage could be afraid to turn back, for fear that he won't survive in his human(oid) form. But then, I'm a bastard. :smallamused:

[Socratov]

I think that especially for a newer player, that the moon druid is not a problem. Sure the bear form can be harsh, but please know that 11AC will chew through that 34 HP in no time. Also, please remember that apart from proficiency the stats won't grow along with your levels as a druid until you unlock a new set of forms, which can be nice, but aren't the bee's knees either...

That said, for utility it's nice to be able to scale walls and swim, but other then that the point is pretty much moot. almost ever other class can get along just fine...

[SharkForce]

Yes they have some levels where they are good. But really they have issues all the way through. Their to hit numbers are low, their armour class is always low. Sure enormous amounts of hit points. But if you start using secondary effects that trigger when hit then they don't look very good at all. I consider druid flexible and good damage soaks, not over powered. It can be played very well and intelligently - in the same way that a good illusionist is excellent, but a mediocre one is a waste of space.

For me the biggest issue is their inability to speak while in wild shape form as this silences one player and quickly becomes no fun. That is what I found I needed to fix - by providing an item to do just that.

The other thing - there is always a bigger crocodile. I found that I needed to provide a few more higher CR beasts. Not a big deal. After level 10 they will probably always want the elementals.

their armour class is not necessarily always low (various forms can benefit greatly from mage armour, for example, and pretty much all forms can benefit from barding - after all, wild shape lasts for *hours* at a time). and in any event, as soon as their form is killed, they *still* have all the AC, HP, and other defenses that the moon druid had before wild shape.

secondary effects are great, if you use the right one. consider, for example, the crocodile (and its giant cousin). terrible DC on that grapple effect... but the DC is not tested until the target *spends their action getting rid of it* at which point they can try to escape. and you know what? i am perfectly willing to get a bite in every round while an enemy spends every action escaping a grapple. heck, i don't even care if they succeed every time. they spent the round not killing things. what more do you want? (but, on the off chance that they don't escape, also they're restrained and everyone else in the party has advantage to hit them. also, that is the situation until their turn comes up regardless... so if i land the attack just after their turn, say, by readying an action, they're still pretty screwed). even using something like a boar or a wolf form that has a save to avoid being knocked prone, plenty of creatures have bad strength saves, and if you force them to save half a dozen times, it will work eventually, causing them problems. giant spiders have an excellent method for capturing people that prevents even healing spells from getting the target back up, if you're facing an opponent that uses something like a healing word spell. a giant toad can force a decision between using your action to escape the grapple, or being probably swallowed. on a select few forms, the DC is actually quite impressive when you get the form (like the mammoth, even at level 20 DC 18 saves are pretty respectable, or sabretooth tiger; DC 14 is not bad at level 6 by any means). as another example, a water elemental's whelm is pretty scary... grappled, restrained, unable to breath (so much for vocal component spells), and the DC is strength-based. not fun for that enemy wizard at all.

moon druids are not too weak. their wild shape CANNOT be as good as a full warrior without breaking the game. giving them the option to switch between being a full warrior and a full spellcaster (and make no mistake, they ARE a full spellcaster, with an excellent spell list that is probably only beaten by the wizard's spell list in what it can do and maybe not even then) would be broken. there would be no point in being a warrior any more, because the druid could just fill that role when needed, while also being able to fill a role that no warrior could ever dream of filling as well. they could even largely fill those roles at the same time (a druid with an entangle spell out controlling the enemy archers while also using speak with plants to keep their allies safe from the entangle and then *also* sitting in melee combat dishing out as much damage in the second and later rounds as a full warrior is pretty much doing both jobs at the same time; fortunately, moon druids can't do that. they're plenty strong enough as-is).

the capstone needs addressing, if you are going to be playing in a game where the capstone is likely to matter. everything else, not really much to worry about.

[dejarnjc]

secondary effects are great, if you use the right one. consider, for example, the crocodile (and its giant cousin). terrible DC on that grapple effect... but the DC is not tested until the target *spends their action getting rid of it* at which point they can try to escape. and you know what? i am perfectly willing to get a bite in every round while an enemy spends every action escaping a grapple. heck, i don't even care if they succeed every time. they spent the round not killing things. what more do you want?


A moon druid can't turn into a regular crocodile until level 4 and can only turn into a giant crocodile at level 15. While at lvl 4 a regular crocodile is definitely a strong form it becomes a meh form around level 5 when enemies should be one or two shotting it's measly 19 hp body.

[Grod_The_Giant]

We could get some offensive leeway by doing something about the big-sack-o-HP issue. But most, I think, should be tied to expending spell slots somehow. That way both magic and shifting use the same general resource pool, rather than being a caster and also a shifter.


If your Druid has seen those animals of course.
It's a bear. They're not exactly weird o


Maybe have temporary hp equal to half the animal's hp?
That still seems excessively generous. Maybe something like CR*10.


Hah! I like that a druid who's taken a lot of damage could be afraid to turn back, for fear that he won't survive in his human(oid) form. But then, I'm a bastard. :smallamused:
Instead of an awkward secret damage split, why not combine with the previous idea... But follow the 3.5 Barbarian's example and have the extra health be real health. Then you could absolutely hit a situation where you're so damaged that you'll die if you change back.

[Segev]

The comments on Moon Druid being the only option for a primary shapeshifter archetype got me thinking about maybe making that more a warrior-class thing. That is, make a subclass for either Barbarian or Ranger that gets shifting capabilities as the primary schtick.

The question is, which is better for it? Barbarian is definitely the more complementary class, with rage being something to which shapeshifting could be tied. Ranger also has the tie-to-nature thing going on, though.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Ranger. It's familiar (see 3.5's beloved Wildshape Ranger) and the class needs more love. There's a discussion on the subject going on a little ways down the forum.

[Dr. Cliché]

It's a bear. They're not exactly weird o


Depends where your campaign takes place and where the druid has been. I mean, if the druid lives in the desert, they can;t just watch bears on the nature channel. :smallwink:



That still seems excessively generous. Maybe something like CR*10.

Not sure about that, to be honest.



Instead of an awkward secret damage split, why not combine with the previous idea... But follow the 3.5 Barbarian's example and have the extra health be real health. Then you could absolutely hit a situation where you're so damaged that you'll die if you change back.

Ouch, that's cruel. I like it. :smallamused:

[Segev]

Ranger. It's familiar (see 3.5's beloved Wildshape Ranger) and the class needs more love. There's a discussion on the subject going on a little ways down the forum.

Unfortunately, "it needs more love" is the biggest reason I can think of, and it's not actually a GOOD one, from a design perspective. Barbarian seems to fit better, overall, having a mechanic in place on which to hang it (see the Bear Warrior for inspiration from 3.5).

I'll try to find that thread.

[SharkForce]

A moon druid can't turn into a regular crocodile until level 4 and can only turn into a giant crocodile at level 15. While at lvl 4 a regular crocodile is definitely a strong form it becomes a meh form around level 5 when enemies should be one or two shotting it's measly 19 hp body.


sure, not every option is amazing at all times. what's your point?

(though i disagree that the crocodile suddenly spontaneously becomes useless at level 5. the enemy you grab will have disadvantage to hit, which makes it about a 50/50 for the person you've grappled to grab you... and in any event, as i recall the giant toad starts to come into play at level 6, and has basically the same thing with more HP, and the giant constrictor is similar with decent HP and higher dex to combine with mage armour, plus i think reach).

some of the special effects are pretty good. the damage is generally about equal with cantrip damage, which is exactly where you should expect a full spellcaster's damage to be. and it comes with extra toughness. what more do you want?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Barbarian seems to fit better, overall, having a mechanic in place on which to hang it (see the Bear Warrior for inspiration from 3.5).
The... prestige class that offers a very specific type of shifting, using quite distinct mechanics, is a better fit than an ACF granting the exact ability (if not its upgrades) to a base class?

[Saggo]

Basically, the premise of your post is that because a Moon Druid isn't always a full caster while Wildshaped, you can ignore the other end. You can't look at things like that in a vaccum, though. The Druid's spell progression by itself is enough to get the Druid through a full adventuring day. Giving them an additional viable resource on top of that would put them head and shoulders above most other classes.
I appreciate trying to restate my position but you missed a nuance that gave you the wrong conclusion. The thought experiment, small as it was it was, was to illustrate that even under extreme circumstances versatility alone isn't a measure of power, but how much of that versatility you can bring to bare at a given moment is. Moon Druid has inherent, built-in limitations of not only their current form's abilities but also managing their decisions to use combat shapeshifting. At no given moment would the Moon Druid be doing more than someone else, even under logical extreme.

Thus being a full caster is not enough justification to limit Moon Druid's DPR, whatever that measure may be. The idea that they cannot or should not be within a useful measure of full martials is not authoritative.

Every full caster can get through the adventuring day on their base spell progression, likewise full martials can get through the day on their weapon alone. Even so they all get full access to their class and archetype features (even a Champion Fighter has multiple features and proficiencies that isn't direct combat). Moon Druid's casting, sizable as it is, is still base spell progression with no augmentation. Even Land Druids get at least expanded spells known.

I think this more than adequately covers my position, so unless someone asks for clarification, I'm leaving it here.


Although I'm not quite sure why you brought up EKs, to be honest; from what I understand, your argument is saying giving a full caster (close to) full melee is OK, as long as you can't use them simultaneously. EKs don't fit that paradigm.If the tick marks were excellent DPR, excellent concentration spells, and excellent feat support, Eldritch Knight is a matching counter example. If that isn't good enough, a Blade Pact Warlock can concentrate on Foresight and have a sustainable DPR that's not only competitive with but comparable to many Fighter builds while having complete access to his spellcasting. Wildshaped Moon Druids are penalized more than most, if not all, classes if they lose concentration. Concentration is self-balancing, a non-issue.


The difference is, you are vastly underestimating how good the spell list is, and overstating how much of an inconvenience Wildshape is to casting.
I believe I've given enough reason why 2 charges is more than an inconvenience and elegant power-potential limiter to Druids.

[dejarnjc]

sure, not every option is amazing at all times. what's your point?

(though i disagree that the crocodile suddenly spontaneously becomes useless at level 5. the enemy you grab will have disadvantage to hit, which makes it about a 50/50 for the person you've grappled to grab you... and in any event, as i recall the giant toad starts to come into play at level 6, and has basically the same thing with more HP, and the giant constrictor is similar with decent HP and higher dex to combine with mage armour, plus i think reach).

some of the special effects are pretty good. the damage is generally about equal with cantrip damage, which is exactly where you should expect a full spellcaster's damage to be. and it comes with extra toughness. what more do you want?

Maybe I misinterpreted the point of your original post but I got the impression that you were implying the druid's wildshape options were too good. They're useful certainly but they are fairly situational and generally other classes' options outclass them. At level 5 you're generally going to be much more useful staying out of combat and utilizing your concentration spells. As others have said, the moon druid does have versatility though its shapes though, which is nice but hardly OP.

[Blue Lantern]

Maybe I misinterpreted the point of your original post but I got the impression that you were implying the druid's wildshape options were too good. They're useful certainly but they are fairly situational and generally other classes' options outclass them. At level 5 you're generally going to be much more useful staying out of combat and utilizing your concentration spells. As others have said, the moon druid does have versatility though its shapes though, which is nice but hardly OP.

This starts reminding me the discussion about the lvl 2 warlock dip. Yes you are getting a nice power spike at some determinate point, but if you took at things closely you see that overall it is not as bad as some make it appears.

[tieren]

I don't get the tone of this thread.

Moondruids are the best low level tank in the game (say levels 2-5). I don't have a problem with that and don't think it needs to be fixed. Let them shine for a brief period.

By the time they are getting any decent tanking feats, they are already starting to get replaced by fighters (level 5) and paladins (level 7). The moon druids still have some fun tricks with new forms or utility, but no one is going to complain that the level 12 moon druid is showing up the level 12 battlemaster or paladin in terms of AC or dpr.

Even the capstone, which will make them frustratingly hard to kill one on one, doesn't give them any new ways to contribute to dpr on the lvl 20 BBEG than another beast bite for piddling dmg. Its kind of like the trope of the super armored defensive fighter who the enemy just ignores because they can't do much offense.

Stop trying to fix what ain't broke.

[Dr. Cliché]

I don't get the tone of this thread.

Moondruids are the best low level tank in the game (say levels 2-5). I don't have a problem with that and don't think it needs to be fixed. Let them shine for a brief period.

For me, it's not their tankiness per se, it's the fact that they can suffer horrifying - even lethal - in their animal forms, yet be perfectly fine when they turn back.

[Segev]

The... prestige class that offers a very specific type of shifting, using quite distinct mechanics, is a better fit than an ACF granting the exact ability (if not its upgrades) to a base class?

No, not "a better fit" in terms of translation from 3.5 to 5e.

I think the Bear Warrior's hooking the transformation to "rage" is a good mechanic on which to hang transformation in general in either of these two classes. It gives it a decided combat-focus, and ties it to an already-extant limit.

Building a shapeshifter archetype for Ranger will not tie as neatly to his existing base-class mechanics, and I'm not entirely sure how I'd implement it. "Just give him wild shape" feels a bit like a cop-out, and suggests the question, "why not just play a moon druid, again?"

[Dr. Cliché]

Building a shapeshifter archetype for Ranger will not tie as neatly to his existing base-class mechanics, and I'm not entirely sure how I'd implement it. "Just give him wild shape" feels a bit like a cop-out, and suggests the question, "why not just play a moon druid, again?"

To be fair, the Ranger in general could be summed up by 'why not play a X, again?' :smalltongue:

[SharkForce]

Maybe I misinterpreted the point of your original post but I got the impression that you were implying the druid's wildshape options were too good. They're useful certainly but they are fairly situational and generally other classes' options outclass them. At level 5 you're generally going to be much more useful staying out of combat and utilizing your concentration spells. As others have said, the moon druid does have versatility though its shapes though, which is nice but hardly OP.

the claim was made that the add-ons to beast form attacks were useless. my point was simply to say, no they are not. when the crocodile bites you (or the giant snake, or the giant toad, or whatever else), if it hits the CC has landed, and it costs an action to escape. that is far from useless.

and actually, you can utilize your concentration spells *and* get into combat, if you so desire.

[Grod_The_Giant]

No, not "a better fit" in terms of translation from 3.5 to 5e.

I think the Bear Warrior's hooking the transformation to "rage" is a good mechanic on which to hang transformation in general in either of these two classes. It gives it a decided combat-focus, and ties it to an already-extant limit.

Building a shapeshifter archetype for Ranger will not tie as neatly to his existing base-class mechanics, and I'm not entirely sure how I'd implement it. "Just give him wild shape" feels a bit like a cop-out, and suggests the question, "why not just play a moon druid, again?"
You play a Ranger because you wanted to trade some of a Druid's casting ability for increased martial and mundane skill. A Moon Druid would be somewhere between a Land Druid and a Wildshape Ranger-- more magic, but fewer uses and less potent forms.

[lperkins2]

I think this issue touches on something I realised recently. There's a fair amount written about the CaW vs CaS play-styles, but I think there is a second, equally important, difference in the approach people take to TTRPGs.

Many people approach D&D (or TTRPGs in general) as a game, where the DM presents challenges and the players come up with strategies to overcome the challenges. This is the most straightforward approach, the one around which the game is 'balanced', and probably the most common approach (it's even implicit in the label TTRPG). From this perspective, the Moon Druid is great, it's the best 'tank' at low levels, and becomes nearly impossible to kill eventually, which able to be a good 'support' character and serve as a modest 'DPR provider'.

Most of the objections seem to come from the other group: those who approach D&D as a narrative mechanism. To this group, it's not about 'winning', or solving the DM's challenges, it's about telling a compelling story, and the DM is there to serve as arbiter and track the countless details of the setting rather than actively trying to challenge the players. Ideally, a great deal of the narrative is driven by the players' ambitions and ideas, and the dice are just needed to add a degree of unpredictability. To this group, the Moon Druid is weird and kinda silly, it smacks the 4th wall a little.

'Yeah, I know he cleaved me in half in my fox form, but I'm fine, just fine, nope, nothing more than a scratch.'

'Um...'

[Blue Lantern]

I think this issue touches on something I realised recently. There's a fair amount written about the CaW vs CaS play-styles, but I think there is a second, equally important, difference in the approach people take to TTRPGs.

Many people approach D&D (or TTRPGs in general) as a game, where the DM presents challenges and the players come up with strategies to overcome the challenges. This is the most straightforward approach, the one around which the game is 'balanced', and probably the most common approach (it's even implicit in the label TTRPG). From this perspective, the Moon Druid is great, it's the best 'tank' at low levels, and becomes nearly impossible to kill eventually, which able to be a good 'support' character and serve as a modest 'DPR provider'.

Most of the objections seem to come from the other group: those who approach D&D as a narrative mechanism. To this group, it's not about 'winning', or solving the DM's challenges, it's about telling a compelling story, and the DM is there to serve as arbiter and track the countless details of the setting rather than actively trying to challenge the players. Ideally, a great deal of the narrative is driven by the players' ambitions and ideas, and the dice are just needed to add a degree of unpredictability. To this group, the Moon Druid is weird and kinda silly, it smacks the 4th wall a little.

'Yeah, I know he cleaved me in half in my fox form, but I'm fine, just fine, nope, nothing more than a scratch.'

'Um...'

There is plently of narrative in which shapeshifting has the side effect of completely healing the user, Animorph or Dresden files for example.

[Segev]

The raging orc's axe cuts the fox in twain, and out of its bisected halves tumbles the druid.

[lperkins2]

There is plently of narrative in which shapeshifting has the side effect of completely healing the user, Animorph or Dresden files for example.

True, and the Moon Druid supports that quite well, but there's also a lot where it doesn't. As a side note, I didn't think shapeshifting in Dresden Files was 'free healing', more that self-healing and the ability to arbitrarily rearrange your internals are basically the same thing, so killing a shapeshifter is kinda like trying to stab Odo to death. To the best of my knowledge, in the series, we never see a shapeshifter cut in half and half disintegrated (I've not read all of them, so feel free to correct me if there's something I've not read yet).

Regardless, there's a fair amount of D&D where the narrative explanation is simply 'it just is', since the characters have no experience with a non-magical world, they'll not question lots of odd things, but even so, the druids spontaneous recovery stands out as one of the odd things about the 'world'. If you're trying to tell a story where you avoid falling back to 'it's magic', or 'it just is' as the explanation of the world, the druid's wildshape could probably use some tweaking.

Note, I'm not arguing to weaken the druid, if anything, the 'shared HP pool' idea makes druids marginally more powerful.



On an unrelated note, I just realised another potential source of absurdity with the druid. It takes a bonus action to revert from beast-form to humanoid form, unless the reversion happens due to damage taken or time expiry. This means, if there is some sort of pressing need for me to cast spells or similar as a bonus action Right Now, and there is a convenient source of predictable damage, I may well choose to spend my movement moving through the trap/fire/spikes or out the someone's threat zone in order to get a 'free' reversion to my humanoid form...

[dejarnjc]

I think this issue touches on something I realised recently. There's a fair amount written about the CaW vs CaS play-styles, but I think there is a second, equally important, difference in the approach people take to TTRPGs.

Many people approach D&D (or TTRPGs in general) as a game, where the DM presents challenges and the players come up with strategies to overcome the challenges. This is the most straightforward approach, the one around which the game is 'balanced', and probably the most common approach (it's even implicit in the label TTRPG). From this perspective, the Moon Druid is great, it's the best 'tank' at low levels, and becomes nearly impossible to kill eventually, which able to be a good 'support' character and serve as a modest 'DPR provider'.

Most of the objections seem to come from the other group: those who approach D&D as a narrative mechanism. To this group, it's not about 'winning', or solving the DM's challenges, it's about telling a compelling story, and the DM is there to serve as arbiter and track the countless details of the setting rather than actively trying to challenge the players. Ideally, a great deal of the narrative is driven by the players' ambitions and ideas, and the dice are just needed to add a degree of unpredictability. To this group, the Moon Druid is weird and kinda silly, it smacks the 4th wall a little.

'Yeah, I know he cleaved me in half in my fox form, but I'm fine, just fine, nope, nothing more than a scratch.'

'Um...'

There are like a thousand and one things in D&D that are more absurd than this.

[MrFahrenheit]

Having DM'ed for a moon Druid character who optimizes con and hp (hill dwarf, level 12 now - con 20, took toughness and con resilient feats, and has rolled remarkably well at each level for new hp), I don't think so. Sure it gets silly narratively with the wild shape when your form gets KO'ed, but mechanically, the class works.

Moon Druids are more meat shields and less tanks. Sure they can dole out ok damage, but once they get their 50 hp as (creature X) reduced to zero, they better wild shape again fast, or retreat to the back row. Even with all the hp the one Druid I mentioned above has, he is incredibly squishy in normal form, even with 110+ total hp - this is owed to his lack of AC. Not saying that he's weak, either. He's very versatile for the same reasons, and AC vs hp was his trade off ...5e is all about the give and take.

[Dr. Cliché]

There is plently of narrative in which shapeshifting has the side effect of completely healing the user, Animorph or Dresden files for example.

I've only read a few Dresden File books, so I can't speak for those, but in Animorphs it just comes across as a really obvious plot-device. So that the heroes can get battered badly in a fight and just be perfectly fine a minute later. I certainly wouldn't hold it up as an example of good writing.

[dejarnjc]

I've only read a few Dresden File books, so I can't speak for those, but in Animorphs it just comes across as a really obvious plot-device. So that the heroes can get battered badly in a fight and just be perfectly fine a minute later. I certainly wouldn't hold it up as an example of good writing.

Having injuries carry over from shape shifting forms to natural forms doesn't make any narrative sense considering almost every aspect of the shapeshifter's body is being changed. If a shapeshifter turns into an octopus and loses an arm then does he lose half of one of his limbs? It's just silly to think about and quibble over.


Though to be fair, shapeshifting in general is pretty silly. Consider the 30lb halfling turning into a 13,000 lb elephant.

[Dr. Cliché]

Having injuries carry over from shape shifting forms to natural forms doesn't make any narrative sense considering almost every aspect of the shapeshifter's body is being changed. If a shapeshifter turns into an octopus and loses an arm then does he lose half of one of his limbs? It's just silly to think about and quibble over.

But that's assuming a very extensive transformation into a creature with a very different anatomy.

What about when the druid turns into something like a bear with a very similar body plan? Does it still make sense that they can lose a limb and just have it back as soon as they return to their human form?

For me, it makes far less sense for them to suffer horrific injuries and just be perfectly fine when they turn back. Even if they can regrow limbs, I'd expect them to suffer from it (like having less blood/fat/muscle).



Though to be fair, shapeshifting in general is pretty silly. Consider the 30lb halfling turning into a 13,000 lb elephant.

That's a pretty extreme example (though I do agree). But, I think turning into creatures of similar size isn't too bad - especially given that many animals have very similar body plans (assuming you stick with stuff like mammals - turning into giant insects is a different matter :smallwink:).

[dejarnjc]

What about when the druid turns into something like a bear with a very similar body plan? Does it still make sense that they can lose a limb and just have it back as soon as they return to their human form?


Eh, even a brown bear (achievable at level 2) can weigh up to 1,400 lbs so in terms of mass even if the bear lost a limb there would be plenty remaining to "reform" the druid's main body. Even a CR 1/8 mule will generally weigh 800lbs. Given the variety of forms equating limb lost in animal form to limb lost in natural form just doesn't work for me since the octopus, whale/shark, giant scorpion, giant wasp, giant crocodile etc. all have different body parts than or are missing body parts that the humanoid druid would normally have.


But I digress since I think we can both agree that everyone's mileage will vary at least somewhat in regards to shapeshifting and narrative.

[Dr. Cliché]

Eh, even a brown bear (achievable at level 2) can weigh up to 1,400 lbs so in terms of mass even if the bear lost a limb there would be plenty remaining to "reform" the druid's main body.

By that logic, a druid would never need to eat. He could just transform into a large animal and then add some of that animal's mass to his own when he turned back. :smalltongue:


Given the variety of forms equating limb lost in animal form to limb lost in natural form just doesn't work for me since the octopus, whale/shark, giant scorpion, giant wasp, giant crocodile etc. all have different body parts than or are missing body parts that the humanoid druid would normally have.

That was why I brought up a bear in the first place. It has the same body plan. Hence, if it loses a limb, it's very easy to apply the same limb loss to a druid.

I accept that it's harder with more unusual forms, but even then it's still the druid's own body that's taking damage. Even if he doesn't lose a limb, it seems silly that he's completely fine afterwards.

Also, going back to the Animorphs example for a moment, they at least had to avoid dying in their animal forms. A Druid can die multiple times per day, only to change back and be completely fine.



But I digress since I think we can both agree that everyone's mileage will vary at least somewhat in regards to shapeshifting and narrative.

Indeed.

[Coffee_Dragon]

A Druid can die multiple times per day, only to change back and be completely fine.

As far as I know, a druid that dies in animal form is dead. A druid that loses all their hp in animal form reverts to their original form. And hp are abstract, so it seems like a better idea to flavour the abstraction in a way that makes sense than to flavour it in a way that doesn't.

[Dr. Cliché]

As far as I know, a druid that dies in animal form is dead. A druid that loses all their hp in animal form reverts to their original form. And hp are abstract, so it seems like a better idea to flavour the abstraction in a way that makes sense than to flavour it in a way that doesn't.

Hp are abstract, but a druid reduced to 0hp in animal form has taken sufficient damage to kill that animal.

[TentacleSurpris]

Moon Druid 20 vs Tarrasque (CR 30):

Turn 1:
Moon druid shapeshifts into an Earth Elemental using two of his unlimited wild shapes per day, attacks for a little bit of damage. Has 126 hp and AC 17.

Tarrasque attacks, which the druid has resistance to. It deals an average of 36 (bite) + claw 28 + claw 28 + horns 32 + tail 24, divided by 2 for resistance, equals 74 points of damage. Sure it could roll higher, but 50 points higher in one round is a lot of Standard Deviations from the mean of 74, and the druid has his own HP and spells to cover that.

Turn 2:
Activate wild shape again, turning into a different colored Earth Elemental. Hit points refresh as a bonus action.

Rinse and repeat until the most feared creature in the realms is destroyed by one character swinging his fists with his eyes closed.

When the Tarrasque swallows the druid, even better, because it will be doing even less damage. Only 56 (16d6) per round. The druid punches the tarrasque from the inside, never dealing enough in one round to make the tarrasque regurgitate it, but the Druid only needs to peck away at its hit points. It might take an hour, but that thing is going down and there's nothing it can do.

The Tarrasque Dies. From punches to the gut from one class. Yeah, I'd say it needs to be houseruled.

[TentacleSurpris]

I just realized, a druid could feed his whole party by transforming into a tasty cow and letting his party carve off a few fresh steaks before reverting back due to damage.

There is a business idea in there somewhere...

[Dr. Cliché]

I just realized, a druid could feed his whole party by transforming into a tasty cow and letting his party carve off a few fresh steaks before reverting back due to damage.

There is a business idea in there somewhere...

Well, since this (https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?261519-D-amp-Dish-The-city-built-around-the-tarrasque)is no longer viable, perhaps we've found a replacement. :smallamused:

[Segev]

I just realized, a druid could feed his whole party by transforming into a tasty cow and letting his party carve off a few fresh steaks before reverting back due to damage.

There is a business idea in there somewhere...

While I love the idea, there's nothing saying that the druid leaves behind anything cut off of his animal form when he reverts. For all we know, it could disintegrate or re-merge with him, Baccano-style.

[Grod_The_Giant]

he is incredibly squishy in normal form, even with 110+ total hp - this is owed to his lack of AC. Not saying that he's weak, either. He's very versatile for the same reasons, and AC vs hp was his trade off ...5e is all about the give and take.
How so? They have a d8 HD, medium armor and shields, healing magic, spells like Barkskin and Stoneskin, and Con is pretty much your second most important ability of you're shapeshifting a lot.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Hp are abstract, but a druid reduced to 0hp in animal form has taken sufficient damage to kill that animal.



First, 0 hp only equals "dead" for NPCs by convention and for convenience. It's not a hard rule nor is there any reason to apply it to PCs in animal form if it's found to have unwanted implications. Second, "enough damage to kill" doesn't mean "squished" or "quartered" unless you so choose (and in general probably shouldn't, unless you want to screw over people using Revivify).

[Dr. Cliché]

First, 0 hp only equals "dead" for NPCs by convention and for convenience.

Even for PCs, 0hp means you're on death's door.


It's not a hard rule nor is there any reason to apply it to PCs in animal form if it's found to have unwanted implications.

So, what are you saying, exactly? That because PCs don't die immediately at 0hp, we should just assume they're totally fine and ignore all the damage that brought them to that point?

Also, by 'unwanted applications' do you actually mean 'this ability makes bugger-all sense'?


Second, "enough damage to kill" doesn't mean "squished" or "quartered" unless you so choose.

Given that I never once tried to argue such, I'm rather perplexed as to why you felt the need to bring it up. :smallconfused:

[Coffee_Dragon]

So, what are you saying, exactly?

I'm saying you're fighting hard for the flavour you don't like. A.k.a. "god I hate these chips (munch munch)".

[hymer]

Yeah, I'd say it needs to be houseruled.

Moon druids are likely the only ones who can reliably take big T in a slugging match at level 20. But they are by no means the only ones who can take T out solo at that level, making the feat much less impressive. Big T is at least as much in need of house ruling as the capstone for moon druids.

[Dr. Cliché]

I'm saying you're fighting hard for the flavour you don't like. A.k.a. "god I hate these chips (munch munch)".

Yes, you're right, obviously lethal damage should be treated as no damage whatsoever when convenient.

Because God forbid anyone dare suggest that a nonsensical ability is nonsensical.

[Segev]

Yes, you're right, obviously lethal damage should be treated as no damage whatsoever when convenient.

Because God forbid anyone dare suggest that a nonsensical ability is nonsensical.

No, damage which knocks a druid out of a wild shape form should not be treated as lethal damage to the druid's normal form. They are, in fact, different things, represented by different mechanics.

Even if you insist on the damage being represented by a fatal blow to the animal-form, the druid's shift back to his native form just doesn't include the damage. Or includes only the overage. It's that simple. You stabbed the elephant through the heart; it only pierced the druid's chest enough to put a hole between his ribs. Or it missed the druid's heart due to relative placement. You cut off the giraffe's head. The druid's head emerges from the neck as he resumes his natural form.

[dejarnjc]

Moon Druid 20 vs Tarrasque (CR 30):

Turn 1:
Moon druid shapeshifts into an Earth Elemental using two of his unlimited wild shapes per day, attacks for a little bit of damage. Has 126 hp and AC 17.

Tarrasque attacks, which the druid has resistance to. It deals an average of 36 (bite) + claw 28 + claw 28 + horns 32 + tail 24, divided by 2 for resistance, equals 74 points of damage. Sure it could roll higher, but 50 points higher in one round is a lot of Standard Deviations from the mean of 74, and the druid has his own HP and spells to cover that.

Turn 2:
Activate wild shape again, turning into a different colored Earth Elemental. Hit points refresh as a bonus action.

Rinse and repeat until the most feared creature in the realms is destroyed by one character swinging his fists with his eyes closed.

When the Tarrasque swallows the druid, even better, because it will be doing even less damage. Only 56 (16d6) per round. The druid punches the tarrasque from the inside, never dealing enough in one round to make the tarrasque regurgitate it, but the Druid only needs to peck away at its hit points. It might take an hour, but that thing is going down and there's nothing it can do.

The Tarrasque Dies. From punches to the gut from one class. Yeah, I'd say it needs to be houseruled.



The easy fix IMO is to just make it so that druids can only wildshape into a new form from their original form. So, no weakened earth elemental turning into a healthy earth elemental. This does presume that a druid can use an action to drop wildshape and a bonus action to take on a new wildshape all in the same turn. Considering how long the combat would take if this is the case, I'm sure the Tarrasque would win it on the back of critical hits.

I already use this in my own game as a druid as it makes more sense thematically to me even though I know that RAW and RAI druids can shift from one form directly into another.

[Dr. Cliché]

No, damage which knocks a druid out of a wild shape form should not be treated as lethal damage to the druid's normal form.

Eh? What are you talking about?



Even if you insist on the damage being represented by a fatal blow to the animal-form, the druid's shift back to his native form just doesn't include the damage.

And, as I've said more than once, that's bloody idiotic.

Turning back to a human - especially as a result of lethal damage - shouldn't just undo all the injuries the druid sustained in animal form.


You stabbed the elephant through the heart; it only pierced the druid's chest enough to put a hole between his ribs. Or it missed the druid's heart due to relative placement. You cut off the giraffe's head. The druid's head emerges from the neck as he resumes his natural form.

It's the same damn body.

If the druid was just possessing an animal's body, then it would make perfect sense. But he's not - he's turning into the animal. If the animal is taking damage, then the druid is taking damage. It's still his body, regardless of form.

Hence, when he turns back, he should still have any injuries he sustained whilst in his animal form.

[dejarnjc]

Eh? What are you talking about?



And, as I've said more than once, that's bloody idiotic.

Turning back to a human - especially as a result of lethal damage - shouldn't just undo all the injuries the druid sustained in animal form.


Look it's obvious that druids are just 4th dimensional beings. It explains the whole non-conservation of mass thing. Just think of it as a 4th dimensional body. The animal shapes are actually 4th dimensional body sets being rotated into the 3rd dimension as the druid's standard form is rotated into the 4th dimension. Once the new form can no longer sustain itself it's rotated back into the 4th dimension and the druid's healthy natural form is rotated back into the 3rd dimension. Boom.


And honestly, as stupid as the above may sound to you, it makes a lot more sense than "The druid's crocodile form has its tail chopped off. As the druid returns to his natural form he finds that his tailbone has been shattered."

[Segev]

And, as I've said more than once, that's bloody idiotic.

Turning back to a human - especially as a result of lethal damage - shouldn't just undo all the injuries the druid sustained in animal form. Why? I'm not being facetious; why shouldn't it? It's magic that violates all sorts of rules. It's altering physical form. If you can alter your form to be a different creature, why can't you alter it to be less wounded?


It's the same damn body.Is it? Are you sure? What, in the text provided for the ability, makes you say so? You can, of course, wish it were, or claim it is, but you can't use your preference to declare the ability nonsensical as written. If fluff can be devised to make it make sense, and that fluff doesn't fly in the face of other established facts, then you don't get to assign fluff that doesn't work with the mechanics and then complain that the mechanics are nonsense because your preferred fluff doesn't work with them.

As well argue that you want mages to get their spells by drawing power out of gemstones, causing them to turn black and crumble, and then complaining that it makes no sense that mages have specific numbers of spell slots per day because they should be able to just pick up more gems, and shouldn't replenish the slots just by resting without getting more gems.

Your fluff isn't fitting with the mechanics. Therefore, that's obviously bad fluff for those mechanics. It doesn't make the mechanics make no sense.


If the druid was just possessing an animal's body, then it would make perfect sense. But he's not - he's turning into the animal. If the animal is taking damage, then the druid is taking damage. It's still his body, regardless of form.

Hence, when he turns back, he should still have any injuries he sustained whilst in his animal form.
Or the druid is wearing an artificial form around himself (magically, so yes he can wear a mouse form around his real body despite size issues), and the animal form's destruction is no more damaging to the druid than his clothes being shredded. Or the druid is magically re-arranging his cells, adding and subtracting mass as needed to assume a new form. When he becomes an animal, he becomes a healthy one, without injuries, by arranging all of this in such a form. When he ceases to be that animal, he returns to being himself, with the wounds he had before (and no more) because that's where his cells and stuff naturally are right now. Extra damage carries over because, as the magical form is discarded, the attack that harmed it still is causing damage to what remains: the druid's natural body.

Fluff can be devised such that it makes sense. Therefore, it's not nonsense.

[Dr. Cliché]

Why? I'm not being facetious; why shouldn't it? It's magic that violates all sorts of rules. It's altering physical form. If you can alter your form to be a different creature, why can't you alter it to be less wounded?

Sure. That makes perfect sense.

Hence why druids also heal themselves when they turn into animals. Oh, wait, no they don't. They keep every single wound they suffered prior to their transformation.



Is it? Are you sure? What, in the text provided for the ability, makes you say so?

"Starting at 2nd level, you can use your action to magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before."
(Emphasis mine.)

You are clearly not body-hopping. You are changing your body into that of a beast.



As well argue that you want mages to get their spells by drawing power out of gemstones, causing them to turn black and crumble, and then complaining that it makes no sense that mages have specific numbers of spell slots per day because they should be able to just pick up more gems, and shouldn't replenish the slots just by resting without getting more gems.

I've no clue what you're trying to say here.



Your fluff isn't fitting with the mechanics.

Do you even read my posts?

The whole point is that the mechanic doesn't fit the fluff. At all. As I said before, it feels like a mechanic for possessing a beast, not turning into one.



Or the druid is wearing an artificial form around himself (magically, so yes he can wear a mouse form around his real body despite size issues), and the animal form's destruction is no more damaging to the druid than his clothes being shredded. Or the druid is magically re-arranging his cells, adding and subtracting mass as needed to assume a new form. When he becomes an animal, he becomes a healthy one, without injuries, by arranging all of this in such a form. When he ceases to be that animal, he returns to being himself, with the wounds he had before (and no more) because that's where his cells and stuff naturally are right now. Extra damage carries over because, as the magical form is discarded, the attack that harmed it still is causing damage to what remains: the druid's natural body.

That's . . . actually a pretty good explanation. Okay, kudos. :smallsmile:

[lperkins2]

That's . . . actually a pretty good explanation. Okay, kudos. :smallsmile:


So, how does the disintegrate spell fit into this? The animal form gets reduced to 0 HP (and disintegrates), and the overage damage gets applied to the druid. If that also reduces the druid to 0, does he turn into dust? And how does that fit with the whole 'magical construct in the shape of a bear around me' idea? I don't have an answer, I'm just curious.

[busterswd]

So, how does the disintegrate spell fit into this? The animal form gets reduced to 0 HP (and disintegrates), and the overage damage gets applied to the druid. If that also reduces the druid to 0, does he turn into dust? And how does that fit with the whole 'magical construct in the shape of a bear around me' idea? I don't have an answer, I'm just curious.

Because when you completely disintegrate things on a cellular level, it doesn't matter which cells are "safe" to damage; they're all dust at that point, so the part of the magical body that the druid actually needs to be alive has been damaged as well.

[Vogonjeltz]

It's a bear. They're not exactly weird o

In the appropriate climate and if the Druid has enough experience to have seen a Bear and lived, sure. Those are both questions that need to be answered along with the DM however, as events outside of actual gameplay definitely need to be discussed in advance.

And there's alot of variance being discussed. I'd imagine most people have never seen a Crocodile in person outside of a zoo, same for Bears, Giant Poisonous Snakes, Giant Badgers, etc..

And in some cases (Bears) seeing one in the wild raises the very real risk of being eaten by them, especially in a medieval society where you can't even try to escape by driving away in a car.


Having injuries carry over from shape shifting forms to natural forms doesn't make any narrative sense considering almost every aspect of the shapeshifter's body is being changed. If a shapeshifter turns into an octopus and loses an arm then does he lose half of one of his limbs? It's just silly to think about and quibble over.


Though to be fair, shapeshifting in general is pretty silly. Consider the 30lb halfling turning into a 13,000 lb elephant.

Hit points aren't meat, they're a gauge of durability, will to live, and luck. Anything and everything up until the killing blow is just wearing a target down.

So if you attack with a greataxe twice, and hit both times, the second time killing them, the first strike could be considered one that was narrowly averted by virtue of luck, or it glanced off their armor, or they really had to burn alot of energy getting out of the way, which put them off balance enough for the follow up that actually hits and kills them.

HP are just a metaphor.

[Democratus]

"Starting at 2nd level, you can use your action to magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before."
(Emphasis mine.)

Nothing in the word "assume" precludes taking on a new body in the shape of a beast and then reverting.

A prince can assume a throne. Destroying the throne won't kill the prince. Neither will destroying a beast shape destroy the druid who assumed it.

[Dr. Cliché]

Nothing in the word "assume" precludes taking on a new body in the shape of a beast and then reverting.

Eh?


A prince can assume a throne.

That is correct, I suppose, though I'm not sure anyone would actually say that. Regardless, it's entirely irrelevant.


Destroying the throne won't kill the prince.

If, on the other hand, the prince assumes the shape of a throne, destroying it would indeed destroy him too.

[Democratus]

If, on the other hand, the prince assumes the shape of a throne, destroying it would indeed destroy him too.

No. In that case he didn't become a throne. He assumed the shape of a throne. If the throne is destroyed he ceases to assume it and becomes the prince again.

[Dr. Cliché]

No. In that case he didn't become a throne.

He became throne-shaped. If anything, it means he might still feel pain as his throne-body is smashed.


He assumed the shape of a throne.

...

Do you even read what you're writing?


If the throne is destroyed he ceases to assume it and becomes the prince again.

Are you trolling now? If you assume the shape of a throne, your body is, for all intents and purposes, that of a throne. Hence, any damage inflicted on said throne is being inflicted on your body. Even if you cease assuming the shape of a throne, that damage still happened and it happened to you.

You didn't teleport to a pocket plane and replace yourself with a throne. You didn't put your spirit inside a throne. There is no third-party that took the damage on your behalf. You assumed the shape of a throne and have to suffer the consequences - including any damage the throne took.

[Democratus]

Are you trolling now? If you assume the shape of a throne, your body is, for all intents and purposes, that of a throne.

We know for a fact assumption is different from becoming - because the druid power tells us that once the form is destroyed you are not also destroyed.

Assuming and becoming are two different words. The druid shapechange uses the word 'assume' for a reason.

Just because you can't wrap your head around it doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.

[Dr. Cliché]

We know for a fact assumption is different from becoming

At this point, you are either being deliberately obtuse, or outright lying. You are ignoring both the sentence in question and also that 'assume' has different meanings, depending on context.

There is a vast difference between 'assuming a throne' and 'assuming the shape of a throne'.

In the former, you are assuming the duties tied to the throne. In the latter, you are taking on the shape of the throne. As in, your body is becoming a throne.

You can't just ignore the meaning and context of words.


Assuming and becoming are two different words.

Correct. Entirely irrelevant, but correct.


The druid shapechange uses the word 'assume' for a reason.

Yes, because if he became an animal then he'd be fully animal. No intellect. No spells.

Whereas, if he merely assumes the shape of an animal, then his body is changing but his mind can remain the same.


Just because you can't wrap your head around it doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.

I find it hilarious that you say this, whilst desperately twisting words because you can't form a rational argument.

[Democratus]

I find it hilarious that you say this, whilst desperately twisting words because you can't form a rational argument.

Nothing about shapechange has to be rational. It's a supernatural power in a fictional world.

It's demonstrably provable that a druid's body isn't destroyed when an animal shape isn't destroyed - because that's exactly what the rules tell us. Thus it is the nature of the D&D universe in which 5th edition Druids exist.

All the protestation is little more than stomping your foot and saying that you don't like it. Which is certainly your prerogative. But it isn't productive.

Instead, I offered a way to linguistically parse the description of the rule so that the wording AND the fictional world were in agreement.

More foot stomping in response.

It's your party. Do what you like. But it isn't cricket to blast someone for trying to help.

[Dr. Cliché]

Nothing about shapechange has to be rational. It's a supernatural power in a fictional world.

Quite the contrary. It doesn't have to be scientifically accurate, but it should still be consistent and in keeping with the world's own logic.



It's demonstrably provable that a druid's body isn't destroyed when an animal shape isn't destroyed - because that's exactly what the rules tell us. Thus it is the nature of the D&D universe in which 5th edition Druids exist.


So, in summation, it doesn't make sense because it doesn't make sense.

I wonder what we'd do without your insight.



All the protestation is little more than stomping your foot and saying that you don't like it. Which is certainly your prerogative. But it isn't productive.

I love how you continue to dismiss my arguments as foot stamping, whilst your own are nothing but mindlessly defending everything as though the PHB is some kind of holy text.



Instead, I offered a way to linguistically parse the description of the rule so that the wording AND the fictional world were in agreement.

But that's the whole point - the only way you're able to do this is by literally ignoring the meaning of words.

The fact that you're having to twist the fluff description this much should tell you that it really doesn't match the mechanics of the ability. But you've already decided that the rule is right, and the fact aren't going to stop you any time soon.



More foot stomping in response.

Yes, you've been doing this a lot. Feel free to stop any time.



It's your party. Do what you like. But it isn't cricket to blast someone for trying to help.

I didn't blast you for trying to help (also, I'd check you definition of 'help'). I blasted you for lying and trying to subvert the meaning of words to make your nonsensical argument work.

[PoeticDwarf]

So basically you're adding a total hp/day limit?

My understanding was that a big issue with the moon druid is that it starts out too strong, but it's forms soon start to lag.

It certainly starts too strong -and archdruid is just too OP, but let's ignore that- however, I think levels 6-19 the Moon Druid can still benefit a lot from the forms, a bit of a HP boost if really needed, stealth options as a spider, that kind of stuff.

[Knaight]

And in some cases (Bears) seeing one in the wild raises the very real risk of being eaten by them, especially in a medieval society where you can't even try to escape by driving away in a car.

From what I've seen of bears - I've run into them in the wild before, without the chance to escape by driving away in a car (I was doing some back country bicycling), and I've seen data - they generally just mind their own business most of the time, particularly for anything that isn't a grizzly bear. If you do something stupid like get between an adult bear and a cub, or get in too close it's an issue, but most bears tend to favor eating lots of small things over hunting big animals, and they generally don't see you as a threat. It's similar to how bears that get out of the wild and come into cities usually end up doing no harm to anyone, and have a tendency to find a nice big garbage can or similar.

[Dr. Cliché]

From what I've seen of bears - I've run into them in the wild before, without the chance to escape by driving away in a car (I was doing some back country bicycling), and I've seen data - they generally just mind their own business most of the time, particularly for anything that isn't a grizzly bear. If you do something stupid like get between an adult bear and a cub, or get in too close it's an issue, but most bears tend to favor eating lots of small things over hunting big animals, and they generally don't see you as a threat. It's similar to how bears that get out of the wild and come into cities usually end up doing no harm to anyone, and have a tendency to find a nice big garbage can or similar.

This does raise a different point though. How would farmers/citizens react to a bear in or near their lands? Or, for that matter, the sight of a druid turning into a bear? In the case of the latter, might they assume a were-bear was around?

I'm just curious about whether you guys have villagers and such react to druids changing into animals (or walking around as them) in urban environments? Or is it just path of the course for D&D farmers? :smallwink:

[Knaight]

I'm just curious about whether you guys have villagers and such react to druids changing into animals (or walking around as them) in urban environments? Or is it just path of the course for D&D farmers? :smallwink:

Someone either turning into a bear or striding into town as one is going to be reacted to. How depends on the specific conditions. Just wandering in as a bear on your own looks very different than something like being disguised as a dancing bear brought by a group.

[Dr. Cliché]

being disguised as a dancing bear brought by a group.

I want to do this now. :smallbiggrin:

[Blue Lantern]

Quite the contrary. It doesn't have to be scientifically accurate, but it should still be consistent and in keeping with the world's own logic.

It is consistent within the word, because all shapechange abilities and spells work the same, if the form reach 0 HP goes back to the original shape. A man that takes the shape of a beast is different from a real beast.

I'll avoid the pointless discussion that is the rest of the derail.

[Dr. Cliché]

It is consistent within the word, because all shapechange abilities and spells work the same, if the form reach 0 HP goes back to the original shape.

But that isn't consistent with its own logic. If reverting to your natural form undoes wounds, you'd expect transforming into a different form to have the same effect. Instead, a druid keeps any wounds he sustained prior to transforming.

[Segev]

So, how does the disintegrate spell fit into this? The animal form gets reduced to 0 HP (and disintegrates), and the overage damage gets applied to the druid. If that also reduces the druid to 0, does he turn into dust? And how does that fit with the whole 'magical construct in the shape of a bear around me' idea? I don't have an answer, I'm just curious.

I picture it like Ra at the end of the Stargate movie. First the human "shell" is disintegrated, revealing the alien beneath. Then the alien is disintegrated as well, since a naquita-enhanced nuke at point blank will deal sufficient damage.

If disintegrate reduces the druid's animal form to exactly 0, the form turns to dust, leaving the druid standing there in the remains. If it does more damage than that, the druid takes the damage on his real form. If the leftover damage reduces him to 0, he turns to dust, too.

The fluff is not really presented in the ability. All we get is that the druid "assumes the form," and some mechanics. What "assumes the form" means in terms of how he assumes it is up to us. He could wear it like a second skin, or he could rearrange his cells, or he could be swapping his own body into an extradimensional space while creating a bestial one from the same "stuff" that familiar spirits (who are fey, celestial, or fiendish) do for their beat-form bodies.

[Dr. Cliché]

The fluff is not really presented in the ability. All we get is that the druid "assumes the form," and some mechanics. What "assumes the form" means in terms of how he assumes it is up to us. He could wear it like a second skin, or he could rearrange his cells, or he could be swapping his own body into an extradimensional space while creating a bestial one from the same "stuff" that familiar spirits (who are fey, celestial, or fiendish) do for their beat-form bodies.

The thing is, if you do that, then you're not 'assuming the shape of an animal'. You're creating a spirit/fey animal and then taking over its body whilst your own body teleports elsewhere.

Also, if the shift is that unusual/extreme, I find it a bit weird that they never once mention it.
"Are you sure we shouldn't say that by 'assume the shape of a beast' what we really mean is 'create a magical mecha of a beast that the druid then pilots'?"
"Don't be absurd, man! It's perfectly clear."
:smallwink:

[Segev]

The thing is, if you do that, then you're not 'assuming the shape of an animal'. You're creating a spirit/fey animal and then taking over its body whilst your own body teleports elsewhere.Possession can also be said to be "assuming" the body of the possessed.


Also, if the shift is that unusual/extreme, I find it a bit weird that they never once mention it.
"Are you sure we shouldn't say that by 'assume the shape of a beast' what we really mean is 'create a magical mecha of a beast that the druid then pilots'?"
"Don't be absurd, man! It's perfectly clear."
:smallwink:
Of course not. I didn't say this was the "intended" fluff. I said it's fluff that could be applied. There is no fluff given. Apply any fluff you like that works with the mechanics presented. That's my point.

That, and don't apply fluff that won't work with the mechanics presented, and then complain that the mechanics don't make sense because of the fluff you chose to apply.

[Blue Lantern]

I wonder how many catgirls are dying for this

[Dr. Cliché]

Possession can also be said to be "assuming" the body of the possessed.

Assuming the *body*, yes. Assuming the *shape*, no.

[Democratus]

Assuming the *body*, yes. Assuming the *shape*, no.

Which is why a druid calls upon the shape of an animal and then assumes it. The druid and the shape are separate.

It's not the body of an animal because there was no animal to begin with. It's just the shape - which the druid assumes (possesses). Much like the assumption of a mark on a stage (meaning to stand in the place of the mark).

Another example is that a person can "assume the position". The position can be destroyed if they are pushed over. But even though the position they assumed is destroyed, the person is not.

A druid can "assume the shape". To everyone else the druid actually looks like this shape of an animal. But destroying the animal puts the druid out of this shape. You then see the druid again - not destroyed even though the shape was destroyed.

[Dr. Cliché]

Which is why a druid calls upon the shape of an animal and then assumes it. The druid and the shape are separate.

That's a contradictory statement. If the druid is separate to the shape he's assuming, then he hasn't assumed it at all.

[Democratus]

That's a contradictory statement. If the druid is separate to the shape he's assuming, then he hasn't assumed it at all.

It's not contradictory in a supernatural universe, which is what D&D is.

[Dr. Cliché]

It's not contradictory in a supernatural universe, which is what D&D is.

In this case, the rules of the universe are irrelevant. The rules of the English language are what matter. :smalltongue:

[Democratus]

In this case, the rules of the universe are irrelevant. The rules of the English language are what matter. :smalltongue:

I am the very model of a modern English mangler! :smallcool:

[Dr. Cliché]

I am the very model of a modern English mangler! :smallcool:

:smallbiggrin:

[JoeJ]

But that isn't consistent with its own logic. If reverting to your natural form undoes wounds, you'd expect transforming into a different form to have the same effect. Instead, a druid keeps any wounds he sustained prior to transforming.

They don't have those wounds while they're in their transformed shape, though. The normal form and the beast form are completely separate as far as hit points are concerned.

[Dr. Cliché]

They don't have those wounds while they're in their transformed shape, though. The normal form and the beast form are completely separate as far as hit points are concerned.

Which is the whole point. :smalltongue:

[JoeJ]

Which is the whole point. :smalltongue:

So how is that inconsistent? When they shift to beast form they get a new, completely uninjured body. When they shift back they lose that body, along with any damage that it has acquired. Wounds stay with the form.

[Segev]

Assuming the *body*, yes. Assuming the *shape*, no.

I think you're splitting hairs so fine that you're in danger of nuclear fission, here. The immediate, somewhat snarky response that came to mind was: "Are you saying the creature's body doesn't have the creature's shape?"

[dejarnjc]

So how is that inconsistent? When they shift to beast form they get a new, completely uninjured body. When they shift back they lose that body, along with any damage that it has acquired. Wounds stay with the form.

At this point he's just arguing for the sake of arguing. He's been given plenty of reasons and explanations as to why it can be considered logical and consistent and makes narrative sense but continues to quibble for no apparent reason.

[Dr. Cliché]

So how is that inconsistent? When they shift to beast form they get a new, completely uninjured body.

But that's the point? Why does changing into a beast shape give them a third-party body that they can obliterate with no ill effects?

Again, they're not possessing another creature - this is their body that's getting injured (regardless of shape).


I think you're splitting hairs so fine that you're in danger of nuclear fission, here.

I'm not the one bending the meaning of meaning in a desperate attempt to pretend the mechanics tie in with the fluff.


The immediate, somewhat snarky response that came to mind was: "Are you saying the creature's body doesn't have the creature's shape?"

A creature's body does indeed have a creature's shape. But that doesn't mean that the two are the same. If you take the shape of a creature, you are effectively imitating it. Taking it's body on the other hand would mean actually stealing its body.

Again, this is more a problem of you guys trying to bend the phrasing to fit the bizarre mechanics.

[JoeJ]

But that's the point? Why does changing into a beast shape give them a third-party body that they can obliterate with no ill effects?

Why wouldn't it?

The only real answer is that's just what it does: it lets the druid temporarily put on a different body. You might just as well ask why being wise lets you hit harder with a Shillelagh but not with a scimitar.

[Dr. Cliché]

Why wouldn't it?

Because there's no third body - just the druid's body changing. :smalltongue:



The only real answer is that's just what it does: it lets the druid temporarily put on a different body.

If that's the case, I kinda wish they had to put on the body in a more literal sense - like having to obtain the pelt of the animal they want to turn into and then wearing it.

[JoeJ]

Because there's no third body - just the druid's body changing. :smalltongue:

Where does it say that?


If that's the case, I kinda wish they had to put on the body in a more literal sense - like having to obtain the pelt of the animal they want to turn into and then wearing it.

That sounds cool. Maybe you should do that in your game.

[tieren]

When using the Wild shape ability the Druids true form is shunted into a featureless demiplane immediately adjacent to the Feywild and the druid's magic summons forth a beast form on the prime material which he is able to possess by astral projection. The caster form is still injured on the demiplane, there has been no healing, but his mind is possessing the animal puppet form.

When the animal puppet form suffers catastrophic damage the effect ends and the caster form is returned to the space on the prime material plane currently occupied by the mindless puppet form which is instantly destroyed and the effect causing the damage continues to damage the caster form which is the application of the overkill damage.

What is the source of the confusion?

[Dr. Cliché]

Where does it say that?

I've already quoted the relevant piece. It's not much but it's all we've got.

If you have a quote from fluff that says druids get a third-party body, feel free to share it.


When using the Wild shape ability the Druids true form is shunted into a featureless demiplane immediately adjacent to the Feywild and the druid's magic summons forth a beast form on the prime material which he is able to possess by astral projection. The caster form is still injured on the demiplane, there has been no healing, but his mind is possessing the animal puppet form.

When the animal puppet form suffers catastrophic damage the effect ends and the caster form is returned to the space on the prime material plane currently occupied by the mindless puppet form which is instantly destroyed and the effect causing the damage continues to damage the caster form which is the application of the overkill damage.

What is the source of the confusion?

Show me that quote in the PHB and I'll drop my argument. :smallwink:

[JoeJ]

I've already quoted the relevant piece.

If you have a quote from fluff that says druids get a third-party body, feel free to share it.

I'm not going to go back and read five pages of posts.

On p. 66 it says you "magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before." On p. 67, "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast" and "when you transform you assume the beast's hit points and Hit Dice."

Nothing in this language says or implies that their old body is undergoing metamorphosis. On the contrary, the words assume and replace make it clear that their beast form is a different body.

[Dr. Cliché]

I'm not going to go back and read five pages of posts.

On p. 66 it says you "magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before." On p. 67, "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast" and "when you transform you assume the beast's hit points and Hit Dice."

The underlined sections are mechanics, not fluff. I asked for a *fluff* quote that supported your view.

As it stands, all you've done is provide further evidence of the disconnect between fluff and rules.

[JoeJ]

The underlined sections are mechanics, not fluff. I asked for a *fluff* quote that supported your view.

As it stands, all you've done is provide further evidence of the disconnect between fluff and rules.

The disconnect is only in your assumption that there is such a thing as "fluff" in the first place. That's not a distinction that's made anywhere in the book.

[Segev]

Again, this is more a problem of you guys trying to bend the phrasing to fit the bizarre mechanics.

Nope. Again: there is no fluff provided. If you don't think fluff we provide fits the mechanics, that's fine; don't use it. Provide fluff you feel does fit the mechanics.

The mechanics are not inherently bizarre, any more than shapeshifting is bizarre in and of itself. Your trouble is that you keep trying to apply fluff that doesn't fit the mechanics, and then insist that the mechanics make no sense because your chosen fluff doesn't fit them. Choose fluff that fits them; there isn't any inherent to the text to contradict the mechanics.

[Dr. Cliché]

The disconnect is only in your assumption that there is such a thing as "fluff" in the first place. That's not a distinction that's made anywhere in the book.

The fact that the rulebook doesn't refer to the distinction doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

It doesn't tell you what a paragraph is either. Does that mean they don't exist?


Nope. Again: there is no fluff provided.

Yes there is. Granted, there isn't much of it, but there's enough to make reasonable Judgements about Wild Shape.


Provide fluff you feel does fit the mechanics.

I feel like I could spend the rest of my life having this conversation.

Please try to understand before one of us dies:

My issue is not with the fluff. Yes, if I wanted to, I'm sure I could come up with some contrived fluff that fits the weird, clunky mechanics of the ability.

The point is that I don't want to. I'd much rather have a mechanic that fits the fluff and which doesn't feel weird, clunky, unintuitive and counter to all sense and reason (even by fantasy standards).

[JoeJ]

The fact that the rulebook doesn't refer to the distinction doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Then please point out what "fluff" you're talking about that doesn't fit the mechanic, because I'm not finding it. I don't see any part of the text about Wild Shape that contradicts any other part.

[georgie_leech]

Yes there is. Granted, there isn't much of it, but there's enough to make reasonable Judgements about Wild Shape.


Are they so reasonable, when they apparently run headlong into the mechanics instead of complimenting them? Fluff doesn't exist in a vacuum.

[tieren]

Because there's no third body - just the druid's body changing. .

The body (caster form) is in another dimension. How else could a 200 pound man turn into a 6 ounce bird without leaving dozens of pounds of mass dropped about? Use some common sense for crying out loud!

[Jarlhen]

My problem with moon druids is that they're supposed to be specialists at shape changing. That's their shtick, their thing, their expertise. Yet it's a bad to mediocre choice in 90% of all combat situations after around level 7 or 8. You will do generally poor damage, have low AC, can't cast spells, and it's a finite resource. Now for a druid that's not specialized on shape changing that would seem reasonable. It adds to their versatility, sometimes it's very useful in combat, it's a great HP sponge (though a pretty weak threat so as a DM I would ignore the shape changed druid for most of the fight if given the option). But as a druid whose whole thing is supposed to be that they're shape changers I find it extremely lackluster in that context. I would much rather see the shape changing get a significant boost and the spell casting be cut down to say ranger levels. Right now I don't really see a benefit to going moon druid if you plan on a longer campaign. It's entirely op from level 2-5, mediocre from 6-8, mostly useless thereafter and at level 10 all druids can fly. It's like having a barbarian whose damage reduction only works against creature with only 1 attack. Great at the start, but it pretty quickly becomes mostly meh even though it's advertised as one of the main, if not the main, selling points of the class.

[Kryx]

Great at the start, but it pretty quickly becomes mostly meh even though it's advertised as one of the main, if not the main, selling points of the class.
This is an eloquent description of the issues with the moon druid.

[Sploggle1]

I'm joining in this very late, so I just skipped to the bottom LOL. How about this fix for the druids. As I said I'm still play testing, but looking at the druid even I thought it was too powerful at the first few levels. (Mainly it got more than all the other classes. What if I converted the 3.5 druid over to 5th? Maybe that will fix the OP problem.

[SharkForce]

My problem with moon druids is that they're supposed to be specialists at shape changing. That's their shtick, their thing, their expertise. Yet it's a bad to mediocre choice in 90% of all combat situations after around level 7 or 8. You will do generally poor damage, have low AC, can't cast spells, and it's a finite resource. Now for a druid that's not specialized on shape changing that would seem reasonable. It adds to their versatility, sometimes it's very useful in combat, it's a great HP sponge (though a pretty weak threat so as a DM I would ignore the shape changed druid for most of the fight if given the option). But as a druid whose whole thing is supposed to be that they're shape changers I find it extremely lackluster in that context. I would much rather see the shape changing get a significant boost and the spell casting be cut down to say ranger levels. Right now I don't really see a benefit to going moon druid if you plan on a longer campaign. It's entirely op from level 2-5, mediocre from 6-8, mostly useless thereafter and at level 10 all druids can fly. It's like having a barbarian whose damage reduction only works against creature with only 1 attack. Great at the start, but it pretty quickly becomes mostly meh even though it's advertised as one of the main, if not the main, selling points of the class.

can't say i particularly agree here. moon druid damage is not amazing. but it is about as good as cantrip damage (and after level 5 there are very few things it won't work on), doesn't take up cantrip choices, can be combined with a variety of spells, and comes with a pretty impressive amount of toughness attached.

don't make the mistake of thinking that just because it isn't always the best, that must mean that it is never good. even at the levels where wild shape isn't quite as good, combat wild shape is good enough that you likely don't need any combat cantrips, and you likely also don't need defensive magic to protect you.

a moon druid can cast some spell with a duration, turn into a bear (or giant scorpion, or snake, or crocodile, or whatever) and do just fine.

[georgie_leech]

I'm joining in this very late, so I just skipped to the bottom LOL. How about this fix for the druids. As I said I'm still play testing, but looking at the druid even I thought it was too powerful at the first few levels. (Mainly it got more than all the other classes. What if I converted the 3.5 druid over to 5th? Maybe that will fix the OP problem.

Uh... that's almost comically counter productive, given how strong the 3.5 Druid was. I mean, it basically has "You have a Fighter pet" as a class feature.

[Kryx]

but it is about as good as cantrip damage
This is accurate. DPR of Classes for Moon Druid (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=416672728)

The problem is cantrip damage assumes you're doing better things with your actions. Moon Druid can't cast spells.

The whole schtick of the class is being an awesome shapechanger. It is not awesome. Wild Shape becomes the worst option for anything except soaking damage after level 5.

[SharkForce]

This is accurate. DPR of Classes for Moon Druid (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=416672728)

The problem is cantrip damage assumes you're doing better things with your actions. Moon Druid can't cast spells.

The whole schtick of the class is being an awesome shapechanger. It is not awesome. Wild Shape becomes the worst option for anything except soaking damage after level 5.

you do better things with your actions, and then you *bonus action* wild shape into something for your cantrip equivalent.

so, for example, you could cast entangle, then wild shape into something. you will (hopefully) have entangle in place for the rest of the fight while you do your cantrip-equivalent damage, thus making it about the same as using your cantrips for damage. except that you also soak a bunch of damage while doing so.

druids have plenty of spells that allow them to fire off the spell and then do something else with their later actions. the land druid uses their later actions for cantrips, primarily. the moon druid uses those later actions for fighting in wild shape. and, considering that they can often soak as much damage in a short rest as another PC's entire health pool, "i get to soak some damage while dealing damage" is actually a pretty awesome ability if they get focused at all.

and that is about as good as you can reasonably hope for it to be, when we're talking about a primary caster that has the ability to wade into melee. it simply cannot be allowed to get as good as a conventional warrior. that's just how it is. if you want a shapechanging warrior that is as good at being a warrior as a barbarian or fighter is, you cannot have balance if you get there by starting from druid.

[Kryx]

you do better things with your actions, and then you *bonus action* wild shape into something for your cantrip equivalent.
That is an option. It is not the option I, as a master shapechanger, would want to do. I want to be able to ravage people as a bear.


you cannot have balance if you get there by starting from druid.
It would definitely be possible if you have a sacrifice spell slots to channel more powerful wildshape functionality.

[SharkForce]

That is an option. It is not the option I, as a master shapechanger, would want to do. I want to be able to ravage people as a bear.

then you should probably homebrew a subclass for some other class, (barbarian is a common choice for this), that can ravage people as a bear (or whatever other creature). because having a subclass of druid capable of competing with the warriors is going to be broken.


It would definitely be possible if you have a sacrifice spell slots to channel more powerful wildshape functionality.

eh, not so much. being able to trade between being both an awesome spellcaster and an awesome warrior makes any spellcasting class that isn't substantially superior as a spellcaster somewhat obsolete, and makes any warrior class that isn't substantially superior as a warrior somewhat obsolete.

druids are too good at magic to be allowed to have a warrior subclass that is equal to an actual warrior class.

[Grod_The_Giant]

"As good as a cantrip" is not an acceptable balance point for a trademark, limited-use ability. Cantrips are pretty much the minimum acceptable contribution to the battle. That's fine for the casting-focused Land Druid; not for the supposedly melee-focused Moon Druid. If Valor Bards, Bladelocks, and Bladesingers can get extra attacks, I'm pretty sure we can upgrade a mathematically mediocre ability.

(And maybe get rid of this stupid "shapeshifting gives you a separate hp pool" business across the board; it's goofy both fluff-wise and mechanically. Go back to some type of polymorph healing, maybe)

[SharkForce]

it isn't a trademark ability, and it isn't that limited use either (twice per short rest is relatively frequent, really, when each use can last several hours).

you're a druid first, before you become any sort of shapechanger. before you ever got so much as a whiff of wild shape, you had druid spellcasting. you're not a shapechanger who happens to have some druid elements, you're a full-blown druid, and then in addition to that you have a subclass.

and that is what you need to remember. circle of the moon is a SUB-class. not a class. you're not a shapeshifter. you're a druid of the circle of the moon. you're not a circle of the moon person with a druid subclass. there is a limit to what you can reasonably add on as a sub-class when the basic class has so much going for it, and that limit says hell no you aren't getting damage comparable to a fighter on top of all those druid abilities, because otherwise we've just made fighter a trap option. the limit on what you can give to a full spellcaster is, practically speaking, roughly equivalent to what their cantrips will give them. that is, in fact, precisely WHY cantrips do that much damage, as opposed to dealing out the same damage a fighter or barbarian could output.

if you want to be an awesome shapeshifter that can just wade into melee combat and destroy people all day every day, then go homebrew something. stop trying to tack it on to what is already a powerful, versatile character with full spellcasting. tack on some shapeshifting abilities to a class that is supposed to be good at melee combat (whether that class should be one that currently already exists or not i leave up to you, though as i've already noted, shapeshifting barbarians have been a thing in prior editions).

(also, i must stress this again, the moon druid wild shape is not bad. the damage is not high, but it adds a great deal of toughness and even offers some control if you choose the right forms, and you can just pile it on top of a spell you're sustaining).

[Saggo]

it isn't a trademark ability, and it isn't that limited use either (twice per short rest is relatively frequent, really, when each use can last several hours).
That barely gets you through combat unless your table is too liberal with short rests, and that assumes you don't lose form to damage, need utility, want a better shape for a particular encounter, or need to cast a spell. Attempting to maintain a Wildshape for hours effectively renders the touted spellcasting ineffective as a power multiplier, and attempting to maintain Wildshape for hours and the decision making of what form to choose and when to drop it acts as a limitation of its own.



you're a druid first, before you become any sort of shapechanger. before you ever got so much as a whiff of wild shape, you had druid spellcasting. you're not a shapechanger who happens to have some druid elements, you're a full-blown druid, and then in addition to that you have a subclass.
The argument can be applied to Warlock and they do get damage comparable with a Fighter with an option that technically doesn't classify as a subclass and they are not locked out of spellcasting. Simply being a full caster is not enough justification.

[Kryx]

the damage is not high, but it adds a great deal of toughness and even offers some control if you choose the right forms
It's literally a bag of HP.

A barbarian archetype wouldn't cover what people want. They want the flavor of a Druid with all the (lower level) casting while being able to turn into a huge beast.


I did make an archetype at one point that sacrificed spell slots for higher CR, but beasts taper off very quickly and stop at CR 8. If porting from PF it goes up to ~13.

[Grod_The_Giant]

it isn't a trademark ability, and it isn't that limited use either (twice per short rest is relatively frequent, really, when each use can last several hours).
Yes it is. Spellcasting is common; wild shape is what makes you a Druid instead of, say, a nature Cleric. Moon Druid is entirely dedicated to improving wild shape. I really don't know how you can argue otherwise.

[SharkForce]

- it's an ability piled on top of full spellcasting. if it is only barely getting you through your combats per day, then that is about as far as it can reasonably be hoped to get.

- warlocks get an attack cantrip that comes close-ish to a ranged fighter specifically because warlocks don't get the full power spellcasting that other full spellcasters do. they don't get full spellcasting plus good damage. if you only look at the highest level of spells, they're not too bad, but their spell list is fairly restricted, and in 5e not having access to a bunch of low level slots is actually a loss. a druid can throw around level 1 and 2 spells to great effect, when they want a low-cost but fairly high-impact option. with a warlock, your low-cost high-impact option is your damaging cantrip.

- if people want a full druid that can also fight like a barbarian, then i'm sorry, but what they want is broken OP, and they can't have it without breaking the game. we had pretty much exactly that in 3.x, and look at how well that went. every time a tier thread comes up, everyone comes to the conclusion that we don't have tiers like we did in 3.x, and 3.x tier lists are not useful in 5e... and that's a good thing. why would we want to bring back some of the worst things about 3.x? it had some good things that i would be glad to see make a comeback, but casters that are as good or better at being a fighter as a fighter is would not be one of those things. 5e went to great lengths to make sure that didn't happen, and is a better game for it.

- spellcasting is common. spellcasting with the druid list is available to only one class: druid. and it is a fairly interesting, diverse, and even sometimes unique list, loaded with powerful and useful spells, a fairly large portion of which are not available to other classes (or are of very limited availability).

[Saggo]

- warlocks get an attack cantrip that comes close-ish to a ranged fighter specifically because warlocks don't get the full power spellcasting that other full spellcasters do. they don't get full spellcasting plus good damage. if you only look at the highest level of spells, they're not too bad, but their spell list is fairly restricted, and in 5e not having access to a bunch of low level slots is actually a loss. a druid can throw around level 1 and 2 spells to great effect, when they want a low-cost but fairly high-impact option. with a warlock, your low-cost high-impact option is your damaging cantrip.
Apologies, I was referring to Blade Pact. It's better DPR than Wildshape, very comparable to many Fighter builds, and doesn't lock them out of spellscasting, which includes as you've mentioned a rather potent ranged attack. Warlock spellcasting is easily within the same category of other full casters, you've listed all their restrictions but left the benefits.


- if people want a full druid that can also fight like a barbarian, then i'm sorry, but what they want is broken OP, and they can't have it without breaking the game.
I don't think you meant anything by it but it's "or", not "also"; a nuance that means that through level 16, they wouldn't break the game if they had better DPR because of how limited they are being Wildshaped. Levels 18-20 remove those limitations and would need to be addressed if the status quo ever changed.

[Jarlhen]

- if people want a full druid that can also fight like a barbarian, then i'm sorry, but what they want is broken OP, and they can't have it without breaking the game.

I think if you go back through the the discussion about this you'll see that one of the main points people have been making is that moon druids should get buffed wild shape and nerfed spellcasting abilities. And I know you'll use "Well then go homebrew it" as some kind of shield against this argument, though I have no idea why. It's a truism. While we would prefer for WotC to make these changes obviously they're not going to at this stage. So if we want them we would need to homebrew them. The argument remains entirely valid though and hopefully it's something they'll take into consideration for the future, and it's certainly something worth discussion as to how to do best. Because right now the moon druid is a nerfed version of the land druid after around level 8 or so and that doesn't fly with most of us (though at level 10 both druid types do, hah).

[Kryx]

Apologies, I was referring to Blade Pact. It's better DPR than Wildshape, very comparable to many Fighter builds, and doesn't lock them out of spellscasting, which includes as you've mentioned a rather potent ranged attack. Warlock spellcasting is easily within the same category of other full casters, you've listed all their restrictions but left the benefits.
For reference a bladelock polearm+GWM does 101% of a fighter polearm+GWM. Polearm does 104%. GWM does 84%.
Definitely comparable without much sacrifice at all. Warlock casting is awesome.


Though I think the arguments in favor are very different than SharkForce is presenting them. As has been mentioned people are fine not having full casting as a trade.

[Saggo]

For reference a bladelock polearm+GWM does 101% of a fighter polearm+GWM. Polearm does 104%. GWM does 84%.
Definitely comparable without much sacrifice at all. Warlock casting is awesome.
I actually had your work in mind when I wrote that.



Though I think the arguments in favor are very different than SharkForce is presenting them. As has been mentioned people are fine not having full casting as a trade.
So I'm not against trading various amounts of spellcasting for better wildshapes, either. I just think that having full spellcasting isn't enough of a reason for weak offense because it doesn't consider inherent limitations.

[georgie_leech]

So I'm not against trading various amounts of spellcasting for better wildshapes, either. I just think that having full spellcasting isn't enough of a reason for weak offense because it doesn't consider inherent limitations.

Trouble is, Druid *is* a full caster, regardless of subclass. You're looking at a full druid adjustment, not just Moon' if you want a Moon Druid to trade casting for physical power.

Hm, unless if wildshape would be altered to use spell slots to power up...

[SharkForce]

bladelock with polearm master and GWM takes a lot longer to come online than a fighter. you need an extra attribute (charisma), and get fewer ASIs. most bladelocks require at least some dipping (which delays spellcasting), and the warlock spell list is not remotely as impressive as the list most other casters get. there are some gems in there, but for the most part, the list just is not as strong as most other casters and a few higher level spell slots (but never more of the highest, and those highest spell slots are very limited) is certainly nice, but not as good as having a bit fewer of the highest level spell slots backed up by plenty of low-level spell slots that can be used to good effect. warlocks have a few gems in their spell list, but for the most part don't have the variety of spells that other classes have.

warlocks have some advantages. but as far as it goes, they are not as strong of a spellcaster as other spellcasting classes. i wouldn't argue they're not a full spellcaster, but they're definitely not in the same league when it comes to spellcasting as a wizard, bard, or druid. they might come a bit close to a cleric, but even then, i suspect not.

and no, i didn't mean "or". subclasses don't remove parts of the core class. so long as you're making a subclass of a druid, it will have all of the druid core abilities. that's how subclasses work. even if you had to expend some uses of spells to get a powerful wildshape, a druid subclass that gives the ability to fight like a barbarian will be able to also cast spells like a druid.

the subclass you want cannot be a druid subclass. there simply is not enough room in the power budget, and doing so would make any class that only improves weapon combat into a trap option.

[Grod_The_Giant]

So all those subclasses that give extra proficiencies and attacks to full casters are... what, chopped liver?

[Saggo]

You left out all of the Warlock benefits that offset the limitations.


and no, i didn't mean "or". subclasses don't remove parts of the core class. so long as you're making a subclass of a druid, it will have all of the druid core abilities.

You may have both features but you can't use one while using the other. Versatility isn't power if you can't use it.

[SharkForce]

So all those subclasses that give extra proficiencies and attacks to full casters are... what, chopped liver?

worth about as much as moon druid, actually. moon druid doesn't add armour proficiency, but it does add a crudload of hit points. and 2 regular attacks with no riders is, in fact, fairly close to cantrip damage. barbarians don't deal more damage than wizards because of 2 attacks, they deal more damage than wizards because of the rage bonus damage, reckless, brutal critical, and sometimes subclass features. likewise with paladin, except that it's smite, improved divine smite, and sometimes subclass features.


You left out all of the Warlock benefits that offset the limitations.

You may have both features but you can't use one while using the other. Versatility isn't power if you can't use it.

- the warlock benefits that offset the limitations largely boil down to warlocks being able to decent at-will damage in exchange for having comparatively poor spellcasting (that is, comparatively poor relative to wizards, druids, clerics, sorcerers, and bards; as compared to all spellcasters including paladins, rangers, eldritch knights, and arcane tricksters, they are middle of the pack).

- versatility absolutely IS power. it is, in fact, one of the main sources of a wizard's power. you cannot cast hypnotic pattern, web, fireball, transmute rock, sunbeam, mass suggestion, stinking cloud, banishment, and wish ==> symbol all at the same time, but being able to choose between many solutions to determine the best one for a given situation is absolutely a power increase over not being able to choose. a character that can choose between being a top-tier melee damage source and being a powerful and versatile spellcaster undeniably has more power than a character that can only do one or the other. in fact, versatility is a crucial part of what brought your class up a tier in 3.x D&D, and classes that didn't have it were bringing a great deal less to a party than those that did, even if the non-versatile class was good at their one thing they did. a 3.x fighter (or, more likely, fighter multiclass/prestige class) could deal a lot of damage if you min-maxed it well enough, and yet it was never remotely close to being considered a tier 1.

[georgie_leech]

Hm, unless if wildshape would be altered to use spell slots to power up...

Expanding on this thought a bit, what if both Subclasses had access to the regular Druid Shapeshifting, but Moon Druids had the option of using prepared spells to transform into a Beast of a CR equal to one less than the level of the spell that could have been prepared (level one spells give CR 1/2)? Like, a 5th level Druid can normally prepare 2 3rd level spells, but a Moon Druid could forego preparing one of those to give access to a specific Beast of CR 2, say a Giant Boar. the creature you can turn into would be chosen at the start of the day; rather than preparing Call Lightning and Dispel Magic, that Druid is preparing Call Lightning and Giant Boar Shape. This evens out the power spike at level 2 a little bit (though not all the way, since Brown Bear is still really good at level 3), scales better (new cap CR 8, reaches every CR but 1 earlier than base Moon Druid), but requires versatility to be sacrificed to get the combat power. Thoughts?

[Kryx]

Expanding on this thought a bit, what if both Subclasses had access to the regular Druid Shapeshifting, but Moon Druids had the option of using prepared spells to transform into a Beast of a CR equal to one less than the level of the spell that could have been prepared (level one spells give CR 1/2)?
Still awful. Bag of HP problem still exists and is even worse. CR 8 at level 20 is still horrendous in comparison to other options like Shapechange or True Polymorph.

As a TRex The druid would have an additional 272 hp (at 16 AC) and do about 32 damage per round (53*.6). Still well below martials (around 60).


The design is inherently flawed imo.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The first step to overhauling shapeshifting is definitely to change the hp bonus. You'd have so much more room to work if you didn't have to worry about that.

[Segev]

Yes there is. Granted, there isn't much of it, but there's enough to make reasonable Judgements about Wild Shape.

Then please point out what "fluff" you're talking about that doesn't fit the mechanic, because I'm not finding it. I don't see any part of the text about Wild Shape that contradicts any other part.

I feel like I could spend the rest of my life having this conversation.

Please try to understand before one of us dies:

My issue is not with the fluff. Yes, if I wanted to, I'm sure I could come up with some contrived fluff that fits the weird, clunky mechanics of the ability.

The point is that I don't want to. I'd much rather have a mechanic that fits the fluff and which doesn't feel weird, clunky, unintuitive and counter to all sense and reason (even by fantasy standards).
Until you respond to JoeJ's post, I see nothing fruitful in responding to your patronizing but ultimately flawed plea that I "understand" something that is based in a false premise.

If, as you claim, your issue is with the "weird, clunky mechanics," it is not with the fact that they don't fit the fluff. Your issue is that you don't like the mechanics, for some reason. Since every fluff that's been suggested to work with it is "contrived" in your opinion, that means you have a preconceived notion of what the fluff SHOULD be. Unfortunately, that fluff isn't present. The issue is that you don't like that your fluff isn't canon and isn't supported by the mechanics.

This is a valid complaint to have, but it doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the mechanics. It means you have fluff you want to represent that are not present in the mechanics.

Unless and until you can point out where your preferred fluff is actually spelled out in the text, however, you don't get to claim the mechanics fail to reflect the fluff-as-presented, because there is not fluff presented that the mechanics fail to support.

[Saggo]

- the warlock benefits that offset the limitations largely boil down to warlocks being able to decent at-will damage in exchange for having comparatively poor spellcasting (that is, comparatively poor relative to wizards, druids, clerics, sorcerers, and bards; as compared to all spellcasters including paladins, rangers, eldritch knights, and arcane tricksters, they are middle of the pack).
As well as multiple at-will spells, unique spells and combos, and one of if not the highest 5th slot endurance, to include a few more. But it's fine, you have your opinion on how to rate Warlock's spellcasting, I don't have an interest in trying to sell the class. What we still have is a full spellcaster that has a martial melee option (not a subclass) that tracks very well, comparable to full martials. It doesn't require a daily resource and has more feat support. It certainly doesn't lock the class out of their spellcasting. Importantly, it hasn't made full martials into trap options. In your terms, there's room in the power budget to increase wildshape damage by an order of magnitude.

It's a brute force solution for sure, an elegant solution would be preferable to everyone I think, but I'll continue to push that Druid spellcasting isn't enough justification for the weak, cantrip-like damage.


- versatility absolutely IS power.
If and when you can apply it.

[Vogonjeltz]

From what I've seen of bears - I've run into them in the wild before, without the chance to escape by driving away in a car (I was doing some back country bicycling), and I've seen data - they generally just mind their own business most of the time, particularly for anything that isn't a grizzly bear. If you do something stupid like get between an adult bear and a cub, or get in too close it's an issue, but most bears tend to favor eating lots of small things over hunting big animals, and they generally don't see you as a threat. It's similar to how bears that get out of the wild and come into cities usually end up doing no harm to anyone, and have a tendency to find a nice big garbage can or similar.

I thought we were discussing Brown bears as that's the big Moon Druid shape at 2nd level?

Still, I think this really points that the need for a Druid to work out with the DM exactly what shapes they can turn into before starting play. That way the Druid is on the same page as the DM knowing what is accessible from the Druid's past experiences.

[Knaight]

I thought we were discussing Brown bears as that's the big Moon Druid shape at 2nd level?

We are. They go in the not-a-grizzly category that tends to leave you alone. They're not something I worry about being attacked by at all, provided that I keep my distance (whereas polar bears might just have a low human attack rate due to there not being a lot of humans in their territory). A wilderness bear encounter is generally going to either look like you see a bear, you wait for a while, the bear goes away. The other big alternative is there's a bear, it finds your food, it eats your food. As a big omnivore, it probably eats all of your food, although there are hilarious exceptions (http://www.wideopenspaces.com/black-bear-goes-bender-drinks-much-beer-passes-lawn/).

[SharkForce]

As well as multiple at-will spells, unique spells and combos, and one of if not the highest 5th slot endurance, to include a few more. But it's fine, you have your opinion on how to rate Warlock's spellcasting, I don't have an interest in trying to sell the class. What we still have is a full spellcaster that has a martial melee option (not a subclass) that tracks very well, comparable to full martials. It doesn't require a daily resource and has more feat support. It certainly doesn't lock the class out of their spellcasting. Importantly, it hasn't made full martials into trap options. In your terms, there's room in the power budget to increase wildshape damage by an order of magnitude.

It's a brute force solution for sure, an elegant solution would be preferable to everyone I think, but I'll continue to push that Druid spellcasting isn't enough justification for the weak, cantrip-like damage.

uhh... their melee option is definitely a subclass. the fact that warlocks get two subclasses doesn't mean it isn't still a subclass. a tome or chain lock can't melee worth anything as a single class character. their at-will spells are severely limited (cool, but severely limited) and practically speaking there isn't a huge improvement between being able to cast a spell as often as you need and being able to cast it as often as you want, they have only a handful of unique spells (which generally revolve around helping them fight), their special combos mostly revolve around fighting as well, and while they get the most level 5 slots in a day, it is a limitation that they don't get the assortment of lower level spells to make those work, their higher level slots are set in stone (and also they never get more of them), and they are still very limited in what kinds of effects they can do.

as a spellcaster, warlocks are not very amazing. they're pretty good at dealing damage (in a featless game, eldritch blast alone makes them extremely good), but they aren't nearly as good at solving problems. in combat, they tend to be able to target fewer saves and inflict fewer status effects as well.


If and when you can apply it.

funny thing about versatility is that by it's very nature, you can usually apply it.

[Demonic Spoon]

Still awful. Bag of HP problem still exists and is even worse. CR 8 at level 20 is still horrendous in comparison to other options like Shapechange or True Polymorph.

As a TRex The druid would have an additional 272 hp (at 16 AC) and do about 32 damage per round (53*.6). Still well below martials (around 60).


The design is inherently flawed imo.

Looking at just the beast's damage is disingenuous. The biggest weakness of land druids is that virtually all of their useful combat spells are concentration, so once they start concentrating on one thing, they're back to cantrips if they want to contribute at all. Optimal use of moon druid shapeshifting is to start concentrating on something and then start fighting in Wildshape. To evaluate how strong wildshape is offensively, you need to figure out how much extra damage you get from wildshape versus a cantrip.

An honest look at a moon druid's per-round damage is whatever they can put out via something like conjure animals plus whatever they do in beast form.

That said, I dislike the design of the moon druid for a handful of reasons, but if you bump up its damage to make it more of a threat you risk it overtaking martials in per-round damage.

[Grod_The_Giant]

If you do try to mix it up while concentrating, you're a lot more likely to blow your check than if you, say, summon a bunch of wolves and hang back chucking fire at things, so that should also enter into calculations.

[Socratov]

Looking at just the beast's damage is disingenuous. The biggest weakness of land druids is that virtually all of their useful combat spells are concentration, so once they start concentrating on one thing, they're back to cantrips if they want to contribute at all. Optimal use of moon druid shapeshifting is to start concentrating on something and then start fighting in Wildshape. To evaluate how strong wildshape is offensively, you need to figure out how much extra damage you get from wildshape versus a cantrip.

An honest look at a moon druid's per-round damage is whatever they can put out via something like conjure animals plus whatever they do in beast form.

That said, I dislike the design of the moon druid for a handful of reasons, but if you bump up its damage to make it more of a threat you risk it overtaking martials in per-round damage.

Barring a couple of spells to use in combat like Moonbeam, Sunbeam and Call Lightning (up to 5th lvl anyway) most of the druid spells are utility by way of preparing the battlefield and other beneficial area effects.

Things like Pass without Trace, Plant Growth, Entangle, Spike Growth all make life a lot easier for your party. So does Protection from energy, water walk, water breathing, etc.

I think I could claim that a druid's power lies not in his wildshaping or in his combat capabilities, but in enabling movement for the party, protection and disabeling the enemy, maybe even more so then the wizard and definitely more so then the sorcerer. Another caster that has this amount of utility is the bard, yet in a different way.

[Saggo]

That said, I dislike the design of the moon druid for a handful of reasons, but if you bump up its damage to make it more of a threat you risk it overtaking martials in per-round damage.

Wildshaped Druids are penalized more for losing concentration, compared to other concentration builds wading into combat, by less AC than most hybrid/gish builds, intentionally getting into position to be attacked, and once losing concentration being forced to decide between dropping form to cast again (where you would either be without wildshape or using up the last charge before a rest) or forgoing any further concentration spells (whereas all other classes would just reapply concentration as needed and keep doing whatever they were doing before). Even if at the logical extreme where wildshape damage was equal to a Fighter's, it would only result in front-loading DPR.

[Demonic Spoon]

If you do try to mix it up while concentrating, you're a lot more likely to blow your check than if you, say, summon a bunch of wolves and hang back chucking fire at things, so that should also enter into calculations.


It depends on a bunch of factors, including the CON mod of the form you're wildshaping into.

In my ideal world:

-Moon druids cannot concentrate on spells while wildshaping
-Moon druids get a discrete list of forms that they choose, rather than just "All creatures of CR X or lower", which helps logistics and "have you seen this creature before" debates
-Individual combat forms are stronger, such that they are a viable alternative to casting spells in combat, without the "bag of hitpoints" problem.

Alternatively, you could just dump the whole idea of taking over a creature's statblock entirely and in its place create a series of thematic power sets. For example, one option might give you a bite and a claw attack and a handful of temporary hitpoints, narratively this could represent a bear or some other hardy animal...or, a utility form might give you a fly speed and offer the druid a choice of whether that means he transforms into an eagle, hawk, or bat.

[Vogonjeltz]

We are. They go in the not-a-grizzly category that tends to leave you alone. They're not something I worry about being attacked by at all, provided that I keep my distance (whereas polar bears might just have a low human attack rate due to there not being a lot of humans in their territory). A wilderness bear encounter is generally going to either look like you see a bear, you wait for a while, the bear goes away. The other big alternative is there's a bear, it finds your food, it eats your food. As a big omnivore, it probably eats all of your food, although there are hilarious exceptions.

Grizzley bears are Brown bears. As far as we (or the Monster Manual creature entries) are concerned, subspecies, like Grizzley's and Kodiaks, are the same thing.

[Knaight]

Grizzley bears are Brown bears. As far as we (or the Monster Manual creature entries) are concerned, subspecies, like Grizzley's and Kodiaks, are the same thing.

As far as the characters in setting are concerned, the distinction probably still matters. If the druid is in an area with bears, odds are pretty good they came across one at some point, and odds are pretty good that it was one of the numerous bears that generally don't bother anyone.