Letting ASI Improvements carry over to Wild Shape: Too Powerful?

[rudy]

I'm trying to re-scale wildshape for Moon Druids in a way such that it doesn't become more powerful at low levels (and in fact I'm limiting them to CR 1/2 for levels 2&3), but doesn't trail off as quickly at mid to high levels.

One thing I considered doing is letting stat adjustments from feats and ASI improvements (but NOT the starting statistics of the player) carry over to the Wild Shape form. This would make an interesting decision between, for example, boosting wisdom, and boosting physical stats, while providing a path for the player who wants to be-wildshape focused be more competitive at mid-to-high levels.

Thoughts? Overpowered? Unnecessary?

[Elminster298]

Absolutely unnecessary. The moon druid is a fairly well balanced class bordering on overpowered until you get the druid capstone. After that it is easily one of the strongest characters(single class or multiclass) in the game. There would be no reason to take physical ASIs(other than the ones already in place) even with this change as you want wisdom for your spells when not an animal. Not only is it not needed, it makes no sense. ASIs are to show the improvement of you as a person. Of your total stat doesn't carry over to your magical form, it makes no sense for a portion of it to. If anything, it would make more sense to say add your wisdom modifier as an improvement to one or more physical skills to show your greater knowledge of animal physiology and your ability to apply that knowledge to your wild shape. Again, it's not needed. The class is fine as is.

[hymer]

Thoughts? Overpowered? Unnecessary?

Well, it would not be enough to make wild shapes strong enough to compete in their slumps with at-will damage dealers. It could even out some of the slumps a little, but it could also be considered something of a trap option; shoring up your weakening wild shape with prcious ASIs.
ASIs can already be used to boost wild shapes; sentinel, mobile, mage slayer, savage attacker. They can make a difference for when you just want to opt out of wild shaping.
So I don't think it would make any great difference. Nor do I really think it should. If someone wants to make a shapeshifter whose primary concern is to rip enemies' faces off in animal (or elemental) shape, straight moon druid isn't the answer. That's not to say there's anything wrong with the moon druid. It's still a full spellcaster with a great spell list, and with a bonus-action panic button for a sack of hp and extra movement modes twice per rest.

[Giant2005]

I'd be more concerned with the book keeping required. You would have to track your ASI gains separately and record the effects of each (every +2 to Str = +1 to hit and damage, every +2 to con = + level HP), and then add those bonuses to every shape you take. You would also have to reverse engineer the animals to figure out if they are using Str or Dex to attack.
It adds a level of complexity that is very anti-5e.

Having said that, if your player is willing to go to that kind of effort (and you are willing to go to that same level of effort in order to police him), then go for it. You can always adjust encounters accordingly. I would be cautious about having him overshadow any other melee characters that don't also have full spellcasting though - give them some perks of their own if you need to.

[rudy]

Not only is it not needed, it makes no sense. ASIs are to show the improvement of you as a person. Of your total stat doesn't carry over to your magical form, it makes no sense for a portion of it to. If anything, it would make more sense to say add your wisdom modifier as an improvement to one or more physical skills to show your greater knowledge of animal physiology and your ability to apply that knowledge to your wild shape. Again, it's not needed. The class is fine as is.

This part is pretty convincing, in that it may not work thematically. I'm not convinced about it being as strong as you say, but I am convinced that you're right about it being unsatisfactory from an "internal logic" point of view. That could be fixed by saying that you can use your ASIs to *only* improve your animal forms, representing your greater mastery, and forcing the Druid to choose between greater spell mastery and greater forms. But I doubt many players would use that. Adding wisdom modifier is obviously too powerful.

And Giant2005, you're right about the bookkeeping, too.

[Elminster298]

This part is pretty convincing, in that it may not work thematically. I'm not convinced about it being as strong as you say, but I am convinced that you're right about it being unsatisfactory from an "internal logic" point of view. That could be fixed by saying that you can use your ASIs to *only* improve your animal forms, representing your greater mastery, and forcing the Druid to choose between greater spell mastery and greater forms. But I doubt many players would use that. Adding wisdom modifier is obviously too powerful.

And Giant2005, you're right about the bookkeeping, too.

I definitely don't think the original idea would be "too powerful" as is, just unnecessary on one of the strongest classes in the game. A couple +1s to your animal forms is going to have minimal impact when you can essentially gain the same by choosing a different form that has the specific stat you are looking for.

Thematically the choice between putting your ASIs to you OR your wild shape forms makes sense and if a player came to me with this I'd allow it. It doesn't break anything and allows the character to feel more specialized.

[rudy]

I think the ASI path was a bad idea. Thematically boring, I now see, and overly complex for what it did. I appreciate all the input it helping me reach that conclusion.

What I'm trying to do now is add some flexibility at higher levels by figuring out a balanced way to "upgrade" lower CR forms to equate to higher CRs.

So that, for example, it's not "Level 18... guess I'll be a mammoth... Level 9... guess I'll be a Giant Scorpion".

Like, upgrading the dire wolf from a CR 1 creature to a CR 3 creature. Seeing if there's a general formula that can be used while maintaining balance. I found another author added 2 to all stats each step (which would be Str, Dex, Con in this case), and gave them an extra hit die for each step, but that seems like too much.

[Giant2005]

You could make a feat that adds half of your proficiency bonus, divided by the CR of the creature to attack and damage rolls as well as AC. As well as 10 times that amount to hit points.
You might want to cap it though because that would be +12 attack/damage/AC and 120 hp for CR 1/4 creatures on a level 17+ character.

That feat would probably be far too powerful as described, so the numbers would need to be tweaked. I'm sure you get the idea though.

[rudy]

You could make a feat that adds half of your proficiency bonus, divided by the CR of the creature to attack and damage rolls as well as AC. As well as 10 times that amount to hit points.
You might want to cap it though because that would be +12 attack/damage/AC and 120 hp for CR 1/4 creatures on a level 17+ character.

That feat would probably be far too powerful as described, so the numbers would need to be tweaked. I'm sure you get the idea though.
Nah; division shouldn't be involved, I don't think. That would make the difference between, say, 5th and 6th pretty insignificant.

The more I look at it, the more it seems like adding +2 Str, +2 Dex, +2 Con and +1 hit dice per "level" of difference (1/4 > 1/2 > 1 > 2 > 3 > 4 > 5 > 6) will work fine. It seems extreme, but if you actually compare the improvement it makes it's not at all. Partly because it doesn't improve the damage DICE of the creature, so the improved creature will often have an edge on, say, AC, while the higher base CR creature is still going to have the edge on damage. Probably will limit it to 3 or 4 levels of improvement, though, just because a CR 6 Panther gets rather silly, if not overpowered.

[rudy]

Example:


Mammoth, CR 6
HP 126, AC 13

Trampling Charge. If the mammoth moves at least 20 feet straight toward a creature and then hits it with a gore attack on the same turn, that target must succeed on a DC 18 Strength saving throw or be knocked prone. If the target is prone, the mammoth can make one stomp attack against it as a bonus action.

Gore. Melee Weapon Attack: +10 to hit, reach 10 ft., one target. Hit: 25 (4d8 + 7) piercing damage.

Stomp. Melee Weapon Attack: +10 to hit, reach 5 ft., one prone creature. Hit: 29 (4d10 + 7) bludgeoning damage.


Giant Elk, CR 2 improved to CR 6
HP 112, AC 18

Charge. If the elk moves at least 20 feet straight toward a target and then hits it with a ram attack on the same turn, the target takes an extra 7 (2d6) damage. If the target is a creature, it must succeed on a DC 18 Strength saving throw or be knocked prone.

Ram. Melee Weapon Attack: +10 to hit, reach 10 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d6 + 8) bludgeoning damage.

Hooves. Melee Weapon Attack: +10 to hit, reach 5 ft., one prone creature. Hit: 22 (4d8 + 8) bludgeoning damage.
The Elk has notably better AC, but also much less damage with their primary attack (15 average versus 25).

[hymer]

Nah; division shouldn't be involved, I don't think. That would make the difference between, say, 5th and 6th pretty insignificant.

The more I look at it, the more it seems like adding +2 Str, +2 Dex, +2 Con and +1 hit dice per "level" of difference (1/4 > 1/2 > 1 > 2 > 3 > 4 > 5 > 6) will work fine. It seems extreme, but if you actually compare the improvement it makes it's not at all. Partly because it doesn't improve the damage DICE of the creature, so the improved creature will often have an edge on, say, AC, while the higher base CR creature is still going to have the edge on damage. Probably will limit it to 3 or 4 levels of improvement, though, just because a CR 6 Panther gets rather silly, if not overpowered.

Have you considered giving moon druids a 'combat form' option aside from regular animals? They could fluff it however they like (who cares if it's a rhino or a giant goat, it charges and deals damage), but there could be, say, three forms. One defensive with better AC, plenty of hp and better saves; one offensive with good to-hit and strong damage; and one that grapples and/or restrains opponents when it hits, and probably has an alternate movement mode. Then you can get past the need to deal with specific stat blocks, and give the moon druid a much smoother advancement curve; and you can decide exactly where it should be compared to the regular melee at all levels.
Just a thought.

[Giant2005]

Example:




The Elk has notably better AC, but also much less damage with their primary attack (15 average versus 25).

22 vs 25 - an Elk that is using its Ram attack without Charging isn't an Elk that should be ashamed of itself!
I think most people would consider the Elk to be by far the superior form of the two. It basically gains all of that extra survivability without much loss at all.

[rudy]

22 vs 25 - an Elk that is using its Ram attack without Charging isn't an Elk that should be ashamed of itself!
I think most people would consider the Elk to be by far the superior form of the two. It basically gains all of that extra survivability without much loss at all.
I disagree. For one, it's not going to be possible to use your charge attack most rounds in prolonged combat. If you charge a big bad, and he's not down, you're not going to charge again without provoking an opportunity attack from that big bad.

Second, if we're going to add in charge attack specifics, we then have to factor in the possibility of the mammoth getting their bonus trample attack on a charge, which is a big increase in damage, and has a very good chance to occur against anything without strength save proficiency. Note that the Elk does not have that bonus attack option.

[rudy]

Have you considered giving moon druids a 'combat form' option aside from regular animals? They could fluff it however they like (who cares if it's a rhino or a giant goat, it charges and deals damage), but there could be, say, three forms. One defensive with better AC, plenty of hp and better saves; one offensive with good to-hit and strong damage; and one that grapples and/or restrains opponents when it hits, and probably has an alternate movement mode. Then you can get past the need to deal with specific stat blocks, and give the moon druid a much smoother advancement curve; and you can decide exactly where it should be compared to the regular melee at all levels.
Just a thought.
Balance wise, your idea would probably provide a smoother curve, I grant. At the same time, I don't like the flavor of it; just a personal preference. I like the Druids being specific animals. But, thank you.

[nilshai]

I would like to have explained why ASI doesn't carry over to the Wild Shape form.

From the Wild Shape Ability in Players Handbook i got "You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source"

ASI is a racial trait (aka feature from your race).
ASI is a class feature (see The Druid table p. 65).
Feat is a class feature (for the same reason as ASI).

As far as i can tell, ASI is an ability you gain and retain, not an instantaneous effect, that you get to be forgotten.
If it would be an instantaneous effect, than the other benefits of feats would also not carry over to the new form. That would directly contradict the rule allowing you to retain feats.

Did i overlook something? Errata?
Imo ASI already carries over.

[hymer]

Did i overlook something? Errata?
Imo ASI already carries over.

The only place where this sort of intent is hinted at that I've noticed is in a Sage clarification for the Tough feat: here (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-july-2016).

I think a DM could rule it the way you indicate. Most, I believe, would say that the ASI affects your stats, and half your stats get replaced temporarily. If you advanced a mind stat you get it in wild shape, but if you advanced a physical stat, it gets overwritten.
And then there's the simplicity aspect of 5e. You'd add to the maths and bookkeeping by letting ASIs go thorugh to wild shapes. And then there are the weird cases waiting to give you headaches. How, for instance, would +2 str affect a riding horse's stats? It looks like the horse doesn't get its str modifier to-hit, as it has only +2, not +5. But we don't know what's going on, so how would we apply +2 str to these stats?

Edit: The horse was actually errata'ed, but please take it as an example. :smallsmile:

[Dalebert]

I used to go down a similar route. In my mind, it seemed to me that you should use the druid's proficiency bonus while he's in beast form if it's better. This would raise his to-hit and some skills. It's arguable by RAW that you should but the fact is moon druids just don't need any improvements. If anything, find ways to help land druids. For instance, it bugs me they don't get any 1st level circle spells. At least then they'd be getting a feature at 2nd that doesn't pale in comparison to suddenly turning into CR 1 beasts which is obscene at 2nd lvl and they'd be more in line with clerics who get domain spells for 1st through 5th level spells.

[nilshai]

Thank you for the clarifications.

I certainly agree, that the early levels of moon druid don't need buffs. I don't like the power jumps, missing wild shape forms and bad attack bonuses later on. More consistency would be nice.

The creatures with bonuses that don't fit their scores are probably all typos, including those not corrected in the errata.

[Saggo]

That's not to say there's anything wrong with the moon druid. It's still a full spellcaster with a great spell list, and with a bonus-action panic button for a sack of hp and extra movement modes twice per rest.

This is indicative of what is wrong with Moon Druid. It's fine and balanced if you're acting as full caster (basically the Druid part) but unlike nearly every other hybrid option you lock yourself out of any spellcasting for at-will damage comparable to cantrips (the Moon part). They could have made a better combat shapeshifter.

Like you say, though, I wouldnt use physical ASIs to address any issues. I'd look at Proficiency or Wis mod bonuses, and more novel ideas like using your Wis DC for Wild Shapes, spell slots to boost a wild shape form for duration, or even a version of Extra Attack at a delayed rate (akin to Beastmaster).

[Citan]

I'm trying to re-scale wildshape for Moon Druids in a way such that it doesn't become more powerful at low levels (and in fact I'm limiting them to CR 1/2 for levels 2&3), but doesn't trail off as quickly at mid to high levels.

One thing I considered doing is letting stat adjustments from feats and ASI improvements (but NOT the starting statistics of the player) carry over to the Wild Shape form. This would make an interesting decision between, for example, boosting wisdom, and boosting physical stats, while providing a path for the player who wants to be-wildshape focused be more competitive at mid-to-high levels.

Thoughts? Overpowered? Unnecessary?
Hi!
I agree with everything other said unfortunately.
Maybe just this would be enough though?
At the levels where you feel the Moon Druid form doesn't really progress, add a feature that allows him to add Wisdom modifier to its attack. Or...


Balance wise, your idea would probably provide a smoother curve, I grant. At the same time, I don't like the flavor of it; just a personal preference. I like the Druids being specific animals. But, thank you.
I'm in the same mindset. :) I find a bit sad that the Druid wouldn't be rewarded for sticking with a particular form and trying to enhance it to the utmost.
So, you could propose the following: Druid chooses one animal form, for which he can add proficiency bonus to attacks + extra Hit point equal to twice his class level.
He can still wild shape into other forms for RP or scouting but he gets one "signature form" or so...

Note that I'm not so familiar with all the creatures Druid can Wildshape into, so my suggestions would probably require tweaking to be perfectly balanced. :)

[nilshai]

So, you could propose the following: Druid chooses one animal form, for which he can add proficiency bonus to attacks + extra Hit point equal to twice his class level.
He can still wild shape into other forms for RP or scouting but he gets one "signature form" or so...

Note that I'm not so familiar with all the creatures Druid can Wildshape into, so my suggestions would probably require tweaking to be perfectly balanced. :)

The problem with using the Druid's stats is, that Beasts with Multiattack have lower attack bonuses and stuff. It would be safer to increase certain statistics based on the difference between the CR of the chosen form and the CR of the highest possible form.
You are able to Wild Shape into a Mammoth, but want to change into a Giant Spider?
CR 6 - CR 1 = 5
Add 5 to the attack bonus, damage and DCs or something...Multiattack creatures get the damage bonus to one attack.

[Theodoxus]

I've been working on a WS variant, though my initial thought was limited forms, more function - though I understand that people like variety... what I don't get is for any specific CR, you're going to grab the best form for your current environment/fight (and most DMs I've read just handwave what animals the Druid has observed).

I'm a fan of standardized abilities for a given level, mostly because it's just easier on bookkeeping. If all the level 3 moonies have a choice between a DPS form (High hit/damage, low AC) and a tanking form (low hit/damage, high AC, riders) and either can be inconspicuous for stealth purposes...

However, the primary drawback is varied attack forms. From multiattack to poison use, beasts come in a lot of flavors and capabilities... creating a listing of options defeats the simplicity of the build. But, I think if the player is willing to sacrifice depth for ease, they should be rewarded.

I haven't run all the numbers for comparison, so this is just an example, but if the base DPS form had a 12s in Str, Dex and Con, with an AC of 10 and an attack dealing 1d6+str, and then you added your proficiency bonus to each (so at 2nd level, you had 14's all around and an AC of 12 , and an attack of 2d6+Str at +6 to hit. There's no CR, so HP would need to be normalized... not sure the best way for that.
At 5th level, they'd have 15's, an AC of 12 and 3d6+Str attack.
At 20th level, they'd have 18's, an AC of 14 dealing 6d6+Str.

One thing that would be missing is special attacks. Probably something like dividing the damage in half and granting two attacks, then add a pounce or knockdown (generally the most used offensive rider for WS I've seen).
So, the progression would be (based on proficiency bonus): 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 2d8, 3d6

The tanking form would deal less damage. Probably only 1 attack, for the amount listed above. But have a marking ability (granting disad to anyone not attacking the druid) or similar mechanic to keep folks attacking it. Base attributes would be 14 Str, 10 Dex, 14 Con with an AC of 12. Add Proficiency bonus to both attributes and AC, so by 20th level, they'd have a 16 Dex and an AC of 21.

The primary problem I see with this, is, being based on proficiency bonus rather than CR (and thus druid level), you could dip 2 levels in druid and be able to change into better forms and never get better at druid. Might want to disallow MC with this variant...

[Citan]

The problem with using the Druid's stats is, that Beasts with Multiattack have lower attack bonuses and stuff. It would be safer to increase certain statistics based on the difference between the CR of the chosen form and the CR of the highest possible form.
You are able to Wild Shape into a Mammoth, but want to change into a Giant Spider?
CR 6 - CR 1 = 5
Add 5 to the attack bonus, damage and DCs or something...Multiattack creatures get the damage bonus to one attack.
Well then you should ever more agree with my idea. I didn't say "use Druid stats", I said "use proficiency bonus".
Which is +6 end of career. Seems much more balanced and predictable throughout. ;)