Looking for clarification from some (possibly) sane individuals on natures warrior

[Dramiscius]

So in my hunt to expand my wildshape hd limits at epic levels (because, let's face it, colossal forms have redonkulus amounts of HD and even with gear I'm not seeing how useful the feat will be if I can't use it for most of them).

Anyway someone suggested natures warrior to me, basically saying that its ability "Wilding" effectively lets you multiply your potential wild shape hd by the number of prcs you have that grant wildshape.

On one hand it seems a little sketchy, at first I was like "this is retarded and makes no sense" but then I realized that classes like planar shepard and master of many forms all specifically give you wildshape (actually momf gives you improved wildshape, and doesn't specifically state it stacks with druid levels, most people seem to assume it does, which would make sense... but

Wilding (Su): Nature's warrior class levels stack with druid levels (as well as levels in other prestige classes that allow these abilities to stack) to determine wild shape abilities and for wild empathy checks. The nature's warrior's class levels stack with other class levels that grant wild shape for the purpose of determining the maximum Hit Dice of a form. For example, a druid 8/nature's warrior 3 would be considered an 11th-level druid for purposes of wild shape HD, size, type, and frequency (she could assume wild shape form 4/day and could become a Tiny creature). She would add +11 for her class levels (instead of +8) to her wild empathy checks against animals and certain magical beasts.

The example they give isn't much help, since it's only NW + druid, but ps for instance specifically grants you wild shape, and you get improved wild shape from momf which are technically separate entities even if they do work harmoniously with advancing the druids ability to WS.

So since NW stack with druid (as well as levels in other prcs that allow these abilities to stack), does that in fact mean that a druid 5, ps 9, momf 1, nw 5 would add +5 hd for the druid +5 for PS and +5 for the momf leaving you with an effective wildshape hd of 30 before items at lvl 20? This is a rather timid example, but I wanted to keep it simple as it can obviously be extrapolated and abused by adding a single level of other prcs that have the wildshape class ability that's allowed to stack with a druid.

It seems legit by RAW, and i'd argue that even by RAI it's fine (though taking a million single dips to increase the multiplier is lame :P) since they included stuff in the ELH like dragon shape / gargantuan and colossal shape, and I can't think of many colossal forms that are within the HD range of shifting without doing something like this and of course using all the gear.

[One Step Two]

Okay, So I dug up the errata for Complete Warrior that uses the line: "The nature’s warrior’s class levels stack with other class levels that grant wild shape for the purpose of determining the maximum Hit Dice of a form."

However, it does call out classes that grant wild shape, so the improved wild shape of Master of Many forms does not stack.

That said, Master of Many forms errata has the exact same line: "The master of many forms’ class levels stack with other class levels that grant wild shape for the purpose of determining the maximum Hit Dice of a form."

So, using your Example of Druid 5/ Planar Shepherd 9/ Master of Many forms 1/ Nature's warrior 5

Wild shape has:
Druid 5 grants 5 HD and 5hr duration, 1/day
Planar Shepherd 9 grants +9 HD and +9hr Duration, upto 5/day
Master of Many forms 1 grants +2 HD (as it stacks with both previous classes) 6/day
Nature's Warrior 5 grants +10 HD (stacking with Druid and Planar shepard) 7/day (6/day as druid 20, +1 for MoMF)

For a total of 26 HD at level 20, usable 7/day for upto 14 hours, as neither MoMF or Nature's Warrior affects duration


Edit: Something I noticed with the Complete Warrior Errata for Nature's Warror, is that the Errata for the Wildling ability doesn't mention explicitly adding or replacing the rules, is there Errata for the Errata?

[Dramiscius]

Ah cool thanks, yea I've been hunting for other classes now that specifically grant wildshape for that purpose. Momf's off the table then, though I could see it being nicer for a wildshape ranger, in the case of druid I feel like 5 levels of NW is far superior. I considered uncanny trickster as well, but that's 3 levels taken from casting / wildshape for the sole purpose of getting +2 to the nw's wilding ability increasing its multiplier.

So i'll continue my search for classes that grant wildshape (the earlier the better) and see what I can come up with :)

Thanks for the help! :)

[One Step Two]

Ah cool thanks, yea I've been hunting for other classes now that specifically grant wildshape for that purpose. Momf's off the table then, though I could see it being nicer for a wildshape ranger, in the case of druid I feel like 5 levels of NW is far superior. I considered uncanny trickster as well, but that's 3 levels taken from casting / wildshape for the sole purpose of getting +2 to the nw's wilding ability increasing its multiplier.

So i'll continue my search for classes that grant wildshape (the earlier the better) and see what I can come up with :)

Thanks for the help! :)

Well, MoMF stacks with the other classes as well, at epic levels, say 25 as:

Druid 5/Planar Shepard 10/Nature's Warrior 5/Master of Many Forms 5

You'd have 35 HD to transform into, and going to MoMF 10, means you'd have 45 HD at level 30, which now includes gargantuan creatures and dragons.

That said, if you're after a class that grans Wild Shape, depending on how your DM views 3rd party material with official licensing, there's a book from the Dragonlance campaign setting called Holy Orders of the Stars. While published by sovereign press, it's still got a WoTC stamp on it. It contains the class the Wild fury of Chislev. This 10 level PRC grants Wild shape, and specifically calls out that it advances it "...to determine the number of times per day she may change, size of her animal form, and other advancement." thus including HD and duration. It has 10/10 casting, and every even numbered level, gains a bonus feat which she may take regardless of requirements from a set list, but they only work while Wild Shaped.

[Dramiscius]

Well, MoMF stacks with the other classes as well, at epic levels, say 25 as:

Druid 5/Planar Shepard 10/Nature's Warrior 5/Master of Many Forms 5

You'd have 35 HD to transform into, and going to MoMF 10, means you'd have 45 HD at level 30, which now includes gargantuan creatures and dragons.

That said, if you're after a class that grans Wild Shape, depending on how your DM views 3rd party material with official licensing, there's a book from the Dragonlance campaign setting called Holy Orders of the Stars. While published by sovereign press, it's still got a WoTC stamp on it. It contains the class the Wild fury of Chislev. This 10 level PRC grants Wild shape, and specifically calls out that it advances it "...to determine the number of times per day she may change, size of her animal form, and other advancement." thus including HD and duration. It has 10/10 casting, and every even numbered level, gains a bonus feat which she may take regardless of requirements from a set list, but they only work while Wild Shaped.

Hmm, that sounds pretty snazzy much better option then arcane heirophant and having to dip 3 lvls into something else for the lvl 2 arcane spellcasting. It's in the book Holy order of the stars.

So right now preliminary hd I'm looking at would be with druid 5, natures warrior 5, abolisher 1, planar shepard 9, WfoC 5.

Sets me at....



Wild shape effects = HD / size / duration / type ?

Druid 5 + 5 = 10EWL for all wild shape effects
AB 1 + 5 = 6 EWL HD / duration
PS 9 + 5 = 14 EWL HD / size / duration
WfoC 5 + 5 = 10 EWL for all wild shape effects

So overall at 25 we have estimated wild shape level of

HD 40
Duration 40
Size 34
Type 20? (I'm not sure if you gain access to the druids normal wildshaping progressional improvements by this? or if I did would it only count as 10th level druid for that?)

Right now from what I can see insofar as increasing wildshape, options are uncanny trickster 3 to make NW give +2 more to each class resulting in +8 total for hd / duration bringing me up to 48, but at this point Momf might be a better route for that since epic spellcasting isn't a concern and i've got 21st level druid casting as is. and by level 30 that's an additional +20 HD of shifting on top of the extra form types.

That reminds me, I should probably swap out this animal companion for something else since it'll be quite a ways below usefulness, and I don't want it around for rp only to get bug splatted when an aoe hits home.

[eggynack]

I don't really buy this. The text doesn't say that nature's warrior stacks with each instance separately. It just says that it stacks with this wild shape, and also that wild shape. In other words, the three things successfully stack together. To reach that conclusion, consider what would happen if nature's warrior only stacked with wild shape, and didn't stack with MoMF's improved wild shape. In that case, your effective wild shape level for the relevant purposes would be equal to the higher quantity of wild shape gained between MoMF and nature's warrior. That's what not stacking means, and, conversely, stacking means that the levels are parsimonious with each other, and that they apply cumulatively to this result.

Consider leaving behind the world of wild shape, and instead move into the world of bonuses. The text associated with bonuses says, "In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect)..." and that means that that's how this term should be generally applied. Taking a specific example, consider a trio of unnamed bonuses to strength. The first of these bonuses would stack with the second, the second would stack with the third, the first would stack with the third, and all three would stack together (a bonus system that somehow lacks transitivity and compactness is vaguely interesting). In other words, the first item stacks with these two items, and, in fact, all other items, for these purposes. However, this does not mean that you somehow multiply the strength bonus across the number of items. After all, stacking speaks to a combination for cumulative effect, and specifically to the quality a set of traits has that allow them to combine in such a way. The strength bonuses just add together normally. Similarly, the wild shape levels would add normally. They are all allowed to combine for this cumulative effect, but there's nothing in the rules that implies at all that you'd double count anything. They just all add together for this shared benefit.

[One Step Two]

Hmm, that sounds pretty snazzy much better option then arcane heirophant and having to dip 3 lvls into something else for the lvl 2 arcane spellcasting. It's in the book Holy order of the stars.

So right now preliminary hd I'm looking at would be with druid 5, natures warrior 5, abolisher 1, planar shepard 9, WfoC 5.

Sets me at....



Wild shape effects = HD / size / duration / type ?

Druid 5 + 5 = 10EWL for all wild shape effects
AB 1 + 5 = 6 EWL HD / duration
PS 9 + 5 = 14 EWL HD / size / duration
WfoC 5 + 5 = 10 EWL for all wild shape effects

So overall at 25 we have estimated wild shape level of

HD 40
Duration 40
Size 34
Type 20? (I'm not sure if you gain access to the druids normal wildshaping progressional improvements by this? or if I did would it only count as 10th level druid for that?)






In addition to the maths, lets iron out some other details:

Druid 5 Means Wildshape 1/day for 5 hours.

If you then taken Wild Fury of Chislev 5, you're druid 10 in every regards to wild shape, 4/day Large size, 10 HD and 10 hour Duration.

9 levels of Planar shepard Gives you 19 HD and 19 Hours 6/day, but the forms are limited Magical beast (native to your plane, templates and all), and you're able to turn into an elemental or outsider of your chosen plane costing 2 uses per day. (where this gets really snazzy is when you pick an outsider with Alter shape to keep hidden as that outsider without looking like them)

Abolisher 1 is iffy in my opinion though, but it does round you out to 20HD for 20 hours.

At this stage however, you do not get access to Tiny, Plant, Huge, or Elemental (upto 3/day)

Now, Finally the Nature's warrior 5 starts to interact with the rest down the line. First and foremost, it does this:
For the purposes of HD, it adds +20, as you have 4 sources of Wildshape, so HD 40 at level 25 is pretty nifty.

But it does have other interactions, due to how Wild Fury of Chislev and Nature's warrior work with Druid, your wildshape now has Access to Tiny, plant and Huge as a 15th level druid would.

So if you take the last 5 levels of Wild Fury of Chislev, you will also gain the Elemental Wildshape 3/day, upto Huge sized Elemental. With upto 45 HD of creature lasting 25 hours.

Lastly, if you keeping going deeper into Epic and do decide to pick up Master of Many forms, not only do you get the various additional types, such as Ooze, Dragon etc, it itself has a stacking effect to the HD, adding a beefy +4 more HD per level taken. so at the end, by level 40, you should be looking at 85 HD worth of monster you can become.

[Dramiscius]

I don't really buy this. The text doesn't say that nature's warrior stacks with each instance separately. It just says that it stacks with this wild shape, and also that wild shape. In other words, the three things successfully stack together.

To reach that conclusion, consider what would happen if nature's warrior only stacked with wild shape, and didn't stack with MoMF's improved wild shape. In that case, your effective wild shape level for the relevant purposes would be equal to the higher quantity of wild shape gained between MoMF and nature's warrior. That's what not stacking means, and, conversely, stacking means that the levels are parsimonious with each other, and that they apply cumulatively to this result.
[/quote]

True, and the rub lies in that the classes interacting with NW in this particular way, and how you as a dm arbitrate it. I can see valid arguments for either side, and reasons to support those said sides. Also Momf and NW don't stack with each other since the errata (well Momf never did, infact pre errata it didn't stack with druid either).

The master of many forms’
class levels stack with other class levels that grant wild
shape for the purpose of determining the maximum Hit
Dice of a form.

The nature’s warrior’s class levels stack with other class
levels that grant wild shape for the purpose of
determining the maximum Hit Dice of a form.



Consider leaving behind the world of wild shape, and instead move into the world of bonuses. The text associated with bonuses says, "In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect)..." and that means that that's how this term should be generally applied. Taking a specific example, consider a trio of unnamed bonuses to strength. The first of these bonuses would stack with the second, the second would stack with the third, the first would stack with the third, and all three would stack together (a bonus system that somehow lacks transitivity and compactness is vaguely interesting). In other words, the first item stacks with these two items, and, in fact, all other items, for these purposes. However, this does not mean that you somehow multiply the strength bonus across the number of items. After all, stacking speaks to a combination for cumulative effect, and specifically to the quality a set of traits has that allow them to combine in such a way. The strength bonuses just add together normally. Similarly, the wild shape levels would add normally. They are all allowed to combine for this cumulative effect, but there's nothing in the rules that implies at all that you'd double count anything. They just all add together for this shared benefit.

A valid take on the situation, and it was my original view as well when I read about it and immediately went "this is bull****", but then I thought about it for a while and looked at the different classes more to notice the differences in the wording between them (which, is one of 3.5's admitted weaknesses, there's quite a bit of ambiguous and non conformity in how things are written among the variety of splatbooks.).

The difference here being that the strength stat bonus comparison you offered isn't really comparable to this situation, in that you're talking about the 3 untyped +1 bonuses that increase your strength, with really no other way to interpret that then "I get +1 to my strength from these 3 sources increasing it by +3".

Class abilities aren't always as cut and dry, which is why the ambiguous wording prevalent in so much 3/3.5 content gets interpreted differently by different people. Especially when multiple classes grant separate instances of the same abilities, or ability progression between classes varies.

Such as here with the NW, MoMf, and stonespeaker guardian (goliath specific) are all I've found so far with similar verbiage regarding wildshape progression, while the vast majority of others specify druid wild shape only.

[eggynack]

T
The difference here being that the strength stat bonus comparison you offered isn't really comparable to this situation, in that you're talking about the 3 untyped +1 bonuses that increase your strength, with really no other way to interpret that then "I get +1 to my strength from these 3 sources increasing it by +3".
You say that it's different, but how is it different? It seems pretty much the same to me. In particular, it looks like one could fairly append your nature's warrior text to strength bonuses, and you'd still be reflecting the text as it exists.

[Dramiscius]

You say that it's different, but how is it different? It seems pretty much the same to me. In particular, it looks like one could fairly append your nature's warrior text to strength bonuses, and you'd still be reflecting the text as it exists.

True, you could in theory append all the bonuses to be reflected numerically in the level progression chart, but they aren't. I'm saying it's easier to see why people get various interpretations when it's not so hard lined within the text since it isn't like that. Caster levels for instance, they get listed both in the progression chart as +1 at each level and specified exactly that taking this class grants progression in spell casting for your chosen arcane / divine / psionic class.

[eggynack]

True, you could in theory append all the bonuses to be reflected numerically in the level progression chart, but they aren't. I'm saying it's easier to see why people get various interpretations when it's not so hard lined within the text since it isn't like that. Caster levels for instance, they get listed both in the progression chart as +1 at each level and specified exactly that taking this class grants progression in spell casting for your chosen arcane / divine / psionic class.
I don't really mean anything about tables or whatnot. I'm saying you could take a modified version of the nature's warrior text, stick it onto some arbitrary unnamed strength bonus item, and that item would operate in exactly the way it does now. Because the text you're citing already basically exists for that item. Are you saying that the strength bonus provided by this item doesn't stack with some arbitrary other item with the same bonus, as well as with further items that allow this same stacking? Because all these things the text says about nature's warrior's wild shape, by what I'm seeing, applies equally to that unnamed bonus. What in the text is telling you that wild shape stacking in this particular case is fundamentally different from strength stacking, or just about any other type of numerical stacking?

[Troacctid]

Eggynack has it right. All three classes would stack together to determine your wild shape. That just means you add them all up.

[Dramiscius]

I don't really mean anything about tables or whatnot. I'm saying you could take a modified version of the nature's warrior text, stick it onto some arbitrary unnamed strength bonus item, and that item would operate in exactly the way it does now. Because the text you're citing already basically exists for that item. Are you saying that the strength bonus provided by this item doesn't stack with some arbitrary other item with the same bonus, as well as with further items that allow this same stacking? Because all these things the text says about nature's warrior's wild shape, by what I'm seeing, applies equally to that unnamed bonus. What in the text is telling you that wild shape stacking in this particular case is fundamentally different from strength stacking, or just about any other type of numerical stacking?

It depends on how you look at the classes in question, in this instance they appear to get wild shape as its own stand alone ability on a per class basis, while they also add to increasing/benefiting from the druids wild shape ability itself. From this point of view, I see NW and its ilk increasing the effective individual wild shape for each of said classes / prcs. The druids wild shaping then in turn gains the increased benefit of the particular classes / prcs by adding their effective wild shape level onto its own in whatever capacity each class benefits the druid's wild shape class feature.

That said, I can see how others might not agree with / think this is wrong, but sadly I'm not aware of anything that might clarify that. (though I know each person might indeed be resolute in their stance and clear in their opinions.)

[eggynack]

It depends on how you look at the classes in question, in this instance they appear to get wild shape as its own stand alone ability on a per class basis, while they also add to increasing/benefiting from the druids wild shape ability itself. From this point of view, I see NW and its ilk increasing the effective individual wild shape for each of said classes / prcs. The druids wild shaping then in turn gains the increased benefit of the particular classes / prcs by adding their effective wild shape level onto its own in whatever capacity each class benefits the druid's wild shape class feature.

That said, I can see how others might not agree with / think this is wrong, but sadly I'm not aware of anything that might clarify that. (though I know each person might indeed be resolute in their stance and clear in their opinions.)
But it doesn't look like nature's warrior has any kind of second standalone element. There's just wilding, and that's the sole source of their wild shape. No advancement or anything. I just don't see where the ambiguity is here. The notion of something stacking with some other thing doesn't connote any sort of multiplicative effect based on how many things you stack with. It's a relationship between any two game objects that lets them work together.

If I'm reading you correctly here, your thinking is that the levels from nature's warrior stack multiplicatively because the things they're stacking onto are different. In other words, druid offers a strength bonus, MoMF offers a dexterity bonus, and nature's warrior kinda adds one of each that stacks with both separately, and nature's warrior only started adding that dexterity bonus when it became clear that there were different things being added to. The problem with such a claim is that you're trying to add all these classes to a single number, effective wild shape level for the purposes of HD, and the numbers of the different classes add together for that purpose. You don't get to just disjoint out some quality that you're trying to advance, just because the wild shape advancements advance different things. You wind up with wild shape that is a lot of different levels for a lot of different things, but all these classes are stacking to the greatest extent possible.

Actually, I'll return to the item example. You have a strength item, a dexterity item, and a strength and dexterity item, all three with unnamed bonuses. All three items have their bonuses stack with each other, just like these levels do. However, you don't consolidate the strength and dexterity item into one discrete bonus, and then apply it twice just because it stacks with both the strength item and the dexterity item. You just add up all the bonuses, because the bonuses can do this just fine. You're thinking of this wild shape advancement as this one object that cannot be divided, but it's absolutely not that. If anything should tell you that, it's the fact that these lesser wild shape advancements exist at all. That you can have "wild shape" which advances all of these things over here, and "wild shape", which only has a small subset of those things. It's not just that this implies that wild shape can mean multiple things. It's that it implies that the underlying bonuses are the discrete particles of this system. You can sum them all together in one list, and the elements that say they stack do so, and the ones that don't fail to do so.

Separately, does nature's warrior actually give a boost to HD? That'd presumably be under the generic "wild shape abilities", but it seems that the text clarifies that as referring to size, type, and frequency. Y'know, the stuff in the stat block. This whole discussion might be irrelevant for this purpose on that basis.

[Dramiscius]

But it doesn't look like nature's warrior has any kind of second standalone element. There's just wilding, and that's the sole source of their wild shape. No advancement or anything. I just don't see where the ambiguity is here. The notion of something stacking with some other thing doesn't connote any sort of multiplicative effect based on how many things you stack with. It's a relationship between any two game objects that lets them work together.

Correct, they don't actually get wild shape, after following the errata wilding itself is actually a little less useful then its original wording which increased HD + abilities.



Original - Wilding (Su): Nature's warrior class levels stack with druid levels (as well as levels in other prestige classes that allow these abilities to stack) to determine wild shape abilities and for wild empathy checks.

vs

errata - The nature’s warrior’s class levels stack with other class levels that grant wild shape for the purpose of
determining the maximum Hit Dice of a form.


It's a pretty substantial nerf, making the NW not work to increase anything but wild shape the hit dice cap associated with it, but whether or not you use the errata is up to each dm since you won't find that errata included in almost any sites listing class information.

Sorry, veering off topic. The original argument I was presented with bringing up this question to begin with was that wilding, because it lacked the specification other of "stacks with druid class levels to determine wildshape etc" that post errata it gave a blanket increase to any and all classes that have "wild shape" as an individual bonus.

Class 1, 2, and 3 have wildshape, so under this assumption when taking it, each level is adding +1 to WS HD to each class on the stack.

If I'm reading you correctly here, your thinking is that the levels from nature's warrior stack multiplicatively because the things they're stacking onto are different. In other words, druid offers a strength bonus, MoMF offers a dexterity bonus, and nature's warrior kinda adds one of each that stacks with both separately, and nature's warrior only started adding that dexterity bonus when it became clear that there were different things being added to. The problem with such a claim is that you're trying to add all these classes to a single number, effective wild shape level for the purposes of HD, and the numbers of the different classes add together for that purpose. You don't get to just disjoint out some quality that you're trying to advance, just because the wild shape advancements advance different things. You wind up with wild shape that is a lot of different levels for a lot of different things, but all these classes are stacking to the greatest extent possible.

Actually, I'll return to the item example. You have a strength item, a dexterity item, and a strength and dexterity item, all three with unnamed bonuses. All three items have their bonuses stack with each other, just like these levels do. However, you don't consolidate the strength and dexterity item into one discrete bonus, and then apply it twice just because it stacks with both the strength item and the dexterity item. You just add up all the bonuses, because the bonuses can do this just fine. You're thinking of this wild shape advancement as this one object that cannot be divided, but it's absolutely not that. If anything should tell you that, it's the fact that these lesser wild shape advancements exist at all. That you can have "wild shape" which advances all of these things over here, and "wild shape", which only has a small subset of those things. It's not just that this implies that wild shape can mean multiple things. It's that it implies that the underlying bonuses are the discrete particles of this system. You can sum them all together in one list, and the elements that say they stack do so, and the ones that don't fail to do so.

I get what you're saying, and at first followed the same line of thought until I considered how much monster HD begins to balloon out at epic levels (everything balloons out, epics a mess and we all know it). While this observation of broken systems doesn't confirm anything, it helped convince me of the ideas potential validity.

And the errata seemed to lend more credibility to the line of thinking in my eyes because it removed the ability for nw to grant its increase towards a class like momf (which pre errata, didn't increase anyones wildshape but its own, and post errata uses the same wording as nw, so within this idea they stand separately not effecting one another.)




Separately, does nature's warrior actually give a boost to HD? That'd presumably be under the generic "wild shape abilities", but it seems that the text clarifies that as referring to size, type, and frequency. Y'know, the stuff in the stat block. This whole discussion might be irrelevant for this purpose on that basis.

Pre errata it was specified as "HD" and "abilities" (apparently determined separately, but i see it vary among wild shape granting prcs too so not a big surprise, abolisher's wild shape for instance only grants an increase to HD + duration and nothing else with its wild shape, while daggerspell shapers wild shape doesn't increase HD at all).

Post errata it's HD only unfortunately, but which version gets used it up to the dm.

[eggynack]

It's a pretty substantial nerf, making the NW not work to increase anything but wild shape the hit dice cap associated with it, but whether or not you use the errata is up to each dm since you won't find that errata included in almost any sites listing class information.
I think you're reading the errata incorrectly in this case. The text in the errata isn't replacing existing text. When that happens, the errata explicitly lays it out as a replacement, or otherwise wholly defines the ability in a new fashion. Instead, I think that the errata is merely giving a quality of wilding, one that does not in any way usurp the qualities of wilding that already exist. I said earlier that nature's warrior may not stack for the purpose of HD, but the errata makes explicit that "abilities" captures HD as an element. Or, y'know, it's just another quality outside the previously present parameters of the ability. Either way.


And the errata seemed to lend more credibility to the line of thinking in my eyes because it removed the ability for nw to grant its increase towards a class like momf (which pre errata, didn't increase anyones wildshape but its own, and post errata uses the same wording as nw, so within this idea they stand separately not effecting one another.)
I just read through the errata, and it doesn't look like NW and MoMF fail to stack at all. MoMF stacks with wild shape, and NW stacks with things that stack with wild shape, and stacking has the symmetric property (pretty sure this is provable from a logical reading of the text), so MoMF stacks with NW just fine. And, critically, if they didn't stack, then you wouldn't get this crazy multiplicative effect. That doesn't even make sense. If they don't stack, then it's like getting an enhancement bonus to strength, and then getting a competence bonus to strength, and then getting a second competence bonus to strength. You don't get some multiplicative effect from that. You just get the higher competence bonus.

Actually, I can just do this directly. " If the modifiers to a particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus and worst penalty applies." We can pretty simply extrapolate that to the inner workings of wild shape bonuses. There are two possible outcomes here. Either everything stacks, in which case they combine for cumulative effect, or some elements do not stack, in which case only the best bonus of the non-stacking bonuses apply. I don't know where you're finding this in-between place where things start explosively multiplying, but it doesn't seem like there's support for it in the text. And if there is no such support, then there is no such ambiguity.

Edit: Even more basic. This:

that post errata it gave a blanket increase to any and all classes that have "wild shape" as an individual bonus.
How is that a supported reading of what stacking means? Or what not-stacking means? Where is it coming from?

[Dramiscius]

I think you're reading the errata incorrectly in this case. The text in the errata isn't replacing existing text. When that happens, the errata explicitly lays it out as a replacement, or otherwise wholly defines the ability in a new fashion. Instead, I think that the errata is merely giving a quality of wilding, one that does not in any way usurp the qualities of wilding that already exist. I said earlier that nature's warrior may not stack for the purpose of HD, but the errata makes explicit that "abilities" captures HD as an element. Or, y'know, it's just another quality outside the previously present parameters of the ability. Either way.

I just read through the errata, and it doesn't look like NW and MoMF fail to stack at all. MoMF stacks with wild shape, and NW stacks with things that stack with wild shape, and stacking has the symmetric property (pretty sure this is provable from a logical reading of the text), so MoMF stacks with NW just fine. And, critically, if they didn't stack, then you wouldn't get this crazy multiplicative effect. That doesn't even make sense. If they don't stack, then it's like getting an enhancement bonus to strength, and then getting a competence bonus to strength, and then getting a second competence bonus to strength. You don't get some multiplicative effect from that. You just get the higher competence bonus.

You're correct, it's an addendum. I did misread the text for NW, last night I'd of swore I saw it mention HD in the original book. So that would mean NW enhances momf but not the other way around, ie NW increases the effective wild shape rating level for momf by 1 per level of NW, but since momf's wild shape never stacked/increase/boost anything but itself prior to the errata it still wouldn't stack/increase/boost NW now as Wilding isn't Wild shape as specified in the errata text. The effect isn't negated, but you do lose out on applying momfs bonus to nw's.

And I get what you're saying using the strength bonuses as an example, but we're looking at things through a different lens. End of the day it depends on how your DM/GM views it.

Do they view all classes that list the wild shape ability (whilst also increasing the druids wild shaping power level based on their effective class level) as individual entities regarding the class ability? IE all benefiting from the wider ranging enhancements of a class that boosts the wild shape class ability, rather then just the "druids" wild shape class ability? (ex, my abolisher, lion of talisad, planar shifter, Wfoc all have their own weaker wildshaping available, but instead we use the druids because they collectively enhance it after providing their own services that can be individually modified.)

Or do they simply view them as you put it stat bonuses to a single unique ability, and all of the aforementioned classes are just different static bonuses provided by the classes in question to enhance the druids wild shape ability?

Personally I find it to be an interesting and valid view, but wholeheartedly understand why others would not, or even if they did wouldn't allow it to operate in such a way mechanically.

[eggynack]

And I get what you're saying using the strength bonuses as an example, but we're looking at things through a different lens. End of the day it depends on how your DM/GM views it.
You're saying that we're looking at things through a different lens, but what's the impetus for doing so? Why would the rules for this form of stacking be somehow special and different? There's no reason I can see that we'd treat wilding differently from any ordinary strength bonus.


Do they view all classes that list the wild shape ability (whilst also increasing the druids wild shaping power level based on their effective class level) as individual entities regarding the class ability? IE all benefiting from the wider ranging enhancements of a class that boosts the wild shape class ability, rather then just the "druids" wild shape class ability? (ex, my abolisher, lion of talisad, planar shifter, Wfoc all have their own weaker wildshaping available, but instead we use the druids because they collectively enhance it after providing their own services that can be individually modified.)
The problem is, it doesn't matter if they're all individual entities or not. You could say that NW stacks with druid, and then it completely separately stacks with MoMF, and then it separately stacks with abolisher. But, at the end of the day, saying that two things "stack" doesn't just mean that you add the numbers together, and then do it again whenever something else says it stacks with it. What stacking means is specifically the quality that two bonuses are parsimonious. If everything stacks, then you form a neat tower. If some things do not stack, then each possibility for a non-stacking element forms a new theoretical tower, and you get only the tallest tower. The term stacking doesn't connote some bonus which you can apply to multiple things. It's a relation, not a function.



Or do they simply view them as you put it stat bonuses to a single unique ability, and all of the aforementioned classes are just different static bonuses provided by the classes in question to enhance the druids wild shape ability?
What's interesting is that, in some ways, it really doesn't work like that either. You don't just have one wild shape level, and then all these things add numbers to it. Instead, wild shape is essentially subdivided into a number of lesser wild shape qualities, like uses/day, size, HD, and so forth, and those separate bonuses stack together to form a variety of effective wild shape levels for those different purposes.


Personally I find it to be an interesting and valid view, but wholeheartedly understand why others would not, or even if they did wouldn't allow it to operate in such a way mechanically.
Look, it could well be interesting, but without some sort of actual mechanical backing, there's no apparent reason why it'd be valid.