Tome of Beasts Wildshaping into Bastet Temple Cat

[nickl_2000]

First of all, I think Wildshaping may be the most confusing and controversial trait in the Players Handbook. There are so may different possibilities and I realize that the final answer for everything is "Ask you DM" because each adventure is different.

So here's the newest one. One of the creatures in the Tome of Beasts and called the Bastet Temple cat (small beast). Through creative background writing and a friendly DM, I have access to this creature as a Wildshaped form. Before you go completely nuts, he said that it was way overpowered as a CR1 creature and bumped it to CR2 for the sake of wildshaping, so while still powerful level 6 is decent.

I've got a few questions that come up from this particular creature that I would like to know what you would do in your campaigns.

1) The temple cat can speak languages (Common, Nurian, and Sylvan). If it can speak languages, does that mean that I would be able to cast spells from my Druid list that have a Verbal only component? It seems like it would still not be allowed as the specific "You can't cast spells" text in the Druid class description would prevent this. Didn't know if it was worth a shot to try and bring up with the DM though. Also, since my character can't speak Nurian I would assume that I wouldn't be able to speak it in cat form.

2) The Cat has innate spellcasting which allows it to cast several spells including Guidance at will, 3/day of Charm Person and Cure Wounds, and 1/day of Enhance Ability of Cat's Grace only. The cat's spell casting stat is charisma with a DC of 14, would that DC be replaced with my characters DC using the Charisma stat (in this case 8 + proficiency -2 due to my lovely 6 charisma), would I use the Cat's DC from the book, or would I use my Druid's normal spell DC? The same applies for casting cure wounds while wildshaped, do I get the cat's natural +4 to the spell, my -2 to the spell, or my wisdom +4 from Druid spell casting?

[DragonSorcererX]

1) The Giant Eagle also speaks (because Tolkien, I think).

2) You can use the Fireball and the other innate stuff from the Pit Fiend when you True Polymorph/Shapechange into it? If so, I would say yes (because 5e is about rullings and not rules, look at Chris Perkins's sessions).

[nickl_2000]

1) The Giant Eagle also speaks (because Tolkien, I think).

My reading is that the Giant Eagle Understands Common, which a druid could do in any wildshaped form. The Temple cat actually can speak languages

[DivisibleByZero]

1) The temple cat can speak languages (Common, Nurian, and Sylvan). If it can speak languages, does that mean that I would be able to cast spells from my Druid list that have a Verbal only component? It seems like it would still not be allowed as the specific "You can't cast spells" text in the Druid class description would prevent this. Didn't know if it was worth a shot to try and bring up with the DM though. Also, since my character can't speak Nurian I would assume that I wouldn't be able to speak it in cat form.

You can't cast spells.
You said it yourself.
If you want to cast spells while wildshaped, and you also want to follow the rules (and not houserule it) then you need 18 levels of druid.

[nickl_2000]

You can't cast spells.
You said it yourself.
If you want to cast spells while wildshaped, and you also want to follow the rules (and not houserule it) then you need 18 levels of druid.

So that normal player inclination of trying to make yourself as powerful as possible while "bending" the rules (although I was picturing Healing word, so it was for the good if the party, I swear!). I figured as much. Better for someone here to shoot me down than me to bring it up with the DM where he can throw a d4 at me and possibly poke out an eye.

[Joe the Rat]

I'd say "beast" might not have been the right descriptor for a sentient, talking, spellcasting creature. Monstrosity perhaps. Maybe celestial.

For the question at hand, the line in question is

You can’t cast spells, and your ability to speak or take any action that requires hands is limited to the capabilities of your beast form.
By text, it doesn't say that you can't cast spells because of the forms limitations. A sensible interpretation, but not a strictly RAW one. RAW gives no actual explanation, just the fact.

The innate spellcasting of the form is part of the creature's game statistics, so it should be available to you.

(This also means a sorcerer multiclass for subtle spell wouldn't help either.)



Now, for what I'd do as a Ruling would be to present you an either-or. Either you get the creature's spellcasting ability, or can do your verbal-only spells.

[nickl_2000]

I'd say "beast" might not have been the right descriptor for a sentient, talking, spellcasting creature. Monstrosity perhaps. Maybe celestial.

A good point, but the Tome of Beasts is a published work and until there is an errata the wording specifically states that it's a beast.



Bred for Magic. Temple cats of Bastet are thought by some
to be outsiders, but they are a terrestrial breed, created by the
priesthood through generations of enchantment.

...

BASTET TEMPLE CAT
Small beast, chaotic neutral








The innate spellcasting of the form is part of the creature's game statistics, so it should be available to you.



Which DC would I use for this then?

[BiPolar]

I'd say "beast" might not have been the right descriptor for a sentient, talking, spellcasting creature. Monstrosity perhaps. Maybe celestial.

For the question at hand, the line in question is

By text, it doesn't say that you can't cast spells because of the forms limitations. A sensible interpretation, but not a strictly RAW one. RAW gives no actual explanation, just the fact.

The innate spellcasting of the form is part of the creature's game statistics, so it should be available to you.

(This also means a sorcerer multiclass for subtle spell wouldn't help either.)



Now, for what I'd do as a Ruling would be to present you an either-or. Either you get the creature's spellcasting ability, or can do your verbal-only spells.

I'd read this as only one option: you get the innate spellcasting of the Temple Cat. Druid rules are clear in that you cannot cast in your wildshape (until level 18 druid). Just because this beast has the ability to talk, does not mean that it overrides that clause.

[DivisibleByZero]

By text, it doesn't say that you can't cast spells because of the forms limitations. A sensible interpretation, but not a strictly RAW one. RAW gives no actual explanation, just the fact.

The innate spellcasting of the form is part of the creature's game statistics, so it should be available to you.

Now, for what I'd do as a Ruling would be to present you an either-or. Either you get the creature's spellcasting ability, or can do your verbal-only spells.

Technically, as per the rules, you can't cast spells. Full stop. So even in this case where the beast can innately cast spells, as a druid wildshaped into that beast you wouldn't be able to.
I'm not saying it would be unreasonable to allow it, as you are using the beast's stat block.

As for your "either-or" scenario, the either-or would be:
Either you follow strict RAW and you can't cast any spells at all, -OR- you follow what most people would assume to be the RAI and you can cast the innate spells native to the beast.
In either case, your own verbal only spells are still not allowed, unless you want to houserule it.

[JackPhoenix]

A good point, but the Tome of Beasts is a published work and until there is an errata the wording specifically states that it's a beast.

It's 3rd party book, though. Just because someone printed it and wants money for it doesn't make it any more valid then my (theoretical) homebrewed "beast" that uses the stats of Tiamat, is (supposedly) CR 1/8 and which I could publish (and demand money for) on Dungeon Master's Guild. You said so yourself, your GM already noted that it's too powerful for CR 1, despite being in a published work. It's up to him ultimately, but IMO it makes no sense as a beast.

5e works differently, there are smarter beasts, and beast type isn't defined, but one of the defining features of animals in 3e was Int <3. If it had Int score 3 or better, it was not an animal, even if the higher intelligence was the only thing separating it from it's less smart kin (stuff like Awaken actually changed creature's type)

[nickl_2000]

It's 3rd party book, though. Just because someone printed it and wants money for it doesn't make it any more valid then my (theoretical) homebrewed "beast" that uses the stats of Tiamat, is (supposedly) CR 1/8 and which I could publish (and demand money for) on Dungeon Master's Guild. You said so yourself, your GM already noted that it's too powerful for CR 1, despite being in a published work. It's up to him ultimately, but IMO it makes no sense as a beast.

5e works differently, there are smarter beasts, and beast type isn't defined, but one of the defining features of animals in 3e was Int <3. If it had Int score 3 or better, it was not an animal, even if the higher intelligence was the only thing separating it from it's less smart kin (stuff like Awaken actually changed creature's type)

Doesn't Adventure League even allow 1 extra book, wouldn't Tome of Beasts be considered on of those? Or do they only allow 1 extra book that's been published by Wizards?


As a side note, from my character history given to the DM

Also, there is a thinly veiled attempt to get access to the Bastet Temple cat as a wild shape as soon as a I reach level 2. I can change the story pretty easily to something else if you tell me that it's just to powerful for this adventure.

So, it's not like I even would have felt bad or complained if the cat was disallowed

[DivisibleByZero]

Doesn't Adventure League even allow 1 extra book, wouldn't Tome of Beasts be considered on of those? Or do they only allow 1 extra book that's been published by Wizards?

It has to be an official WotC product.

[Ursus the Grim]

Technically, as per the rules, you can't cast spells. Full stop. So even in this case where the beast can innately cast spells, as a druid wildshaped into that beast you wouldn't be able to.


I hate agreeing with DBZ, but he's definitely right in this case. Wild Shape makes no distinctions between spells from your shape and spells from the Beast. You might have spellcasting in your stat block, but you can't use it.

RAI (from the latest podcast with Crawford) would probably also be that you can't use the Beast's spells either. He was very clear about them wanting to avoid a druid casting spells from Beast form through any circumstances before level 18.

Just go for the Crag Cat instead.

[nickl_2000]

It has to be an official WotC product.

thanks, never played AL so I don't know the rules other than what I have seen on here, and thanks for the other readings and opinions.




I hate agreeing with DBZ, but he's definitely right in this case. Wild Shape makes no distinctions between spells from your shape and spells from the Beast. You might have spellcasting in your stat block, but you can't use it.

RAI (from the latest podcast with Crawford) would probably also be that you can't use the Beast's spells either. He was very clear about them wanting to avoid a druid casting spells from Beast form through any circumstances before level 18.

Just go for the Crag Cat instead.

Interesting, I will mention that to him next time and see if he wants to kill off the spell casting entirely for the critter. If I lose it, I lose it oh well I just have to shift out to heal party members.

I did see the crag cat at one point and found it super interesting, but there is absolutely no way that it would fit into the setting and backstory. I'll get what I get from here and live with it. Frankly I don't even have any of the bears yet and my never get them, despite all the guides saying that they are the best critters at early levels.