Teleporting Dryad

[Blue Wizard]

Ok, so I asked my DM this question: "Suppose a dryad got the ability to teleport, could be an item, could be innate, how doesn't matter. Now, can she take her tree with her?"

He thought about it for a minute, then replied, "Since she is the tree, one could argue that she could take it with her. One could also argue that she MUST take it with her."

So I thought I'd throw it open to the playground for a bit. My DM has no firm opinion, so surely there are those in this forum who'd like to analyze this, as this is almost certainly going to set the precedent for a LOT of spells used in our campaign, as due to player shenanigans, there are going to be thousands of spell-using dryads about. So, should they be able to cast the spell Fly and you see this humongous oak soaring through the air?

Gaseous Form? She and her tree turn to mist, a mist that works its way into every crack of a building, then reforms?

Show me your ideas. They could be a powerful influence on my DM's opinion.

[Silva Stormrage]

Absolutely not RAW or RAI. While certainly an interesting idea the dryad is not the tree itself.


Tree Dependent (Su)
Each dryad is mystically bound to a single, enormous oak tree and must never stray more than 300 yards from it. Any who do become ill and die within 4d6 hours. A dryad’s oak does not radiate magic.


Bound to a tree. They are not the tree itself. Thats why if you kill a dryad the tree doesn't explode or wither away.

This precedent would be somewhat weird as well as it would imply targeting the tree with anything would also damage the dryad.

So ya RAW it doesn't work but it's a cool idea. A custom item or template could allow it to work fine though.

[Blue Wizard]

D&D has lots of forms of mystical bonds, a wizard's familiar is one example. The specifics of this form of mystical binding are not detailed any further in that sample. That represents a lack of information, not a rebuttal.

However, folklore and mythology, from which D&D draws the bulk of its material, does. And those sources are clear that dryads are the spirits of trees. Previous editions agree on this. Even the Kingdoms of Kalamar (an authorized D&D product) confirm - dryads are the spirits of their trees. So I am pretty sure we are clear on RAI.

I do realize that in strict RAW games, a lack of information is a rebuttal. But lots of things, like vampires, suffer a shocking lack of detail on any specifics as to their mythological roots, as presented in the game manuals. You are just expected to know that a vampire behaves in ways that are typical of vampires.

Anyway, not worth arguing over. My DM already takes the same point of view I do - dryads are the spirit of their trees (which is why he wouldn't let me transform their trunks into treants, darn it!).

So the basis of the question stands. In this instance, even if in none other, the premise stands and is sound.

[Silva Stormrage]

Oh sorry I must of misread the question. i thought you were asking on wether or not the trick works.

If it's automatically assumed it works and any spell cast on the dryad affects her tree?


Teleporting into the sky and using the tree as an artillery drop. Cast DR/hardening spells on yourself before hand so your tree doesn't get destroyed by the drop.

Polymorph and similar spells double your effectiveness if you can get the tree to actually attack things. You could use this to disguise it though if you need to enter a city. Cast polymorph on yourself and disguise the tree as a sleeping human. Also works for easy mobility if you need to move the tree without teleporting everywhere.

[Ruethgar]

Considering that Acorns of Far Travel were made so that Dryads could leave their trees, It seems implied that they can’t topically take them along. And regardless of the RL lore of Dryads, there are always allowances for simpler and more reasonable gameplay.

If you Acorned and mundane traveled several miles away, then cast dimension door, from where do you teleport? Which part of ‘yourself’ teleports? Since half of yourself is out of range of the caster half of yourself does the spell fail?

[Bronk]

Bound to a tree. They are not the tree itself. Thats why if you kill a dryad the tree doesn't explode or wither away.


Considering that Acorns of Far Travel were made so that Dryads could leave their trees, It seems implied that they can’t topically take them along. And regardless of the RL lore of Dryads, there are always allowances for simpler and more reasonable gameplay.

Totally agree. Also, Splinterwaifs wouldn't exist if the dryad died completely when the tree was killed.



He thought about it for a minute, then replied, "Since she is the tree, one could argue that she could take it with her. One could also argue that she MUST take it with her."

So I thought I'd throw it open to the playground for a bit. My DM has no firm opinion, so surely there are those in this forum who'd like to analyze this, as this is almost certainly going to set the precedent for a LOT of spells used in our campaign, as due to player shenanigans, there are going to be thousands of spell-using dryads about. So, should they be able to cast the spell Fly and you see this humongous oak soaring through the air?

Gaseous Form? She and her tree turn to mist, a mist that works its way into every crack of a building, then reforms?

So, if the DM has already ruled that a dryad and her tree are literally one being, then they have more sameness than a pair of dvati twins. Teleporting would be an issue, first because a dryad would count as a much larger creature for the spell, one medium creature and one huge or larger creature (or maybe just one super large creature) because their trees have to be so big. The other issue would be that wherever you went, a giant tree would show up. If you teleport into a space that would be fine for a medium creature but unsafely small for a gargantuan oak tree (most indoor places), one or both parts of the dryad tree combo would suffer the scrambling mishap damage. That could be double damage, too!

Also, it's almost as if they have 'share spells' like with a familiar, only more so. I agree that under this ruling you would have flying trees, and if you used a shape changing spell the tree should disappear from wherever it is and merge with the dryad's body. But unlike 'share spells', this would also be the case with a non spell effect like Wild Shape. Plus, which one would merge into the other? You'd have to decide if you went by proximity to the originating effect, or by mass, or maybe they end up changed but somewhere in the middle as their bodies physically move and merge? What if something prevents them from moving? Do they act like an ooze or something with gaseous form?

Then, you'd have to decide if the tree was still an object, or, because it was part of a dryad, had some portion of the dryad's hit points and other vulnerabilities. That would relate to the mishap damage from teleport too...

[Lapak]

I don't think the basic premise flies. The dryad is able to walk around without carrying the tree because she is (part of) the spirit in a separate physical form. Teleport only affects the physical form; you can teleport someone's body whose soul is Soul Trapped or Magic Jarred and the soul doesn't go anywhere. Or you can move the soul container, and the body doesn't get moved. (Either might have bad effects, just as it might for the dryad, but it doesn't physically drag the other half along.)

[Bronk]

Hmm, that would really mess up dryad groves too, if the trees just up and left sometimes. The locals would all be in a tizzy... topiary guardians would be left in the lurch, thorns sent to protect them would get lost, and the oaken defenders would throw their tentacles up in frustration!

[Nifft]

I like this idea of tree commuters.

Maybe cities will have special grassy areas reserved for visiting dryads to park their trees -- a park park, if you will.

[Darrin]

The tree is a separate living organism. More specifically, a plant. The target line of the spell says, "You and touched objects or other touched willing creatures." There may be some argument over whether the tree counts as an "object" or a "creature". Plants without stat blocks are sometimes treated as objects by the rules, and sometimes they are treated as creatures. Either way, it's possible that the druid could bring the tree along. However, size may be a limiting factor. If it counts as an object, then the dryad has a weight limit based on their max load (Str 10, so 100 lbs). If it counts as a creature, then you may need to decide if the tree counts as large (counts as two medium creatures) or huge (counts as four medium creatures).

Outside of acorn of far travel, there may be other methods for a dryad to move her tree around. Smokey confinement (Complete Mage) might work. A modified bag of holding with some combination of a Ring of Sustenance, Necklace of Adaptation, Decanter of Endless Water, or a Wind Pipe (Stormwrack) could provide the dryad with some mobility.

[liquidformat]

So some comments and questions while we are on this topic.

First, what happens to the dryad if their tree is destroyed?
I have always thought of the dryads tree like a lich's Phylactery, so when the tree is destroyed the dryad is no longer within range of it and therefore dies in 4d6 hours.

Second, by RAW or RAI is there any reason liveoak or awaken can't be cast on the dryad's tree?
If it can then it seems to me that the standard dryad would have their tree permanently become a Treant and most dryads would be bound to oak treants rather than just plain oak trees.

Third, if an oak tree is magical enough to form a dryad spirit why isn't it magical enough to form its own spirit and become a treant?

[Darrin]

Third, if an oak tree is magical enough to form a dryad spirit why isn't it magical enough to form its own spirit and become a treant?

As per Treebeard, it takes a *LONG* time for trees to decide something. I would guess that many of the older trees would decide that all that walking around stuff is much more suited to younger saplings.

[liquidformat]

As per Treebeard, it takes a *LONG* time for trees to decide something. I would guess that many of the older trees would decide that all that walking around stuff is much more suited to younger saplings.

But a treant not moving around would still be a treant. Also they seem pretty spritely when they get pissed off...

[Daefos]

The tree is a separate living organism. More specifically, a plant. The target line of the spell says, "You and touched objects or other touched willing creatures." There may be some argument over whether the tree counts as an "object" or a "creature".

Doesn’t seem like there’d be much of an argument.

This type comprises vegetable creatures. Note that regular plants, such as one finds growing in gardens and fields, lack Wisdom and Charisma scores (see Nonabilities, above) and are not creatures, but objects, even though they are alive.
I’ll concede that there may be other spells or effects that might let a tree count as a creature (an Awaken spell comes to mind), but by default? Trees are absolutely objects.

[Doctor Awkward]

Doesn’t seem like there’d be much of an argument.

I’ll concede that there may be other spells or effects that might let a tree count as a creature (an Awaken spell comes to mind), but by default? Trees are absolutely objects.

Originally I came here to say exactly this.
However...


Ok, so I asked my DM this question: "Suppose a dryad got the ability to teleport, could be an item, could be innate, how doesn't matter. Now, can she take her tree with her?"

He thought about it for a minute, then replied, "Since she is the tree, one could argue that she could take it with her. One could also argue that she MUST take it with her."

So I thought I'd throw it open to the playground for a bit. My DM has no firm opinion, so surely there are those in this forum who'd like to analyze this, as this is almost certainly going to set the precedent for a LOT of spells used in our campaign, as due to player shenanigans, there are going to be thousands of spell-using dryads about. So, should they be able to cast the spell Fly and you see this humongous oak soaring through the air?

Gaseous Form? She and her tree turn to mist, a mist that works its way into every crack of a building, then reforms?

Show me your ideas. They could be a powerful influence on my DM's opinion.


So the dryad from Dungeons & Dragons is based largely on the popular perception of dryads which comes from Greek myth, specifically the hamadryad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamadryad). As noted in the link, hamadryads are a specific type of dryad, which in Greek myth are a specificy type of nymph. I bring this up because Greek myth is not definitive on the nature of dryads, with some believing that they are the tree, or rather the physical embodiment of the spirit of the tree.

With that being said, the biggest difference between the two is that is that Greek myth draws no distinction between the divinity of nature and the divinity of the gods, while nature spirits in D&D are, in general, something else entirely ("creatures with supernatural abilities and connections to nature or to some other force or place"). Rather than being associated with, or agents of, deities specifically tied to nature, fey creatures in D&D instead worship them. A full 99% of plot threads involving dryads specifically revolve around threats to their particular tree, and their existence being dependent upon the particular tree is very strongly implied if not outright anywhere stated. In spite of these differences, nothing in the description of dryads directly contradicts Greek myth, and it's probably not unreasonable to treat the tree a dryad is bonded to as being a part of the dryad.

On the third hand, there are many practical considerations that will have to be ruled on. How does a tree stay alive that has been uprooted to fly through the air or materialize in a room? It could be enough of a headache that the best answer might still be, "leave it be."

[Getsugaru]

Why not just be bound to a tree made from living wood (or whatever that Eberron material is called) and then convert it into an airship? Or a ring? Or put a ring gate on the tree and carry the other with you? Or just dip an Acorn of Fartravel in some Ungent of Timelessness so that it never expires? I know none of these are direct answers to your questions, but I just wanted to mention that there are many workarounds for the Dryad dependancy that can be interesting and fun. Sorry if this post is useless.

[liquidformat]

Doesn’t seem like there’d be much of an argument.

I’ll concede that there may be other spells or effects that might let a tree count as a creature (an Awaken spell comes to mind), but by default? Trees are absolutely objects.

It is only an object with no wisdom or charisma if you believe that the tree and the dryad are two separate beings, if a dryad is instead the personification of the tree's magical soul then I would argue it isn't an object. To an extent this goes back to my earlier question as to what the tree is to the dryad.

We could put it in the same realm as a Phylactery then in a sense it is a physical object that houses the dryad's soul. That would have some interesting consequences especially for the origins of lich.

Also interestingly the dryad entry doesn't say that the tree a dryad is bound to even has to be alive or that they have to stay within range of the entire tree or just a part. Technically making a staff out of a tree branch and carrying it with you wouldn't go against RAW of staying within 400' of the tree. Similarly if you PAO the tree into something else is it still a tree for purposes of the dryad?

[Nifft]

Why not just be bound to a tree made from living wood (or whatever that Eberron material is called) and



Tree Dependent (Su)

Each dryad is mystically bound to a single, enormous oak tree and must never stray more than 300 yards from it. Any who do become ill and die within 4d6 hours. A dryad’s oak does not radiate magic.

Presumably because that magical substance is not an oak tree.

Changing Dryads to use non-oak trees seems like a pretty good idea, but it's not what the rules currently say.

[Bronk]

First, what happens to the dryad if their tree is destroyed?
I have always thought of the dryads tree like a lich's Phylactery, so when the tree is destroyed the dryad is no longer within range of it and therefore dies in 4d6 hours.


They die, but they also might become a splinterwaif (Dragon 307).



Second, by RAW or RAI is there any reason liveoak or awaken can't be cast on the dryad's tree?


Awaken for sure, but probably not Liveoak. It has a bunch of unlikely conditions attached to it, plus it has to be cast on a 'huge' tree. Dryad trees are 'enormous', so, verbiage aside, probably bigger than that.



If it can then it seems to me that the standard dryad would have their tree permanently become a Treant and most dryads would be bound to oak treants rather than just plain oak trees.

Well, standard dryads don't have druid magic, so that's one thing, plus, I don't think Liveoak would work, so that leaves Awaken. If they manage to cast the spell themselves, that would probably work out for them... They'd have a 16HD gargantuan or 32HD colossal tree-construct as their friend. However, if they get someone else to cast it, suddenly their tree becomes friends with someone else, which would be, at the least, a huge bummer for them.



Third, if an oak tree is magical enough to form a dryad spirit why isn't it magical enough to form its own spirit and become a treant?

Treants have their own plant creature thing going on. Aside from that, 3.5 really could have used more fey support!

[Crake]

There may be some argument over whether the tree counts as an "object" or a "creature".

There is actually 0 argument over it. By dnd's own definition, to qualify as a creature you must have a wis and cha score, and you can't have one without the other. Wisdom being defined as the ability to percieve the world around you, and charisma (in it's most basic form) as the ability to differentiate yourself from not yourself. Without those two things (which trees do not have) you are an object. Objects CAN have other ability scores; I know certain objects are documented as having str and dex scores (notably various traps), and I imagine a tree would have a con score, though I've not ever heard of an object having an intelligence score WITHOUT also having a wis and cha score (intelligent items have all 3, and are actually considered constructs for resolving effects).

As for the main topic of this thread though: Ultimately, there's no real precedence for what your DM has done, so nobody can really give you clear ideas of how it would work. Since your DM is the one who made this ruling (which I and many others strongly disagree with), he would be the one who you should be asking these questions to, as even if we were to give you answers, that doesn't mean he will agree with them at all.