[3.5] Big Bad Wolf

[Thurbane]

So, just a hypothetical for me as a DM.

Using a regular Wolf (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/wolf.htm) as the base, how tough can you make it using templates etc. without changing its type from Animal (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#animalType).

This should be entirely internal to the animal itself, and not rely on other characters (i.e. not relying on it being an Animal Companion or similar).

This is purely a hypothericcal challenge: in reality, the CR would likely be artificially inflated against what kind of threat the wolf actually represents.

To begin with, the Wolf can be advanced up to 6HD and large size.

I like the Warbeast template, but it's a bit too reliant on someone training the animal to apply it for this challenge.

I'd like to stick to official, non-dragon, non 3rd party, non PF, non Kalamar/Ravenlift/Dragonlance sources please.

Thoughts? Ideas?

Cheers - T

[Eldan]

Difficult. Almost any template you can put on an animal makes it a magical beast.

Titanic is a good start: 25 HD, Gargantuan size, area attacks, trample, massive physical stat bonuses.
https://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/titanic.shtml
(https://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/titanic.shtml)

Woodling doesn't technically change the type, though it gives plant traits. It's also just generally a bit weird, but it does give SLAs based on wisdom.
https://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/woodling.shtml

[Saintheart]

- It can be made Titanic (MM 2).
- It can be infused with Faezress (Underdark).
- It can be Dungeonbred (Dungeonscape).
- It can be Dark (Tome of Magic).
- And then since it's a Dark creature and therefore likely evil Animal, it can be Sanctified (BoED).
- By advancing to 6HD it picks up another feat. Pick Cleave. Once Titanic, its BAB is greater than +5, its size is Large+, and it therefore now qualifies to enter the War Hulk prestige class and take all 10 levels.

[Tzardok]

Paragon from the Epic Level Handbook doesn't change the creature type. The same goes for Magebred from Eberron, but that one probably suffers from the same problems as Warbeast.

[AvatarVecna]

"not rely on other characters"

does this include the actions of deities? Beast Of Xvim is tempting.

[Biggus]

Paragon from the Epic Level Handbook doesn't change the creature type.

This would be a great idea, but it gives +15 Int, and


no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal

[AvatarVecna]

Paragon and Beast Of Xvim both would change Int to 3+ if applied to an animal. Both have been updated to 3.5, and neither was updated to include such a type change. It is within reason to read this as a case of Specific Trumps General.

Wolf, not advanced

Elite Array

Template: Titanic Creature
Template: Paragon Creature
Template: Woodling
Template: Beast Of Xvim



Size/Type
Gargantuan Animal


HD
26d8+754 (962 hp)


Init
+11


Speed
Speed 150 ft


AC
66 (+9 dex, +12 insight, +12 luck, +27 natural, -4 size), touch 39, flat-footed 57


BAB/Grapple
+19/+77


Attack
Epic: Unarmed +61 melee (12d6+41) or Bite +61 melee (6d6+51) or Slam +61 melee (4d6+51)


Full Atack
Epic: Unarmed +61/+56/+51/+46 melee (12d6+41) and Bite +56 melee (6d6+30)


Space/Reach
20 ft / 15 ft


SA
Frightful Presence, Feed, Smite Good, Spell-Like Abilities, Trample (3d8+51), Trip


SQ
Darkvision 60 ft, DR 10/epic, DR 10/silver and magic, DR 5/slashing, ER 10 (Cold, Fire), Fast Healing 20, Fear Immunity, Low-Light Vision, Plant Traits, Poison Immunity, Scent, SR 56, Vulnerability to Fire


Saves
Fort +44, Ref 34, Will +28


Abilities
Str 53, Dex 29, Con 45, Int 22, Wis 30, Cha 25


Skills
Bluff +31, Diplomacy +21, Disguise +31*, Intimidate +35, Hide +48*, Listen +49, Move Silently +48*, Spot +49, Survival +49


Feats
Combat Reflexes, Deflect Arrows, Great Fortitude, Improved Natural Attack (Unarmed Strike), Improved Unarmed Strike, Leadership, Quick Reconnoiter, Superior Unarmed Strike, Track



Epic Feats
Epic Leadership, Exceptional Deflection, Infinite Deflection


Environment
Temperate Forests


Organization
Lone Wolf


CR
31


Treasure
-


Alignment
LE


Advancement
Beast Of Xvim :smallwink:


LA
-



I'm sure most of these skills and feats could be tossed for more useful ones. I went with what I thought was funny or mildly fitting for the Big Bad Wolf idea. Leadership is the cheese choice, though: Beast Of Xvim's "Feed" is an "eat to gain HD" ability that lacks both a maximum cap on their HD increase, and a built-in method of losing the HD (both of which are problems the Dusk Giant has to contend with, for example). As such, a cultish cohort leading people to become followers to the Big Bad Wolf is all but feeding them directly into a meat grinder. We don't eat the Cohort because recruiting cohorts takes a penalty per previous cohort death, and the cohort we have without further penalties is lvl 21, which is...desirable. Plus, eating followers gets a penalty, but it's just a binary "killed/didn't kill" rather than a -1 per follower bloating your belly. This potential for infinite growth arguably means Beast Of Xvim is doing more work than Paragon is, in the long run.

EDIT: If the Int argument is accepted, but a god's gift is not, we can drop BoX without much regret. Outside of the infinite improvement, it's not giving us much. The main difference will be the Cha +4 it was giving - if you still want that lvl 21 cohort, you're gonna need to shift the base scores assigned to Dex and Cha. This will keep Cha the same, and lower Dex by 4 points, affecting a whole bunch of stats.

[Tzardok]

This would be a great idea, but it gives +15 Int, and

If I were the GM, I'd rule that paragon animals wouldn't get the Int bonus.

Edit: No, forget what I said. Paragon grants spell-like abilities; ruling a change from animal to magical beast is more logical.

[Biggus]

If I were the GM, I'd rule that paragon animals wouldn't get the Int bonus.

Fair enough. It's definitely a GM call whether it can applied to animal.


Paragon and Beast Of Xvim both would change Int to 3+ if applied to an animal. Both have been updated to 3.5, and neither was updated to include such a type change. It is within reason to read this as a case of Specific Trumps General.


It's not an entirely unreasonable reading. On the other hand, the wording of the animal type is very specific and definite:


no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal

[Gorthawar]

Mineral warrior only adds the earth subtype but keeps the animal type.

[ShurikVch]

Besides the all aforementioned, there are also:
Ba'traa Creature (https://web.archive.org/web/20130531110913/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/bs/20040829a)
Blood Ghoul (https://web.archive.org/web/20070817233050/http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/WE_Ghostwalk.zip)
Chameleon Creature (Underdark)
God-Blooded (Monster Manual V) - likely, Kord-Blooded
Magebred (Eberron Campaign Setting)
Magic-Infused (https://web.archive.org/web/20130531124332/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/al/20041222a)
Plague Carrier (https://web.archive.org/web/20090604100723/http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=fr/pg20011219b)
Voidmind Creature (Monster Manual III)
Warbeast (Monster Manual II)

Also, how about the Unique NPC Abilities (Dungeon Master's Guide II)?



It's not an entirely unreasonable reading. On the other hand, the wording of the animal type is very specific and definite:

no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal
Note: Ooze (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#oozeType) and Vermin (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType) types are listed as Mindless, yet both have examples with Int score
Also, even the Animal type itself says:

An animal possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).
Thus - limitation can't be that strict
(After all, 3.0 adventures already has Animals with Int above 2)

[AvatarVecna]

Fair enough. It's definitely a GM call whether it can applied to animal.



It's not an entirely unreasonable reading. On the other hand, the wording of the animal type is very specific and definite:

That's not how that works. The "specific" in "specific trumps general" is not determined by how clear-cut or unambiguous the rule is, it is determined by how circumstantial it is.

[Biggus]

Note: Ooze (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#oozeType) and Vermin (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType) types are listed as Mindless, yet both have examples with Int score

Those entries both contain the words "if the vermin/ooze has an Intelligence score. However, most vermin/oozes are mindless and gain no skill points or feats". They acknowledge that there are exceptions. There's nothing similar in the animal entry.



(After all, 3.0 adventures already has Animals with Int above 2)

The wording was different in 3.0, the animal type said "All animals have Intelligence scores of 1 or 2". In 3.5 it was changed to "no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal".


That's not how that works. The "specific" in "specific trumps general" is not determined by how clear-cut or unambiguous the rule is, it is determined by how circumstantial it is.

You've misunderstood my point. To be fair, I should probably have used a different word than "specific" but I don't know another one that means the same thing.

The wording of the 3.5 animal type is "no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal" (emphasis mine). Writing it this way excludes any possibility that an animal can have more than 2 Int: having less than 3 Int is part of the definition of animal. As mentioned above, this wording was changed from 3.0: I can't see any reason to do so other than to make the point unequivocal.

[ShurikVch]

Those entries both contain the words "if the vermin/ooze has an Intelligence score. However, most vermin/oozes are mindless and gain no skill points or feats". They acknowledge that there are exceptions. There's nothing similar in the animal entry.



The wording was different in 3.0, the animal type said "All animals have Intelligence scores of 1 or 2". In 3.5 it was changed to "no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal".



You've misunderstood my point. To be fair, I should probably have used a different word than "specific" but I don't know another one that means the same thing.

The wording of the 3.5 animal type is "no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal" (emphasis mine). Writing it this way excludes any possibility that an animal can have more than 2 Int: having less than 3 Int is part of the definition of animal. As mentioned above, this wording was changed from 3.0: I can't see any reason to do so other than to make the point unequivocal.
Then what's about the Riding Dog (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#onyxDog) with Int 8?

[AvatarVecna]

You've misunderstood my point. To be fair, I should probably have used a different word than "specific" but I don't know another one that means the same thing.

The wording of the 3.5 animal type is "no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal" (emphasis mine). Writing it this way excludes any possibility that an animal can have more than 2 Int: having less than 3 Int is part of the definition of animal. As mentioned above, this wording was changed from 3.0: I can't see any reason to do so other than to make the point unequivocal.

It only excludes such possibilities if it has absolute authority on the subject over other sources. I understand why you're reading it as being utterly unambiguous and beyond argument - writing it that way is an indication of designer intent - but that's simply not how the rules work. Lots of rules are written using very absolute language, and yet still have exceptions within the rules. Things are written using absolutist language because the alternative is writing every mechanic in a vague "unless something else says it can beat this" and then writing the mechanics that beat it as "this explicitly beats that other rule". The whole point of "Specific Trumps General" is so that they can save on ink: they write two absolute, unambiguous rules that contradict each other, while having it clear which one takes precedence when both apply.

The fact that this particular rule feels like it's written to be even more unambiguous than most other rules? Meaningless, mechanically. It is not the sole rule in the system that is immune to exceptions, just because you wish it to be. It is 100% mechanically true, except in circumstances where something else says it isn't. Just like every other general rule.

[Telonius]

Not sure if this would work, but Half Golem. It only changes the type on a failed save. The problem is the -6 to Int and Cha. You'd need to boost those scores (probably using other templates) to at least 7 each for it not to kill the thing.

If we could start as a Dire Wolf (seems like that would make sense for Big and Bad), you could use the Horrid template.

EDIT: Regarding animal intelligence, I think that's got to be referring to just the base score of a typical member of the species. If you cast Fox's Cunning on an animal, it wouldn't change the type.

[Thurbane]

Thanks for the great suggestions everyone.

Let's assume that for my purposes, the Int of the wolf should not go above 2.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Enhance the wolf's hide as an illithid skin graft and further enhance it as a headband of intellect +6. The wolf retains the animal type, and its inherent Int is still 2, just with an enhancement bonus, but it can function as though it had an Int of 8, which is plenty to work with. Now start piling on the class levels. Wolf 2/monk 1/psywar 17 with Tashalatora, maybe? Ardent 18? I'd suggest druid, but the wolf can't make the verbal or somatic components for spells without at least 1 magic item and a feat.

[Tzardok]

I just noticed that Chameleon creature and Voidmind don't change the creature type. Wonderful. A camouflaged, tentacled, titanic wolf controlled by mindflayers.

By the by, Multiheaded isn't updated to 3.5; it still mentions that animals become beasts. Most GMs will propably rule that in 3.5 it would make animals into magical beasts, but some may instead say no type change. Do with this what you want.

[AvatarVecna]

Thanks for the great suggestions everyone.

Let's assume that for my purposes, the Int of the wolf should not go above 2.

Titanic Creature and Woodling are still solid, giving epic HD and a pile of plant immunities. Elite Array is still useful for screwing around with attributes, although without +15 across the board, it's gonna be harder to qualify for some of the neat epic feats. Not going above Int 2, not being allowed to change type, and not being a product of somebody else's actions really limits things though. Most templates that can apply to animals either change just type, improve Int, or are the result of meddling by other creatures (Half-Golem, Voidmind, God-Blooded, Warbeast, Dungeonbred Creature, Magebred Animal, etc). I'd assume that class levels are similarly off the table. Can't benefit from ritual sacrifice since that kinda requires intent. Probably can't benefit from magic items, especially since they have no treasure by default.

[ben-zayb]

Lolth-Touched is mechanically not reliant on other creatures, but by flavor is blessed by Lolth.

[Biggus]

Then what's about the Riding Dog (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#onyxDog) with Int 8?

It doesn't actually say that it's an animal.


It only excludes such possibilities if it has absolute authority on the subject over other sources. I understand why you're reading it as being utterly unambiguous and beyond argument - writing it that way is an indication of designer intent - but that's simply not how the rules work. Lots of rules are written using very absolute language, and yet still have exceptions within the rules. Things are written using absolutist language because the alternative is writing every mechanic in a vague "unless something else says it can beat this" and then writing the mechanics that beat it as "this explicitly beats that other rule". The whole point of "Specific Trumps General" is so that they can save on ink: they write two absolute, unambiguous rules that contradict each other, while having it clear which one takes precedence when both apply.

The fact that this particular rule feels like it's written to be even more unambiguous than most other rules? Meaningless, mechanically. It is not the sole rule in the system that is immune to exceptions, just because you wish it to be. It is 100% mechanically true, except in circumstances where something else says it isn't. Just like every other general rule.

Yes, I understand all that. But the point in this case is that you said "it is within reason to read this as a case of Specific Trumps General". What I'm arguing is that in a case where something could possibly be read as specific trumps general but doesn't actually specifically say it is (as many, many abilities do) and the designers have gone out of their way to write the general rule in a way that says there are no exceptions, it makes more sense to assume it doesn't.

[ShurikVch]

It doesn't actually say that it's an animal.
It doesn't say it isn't:

creature with the same properties as a riding dog except that it is endowed with an Intelligence of 8, can communicate in Common, and has exceptional olfactory and visual abilities. (It has the scent ability and adds +4 to its Spot and Search checks.) It has 60-foot darkvision, and it can see invisibility.
If it was Construct, Magical Beast, or Outsider - we would need to recalculate its BAB, maybe hp, maybe saves, and maybe also skill ranks; and to add the corresponding Type traits

[ShurikVch]

If OP is OK with d20 Modern, then Menace Manual have Half-Fraal template, and Apocalypse - Mutated Creature...

[Elenian]

Fine. We just need enough int reducing templates to keep our int under 3 even after Paragon's +15. Lost is -6 (magic of incarnum), as is Half-Golem (no type change until we fail a will save). Feral is -4, Mineral Warrior -2. I'm sure there are others. Titanic Paragon Feral Half-Golem Woodling Mineral Warrior Dark Wolf should do as a starter...

[Beni-Kujaku]

Fine. We just need enough int reducing templates to keep our int under 3 even after Paragon's +15. Lost is -6 (magic of incarnum), as is Half-Golem (no type change until we fail a will save). Feral is -4, Mineral Warrior -2. I'm sure there are others. Titanic Paragon Feral Half-Golem Woodling Mineral Warrior Dark Wolf should do as a starter...

If you really want to go that way, use everything you can, then put 9 levels of wizard, scribe a scroll of Feeblemind, then affect itself with it to go back to 2 Int. However, I don't think that's what Thurbane is looking for, surprisingly. "should not go above 2" doesn't mean "could go above 2, but must go back to 2 or less in the end".

Apart from that, I second Shurikvch's templates and DMG2 NPC abilities. If the wolf is strong enough (and already Kord-blooded), it may also have a divine rank 0 (higher would require worshippers). It could have gone to most magical locations in complete scoundrel.

Finally, you have lots of feats and HD due to being Titanic. You can take Fey Heritage, Fey Legacy, then a few item creation feats, and go to town with items not requiring any specific spell or requiring spells that you already have as SLAs due to Fey Legacy. For example, you could have a helm of telepathy, a tan bag of tricks, some unguent of timelessness (there has to be some cheese you can do with that); some psychic poison oil, a cloak of charisma, some goggles of following (I assume Wilderness Lore became Survival). And if you somehow get access to useable limbs, or use Wyrmgrafter to craft a smashing tail, then take Prehensile Tail, you can craft weapons, like that one from Heroes of Battle that renders enemies shaken each time it strikes.