Can a Character Acquire Swarm Traits Through Wild Shape?

[Doctor Despair]

S W A R M S

Setting aside the possibility of using True Mind Switch on a hive mind or something similar, I wanted to revisit a question with the Playground: can a character use wild shape to acquire swarm traits?

First and foremost, we should settle whether or not a character can use wild shape to become a swarm. The RAI of it seems fairly settled with generic wild shape: wild shape lets you become a single creature, and swarms are, by the game's own admission, "dense masses of Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creatures that would not be particularly dangerous in small groups, but can be terrible foes when gathered in sufficient numbers." However, the passage goes on to say:

For game purposes a swarm is defined as a single creature with a space of 10 feet—gigantic hordes are actually composed of dozens of swarms in close proximity. A swarm has a single pool of Hit Dice and hit points, a single initiative modifier, a single speed, and a single Armor Class. It makes saving throws as a single creature.

So for the purposes of the game, a swarm is a single large creature. Swarm is also a subtype, and there are absolutely animal swarms. An 8th level druid can turn into a large animal, so by RAW a rat or bat swarm should be a valid selection for the druid, right? Or, with Child of Winter (ECS) & Vermin Shape (ECS), a spider, centipede, or locust swarm?

Well, let's hold our swarms of miniature horses (KoK: Dangerous Denizens: The Monsters of Tellene). Apart from the RAI argument of whether a swarm should count as a single creature or not, there are other things that might imply a vanilla druid cannot do this. First and foremost: two other classes explicitly grant the ability to become swarms. The City-Shape Druid ACF changes a number of ways in which wild shape works:

Spoiler: City-Shape

Show

The ability to transform into an animal is the hallmark of the druid, so much so that even many urban druids choose to retain it. Some, however, prefer the ability to blend and maneuver within the streets of the city, sacrificing size for a wider range of forms.

Class: Druid.

Level: 5th.

Replaces: If you select this class feature, you do not gain all the aspects of standard wild shape (except for the ability to wild shape into an elemental at high levels, which remains unchanged).

Benefit: At 5th level, the druid gains the ability to transform into an animal, as per the standard wild shape ability. She can do this once a day to start with, but the frequency of her wild shapes increases as per the standard druid advancement chart.

At 8th level, the druid does not gain the ability to transform into Large animals. Instead, she may transform into Small and Medium vermin, as well as animals.

At 11th level, the druid gains the ability to transform into Tiny animals and vermin.

At 12th level, the druid does not gain the ability to transform into plant creatures. Instead, she may transform into an animal- or vermin-based swarm, so long as it fits within her standard wild shaping Hit Die limits.

At 15th level, the druid does not gain the ability to transform into Huge animals. Instead, she gains the ability to transform into Large animals and vermin.

Special: The Natural Spell feat functions with city-shape just as it does standard wild shape.

At the 12th level, the City-Shape Druid gains the ability to transform into an animal or vermin-based swarm with no size restriction. If druids could do this normally, why would it be gated behind an ACF?

Of course, there were other changes to the ACF; notably, it enables the druid to wild shape into vermin. Perhaps the writers thought it would be thematic for the vermin-based ACF to achieve the ability to become a swarm four levels after the generic druid... The same argument can be made, however, based on the other source of wild shape-into-swarm: the Vermin Keeper (Underdark):

Spoiler: Vermin Keeper

Show

Vermin Form (Su): Beginning at 1st level, a vermin keeper can use his wild shape ability to assume a vermin form. Starting at 1st level, he can turn himself into any Small vermin. As he gains vermin keeper levels, the diversity of forms available to him increases. He can become a Tiny vermin at 2nd level, a Medium vermin at 4th level, a Diminutive vermin at 5th level, a Large vermin at 7th level, a Fine vermin at 8th level, and a Huge vermin at 9th level.

Swarm Form (Su): At 10th level, a vermin keeper can use his wild shape to assume the form of any vermin swarm (any swarm whose constituent creatures are of the vermin type).

If having the ability to wild shape into a large vermin form were sufficient to become a vermin swarm, then why would the Vermin Keeper's capstone ability allow it to do something it supposedly had already been able to do from level 7? I suppose there is technically a different functionality. If we willfully ignore the game definition of a swarm as a large creature, then the capstone should remove that size limitation (letting you become a swarm of NI size, where NI is equal to the size of the plane on which you currently reside). Setting aside that dysfunctional reading, it seems like at least some of the writers were convinced that wild shape wasn't capable of transforming creatures into swarms without specific text allowing you to do so.

I suppose that leads us to posit our first question:

1. In your opinion, can a character with the ability to wild shape into large animals and/or large vermin use that ability to wild shape into a swarm?

With that said, there are certainly at least two unassailable ways to use wild shape to become a swarm. That leaves us with an uncomfortable situation though: neither of these abilities, to my eye, confer swarm traits (i.e., the entire reason to be a swarm). Consider the text of wild shape:

Spoiler: Druid

Show

Wild Shape (Su)
At 5th level, a druid gains the ability to turn herself into any Small or Medium animal and back again once per day. Her options for new forms include all creatures with the animal type. This ability functions like the alternate form special ability, except as noted here. The effect lasts for 1 hour per druid level, or until she changes back. Changing form (to animal or back) is a standard action and doesn’t provoke an attack of opportunity. Each time you use wild shape, you regain lost hit points as if you had rested for a night.

Any gear worn or carried by the druid melds into the new form and becomes nonfunctional. When the druid reverts to her true form, any objects previously melded into the new form reappear in the same location on her body that they previously occupied and are once again functional. Any new items worn in the assumed form fall off and land at the druid's feet.

The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with.

A druid loses her ability to speak while in animal form because she is limited to the sounds that a normal, untrained animal can make, but she can communicate normally with other animals of the same general grouping as her new form. (The normal sound a wild parrot makes is a squawk, so changing to this form does not permit speech.)

A druid can use this ability more times per day at 6th, 7th, 10th, 14th, and 18th level, as noted on Table: The Druid. In addition, she gains the ability to take the shape of a Large animal at 8th level, a Tiny animal at 11th level, and a Huge animal at 15th level.

The new form’s Hit Dice can’t exceed the character’s druid level.

At 12th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a plant creature with the same size restrictions as for animal forms. (A druid can’t use this ability to take the form of a plant that isn’t a creature.)

At 16th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a Small, Medium, or Large elemental (air, earth, fire, or water) once per day. These elemental forms are in addition to her normal wild shape usage. In addition to the normal effects of wild shape, the druid gains all the elemental’s extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities. She also gains the elemental’s feats for as long as she maintains the wild shape, but she retains her own creature type.

At 18th level, a druid becomes able to assume elemental form twice per day, and at 20th level she can do so three times per day. At 20th level, a druid may use this wild shape ability to change into a Huge elemental.

• Wild shape lasts for 1 hour/druid level.
• Using it requires you to have sufficient HD and familiarity to master the new form.
• Using or ending wild shape is a standard action that does not provoke AOOs.
• When you use it, your gear melds into your new form.
• When you use it, your HP recovers as if you had rested for the night.
• When you use it, you lose the ability to speak and gain the ability to communicate with creatures of your "grouping."
• Apart from the above (for our purposes), it works as alternate form.

So we refer to Alternate Form...

Spoiler: Alternate Form (Su)

Show

A creature with this special quality has the ability to assume one or more specific alternate forms. A true seeing spell or ability reveals the creature’s natural form. A creature using alternate form reverts to its natural form when killed, but separated body parts retain their shape. A creature cannot use alternate form to take the form of a creature with a template. This ability works much like the polymorph spell, except that the creature is limited to the forms specified, and does not regain any hit points for changing its form. Assuming an alternate form results in the following changes to the creature:

• The creature retains the type and subtype of its original form. It gains the size of its new form. If the new form has the aquatic subtype, the creature gains that subtype as well.
• The creature loses the natural weapons, natural armor, and movement modes of its original form, as well as any extraordinary special attacks of its original form not derived from class levels (such as the barbarian’s rage class feature) movement modes, and extraordinary special attacks of its original form.
• The creature gains the natural weapons, natural armor, movement modes, and extraordinary special attacks of its new form.
• The creature retains the special qualities of its original form. It does not gain any special qualities of its new form.
• The creature retains the spell-like abilities and supernatural attacks of its old form (except for breath weapons and gaze attacks). It does not gain the spell-like abilities or supernatural attacks of its new form.
• The creature gains the physical ability scores (Str, Dex, Con) of its new form. It retains the mental ability scores (Int, Wis, Cha) of its original form. Apply any changed physical ability score modifiers in all appropriate areas with one exception: the creature retains the hit points of its original form despite any change to its Constitution.
• Except as described elsewhere, the creature retains all other game statistics of its original form, including (but not necessarily limited to) HD, hit points, skill ranks, feats, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses. The creature retains its hit points and save bonuses, although its save modifiers may change due to a change in ability scores.
• The creature retains any spellcasting ability it had in its original form, although it must be able to speak intelligibly to cast spells with verbal components and it must have humanlike hands to cast spells with somatic components.
• The creature is effectively camouflaged as a creature of its new form, and it gains a +10 bonus on Disguise checks if it uses this ability to create a disguise.
• Any gear worn or carried by the creature that can’t be worn or carried in its new form instead falls to the ground in its space. If the creature changes size, any gear it wears or carries that can be worn or carried in its new form changes size to match the new size. (Nonhumanoid-shaped creatures can’t wear armor designed for humanoid-shaped creatures, and viceversa.) Gear returns to normal size if dropped.*

*This last part is in disagreement with Wild Shape, so is obviated.

Most notably for us:

• The creature retains its type and subtype, and does not gain that of the form it is wild shaping into (with the exception of aquatic creatures' subtype).
• The creature gains the extraordinary special attacks of the new form (e.g. disease, poison, wounding, distraction).
• The creature retains the special qualities of its original form. It does not gain any special qualities of its new form.

Now, swarm traits are listed among the special qualities for swarms. If you don't gain the special qualities of your new form, and you don't gain the subtypes of your new form, it would stand to reason that you wouldn't gain swarm traits. However, in terms of in-game logic, it seems entirely ridiculous to me that you could become a swarming horde of creatures, yet not inherit any of the physical properties of being a swarm. I'd imagine an adventurer with a sword moving to make a normal weapon attack against a wild shaped rat swarm (which a normal swarm would be immune to) and just somehow managing to skewer dozens of the things into a makeshift shish kabob every time... Swarm traits seem like they really ought to have been made a natural ability, and yet they were designated as a special quality (which, as far as I'm aware, shoehorns them into being extraordinary, spell-like, or supernatural). This leads me to my second question:

2a. In your opinion, does a character who uses a game-legal method to wild shape into a swarm (such as, but not necessarily limited to, Vermin Keeper or City-Shape Druid) gain the swarm traits?

With that said, it's quite possible the RAW is just not on the side of the would-be wild-shapers. Fortunately for them, there are some means a character can use to circumvent the normal mechanics of wild shaping: Enhance Wild Shape (Spell Compendium), and Master of Many Forms (Complete Adventurer).

Spoiler: Enhance Wild Shape

Show

(Spell Compendium, p. 82)

Transmutation
Level: Druid 4,
Components: V, S,
Casting Time: 1 minute
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 hour/level

You call upon the primordial energies of nature to fill you with the raw power of nature. A feral feeling grows within you, seeking release.

This spell infuses your wild shape ability with magical energy, magnifying and enhancing its power. The type of enhancement must be chosen at the time the spell is cast and cannot be changed once the spell is in effect. The next time you activate your wild shape ability (during the duration of enhance wild shape), this spell enhances your new form in the way you selected. The enhancement to your wild shape remains as long as you stay in that form (or until the spell's duration expires) but does not apply to your next wild shape form. If you do not activate your wild shape ability during the duration of enhance wild shape, the spell has no effect.

You select one of the following enhancements when you cast this spell.

• Assume the form of a plant with your next wild shape.
  
• Gain the extraordinary abilities of the new form.
• The new form assumed is stronger than normal and gains a +2 bonus to Strength.
• The new form assumed is more agile than normal and gains a +2 bonus to Dexterity.
• The new form assumed is healthier than normal and gains a +2 bonus to Constitution.

A druid can be affected by more than one enhance wild shape spell at a time, but a different wild shape enhancement must be chosen each time.

Spoiler: Master of Many Forms

Show

Extraordinary Wild Shape (Ex): Starting at 7th level, a master of many forms gains the extraordinary special qualities of any form she assumes with wild shape.

Both of these methods independently allow a wild shape-user to take on the extraordinary qualities of their wild shape form. Again, I feel like swarm traits should be natural abilities, yet they are listed under special qualities (suggesting they are ex), and they are gained by merit of a subtype, leaving things all kinds of confusing. This leads me to my third question:

2b. In your opinion, would either Extraordinary Wild Shape or Enhance Wild Shape allow a character to use wild shape to gain swarm traits?

Thank you so much for any thoughts or clarification you can offer!

[Saintheart]

1. No.

2a. No.

2b. No.

Spoiler: In conclusion

Show

[Doctor Despair]

1. No.

2a. No.

2b. No.

Spoiler: In conclusion

Show

I personally agree with you on #1, but would you care to elaborate on #2 and #3?

[Gruftzwerg]

I agree that the swarm traits should be the main selling point of shaping into a swarm. But by raw, none of these give you the traits (special qualities) by default.

Imho the entire type-subtype system in 3.5 bears some logical problems. It would have been much easier if swarms (and undead..) would be just a subtype (that you could gain on top of your regular type and traits) instead of making it a separate type for itself. Finally those things should be given out under specific situations like its been done with the aquatic subtype. Sadly this is not the chase... The idea of types and subtypes is imho a very good one, but they failed to use it correctly as logically intended..


Extraordinary Wild Shape & Enhance Wild Shape both give you the swarm traits. The traits are Special Qualities and that is defined as either EX,SLA or SU. With the definitions of EX,SLA & SU we can safely exclude SLA & SU since the traits obviously aren't magical abilities and thus default to EX.

Sadly the Special Qualities line doesn't include NA (Natural Abilities) as option. Imho it would make more sense since the swarm traits result from the natural form of swarms.

___


Welcome to the messy parts of 3.5... ^^

[Saintheart]

I personally agree with you on #1, but would you care to elaborate on #2 and #3?

You called for opinions, there was no prerequisite that they had to be good ones

[Doctor Despair]

You called for opinions, there was no prerequisite that they had to be good ones

I agree that the swarm traits should be the main selling point of shaping into a swarm. But by raw, none of these give you the traits (special qualities) by default.

Imho the entire type-subtype system in 3.5 bears some logical problems. It would have been much easier if swarms (and undead..) would be just a subtype (that you could gain on top of your regular type and traits) instead of making it a separate type for itself. Finally those things should be given out under specific situations like its been done with the aquatic subtype. Sadly this is not the chase... The idea of types and subtypes is imho a very good one, but they failed to use it correctly as logically intended..


Extraordinary Wild Shape & Enhance Wild Shape both give you the swarm traits. The traits are Special Qualities and that is defined as either EX,SLA or SU. With the definitions of EX,SLA & SU we can safely exclude SLA & SU since the traits obviously aren't magical abilities and thus default to EX.

Sadly the Special Qualities line doesn't include NA (Natural Abilities) as option. Imho it would make more sense since the swarm traits result from the natural form of swarms.

___


Welcome to the messy parts of 3.5... ^^

I was leaning this way as well wrt the second point. Out of curiosity: what's your opinion on the legality of #1?

[Gruftzwerg]

I was leaning this way as well wrt the second point. Out of curiosity: what's your opinion on the legality of #1?

From a strict RAW point of view, I don't think so...

Because a swarm sole "acts" (! this is the word used in the traits !) like a single creature. But it ain't a single creature. While there are several exceptions mentioned, spells, effect or the wild shape ability are none of em.

And Wild Shape refers to a single target "animal" (!rule text uses singular here!) as a legal target form.

Thus, you can't "normally" wild shape into swarm. You need some "specific" exceptions like Master of Flies or those you mentioned.

[Venger]

I personally agree with you on #1, but would you care to elaborate on #2 and #3?

As Saintheart says, the RAW answer to all of your questions is no.

Your delineation of the rules does a good job of answering 2a and 2b, but to elaborate:

2a) Wild shape does not normally confer traits derived from type or subtype
2b) swarm traits are not ex sqs by RAW

Gruftzwerg's analysis of what swarm traits ought to be; su, ex, or sp is sound and would be a reasonable houserule but if you're asking about RAW, it's just not there.

[Aquillion]

Another RAW reason why the answer to #1 is no:

While it is true that the Swarm is treated as a single creature, this is not the only bar to a Druid becoming one. Druids are limited to a "Small or Medium animal"; the rule you quoted for treating Swarms as a single animal define various ways to handle them but notably do not change their size, which remains Diminutive - you said "a swarm is a single large creature", but it notably does not say that. It just says they occupy a space of 10 feet - which overrides the normal rules for their size, but does not itself make them Large in other ways. This actually matters for reasons beyond this discussion - if they were Large their stats and abilities would change substantially, but they are not.

So that said, swarms are listed as Diminutive in their stat block and are therefore off-limits to standard Druids. This is not a problem for the city-shape ACF (which never grants the ability to turn into individual Diminutive creatures but whose ability to turn into any animal or vermin swarm with only HD limits considered plainly overrides this), but it introduces weirdness for the Vermin Keeper, who gets the ability to become Diminutive five levels before the ability to become a swarm. Still, the RAI is clear.

The RAI for rules 2 and 3 is also clear. Obviously you get Swarm traits, otherwise there would be no purpose to the class features that let you become swarms - becoming a swarm with no swarm traits is completely useless. Yes, sure, you can make a RAW argument for them not getting swarm traits, but if someone is asking to play one of the two builds that unambiguously allows them to turn into a swarm as the main selling point, you need to either allow them to get Swarm traits as obvious RAI, or just flat-out tell them you won't allow those builds at your table (or you can tell them they can become a useless "swarm" with no swarm traits, but that's not much different from banning the ACF / class in question.)

Like, it's fine to argue RAW for fun forum discussions, but it's important to be clear about how straightforward this is - the interpretation that they don't get swarm traits completely guts the obvious and intended core purpose of those class features, comparable to finding some RAW interpretation that says that wizards can't cast spells or something. It's not a reading you should ever seriously consider in actual play.

With that said I'm also not sure even the RAW argument that they don't get swarm traits is solid. Yes, I can see where people are coming from (they're reading the Swarm entry as "these are features of the swarm subtype, and you don't get the subtype with Wild Shape"), but you can also read it as saying "these are features you should use to adjudicate anything that falls under the colloquial definition of a swarm; whenever any other rule or ability, in any context, says that something is a swarm, that means you should use these rules." And in the latter case that means you get those swarm features - the class features in question unambiguously say "you can turn into a swarm", and the rules for swarms unambiguously say "here's how you handle swarms", which means they apply to anyone using a shapeshifting power that lets them become one.

It doesn't say "these are the rules for the swarm subtype"; nothing in the section on swarms that I can see attaches the rules it's listing to a subtype or anything like that. It just says "when a swarm does X..." And the Wild Shape upgrades in question let you turn into a swarm. Looking over the list of what Wild Shape grants you by default isn't meaningful because the class features in question have overridden that to say "and, also, you can become a swarm", which has a specific meaning laid out in the rules page for swarms.

[Venger]

The RAI for rules 2 and 3 is also clear. Obviously you get Swarm traits, otherwise there would be no purpose to the class features that let you become swarms - becoming a swarm with no swarm traits is completely useless. Yes, sure, you can make a RAW argument for them not getting swarm traits, but if someone is asking to play one of the two builds that unambiguously allows them to turn into a swarm as the main selling point, you need to either allow them to get Swarm traits as obvious RAI, or just flat-out tell them you won't allow those builds at your table (or you can tell them they can become a useless "swarm" with no swarm traits, but that's not much different from banning the ACF / class in question.)

Like, it's fine to argue RAW for fun forum discussions, but it's important to be clear about how straightforward this is - the interpretation that they don't get swarm traits completely guts the obvious and intended core purpose of those class features, comparable to finding some RAW interpretation that says that wizards can't cast spells or something. It's not a reading you should ever seriously consider in actual play.

The designers of those features forgot wild shape does not change type/subtype in 3.5. I agree they thought they were giving you swarm traits, they just didn't actually say that because they didn't understand the rules.

I was under the impression Doctor Despair was interested in RAW answers to the questions at the end of the post, since this is an adaptation of a question originally posted in the simple RAW thread. For this reason, I only talked about RAW.

In actual play, obviously, if you want to use these, houserule in that they confer swarm traits, certainly. Like monks not being proficient with natural weapons, it is true RAW, but I didn't advise using it in actual play and agree it should be houseruled in this instance.

With that said I'm also not sure even the RAW argument that they don't get swarm traits is solid. Yes, I can see where people are coming from (they're reading the Swarm entry as "these are features of the swarm subtype, and you don't get the subtype with Wild Shape"), but you can also read it as saying "these are features you should use to adjudicate anything that falls under the colloquial definition of a swarm; whenever any other rule or ability, in any context, says that something is a swarm, that means you should use these rules." And in the latter case that means you get those swarm features - the class features in question unambiguously say "you can turn into a swarm", and the rules for swarms unambiguously say "here's how you handle swarms", which means they apply to anyone using a shapeshifting power that lets them become one.

This is something of a reach. Are you also of the opinion that tanar'ri, for example, do not actually have tanar'ri traits, because the section listing tanar'ri traits says "here's what tanar'ri traits are" instead of "these traits are possessed by all creatures of the tanar'ri subtype" ?

[Gruftzwerg]

2b) swarm traits are not ex sqs by RAW

Gruftzwerg's analysis of what swarm traits ought to be; su, ex, or sp is sound and would be a reasonable houserule but if you're asking about RAW, it's just not there.

I guess our opinion about RAW differs here. As I've showed, the Special Qualities is declared as either EX, SLA or SU. Just because the "overall traits" have no "friendly reminder" doesn't mean anything. The DM is still enforced by RAW to designate each "individual trait" into those categories by their definition. Since "individual traits" can be Ex, Sla or Su, it could be problematic to give "overall traits" a single desgnation into those categories (this is imho the reason why overall traits have no friendly reminder about their special ability type).

The designers of those features forgot wild shape does not change type/subtype in 3.5. I agree they thought they were giving you swarm traits, they just didn't actually say that because they didn't understand the rules.

Master of Flies is from Savage Species, which is 3.0 content which didn't get updated. As such, imho, the DM is enforced (by the conversion rules if you don't ban 3.0 content as houserule) to adjust the PRC to work with the 3.5 conversion rules as the PRC was intended. This would mean that the DM designs an ERRATA to change the ability to also give you the swarm traits.

[Crake]

So for the purposes of the game, a swarm is a single large creature.

I mean, that's just straight up not correct. They are immune to effects that target single creatures, specifically because they aren't single creatures. They share a collective set of statistics, but they aren't anywhere defined as being a single creature.

[Doctor Despair]

On an unrelated note, I found another method that allows you to gain extraordinary qualities from of your wild shape (providing it is an animal form): Exalted Wild Shape. It explicitly says "you gain the extraordinary and supernatural abilities of the creature (providing you use it to become a celestial X). Bat and rat swarms are eligible for this, so if Enhance Wild Shape would get a level 12 City-Shape Druid swarm traits, then this gets us a dispel-proof version (as well as spell resistance equal to 5 + HD). MoMF would too, but it'd be a tight fit given how level-hungry getting access to swarm forms is.

I mean, that's just straight up not correct. They are immune to effects that target single creatures, specifically because they aren't single creatures. They share a collective set of statistics, but they aren't anywhere defined as being a single creature.

For game purposes a swarm is defined as a single creature with a space of 10 feet

They are a group of creatures that are defined as a single creature but have unique qualities due to being composed of multiple creatures. That's why, upon wild shaping into one using an appropriate technique, you don't get thousands of actions per turn. You are still a single creature as a swarm.

I guess our opinion about RAW differs here. As I've showed, the Special Qualities is declared as either EX, SLA or SU. Just because the "overall traits" have no "friendly reminder" doesn't mean anything. The DM is still enforced by RAW to designate each "individual trait" into those categories by their definition. Since "individual traits" can be Ex, Sla or Su, it could be problematic to give "overall traits" a single desgnation into those categories (this is imho the reason why overall traits have no friendly reminder about their special ability type).

You know, as I'm looking at other entries in the SRD monster filter, I'm seeing that undead have "undead traits" listed under their qualities, elementals have "elemental traits," plants have "plant traits..." Would we make the same argument with regard to these qualities for other types? I'm more reluctant to use this reading as a result of it.

Master of Flies is from Savage Species, which is 3.0 content which didn't get updated. As such, imho, the DM is enforced (by the conversion rules if you don't ban 3.0 content as houserule) to adjust the PRC to work with the 3.5 conversion rules as the PRC was intended. This would mean that the DM designs an ERRATA to change the ability to also give you the swarm traits.

This, at least, seems to pretty clearly give swarm traits (if only because it was designed when wild shape was based off of Polymorph instead of Alternate Form). If it is left unupdated, it seems to grant the traits; as you said, if the DM does update it, it would behoove them to do so in a way that preserves access to the swarm traits to avoid WotC's mistake w.r.t. City-Shape Druid and Vermin Keeper.

[Tzardok]

My opinion is:

1. No

2a. Yes.

As for why? Because it doesn't feel right to be able to split into many creatures without a dedicated ability, but if you had such an ability it would be unfair not to enjoy the benefits (and drawbacks) of being many creatures at once.

[Gruftzwerg]

You know, as I'm looking at other entries in the SRD monster filter, I'm seeing that undead have "undead traits" listed under their qualities, elementals have "elemental traits," plants have "plant traits..." Would we make the same argument with regard to these qualities for other types? I'm more reluctant to use this reading as a result of it.

Yeah this extends also to other traits too. E.g. a MoMF 7 would get the EX plant traits. Now you look up each of those traits if they have an explicit statement regards their Special Ability type. If they have not, the Primary Source for Special Abilities kicks in and gives a definition for each category which are exclusive to each other and don't overlap. With that, you (the DM) can determine into which category each trait belongs and where you have to designate it. Now you know which traits are EX (or natural abilities) and know what you get as MoMF 7 being in plant form.

[Twurps]

I think most my answers will hinge around whether or not swarm traits are (ex), so lets get that out of the way first.

unfortunately: there's RAW going both ways.
Player handbook and monster manual just don't seem to agree.

PH(p180) has this to say, under the header of 'special abilities':
Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

However: Monster manual seems to 'not otherwise designate' a lot of abilities in monster stat blocks. Some of which are clearly not natural. One could refer to the glossary and hope for a designation there, which sometimes works, but sometimes doesn't, and isn't helped by the fact that some of the abilities that are actually 'otherwise designated' can be designated differently across different creatures.
Finally: there's no mention at all of Natural abilities in the monster manual. In fact it states (p6): A special ability is either extraordinary (Ex), spell-like (Sp), or supernatural (Su).
And in the glossary goes on to mark flight (a natural ability according to PH) as either (ex) or (su). Clearly: Natural abilities aren't a thing in the MM.

So it comes down to: Do natural abilities exist as a seperate category? My answer would be 'no' as to me monster manual should be the main source for this sort of things.
People will argue that that's not RAW, because it required my judgement answer to that question. However: Nobody can come to any conclusion without making a judgement call on that question. So It's as RAW as it's ever going to get, and people making a different call on that question will come to a different RAW conclusion. Making this a never ending debate.

With that out of the way. My RAW answers would be:
1) yes: for game purposes it's a single creature.
2a) No: Swarm traits are (ex). you don't get (ex)
2b) Yes: Swarm traits are (ex). you do get (ex)

Ruling it in a 'making sense' way (Not RAI mind you)
1) No: you can turn into a single creature. Swarms are not single creatures. breaking yourself in a thousand pieces should kill you.
2a) yes: As you argued yourself: being vulnerable to weapon damage as a swarm makes zero sense.
2b) yes, as above.

[Gruftzwerg]

So it comes down to: Do natural abilities exist as a seperate category? My answer would be 'no' as to me monster manual should be the main source for this sort of things.
People will argue that that's not RAW, because it required my judgement answer to that question. However: Nobody can come to any conclusion without making a judgement call on that question. So It's as RAW as it's ever going to get, and people making a different call on that question will come to a different RAW conclusion. Making this a never ending debate.

Sorry for going a lil off topic here, but it's part of solving the riddle here and this issue is coming up on a constant base:

Natural Abilities are in a legal limbo of being the one Special Ability that is not a Special Ability...

Have a look at the Special Ability section: (PHB looks similar with slightly different order)

While the entire page is titled Special Abilities, Natural Abilities is not part of the Special Ability paragraph..

Imho the following sentence..

Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

has to be seen in context of the provided definition for those Special Abilities.

Then the Special Ability paragraph start with the definition:

A special ability is either extraordinary, spell-like, or supernatural in nature.

The definitions aren't there just for show. And the definitions also don't say that these abilities needs to be always marked by a friendly reminder either (Ex, Sla, Su). Thus each Special Ability being the Primary Source for itself, they set the standards what it needs to be one of em. And since the categories are clearly distinct from each other, this causes the least dysfunctions imho. Otherwise you end up with "Spells" (from casting classes) as being Natural Abilities because they lack the friendly reminder. They are clearly magical and not part of the body and thus spells can't be Natural Abilities.

[eggynack]

2b) swarm traits are not ex sqs by RAW

Unless the swarm in question is the bloodbloater from the fiend folio, apparently. No, this is not also true for the many other swarms listed in the same book. This game is a frigging mess.

[Doctor Despair]

By that criteria, the Jellyfish Swarm (12HD, Vermin), Leech Swarm (2HD, Vermin), and Piranha Swarm (8HD, Animal) should all work, as they have the traits listed as Ex, right? They're from Stormwrack, pages 161-163.

[Gruftzwerg]

By that criteria, the Jellyfish Swarm (12HD, Vermin), Leech Swarm (2HD, Vermin), and Piranha Swarm (8HD, Animal) should all work, as they have the traits listed as Ex, right? They're from Stormwrack, pages 161-163.

Nice catch. As we can see here the entire Swarm traits are marked as EX (since none of the individual traits is magical). This shows that as I said, that friendly reminders are used on an inconsistent base in 3.5. The accuracy depends mostly on the book.

But I'm am still having a hard time to allow multiple creatures as target form for regular Wild Shape.
Wild Shape only talks about a singular target form and the swarm traits only let you count as single creature for a few special things (and spells/abilities/effects are not included here).

[Aquillion]

This is something of a reach. Are you also of the opinion that tanar'ri, for example, do not actually have tanar'ri traits, because the section listing tanar'ri traits says "here's what tanar'ri traits are" instead of "these traits are possessed by all creatures of the tanar'ri subtype" ?

No, it's the opposite. Anything described as a tanar'ri in the rules has those traits unless noted otherwise. This includes anything with the tanar'ri subtype but is not limited to it.