TheRPGSite

Closed out one of my two 5e games for various reasons. The players did reach level 12, and I remembered how much I hated D&D's ultra-versatile magic system that makes a mockery of non-caster classes and skills.

One especially sore point: the druid wildshape ability, especially on the moon druid archetype.

I resisted a desire to depower it because I wanted to see 5e in an unadulterated form. People also said that it wasn't so bad as levels went on, that the unbelievable number of hit points the druid player could field would matter less because of its typically low AC. This did not happen.

I wouldn't say he was indestructible, just close enough that he might as well have been for monster tactic purposes. He certainly made the rogues and monks look like chumps, and that's what matters to me.

ON TOP OF THAT, the versatility was a show stealer time and time again. Need to spy and infiltrate? Turn into a tiny critter. Need to overcome obstacles or escape? turn into a flying critter. Need to escape by water? Turn into a swimming critter. Need to tank? Turn into a bear. Need to track or detect things? Turn into a scent or tremorsense critter. etc.

And once you hit level 10? Turn into elementals to walk through walls, fly 100 feet a round, resist non-magical weapons, flow through tiny gaps, and still contribute to combat.

All of that... and you still have SPELLS (more versatility that you can turn into hit points in a pinch) and your own pool of hit points!

So from my personal perspective the case is demonstrably closed: druid wildshape is unfair and poorly designed. I will definitely depower it next time once I can figure out what the fix is. If there is a next time. The caster supremacy is definitely grinding my gears enough that it's starting to overshadow the things I like about the edition.

I can say that in my current 5th ed game, one of the characters is a Barbarian/Druid - and wild shape has taken an already potent character and made him incredibly versatile. He's easily the most powerful and useful character at the table, with only the straight cleric being as useful overall (and that's largely because they've been in an undead heavy area of late).

The entire druid class is on my radar to take a very careful look at and figure out a way to make it a bit less dominant at the table.

Ugh I was worried about that. I think that I'll stand my traditional ground and forbid the class. Instead, people can be Clerics with nature domains or Warlocks with Pagan-inspired patrons.

How often are you allowing short rests and all that since otherwise you get only two uses?

And note that the Druid can only assume forms that they have seen. So another avenue to limit just how versatile a druid is. (And really should have been more emphasized in the PHB) If the PCs never get to certain environs, which is very possible, then the Druid (and the Wizard) do not have access to those.  That means NO mammoth at level 18. No dinosaurs or other prehistorics, and depending on locale, could mean whole swaths of animals they are never going to meet. Kefra for example at level 9 got nothing new because so far we have never encountered an Ankylosaurus, Giant Scorpion or Killer Whale. And still hadnt by level 12 and we have not spotted a single elephant.

And according to the designers. Swarms are not allowed for beast shape.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915296So from my personal perspective the case is demonstrably closed: druid wildshape is unfair and poorly designed. I will definitely depower it next time once I can figure out what the fix is. If there is a next time. The caster supremacy is definitely grinding my gears enough that it's starting to overshadow the things I like about the edition.

A couple of observations

The ability make sense in terms of being a druid.

You have one campaign with the class with a player who obviously figured an optimal set of tactics for that class and archetype. It happens, if it wasn't the druid it would been the wizard or some other class that a player got a handle on.
 
Your description focused solely on what the character was doing in combat. The consequence of having a campaign where the main focus is on combat is that imbalances quickly show up as well as  relative player skill at strategy and tactics. All RPGs rules have this issue can wind up "broken".

In general, the way to I found around this is to run the campaign more as a slice of the character's lives. People with radically different skill competencies are able to successfully work together in real life. The trick is add just enough so the campaign is more than just a series of combat vignettes stitched together. This way all characters regardless of their combat capability have moments to shine.

This leads to be my final point, nowhere in your complaint I read of any consquence to the players for being a druid. In my view clerics, druids, paladins, are NOT free agents. In exchange for their awesome abilities they are servants of a higher power or organization. Incorporating this into my campaign is the single biggest check against combat munchkinism I have. Being a druid should result in complications for that characters a lot of complications. Complication that interfere with going wherever and doing whatever the player wants to do with the character.

My advice this is what what you do for next campaign. If you want to be free of obligations then play a fighter, rogue, or wizard. Otherwise your class will cause complications.

For reference here is everything a Druid can Wild Shape into with the D&D 5e core books. Remember the Druid has to have seen the creature before he can use Wild Shape to change into that creature.

Standard Beast Shapes

Level 2: Max CR ¼, no flying or swimming speed
(0) Baboon, Badger, Cat, Deer, Giant Fire Beetle, Goat, Hyena, Jackal, Lizard, Rat, Scorpion, Spider, Weasel
(0.125) Camel, Giant Rat, Giant Weasel, Mastiff, Mule, Pony
(0.25) Axe Beak, Boar, Draft Horse, Elk, Giant Badger, Giant Centipede, Giant Goat, Giant Lizard, Giant Wolf Spider, Panther, Riding Horse, Swarm of Rats, Wolf

Level 4: Max CR ½, no flying speed
(-) Frog, Sea Horse
(0) Crab, Octopus, Quipper
(0.125) Giant Crab, Poisonous Snake
(0.25) Constrictor Snake, Giant Frog, Giant Poisonous Snake
(0.5) Ape, Black Bear, Crocodile, Giant Sea Horse, Reef Shark, Swarm of Insects, Warhorse

Level 8: Max CR 1
(0) Bat, Eagle, Hawk, Owl, Raven, Vulture
(0.125) Blood Hawk, Flying Snake, Stirge
(0.25) Giant Bat, Giant Owl, Pteranodon, Swarm of Bats, Swarm of Ravens
(0.5) Giant Wasp, Swarm of Wasps
(1) Brown Bear, Dire Wolf, Giant Eagle, Giant Hyena, Giant Octopus, Giant Spider, Giant Toad, Giant Vulture, Lion, Swarm of Quippers, Tiger


Circle of the Moon Forms

Level 2: Max CR 1, no flying or swimming speed
(0) Baboon, Badger, Cat, Deer, Giant Fire Beetle, Goat, Hyena, Jackal, Lizard, Rat, Scorpion, Spider, Weasel
(0.125) Camel, Giant Rat, Giant Weasel, Mastiff, Mule, Pony
(0.25) Axe Beak, Boar, Draft Horse, Elk, Giant Badger, Giant Centipede, Giant Goat, Giant Lizard, Giant Wolf Spider, Panther, Riding Horse, Swarm of Rats, Wolf
(0.5) Ape, Black Bear, Swarm of Insects, Warhorse
(1) Brown Bear, Dire Wolf, Giant Hyena, Giant Spider, Lion, Tiger

Level 4: Max CR 1, no flying speed
(-) Frog, Sea Horse
(0) Crab, Octopus, Quipper
(0.125) Giant Crab, Poisonous Snake
(0.25) Constrictor Snake, Giant Frog, Giant Poisonous Snake
(0.5) Crocodile, Giant Sea Horse, Reef Shark
(1) Giant Octopus, Giant Toad, Swarm of Quippers

Level 6: Max CR 2, no flying speed
(2) Allosaurus, Giant Boar, Giant Constrictor Snake, Giant Elk, Hunter Shark, Plesiosaurus, Polar Bear, Rhinoceros, Sabre-Toothed Tiger, Swarm of Poisonous Snakes

Level 8: Max CR 2
(0) Bat, Eagle, Hawk, Owl, Raven, Vulture
(0.125) Blood Hawk, Flying Snake, Stirge
(0.25) Giant Bat, Giant Owl, Pteranodon, Swarm of Bats, Swarm of Ravens
(0.5) Giant Wasp, Swarm of Wasps
(1) Giant Eagle, Giant Vulture

Level 9: Max CR 3
(3) Ankylosaurus, Giant Scorpion, Killer Whale

Level 12: Max CR 4
(4) Elephant

Level 15: Max CR 5
(5) Giant Crocodile, Giant Shark, Triceratops

Level 18: Max CR 6
(6) Mammoth

Finally here is a good reddit thread (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/327s75/5e_circle_of_the_moon_druids_op/) on how OP the Moon Druid is. Look like Wild Shape is super good from levels 2 to 4 and then at 5 the melee classes catch up and quickly exceed the utility of the ability afterwards.

I have only played a low level Druid so I don't have much first hand experience with powerful wild shape.  

But I have listened to a lot of critical role.  (Helps pass the time at a monotones job). The Druid in that (12th level where I left off) wasn't overly dominate.  She had the versatility of a regular caster and when shifted she could tank like a beast.  But she couldn't dish it out.  

In any round of combat the rouge, sorc, and barb were doing more damage.  The ranger and fighter often were (wierd home brew gunslinger fighter). Barb could tank too.

In your game is the Druid just tanking or out DPSing the others as well?

How would you balance the Druid?

Quote from: estar;915319Finally here is a good reddit thread (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/327s75/5e_circle_of_the_moon_druids_op/) on how OP the Moon Druid is. Look like Wild Shape is super good from levels 2 to 4 and then at 5 the melee classes catch up and quickly exceed the utility of the ability afterwards.

Yep, that matches pretty well from what I've seen. Druid wildshape is insanely powerful at early levels but then the lack of animal forms at higher levels makes them a lot weaker, able to take some punishment but not as good at dishing it out. They have to almost abandon the animal shape in favor of elemental forms eventually, which doesn't really match up with the traditional druid most of us are used to.

Probably the two biggest issues that made the druid in the OP's group seem so powerful were the fact that they (I'm assuming) got to transform into any form they wanted and were being compared to classes like the monk. I'm running a monk now, and while it's fun it's a pale shadow of what I think a monk should be. The fact I can't even out-jump a dwarf fully laden with plate armor unless I spend some of my very, very precious ki still frustrates me to no end.

Quote from: Brand55;915339I'm running a monk now, and while it's fun it's a pale shadow of what I think a monk should be.

Try this variant I made.

The Halfling Shadow.  (http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%205e%20Halfling%20Shadow.pdf)
Grab your pipe and try one. :-) Just about everybody who tried it liked it.

Amazing how reskinning something turns into something cool.

Moon Druids were quickly banned at our table--the rest of the party could just sit back and watch our Druid take on eight or so low level monsters (the same level she was) with no real risk at all, because it's all temp HP anyway, and she was casting healing spells as a bonus action. Once you get to summoning spells, then the other druid gets stupid too--our guy brings 30 pages of stats for all the things he can summon, to cover most any scenario.

A spell that needs dozens of pages to use "properly"? That means there's something wrong.

Hmm... being outdoorsy in my youth, what have I seen? Ignoring zoos, of course.

Quote from: estar;915314For reference here is everything a Druid can Wild Shape into with the D&D 5e core books.
Circle of the Moon Forms

Level 2: Max CR 1, no flying or swimming speed
(0) Badger, Cat, Deer, Goat, Lizard, Rat, Scorpion, Spider, Weasel
(0.125) Mastiff, Mule, Pony
(0.25) Boar, Draft Horse, Elk, Riding Horse, Wolf
(0.5) Black Bear, Warhorse

Level 4: Max CR 1, no flying speed
(-) Frog, Sea Horse
(0) Crab, Octopus
(0.125) Poisonous Snake
(0.5) Crocodile (Alligator, really), (some sort of) Shark
(1) Giant Octopus

Level 8: Max CR 2
 (0) Bat, Eagle, Hawk, Owl, Raven, Vulture

Level 9: Max CR 3
 (3) Killer Whale

Plus a number of fish, trout, salmon, &c.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;915328How would you balance the Druid?

Make them a power class (monk), rather than a caster class. They gain a number of abilities centered around "life" and living things. They can infuse other things with life, which gives you healing, entangle, and the like. But their main abilities circle around living in a variety of ecosystems and being able to interact with plants, animals, and living things in general. They don't have an elemental focus.

I also have druids that are element benders, sort of, but they're considered mad and a perversion of druidic power.

That said, I'm not familiar enough with 5e to quite understand how hit points are an issue. Do they get a bonus when they change?

Quote from: Omega;915306How often are you allowing short rests and all that since otherwise you get only two uses?

In dungeon: I have a punitive old school encounter table. Often didn’t matter because thanks to the druid’s durability and spells they were pretty fresh when setting up a defensive position for their hour rest most of the time. There are also many spells (including ones that the druid has) that makes secure rest fairly reliable if the GM isn’t being a cock-block.

No, you can’t realistically put a time limit on every dungeon.

And the thing is, the short/long rest model of balance is totally busted as soon as dungeons are not the centerpiece of most campaign sessions. My campaign turned into heavy espionage and urban encounters. Once that’s the case you just can’t lock down short/long rests reliably in realistic scenarios, plans and sequences of events without looking like you are deliberately gunning for the casters.

I will list the idea of using short/long rest as a balancing factor as one of 5e’s major flaws.

And even IF the druid didn’t get a short rest for some reason, two uses of wildshape was usually more than enough to make the non-casters feel inadequate. Oh, and don’t forget the spells.

Quote from: Omega;915306And note that the Druid can only assume forms that they have seen.

Sorry, this is a dubious way to ‘balance’ it. Eventually any smart druid will see what he needs to and bust right through this little game of ‘Mother May I?’ at which point you’re back where you started.

I ran my campaign in a big city in Eberron, a very cosmopolitan and semi-modern (WotC) setting. The druid went to the zoo and saw what he needed to see. I guess I shouldn’t have made the mistake of using the setting I wanted.

By the way, would you apply the same restrictions to summon spells, polymorph spells, and gating spells? They don’t have any such limit as written.

Quote from: EstarYour description focused solely on what the character was doing in combat.

No.

Quoting my first post:  “ON TOP OF THAT, the versatility was a show stealer time and time again. Need to spy and infiltrate? Turn into a tiny critter. Need to overcome obstacles or escape? turn into a flying critter. Need to escape by water? Turn into a swimming critter. Need to tank? Turn into a bear. Need to track or detect things? Turn into a scent or tremorsense critter. etc.
And once you hit level 10? Turn into elementals to walk through walls, fly 100 feet a round, resist non-magical weapons, flow through tiny gaps, and still contribute to combat.”

Quote from: EstarIn general, the way to I found around this is to run the campaign more as a slice of the character's lives. People with radically different skill competencies are able to successfully work together in real life.

ROGUE: Guess I’ll go case the fortress for our little robbery mission.

DRUID: Nah, let me turn into a pigeon and a rat to do it in greater depth and with less chance of detection than you. Shit, while I’m at it I’ll just do the robbery myself.

COCK-BLOCK GM: Err, it’s magically warded all over against specifically that sort of thing. *Thinks a little bit more* Uh, for half a mile around the castle at least. And all the guards are super suspicious of pigeons and rats. Somehow. Chase them all day.

DRUID: Hey, I thought this kingdom didn’t have that kind of resources… are you just awkwardly creating a reason for the feeble rogue class to exist?

COCK-BLOCK GM: Not at all, I’ll, uh, put together a little dungeon for you to totally bust open with your versatility and feel good about later. (Thinks, “It will have to be a throwaway, I wouldn’t want you to make child’s play out of something I put a lot of time and effort into.”)

ROGUE: Hey, you ever notice how Professor X is always getting knocked out or sidelined for important X-Men storylines, just so there can be a sense of drama and suspense? Yeah…

Quote from: EstarThis leads to be my final point, nowhere in your complaint I read of any consquence to the players for being a druid. In my view clerics, druids, paladins, are NOT free agents. In exchange for their awesome abilities they are servants of a higher power or organization. Incorporating this into my campaign is the single biggest check against combat munchkinism I have. Being a druid should result in complications for that characters a lot of complications. Complication that interfere with going wherever and doing whatever the player wants to do with the character.

Using roleplaying restrictions to balance out mechanical advantages is an old argument, with some merit and utility at some tables. Not at mine. Or any table I am in regular contact with.

Quote from: HeadlessBut I have listened to a lot of critical role. (Helps pass the time at a monotones job). The Druid in that (12th level where I left off) wasn't overly dominate. She had the versatility of a regular caster and when shifted she could tank like a beast. But she couldn't dish it out.

In any round of combat the rouge, sorc, and barb were doing more damage.

This is true and a good point, the druid still needed damage servants to actually finish off in a timely manner anything that wasn’t totally bypassed.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915360ROGUE: Guess I’ll go case the fortress for our little robbery mission.

DRUID: Nah, let me turn into a pigeon and a rat to do it in greater depth and with less chance of detection than you. Shit, while I’m at it I’ll just do the robbery myself.

COCK-BLOCK GM: Err, it’s magically warded all over against specifically that sort of thing. *Thinks a little bit more* Uh, for half a mile around the castle at least. And all the guards are super suspicious of pigeons and rats. Somehow. Chase them all day.

DRUID: Hey, I thought this kingdom didn’t have that kind of resources… are you just awkwardly creating a reason for the feeble rogue class to exist?

COCK-BLOCK GM: Not at all, I’ll, uh, put together a little dungeon for you to totally bust open with your versatility and feel good about later. (Thinks, “It will have to be a throwaway, I wouldn’t want you to make child’s play out of something I put a lot of time and effort into.”)

ROGUE: Hey, you ever notice how Professor X is always getting knocked out or sidelined for important X-Men storylines, just so there can be a sense of drama and suspense? Yeah…

That was good. Made me laugh. Thanks--it helped my day a lot. :D

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915360ROGUE: Guess I’ll go case the fortress for our little robbery mission.

DRUID: Nah, let me turn into a pigeon and a rat to do it in greater depth and with less chance of detection than you. Shit, while I’m at it I’ll just do the robbery myself.

COCK-BLOCK GM: Err, it’s magically warded all over against specifically that sort of thing. *Thinks a little bit more* Uh, for half a mile around the castle at least. And all the guards are super suspicious of pigeons and rats. Somehow. Chase them all day.

DRUID: Hey, I thought this kingdom didn’t have that kind of resources… are you just awkwardly creating a reason for the feeble rogue class to exist?

COCK-BLOCK GM: Not at all, I’ll, uh, put together a little dungeon for you to totally bust open with your versatility and feel good about later. (Thinks, “It will have to be a throwaway, I wouldn’t want you to make child’s play out of something I put a lot of time and effort into.”)

ROGUE: Hey, you ever notice how Professor X is always getting knocked out or sidelined for important X-Men storylines, just so there can be a sense of drama and suspense? Yeah…

ROGUE: Guess I’ll go case the fortress for our little robbery mission.

DRUID: Nah, let me turn into a pigeon and a rat to do it in greater depth and with less chance of detection than you. Shit, while I’m at it I’ll just do the robbery myself.

COMPETENT GM: Okay, so which form are you going to take? (makes a note of Lucifer, the head guard's ill-tempered, one-eyed tabby)

If a rogue went alone, there would likely be complications. It's expected. The same should be true for anyone else. And yes, maybe sometimes you reward good preparation or smart thinking by letting a plan go off smoothly, but generally players won't have a fit if there are logical problems placed in front of them. Sure, it puts more work on the GM, but that's true of any game where there are lots of powers to juggle. Create challenges where having hands or a mouth are important. That two-shift limit is a big deal (and part of why level 20 is so amazing for druids). Use natural predators. Heck, use situations where it's best if the party members work together; going back to third edition, I once ran a campaign where a bard (we had no rogue) and a druid infiltrated a traveling circus of horrors by pretending to be one of the new acts.

I do agree that 5e is hardly the most balanced edition out there, as I said before. Some classes get tons of utility, others not so much. But that's also not a terrible thing as some players don't want to bother with keeping track of so much stuff. Having options for them is the silver lining in the dark cloud that is class imbalance.

Quote from: estar;915345Try this variant I made.

The Halfling Shadow.  (http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%205e%20Halfling%20Shadow.pdf)
Grab your pipe and try one. :-) Just about everybody who tried it liked it.

Amazing how reskinning something turns into something cool.

That's pretty cool. The flavor is great and I like how you've added more non-combat features, along with more high-level benefits.

Quote from: Brand55;915372That's pretty cool. The flavor is great and I like how you've added more non-combat features, along with more high-level benefits.

Thanks, I was pleased with the result. I am working on what is basically a 2nd edition of my Majestic Wilderlands and when the 5e SRD came out, I was torn between keeping OD&D as my foundation or going with 5e. If they released it in 2014, I might have gone with 5e but with a 2015 release I had over ten thousands words done already. Plus after making that and the Berserker (http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%205e%20Berserker.pdf). I released that the extra work to flesh out a 5e class was unappealing. But who knows I may do smaller releases at some point.

Oh if you liked the format of those two classes. I did the following

Basic Classes Level 1 to 20 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx9oLF40m-b8dk9WcjBidDlSNFk/view?usp=sharing)
Complete Quick Start Character Generation. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx9oLF40m-b8RjlzaGQ4M2hMc0k/view?usp=sharing)

mmmm and I guess I made a elvish monk called a mystic.
Elven Mystic. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx9oLF40m-b8dDNYVFpzVUJ3R28/view?usp=sharing)

And I forgot, I wrote up a bunch of Fighter NPCs if you want your setting to be more like Harn or Medieval Europe.

NPCs for a Feudal Setting. (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx9oLF40m-b8dlJJZFdmZmdkX2M/view?usp=sharing)

Quote from: Brand55;915372COMPETENT GM: Okay, so which form are you going to take? (makes a note of Lucifer, the head guard's ill-tempered, one-eyed tabby)

Uh, not "COMPETENT". I'm sure you meant "Cockblockingprick" right? I mean unless that cat can hit for 20+ points of damage, it's not remotely a threat to a Moon Druid.

Quote from: Doom;915379Uh, not "COMPETENT". I'm sure you meant "Cockblockingprick" right? I mean unless that cat can hit for 20+ points of damage, it's not remotely a threat to a Moon Druid.

I don't play 5e, but if the druid is a rat, I would think that a big tabby is dangerous to the rat, if it attacks before the druid can change or maybe where it is dangerous to change?

Disclosure: my tabby is a 15 lb part Maine Coon Cat.

Quote from: Doom;915379Uh, not "COMPETENT". I'm sure you meant "Cockblockingprick" right? I mean unless that cat can hit for 20+ points of damage, it's not remotely a threat to a Moon Druid.

It sure is when that druid is running around as a measly rat. A rat has 1 HP. 1. And an AC of 10. A single hit means the moon druid is back in his natural form, probably far away from backup in someplace he doesn't want to be, with only a single wildshape left. And heaven forbid that he come across a large dog, or a hawk, or an irate cook that's sick of the rats constantly getting into his pantry. That's the very real danger you take on when you head off alone. No one bats an eye when a rogue heads into danger and has to dodge patrols, traps, and all sorts of nastiness. Others shouldn't get a pass just because they require different challenges. Environments shouldn't be white spaces with no life to them.

Also note that I didn't say the druid in that situation was also automatically going to fail. If I did, you'd have a point. I merely pointed out that there are ways of challenging him so that it's not an easy cakewalk for him go through untested. Personally, I think it'd be a much better solution to have the druid and rogue working together to case a prospective target. They could complement each other and, if something did go wrong, no one would be stuck on their own when the guards started rushing in.

Fair enough, though the druid might be better off as a sparrow. As you say, nobody bats an eye when a sparrow flits by.

"Only one wildshape left." Heh.

Quote from: Brand55;915384It sure is when that druid is running around as a measly rat. A rat has 1 HP. 1. And an AC of 10. A single hit means the moon druid is back in his natural form, probably far away from backup in someplace he doesn't want to be, with only a single wildshape left. And heaven forbid that he come across a large dog, or a hawk, or an irate cook that's sick of the rats constantly getting into his pantry. That's the very real danger you take on when you head off alone. No one bats an eye when a rogue heads into danger and has to dodge patrols, traps, and all sorts of nastiness. Others shouldn't get a pass just because they require different challenges. Environments shouldn't be white spaces with no life to them.

Also note that I didn't say the druid in that situation was also automatically going to fail. If I did, you'd have a point. I merely pointed out that there are ways of challenging him so that it's not an easy cakewalk for him go through untested. Personally, I think it'd be a much better solution to have the druid and rogue working together to case a prospective target. They could complement each other and, if something did go wrong, no one would be stuck on their own when the guards started rushing in.

This is a fair response to my half-baked snark. I'll cede it. Partially.

Can you tell I'm a little bitter? While I'm at it I'll apologize to Estar, that probably sounded personal when it shouldn't have. Estar's a good guy.

My larger point still stands, it just doesn't seem right to give this much versatility AND power in a game about distinct classes. If most of the advice for coping with it comes down to "come up with bizarre measures to hamper the druid player", then I feel it was an error to include the power in the first place.

Shapeshifting is a cool feature, don't get me wrong. But it's good enough to be a class all on its own even with limitations.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915395This is a fair response to my half-baked snark. I'll cede it. Partially.

Can you tell I'm a little bitter? While I'm at it I'll apologize to Estar, that probably sounded personal when it shouldn't have. Estar's a good guy.

My larger point still stands, it just doesn't seem right to give this much versatility AND power in a game about distinct classes. If most of the advice for coping with it comes down to "hamper the druid player", then I feel it was an error to include the power in the first place.

Shapeshifting is a cool feature, don't get me wrong. But it's good enough to be a class all on its own even with limitations.

Yeah, and I understand where you're coming from. Personally, I think the druid is pretty good (if unbalanced; the power should be more even over the levels) and some of the other classes need to be brought up some, given more options and versatility. That way everybody gets to play.

Have you ever looked at 13th Age? The druid in 13 True Ways is my very favorite take on the druid, ever. They basically break down the normal schtick so you can diversify a little or focus on certain areas. So you can be an amazing shifter, or have an animal companion, or have nature magic, or be a warrior. But you can't do everything, so you could have a party of 3 or 4 druids and they could all be different.  I would have loved to see that approach more in D&D 5e with its classes.

If you wanted to change it up it might make sense to make the Druid a half caster.  Add a couple extra uses of wild shape and let them last longer.   But the Druid still won't be doing much damage. And would be less useful party play and more useful going solo.  

I like wild shape.  I like the Druid.  I think the game is reasonably well balanced, though as I understand it rigorous balance was not as important to this edition as previous ones.   If you think the Druid is OP play one.  I would love to have a whole party of Druids as a GM or a player.  

If you don't want to be a Druid perhaps the problem isn't that the Druid is OP but that the monk or rogue isn't OP any more?

I'm more cheesed at how incorrect I was about the Wizard class

They made the 5e wizard the best class for magic (that doesn't heal) and I completely missed it.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;915447I'm more cheesed at how incorrect I was about the Wizard class

They made the 5e wizard the best class for magic (that doesn't heal) and I completely missed it.

To be fair, the wizard has always been the best class for magic that doesn't heal...he just now can do that, too, sort of, with Polymorph (basically granting shapechange to another character, which can easily add a full HP tyrranosaur on the table where once was a  low hp character). Granted, there are far worse things that are messed up about 5e spellcasters than that.

The solution really isn't to buff up the other classes, because the other classes really aren't weak, per se (well, maybe the monk, but again we rather have historical precedent there...). It's that the spellcasting classes are nuts, as both spells and spellcasting with every edition evolve into ever more power.

One of the big ways to tone it down is to do it as AD&D did, at least with summons and such: make the outcome random. There's a huge difference between "summon a random but appropriate to the area creature, and player has to figure out how to get the best use out of it" (the old D&D way) and "let the player pore through hundreds of pages of monsters stats and figure out the absolute best thing to summon while the non-spellcasters feel stupid." (the 5e way).

Something similar with Wild Shape would probably be good. I personally think the 5e's druid "I will take the form of this incredibly majestic big cat, and I will then have monsters desecrate its body by hacking into it repeatedly. After they have done so...I will simply repeat the process" basic tagline to be rather silly.  I somehow think "Wow, the nature gods have (randomly) granted me the form of this majestic creature. I should respect and honor this form, for next time I could just as easily take the form of an AC 10 rat."   Make the random charts allow for some better creatures, and this puts the ball back into the player's field for playing well in a given situation, instead just the player just going online to find "the best" and using that exclusively.

I do concede that in olden days, certain classes (ranger, druid, cleric, and paladin) had "class obligations" but I honestly reckon those days are over...the fetishization of balance has easily eclipsed whatever interest there ever was in roleplaying (no judgement there, honest).

I meant it has the same casting system as the Warlock and Sorcerer which are now completely neutered.  They can cast whatever spell they want whenever they want as long as A) They have slots.  B) Have the spell 'prepared'.

B used to be the purview of the Sorcerer.  Which gave it an 'edge' for playing an 'easy' Caster class.  But not anymore.  The Wizard can do it and better, with more versatility.

Quote from: estar;915314For reference here is everything a Druid can Wild Shape into with the D&D 5e core books. Remember the Druid has to have seen the creature before he can use Wild Shape to change into that creature.

Standard Beast Shapes

Swarm of Rats

According to the designers. Swarms are not allowed for beast shape.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915360Sorry, this is a dubious way to ‘balance’ it. Eventually any smart druid will see what he needs to and bust right through this little game of ‘Mother May I?’ at which point you’re back where you started.

I ran my campaign in a big city in Eberron, a very cosmopolitan and semi-modern (WotC) setting. The druid went to the zoo and saw what he needed to see. I guess I shouldn’t have made the mistake of using the setting I wanted.

By the way, would you apply the same restrictions to summon spells, polymorph spells, and gating spells? They don’t have any such limit as written.

1: um... How is playing by the rules "Mother may I"? The PHB specifically says "animals the druid has seen." Is the DM supposed to just cater to the druid player and poof there's a Mastadon! Gotta catch em all!

2: And why did the zoo have every critter the druid wanted? Last check many zoos have a rather limited roster that may or may not be very exotic. The fact you have a druid in a big city where the usual checks and balances are being lessened or removed should have been a tip off here.

3: Polymorph doesn't. Shapechanged has the same "has seen" limitation as the Druid. As for Gate. er, that opens a portal to another plane? Did you mean the various "Conjure" spells? That says the spell calls "fey spirits that take the forms of beasts" not actual animals. Read that as you may Either way. If a Wizard and a Druid are working together to polymorph someone or conjure animals and catalogue all animals for the druid to memorize then that is clever gaming of the system and great teamwork. Though note that according to the designers the DM determines what was summoned by a conjure spell. The caster determines the type those spirits assume. That might be local critters. That might be only what the caster has seen. YMMV and each DMs going to have their own ideas how that rolls.

X: What you have is a clusterfuck of an ideal location/setting that very savvy players are gaming for max advantage. Like someone else noted. If it wasnt the Druid then it would be one of the other classes. Ive seen some really insane gaming of the Polymorph spell if the DM doesn't reign that in. The fact that you have them in a city with an extensive zoo means you just laid out a buffet of power.

Quote from: Baron Opal;915357That said, I'm not familiar enough with 5e to quite understand how hit points are an issue. Do they get a bonus when they change?

In 5e a Druid resumes their current HP when they change back. So if they had 4 of 12 HP left, changed into a constrictor. Took 12 of their 13 points of damage and changed back, then would have 4 HP again rather than 1. Also if they are taken to zero or negative they just revert back too and the excess carries over. So same snake gets hit for 15 damage and goes down. The Druid reverts and is conscious with 2 HP left.

So its effectively two buffers of temp HP. More if the Druid can get a short rest in. Compare that to a Fighter who can regain 1d10 + level in HP once before needing a short rest, or the Warlock who can potentially pick up False Life as an at will (1d4+4).

Quote from: Christopher Brady;915453I meant it has the same casting system as the Warlock and Sorcerer which are now completely neutered.  They can cast whatever spell they want whenever they want as long as A) They have slots.  B) Have the spell 'prepared'.

B used to be the purview of the Sorcerer.  Which gave it an 'edge' for playing an 'easy' Caster class.  But not anymore.  The Wizard can do it and better, with more versatility.

Very much so. The 5e Sorcerer is very different from the playtest one which was using willpower points to fuel spellcasting. The 5e Sorcerer might as well have been an alternate Wizard path as its just a wizard with some casting format tricks.

Quote from: Omega;9154901: um... How is playing by the rules "Mother may I"? The PHB specifically says "animals the druid has seen." Is the DM supposed to just cater to the druid player and poof there's a Mastadon! Gotta catch em all!

I have trouble believing this ability was deliberately balanced around what the druid has seen. That just seems like flavor, not a deliberate restriction. Consider the following:
- You can safely assume the druid has seen a lot of critters because of his training. Depending on the setting, elder druids can show younger druids all the forms they've picked up. Players could also state they came from exotic lands and then reasonably argue they've seen a bunch of useful forms that way. Now the GM trying to use this rule for balance find themselves in the odd position of trying to restrict the druid's personal history in weird ways.
- The GM could decide to head this off at the pass by not using the most 'unbalanced' animal forms in his campaign world... but then a player's choice of class has prevented the GM from using lots of cool animals. "Well I really wanted to have a bitchin' king kong style encounter in this campaign, but shucks, there's a druid in the game and I don't want him to make a mockery of the other players in the group so I better change the setting so they don't exist."
- And remember, this is a binary on/off switch that, once flipped, is irrelevant for balance. Imagine I tried to balance a fighter ability to reliably cause instant death by saying "it's ok though, you can only use this ability once you have seen a mass grave on an ancient battlefield." Would that seem fair to the other players?

It all really just looks like a desperate GM pathetically trying to wriggle around bad design and clamp down on the player's core-book choices. The druid should not have been printed as such.

Quote from: Omega;915490And why did the zoo have every critter the druid wanted? Last check many zoos have a rather limited roster that may or may not be very exotic. The fact you have a druid in a big city where the usual checks and balances are being lessened or removed should have been a tip off here.

Eberron has a magic corporation house that specializes in gathering, distributing, and selling beasts. It's their thing. But again, what you are advocating is NOT using cool animals or cool settings just because of one class.

Quote from: Omega;915490What you have is a clusterfuck of an ideal location/setting that very savvy players are gaming for max advantage. Like someone else noted. If it wasnt the Druid then it would be one of the other classes. Ive seen some really insane gaming of the Polymorph spell if the DM doesn't reign that in. The fact that you have them in a city with an extensive zoo means you just laid out a buffet of power.

You're not exactly singing 5e's praises here.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915507I have trouble believing this ability was deliberately balanced around what the druid has seen. That just seems like flavor, not a deliberate restriction. Consider the following:

You're not exactly singing 5e's praises here.

1: So you ignored the rules then complain when something breaks?

2: Since you seem to be gunning for 5e. Guess you would see it like that. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Doom;915451One of the big ways to tone it down is to do it as AD&D did, at least with summons and such: make the outcome random. There's a huge difference between "summon a random but appropriate to the area creature, and player has to figure out how to get the best use out of it" (the old D&D way) and "let the player pore through hundreds of pages of monsters stats and figure out the absolute best thing to summon while the non-spellcasters feel stupid." (the 5e way).

With regard to summoning spells, the player gets to specify the number & CR of summoned creatures but the DM decides what exactly shows up. Each of the spell descriptions states that the DM has the statistics for what is summoned. So player says that he wants four beasts of challenge rating 1/2 and the DM decides what creatures within those parameters are actually summoned.

If you let the player flip through the MM and cherry pick the most advantageous creature every time then you might conclude that the spell is "broken". This is not the case. It is the DM without the balls to enforce the rules who is broken.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915296Closed out one of my two 5e games for various scheduling reasons. The players did reach level 12, and I remembered how much I hated D&D's ultra-versatile magic system that makes a mockery of non-caster classes and skills.

One especially sore point: the druid wildshape ability, especially on the moon druid archetype.

I resisted a desire to depower it because I wanted to see 5e in an unadulterated form. People also said that it wasn't so bad as levels went on, that the unbelievable number of hit points the druid player could field would matter less because of its typically low AC. This did not happen.

I wouldn't say he was indestructible, just close enough that he might as well have been for monster tactic purposes. He certainly made the rogues and monks look like chumps, and that's what matters to me.

ON TOP OF THAT, the versatility was a show stealer time and time again. Need to spy and infiltrate? Turn into a tiny critter. Need to overcome obstacles or escape? turn into a flying critter. Need to escape by water? Turn into a swimming critter. Need to tank? Turn into a bear. Need to track or detect things? Turn into a scent or tremorsense critter. etc.

And once you hit level 10? Turn into elementals to walk through walls, fly 100 feet a round, resist non-magical weapons, flow through tiny gaps, and still contribute to combat.

All of that... and you still have SPELLS (more versatility that you can turn into hit points in a pinch) and your own pool of hit points!

So from my personal perspective the case is demonstrably closed: druid wildshape is unfair and poorly designed. I will definitely depower it next time once I can figure out what the fix is. If there is a next time. The caster supremacy is definitely grinding my gears enough that it's starting to overshadow the things I like about the edition.

Yep, agree, its broken....

Quote from: Omega;915491In 5e a Druid resumes their current HP when they change back.

I see. A druid with 20 hp takes an animal form. These animals usually have 10 hp. After they lose 10 hp they are forced back into human form with their untouched 20 hp. There's a certain elegance in that.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;915360By the way, would you apply the same restrictions to summon spells, polymorph spells, and gating spells? They don't have any such limit as written.

One thing that I have done is that the Summon Monster spells are tied to specific critters. If you summon the Eidolon of the Third Pale, that's the only thing you can summon. If you want another critter, you need to research another instance of the spell. For polymorph, you can turn into anything you can see or from a number of forms equal to 3 + INT bonus. Your own racial form is a gimme. Learning a form you haven't seen, or swapping out an old one, is like researching a 1st level spell.

It might be worthwhile to limit the number of known forms somehow. 1/2 level, 3 + WIS bonus, something.

Quote from: Omega;915491In 5e a Druid resumes their current HP when they change back. So if they had 4 of 12 HP left, changed into a constrictor. Took 12 of their 13 points of damage and changed back, then would have 4 HP again rather than 1. Also if they are taken to zero or negative they just revert back too and the excess carries over. So same snake gets hit for 15 damage and goes down. The Druid reverts and is conscious with 2 HP left.

So its effectively two buffers of temp HP. More if the Druid can get a short rest in. Compare that to a Fighter who can regain 1d10 + level in HP once before needing a short rest, or the Warlock who can potentially pick up False Life as an at will (1d4+4).

So the tabby wouldn't kill the rat, but would make the druid revert to human form--possibly in an awkward location.

Quote from: Omega;9155081: So you ignored the rules then complain when something breaks?

Did you just ignore all the nuances of what I wrote? We can't really have a conversation if you do that.

Quote from: Omega;9155082: Since you seem to be gunning for 5e. Guess you would see it like that. :rolleyes:

Nope, 5e has many elements of a good game, and I've had good sessions with it. I'm just pointing out the druid is busted in particular, while touching on the fact that caster supremacy is still a problem and the short/long rest mechanic doesn't make for a strong balancing element in any reasonably diverse campaign.

It's a symptom that has been present in every WotC edition of D&D.  A lot of the controls on classes got removed with no replacements.  IIRC 2e the druids didn't get shapechange until several levels later, had higher stat requirements than basic classes, and had the hierarchy to deal with.  A lot of that was disappointing to players who wanted to pull the stunts that they now pull with Druids because the character often died or the campaign ended before they got all their cool toys.  Now it is all front loaded with some partial gating in the form of movement restrictions on wild shape, a bogus restriction on uses per short rest, and a requirement to have "seen the animal before."

People seem to also be forgetting that SL stated that the group was 12th level.  That's a plenty experienced bunch.  Since it is Eberron and urban from the sounds of it that reduces a lot of the power of Druids but they were still strong.  By 12th level if a party has been travelling the wilderness they will have seen a lot of wild animals.  We don't put them on our encounter sheets because they aren't encounters.  A pack of wolves generally won't attack a party of healthy humans but you sure as hell will see them.  Back when my mother in law still lived in Dawson Creek we used to see Moose eating leafs off the trees of people on the block, deer and wolves in the park across the street.  Here in Vancouver and in nearby Squamish I have seen Killer Whales, dolphins and grey whales (all from my offfice building) and Bald Eagles and Brown Bears.  That is just the "exotic" stuff.  Add in the usual urban vermin we have here -- coyotes, skunks, black bears, cougars, moles, mice, rats, pigeons, sea gulls.  Oh and I almost forgot Salmon and Sturgeon.  That is just a small list of the stuff you can see around here.

I've also traveled to Egypt, Australia (Queensland only but including snorkelling in the Great Barrier Reef), Maui, and different parts of Canada, the US, and Europe and that suddenly expands greatly.  Scorpions, desert fox, puffer fish, turtles, cassowary (in the wild!), kangaroos, koalas, humpback whales, road runners, prairie dogs.  Holy shit I've seen a lot of wildlife.

About limiting the power of the Druid by limiting the forms they have seen.  Don't do that it's just bad DMing.  I can't even describe how bad that is.  
You wouldn't let someone roll up a cavalier and then kill his horse.  That's a dick move.  If you don't want people shape shifting don't let them play a Druid.  

As has already been pointed out in combat the Druid is balanced.  It can tank but not DPS.

If your problem is the versatility and power if magic d&d might not be the game for you.  It's a high magic system.  Like ridiculously high.  If that's not what you want this isn't the system you want.

Related to the high magic in D&D.  It seems to me if it was a real place there would be simple and cheep counter measures.

For instance.  Every merchant has a iron plate they tap coins on to remove enchantment, or the scales might be better.  All the gates to the city have a permanent detect magic spell on them.  The wall sconces in the castle are enchanted with fairy fire that automatically surrounds anything invisible.  The Wizard's apprentices take turns monitoring the scrying pool any spell over 3rd level and they raise the alarm.  
 
This is again a different game, in d&d the players have magic and some of the things they are fighting.  That's fun but it doesn't make sense to me.  

This might be a different thread.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;915509With regard to summoning spells, the player gets to specify the number & CR of summoned creatures but the DM decides what exactly shows up. Each of the spell descriptions states that the DM has the statistics for what is summoned. So player says that he wants four beasts of challenge rating 1/2 and the DM decides what creatures within those parameters are actually summoned.

If you let the player flip through the MM and cherry pick the most advantageous creature every time then you might conclude that the spell is "broken". This is not the case. It is the DM without the balls to enforce the rules who is broken.

That's a very interesting way to look at the rules on page 225 of the 5e PHB. Are we talking about the same game?

"You summon fey spirits that take the form of beasts..." is what the spell says. They're not even animals they're...whatever they want to be. Why would they choose something that isn't appropriate? Where does it say the DM decides exactly what form the fey spirits take? You mean the DM can just say "Okeedoke, you get some cows which I'll call whatever CR you ask for. Again." every time, even when the player really just wants an otter to swim around and check for underwater exits? That's...supremely dickish, no?

I suspect my players might riot if I try that, but "the DM can just be a dick" seems to be a poor way to interpret how that spell works. I really think rolling randomly would be better than just pure DM dickishness.

in my opinion, of course.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;915328How would you balance the Druid?

Well, I still haven't gotten to test 5e in play, but assuming the OP is accurate and it is overpowered, I can certainly imagine up a more constrained ability. Why not just make wildshape 'you become the animal in question.' As in: you have the exact same stat block as the animal (excepting that you can turn back into a druid if you want). If you die as the animal, you're dead. Thus a druid who becomes a sparrow or rat for infiltration is gambling since they now have 1 or 2 hp. turn into a bear to fight? That's good for the few levels where a bear is actually challenging, but your proficiency bonus as a bear doesn't go up. I think that's similar to how it worked in AD&D.

The whole druidy shapeshifting thing, in any game I've ever played, is tough to deal with because fly. Fly, fly, fly.

"Okay, you're looking out across a huge chasm, where-"
"I turn into a bird and fly over!"
"...okay..."

"As you approach the town, you notice_"
"Wait! I'm gonna turn into a bird and scout ahead."
"...okay..."

"When you enter the tavern, you see--"
"Wait! Can I fly through the window instead?"
"Why"
"I dunno..."
"...whatever..."

(I hate Druids)

don't anyone tell cranebump about aarokocra.

...or pixies

...or raven familiars


...or wizards

Quote from: Willie the Duck;915578
don't anyone tell cranebump about aarokocra.

...or pixies

...or raven familiars


...or wizards

Noooo! Don't tell them about Rocs either!

P.S. Yeah, I hate all that stuff, too, wizards included. :-)


By the way, on topic: some of my DW players also play regular 5E, and, to a one, agree with 5th druid brokenness, regards to wild shape.

Quote from: Headless;915535If your problem is the versatility and power if magic d&d might not be the game for you.  It's a high magic system.  Like ridiculously high.  If that's not what you want this isn't the system you want.

  WotC has defined D&D as "the game where you fight monsters with magic."

Quote from: Doom;915539That's a very interesting way to look at the rules on page 225 of the 5e PHB. Are we talking about the same game?

"You summon fey spirits that take the form of beasts..." is what the spell says. They're not even animals they're...whatever they want to be. Why would they choose something that isn't appropriate? Where does it say the DM decides exactly what form the fey spirits take? You mean the DM can just say "Okeedoke, you get some cows which I'll call whatever CR you ask for. Again." every time, even when the player really just wants an otter to swim around and check for underwater exits? That's...supremely dickish, no?

I suspect my players might riot if I try that, but "the DM can just be a dick" seems to be a poor way to interpret how that spell works. I really think rolling randomly would be better than just pure DM dickishness.

in my opinion, of course.

On the other hand, it says the fey spirits take the form of beasts. The fey do it. Not the player tells the fey to show up as a certain animal.

Quote from: cranebump;915583Noooo! Don't tell them about Rocs either!

P.S. Yeah, I hate all that stuff, too, wizards included. :-)


By the way, on topic: some of my DW players also play regular 5E, and, to a one, agree with 5th druid brokenness, regards to wild shape.

They still have Cloak of the Bat in 5e?

Quote from: Doom;915539That's a very interesting way to look at the rules on page 225 of the 5e PHB. Are we talking about the same game?

"You summon fey spirits that take the form of beasts..." is what the spell says. They're not even animals they're...whatever they want to be. Why would they choose something that isn't appropriate? Where does it say the DM decides exactly what form the fey spirits take? You mean the DM can just say "Okeedoke, you get some cows which I'll call whatever CR you ask for. Again." every time, even when the player really just wants an otter to swim around and check for underwater exits? That's...supremely dickish, no?

I suspect my players might riot if I try that, but "the DM can just be a dick" seems to be a poor way to interpret how that spell works. I really think rolling randomly would be better than just pure DM dickishness.

in my opinion, of course.

Page 225 "The DM has the creatures statistics"

and this from the FAQ from one of the designers.

QuoteQ: When you cast a spell like conjure woodland beings, does the spellcaster or the DM choose the creatures that are conjured?

A: A number of spells in the game let you summon creatures. Conjure animals, conjure celestial, conjure minor elementals, and conjure woodland beings are just a few examples.
Some spells of this sort specify that the spellcaster chooses the creature conjured. For example, find familiar gives the caster a list of animals to choose from.
Other spells of this sort let the spellcaster choose from among several broad options. For example, conjure minor elementals offers four options. Here are the first two:
•
One elemental of challenge rating 2 or lower
•
Two elementals of challenge rating 1 or lower
The design intent for options like these is that the spellcaster chooses one of them, and then the DM decides what creatures appear that fit the chosen option. For example, if you pick the second option, the DM chooses the two elementals that have a challenge rating of 1 or lower.
A spellcaster can certainly express a preference for what creatures shows up, but it’s up to the DM to determine if they do. The DM will often choose creatures that are appropriate for the campaign and that will be fun to introduce in a scene.

Quote from: Doom;915539That's a very interesting way to look at the rules on page 225 of the 5e PHB. Are we talking about the same game?

"You summon fey spirits that take the form of beasts..." is what the spell says. They're not even animals they're...whatever they want to be. Why would they choose something that isn't appropriate? Where does it say the DM decides exactly what form the fey spirits take? You mean the DM can just say "Okeedoke, you get some cows which I'll call whatever CR you ask for. Again." every time, even when the player really just wants an otter to swim around and check for underwater exits? That's...supremely dickish, no?

Well what about summoning 8 pixies every single time regardless of how appropriate it might be for the terrain just for the awesome spell casting power?

Players can be dicks too.

The fair way to handle it is with tables based on prevailing terrain. That way a player in an aquatic environment is likely to get those otters but a player in the underdark has little if any chance to get pixies. The tables can be weighted to give the most terrain appropriate results with a few exceptions on the extreme ends of the curve because magic.

Quote from: Harlock;915593They still have Cloak of the Bat in 5e?

Cloak of the Bat(r)

And Broom of Flying(u)
And Carpet of Flying(vr)
And the Griffon and Fly Figurines of Wonderous Power(r)
And Potion of Flying(vr)
And Potion of Gaseous Form(r)
And the Bird version of Quaal's Feather Token(r 15% chance) Dont tell crane its roc.
And Wand of Polymorphing(r)
And Winged Boots(u)
And Wings of Flying(r)

Did I miss any? Do boots of Levitation(r) And Horseshoes of the Zephyr(vr) count? :D

Well, you finally got me on one. That definitely makes summoning a bit less ridiculous.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;915601The fair way to handle it is with tables based on prevailing terrain. That way a player in an aquatic environment is likely to get those otters but a player in the underdark has little if any chance to get pixies. The tables can be weighted to give the most terrain appropriate results with a few exceptions on the extreme ends of the curve because magic.

Agreed, there really should have been tables or the like. Man, wonder who suggested that...

Quote from: Doom;915607Agreed, there really should have been tables or the like. Man, wonder who suggested that...

Seems the idea was that the DM would be making the random tables based on the locale. Theres a section in the DMG on how to. But for summons types seems its more because the summons are more fluid and versatile instead of a fixed random loadout. Just the Animals and Woodland Beings ones alone one youd need a table for CRs 1/4 to 2 for each. Elementals up to CR 9. Celestials to CR 5 and so on.

They could have stuck to something more fixed in level. But 5e seems to be all about versatility in some way.

Coming back to this, here's a fix I've been thinking about for addition to my table rules document:

- (page 67) Wild Shape. In the second bullet point, change the first few sentences to this: "When you transform, you assume the beast's hit points and Hit Dice. Then, if the beast has more hit points than your true form currently does, reduce its maximum hit points until they equal your true form's (this does not count as damage)."

EDIT: Obviously this would apply to polymorph and shapechange as well.

Easiest fix is you just use your own Druid HP instead of the animal's. Thus the temp HP issue is wholly dead. When you're at 0 HP you're unconscious; no bleed over tabulation. Less bookkeeping, less math, less ablative bloating, less heedless animal destruction.

You already get enough other animal advantages, but this way it shifts the feature into heavier exploration than ablative combat.

That makes assuming a combat form rather useless then. Whats the point other than the imagined threat of the shapechanger getting essentially temp HP? Keep in mind that any excess damage they take if they drop carries over.

Also why apply it to Polymorph and Shapechange? Polymorph is castable only a limited number of times even at the higher levels and Shapechange costs 1500gp a use and even more in how many times can cast. (True Polymorph though is pretty cheap to cast but still limited.) And both polymorphs leaves the target with the mental stats of said form too. (Animal Shapes doesnt have that limitation.)

And is this also being applied in reverse to forms with less HP than the PC? If not then it comes across as just a backhanded nerf.

And what about the Warlock spamming False Life? Thats an at will handfull of temp HP over and over.

I said for the druid feature. Polymorph is a separate case and one I am not as concerned about if you return martial interrupt during casting.

As for lowering its combat viability, I could care less. Switching to exploration emphasis, and shifting where nothing is guaranteed to be as it seems, works my conception of the mysteries of the moon and life's mutability. No need or interest in making it viable as a meat shield wall. They'll be fine, they still have spells.

Also using your own Druid HP does not lower your HP for a smaller animal. It was quite clear in the first sentence.

I'm sorry Opaopa, no druid player I'm likely to GM for will accept that.

Quote from: Omega;918284Also why apply it to Polymorph and Shapechange? Polymorph is castable only a limited number of times even at the higher levels and Shapechange costs 1500gp a use and even more in how many times can cast. (True Polymorph though is pretty cheap to cast but still limited.) And both polymorphs leaves the target with the mental stats of said form too. (Animal Shapes doesnt have that limitation.)

Hmm, good point.

The Moon Druid in my Golarion game is powerful but not dominant. She was very powerful levels 2-4 of course (CR 1 at level 2 is pretty ridiculous), but at level 6-8 a CR 2 form is no longer a big deal in combat. Scouting is limited by the vulnerability of small animal forms since they use animal stats, not Druid stats. And unlike 3e there's no wildshaped spellcasting (or even talking!) so she spends most of her time in human form. I'd say recently the Shadow Monk has been more powerful due to his use of Ki points to Stun enemy casters and leaders.

My game is set in Varisia, Golarion (using the Runelords & Shattered Star APs), so I allow temperate & some sub-tropical creatures and some Ice Age creatures, I expect she'll have seen a mammoth by level 18, I allow cave bears, but no dinosaurs.

I haven't really seen any class dominate totally in my 5e games, though Barbarian is very strong and Paladin is oddly dull though not underpowered. Fighter is a bit weak in combat, Rogue is a bit weak in combat but has useful out of combat abilities. No one plays Rangers, the opposite of 4e and indicating a bit of design failure - 5e screwed up both Rangers & Paladins IMO by making them spell-centric, not what most people look for in those classes.

Quote from: Omega;9155081: So you ignored the rules then complain when something breaks?

2: Since you seem to be gunning for 5e. Guess you would see it like that. :rolleyes:

5e is definitely designed around GM judgement/Mother May I. People who don't like that would be better off with a different system - 4e for instance runs well out of the box. 5e is not intended to be 'player empowering', it's much much closer to old school 'GM as benevolent dictator'.

Quote from: Headless;915535You wouldn't let someone roll up a cavalier and then kill his horse.

Er... if that is the natural consequence of play, I certainly would, and so would any decent GM.

A decent DM would tell some up front that the adventures were going to start on a boat and the go underground, so you can play a cavileer, but you won't get a horse.  

And we aren't talking about natural consequences of play we are talking about a mid game nerf because someone is being too creative with wild shape.

Quote from: S'mon;9183425e is definitely designed around GM judgement/Mother May I.

Somewhat ironic, given that the man in charge introduced "Mother May I" as a negative term to online RPG discourse.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;918382Somewhat ironic, given that the man in charge introduced "Mother May I" as a negative term to online RPG discourse.

Mearls? Or are you taking yet another self-congratulatory piss on Gygax's grave? :D

#WhatDecadesLongGrudgeAgainstSomeoneYouNeverMetWouldJesusHold?

Quote from: S'mon;918341I haven't really seen any class dominate totally in my 5e games, though Barbarian is very strong and Paladin is oddly dull though not underpowered. Fighter is a bit weak in combat, Rogue is a bit weak in combat but has useful out of combat abilities. No one plays Rangers, the opposite of 4e and indicating a bit of design failure - 5e screwed up both Rangers & Paladins IMO by making them spell-centric, not what most people look for in those classes.

This is where you see a big difference in builds and choices within a class. You might have one fighter who just doesn't look overly impressive, yet beside him is another at only level 6 who dishes out six attacks doing 100+ damage the first round thanks to Sentinel/Polearm Master/Great Weapon Master. And hiding behind the wizard is the halfling rogue fires twice every round with a hand crossbow for respectable damage thanks to Sneak Attack, Sharpshooter, and Crossbow Expert.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;918309I'm sorry Opaopa, no druid player I'm likely to GM for will accept that.

Means you haven't gored your table enough with your viking hat. :p

There's already a growing list of things I'd edit out or substitute if I'd run another non-RAW homegame of 5e. But as my issues goes, I don't know if it really breaches my top 5. In a pile of strong stuff and unintended consequences I don't consider it too terrible; not ideal for me, but relatively irritating, mostly in fits and starts 'til lv 20.

Well the good news is that if a shifted Druid is reduced to zero HP by Disintigrate then they dont revert back. They disintigrate into dust and are gone. :eek:

Quote from: Omega;918455Well the good news is that if a shifted Druid is reduced to zero HP by Disintigrate then they dont revert back. They disintigrate into dust and are gone. :eek:

That actually is really useful to know about spell & feature interactions. More spheres of annihilation everybody! Put them everywhere, like inside the mouths of demon heads in bas relief friezes!

Quote from: CRKrueger;918383Mearls? Or are you taking yet another self-congratulatory piss on Gygax's grave? :D

  No, I tracked this down a few years ago, and Mearls did seem to be the origin point, although the term has drifted. Gygax blessed us with the roots of 'fantasy superheroes', although again, the term's come to mean something substantially different.

Quote#WhatDecadesLongGrudgeAgainstSomeoneYouNeverMetWouldJesusHold?

It's not Gygax I have an issue with; it's that small but noisy fringe of the OSR that uses his name and reputation like a bludgeon to try and shame anyone who prefers different ways of playing.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;918506It's not Gygax I have an issue with; it's that small but noisy fringe of the OSR that uses his name and reputation like a bludgeon to try and shame anyone who prefers different ways of playing.

You mean the ones who claim their games are the way it was 'meant to be played'?

As an alternative balancing measure, I've also been thinking about stunning the druid for 1 round when he's reduced to 0 in an alt form. It still leaves him with tons of HP, but it's less intrusive than my first proposal, he'd at least feel less invincible and the party would react accordingly.

Thoughts?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;918517As an alternative balancing measure, I've also been thinking about stunning the druid for 1 round when he's reduced to 0 in an alt form. It still leaves him with tons of HP, but it's less intrusive than my first proposal, he'd at least feel less invincible and the party would react accordingly.

Thoughts?

Yeah. I was not happy with the Druid just popping back up after being "killed" in animal form. That has still got to be traumatic even if they were in Coyote form. :D

That was actually a self imposed limit Kefra put on her Druid as she didnt like that pop-up feature either. The DM did discuss the optional massive damage rule and how that might make a shapeshifters life excessively difficult.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;918517As an alternative balancing measure, I've also been thinking about stunning the druid for 1 round when he's reduced to 0 in an alt form. It still leaves him with tons of HP, but it's less intrusive than my first proposal, he'd at least feel less invincible and the party would react accordingly.

Thoughts?

If it works for your group and your players are fine with it, go for it. But I'd never play a druid with that limitation. The druid in my party has already almost completely abandoned wild shape for now because she's in one of those lulls where it's become nearly useless, especially for what we're doing. Her attacks aren't magical, so almost everything we fight takes half damage or is outright immune to her animal-form strikes. And her strongest combat forms get taken out in two hits because of low HP relative to our level and abysmal AC. She likely won't use the ability much until 6th level, which is still many sessions off. So for what I've experienced, I'd say absolutely not to any sort of outright nerf to the druid's shifting ability. I maintain what they really need is a more evenly leveled power curve since being amazing at level 2 and incredibly weak at 5 is silly to me.

But for you? Maybe that works for your campaign. All you can do is suggest it and see what your players think about the issue.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;918513You mean the ones who claim their games are the way it was 'meant to be played'?

Why all the Nvidia hate?

Quote from: CRKrueger;918563Why all the Nvidia hate?

I take umbrage against anyone who claims there's badwrongfun, and those people who tout that their game is how it's 'really meant to be played' are shouting "MY WAY IS THE RIGHT WAY!  YOU'VE BEEN DOING IT WRONG!" to me.

Which is pretty much the antithesis of what Mr. Gygax has been purported to say about D&D.

Quote from: Brand55;918395This is where you see a big difference in builds and choices within a class. You might have one fighter who just doesn't look overly impressive, yet beside him is another at only level 6 who dishes out six attacks doing 100+ damage the first round thanks to Sentinel/Polearm Master/Great Weapon Master. And hiding behind the wizard is the halfling rogue fires twice every round with a hand crossbow for respectable damage thanks to Sneak Attack, Sharpshooter, and Crossbow Expert.

A Barbarian can take the same Feats a Fighter can, Fighters only get slightly more. Eg my Barbarian used Polearm Master & Great Weapon Master with Reckless Attack for ridiculous damage, and attacking from 10' then stepping back meant I'd get a free attack on enemy closing so I rarely even got attacked.

Quote from: KingCheops;915531I've also traveled to

On a jet plane, right?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;918564I take umbrage against anyone who claims there's badwrongfun, and those people who tout that their game is how it's 'really meant to be played' are shouting "MY WAY IS THE RIGHT WAY!  YOU'VE BEEN DOING IT WRONG!" to me.

Which is pretty much the antithesis of what Mr. Gygax has been purported to say about D&D.

It's OK to be in the wrong again, darlin', as long as you don't make a habit out of it. Besides, you just precious when you're all pouty! "Umbrage!" Oo-ee, like a schoolmarm fixin' ta flounce on outta here!
:D
/poke... poke, poke

Quote from: Opaopajr;918579It's OK to be in the wrong again, darlin', as long as you don't make a habit out of it. Besides, you just precious when you're all pouty! "Umbrage!" Oo-ee, like a schoolmarm fixin' ta flounce on outta here!
:D
/poke... poke, poke

Uh?... Chris is right you know on both counts. Moreso on the second point.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;918564I take umbrage against anyone who claims there's badwrongfun,

Good thing I have never seen anyone actually claim that then.

Quote from: Omega;918581Uh?... Chris is right you know on both counts. Moreso on the second point.

I, as OSR Pontifex Maximus and Grand Mufti, denounce your rank heresy and demand satisfaction! Badwrongfun! Stone the idolater! lalalalala!
:D

Quote from: Opaopajr;918599I, as OSR Pontifex Maximus and Grand Mufti, denounce your rank heresy and demand satisfaction! Badwrongfun! Stone the idolater! lalalalala!
:D

Does Pundit know you're laying claim to his title? :D

Quote from: S'mon;918567A Barbarian can take the same Feats a Fighter can, Fighters only get slightly more. Eg my Barbarian used Polearm Master & Great Weapon Master with Reckless Attack for ridiculous damage, and attacking from 10' then stepping back meant I'd get a free attack on enemy closing so I rarely even got attacked.

Sure, that combination works great. But the fighter will get that combination faster unless you restrict yourself to playing a variant human. Even if you do pick the human, the fighter can grab Sentinel faster (a lot faster, depending on your race choice), and that Feat is fantastic with Polearm Master because it can stop an enemy outside of its melee range and allows great control of the nearby battlefield. He won't need to leave himself vulnerable (especially from ranged attacks and spells) by recklessly attacking and can use Precision Attack to hit just as often with GWM's extra damage.

Both classes have their advantages and can be absolutely brutal in combat. And they can both be utterly screwed in the wrong campaign if the GM is stingy with magic weapons and starts throwing the right sort of enemies their way.

Another thing we discussed was allowing advantage to attacking forms that are classed large or up since as is in 5e there is no penalty for being a bigger target. (except vs the Hunter path Ranger)

Quote from: Brand55;918647Sure, that combination works great. But the fighter will get that combination faster unless you restrict yourself to playing a variant human. Even if you do pick the human, the fighter can grab Sentinel faster (a lot faster, depending on your race choice), and that Feat is fantastic with Polearm Master because it can stop an enemy outside of its melee range and allows great control of the nearby battlefield. He won't need to leave himself vulnerable (especially from ranged attacks and spells) by recklessly attacking and can use Precision Attack to hit just as often with GWM's extra damage.

Both classes have their advantages and can be absolutely brutal in combat. And they can both be utterly screwed in the wrong campaign if the GM is stingy with magic weapons and starts throwing the right sort of enemies their way.

I played Variant Human of course. I was going to take Sentinel but another PC did so I focused more on massive destruction. If anything I wanted enemies to come at me since I was ridiculously durable as well as massively destructive, so in the end I often got close to encourage them to attack me instead of the squishies. But it was my choice.

Found this selection of possible changes to Wild Shape:

http://nevinera.net/5e-wildshape-variant/

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;918909Found this selection of possible changes to Wild Shape:

http://nevinera.net/5e-wildshape-variant/

QuoteYour forms can be entered and left as an action (bonus action for Moon druids), and have no time or frequency limits. Their HP are persisted for each form, and are recovered like player HP (spend their HD to recover health during short rests unless unconcious, recover HP and dice during long rests). Conditions are also persisted, but are removed with even a short rest.

Way too abusable.

QuoteForms with HP less than 4x druid level may use that as their HP instead.

Uh. No?

QuotePhysical skill bonuses are optionally recalculated using your proficiency and the shape's stats. If the beast has a higher skill bonus than that, you may keep theirs instead.

Uh... Hell no?

QuoteMoon druids may choose to use their spell attack bonus instead of the form's attack bonus, and may choose to use their spell DC instead of the form's ability DCs. Note: you can leave this change out to reduce complexity, or possibly make the option available starting at level 8 or 9.

Also no.

QuoteIf a Druid of the Moon casts Barkskin on themselves, they may choose to cast it on one of their forms instead, even while they are not using that form.

uh. Fuck no?

And so on and so fourth freaking no.

Oh dear god, those are terrible. Why even bother with fixes then?; these are so permissive. The only one I liked was #4:

Having a form's HP reduced to zero reverts you to your normal form, deals overflow damage, and also stuns you until the end of your next turn. A form with zero HP cannot be used (and its HP cannot be recovered) until a long rest.

And even still that's needless bookkeeping that doesn't improve the game, let alone truly mitigate the feature's power. Are you sure my fix is too restrictive compared to 'giving away the farm'?
:confused:

From what you've clarified about what you don't like, I don't think this is remotely in the same county of you want.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;918909Found this selection of possible changes to Wild Shape:

http://nevinera.net/5e-wildshape-variant/

I'd be firmly against using those rules, but for completely opposite reasons than Omega.

Just what role do you see the druid playing in any given campaign? That would go a long way to telling you what sort of changes, if any, you should be looking at implementing.

Damage? Right now druids rank near the bottom at pumping out damage, especially in wild form. Those changes just make them worse to the point that lower-level druids might as well stick to shillelagh.

Tanking? Druids are one of the best tanks, right behind the barbarian, but those changes will hurt them. A lot. So the druid's primary role in combat is going to take a massive hit. Even adding the barkskin benefit is not that useful because it's Concentration; it will never stay up (AC 16 is not great for a melee tank without resistance or tons of HP to rely on), so every druid would be forced to be a variant human to take War Caster or Resilient at chargen just to get any benefit from it.

Utility? Also a huge strength currently, but then also something that suffers mightily with those rules by forcing the druid into a single form and making them choose it ahead of time. Does your druid want a few more hit points (with awful AC and a single weak attack) or a scout form that might prove useless today? Druid spells certainly don't offer the sort of utility that wizards benefit from to make up the difference.

Honestly, the one that really caught my eye was the restriction on multiattacks until level 5, which makes complete sense given the similar restriction for every other class, even the revised beastmaster ranger they just published in Unearthed Arcana. That would probably resolve a lot of the concerns about how strong the class is from lvl 2 to 6.

It isn't really the strength of the attacks that's the issue, it's the freakishly huge amount of hit points...and it all comes back with a short rest.

Now, certainly, some dungeons can be on a tight timeline, but you're always being hounded to the point that you can't take a short rest (because doing so gives nearly 3 digits of hit points to one character, plus the recovery possibilities all others get), it's warping the game on that alone.

Then you toss in all the other possibilities, like utility. You'd pretty much have to give the fighter 50 temp hp at ever short rest to put it on the same level. Theoretically, at higher levels, it's not so bad...but now you have to factor in various feats and spells, making it tough to really have an apples to apples comparison.

Quote from: Doom;919204It isn't really the strength of the attacks that's the issue, it's the freakishly huge amount of hit points...and it all comes back with a short rest.

You're right, I'm just having a hard time settling on a solution. Getting stunned when you hit 0 hp in a form might be both too harsh and not really a fix since the enemies would still have to make it through a ton of ablation that all comes back on a rest anyway.

Here are some other possibilities:
- If you hit 0 hp in a form you take a level of exhaustion.
- If you hit 0 hp in a form you can't wild shape again for 1 minute.
- Wild Shape does not replace your HP, just gives you a low-ish number of temporary HP and you never get 'knocked out' of a form.
- Each time you wild shape you must give up one of you healing hit dice.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;919239You're right, I'm just having a hard time settling on a solution. Getting stunned when you hit 0 hp in a form might be both too harsh and not really a fix since the enemies would still have to make it through a ton of ablation that all comes back on a rest anyway.

No its not too harsh nor too lenient. Someone can hopefully revive them if they go down. Short rest recovery doesnt do the Druid any good if they die same as nigh unlimited False Life extra HP doesnt make the Warlock invincible. Hence why we settled on no pop-up on being taken down to 0 in animal form.

Heres what we use.
1: Dropping to 0 HP in animal form is the same as for everyone else. Unconcious. This is the simplest one.

2: Kefra suggested this one herself. Still testing it. Each TF or short rest allows the druid to expend their beast shapes HD to heal the damaged form. Same as the character can to their regular self. Also just like the Rangers animal companion and familliars can. Little more bookeeping and the GM thinks its excessive restriction since we get short rests so rarely and have never abused short rests. And Kefra and I are kinda reliant on those. We get along fine without.

3: Massive damage rules are in effect! Mostly a hazard to the smaller low HP forms.

Quote from: Omega;919395Heres what we use.
1: Dropping to 0 HP in animal form is the same as for everyone else. Unconcious. This is the simplest one.

Just to clarify...
Unconscious with all the the druid's true form HP intact, OR
unconscious because the druid's true form HP are ALSO reduced to 0?

If it's the first one, how long does he stay unconscious?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;919487Just to clarify...
Unconscious with all the the druid's true form HP intact, OR
unconscious because the druid's true form HP are ALSO reduced to 0?

If it's the first one, how long does he stay unconscious?

Unconcious with the druid back to whatever HP they had when they changed, plus any carryover from the KO blow or any followups.

And a small digression. Carryover damage is one of the major threats to anyone shifted. Moreso if you interpret the rules such that damage after KO isnt just absorbed like normal. So your bear goes down and 2 points carry over. But someone wacks it again for good measure for 6 more so that carries over too.

Either way everyone at both tables agreed that popping back up after being KOed and forced to revert was not very "realistic" in context.

Either way basic stabalizing from someone else will revive them.

I'm a bit late to the party but after reading through the thread it covered many of my concerns about the Druid Wild shape ability.

Now perhaps I'm just a hard core DM but I've never had a problem with telling Players NO from time to time. Sometimes shit players can do in the Rules as Written, or come up with on their own are just flat out to powerful, if not down right game breaking. There is more than 1 way to skin a cat, and if the Druid can't shape shift into a Dragon and has to settle for a Sparrow so be it.

Some of the limitations I've considered placing on Druid Shape Shift are

• Only allow shifting into non-magical animals.
• Only allow shifting into non-magical currently non extinct animals
• HP's remain the same when in animal form, so uses the Druids current HP. No Temp HP bolster then when you switch back you have your Human HP.
• HP becomes the animals HP. So a 1HP rat, if the Druid takes 1HP then they are dead. Makes the Druid think a bit harder about taking on weaker animal forms. Cost/Benefit analysis.
• Any cuts, bruises, sickness, disease, curse, transfer over to the animal form. It's a poly-morph not a cure all.
• I would apply these limitations onto the Poly-morph spell as well, granted without the natural animal restrictions.
• Make the transformation to and from animal form take a full round where the Druid/Animal is helpless and more vulnerable to attack.
• Make their clothing/gear/weapons drop off them and not "magically" go with them when they shape shift. So if they were to shift back to Human form in a different spot they'd be naked.

You could use one of them? pick and choose a few or use them all. I think the versitilaty of being able to change into an Animal even if it's mundane and weak has sooooooo much versatility and potential it's still an amazingly flexible and powerful ability.

Quote from: Gwarh;921254Some of the limitations I've considered placing on Druid Shape Shift are

• Only allow shifting into non-magical animals.
• Only allow shifting into non-magical currently non extinct animals
• HP's remain the same when in animal form, so uses the Druids current HP. No Temp HP bolster then when you switch back you have your Human HP.
• HP becomes the animals HP. So a 1HP rat, if the Druid takes 1HP then they are dead. Makes the Druid think a bit harder about taking on weaker animal forms. Cost/Benefit analysis.
• Any cuts, bruises, sickness, disease, curse, transfer over to the animal form. It's a poly-morph not a cure all.
• I would apply these limitations onto the Poly-morph spell as well, granted without the natural animal restrictions.
• Make the transformation to and from animal form take a full round where the Druid/Animal is helpless and more vulnerable to attack.
• Make their clothing/gear/weapons drop off them and not "magically" go with them when they shape shift. So if they were to shift back to Human form in a different spot they'd be naked.

You could use one of them? pick and choose a few or use them all. I think the versitilaty of being able to change into an Animal even if it's mundane and weak has sooooooo much versatility and potential it's still an amazingly flexible and powerful ability.

1: Thats allready in the 5e rules. Aside from the Stirge (which has no place at all listed as a natural animal) all the listed critters are either normal or giant versions. And some of the giant versions occur in real life nature to some degree. (While others obviously dont)
2: Theres allready a check in place since the Druid has to have seen a dinosaur/prehistoric species before they can become one. That puts a major curb on the ability.
3: Uh? Sorry. No 50hp rats.
4: Not sure about death. But unconsciousness should have been the default. Possibly with massive damage trauma based on the animal forms HP. That would make small animal forms more challenging.
5: This is a grey area in 5e. Do status effects carry over to the beast form and back as well? We have been playing it that yes, poison or disease or things like curses and debuffs do carry over.
6: Some of the transformative spells have simmilar limitations as a Druid has. But "Only things you've seen" should apply.
7: Thats allready an option in the rules. Locking it to being unable to absorb the gear doent change much. The Druid does not get any benefit from absorbed gear. And players will just start commissioning or fashioning variable gear to bypass the problem so they can wear the gear AND get the benefits.

Quote from: Omega;9217751: Thats allready in the 5e rules. Aside from the Stirge (which has no place at all listed as a natural animal) all the listed critters are either normal or giant versions. And some of the giant versions occur in real life nature to some degree. (While others obviously dont)
2: Theres allready a check in place since the Druid has to have seen a dinosaur/prehistoric species before they can become one. That puts a major curb on the ability.
3: Uh? Sorry. No 50hp rats.
4: Not sure about death. But unconsciousness should have been the default. Possibly with massive damage trauma based on the animal forms HP. That would make small animal forms more challenging.
5: This is a grey area in 5e. Do status effects carry over to the beast form and back as well? We have been playing it that yes, poison or disease or things like curses and debuffs do carry over.
6: Some of the transformative spells have simmilar limitations as a Druid has. But "Only things you've seen" should apply.
7: Thats allready an option in the rules. Locking it to being unable to absorb the gear doent change much. The Druid does not get any benefit from absorbed gear. And players will just start commissioning or fashioning variable gear to bypass the problem so they can wear the gear AND get the benefits.

I agree with all your points. The Druid can only wildshape into beasts that they've seen; the GM certainly doesn't need to allow dinosaurs.

I'd just like to reiterate that the Moon Druid Wildshape issue really is only over a few levels where the CR is too high, too early. The Druid IMC is 7th level and wildshaping to CR 2 causes no combat issues. Wildshaping to non-combat forms is powerful but other PCs have powers of similar magnitude. The big issue is that CR 1 Wildshape at level 2 is vastly overpowered; CR 1 wildshape resembles the level 5 ablities of other classes such as multi-attack and fireball. If you are going to be playing a lot at levels 2-4 it merits house ruling, perhaps to CR 0.5 level 2-3, CR 1 level 4-5. For my own long term campaign it was an issue that went away quickly enough.

Quote from: Omega;9217757: Thats allready an option in the rules. Locking it to being unable to absorb the gear doent change much. The Druid does not get any benefit from absorbed gear. And players will just start commissioning or fashioning variable gear to bypass the problem so they can wear the gear AND get the benefits.

Well, one could nerf the variable gear option (/it working in this context), if this were seen as a problem. I know not having your gear was likely supposed to be a cost to the benefit of wildshape in 3e, and they proceeded to make it exceedingly easy to bypass almost immediately (which is probably why we're all sensitive to overpowered druids to this day. I certainly don't remember them stomping all over the game in 2e or earlier).

I however agree with others. Moon druid is overpowered in tightly constrained levels of play. If you're playing a one-off adventure at low-mid levels, expect a lot of moon druids. Otherwise, it isn't much of a problem.

Lets look at the Moon Druid at level 2 with Brown Bear:

AC 11: About dead average. Equivalent to an unarmoured character with a 12-13 DEX. This is the big weakness of the form. Its an easy target.

34 hp: This is the biggy at level 2. A Fighter will average only 15 HP before CON mods and its not till around level 4 before catching up. Depending on CON of course. More pressing might be the extra HP the form allows. 68 HP if used 3 times. This assumes the Druid is obsessively using the Bear only. But as noted before. My Warlock character can get 1d4+4 temp HP every round if need be at level 1.

2 attacks averaging 8 and 11: Not bad and it isnt till level 5 or so most non-dual wielding characters can get close to that.

Keep in mind that this is it till level 6 and dependent on if you've lucked out to have spotted things like a giant constrictor, etc. Theres the problem of no spellcasting while you keep up that form, and not so little problems like passages a large creature cant negotiate, necessitating dropping the form. You've only got 2 uses and who knows when the next short rest is.

YMMV. But thats not as great a boon as it appears.

Another issue I'm grappling with is the elemental form they get at level 10. My druid had a field day with that.

Elementals are resistant to non-magical weapons, effectively doubling their already sky high HP in worlds where most people don't get magical weapons and you don't want to deploy legions of high magic / extra dimensional critters.

The air elemental has incredible mobility, flying at a speed of 90 feet per round and making a joke out of many location-based challenges or those rare critters that could even attempt to take it on in combat.

The earth elemental glides through unworked earth and stone, leaving no passage to follow them through. This makes for incredible hit-and-run tactics in a huge range of terrain (how many burrowing critters do YOU field), and obsoletes many dungeons (either they waltz around a natural complex or they outline map a worked-stone complex).

Naturally the rest of the party is left out of these shenanigans, and the decision process of my party routinely came down to:
"Should we do this the hard but fun way or should we just send in the lone druid to cut this Gordian Knot at minimum risk?"

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;921992Another issue I'm grappling with is the elemental form they get at level 10. My druid had a field day with that.

Right. This is where the real trouble kicks in if. Kefra's got it but hasnt used it so far as it doesnt fit her idea of her Druid character or even the Circle of the Moon concept to her. Also it breaks the Moon Druids CR progression.

Some thoughts.

1: It uses up all your transformations. Thats still up to 10 hours of being a rock monster.
2: None of the forms are stealthy. They give their presences away in various ways. Some have movement restrictions too due to size or other factors.
3: Still cant wear their gear.
4: Cant be used if you've transformed allready and havent had a chance to rest.

Some irks

1: 5e elementals other than the Earth one have no severe element weaknesses. Adding in an element weakness for each would fix that.
2: Some potentially annoying special movement powers. Earth can at least be stymied by worked structures which means about 75% of all adventure locales.

So far no ones been particularly thrilled with the elemental form and Kefra talked with the GM and opted to just gain a Shambling Mound form for the same cost.

In general, they did a decent job of making the druid tame compared to 3.5. I made a druid with templates that could either be an effective spellcaster or an amazing tank. And, if I wanted to not do anything, I had my pet with templates too. I was a flying grappling, tank when necessary and a stand in the background spellcaster too. Tank my flying dire tiger and summon creatures for help = untouchable. So, they did a good job with leveling it out. Also, any class can be OP in 5e. I had a flying monk with a 20 AC when holding my kensai weapon. And using my Kai points I would hit for up to 32 points of damage in one turn - all at level 4. There are ways to do it anywhere if you look.

To add to your nightmare a bit, have the druid dip into monk for one level to get the wisdom ac bonus in wild shape.

Quote from: drhellier;1055625In general, they did a decent job of making the druid tame compared to 3.5. I made a druid with templates that could either be an effective spellcaster or an amazing tank. And, if I wanted to not do anything, I had my pet with templates too. I was a flying grappling, tank when necessary and a stand in the background spellcaster too. Tank my flying dire tiger and summon creatures for help = untouchable. So, they did a good job with leveling it out. Also, any class can be OP in 5e. I had a flying monk with a 20 AC when holding my kensai weapon. And using my Kai points I would hit for up to 32 points of damage in one turn - all at level 4. There are ways to do it anywhere if you look.

To add to your nightmare a bit, have the druid dip into monk for one level to get the wisdom ac bonus in wild shape.

The AC bonus may not stack depending on what WOTC eventually ruled. I know it does not with the barbarian Barbarian AC bonus for example. But I think it does still work for Druids. And keep in mind that not all animal forms have high enough DEX to matter. But might work for a Druid in say Cat form (DEX mod +2) or Giant Eagle (DEX mod +3). Whereas the Brown Bear has a DEX mod of 0 while Mammoth has a -1.

So it is YMMV is multiclassing into Monk would be worth the long term loss of unlimited use of wildshape.

And on a side note I updated the old thread over on BGG cataloguing all the beast shapes.

So, how does Disintegrate work against a shape changed Druid?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1055632So, how does Disintegrate work against a shape changed Druid?

AFAIK you still turn to dust at 0 hp.

BTW I GM'd Quillax the Moon Druid from 1st to 18th level (http://smonscurseofthecrimsonthrone.blogspot.com/) (player wrote most of the session accounts in that link) and I'd say over that span it was a well balanced, competent but not game breaking class. She never multiclassed and I would lean towards having the animal stats fully replace the PC stats (except INT/WIS/CHA) when wildshaping, so no game-breaking exploits were attempted.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1055632So, how does Disintegrate work against a shape changed Druid?

By the 5e rules if it reduces the shapechanged druid to 0 HP. They are destroyed as they never get the chance to revert. This was clarified in one of the errata.

QuoteQ: What happens if a druid using Wild Shape is reduced to
0 hit points by disintegrate? Does the druid simply leave
beast form?
A: The druid turns to dust, since the spell disinte-
grates you the instant you drop to 0 hit points.

Wildshape provides too much free HP.

But if the HP wasn't free, the low AC would make ever using wildshape to smack things prohibitive.

A great mechanical solution: Keep your HP and AC while wildshape even if it doesn't make sense (like wearing a shield).

A more immersive solution: Lose the same percentage of health to your base form that the animal form lost.
You may spend expend the animals HD to heal during a short rest that is separate from your own.

Reason: This allows for wildshape to be less costly if you have time post combat to heal up, while preventing it from being a giant HP buffer for your side in-combat.

Jeez, what's with people necro-ing my drivel all over the internet lately. :p

The "low ac balances it" is wrong. In older versions of AD&D, the loss of 4 points of AC (the typical loss here) was a big deal, especially at low levels. But 5e has shifted "low" quite a bit. So, what in, say, 3e, would mean an effective 400% increase in damage from reducing AC (and similar for older versions), is now only around a 50% bonus. Adding a couple hundred hit points more than offsets that at low level (and being able to "bonus action" in more HP on top of that) makes for mathematically pointless combats (that the other players can ignore while the druid solos it), on top of the hit points all being basically free.

Basically I just tossed Moon Druid from the game; the other type of druid isn't so insane, although it's tough to adapt adventures to realistically account for the built-in shape change which should be accounted for if the fantasy world really evolved.

It's easier bookkeeping to just keep your PC's Hit Points and open up access to forms that use fly/swim/climb/burrow/etc. As long as the CR progression range is kept low, you have a disgustingly powerful Exploration and Social feature. That switch from Combat to "the other two game pillars" is essentially a de facto archetype ban on some tables. ;)

Also, any tiny CR critter that can take more than one good hit is AWESOME roleplay consequences. "Why, squire, does that sparrow not die to my falcon's dive?" "I don't know, my lord. Fell magics, perhaps? Should we see?"

Quote from: Opaopajr;1055666It's easier bookkeeping to just keep your PC's Hit Points and open up access to forms that use fly/swim/climb/burrow/etc. As long as the CR progression range is kept low, you have a disgustingly powerful Exploration and Social feature. That switch from Combat to "the other two game pillars" is essentially a de facto archetype ban on some tables. ;)

Also, any tiny CR critter that can take more than one good hit is AWESOME roleplay consequences. "Why, squire, does that sparrow not die to my falcon's dive?" "I don't know, my lord. Fell magics, perhaps? Should we see?"

Exploration I get, but help me to understand how Wild Shape is "disgustingly powerful" in the Social pillar.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1055672Exploration I get

IME shapes useful for exploration are extremely vulnerable*, and a solo Wildshape-scouting druid in a dungeon is taking a huge risk. In any case a Wizard familiar can do the same without danger to PC life.

I don't recall any combat so trivial our Wildhaped druid could handle it alone. If she could handle it, the Goliath Barbarian could certainly handle it!

Basically, the Moon Druid power certainly looks OP at level 2, and is very strong through low levels, but increasingly insignificant at high levels when other classes can do things a lot more impressive. In double digit levels it became rare for the Moon Druid to Wildshape, while she could still tank, more commonly she would rely on her spells while the Barbarian took the front.

*A few weeks back we had a wildshaping druid turn into a crocodile to explore submerged tunnels into a black dragon's lair... was very lucky to make it back alive (just)!

There is a-lot of free HP in 5e. Everything from short rests to easily available basic healing potions to shapechange healing to some spells that grant temp extra HP.
For the Druid it kinda works as Moon path ones have that tendency to be on the front lines. But I think there should be some sort of penalty for effectively getting killed in beast form.
Thats up to the individual groups to figure out really.

But from watching Kefra and her Moon Druid in action we bounced around with the DM some ideas. Heres another one we tried.
1: Gain a level of exhaustion. A druid taking a-lot of risks could after a few short rests potentially kill themselves through accumulated exhaustion. Otherwise its stull going to leave them impaired if they got offed over three uses. And it gives a use for the oddly underused exhaustion rules.
2: Is knocked unconscious. This was the most bothersome part of the whole shapechange thing. You just effectively got killed but are awake and just fine?
3: Make a save or lose half your remaining HP on reversion. Though we found that the exhaustion and KO were overall enough to add some threat to shapechange deaths as being KOed leaves the person potentially very vulnerable.

Quote from: S'mon;1055673Basically, the Moon Druid power certainly looks OP at level 2, and is very strong through low levels, but increasingly insignificant at high levels when other classes can do things a lot more impressive. In double digit levels it became rare for the Moon Druid to Wildshape, while she could still tank, more commonly she would rely on her spells while the Barbarian took the front.

This was the same conclusion we came to over on BGG. Even with the shapechange healing potential the wildshapes started to drop off in usefullness after about level 5 or so. YMMV of course.

Quote from: Omega;1055677This was the same conclusion we came to over on BGG. Even with the shapechange healing potential the wildshapes started to drop off in usefullness after about level 5 or so. YMMV of course.

From what I recall, the animal forms CR 1 (lvl 2-5) and CR 2 (6-8) are very good. CR 3 (9-11) are still useful, but by 11th level spellcasting is generally the better option, and there aren't many high CR beast forms.

Its not just that there are no good high CR animals. If your Druid has never been to a prehistoric themed area then there are NO high CR beasts at all. Or giant animals are few o none.

at CR 6 There is just the Mammoth.
At CR 5 theres the Giant Croc, Giant shark and Triceratops
At CR 4 at least theres the elephant which might or might not be a rare sight in your campaign.
At CR 3 Ankylosaurus, Giant Scorpion, Killer Whale
And so on.
Even at CR 2 its alot of giant animals and a dinosaur. But at least theres some common animals to gain access to.
------------
Heres the extra animals I collected from the other books so far.

Volo's Guide adds some more beasts.

Auroch CR2
Cow CR1/4
Dolphin CR1/8

Cranium Rat CR0

Dimetrodon CR1/4
Brontosaurus CR5
Deinonychus CR1
Hadrosaurus CR1/4
Quetzalcoatalus CR2
Stegosaurus CR4
Velociraptor CR1/4

Kobold Inventor has a Skunk. No rating but Id say its CR0


Plane-Shift: Kaladesh adds one more

Gremlin CR1/2

Out of the Abyss adds 2 more

Female Steeder CR1
Male Steeder CR1/4
------------
Some more beasts to add!

Nothing new in Xanithars Guide. But it does add rules for limiting what animals a Druid knows based on the region they are from. Also new druid spells.

Oddly nothing new in Mordenkainens Tome.

Plane Shift Zendikar
Baloth: same stats and CR as a Triceratops. Woodcrasher Baloths also have a climbing Speed of 30
Murasa Oxen: same stats and CR as a giant goat.
Terastodon: same stats and CR as a mammoth.
Scythe Leopard: same stats and CR as a sabertooth.
Terra Stomper: same stats and CT as a T-Rex (which puts it outside the bounds of a druid but not outside the bounds possibly of some spells.)

Plane Shift Kaladesh
Missed this one. The Sky Leviathan, CR10. (which puts it outside the bounds of a druid but not outside the bounds possibly of some spells.)
And another missed. Drakes: Small ones use the Pteranodon and larger ones use the Giant Eagle.

Plane Shift Amonkhet
Drakes: Small ones use the Pteranodon and larger ones use the Giant Eagle.
Serpopard CR3
Cerodon: same stats and CR as a mammoth with the additional ability to deal double damage to structures and objects.

Plane Shift Ixalan
Brontodon: same as Brontosaurus from Volo.
Ceratops: same as a Triceratops
Aegisaur: uses Ankylosaur
Armasaur: uses Stegosaur from Volo.
Hammer Skulls: uses Giant Goat.
Aerosaur: use the Pteranodon or Quetzalquatalus from Volo.
Sailback: uses Giant Crocodile
Frilled Deathspitter CR1/2
Regisaur: uses T-Rex
Gishath, Sun's Avatar CR10. Another one outside the bounds of a Druid.
Macaw and Parrot: same as Raven
Horned Frog: same as giant frog
Piranha: same as Quippers and quipper swarms
Trilobite: same as Crab and Giant Crab

Plane Shift Dominaria
Kavu Predator CR2
Steel Keaf Kavu CR4

There might have been one or two missed as they were just reskins effectively but pretty sure bot all of them could pin down. Alot of repurposed beasts which is great as it gives DMs ideas and examples of how to go about this.

Giant ape is CR 7 - no good for wildshape but handy for Polymorph.

I remember feeling sorry for the Druid at level 9 at the dearth of new forms, and letting her wildshape into CR 3 Owlbear. :)

I'm late to the party but the house rulings I'd make on Druid Animal Form would be

• Allow the Druid to only know 1 animal form at a time. Think of it like their spirit animal. Must be choosen in advance.
• Allow the Druid to change their chosen animal form but require a ritual to make said change.
• Druids HP stays same regardless of animal changed into.
• Movement type, Damage, senses, etc as per animal form in the Monster Manual. (So turning into a mouse you'd not even do 1hp dmg per attack, but you'd be damn small and hard to hit)
  
• Druids are not allowed to change into magical creatures, only natural creatures. (So no chimeras, dragons or elementals)
  
• No spell casting allowed while in animal form, but the Druid can speak with other animals. (Maybe just others of the species they've changed into? Maybe other Mamals, Insects, etc, or maybe all creatures. DM's caveat)
  

Quote from: HappyDaze;1055672Exploration I get, but help me to understand how Wild Shape is "disgustingly powerful" in the Social pillar.

I think this is probably referring to eavesdropping on conversations as a mouse or other small creature. As a mouse, they are extremely stealthy and even if spotted won't arouse suspicion. That is potentially extremely useful within social circles.

In general, I tend to agree with Opaopajr that wildshape is extremely useful even without combat tanking. Most of my play in 5E has been in the range of levels 1-8, and I've found it very powerful in that range.

Quote from: Omega;1055710Its not just that there are no good high CR animals. If your Druid has never been to a prehistoric themed area then there are NO high CR beasts at all. Or giant animals are few o none.

at CR 6 There is just the Mammoth...

And that huge list is the other issue. Yes, the DM can restrict it all with "you have to have seen the animal" but now we're back where we started, trying to fix the problem by adding our own rules. But if you don't do that, then now you get a few "hmm, what's the bestest thing i can use..." situation, dragging the game down.

Quote from: Doom;1055739Yes, the DM can restrict it all with "you have to have seen the animal" but now we're back where we started, trying to fix the problem by adding our own rules.

No, that's the rule in the book. Maybe not a good rule, but it is what it is.

Yes, it's a rule in the book...but adjudication of it is harsh. Do druids hang out together ever? Are there zoos? Can illusions work well enough? How about various polymorphs? Scrying? Any game world which works under that rule is likely to have a work-around already built into the culture.

As noted above Xanithars Guide actually adds in some guidelines for animals a druid knows based on region/biome.

Quote from: Omega;1055761As noted above Xanithars Guide actually adds in some guidelines for animals a druid knows based on region/biome.

I was looking at them yesterday and they are pretty good. But it requires the GM not be a dick and the player not be a dick. 5e really empowers GM judgement in a way some people aren't comfortable with. We never had any problem IMC set in Golarion's Varisia, the Druid couldn't turn into dinosaurs but she could do brown & cave bears, giant elk, houseruled owlbear, sabretooth tiger etc, as well as small animals and birds. She could have turned into a CR5 giant crocodile at 15th but by then was rarely Wildshaping.

IMO it's clear the intent is the Druid should be familiar with the animals in their natural environment, zoos and illusions and polymorphs don't count any more than seeing a picture in a book. YMMV (if you're a bad GM) :D

some summons dont work either as they are just spirits shaped like animals or whatever.

Over on BGG early on there was a small blowup over the druid and some other 5e things which culminated in one member declaring that it was the players 'right' to know every animal in the MM. Or every spell. etc. Same sorts who were claiming that if a player was running a cleric then the DM must put undead in the adventure for them to turn. Its usually not that bad over there. But when BGG goes Foregy they go whole hog.

Quote from: Omega;1055807Over on BGG early on there was a small blowup over the druid and some other 5e things which culminated in one member declaring that it was the players 'right' to know every animal in the MM. Or every spell. etc. Same sorts who were claiming that if a player was running a cleric then the DM must put undead in the adventure for them to turn. Its usually not that bad over there. But when BGG goes Foregy they go whole hog.

5e isn't designed to work with dickhead players (or GMs) - as the discussions I saw this morning over at The Gaming Den make clear. :D

I kind of hate that 5e requires heavy subjective balancing like this.

Let's just simplify it to the GM saying, "nuh uh" and move on.

From my perspective, if characters have abilities like wildshape, they should work even in the worse case that the druid is Chris Pratt and knows every dinosaur. But you know, 5e doesn't have solid rules like that and they basically don't work well "as is", so the GM has to step in and rework player abilities using open ended caveats.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1055672Exploration I get, but help me to understand how Wild Shape is "disgustingly powerful" in the Social pillar.

Social espionage and emotional favortism. Many overlook animals (assuming no language), while others get attached, or even go out of their way to cultivate vurtuous public appearances with them. Be a mundane animal, a 'wild pet', or even a sacred (or ill omen) animal, and use human indifference or attachment to flip the script. ;)

Old tricks I well learned from other games where you could swap out into animal vessels. :)

Quote from: Rhedyn;1055816From my perspective, if characters have abilities like wildshape, they should work even in the worse case that the druid is Chris Pratt and knows every dinosaur.

Well it 'works' - the lost world dinosaur druid is more powerful than the druid restricted to medieval European animals, but it's not game breaking. I'd say it's a lot like wizard spellbooks, another open-ended power; it would be reasonable to allow druids to quest for unusual animals to acquire more forms.

Quote from: S'mon;1055781I was looking at them yesterday and they are pretty good. But it requires the GM not be a dick and the player not be a dick. 5e really empowers GM judgement in a way some people aren't comfortable with. We never had any problem IMC set in Golarion's Varisia, the Druid couldn't turn into dinosaurs but she could do brown & cave bears, giant elk, houseruled owlbear, sabretooth tiger etc, as well as small animals and birds. She could have turned into a CR5 giant crocodile at 15th but by then was rarely Wildshaping.

IMO it's clear the intent is the Druid should be familiar with the animals in their natural environment, zoos and illusions and polymorphs don't count any more than seeing a picture in a book. YMMV (if you're a bad GM) :D

I get people asking how long they have to "see" a creature before it counts.

If they see a T Rex for 5 seconds from across a field does it count?

Does it take a minute?

Just a glance?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1055837I get people asking how long they have to "see" a creature before it counts.

If they see a T Rex for 5 seconds from across a field does it count?

Does it take a minute?

Just a glance?

How about spending a Long Rest with one? Bit of Diane Fossey/Gorillas in the Mist?

You could be kind and allow 'attunement' to a form on a Short Rest, a la magic items.

Quote from: S'mon;1055829Well it 'works' - the lost world dinosaur druid is more powerful than the druid restricted to medieval European animals, but it's not game breaking. I'd say it's a lot like wizard spellbooks, another open-ended power; it would be reasonable to allow druids to quest for unusual animals to acquire more forms.

For wizards, though, the current rules guarantee that they gain two spells of their choice every time they level up. That means that any spell they find will be at most their third choice - probably less. So it's far less of a vital difference. This means that encountering a powerful enemy wizard will be notable, but not necessarily crucial.

For druids under current rules, it's quite possible that a creature they encounter will become their top pick wildshape. That means that as GM, if I have dinosaurs or other beasts in my adventure, it may majorly change the party balance.

This seems like more of a bug than a feature to me. As a GM, I'd prefer to be OK putting dinosaurs in my adventures without worrying that it will mess things up. I'd be inclined to do like wizards, and give druids a free choice of wildshape of their choice per level - but have other house rules to more strictly limit their power and flexibility. I'd lean towards lowering the CR available at lower levels, and also requiring a predefined limited number of forms - maybe one form at the start and adding one per level.

Of course giving a character the ability to arbitrarily assume the form of any animal is unbalanced. This should be obvious to anyone with even basic experience in game design or who has ever read Animorphs.

5e is going to be unbalanced for as long as the writers and community refuse to acknowledge that it is unbalanced. While 4e was much-maligned, it still tried to address the balance issues. 5e just undid all that work and then retread much of the same ground as 4e without realizing it because the writers seemingly blocked all memory of developing 4e.

There are many systemic reasons why 5e is unbalanced. It does not acknowledge that an imbalance exists even though "linear warriors, quadratic wizards" is an infamous cliche. It does not rely on a point-buy system for balance like GURPS or Mutants & Masterminds does. It does not try to buff other classes by giving them equally useful options.

So I will never play 5e.

Quote from: S'mon;1055838How about spending a Long Rest with one? Bit of Diane Fossey/Gorillas in the Mist?

You could be kind and allow 'attunement' to a form on a Short Rest, a la magic items.

That works if it's like a dog, but how do you do that with a T Rex. The kind of animal you'd quest to find or encounter in the jungle and be excited to use.

If there is a creature classified as a "beast" that you do not want a druid to wildshape into in your world, reclassify it as something else.  Likewise, if you want something else to be available, reclassify it as a "beast".  Done.  This is how the default rules handle it, and it is easy to modify.

Quote from: jhkim;1055846I'd be inclined to do like wizards, and give druids a free choice of wildshape of their choice per level - but have other house rules to more strictly limit their power and flexibility. I'd lean towards lowering the CR available at lower levels, and also requiring a predefined limited number of forms - maybe one form at the start and adding one per level.

I'm inclined to agree that would be a better approach. :) Like I said, the current system works - certainly better than it first appears, my original PHB was full of pencilled strike throughs in the Moon Druid region, later erased. But it certainly feels pretty half-arsed.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1055852If there is a creature classified as a "beast" that you do not want a druid to wildshape into in your world, reclassify it as something else.  Likewise, if you want something else to be available, reclassify it as a "beast".  Done.  This is how the default rules handle it, and it is easy to modify.

Agreed - that's what I did with the owlbear, to give a decent CR 3 combat option.

And because I have two cool owlbear minis. :)

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1055852If there is a creature classified as a "beast" that you do not want a druid to wildshape into in your world, reclassify it as something else.  Likewise, if you want something else to be available, reclassify it as a "beast".  Done.  This is how the default rules handle it, and it is easy to modify.

Quote from: S'mon;1055858Agreed - that's what I did with the owlbear, to give a decent CR 3 combat option.

And because I have two cool owlbear minis. :)

The monster types mechanic is a mind-numbingly stupid way to balance anything. If the developers thought it made sense as a way to balance anything at all, they really need to get their heads examined.

The mechanic itself is logically unsound (why can't a monster have two types?), poorly defined (what the hell is a monstrosity? what if a monster doesn't fit?), and relies on backwards world building. At least half of the types only make sense in a specifically D&D context and make no sense for any campaign setting not specifically built around the D&D rules. The distinction between "fey", "elementals" and "giants" is a perfect example: no mythology anywhere in the real world makes a distinction between those. Paracelsus, the guy who literally invented the concept of elementals, specifically referred to fairies as elementals. Norse mythology literally described giants as elemental beings, born from the elements and who lived on the Norse equivalent of elemental planes. In Scandinavian countries (http://humoncomics.com/trolls-from-four-countries) and the dictionary (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/troll), trolls range in size from dwarves to giants; the D&D troll is specifically one that appeared in a story by Poul Anderson. Speaking of real mythology, D&D lacks a "spirit" type even though this is a universal concept in comparative mythology. Don't get me started on how a 5e "spirit shaman" conversion is expected to work.

Quote from: jhkimI'd be inclined to do like wizards, and give druids a free choice of wildshape of their choice per level - but have other house rules to more strictly limit their power and flexibility. I'd lean towards lowering the CR available at lower levels, and also requiring a predefined limited number of forms - maybe one form at the start and adding one per level.

Quote from: S'mon;1055857I'm inclined to agree that would be a better approach. :) Like I said, the current system works - certainly better than it first appears, my original PHB was full of pencilled strike throughs in the Moon Druid region, later erased. But it certainly feels pretty half-arsed.

Well, I've played and run in several games with Moon Druids without using house rules, and we had fun - so in that sense it works. But with a decent GM and a good social contract, just about any system works.

Design-wise, it was a dumb choice that obviously could have been done better - in that sense I agree with BoxCrayonTales.

Overall, though, I think 5e is a reasonable system. Balance isn't a big issue for me usually, notably. There are some points that definitely bug me - but then, there are points that bug me about nearly all published systems.

5e's balance is supposed to make it easier to DM, which our group found 3.X easier to DM at high levels than 5e.

So 5e's lack of balance kind of kills it for me, because aside from being easier to run/play, I see no reason to play it over 3.X, 4e, 2e, 1e, or BECMI, which the lack of balance undermines "ease of play"

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055861The monster types mechanic is a mind-numbingly stupid way to balance anything. If the developers thought it made sense as a way to balance anything at all, they really need to get their heads examined.

That your opinion and I understand why you would opt to do something else in your campaign. However it wasn't you writing 5e so they made a judgment call. Rather than making a specific list things that Druids are allowed to shapechange into. They used the monster type system which they developed. And picked the type, beasts, that reflect their feeling that Druid should only be able to shapechange into natural animals.

Not hard to see the chain of reason they used.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055861The mechanic itself is logically unsound (why can't a monster have two types?), poorly defined (what the hell is a monstrosity?

Page 7

QuoteMonstrosities are monsters in the strictest sense frightening creatures that are not ordinary, not truly natural, and almost never benign. Some are the results of magical experimentation gone awry (such as owl bears), and others ,are the product-of terrible curses (including minotaurs and yuan-ti). They defy categorization, and in some sense serve as a catch-all category for creatures that don't fit into any other type.

Seem pretty straightforward

Quotewhat if a monster doesn't fit?), and relies on backwards world building. At least half of the types only make sense in a specifically D&D context and make no sense for any campaign setting not specifically built around the D&D rules.

Aside from the fact that many hobbyist seem to disagree by using their dollars to make it the #1 RPG in the industry and hobby. Aside from ignoring that Dave Arneson's and Gary Gygax's specific mishmash of early 70s inspiration has spread throughout the globe to become dominant face of the fantasy genre.

It pretty flexible. Which is why the above two occurred. Moreso it not a a strong component of what make D&D 5e work. The wildshape ability is an illustration of this. It been a long standing trope of the Druid class that they can shapechange into animal form. Various editions handled the definition of animal forms differently but they all amount to a list. A list of thing that druids can shapeshift into. So if you don't like the list then change the fucking list and be done with it. Rather than thinking they are total idiots for coming up with a list in the first places. Especially what they chose is the category that represent natural animals

From Page 6

QuoteBeasts are nonhumanoid creatures that are a natural part of the fantasy ecology. Some of them have magical powers, but most are unintelligent and lack any society or language. Beasts include all varieties of ordinary animals, dinosaurs, and giant versions of animals.

QuoteThe distinction between "fey", "elementals" and "giants" is a perfect example: no mythology anywhere in the real world makes a distinction between those. Paracelsus, the guy who literally invented the concept of elementals, specifically referred to fairies as elementals. Norse mythology literally described giants as elemental beings, born from the elements and who lived on the Norse equivalent of elemental planes.

1) I read their definition, and looked at what they put in those categories make sense to me.

2) Again D&D relies on the mish-mash that Gygax and Arneson found interesting in the early 70s. A combination of Victorian fairy tales, Hammer Horror films, Harryhausen fantasise, Tolkien, Vance, Howard, Medieval History, Greek Myths, Norse Myths, etc, etc.

You know what game does that? GURPS, while as references their sourcebooks are great. but their settings and adventures almost always suck. Because they adopt the same attitude you do and produce things that obviously grounded in history and real world myth. There are exceptions like Tredroy, Harkwood, the DF adventures, but mostly the results are dull, uninteresting and boring to most hobbyists.

Gygax and Arneson version of fantasy crops up over and over again because it is fun and interesting. But I will concede that it not 100% universal. Which is why are there are alternative.

Quotethe D&D troll is specifically one that appeared in a story by Poul Anderson. Speaking of real mythology, D&D lacks a "spirit" type even though this is a universal concept in comparative mythology. Don't get me started on how a 5e "spirit shaman" conversion is expected to work.

Certainty has a spirit, a spirit of fun and adventure. The sense that anything possible by the intersection of so many disparate elements mashed together in a fun and crazy mess. The example of Poul Anderson is a great one. Poul Anderson's Trolls are in the game because Gygax and Arneson used them in their campaign and players found them to be fun to fight compared to how Trolls work in Norse myth.

If D&D had a "spirit" in the way you are suggested then it would have been relagated to the same niche occupied by Middle Earth, Tekumel, Glorantha, Harn, Jorune, all setting with a strong sense of place and mythology. But all of them are specialized tastes actively played by narrow niches of the hobby.

I love Adventure in Middle Earth but I well well aware that it will never supplant D&D fantasy as the default. It too specific of a feel to work as a general purpose fantasy RPG despite being based on the D&D 5th edition rules.

Finally the point of what we do is play or referee a campaign where players interacts with a setting as their character. Unless the campaign is about a specific setting like Tekumel or Middle Earth, then the rules by default are going have to alter to fit the setting you have in mind. If the RPG is general purpose enough then generally this means picking which elements you going to use from the lists of monsters, treasure, character options, or magic system. Otherwise you will have alter the rules to make what doesn't fit, fit your setting.

This includes the list of creatures that Druid shapeshift into if indeed Druids exist in the setting and if they do they can shipshape into natural creatures.

Quote from: estar;1055869That your opinion and I understand why you would opt to do something else in your campaign. However it wasn't you writing 5e so they made a judgment call. Rather than making a specific list things that Druids are allowed to shapechange into. They used the monster type system which they developed. And picked the type, beasts, that reflect their feeling that Druid should only be able to shapechange into natural animals.

Not hard to see the chain of reason they used.

Plus, it doesn't have a lot to do with "balance" at all, at least not directly.  Yeah, they wanted to remove some of the problem creatures from the "list" to tone down the powers, but the main function behind using the "Beast" category is merely to make it simple to communicate.  The main "balance" factors are the CR limits and the various monster abilities (e.g. flying) gated by druid level.

Quote from: estar;1055869That your opinion and I understand why you would opt to do something else in your campaign. However it wasn't you writing 5e so they made a judgment call. Rather than making a specific list things that Druids are allowed to shapechange into. They used the monster type system which they developed. And picked the type, beasts, that reflect their feeling that Druid should only be able to shapechange into natural animals.

Not hard to see the chain of reason they used.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055861The mechanic itself is logically unsound (why can't a monster have two types?), poorly defined (what the hell is a monstrosity?

Page 7


Seem pretty straightforward



Aside from the fact that many hobbyist seem to disagree by using their dollars to make it the #1 RPG in the industry and hobby. Aside from ignoring that Dave Arneson's and Gary Gygax's specific mishmash of early 70s inspiration has spread throughout the globe to become dominant face of the fantasy genre.

It pretty flexible. Which is why the above two occurred. Moreso it not a a strong component of what make D&D 5e work. The wildshape ability is an illustration of this. It been a long standing trope of the Druid class that they can shapechange into animal form. Various editions handled the definition of animal forms differently but they all amount to a list. A list of thing that druids can shapeshift into. So if you don't like the list then change the fucking list and be done with it. Rather than thinking they are total idiots for coming up with a list in the first places. Especially what they chose is the category that represent natural animals

From Page 6



1) I read their definition, and looked at what they put in those categories make sense to me.

2) Again D&D relies on the mish-mash that Gygax and Arneson found interesting in the early 70s. A combination of Victorian fairy tales, Hammer Horror films, Harryhausen fantasise, Tolkien, Vance, Howard, Medieval History, Greek Myths, Norse Myths, etc, etc.

You know what game does that? GURPS, while as references their sourcebooks are great. but their settings and adventures almost always suck. Because they adopt the same attitude you do and produce things that obviously grounded in history and real world myth. There are exceptions like Tredroy, Harkwood, the DF adventures, but mostly the results are dull, uninteresting and boring to most hobbyists.

Gygax and Arneson version of fantasy crops up over and over again because it is fun and interesting. But I will concede that it not 100% universal. Which is why are there are alternative.




Certainty has a spirit, a spirit of fun and adventure. The sense that anything possible by the intersection of so many disparate elements mashed together in a fun and crazy mess. The example of Poul Anderson is a great one. Poul Anderson's Trolls are in the game because Gygax and Arneson used them in their campaign and players found them to be fun to fight compared to how Trolls work in Norse myth.

If D&D had a "spirit" in the way you are suggested then it would have been relagated to the same niche occupied by Middle Earth, Tekumel, Glorantha, Harn, Jorune, all setting with a strong sense of place and mythology. But all of them are specialized tastes actively played by narrow niches of the hobby.

I love Adventure in Middle Earth but I well well aware that it will never supplant D&D fantasy as the default. It too specific of a feel to work as a general purpose fantasy RPG despite being based on the D&D 5th edition rules.

Finally the point of what we do is play or referee a campaign where players interacts with a setting as their character. Unless the campaign is about a specific setting like Tekumel or Middle Earth, then the rules by default are going have to alter to fit the setting you have in mind. If the RPG is general purpose enough then generally this means picking which elements you going to use from the lists of monsters, treasure, character options, or magic system. Otherwise you will have alter the rules to make what doesn't fit, fit your setting.

This includes the list of creatures that Druid shapeshift into if indeed Druids exist in the setting and if they do they can shipshape into natural creatures.

I don't know where to begin rebutting you. Your take on the fantasy genre is completely wrong.

D&D is not the face of fantasy. Tolkien is. Rowling is. George Martin is. Those are household names. Gygax is not.

Unless fantasy fiction is outright based on D&D, which is a minority outside of Japanese light novels which are technically based on video games inspired by D&D, most writers take inspiration from mythology and a surface read of Tolkien.

Rowling, a world-famous author, took her monsters right out of mythology, not D&D.

Gygax used Anderson's troll because he probably had no idea Norse trolls existed since his only resource was his local library. Norse trolls, for anyone familiar, are infinitely more diverse an interesting.

The Trollhunters cartoon on Netflix has dozens of varieties of trolls, none of which take any inspiration from D&D. This works to its advantage.

My complaint about monster types is fairly minor in comparison and I don't expect you to understand it. You can provide definitions, but the very natural centaur and griffin are monstrosities whereas the strige and tressym and cranium rat are beasts. The writers cannot keep the types straight.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055878I don't know where to begin rebutting you. Your take on the fantasy genre is completely wrong.

D&D is not the face of fantasy. Tolkien is. Rowling is. George Martin is. Those are household names. Gygax is not.

You are right that Gygax or Arneson are not household names. Their take didn't become the face of fantasy because of what they did directly with tabletop gaming. It became the face of fantasy indirectly. Because of computer RPGs and MMORPGS particularly World of Warcraft. And those games owe their legacy to D&D as many of the early computer games were attempts to recreate D&D using software. Along with a strong contribution by Games Workshop through Warhammer Fantasy and 40k. In literature the TSR popular novels bled over and merged with the path blazed by Brook's Shannara that influenced the next two decades of fantasy novels. So circa 2000 much of fantasy was vaguely D&Dish. Not all but it was a dominant theme. And it wasn't in lockstop mostly variations on a theme.

It wasn't until Jackson's Lord of the Rings debuted that a serious alternative took hold particularly in TV and Movies. HBO's Game of Thrones further cemented this trend.

Incidentally, in part Game of Thrones was written by Martin as a reaction to what was happening in the fantasy genre in the late 80s because of the influence of D&D.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055878Rowling, a world-famous author, took her monsters right out of mythology, not D&D.

Except like Gygax and Arneson she put her own spin on them and they are not accurate in regards to the original source material. It a good adaptation and it good that you mentioned the Harry Potter series. Because along with Game of Throne is continued to support a healthy alternative to the legacy of Shannara and TSR.

However the alternatives didn't truly took hold until the movies and series came out. The superior visual presentation in conjunction with the excellence of the respective books it what in my opinion changed things. Prior to that fantasy inspired by Shannara and D&D ruled the roost.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055878Gygax used Anderson's troll because he probably had no idea Norse trolls existed since his only resource was his local library. Norse trolls, for anyone familiar, are infinitely more diverse an interesting.

I am certain that Gygax had a good understanding of mythology. I was a voracious reader growing up and was well aware of the different varieties of Norse trolls and other mythological creatures. Bullfinich's Mythology was a starting point that led me to seek out other books. Which were plenty of to be had in my rural Northwest Pa town of 15,000. Both in the library and the local bookstores including B. Daltons. Then there was Erie, PA 45 minutes away along with a visit to Pittsburgh a handful times a year.

The same with Lake Geneva, Madison, Milwaukee and Chicago. It was not some benighted dark age in the 60s or 70s.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055878My complaint about monster types is fairly minor in comparison and I don't expect you to understand it. You can provide definitions, but the very natural centaur and griffin are monstrosities whereas the strige and tressym and cranium rat are beasts. The writers cannot keep the types straight.

Spoke like a true snob. When it comes to the fantastic and supernatural is all made stuff whether it is last year, 40 years ago, or a thousand years ago. The point of the exercise is to present one's take on the material. If your goal is to help hobbyist pretend to be character in a setting where Norse mythology is real and part of the world. Then using Poul Anderson's take on troll is a good point of criticism for that work.  

However I will let Gygax tell you what the point of D&D was.

QuoteThese rules are strictly fantasy. Those wargamers who lack imagination, those who don't care for Burroughs' Martian adventures where John Carter is groping through black pits, who feel no thrill upon reading Howard's Conan saga, who do not enjoy the de Camp & Pratt fantasies or Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser pitting their swords against evil sorceries will not be likely to find DUNGEONS & DRAGONS to their taste. But those whose imaginations know no bounds will find that these rules are the answer to their prayers. With this last bit of advice we invite you to read on and enjoy a "world" where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!

Quote from: Rhedyn;1055816I kind of hate that 5e requires heavy subjective balancing like this.

Let's just simplify it to the GM saying, "nuh uh" and move on.

From my perspective, if characters have abilities like wildshape, they should work even in the worse case that the druid is Chris Pratt and knows every dinosaur. But you know, 5e doesn't have solid rules like that and they basically don't work well "as is", so the GM has to step in and rework player abilities using open ended caveats.

If the PCs never visit Dinosaur Island or the Lost Plateau then they arent ever going to see these things. Or they might just not exist in the campaign. Same as how anything might or might not be in a campaign or setting. Dragonlance and Dark Sun come to mind. Then there is Masque of the Red Death which removes alot.

Overall 5e does work even if you know those dino/prehistoric shapes. As noted earlier. There are bonuses and cons to using them.

Top end example, currently, is the Mammoth with 126 hp. But an AC of 13 and a DEX of 9. So the Druid could get potentially something on the order of 378 extra HP and more likely to make STR and CON saves/checks. But is probably more vulnerable. Both due to the generally low AC and especially vs spells that require DEX saves like Fireball, Lightning Bolt and a few others. Much the same with the Triceratops for example, but only 95 hp.

Quote from: Omega;1055890If the PCs never visit Dinosaur Island or the Lost Plateau then they arent ever going to see these things. Or they might just not exist in the campaign. Same as how anything might or might not be in a campaign or setting. Dragonlance and Dark Sun come to mind. Then there is Masque of the Red Death which removes alot.

Overall 5e does work even if you know those dino/prehistoric shapes. As noted earlier. There are bonuses and cons to using them.

Top end example, currently, is the Mammoth with 126 hp. But an AC of 13 and a DEX of 9. So the Druid could get potentially something on the order of 378 extra HP and more likely to make STR and CON saves/checks. But is probably more vulnerable. Both due to the generally low AC and especially vs spells that require DEX saves like Fireball, Lightning Bolt and a few others. Much the same with the Triceratops for example, but only 95 hp.

Buut every attack against the druid is wasted.

All the low AC and saves do is make the form too vulnerable if the Druid was using their HP, which would make the forms kind'of useless. So instead they get a free HP bubble, which is just really powerful in 5e.

Combat isn't the be all and end all of DnD , or at least for MY tastes shouldn't.
Moon Druids are very combat focused and are less useful outside of combat.  Meaning in actual Roleplay and doing stuff outside of combat.

For example, the Ranger, commonly seen as a weak Class, mainly due to it's less usefulness in combat (which is debatable).
But the Ranger has LOTS of great uses OUTSIDE of combat.

I suppose if you play DnD with a view of it nearly all being combat, this could be a problem, but that sounds like a boring campaign for my tastes.

For me, I prefer about 25% to 30% if appropriate to what's going on, to be devoted to combat.
I've run and played many sessions where there was very little or no combat at all and it was great fun.

Obviously I'm not saying other people are doing it wrong.  Whatever floats your boat for YOUR DnD is no skin off my nose.

Kefra and a few other druid players, moon or otherwise would disagree with the idea of the Moon druid being combat focused. They actually get a fair spread of animals that can be applied to all manner of different problems.

Kefra for example in 5e has her Moon Druid as a former spy. She would assume a bird form and just hang around eavesdropping. And as mentioned before she got herself killed trying to scout a swamp region as a swamp snake. Another player I met would scout areas as a spider for what she termed the "ATV" ability to scout from unexpected directions.

One thing I like to emphasize that players oft overlook is... scale.

Small or really small critters are dealing with things on a vastly different scale. A table leg becomes something like a tree trunk to a mouse or spider. A 20x20 room becomes a vast expanse the equivalent of I believe a 480x480 cavern.

Or on the flip side. A Mammoth is going to have a potentially damn hard time in any room with a 10ft ceiling. WHAM!

Quote from: Omega;1055909Or on the flip side. A Mammoth is going to have a potentially damn hard time in any room with a 10ft ceiling. WHAM!

Yeah, I never saw Huge forms used much, except for overland transport via giant elk. My Druid certainly never changed into a mammoth.

Quote from: Omega;1055909One thing I like to emphasize that players oft overlook is... scale.

THIS is a huge (no pun intended, but laughter accepted) issue.  No one seems to realize just how tall giants are compared to the average person.

Quote from: Omega;1055909Small or really small critters are dealing with things on a vastly different scale. A table leg becomes something like a tree trunk to a mouse or spider. A 20x20 room becomes a vast expanse the equivalent of I believe a 480x480 cavern.

Or on the flip side. A Mammoth is going to have a potentially damn hard time in any room with a 10ft ceiling. WHAM!

Fun fact, the average modern house interior is 8ft high from floor to ceiling.

Quote from: estar;1055881Spoke like a true snob. When it comes to the fantastic and supernatural is all made stuff whether it is last year, 40 years ago, or a thousand years ago. The point of the exercise is to present one's take on the material. If your goal is to help hobbyist pretend to be character in a setting where Norse mythology is real and part of the world. Then using Poul Anderson's take on troll is a good point of criticism for that work.  

I acknowledge and apologize for my rudeness and stupidity. I wrote my last post on my phone in the middle of after-work traffic and I was not thinking or explaining myself clearly.

I think D&D trolls are overused and have lost any novelty. That is why I love Trollhunters and the breath of fresh air that is Trudvang Chronicles: while based on Scandinavian myth and folklore, it still puts it own spin on things to provide diversity and imagination. Like the giant dwarf, which is awesome.

But back to my original complaint, the types mechanic is borked. Many of the types are arbitrary and poorly defined, so what monsters get placed into them often feel arbitrary. For example, the stirge, tressym and cranium rat are beasts, the centaur, owlbear and griffin are monstrosities, and the dryad, satyr, blink dog and hag are fey. The definitions of the types do not help to explain this and are often contradicted by the monsters. Monstrosities are supposedly unwholesome or whatever, but the centaur, owlbear and griffin are natural allies of the druid so this definition makes no sense. The beast type does not solely cover animals that exist in reality or lack magic powers, since it includes giant bugs and fictional creatures and spell-casters.

The types cover a variety of things that are not comparable, such as extraplanar origin, body type, and so forth. It would make vastly more sense to split these things up, like how 4e had separate origins, types and keywords.

It is also very easy to create monsters that do not fit the existing types. For example, is a "junk elemental" or "spontaneous construct" applicable as a construct or an elemental? What type do you place an anthropomorphic spirit of law or neutrality that is not a construct, fiend, or celestial? What type do you place nature spirits (a la RuneQuest, Encyclopaedia Divine: Druids, etc) that dwell in the spirit world and interact with the physical world by manifesting in incorporeal visage, materializing a physical avatar, or possessing objects/bodies? Where do you place a cyborg or biomechanical entity? Where do you place a physical living creature whose existence was caused by strong emotion/desire and who ceases to exist when a condition is met, a la ghosts? Where do you place an air elemental animated from the dying breath of a dead person? Where do you place a nature spirit who has permanently incarnated into a physical form without losing their spiritual nature? Where do you place humans and demi-humans who were created and live on the elemental, upper or lower planes? Where do you place the hybrid animals that make up all animal life in the world of Avatar: The Last Airbender? Where do you put the alien animals from speculative fiction documentaries like Darwin IV? Where do you place any monster which can easily fit into multiple types or none at all?

When WotC debuted 3.0, they had two types for "animal" and "beast". "Animal" covered real or historical animals, whereas "beast" covered ahistorical animals. This distinction was arbitrary and nonsensical: why should Earth matter to a fantasy world? The "magical beast" type displayed a similar problem, since the D&D implied setting is built around the arbitrary conceit that magic is unnatural and transient (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html) even though that is at odds with all fantasy, fairy tales, folklore and myth that predates D&D. IMO, that model of magic is inherently nonsensical and not holistic at all; it makes the gods who created the fictional world look like immigrants from our Earth who had no idea how to build anything from first principles, so they just copied Earth and then crudely tacked magic on.

But I digress...

The types were invented ad hoc by WotC to cover a bunch of obscure concepts. This promotes lazy design and forces anyone writing a setting or bestiary to force their world building to fit the rules rather than use the rules to support their world building. Probably the single worst restriction is that monsters may only have one type, even though the Rules Cyclopedia which implemented the first type mechanic allowed monsters to have multiple types. This forces designers to pigeonhole their monsters and arbitrarily restricts creativity. We don't need that many types either, especially not as arbitrary and restrictive as they are: five types for "animates", "beasts", "folks", "spirits" and "monsters" can easily cover all possible concepts.

The article "The Frustration of Fantasy Taxonomies (https://www.monsterdarlings.com/blogposts/2016/03/02/the-frustration-of-fantasy-taxonomies)" probably puts it better than I can.

EDIT: On a related note, I think D&D does its monsters a disservice. Taking monsters from mythology and then mutilating them beyond recognition does not somehow make them better or more game-able or whatever. It just makes them bland and boring IMO. For example, the Greek monsters like lamia, minotaur, gorgon, etc had their own stories and diversity in mythology but in D&D they are reduced to generic obstacles for parties to kill. Many of the myths had some kind of moral message that is completely lost in the transition.

So that's why I like re-imaginings of the monsters which go back to their roots, introduce new ideas, and remove the unnecessary D&Disms. Pathfinder is a perfect example of IMO the wrong direction to go, since they just double down on the arbitrary bizarre D&Disms. To add insult to injury they lie about it and claim to be truer to mythology when they are totally not.

Quote from: Omega;1055909One thing I like to emphasize that players oft overlook is... scale.

Small or really small critters are dealing with things on a vastly different scale. A table leg becomes something like a tree trunk to a mouse or spider. A 20x20 room becomes a vast expanse the equivalent of I believe a 480x480 cavern.

Or on the flip side. A Mammoth is going to have a potentially damn hard time in any room with a 10ft ceiling. WHAM!

In terms of flavor, that's a good point. In terms of damage, I think that's already accounted for by the creature's low hp.

Quote from: Omega;1055909One thing I like to emphasize that players oft overlook is... scale.

Small or really small critters are dealing with things on a vastly different scale. A table leg becomes something like a tree trunk to a mouse or spider. A 20x20 room becomes a vast expanse the equivalent of I believe a 480x480 cavern.

Or on the flip side. A Mammoth is going to have a potentially damn hard time in any room with a 10ft ceiling. WHAM!

While obviously scale does matter, I think it can be misconstrued. For example, I've seen mice scamper up or down a table leg in the blink of an eye - which is vastly different than a human or even a monkey and a tree trunk. In a flat out run they're roughly a third of human speed - so 10 foot move for D&D would be appropriate - which is quite out of scale with the height difference.

This strikes me as quibbling. Sure, one should properly adjudicate limitations of animals - but overall, the ability to change into any animal is still an extremely useful power.

Quote from: jhkim;1055990While obviously scale does matter, I think it can be misconstrued. For example, I've seen mice scamper up or down a table leg in the blink of an eye - which is vastly different than a human or even a monkey and a tree trunk. In a flat out run they're roughly a third of human speed - so 10 foot move for D&D would be appropriate - which is quite out of scale with the height difference.

This strikes me as quibbling. Sure, one should properly adjudicate limitations of animals - but overall, the ability to change into any animal is still an extremely useful power.

A fun exercise I like to do is eyeball remake D&D classes in GURPS and see who has crazy higher point values.

Wildshape is like a combination Morph and Extra Life, which for Moon Druid forms nets around 200 points (or only 125 for smaller animals) by itself and GURPS Dungeon Fantasy characters start at 250 total points.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1055968the D&D implied setting is built around the arbitrary conceit that magic is unnatural and transient (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html) even though that is at odds with all fantasy, fairy tales, folklore and myth that predates D&D.

It's a trope which has strong basis in the 1930s-40s Modernist swords & sorcery and horror fiction that was a huge influence on Gygax: RE Howard, HP Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber (slightly surprisingly given Nehwon's cosmology) are the three big ones that come to mind. In these works, Magic is an unnatural force of the Outer Dark, trickling in from the dark depths of space. It's not a natural part of the human cosmos, it's something sorcerers work with and blast their sanity engaging with Things Man Was Not Meant To Know.

That's where it comes from. D&D ran with this 0e through 3e, then discarded it in 4e (creating a much more Mythic feel), then of course 5e brought it back with the rest of the pre-4e baggage.

Quote from: S'mon;1055998It's a trope which has strong basis in the 1930s-40s Modernist swords & sorcery and horror fiction that was a huge influence on Gygax: RE Howard, HP Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber (slightly surprisingly given Nehwon's cosmology) are the three big ones that come to mind. In these works, Magic is an unnatural force of the Outer Dark, trickling in from the dark depths of space. It's not a natural part of the human cosmos, it's something sorcerers work with and blast their sanity engaging with Things Man Was Not Meant To Know.

That's where it comes from. D&D ran with this 0e through 3e, then discarded it in 4e (creating a much more Mythic feel), then of course 5e brought it back with the rest of the pre-4e baggage.

I question that line of logic. None of those inspirations worked remotely like D&Ds conception of magic and antimagic. Quite the contrary, Lovecraft's "The Dreams in the Witch-House" outright states that what humans call magic is just really advanced mathematics a la Clarke's Law. (You have to keep in mind he was a romantic and considered scientific progress to be existentially terrifying.)

D&D, by contrast, treats magic as a force which suffuses the universe and lets casters cheat physics. Antimagic can negate it without any detrimental effects on the rest of reality. Although it makes absolutely no sense for any universe to be structured this way, as shown by the fundamental forces observed by scientists being equally fundamental to everything, this conceit is used by the majority of modern fantasy since modern writers cannot world-build from first principles but can only iterate. In short, monkey see monkey do.

In a holistic fantasy universe the magic would be the equivalent of technology. Indeed, it would replace real world technology because the underlying physics would logically prohibit the development of real world technology. If the universe is composed of the five elements of air, earth, fire, water and aether, where the hell are you going to get the electrons needed to create electronics? Can you even make gunpowder in this universe? Is coal and steam power even physically possible?

It isn't surprising that most writers take the easy path and just crudely tack magic into our real world physics rather than rewrite physics to run on magic. It would take a lot of work to figure out from first principles.

Anyone who did design a holistic magical universe from first principles, publish it and become wildly successful... you would cause a paradigm shift in the fantasy genre equal to or greater than that caused by Tolkien. You would set the standard for every future magic system.

Quote from: S'mon;1055998It's a trope which has strong basis in the 1930s-40s Modernist swords & sorcery and horror fiction that was a huge influence on Gygax: RE Howard, HP Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber (slightly surprisingly given Nehwon's cosmology) are the three big ones that come to mind. In these works, Magic is an unnatural force of the Outer Dark, trickling in from the dark depths of space. It's not a natural part of the human cosmos, it's something sorcerers work with and blast their sanity engaging with Things Man Was Not Meant To Know.

That's where it comes from. D&D ran with this 0e through 3e, then discarded it in 4e (creating a much more Mythic feel), then of course 5e brought it back with the rest of the pre-4e baggage.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1056012I question that line of logic. None of those inspirations worked remotely like D&Ds conception of magic and antimagic. Quite the contrary, Lovecraft's "The Dreams in the Witch-House" outright states that what humans call magic is just really advanced mathematics a la Clarke's Law. (You have to keep in mind he was a romantic and considered scientific progress to be existentially terrifying.)

D&D, by contrast, treats magic as a force which suffuses the universe and lets casters cheat physics. Antimagic can negate it without any detrimental effects on the rest of reality. Although it makes absolutely no sense for any universe to be structured this way, as shown by the fundamental forces observed by scientists being equally fundamental to everything, this conceit is used by the majority of modern fantasy since modern writers cannot world-build from first principles but can only iterate. In short, monkey see monkey do.

I'd agree with BoxCrayonTales about Lovecraft and Howard, at least. I can't picture anything like an "anti-magic field" in either Lovecraft or Howard. For Lovecraft, the Things That Man Was Not Meant to Know are in a sense extremely natural - they are the real truth that we can't stand to see. A recurring theme for him is the terrifying evil that is within or among the mundane. In R.E. Howard's stories, I'd agree magic is usually alien to the natural world - but that's more a source rather than a distinct energy. I'm not sure about Fritz Leiber. I have seen this in non-D&D fiction, though, like in Larry Niven's "The Magic Goes Away". Although that story was published after D&D, I think it has precursors in some earlier fantasy fiction.

To my mind Anti-magic fields feel more Vancian.  

Not that I can recall anything of the sort in the Dying Earth - but they fit a concept of magic as decadent poorly understand superscience in which magic is an alien or extraplanar force to be manipulated and with which to manipulate the world.

If we were to split 3E animals and beasts categories into "earth animals" and "aliens" then the division would make sense.  

So many D&D conceit's just make a lot more sense if we assume a Dying Earth/New Sun, style of setting.

Quote from: jhkim;1056017I'd agree with BoxCrayonTales about Lovecraft and Howard, at least. I can't picture anything like an "anti-magic field" in either Lovecraft or Howard.

Elder Sign? Or is that a sub-HPL writer?

D&D treatment of magic is very similar to how you see it treated in comics, certainly Superhero comics (& Savage Sword of Conan) of that era.

Quote from: TJS;1056020To my mind Anti-magic fields feel more Vancian.  

Not that I can recall anything of the sort in the Dying Earth - but they fit a concept of magic as decadent poorly understand superscience in which magic is an alien or extraplanar force to be manipulated and with which to manipulate the world.

If we were to split 3E animals and beasts categories into "earth animals" and "aliens" then the division would make sense.  

So many D&D conceit's just make a lot more sense if we assume a Dying Earth/New Sun, style of setting.

Yes. Good point.

Quote from: TJS;1056020To my mind Anti-magic fields feel more Vancian.  

Not that I can recall anything of the sort in the Dying Earth - but they fit a concept of magic as decadent poorly understand superscience in which magic is an alien or extraplanar force to be manipulated and with which to manipulate the world.

If we were to split 3E animals and beasts categories into "earth animals" and "aliens" then the division would make sense.  

So many D&D conceit's just make a lot more sense if we assume a Dying Earth/New Sun, style of setting.

These implied conceits should not be forced on to campaigns settings that are not trying to emulate post-apocalyptic settings like that. Honestly, in that context anti-magic seems closer to EMP if magic is supposed to be the equivalent of technology. There are numerous physical reasons to explain how EMP works, why it shorts out electronics but doesn't kill people even though our nervous systems rely on electrical charges.

Anti-magic does not operate on the same logic as EMP, since the same force behind magic is almost never depicted as underlying human biology. There are a few settings here and there which try to explain magic as being fundamental to reality continuing to exist (like Buffyverse magic being required for human creativity), but most of these efforts are half-hearted at best.

Quote from: S'mon;1056047Elder Sign? Or is that a sub-HPL writer?

D&D treatment of magic is very similar to how you see it treated in comics, certainly Superhero comics (& Savage Sword of Conan) of that era.

Originally the elder sign was a simple religious prohibition, but in Call of Cthulhu IIRC the elder sign works along the same lines as crosses repelling vampires. That is much more specific than interrupting a fundamental force of reality.

Superhero comics are their own thing. Again, writers probably use that logic because they are too reliant on a modern education and cannot world build from first principles. Magic being something extraneous to our reality is easier for people with a modern education to understand.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1056089Superhero comics are their own thing. Again, writers probably use that logic because they are too reliant on a modern education and cannot world build from first principles. Magic being something extraneous to our reality is easier for people with a modern education to understand.

Yes.

I think you'd be happier if you accepted that D&D is not a Universal Generic Fantasy Role-Playing System. It's "shit they thought would be fun", to quote Monard. Super hero comics (including Marvel Conan) were definitely a big influence. It definitely is not intended to model myths, or fairy-tales. Or how pre-modern people viewed (& view) the world.

Edit: Notably, with the 1930s-1970s Modernist ethos, it doesn't really do Post-Modernist tropes very well either, though 2e Planescape gave "Belief Creates Reality" a good try.

Thing is. Even faerie tale magic tends to lean to being either structured or at least reliable. Casting Polymorph works every time unless someone has a counter or in rare cases resists all or part of the spell. Some require components to cast. Etc. D&D draws heavily from that as well.

Lovecraft's magic, and sometimes even science was esoteric in that it bridged the gaps between supernatural and science. Spells were akin to mathematical formula or mental exercises that served as a trigger. If you say these words at this time then something WILL happen. If you deviate then something might happen. Or might do something you dont want. Magic also tended to take alot of study and research to grasp. Howards magic is much the same and borrows heavily from Lovecraft's ideas, including the risk of sanity loss.

Then toss in Vance's system and mix well and you have the basis for D&D. Relatively reliable magic. But some spells come at a cost or risk. Either to the caster, or via risk of failure such as the target resists it, or someone disrupts the casting.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1056089These implied conceits should not be forced on to campaigns settings that are not trying to emulate post-apocalyptic settings like that. Honestly, in that context anti-magic seems closer to EMP if magic is supposed to be the equivalent of technology. There are numerous physical reasons to explain how EMP works, why it shorts out electronics but doesn't kill people even though our nervous systems rely on electrical charges.

Anti-magic does not operate on the same logic as EMP, since the same force behind magic is almost never depicted as underlying human biology. There are a few settings here and there which try to explain magic as being fundamental to reality continuing to exist (like Buffyverse magic being required for human creativity), but most of these efforts are half-hearted at best.

You can argue that lots of things shouldn't be forced on campaign settings - Elves, Dwarves, Tieflings, a cartoon conception of religion that makes absolutely no fucking sense - but you know - it's D&D cruft accumulates - like it or not, it abides.

And I'm not sure what your point is about EMP.  You seem to be going off on some kind of tangent that I have a hard time relating to anything I said,.  I certainly didn't say magic=technology.

Back on topic.

For those who have dealt with it. How do you handle someone casting Control Animal or equivalents in someone in an animal form? Works? Doesnt Work? Allow a save?

As a DM I allow spells like that to work on Polymorphed subjects as polymorph effects the mind as well as the body.

With shapechanges where the mind is intact I tend to look at the spell used and just how powerful the caster is vs the target. And have a talk with the player if necessary. If the player thinks its fime to have their character effected while shapechanged then there we go. I allow a save in either case as makes sense and is fair to the player.

Quote from: Omega;1056154How do you handle someone casting Control Animal or equivalents in someone in an animal form? Works? Doesnt Work? Allow a save?

As a DM I allow spells like that to work on Polymorphed subjects as polymorph effects the mind as well as the body.

I would say no. The druid retains their human mind and mental stats. I also wouldn't let Control Animal allow a PC to take control of a demon that was in animal form or a werewolf, for example. Control Animal is only for natural animals.

Quote from: jhkim;1056158I would say no. The druid retains their human mind and mental stats. I also wouldn't let Control Animal allow a PC to take control of a demon that was in animal form or a werewolf, for example. Control Animal is only for natural animals.

Same here if its shapechanges rather than polymorphing. Polymorphing the demon into a frog and then nailing it with control animal Id allow. Probably with a save.

Quote from: drhellier;1055625In general, they did a decent job of making the druid tame compared to 3.5. I made a druid with templates that could either be an effective spellcaster or an amazing tank. And, if I wanted to not do anything, I had my pet with templates too. I was a flying grappling, tank when necessary and a stand in the background spellcaster too. Tank my flying dire tiger and summon creatures for help = untouchable. So, they did a good job with leveling it out. Also, any class can be OP in 5e. I had a flying monk with a 20 AC when holding my kensai weapon. And using my Kai points I would hit for up to 32 points of damage in one turn - all at level 4. There are ways to do it anywhere if you look.

To add to your nightmare a bit, have the druid dip into monk for one level to get the wisdom ac bonus in wild shape.

Welcome to theRPGsite!

Quote from: jhkim;1056158I would say no. The druid retains their human mind and mental stats. I also wouldn't let Control Animal allow a PC to take control of a demon that was in animal form or a werewolf, for example. Control Animal is only for natural animals.

As of 5e, the spells animal friendship and dominate beast target "beasts" (the former spell automatically fails if the beast's int score is 4 or higher). This includes both real animals, historical animals (dinosaurs, sabertooth tigers), fictional animals (axebeak, flying snake, stirge), intelligent and/or magical/psychic animals (tressym, cranium rat). The polymorph spell does not specify if the target's type changes as well, but if the target's type does change to beast then it would be subject to spells which target beasts. This seems to be something placed squarely in the DM's control.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1056477As of 5e, the spells animal friendship and dominate beast target "beasts" (the former spell automatically fails if the beast's int score is 4 or higher). This includes both real animals, historical animals (dinosaurs, sabertooth tigers), fictional animals (axebeak, flying snake, stirge), intelligent and/or magical/psychic animals (tressym, cranium rat). The polymorph spell does not specify if the target's type changes as well, but if the target's type does change to beast then it would be subject to spells which target beasts. This seems to be something placed squarely in the DM's control.

The druid takes the shape of a beast; but retains the benefit of any features of class, race or other source (except senses like darkvision, unless the beast shape has the same sense). I would say that type (or the benefit of being a humanoid and not a beast) would mean that Dominate Beast would not affect such a druid. (And they should still have better than a 3 INT.)

Polymorph changes the target into another creature; it retains only alignment and personality and otherwise uses all of the game statistics of the creature turned into instead. So, Dominate Beast would work; the target now has the beast type as one of its statistics.

On the issue of whether Moon Druids are overpowered below 20th level, I have to say no after playing one to 19th level. The shapes available scale at one third the party's level, so they aren't all that powerful. Elementals are somewhat better (against many opponents, even at high levels, they effectively have double the hit points because of resistance to non-magical weapon damage, but they use both wild shapes), but the fire elemental is the only one with a useful special ability (setting many opponents on fire by moving through them). The fire elemental only has 102 HP and the last time I used that I got targeted by Power Word Kill after taking some damage. (This engendered an argument over whether the 150 HPs as a druid counted as "having at least 100 HP"; apparently the Sage Advice ruling on this is stupid and says it kills the druid; fortunately I had Death Ward from the Cleric so the argument turned out to be moot. But I rethought the use of Wild Shape after that; only a few Wild Shapes have 100 HP, and all of them can expect to drop under pretty fast. But that spell is the only drawback to constant Wild Shaping for the 20th level Moon Druid.)

My experience is that 17-20th level adventures depend a lot on Counterspell (by both sides) and Moon Druids can't help with that. HP are significant and Moon Druids get a lot, but without the unlimited Wild Shapes the Barbarian is a better tank. After reaching 17th level, I was more useful with Shapechange to turn into a beholder than using Wild Shape.

Initially the detractors were freaking over the damage potential. When that was shot down they shifted focus to the HP potential.

And honestly the wildshape ability makes the druid a potential damage sponge. They may get hit more which might mitigate that. But getting essentially 3 (correction: 2) big boosts of temp HP could be a big thing. We saw this with Kefra's Druid PC and was part of why we started trying to figure out some limits that made sense. Kefra was the one who suggested the KO on beast shape kill as it made the most sense.

Even if all you have worked up to is the Black Bear form that is still 34 temp HP every use. Normal druid can use the bear at level 8. Moon druid at level 2.  The only class that comes close is the Warlock using Armour of Agathys which for a warlock tops out at 25 HP.

Wild Shape as a combat pillar is milquetoast.  As an exploration pillar it is ridiculous.  I'm so glad I don't have one in my game -- the Totem Barbarian with Speak with Animals and the Ranger with Animal Friendship are enough of a headache.  Although it did create an awesome moment for our new Ranger player when she charmed a plesiosaur and the party rode that along the coast to a trading post.

Quote from: Omega;1056590Initially the detractors were freaking over the damage potential. When that was shot down they shifted focus to the HP potential.

And honestly the wildshape ability makes the druid a potential damage sponge. They may get hit more which might mitigate that. But getting essentially 3 big boosts of temp HP could be a big thing. We saw this with Kefra's Druid PC and was part of why we started trying to figure out some limits that made sense. Kefra was the one who suggested the KO on beast shape kill as it made the most sense.

Even if all you have worked up to is the Black Bear form that is still 34 temp HP every use. Normal druid can use the bear at level 8. Moon druid at level 2.  The only class that comes close is the Warlock using Armour of Agathys which for a warlock tops out at 25 HP.

Shapechange can boost HP a lot with a better AC and confer a variety of magical abilities (although not spell casting); only once per long rest, but Wild Shape below 20th level is only twice per short rest or once for elementals. At the cost of mental abilities and some saving throws, Polymorph would let a high level warlock turn into a higher CR beast more times per short rest. And there are various Conjure spells that bring in allies with lots of HP to soak damage (but the risk of losing concentration balances that).

The 20th level druid who can Wild Shape without limit is still better from the HP point of view.

oops, you are correct. It is only 2 per short or long rest.

That actually brings it more or less in line with a Warlock with Armour of Agathys after a few levels and they can cast it twice per short rest at a better output level.

I just never allow druids.

Interesting that the data release a while back about the popularity of D&D classes seemed to indicate that they were the least popular class in 5E anyway.

Perhaps regardless of how powerful they may be - they're just too fiddly?

Quote from: TJS;1057001Interesting that the data release a while back about the popularity of D&D classes seemed to indicate that they were the least popular class in 5E anyway.

Perhaps regardless of how powerful they may be - they're just too fiddly?

Even the land druid is tough to play for a beginner, unless they are a natural.  Put in meaningful combat shifting, and it is probably the most complicated single class character you can play.  I've got a smart, interested new player with a land druid, because it best fit her character concept.  I mentioned to her casually that I steered her to land instead of moon to make it a little easier, and she was horrified at the thought of more to deal with.  The character is almost 5th level, and she is just now really getting the hang of the options.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1056995I just never allow druids.

That is a pretty narrow view. I'd rather have druids in the campaign than clerics if given a choice. Usually less healing oomph. (Depending on edition)

Of course there were no druids in BX. But if I recall correctly BECMI did add them back in? Been a while since glanced at any of that.

Quote from: Omega;1057132That is a pretty narrow view. I'd rather have druids in the campaign than clerics if given a choice. Usually less healing oomph. (Depending on edition)

Of course there were no druids in BX. But if I recall correctly BECMI did add them back in? Been a while since glanced at any of that.

Yes, BECMI druids were a high-level option for neutral clerics. And to be fair I did allow those, though I can't recall any player having actually run one.

In most settings, I just don't think druids are necessary.  In terms of Medieval-Authentic settings, they'd be a total anachronism.

The biggest problem I experienced in play with a Moon Druid was the player refusing to do anything but shape-shift and fight in melee, when it frequently would have benefited the party far more to use his spells for something other than the nightly max-out of Goodberry and to use the Wild Shape for utility purposes. Any time the party positively begged him to turn back into an elf and cast Fog Cloud or something, he'd whine, "But I'm the taaaaaaaaannnnk and I'm saving all my slots for Gooooooodbeeeerrry." Yes, it's pretty overpowered up front, and this is well-documented, but IMO by level 6 or so, I'd rather have any other Druid but a Moon Druid in the party. Beast AC sucks, so the hit rate of monsters on them is pretty damn near close to 100%, so a druid wild shape gets single-round BTFO a lot. So you get a lot of whining from the Moon Druid that the party should be doing more to help them not get destroyed by enemies while they fart out mediocre damage.

Biggest problem with Wild Shape that applies to all druids is it's a short-rest power. It is way too powerful as a utility for that. It should be twice per day, not twice per short rest.

I am playing a Moon Druid (ghostwise halfling) and having a blast. I don't wildshape every combat. I use a lot of spells in combat. We have a cleric so most of my spells are not spent on spells like goodberry.  And I do use wildshape for non-combat purposes like scouting and sneaking and exploring.

Kefra's Wood Elf Moon Druid tends to not go wild unless necessary and leans heavily to using the transformations for scouting when possible. But was totally awesome watching her go all Orca on some pirates. We just hit level 14 recently and screw wildshape. At Will Alter Self. A practically unlimited non-illusion disguise, breath water, and more.

This is also the level my Human Warlock PC picked up Create Thrall and Jan's Half-Orc Fighter is outpacing both of us in damage output. And Diana, the player from one of the other tandem groups we picked up, patterned her Human Monk character on Wonder Woman and has been pulverizing stuff left and right.

Quote from: Omega;1058844Kefra's Wood Elf Moon Druid tends to not go wild unless necessary and leans heavily to using the transformations for scouting when possible. But was totally awesome watching her go all Orca on some pirates. We just hit level 14 recently and screw wildshape. At Will Alter Self. A practically unlimited non-illusion disguise, breath water, and more.

Yeah the time I turned into a large octopus and swam to the rescue of a girl thrown overboard from a boat while bound and gagged and rescuing her at a speed not anticipated by the DM? Priceless.

Quote from: Mistwell;1058815I am playing a Moon Druid (ghostwise halfling) and having a blast. I don't wildshape every combat. I use a lot of spells in combat. We have a cleric so most of my spells are not spent on spells like goodberry.  And I do use wildshape for non-combat purposes like scouting and sneaking and exploring.

See, my friend, this is how it's supposed to be done. And IMO it's largely fine like this (though should still be long rest rather than short rest).

Quote from: Mistwell;1058852Yeah the time I turned into a large octopus and swam to the rescue of a girl thrown overboard from a boat while bound and gagged and rescuing her at a speed not anticipated by the DM? Priceless.

My players set the guy's boat on fire, leaving him unconscious.  I hate Strahd.

It really doesn't surprise me that they're the least popular class.