D&D (2024) What would be the path between Wildshape Templates and Use an Beast statblock?

[Parmandur]

I doubt that is possible. Which means we are likely to more or less default to the status quo.

Seems pretty doable: allow the old rules as thr basis, and include a handful of scalable refluffablenoptiona for quick use. The big problem, IMO, worh the previous templates were the weird restrictions it imposed. If they just present three good defaults that scale, and say "but, sure you can be a hummingbirds or anything else from the MM that meets thr requirements" then I don't see why people who don't like templates would object. It's simply a new option.

 

[Clint_L]

Seems pretty doable: allow the old rules as thr basis, and include a handful of scalable refluffablenoptiona for quick use. The big problem, IMO, worh the previous templates were the weird restrictions it imposed. If they just present three good defaults that scale, and say "but, sure you can be a hummingbirds or anything else from the MM that meets thr requirements" then I don't see why people who don't like templates would object. It's simply a new option.

It's not, though, and this is where I think the two sides are talking past each other. A lot of players who enjoy Moon Druids are saying that they want the ability to transform into specifically identified creatures, not "stat block X that you can call a wolf, a lion, or whatever you want." I think folks are being very plain about this but not always being heard.

My students hated the updated beastmaster because of the templates. Optimization-wise, the templates were better. But the flavour was not what they wanted. They wanted their pet bear, or whatever.

 

[Parmandur]

It's not, though, and this is where I think the two sides are talking past each other. A lot of players who enjoy Moon Druids are saying that they want the ability to transform into specifically identified creatures, not "stab lock X that you can call a wolf, a lion, or whatever you want." I think folks are being very plain about this but not always being heard.

My students hated the updated beastmaster because of the templates. Optimization-wise, the templates were better. But the flavour was not what they wanted. They wanted their pet bear, or whatever.

But I'm saying allow both: let people pick the lion or horse or hummingbird from the MM, while also supplying some basic stat blocks in the Class write-up for people who don't want the homework. I'm not sure what's objectionable about increasing options...?

 

[Leatherhead]

My students hated the updated beastmaster because of the templates. Optimization-wise, the templates were better. But the flavour was not what they wanted. They wanted their pet bear, or whatever.

So all they wanted was a name? Thats easy to palliate. Just make a template called ursine spirit and let it scale, without the baggage of being tied down to monster stat bock.

 

[Parmandur]

So all they wanted was a name? Thats easy to palliate. Just make a template called ursine spirit and let it scale, without the baggage of being tied down to monster stat bock.

No, it's pretty clear that using rhe MM stst block is necessary to a lotnofnpeople. Better to add templates as an equivalent option than try to add limits.

 

[Leatherhead]

No, it's pretty clear that using rhe MM stst block is necessary to a lotnofnpeople. Better to add templates as an equivalent option than try to add limits.

I honestly doubt they will even use the MM for wildshape statblocks. If anything it's going to be a curated list of animals in the PHB.

And from there, it's just one step further to add dynamic level scaling.

 

[Parmandur]

I honestly doubt they will even use the MM for wildshape statblocks. If anything it's going to be a curated list of animals in the PHB.

And from there, it's just one step further to add dynamic level scaling.

Nah, they will keep the MM approach, and Indoubt theybwill have many stst blocks in the PHB this time around.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Yeah, we all as players have a hard time accepting that some things we think are completely obvious and correct could possibly be disliked if not out-and-out shunned by most other players. It just doesn't seem possible... and thus we think "Oh, if only we could just present it better, all those other folks will finally realize the error of their ways." When in truth... we just might be the outlier that likes something no one else does and never will. Hard truths can be hard to swallow.

My thoughts on half of 5e. I know full well that a lot of stuff I like and want DnD to push into more are instead things that the majority want to do the exact opposite.

 

[Clint_L]

This is a debate that I think to some degree comes down to the gamer vs. role-player divide that has been, to some degree, part of D&D's DNA since the beginning. I think to a gamer the template option makes perfect sense, whereas to a role-player it is a nonstarter. I often find that it is hard for some folks to believe that many players, probably most, are not hardcore optimizers, and care more about aesthetic choices than about numbers. Sometimes a lot more.

 

[Horwath]

I just want the reprint and rebalance of 3,5e PHB2 Shapeshift druid variant.