Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hawk Diesel" data-source="post: 7585401" data-attributes="member: 59848">First of all, I have codified my Wildshape adjustments at the DMsGuild Here: <a href="https://www.dmsguild.com/product/248228/Improving-Wild-Shape" target="_blank">https://www.dmsguild.com/product/248228/Improving-Wild-Shape</a> They are "Pay What You Want" so feel free to download it for free. I'm not sure if I have made any changes from what is presented above since it has been so long since I've looked at this thread.Sorry, but this is really an opinion so I don't know how to incorporate this feedback. These changes and suggestions may not fit the style of play you are accustomed to, and that's fine. But I obviously disagree with your stance that these changes "destroy a major class feature" or "ruin druids entirely."For regular druids, in the original version beasts that a non-moon druid can turn into tend to have relatively low HP anyways. For those that do have a larger pool of HP, they tend to have lower AC. In my version, a druid maintains their own AC, which is often higher than the beast forms you might change into. So the temp HP and the higher AC offset what non-moon druids would otherwise have in wildshape. Non-moon druids usually use wildshape for scouting, sneaking into small spaces, or getting places they otherwise couldn't. They don't need the HP since they aren't using their wildshape for combat.For Moon Druids using my version of wildshape, they also gain unarmored defense like monks, allowing them to reduce MAD and improving AC. In addition to this, they continue to benefit from all their equipment and magic items. This isn't the case for moon druids using the normal wildshape rules. They are forced to change their AC to match their form, which tends to be significantly lower, especially for forms with lots of HP. They also are forced to have their equipment be absorbed into their form if it won't fit on their chosen beast form, which in turn makes the equipment inert and non-functional. So once again, the loss of those HP pools is balanced by a typically higher AC and continual access to magic weapons. Not to mention that both moon druids retain their ability to quickly heal using their spell slots in wildshape.Have you actually compared the damage of the available beasts to the damage I propose for Wildshape? As an example, you can become an Allosaurus at level 6 under original wildshape rules. As an action, they can deal 2d10+4 damage with their bite. Using my rules, a moon druid will deal 2d8 damage, and add their Wisdom modifier to damage. In my version, MAD is reduced by allowing moon druid attacks to be modified by wisdom.At level 12 you can become an elephant using the original wildshape. As an action, they can deal 3d10+6 damage with their stomp. My druid can deal 3d8 damage + their wisdom modifier. Once again, yes, the damage is a bit lower, but it is not "pretty bad." Personally, I think the trade-off is fair, as my version of wildshape does not need a player to actually have the monster stat block printed out in front of them, nor do they need to search through all their beast form options to determine which would be best in the particular circumstance. My wildshape options are meant to be modular and allow the character to have a simple template that goes over their mechanics, rather than outright replace them.Once again, this is entirely opinion. You don't provide any concrete examples of how my wildshape "nerfs [the druid] into the ground," nor do you point out the ways that my version fails to solve the problem I am looking to solve. You also don't provide any ways that I might improve my design other than, essentially, "THIS SUCKS!" As I said, these changes may not be for you or your game table, but that alone does not mean that my design decisions are faulty or without merit.Once of the only real concrete piece of feedback you provide, but once again, I think there are other aspects the balance out with the reduced HP pools.How so? From the way that I read what I created, the shapechanging aspect is still there. Also, I don't know how you define utility? My version still gains advantage on chosen ability checks and provides darkvision. What specifically do you find missing or lacking that impacts what you define to be "utility"?I personally think I've expanded the flavor. You are no longer stuck being a wolf, but could be a werewolf. Or a bugbear. Or a crab beast. Or a particularly vicious slime mold. What you become isn't limited to the specific beast you choose in the Monster Manual, but can be anything your imagination desires based on the choices you make for your wildshape options using my version. I definitely dispute this. My version does do slightly less damage than a moon druid does. But it is not significantly less. It remains on par with what a fighter might do per round. But you have to remember that a druid, whether circle of the moon or otherwise, they are still full casters on par with wizards and clerics. They should not be full equals to fighters, paladins, or rangers in combat.I see a lot of benefit. The monster manual no longer becomes a player resource. A player no longer has to have multiple printouts of the beasts they might change into. A player can easily use a simple template to put over their existing character sheet, rather than worry about changing abilities or ability scores. It is easier to track. You no longer have the problem of Moon Druids being just pools of limitless hit points. The player has more agency over what their wildshape appears like or how it functions. We no longer have to rely on CR to evaluate whether a beast form is appropriate for the character's level. You don't have to worry about future beasts being created without wildshape in mind. You now don't have to worry about gaps when you can't find beast forms of an appropriate CR (since higher CR creatures tend to be larger, meaning that they can't fit everywhere or be appropriate for tasks outside of raw combat in large, open spaces. If you have more concrete feedback that is not completely based on opinion, or suggestions on how I might change or improve my product, I would greatly welcome the discourse. Otherwise, I just think this product doesn't fit you or your playstyle, rather than any real issues in my design of the mechanics presented.</blockquote>

Verification