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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Captain Panda" data-source="post: 7585450" data-attributes="member: 6861845">That's fair. My initial impression was more a knee-jerk response as a druid main than proper analysis. That's a fair retort, I'll back my position up a bit.That's totally fair. Your version of wildshape for non-moon druids might work. My vantage point is entirely that of a salty moon druid who would throw a fit if a DM tried to take my toys away. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I disagree with the design both from a balance and a flavor standpoint. On my view, the low AC that moon druids have wild wild shaped is not a bug, or a negative, but a feature. The low hp and high volume of expendable hit points do a great job encouraging even intelligent monsters to attack the druid, because they are already up close and make for very easy to hit targets. The low AC facilitates the moon druid's tanking capacity, and the beast attacks have a very different feel to them than standard melee characters or cantrips. Replacing the polar bear's 2d6+1d10+10 damage with 2d8+wisdom (at level 6) is not only a fairly hefty nerf, but it's also a change in feel. The damage formula you offer is on par with a standard cantrip, more or less. Cantrips (outside of eldritch blast and the Sword Coast ones) tend to be the literal bare-minimum the game system assumes for any given level range. Wildshape provided a wall of expendable, easy to hit HP and attack options that generally exceed that bare-minimum threshold by a bit, depending on the level and specific form. Yes, I've compared the damage vs. the damage you're proposing. The standard forms I've seen used (and used) while progressing have been brown bear, polar bear, giant scorpion, earth elemental, stegosaurus or elephant, and mammoth. Comparing the damage of any of those forms to cantrip damage and the form's damage will come out on top, and typically by a reasonable amount. Again, that's fair. If you are looking to remove bookkeeping from the druid, your way does that. I contend that it does so at a steep cost to the power potential of at least the moon druid subclass. You lose an enormous amount of disposable hit points but gain armor, which can be a good trade in certain circumstances, but I contend that in most situations where you want to soak up damage and attention you would be better served by having the large pool that you can replenish fairly easily for that purpose. I'm here referring to the general abilities animals sometimes have. Unless I missed it, a druid using your rules could not turn into a giant spider and create a bridge of web across a chasm, for example, or take the form of a giant octopus to gain the ability to reliably restrain targets. Moon druids already don't compete with fighters in damage, but this change makes the gulf wider. A level 12 fighter, specialized at doing ranged damage, can do 4d6+60 damage (assuming all hits) a round. The elephant's 3d10+6 is already way, way behind that. Making it 3d8+5 just pushes the moon druid down to the baseline, minimum assumed damage for the tier. I don't see that as a problem, but the design intention of the subclass. Tanks operate in different ways. The eldritch knight has crazy high AC, the barbarian resists everything but has a modest AC, the bladesinger has a ridiculous AC and bare minimum hit points, and the moon druid has functionally no AC, but easily eats damage up.Well, anything I suggest will be based on opinion, but I'll try to be a bit more constructive. Again, read that not as a reviewer, but as a salty moon druid having his favorite toy taken away. XD Suggestions for improvement:-The low AC, high HP design of the moon druid provides a unique function that isn't found elsewhere, to my knowledge, in fifth edition. One should be cautious in removing it.-The damage should be scaled up to match or even exceed what a standard wild shape form would provide. My argument for this is that your version of wild shape will not last nearly as long as the standard one, so it should have more payoff during its limited duration.-This one is big, but have you considered allowing spells to be cast while wild shaped? The Circle of Spores feature is very similar to what you have outlined, but the fact that it is less powerful but allows the player to continue using their primary resource, spellcasting, makes it a much more viable option.I'd also suggest making this an option and not a mandatory feature. Some players, like me, enjoy the bookkeeping. The game has a lot of simple class options that don't require a great deal of forethought and bookkeeping, but I argue that they don't all need to be that way.</blockquote>

Verification