Can a Druid Wildshape into a Rat Swarm?

[Diirk]

For some game purposes. I think common sense should apply here. Remember this quote from alter self? "Any part of the body or piece of equipment that is separated from the whole reverts to its true form." Now with a rat swarm, you're 300 rats. 299 rats are therefore seperated... thats a whole lot of body reverting.

Plus, I think its a little over the top that a druid should be able to become immune to all spells except those that effect an area, in addition to taking half damage from most weapons...

 

[Kae'Yoss]

For some game purposes. I think common sense should apply here.

I apply. While swarms are treated as one creature for purposes of initiative and attacks and whatever, they remain separate creatures. Druids aren't supposed to split into dozens of creatures at once.

 

[Gez]

It would fit the Children of Winter, though.

 

[Voadam]

Swarm isn't a template. There are absolutely no mechanics available to construct a new swarm from scratch.

Green Ronin's advanced bestiary has a swarm template I believe.

 

[Voadam]

I guess some people read the word "creatures" and choose not to see the fact that it's plural. Others see the "for game purposes" and then choose to ignore the remaining paragraph that specifically outlines what purposes. Then, those same people don't bother reading the subtype description like I suggested.

And some people apparently read "for game purposes" as "only the specific game purposes mentioned in the next sentence." Although, that does not seem a valid way to read it to me

 

[Voadam]

I apply. While swarms are treated as one creature for purposes of initiative and attacks and whatever, they remain separate creatures. Druids aren't supposed to split into dozens of creatures at once.

Why not when the creatures collectively have the characteristics of a single valid creature and cannot split apart and scatter individually?

My gut instinct was no but then on looking over the mechanics of swarms and wildshape it looks valid under RAW and does not create significant problems.

Sounds more like gut reaction Rule 0 than RAW.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Anyway - wild shape is a game mechanic. For game purposes a swarm is a single creature. I really don't see whats unclear about that...

Not for all game purposes. To know which specific game purposes, you need to read the subtype description. A swarm is still a collection of many creatures; it is not a single creature. It lists all the specific rules for swarms as a single entity, for all other considerations, a swarm is still a collection of creatures.

Why not when the creatures collectively have the characteristics of a single valid creature and cannot split apart and scatter individually?

Swarms not only can break apart, but in some situations they do. In fact, they are specifically allowed to move through cracks or other areas where they have to break apart to do it individually. When knocked out, they become dispersed for a period of time. When 'killed', they disperse.

 

[Voadam]

Not for all game purposes. To know which specific game purposes, you need to read the subtype description. A swarm is still a collection of many creatures; it is not a single creature. It lists all the specific rules for swarms as a single entity, for all other considerations, a swarm is still a collection of creatures.

Uhm, I'm not seeing anywhere in the swarms monster entry or subtype entry that a swarm creature (monster entry, not just subtype) is considered a collection of creatures for any game rule purpose.

It seems you are reading "For game purposes a swarm is defined as a single creature" as "For CERTAIN game purposes a swarm is defined as a single creature" based upon the list that follows the phrase. That list looks like demonstrative examples of game purposes, not a restriction on the phrase "for game purposes".

Care to put up quotes from the srd that support your interpretation and explain why it supports your interpretation?

Again, I feel the key phrase is in the monster entry where it says "For game purposes a swarm is defined as a single creature".

 

[Pielorinho]

Plus, I think its a little over the top that a druid should be able to become immune to all spells except those that effect an area, in addition to taking half damage from most weapons...

Is this a benefit that outpaces the benefit of Gaseous Form in any way? Keep in mind that the druid in this form loses all attacks.

Hmm...although if the druid has Natural Spell, this form could become very tempting.

I think I'd allow it as a feat. (And I realize that this is based on my version of common-sense understanding, not on line-by-line reading; the latter method suggests to me that it's legal).

Daniel

 

[The Souljourner]

If I'm the DM, then I'd say no. I don't care what the swarm is treated as, it is multiple creatures. Druids can only change into one. Case closed.

-The Souljourner