Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sir Brennen" data-source="post: 4557849" data-attributes="member: 553">I don't think ShapeShifting and Spellcasting need to be mutually exclusive. They might be, but don't have to be. If the druid class has both as class features to choose between, I could see taking Shapeshifting and then still being able to select some Druid spells as powers. My guess is the opposite won't be true. Without the Shapeshifter class ability, powers based on being in beast form will be completely useless to take if you choose the spellcaster focus. This is assuming Shapeshifting is like the Beastmaster ability for Rangers - completely useless without the Beastmaster ability (you can't get a Beast companion), but with it, the ranged and melee powers of the rangers can still easily be mixed in.Here's a thought: assuming there's a Shapeshifter ability for the Druid, what if the abilities all had the "Beast" keyword, which can be used by the character himself when in beast form or by a pet? Would make for some interesting multiclassing options between Beastmaster Ranger and Shapeshifter Druid.The only thing about having both a Spell focused and Shifter focused ability in the same class is their powers have to support the same role. My guess (about my guesses) is that would be a Striker. So then we'd have our first group of spell-powers supporting that role. Call Lightning, anyone? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Whew! Wild Speculation is fun!</blockquote>

Verification