D&D 5E (2014) Kung Fu Panda: How do wildshape and monk class abilities interact?

[brehobit]

OK, this is probably a RAW, RAI, "how would you rule it" set of questions. But...

1. How does a monk's unarmed defense work with wildshape? For that matter a barbarian's unarmed defense?
2. How would martial arts--in particular the bonus attack--work in wildshape?

-----

For the first I'm leaning toward saying AC=animal AC or 10+DEX+WIS+SIZE mod, whichever is better.
For the second I'm unsure. I think RAW it doesn't work and it would probably be OP to let it work. But it's cool.

 

[steeldragons]

OK, this is probably a RAW, RAI, "how would you rule it" set of questions. But...

1. How does a monk's unarmed defense work with wildshape? For that matter a barbarian's unarmed defense?
2. How would martial arts--in particular the bonus attack--work in wildshape?

Can monks and barbarians wildshape?

Well, if you mean via multiclassing, which I wouldn't permit anyway, but even if you do none of them "work" with wildshape.

Wildshape turns you into the animal. You do not, I believe RAW (but I generally go more for "common sense" and it meets that criteria as well), maintain the use of any class abilities unless they are something that the animal form can perform (which is essentially nothing except, possibly, movement based features).

You are an animal with your brain in it, not an anthropomorphic creature with human-like hand-ppendages and joints that move like a humanoid body. No martial arts in wildshaping.

But yes, Kung Fu Panda is a very cool show. Mining it for magic items, monk-related plot ideas, or general storylines is definitely worthwhile.

 

[Stalker0]

OK, this is probably a RAW, RAI, "how would you rule it" set of questions. But...

1. How does a monk's unarmed defense work with wildshape? For that matter a barbarian's unarmed defense?
2. How would martial arts--in particular the bonus attack--work in wildshape?

-----

For the first I'm leaning toward saying AC=animal AC or 10+DEX+WIS+SIZE mod, whichever is better.
For the second I'm unsure. I think RAW it doesn't work and it would probably be OP to let it work. But it's cool.

So to the first question, is natural armor considered armor? Tough Question, is nothing else I would have unarmed defense overwrite the beasts natural AC. So it would not get its natural armor added in.

To the second, I think we need to look at the spirit of the rules on this one. For the Monk, their unarmed damage is meant to be d4 at first level, regardless of what weapon they might have at their disposal. Further, they are not intended to have more than a d8 damage...at least until higher levels. So I would not overwrite that.

I would use the beast's damage on the main attack. If the damage is a d8 or less, I would allow martial arts. For the unarmed strikes of flurry, I would use the d4 as normal. In effect, we are producing the damage damage as the base monk...but allowing it in wildshape (with all the other advantages wildshape might bring).

 

[brehobit]

. You do not, I believe RAW (but I generally go more for "common sense" and it meets that criteria as well), maintain the use of any class abilities unless they are something that the animal form can perform (which is essentially nothing except, possibly, movement based features).

I think this raises an interesting question. I'd generally allow class features like Rage, Reckless attack, danger sense, etc. to work just fine in wildshape. The rule is "You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race or other source and can use them if the new form if physically capable of doing so." I'd say that's most things that don't involve using equipment or talking. You've obviously got a different set of thoughts. Where would you draw the line?

 

[Paraxis]

You keep your class abilities when wild shaped. So we look at those abilities.

The AC of a druid/monk would be the beasts listed AC or 10+dex+wis, druid/barbarian beasts listed AC or 10+con+dex.

Not all natural attacks are unarmed strikes, unarmed strikes is a term used for humanoids attacking without weapons, so a wolf's bite for example would not trigger the monk's martial arts bonus attack because it is not an unarmed strike.

 

[steeldragons]

Well, as already stated, I wouldn't permit multiclassing with druids and monks and barbarians. So there are no questions as to "what barbarian stuff can I use in wildshape? What monk stuff can I use in wildshape?"

If we're just doing thought exercises, here, and a "what if..." then...also as stated, "common sense" makes the line...which will undoubtedly be on a case-by-case basis and thus a very wavy line...as practically all "lines drawn" in D&D are.

Danger sense? Well, PHB says you don't get any of your "special senses" [like darkvision] unless the animal has that also. S'Ok, makes sense. Most animals have something like this anyway. So sure.

Reckless attack? I don't know what that is or what it does, so I don't know.

Rage? That would depend on how you fluff your raging. Are you being possessed by an primal spirit? Are you working yourself into a battle frenzy? Is it some wild magic trapped in your soul? I suppose, it being a mental thing, it could be something the animal could do: a raging tiger...a raging bear... sure. Why not, right? BUT, you're not going to just "turn it off" when you're done. I'd probably need multiple wisdom or charisma checks to avoid having one's personality/conscious mind becoming "lost in the animal", as it were.

 

[AverageCitizen]

Well, if you look at the monster stat blocks, their attacks are "Melee Weapon Attack"s. So, I'd say RAW you can use it with a barbarian rage but not with monk's unarmed strike. However, I'd rule that so long as the animal was able to stand and fight like a human, the monk could use his unarmed strike, so no Kung Fu Panda but you do get Monkey Ninjas.

 

[Lrdroland]

Well, as already stated, I wouldn't permit multiclassing with druids and monks and barbarians. So there are no questions as to "what barbarian stuff can I use in wildshape? What monk stuff can I use in wildshape?"QUOTE]

Why wouldn't you allow multiclasses between a Druid and Barbarian? They don't seem that dissimilar that you couldn't come up with why you are both.

 

[Eejit]

You keep your class abilities when wild shaped. So we look at those abilities.

You keep your class abilities "if the new form is physically capable of doing so."


Obviously it's for the DM at each table to adjudicate.

Personally I'd allow mental (non-spellcasting) abilities such as Rage, Stillness of Mind, Half-Orc Savage Attacks.

I wouldn't allow more physical traits or abilities like Half-Orc/Wood Elf Speed, Unarmored Defense, Evasion or Martial Arts. The only such ability I would allow is the Devil's Sight Invocation

 

[Klaus]

To keep things simple, I'd go with the first line of Wild Shape: "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast". So AC (a game statistic) is simply replaced.