Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FitzTheRuke" data-source="post: 8970157" data-attributes="member: 59816">Done. I had lots to say about this one, and I'm not someone who was particularly outraged by this version of Wildshape. (Though I spoke up on behalf of complaints I've seen here - I've got your back wildshapers!)One thing that I think might be interesting to discuss: I had a thought while posting:Why isn't Wild Shape tied to various polymorph spells that could be on the Primal list (and to a lesser extent Arcane, I guess). I mean, they put most of the Smites on the Divine list and I would argue that they don't belong there. For one, they're pretty boring for spells, and for another, they don't really belong to the Cleric.On the other hand, why can't a Ranger turn into a mountain lion, or a Barbarian into a Bear? Couldn't Wild Shape work like that? It would be more obvious to the designers which stat-blocks belong to which levels, if they were tied to spells. The Druid could still get "free" access to them, and the Moon Druid could still get enhancements (access to more of them/using them as a bonus action, and some Temp HP or whatever is needed).What do you all think? I think there should be some design similarities between a Druid's Wild Shapes and a Ranger's Beast Companions (as well as Beasts that are summoned by either class, or any class really).</blockquote>