D&D General The Owlbear Druid: How Would You Do It? (A Poll)

[Bill Zebub]

World of Warcraft is calling from 2005.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

There is no particular reason for the owlbear to be a monstrosity rather than a beast any more than there is for the platypus. In my world they're beasts, (and also the totem animal of our barbarian) and I would absolutely let a druid to wildshape into one, assuming the other requirements are met (so a moon druid thing really.) You of course could also refluff a CR 1 brown bear into a scrawny owlbear. Owlbears (sadly) have no unique mechanics to distinguish them from bears apart keen sight.

 

[Steampunkette]

I will also note: While writing that article I was shocked by how many monstrosities can turn people to stone.

Basilisk, Cockatrice, Gorgon, Medusa... Sure it's only 4 out of 50 from the core rulebook, but it's pretty much all the main "Petrifiers". And while three of them are pretty "Animal" in structure, Medusa stands out against them.

Maybe 3e's separation between Monstrous Humanoids and Magical Beasts was a good idea.

 

[TwoSix]

World of Warcraft is calling from 2005.

Yea, I think this way more about the evolving narrative of what an owlbear is than how a Druid is defined. They've gone from wizard-created grotesque hybrids to weird-but-cute nature's defenders. And I agree, I think their portrayal in WoW had a lot to do with that change.

 

[John R Davis]

Allowed change to snowy owlbears when I ran ROTFM

 

[Vaalingrade]

I will also note: While writing that article I was shocked by how many monstrosities can turn people to stone.

Basilisk, Cockatrice, Gorgon, Medusa... Sure it's only 4 out of 50 from the core rulebook, but it's pretty much all the main "Petrifiers". And while three of them are pretty "Animal" in structure, Medusa stands out against them.

Maybe 3e's separation between Monstrous Humanoids and Magical Beasts was a good idea.

To be fair, from the four, they all represent just two mythological monsters.

I have no idea how a snake haired lady and her sisters digivolved into a metal cow, but on the bright side, at Ultimate, there's like a 50% change they get jean shorts or 300 belts.

 

[NotAYakk]

I'd go with:

Wildshape:
Druids know a limited number of forms they can wild shape into; no more than their proficiency bonus. They can learn new beasts by simply observing one for a short period (1 minute). There are also secret techniques to transform into some other creatures, such as monstrosities, that druids can learn; this requires far more than simply observing the creature, however, and not all creatures can be learnt.

Circle of the Moon:
Has twice as many shapes. Gets access to Elementals at a certain level.

and now, Wildshape forms are limited (less "look through book for anything" during play), and as a DM/Player, they can work to get unique forms. But because the DM has veto, I don't have to worry about cockatrices or the like.

...

I much prefer "fixed list per PC" as opposed to "open every monster manual and search". As a benefit, then extending that list becomes the DM's explicit prerogative; give a base list that PCs can pick from "for free".

Learning how to Owlbear becomes like getting a magic item.

 

[Jer]

I have no idea how a snake haired lady and her sisters digivolved into a metal cow,

I remember reading somewhere that there was a medieval or early modern bestiary that had a metal bull that breathed poison called a Gorgon and that either it had been reprinted in the decade before D&D came on the scene or some other encyclopedia of monsters had used it as source material in the decade before D&D came on the scene (I can't remember which). Either way the description apparently matched Gygax's Gorgon exactly and there were a number of other monsters in there that looked like they made their way into the Monster Manual as well.

You can imagine Gygax wracking every book of monsters he could find to fill all the pages of the Monster Manual he'd decided to write.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

I've given my players feats in the past that lets them add certain non-beast creatures to their WS repertoire. That option worked well since it allowed more options without having a large innundation of choices that we had to keep track of. It would also be fairly easy to build that same option into an archetype as well.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

I remember reading somewhere that there was a medieval or early modern bestiary that had a metal bull that breathed poison called a Gorgon and that either it had been reprinted in the decade before D&D came on the scene or some other encyclopedia of monsters had used it as source material in the decade before D&D came on the scene (I can't remember which). Either way the description apparently matched Gygax's Gorgon exactly and there were a number of other monsters in there that looked like they made their way into the Monster Manual as well.

You can imagine Gygax wracking every book of monsters he could find to fill all the pages of the Monster Manual he'd decided to write.

Looks like it's related to The Historie of Foure-Footed Beastes