D&D (2024) Wild shape? Was the 3.5e PHB2, Shapeshift variant the best wild shape to date?

[Horwath]

Then let's give most of the casting the heave-ho.

It's so iconic for shapeshifters I object to sealing them behind a subclass.

Way too high says I. D&D needs to move on from Fear of Flying and it's not going to do that when flying keeps getting shoved in the high levels.

Yeah, 5th level if banned from casting and ranged attacks(we cannot count of all shennanighans players could pull off) seems like good level.
Only problem is that it might invalidate certain terrain challenges too soon. But then again, other classes have features that can do that too.

Then move treant form to 9th level and add elemental form at 13th level.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Only problem is that it might invalidate certain terrain challenges too soon. But then again, other classes have features that can do that too.

Might encourage people to do something more with the exploration pillar than being tedious.

 

[Horwath]

Might encourage people to do something more with the exploration pillar than being tedious.

maybe,

but the world becomes much less dangerous with flying.
To traps, no terrain obstacles, most monsters ignored, to challenge players you have to exclusively be in small dungeons or throwing only spellcasters and master archers at them.

flight is great is entire party has it, or no one has it.
same as darkvision.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm not going to rehash this in this thread as it's about wildshape, not encounter design, but just don't use wide open plains with melee hitpoint bags and the issue disappears. I have two flier species in my game and I have plenty of variation in my encounters. I just don't use 50 year old encounter design to do it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Back on topic, mobility forms seem to be missing. There's aquatic and predator forms, but they can't turn into a horse or camel or eventually elephant.

 

[Horwath]

Back on topic, mobility forms seem to be missing. There's aquatic and predator forms, but they can't turn into a horse or camel or eventually elephant.

I would keep various size for moon druid, to keep the base class simple.
Ferocious predator is large, maybe it can be also represented by horse or camel, just have hoof stomp instead of bite.

maybe add small shape:
+0 STR
1d4+str damage
speed: 20ft, climb 20ft, burrow 20ft
AC: 13+dex

 

[Neonchameleon]

I like it, but part of being a shapeshifter is taking the power and agility of the new form. Drop the need to use any of your own physical stats and it's good.

There are multiple schools of thought on this. If you're a scrawny wizard and change into a bear do you

• Turn into a bear who is relatively as scrawny as you are a wizard because the bear is you as a bear
• Turn into a perfectly average bear
• Turn into Beefy McBeefbear because it's your shapechange and if you want muscles you'll have them

All are valid interpretations.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

There is a big difference between a flying ranged attack, and flying melee attacks.

Being 600' up with a long bow is an auto-win. That should be feared.

Not so much when you still need to be within reach of the enemy.

Not if the enemy has flyers and archers.

Hell, even a simple falconer of sorts can send a bird with noticeable damage and flyby to harry the lone archer.

 

[Vael]

I remember kinda liking the PH2 version, though it is significantly less powerful. Also, purely combat focused, no stealth or utility forms. That's what I think is lacking from the UA Druid and the 3.5 PH2 version ...

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Big no to adding proficiency to AC. Why does the full caster get to be a better tank than a non-caster? Honestly, I'd prefer no wild shape without spell expenditure, and each form is a spell, upcast for bigger bonuses.

Make a shifter class that can take form add-ons in an ala carte manner similar to invocations, with one subclass being a partial caster.