Wildshape and die?

[Hypersmurf]

I am running 3.5, but my argument came from an item in MoTW item called a broach of wilding that you attached to an item to let it stay wearable when you wildshaped.

Right. That's 'cos in 3E, for which MotW and the Wildling Clasp were written, all items merged on Wildshape.

-Hyp.

 

[youspoonybard]

Bears have necks, so the magic item should still work.

Of course, if you look at the "Wild Creatures" or whatever it was called thing they had on the WotC website, they had all of the equipment slots for a human on an animal...it looks like the vast majority of items would work. Not to mention the page in the Draconomicon which has slots for DRAGONS (Dragon Wildshape, anyone, the Epic version of course).

Fully equipped Dragons without arcane but with full Druid casting ability...

 

[juliaromero]

Well, if you rule that a bear CAN wear an amulet, does the bear HAVE to wear the amulet? I mean, does the druid then have a choice when it wild shapes on which "usable" equipment it melds? We have druid in our campaign that mostly uses her wild shape for stealth and spy missions and it could cause problems if her forms were suddenly forced to have equipment.

On a side note, does detect magic see that an animal is really a polymorphed/wild shaped something?

 

[youspoonybard]

Well, if you rule that a bear CAN wear an amulet, does the bear HAVE to wear the amulet? I mean, does the druid then have a choice when it wild shapes on which "usable" equipment it melds? We have druid in our campaign that mostly uses her wild shape for stealth and spy missions and it could cause problems if her forms were suddenly forced to have equipment.

On a side note, does detect magic see that an animal is really a polymorphed/wild shaped something?

When I asked Andy Collins that, he responded "There is no choice in the matter" or something to that extent. I'm paraphrasing here.

 

[Tatsukun]

I remember something about CON damage not killing you unless you hit 0. The argument went like this…

At each level, you get D(something) + your CON modifier.

First level Bob the wizard (with a 14 CON) = 4 + 2 = 6 HP

If you loose CON, that modifier goes down (maybe negative) and this total number of HP gained at each level goes down.

Poisoned Bob (with a 14 CON, but poison lowers it to 9) = 4 –1 + 3
The difference between 3 and 6 is 3, so he takes 3 HP from the poison.

But, you always get at least one hit point. So, if Bob ends up with a CON of 1…

Really poisoned Bob (con now 1) = 4 – 5 = -1 BUT you always get one per level so 1

The difference between –1 and 6 is 7, so Bob should take 7 HP, but in this case the ‘always at least one per level’ rule saved him, he is at one hit point. Note that he would be at 2 HP if he were bob the second level wizard.

In short, CON damage can not put you below your level in HP unless your CON gets to 0, in which case you die.

I think this rule will save the druid. He will loose his 4 CON if the DM rules that your bear form can’t wear the amulet. That SHOULD cost him 22 Hp, but since that would put him below 11 HP (one per level) he’s ok.

That’s my 2 yen.

-Tatsu

 

[Christian]

Well, if you rule that a bear CAN wear an amulet, does the bear HAVE to wear the amulet? I mean, does the druid then have a choice when it wild shapes on which "usable" equipment it melds? We have druid in our campaign that mostly uses her wild shape for stealth and spy missions and it could cause problems if her forms were suddenly forced to have equipment.

On a side note, does detect magic see that an animal is really a polymorphed/wild shaped something?

Shouldn't be a huge problem, as long as the druid knows which items will meld and which won't. Take off the amulet before you shift, then you'll look 'natural'.

 

[Christian]

I remember something about CON damage not killing you unless you hit 0. The argument went like this?

At each level, you get D(something) + your CON modifier.

First level Bob the wizard (with a 14 CON) = 4 + 2 = 6 HP

If you loose CON, that modifier goes down (maybe negative) and this total number of HP gained at each level goes down.

Poisoned Bob (with a 14 CON, but poison lowers it to 9) = 4 ?1 + 3
The difference between 3 and 6 is 3, so he takes 3 HP from the poison.

But, you always get at least one hit point. So, if Bob ends up with a CON of 1?

Really poisoned Bob (con now 1) = 4 ? 5 = -1 BUT you always get one per level so 1

The difference between ?1 and 6 is 7, so Bob should take 7 HP, but in this case the ?always at least one per level? rule saved him, he is at one hit point. Note that he would be at 2 HP if he were bob the second level wizard.

In short, CON damage can not put you below your level in HP unless your CON gets to 0, in which case you die.

I think this rule will save the druid. He will loose his 4 CON if the DM rules that your bear form can?t wear the amulet. That SHOULD cost him 22 Hp, but since that would put him below 11 HP (one per level) he?s ok.

This works if you're dealing with just Con damage, but not when you're dealing with hit point damage as well. Con damage can't reduce your base hit points below one per level, but if you've taken more than your level in damage, you could end up in the negative range, net.

 

[CRGreathouse]

This works if you're dealing with just Con damage, but not when you're dealing with hit point damage as well. Con damage can't reduce your base hit points below one per level, but if you've taken more than your level in damage, you could end up in the negative range, net.

Yep. If the first-level wizard has 2 damage, he'll drop to -1 if his Con is 1.

 

[Tatsukun]

Is this written somewhere clearly? It wouldn't be the first thing I had wrong about 3.X.

Hmmmm.

-Tatsu