D&D 5E Wildshape check: am I doing it right?

[Immoralkickass]

Again with the insults. Maybe instead of being so quick to insult people, you actually look at the posts you're quoting and the rules again. It literally says there are limitations to what you get. Even gives a specific example (darkvision).

So no, I am not wrong when I say that the statement "you get the racial and class features" is false, because it is. Because it leaves off the the last part of that statement, and the very next statement after it. I've already posted that I'm aware Crawford says you get to use dragonbreath, but I'm saying that IMO at my table, there is a legitimate reason to not allow it for reasons I gave. This is a game that repeatedly stresses rulings over RAW, or have you never read the PHB or DMG? My ruling is not automatically "garbage" or "idiodic" just because it's counter to a Sage Advice ruling. Or are you suggesting that any disagreement with Sage Advice is "idiotic" and "garbage"?

The other thing I've argued is that you do not get all of those racial or class features. That is a true statement as well, based on what I quoted out of the PHB.

So what exactly am I wrong about?

"I would rule dragonborn do not get that feature because it's ancestral, and that means biology by definition, therefore you need the biology to make it work."--That's a statement of houseruling at my table and a perfectly viable interpretation of the rules, regardless of what Jeremy said later.

"You do not get all your racial or class features."---That's a true statement as well. Says so right there in the book that you keep ignoring. It depends. Depends =/= automatically get.

Wrong again. Its examples are for 'special senses', and I'm pretty sure breath weapon doesn't count as that. By the way, its not an insult if its true.

Again, no rulings in a forum about what is right or wrong. RAW or RAI is referred to, not rulings. You can rule anything you want, so it is pointless. Nobody is saying you can't have your own rulings.

I am sick of this, as apparently you can't read nor argue properly. It can't be more obvious where you are wrong.

 

[jaelis]

No, YOU are wrong. Again. You have to get off YOUR high horse and stop being stupid. We don't talk rulings here, we talk RAW. If RAW is unclear, then Sage Advice. Opinions can be wrong, and yours just happen to be.

That's silly we talk rulings all the time.

The RAW is ambiguous here it doesn't say what body parts are required either way. Crawford has indicated the RAI. I'm 100% sure he would also support an individual DM's individual ruling for their table.

 

[Sacrosanct]

What happen to the 'correct me if I'm wrong' part? You are wrong so I corrected you, but you refuse to accept the fact.

Since you added this edit, I'll quote it separately. What part of this don't you understand:

"...if the new form is physically capable of doing so. However, you can't use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense."

Do you know what that means? That means that this:

- use the druid's special abilities from class, race, feats etc.

Is wrong. Because it omits the qualifiers. It omits the exceptions where you don't get those things. You keep saying I'm wrong to argue that, but it's right there in the book.

The irony of you saying "but your refuse to accept the fact." Good lord. How many times do I need to quote the book before you accept it exists?

Oh, and we do talk rulings here. This is a discussion board. And the RAW repeats often and in no uncertain terms that rulings are more important than RAW at game tables. Who do you think you are to dictate what can and can't be discussed on a D&D messageboard? CapnZapp? (who tried pulling that earlier today).

 

[Sacrosanct]

Wrong again. Its examples are for 'special senses', and I'm pretty sure breath weapon doesn't count as that. By the way, its not an insult if its true.

Is darkvision a racial trait or isn't it? Pretty sure it is. It's right there in the racial description. And it's something that is not automatically given (along with any other class or racial ability that is not compatible if the form does not allow it, like gaining the benefits of shield mastery or heavy armor mastery feats while wildshaped, because your form cannot support wearing/wielding the items necessary to gain those benefits). So again, you do not always gain the abilities of class/racial/feat features. It's circumstantial. And the book literally calls it out. I have no idea why you keep trying to insist I'm wrong here and are arguing that you always get those things. It's quite literally in black and white (with a parchment background).

I am sick of this, as apparently you can't read nor argue properly. It can't be more obvious where you are wrong.

At least you're good at being ironic.

 

[Immoralkickass]

Since you added this edit, I'll quote it separately. What part of this don't you understand:

"...if the new form is physically capable of doing so. However, you can't use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense."

Do you know what that means? That means that this:



Is wrong. Because it omits the qualifiers. It omits the exceptions where you don't get those things. You keep saying I'm wrong to argue that, but it's right there in the book.

The irony of you saying "but your refuse to accept the fact." Good lord. How many times do I need to quote the book before you accept it exists?

Oh, and we do talk rulings here. This is a discussion board. And the RAW repeats often and in no uncertain terms that rulings are more important than RAW at game tables. Who do you think you are to dictate what can and can't be discussed on a D&D messageboard? CapnZapp? (who tried pulling that earlier today).

Oh so you are indeed stupid and can't read. An exception to the rule does not mean the rule is wrong.

Rulings are pointless for arguments unless specifically requested. You go ahead and rule whatever you want at your table, but don't go around touting it as the default correct way to do things. You started by saying something that is contradictory to the Wild Shape rules. I corrected you not because I enjoy calling you out, but in case it misled other people.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Oh so you are indeed stupid and can't read. An exception to the rule does not mean the rule is wrong.

Rulings are pointless for arguments unless specifically requested. You go ahead and rule whatever you want at your table, but don't go around touting it as the default correct way to do things. You started by saying something that is contradictory to the Wild Shape rules. I corrected you not because I enjoy calling you out, but in case it misled other people.

Here's some friendly advice. Don't go around slinging personal insults. It doesn't help your argument, and people won't take you seriously. I'm not being sarcastic. I'm being sincere with that.

What I said was that you don't always get those benefits. That is a true statement. The book even says so literally in black and white. That's not an exception to the rule. That is the rule. Not only with racial features (like darkvision, which is a feature of the race), but with any other class, race, or ability that is incompatible with the new form, like many feats. What is misleading (since you say your whole point in responding to me is to avoid people being misled) is to present your position like you always get those features. Because that's not true at all.

 

[Immoralkickass]

Is darkvision a racial trait or isn't it? Pretty sure it is. It's right there in the racial description. And it's something that is not automatically given (along with any other class or racial ability that is not compatible if the form does not allow it, like gaining the benefits of shield mastery or heavy armor mastery feats while wildshaped, because your form cannot support wearing/wielding the items necessary to gain those benefits). So again, you do not always gain the abilities of class/racial/feat features. It's circumstantial. And the book literally calls it out. I have no idea why you keep trying to insist I'm wrong here and are arguing that you always get those things. It's quite literally in black and white (with a parchment background).



At least you're good at being ironic.

'Special senses' is very specific in D&D. It refers to darkvision, blindsight, tremorsense, keen smell, etc. Any other class or race features does not fall under this. It can't be more clear.

 

[Sacrosanct]

'Special senses' is very specific in D&D. It refers to darkvision, blindsight, tremorsense, keen smell, etc. Any other class or race features does not fall under this. It can't be more clear.

Say what? The book says, "You retain the benefits from any feature of your class, race, etc.." Darkvision is a racial feature. A sense and feature are not mutually exclusive. A sense is part of the racial feature, because it's the race that grants it (unless otherwise specified via magic spell or item). Darkvision is listed in the same section along with every other racial trait/feature. It's part of that race's feature package. It's not listed out separately in it's own section, but is part of the entire trait package.

*edit* It's also telling you keep ignoring the other part of the disqualifies I keep listing. Even if you throw out darkvision, you still don't always get those features when wildshaped, like it says right there in the book.

The bottom line is you do not always "...retain the benefits from any feature of your class, race, etc..." like was presented in the OP, and what I had disagreed with. End stop. Right there in black and white.

 

[Immoralkickass]

Say what?

Says the friggin Basic Rules p4.

 

[Sacrosanct]

NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

If you’re arguing that something listed under the TRAIT section of a race description is not a racial trait, then we’ve truly entered into bizarro world.

And yet again, you ignore all the other disqualifies as listed not only in the same book, or same section, but literally the second half of the same sentence that says you keep features.

So I’m not sure why you keep arguing and saying I’m wrong. You do not always get those features. It’s entirely circumstantial. And literally says so in the same sentence.


Edit* I've just pulled up the basic rules. No where on page 4 does it even mention darkvision. So perhaps you can kindly show me exactly where it states that darkvision is NOT a racial feature/trait. That would certainly be odd, since that's the literally the section where it's granted--under a race's list of traits/features.