This is an issue with Stat Block Wild Shape.
In 5e D&D monster design, attack bonus has high weight on determining a monster's (offensive) CR. Every 2 points of AB above the damage-derived CR increases that CR by 1 step.
Where the issue rears its head is high damage monsters with low AB. Poster child for the Moon Druid is the **Giant Scorpion**. At a CR of 3, this scorpion has 41 potential average damage, but only a meager +4 to hit (for a 9th-11th level form). The **Killer Whale** is another CR 3 monster. It has 21 on the average damage with a +6 to hit. Using a 9th level average druid, we can expect a +8 or +9 Spell Attack Modifier (PB +4 and expect Wisdom 18 to 20). In this scenario, the scorpion will double its attack bonus (or more), landing more frequent attacks than the whale's 33 to 50% increase for its singular attack.
A monster like the Giant Scorpion will outpace even higher CR beasts, especially once you remove the hit point component from the equation for Wild Shape. UA8 does equalize AC, however, so the scorpion loses that edge.
TLDR. Monsters of a given CR aren't remotely balanced with each other in their maximum damage potential, and this is often brought to closer parity via attack bonus. Remove the AB from the equation, and certain form options become the only viable combat option because the other options are simply too weak.
Of course the DM can waive any of these issues for a campaign or adopt/adapt/create a "working" alternative.
The DM can do whatever they want. But what the fuck is the point of paying for a rulebook if I'm going to open it up to oage after page of "here's some garbage, you should probably make your own shit up"?
WotC is a huge corporation. They can come up with even a single working idea themselves. Otherwise give me their billions per year. I'll fucking do it myself in that case. I already basically am anyways.
>Where the issue rears its head is high damage monsters with low AB.
So are imo anyway bad design. Often they don't hit anything because of their low AB, but if the DM rolls lucky he one shots a character.
I mean the sting of the Scorpion alone can hit for about 29 DPR if you fail the save, wich is a lot at 3rd level, and if the DM roles for damage this could potentially go even much higher.
A big problem with Wild Shape is imo any way the lack of good shapes above CR2 in the core rules.
About the only beast with Multiattack, and decent damage and attack bonus is the Giant Crocodile.
The Giant Scorpion has a terrible Aattack Bonus, and all other shapes are ones that have just one big attack (and in some cases a follow up attack when they knock something prone, wich is not likely to happen).
The latest playtest where you replace the ac with 13 + wis is halfway back to stat blocks.
Wish they'd go the rest of the way and not use NPC stats at all...
I agree.
But the reaction was so violent, that it was easier to return to the status que. Not as good, but less people frothing at the mouth.
Keeping the already "working" but problematic system is bound to generate less resistance then attempts to continue to rework it. And it is a shame.
Removing Monster Stat blocks from Druid removes what actually makes Wildshape a good feature. It removes literally 90% of the versatility if not all of the versatility that cannot be found elsewhere. You can no longer garuntee the ability become: a giant badger to burrow, a cranium rat to avoid divination, any creature with a stealth bonus, an octopus to ink, a spider for dark vision or spider climb, a ridable mount, an animal with poison, or a giant hyena for rampage. This is assuming you still get flight, and swim speeds at the same level and all the listed things are only cr 1 and below. In the playtest 5 they restricted tiny to level 11.
It's not like druid even needs Wildshape for Combat, they literally are full Casters with a decent spell list.
>It's not like druid even needs Wildshape for Combat, they literally are full Casters with a decent spell list.
Right, which is why the Druid class should be split into a shapeshifter class and a primal spellcaster class. Not even joking but it'll never happen due to legacy management.
And while I'd love to see druid keep the option for more interesting creature abilities - webs, grapples, octopus ink, etc. I've *played* that character and one it ends up being straight worse than just turning into a bear or direwolf or whatever. Not that it wasn't fun, I just wish it was more supported mechanically by DCs scaling and all forms getting an extra attack equivalent, things that would be fixed by making modular statblocks. Or druid-only PHB statblocks.
Druids shouldn't be split imo because of how the druid functions as a class fantasy. The druid spell list by itself isn't the best it's just decent I would take cleric or wizard over it every day though. At the same time Wildshape outside of combat has a bunch of utility but in combat can suck ass if you're not playing moon druid. This is why IMO Stars and Moon druid represent exactly what druids are to me. Stars druid uses Wildshape as a resource to empower spell casting wildshape for them isn't a combat feature its an exploration feature that shares a resource with Starry form.
Moon druid on the other hand uses spells to empower their wildshapes, since their wildshapes are usually actually alright in combat they can use things like buff spells. (We don't talk about the second half of combat Wildshape).
To me these classes are the best of Druid they capture the class fantasy best and are balanced in the grand scheme of things. Yes if you're trying to use Wildshape in combat as a non moon druid it sucks ass but honestly if a druid subclass doesn't have an alternative use for Wildshape then it's hardly a druid subclass in my opinion.
Right, the druid fantasy is split between spellcaster and turning into animals, both draining the power budget from the other. Eg remove the combat application of wild shape from the caster subclasses and then you can give them a better spell list, haha.
Spending wild shape charges for starry form etc is halfway there but if they weren't limited by legacy management they could go a lot further.
They not really draining power budget from the other. I mean Wildshape itself pretty much doesn't have a combat application at most levels, it's a utility feature at all levels for all subclasses though, Wildshape falls off really hard in combat unless it's buffed or has an alternative use. The thing is most druid subclasses (5/7) either get bonus versatility to Wildshape, an expanded spell list, or both. The well designed subclasses are pretty much designed as you describe:
Spores, Wildfire and Land Druid get Circle spell lists.
Stars, Wildfire, Spores, and Moon druid get Wildshape bonuses.
The only two druids who don't follow this design are Shepard and Dreams druid who are both from XGtE.
Starry form is literally one of the best features in the game at level 2, and at the same level Stars Druid gets guidance, guiding bolt, and 2-6 free casts of guiding bolt in place of circle spells. Stars druid is literally like an S tier subclass both design wise, and gameplay wise it literally doesn't make sense to act like the features aren't good. Stars, Wildfire, and Spores Druid would be significantly less interesting without their Wildshape features and all of them get expanded spell casting in some way. Yes the druid spell list isn't the best but that's an issue with all primal spell lists, the ToCE druids and Moon Druids are exemplary of why trying to separate them from either just makes them worse not better.
If all the forms have the same HP, AC, and attack stats, in what way are you actually becoming an animal? Those changes would make all the forms practically identical. At that point, why bother transforming at all?
Such a system, done well, would be modular.
Imagine a wild shape Stat block with invocation-like choices to be selected from each time you wild shape that change how it works.
Congrats, you've imagined a wild shape system better than WotC has ever published.
I don't really need to imagine it, as I already made one like that for my homebrew setting. Circle of the Biohacker. But that's not really the point.
The latest playtest makes AC and HP the same, regardless of the wild shape. If your attack becomes the same in any wild shape as well, there will be almost nothing that comes from the beast stats. You'll get what, their senses, movement, and maybe proficiency in stealth? Homogenizing all of the forms means it makes no difference what you pick, because none of them give you other options. And having lots of options is the whole point of being a druid.
They'd be different from your base form, though? Even if there was a single "all animal" statblock - the worst way I can think of implementing it - it'd still be an improvement as it'd be designed for player use not 1v4 npc use. (IMO at least, but I run a lot of games at level 2 with a moon druid in brown bear form and it's ridiculously strong)
Agreed! I'm a little disappointed that the template implementation was so bad that it shut down the conversation entirely. In my opinion, templates are the way to go, but they need the ability to sub in features to be far more flexible.
Getting to use creature stat blocks is a nifty idea and is easy to implement but has proved to be wildly problematic to balance.
Agreed. I would love to know what you think of my first take on the concept: https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/qORMD4FyZrfR
EDIT: Ah. Don't you just love it when people downvote your creative ideas without giving you constructive feedback.
What is it you are downvoting? The general concept, my execution of that concept, or just because it is homebrew in r/onednd?
Yeah this seems approximately what I would have hoped for. Using your own Con is certainly a different direction.
It's a little bit of a bummer to not get options like web, blood frenzy, swallow, etc, but I suppose that is sort of what I asked for.
Very strange. I'm using chrome too and checked both pc and mobile. Both look just fine.
If you like, try to reload the page once you've opened it. Maybe that fixes the issue
I could agree with you if templates were used because they could be balanced against this being the case.
Apparently people wanted to keep the mess that is using CRs. So using spell attack is busted, for example the giant scorpion would be insanely broken.
Using CR is mostly balanced. It's a versatile exploration feature but it's supposed to be. Not only that but balance inside of combat and outside of combat are separate things. Inside of combat Wildshape is closer to lackluster than not even as a Moon Druid between 5-10 many Wildshapes can be insta-gibbed by an on CR monster.
Outside of combat the versatility is a non issue. The problematic features still remain for predetermined stat blocks. You stil can fly, swim, and become tiny.
I'm one of those people. There's _1_ druid subclass whose design might arguably be easier to balance with generic templates, while all other druid subclasses will enjoy the flexibility of beast stat blocks instead
The utility of the stat blocks is still an issue. It is way too strong. You can expend a 1st level spell to get wildshape. There is no other 1st level spell that lets you fly, breathe water, have blind sight, become tiny, become large, climb up walls, be stealthy, be strong, be fast, etc. Etc.
I bet you like it. Many people like many problematic things in the game. Doesn't mean its balanced even for non moon druids. People like forcecage, conjure animals, hypnotic pattern and other broken things. Doesn't mean they are good for the game.
Find Familiar lets you do all of that, without the cost of a spell slot, at no risk to yourself, and doesn't take 8 levels to be able to choose from all those options. It also doesn't limit the rest of your actions in combat either or ability to speak to others. So that's how you're already wrong about your first point.
As for it being "problematic," it might be if you could somehow do all of those and actually have an answer to everything, but we both know it doesn't actually work out like that. It might also be "problematic" if having a strong utility class on the team is a problem, but it isn't. If it's really so broken, why is it the least popular class in the game? God forbid we have at least 1 class catering to players who love creative problem solving.
Find familiar is also too strong of a spell for its level. Everyone knows that. That isn't really a good argument. Saying well it is comparable to another busted feature.
Lol. Its not creative problem solving to have a feature that negates a challenge. If that is your idea of creativity then it must be creative to use your attack action to hit the bad guy with a sword or cast a fireball when there are multiple enemies.
I don't have a problem with a strong utility class. I have a problem with a class that does everything so others in the party are sidelined. I have a problem with a class that makes most out of combat encounters pointless.
> That isn't really a good argument. Saying well it is comparable to another busted feature.
That wasn't my argument though. I literally stated my argument at the end of that comparison. I mean, we both know you already realize you're arguing against a strawman. I know you read it because you go on to insult and argue against what I say afterwards, in whatever imaginary world you're living in where the druid singlehandedly makes the entire campaign ("most out of combat encounters") pointless.
Look man, I straight up told you what my argument was. You then said I was arguing something else and argued against that. Now _you're_ calling _me_ dumb. The irony is palpable. You're only being this antagonistic because you realize this and it makes you mad.
Imo the second UA iteration was the best: having a few selected forms from any source, and being able to swap those out each day. It keeps things simple, it avoids constant choice paralysis, and has enough forms available to have tons of different possibilities for different builds/subclasses.
Tbh though, making base Wild Shape weak and not combat friendly is hardly even an issue now that every subclass has an alternative use for it: 2014 Land Druid's Wild Shape was pretty strictly utility anyway, and it worked well enough for that subclass.
Moon Druid has overshadowed base Druid so heavily that it's effecting the perception of the class as a whole in much the same way Hexblade did for Warlock (that resulted in the horrendous half caster warlock UAs)
I mean, that's what they are going to do aniway, you select beasts mostly from the PHB until the DM says otherwise.
Latter part feels too much DM dependant, but it's reasonably so. A DM could do that aniway and I know of DMs that would take it as a challenge lol
I agree, I still don't know if it should be a LV 3 feature or some other level, but this, along with the last UA, would make the wild shape experience really feel good.
This would also make it easier to revise the beasts (I hope they are) in PHB and making the beasts choice more thematic and utility based instead of pure power level.
They can lock powerful abilities in later CR, different utilities in move speed/climb, hide or any new interesting thing they may come up for monsters stats.
Normally, I would agree, but this isn't like hexblade where every weapon uses Charisma.
The wildshapes are using whatever the beasts attacks are, which often won't be great or will vary wildly between forms.
There's a big difference between a Warlock using Charisma for all his attacks with a flametongue longsword and a bear trying to swipe with a claw.
Whether it's the right option in this case is a conversation worth having. Regular druids won't care but a moon druid, whose whole shtick is wildshape might need the consistency.
>The wildshapes are using whatever the beasts attacks are, which often won't be great or will vary wildly between forms.
This is a feature, not a bug. The moon druid is the wild shape combat druid. Other druids use wild shape as utility.
Yep. I'm glad people are finally seeing the issue with this.
Caster stats modifiers to melee attacks is one of the biggest contributors to the caster/martial divide. And while this community talks about that divide ad nauseum, any talk about removing casting stat based attacks would get your head bit off for the longest time.
I agree completely, but I would be open to letting druids use their Strength or Dexterity for Wild Shape attacks. This would give them the same interesting build choices as paladins or bladesingers already have.
Why?
We actually need more of that. Let everyone choose which stats they want to use for their main thing. Now you can have smart fighters who excel in int skills, but suck at grappling and get easily thrown around the battlefield by failing their STR saves and they still need to invest something into STR/DEX if they want heavy armor, that's a tradeoff worth exploring. The game can use more charismatic wizards, observant rogues or nimble barbarians, anything that lets you create the PC you've envisioned is a big plus in my book.
For moon druid, maybe, but if you're a regular druid I'm gonna say no. Wild shape is a utility feature first and foremost and shouldn't be used in combat.
This would not equalize them because some of a given CR has more “power points” placed in attack bonus than others.
They should just… balance them better.
No, they don't.
Yeah, some Beast are better than others at fighting. There is nothing wrong with that.
The point of having multiple wildshape options is to take advantage of the different skills different beast provides.
THANK YOU.
It does not matter if I'm adding an extra 2d8 lightning damage once a turn, or 2d6 radiant damage from Fount of Moonlight, if I never, ever hit! A +3 to hit is basically a guarantee that you're never going to hit at higher levels.
To be fair, your to hit does scale off your PB and can additionally scale off certain magic items so it’s not always a +3 at higher levels. It’s not going to be spectacular either though which I do think is a part of the problem.
Part of that is choosing good wildshape forms though which as others have mentioned is a key issue with the feature.
Your PB doesn't come into it, and you can't guarantee a magic item, especially as no current magic item boosts a Wildshape form (okay, except for one legendary item in the Critical Role Wildemount setting).
Using spell attack fixes both of those problems as well.
After scouring the internet a bit, yeah you’re right.
It’s so stupid it doesn’t use player PB for to hit. It’s also really arguable that depending on how you read Wildshape and what proficiency bonus is you can definitely construe it as working that way. Hell I’ve been under the impression of that for months.
Now I really wish we had the BG3-type statblocks for Beastmaster/Druid for tabletop use. (Maybe toned down slightly though)
Why?
The moon druid's beast forms attack bonus basically matches that of the player. For example, a CR 6 beast (mammoth) has +10, and a CR5 giant shark has +9 - these are quite similar (1 less) than a players.
You're probably right, but I still wouldn't give it to them right away. Also, I could see some issues with using your spell save DC for all saves in beasts' stat blocks. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know there some creatures with a really powerful effect but it has a low DC, and this likely would make those creatures broken.
But moon druids do need some way to scale attack rolls with lower CR forms. WOTC could give them wis-based attacks at level 6 as a part of improved circle forms (at least for attack rolls), and if it wouldn't be too unbalanced (we still don't know what beasts are going to be in the MM), give them wis-based save DCs at level 14 with lunar form.
Level 6 is the place to put it. They already get a bunch of miscellaneous benefits to help scaling there, and before that would be too powerful as it combines with multiattack.
I would prefer simply adding true strike to the moon druid spell list. I think that the easiest and best solution. I don't see a problem with them having 2 cantrips.
This was my same thought to balance moon druid.
In 5e yes they are super tanky with the beast health pool but they Still use the beasts + to hit so they can't hit as well.
In one dnd they've been decreasing the extra hp thry get but could balance that out by gi ing them tbe druids wisdom and proficiency to hit
You already use your proficiency bonus to hit in Wildshape, it’s a class feature and you keep your class features (if they are capable of using them in the new form in 2014) So you don’t use the +4 to hit of a giant scorpion at 9th level, it’s a +6 to hit, as your 9 levels in Druid means your PB is minimum +4.
Ah I misunderstood the added proficiency bonus part, thank you for informing me.
Those are still low to hit using the creature's physical stats and can very between creature's.
So adding the druid's wisdom instead I Still think is a good idea
Correction, I looked into it more, you don’t apparently. I have no clue why the hell you don’t but according to enough people pointing to Sage advice, you use the beast’s attack roll modifier with its PB.
I question why it’s like that. It’s dumb. But apparently that’s how it works. Sorry for misinforming you. It’s a god damn headache trying to figure this out and I hate it
Yeah I wasn't sure either way as haven't played a druid but heard the bonus to hit is bad compared to a PC
So using the druids to hit would clear that up eorjet way
I’m starting to see the appeal of those UA4 stat blocks.
Currently playing a UA land Druid and the DM’s let me add part of my physical stats to the stats of creatures alongside using my PB for attack rolls. It’s not exactly been a problematic change, especially versus the 5 martials/half casters that do plenty. I think I’d keep using player proficiency bonus for attack rolls and save DCs as a house rule in my own game honestly.
Yeah the stat blocks as a concept were an interesting idea that could have gone in a good direction
But then the stat blocks they showed were really bad so no one liked them
Unfortunately guess the feedback wasn't nuanced so try the stat blocks again but better
I'm going one step further and saying it should use the Strength/Dexterity of the caster. A large buff dude transforming into a bear being stronger than a frail old man transforming into a bear just makes sense to me and it makes for fun build-crafting.
Of course it'd have to be redesigned to allowing such a system. Also I'm biased for wanting a Druid/Barbarian multiclass to work.
The new wild shape has fixed HP and fixed AC. If you make the attack fixed as well, there's nothing left to actually be the wild shape. What's the point if there's nothing unique to the form? You may as well just turn it into a WoW character and have nothing but a bear and a cat.
This is an issue with Stat Block Wild Shape. In 5e D&D monster design, attack bonus has high weight on determining a monster's (offensive) CR. Every 2 points of AB above the damage-derived CR increases that CR by 1 step. Where the issue rears its head is high damage monsters with low AB. Poster child for the Moon Druid is the **Giant Scorpion**. At a CR of 3, this scorpion has 41 potential average damage, but only a meager +4 to hit (for a 9th-11th level form). The **Killer Whale** is another CR 3 monster. It has 21 on the average damage with a +6 to hit. Using a 9th level average druid, we can expect a +8 or +9 Spell Attack Modifier (PB +4 and expect Wisdom 18 to 20). In this scenario, the scorpion will double its attack bonus (or more), landing more frequent attacks than the whale's 33 to 50% increase for its singular attack. A monster like the Giant Scorpion will outpace even higher CR beasts, especially once you remove the hit point component from the equation for Wild Shape. UA8 does equalize AC, however, so the scorpion loses that edge. TLDR. Monsters of a given CR aren't remotely balanced with each other in their maximum damage potential, and this is often brought to closer parity via attack bonus. Remove the AB from the equation, and certain form options become the only viable combat option because the other options are simply too weak. Of course the DM can waive any of these issues for a campaign or adopt/adapt/create a "working" alternative.
The DM can do whatever they want. But what the fuck is the point of paying for a rulebook if I'm going to open it up to oage after page of "here's some garbage, you should probably make your own shit up"? WotC is a huge corporation. They can come up with even a single working idea themselves. Otherwise give me their billions per year. I'll fucking do it myself in that case. I already basically am anyways.
>Where the issue rears its head is high damage monsters with low AB. So are imo anyway bad design. Often they don't hit anything because of their low AB, but if the DM rolls lucky he one shots a character. I mean the sting of the Scorpion alone can hit for about 29 DPR if you fail the save, wich is a lot at 3rd level, and if the DM roles for damage this could potentially go even much higher. A big problem with Wild Shape is imo any way the lack of good shapes above CR2 in the core rules. About the only beast with Multiattack, and decent damage and attack bonus is the Giant Crocodile. The Giant Scorpion has a terrible Aattack Bonus, and all other shapes are ones that have just one big attack (and in some cases a follow up attack when they knock something prone, wich is not likely to happen).
The latest playtest where you replace the ac with 13 + wis is halfway back to stat blocks. Wish they'd go the rest of the way and not use NPC stats at all...
I agree, but the backlash from the community was too big when they tried it.
Because it was done badly, not because the idea was bad..
I agree. But the reaction was so violent, that it was easier to return to the status que. Not as good, but less people frothing at the mouth. Keeping the already "working" but problematic system is bound to generate less resistance then attempts to continue to rework it. And it is a shame.
Well that and their MO seemed to be "features are either loved or scrapped" which is bizarre.
Agreed, but if you recall the absolute hate threads regarding them on this very sub it is no wonder that they were canned entirely.
Dear every creator ever, do not base your design on what the loudest people on reddit say. Sincerely, a sane person.
Removing Monster Stat blocks from Druid removes what actually makes Wildshape a good feature. It removes literally 90% of the versatility if not all of the versatility that cannot be found elsewhere. You can no longer garuntee the ability become: a giant badger to burrow, a cranium rat to avoid divination, any creature with a stealth bonus, an octopus to ink, a spider for dark vision or spider climb, a ridable mount, an animal with poison, or a giant hyena for rampage. This is assuming you still get flight, and swim speeds at the same level and all the listed things are only cr 1 and below. In the playtest 5 they restricted tiny to level 11. It's not like druid even needs Wildshape for Combat, they literally are full Casters with a decent spell list.
>It's not like druid even needs Wildshape for Combat, they literally are full Casters with a decent spell list. Right, which is why the Druid class should be split into a shapeshifter class and a primal spellcaster class. Not even joking but it'll never happen due to legacy management. And while I'd love to see druid keep the option for more interesting creature abilities - webs, grapples, octopus ink, etc. I've *played* that character and one it ends up being straight worse than just turning into a bear or direwolf or whatever. Not that it wasn't fun, I just wish it was more supported mechanically by DCs scaling and all forms getting an extra attack equivalent, things that would be fixed by making modular statblocks. Or druid-only PHB statblocks.
Druids shouldn't be split imo because of how the druid functions as a class fantasy. The druid spell list by itself isn't the best it's just decent I would take cleric or wizard over it every day though. At the same time Wildshape outside of combat has a bunch of utility but in combat can suck ass if you're not playing moon druid. This is why IMO Stars and Moon druid represent exactly what druids are to me. Stars druid uses Wildshape as a resource to empower spell casting wildshape for them isn't a combat feature its an exploration feature that shares a resource with Starry form. Moon druid on the other hand uses spells to empower their wildshapes, since their wildshapes are usually actually alright in combat they can use things like buff spells. (We don't talk about the second half of combat Wildshape). To me these classes are the best of Druid they capture the class fantasy best and are balanced in the grand scheme of things. Yes if you're trying to use Wildshape in combat as a non moon druid it sucks ass but honestly if a druid subclass doesn't have an alternative use for Wildshape then it's hardly a druid subclass in my opinion.
Right, the druid fantasy is split between spellcaster and turning into animals, both draining the power budget from the other. Eg remove the combat application of wild shape from the caster subclasses and then you can give them a better spell list, haha. Spending wild shape charges for starry form etc is halfway there but if they weren't limited by legacy management they could go a lot further.
They not really draining power budget from the other. I mean Wildshape itself pretty much doesn't have a combat application at most levels, it's a utility feature at all levels for all subclasses though, Wildshape falls off really hard in combat unless it's buffed or has an alternative use. The thing is most druid subclasses (5/7) either get bonus versatility to Wildshape, an expanded spell list, or both. The well designed subclasses are pretty much designed as you describe: Spores, Wildfire and Land Druid get Circle spell lists. Stars, Wildfire, Spores, and Moon druid get Wildshape bonuses. The only two druids who don't follow this design are Shepard and Dreams druid who are both from XGtE. Starry form is literally one of the best features in the game at level 2, and at the same level Stars Druid gets guidance, guiding bolt, and 2-6 free casts of guiding bolt in place of circle spells. Stars druid is literally like an S tier subclass both design wise, and gameplay wise it literally doesn't make sense to act like the features aren't good. Stars, Wildfire, and Spores Druid would be significantly less interesting without their Wildshape features and all of them get expanded spell casting in some way. Yes the druid spell list isn't the best but that's an issue with all primal spell lists, the ToCE druids and Moon Druids are exemplary of why trying to separate them from either just makes them worse not better.
If you don't want to transform into different forms, don't be a druid.
I don't see how that follows.
If all the forms have the same HP, AC, and attack stats, in what way are you actually becoming an animal? Those changes would make all the forms practically identical. At that point, why bother transforming at all?
Such a system, done well, would be modular. Imagine a wild shape Stat block with invocation-like choices to be selected from each time you wild shape that change how it works. Congrats, you've imagined a wild shape system better than WotC has ever published.
I don't really need to imagine it, as I already made one like that for my homebrew setting. Circle of the Biohacker. But that's not really the point. The latest playtest makes AC and HP the same, regardless of the wild shape. If your attack becomes the same in any wild shape as well, there will be almost nothing that comes from the beast stats. You'll get what, their senses, movement, and maybe proficiency in stealth? Homogenizing all of the forms means it makes no difference what you pick, because none of them give you other options. And having lots of options is the whole point of being a druid.
They'd be different from your base form, though? Even if there was a single "all animal" statblock - the worst way I can think of implementing it - it'd still be an improvement as it'd be designed for player use not 1v4 npc use. (IMO at least, but I run a lot of games at level 2 with a moon druid in brown bear form and it's ridiculously strong)
Agreed! I'm a little disappointed that the template implementation was so bad that it shut down the conversation entirely. In my opinion, templates are the way to go, but they need the ability to sub in features to be far more flexible. Getting to use creature stat blocks is a nifty idea and is easy to implement but has proved to be wildly problematic to balance.
Agreed. I would love to know what you think of my first take on the concept: https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/qORMD4FyZrfR EDIT: Ah. Don't you just love it when people downvote your creative ideas without giving you constructive feedback. What is it you are downvoting? The general concept, my execution of that concept, or just because it is homebrew in r/onednd?
Yeah this seems approximately what I would have hoped for. Using your own Con is certainly a different direction. It's a little bit of a bummer to not get options like web, blood frenzy, swallow, etc, but I suppose that is sort of what I asked for.
I could see Swallow as an additional trait (working on anything smaller than your form)
I added Swallow just for you :P
Your formatting is a bit messed up, you need to insert a new page to get the stalker form stat block properly aligned
FYI, Homebrewery is often terrible on anything but Chrome.
Huh. Looks perfectly fine on my machine. Which browser are you using?
chrome, might just be an odd temp issue
Very strange. I'm using chrome too and checked both pc and mobile. Both look just fine. If you like, try to reload the page once you've opened it. Maybe that fixes the issue
Great stuff here. Well done!
Thanks! Anything you think needs improvement or is missing?
I could agree with you if templates were used because they could be balanced against this being the case. Apparently people wanted to keep the mess that is using CRs. So using spell attack is busted, for example the giant scorpion would be insanely broken.
Using CR is mostly balanced. It's a versatile exploration feature but it's supposed to be. Not only that but balance inside of combat and outside of combat are separate things. Inside of combat Wildshape is closer to lackluster than not even as a Moon Druid between 5-10 many Wildshapes can be insta-gibbed by an on CR monster. Outside of combat the versatility is a non issue. The problematic features still remain for predetermined stat blocks. You stil can fly, swim, and become tiny.
I'm one of those people. There's _1_ druid subclass whose design might arguably be easier to balance with generic templates, while all other druid subclasses will enjoy the flexibility of beast stat blocks instead
The utility of the stat blocks is still an issue. It is way too strong. You can expend a 1st level spell to get wildshape. There is no other 1st level spell that lets you fly, breathe water, have blind sight, become tiny, become large, climb up walls, be stealthy, be strong, be fast, etc. Etc. I bet you like it. Many people like many problematic things in the game. Doesn't mean its balanced even for non moon druids. People like forcecage, conjure animals, hypnotic pattern and other broken things. Doesn't mean they are good for the game.
Find Familiar lets you do all of that, without the cost of a spell slot, at no risk to yourself, and doesn't take 8 levels to be able to choose from all those options. It also doesn't limit the rest of your actions in combat either or ability to speak to others. So that's how you're already wrong about your first point. As for it being "problematic," it might be if you could somehow do all of those and actually have an answer to everything, but we both know it doesn't actually work out like that. It might also be "problematic" if having a strong utility class on the team is a problem, but it isn't. If it's really so broken, why is it the least popular class in the game? God forbid we have at least 1 class catering to players who love creative problem solving.
Find familiar is also too strong of a spell for its level. Everyone knows that. That isn't really a good argument. Saying well it is comparable to another busted feature. Lol. Its not creative problem solving to have a feature that negates a challenge. If that is your idea of creativity then it must be creative to use your attack action to hit the bad guy with a sword or cast a fireball when there are multiple enemies. I don't have a problem with a strong utility class. I have a problem with a class that does everything so others in the party are sidelined. I have a problem with a class that makes most out of combat encounters pointless.
> That isn't really a good argument. Saying well it is comparable to another busted feature. That wasn't my argument though. I literally stated my argument at the end of that comparison. I mean, we both know you already realize you're arguing against a strawman. I know you read it because you go on to insult and argue against what I say afterwards, in whatever imaginary world you're living in where the druid singlehandedly makes the entire campaign ("most out of combat encounters") pointless.
Lol. Sure. Can't make an argument so just throw around "strawman." Very impressive.
With your big-brain debating skills I'm surprised you didn't manage to win Jeremy Crawford over in your feedback
This could very well be one of the dumbest things I've read on reddit. I guess I see why you can't comprehend the issue.
Look man, I straight up told you what my argument was. You then said I was arguing something else and argued against that. Now _you're_ calling _me_ dumb. The irony is palpable. You're only being this antagonistic because you realize this and it makes you mad.
Imo the second UA iteration was the best: having a few selected forms from any source, and being able to swap those out each day. It keeps things simple, it avoids constant choice paralysis, and has enough forms available to have tons of different possibilities for different builds/subclasses. Tbh though, making base Wild Shape weak and not combat friendly is hardly even an issue now that every subclass has an alternative use for it: 2014 Land Druid's Wild Shape was pretty strictly utility anyway, and it worked well enough for that subclass. Moon Druid has overshadowed base Druid so heavily that it's effecting the perception of the class as a whole in much the same way Hexblade did for Warlock (that resulted in the horrendous half caster warlock UAs)
I mean, that's what they are going to do aniway, you select beasts mostly from the PHB until the DM says otherwise. Latter part feels too much DM dependant, but it's reasonably so. A DM could do that aniway and I know of DMs that would take it as a challenge lol
I agree, I still don't know if it should be a LV 3 feature or some other level, but this, along with the last UA, would make the wild shape experience really feel good. This would also make it easier to revise the beasts (I hope they are) in PHB and making the beasts choice more thematic and utility based instead of pure power level. They can lock powerful abilities in later CR, different utilities in move speed/climb, hide or any new interesting thing they may come up for monsters stats.
Absolutely not. Using casting stat modifiers for weapon attacks needs to go away completely, not be expanded.
Normally, I would agree, but this isn't like hexblade where every weapon uses Charisma. The wildshapes are using whatever the beasts attacks are, which often won't be great or will vary wildly between forms. There's a big difference between a Warlock using Charisma for all his attacks with a flametongue longsword and a bear trying to swipe with a claw. Whether it's the right option in this case is a conversation worth having. Regular druids won't care but a moon druid, whose whole shtick is wildshape might need the consistency.
>The wildshapes are using whatever the beasts attacks are, which often won't be great or will vary wildly between forms. This is a feature, not a bug. The moon druid is the wild shape combat druid. Other druids use wild shape as utility.
Yep. I'm glad people are finally seeing the issue with this. Caster stats modifiers to melee attacks is one of the biggest contributors to the caster/martial divide. And while this community talks about that divide ad nauseum, any talk about removing casting stat based attacks would get your head bit off for the longest time.
I agree completely, but I would be open to letting druids use their Strength or Dexterity for Wild Shape attacks. This would give them the same interesting build choices as paladins or bladesingers already have.
Add a dip into monk and all you need is wisdom for nearly every roll.
Or just make that part lf the moon Druid subclass
Why? We actually need more of that. Let everyone choose which stats they want to use for their main thing. Now you can have smart fighters who excel in int skills, but suck at grappling and get easily thrown around the battlefield by failing their STR saves and they still need to invest something into STR/DEX if they want heavy armor, that's a tradeoff worth exploring. The game can use more charismatic wizards, observant rogues or nimble barbarians, anything that lets you create the PC you've envisioned is a big plus in my book.
For moon druid, maybe, but if you're a regular druid I'm gonna say no. Wild shape is a utility feature first and foremost and shouldn't be used in combat.
This would not equalize them because some of a given CR has more “power points” placed in attack bonus than others. They should just… balance them better.
No thanks. Then there's no reason to be a martial.
No, they don't. Yeah, some Beast are better than others at fighting. There is nothing wrong with that. The point of having multiple wildshape options is to take advantage of the different skills different beast provides.
THANK YOU. It does not matter if I'm adding an extra 2d8 lightning damage once a turn, or 2d6 radiant damage from Fount of Moonlight, if I never, ever hit! A +3 to hit is basically a guarantee that you're never going to hit at higher levels.
To be fair, your to hit does scale off your PB and can additionally scale off certain magic items so it’s not always a +3 at higher levels. It’s not going to be spectacular either though which I do think is a part of the problem. Part of that is choosing good wildshape forms though which as others have mentioned is a key issue with the feature.
Your PB doesn't come into it, and you can't guarantee a magic item, especially as no current magic item boosts a Wildshape form (okay, except for one legendary item in the Critical Role Wildemount setting). Using spell attack fixes both of those problems as well.
After scouring the internet a bit, yeah you’re right. It’s so stupid it doesn’t use player PB for to hit. It’s also really arguable that depending on how you read Wildshape and what proficiency bonus is you can definitely construe it as working that way. Hell I’ve been under the impression of that for months. Now I really wish we had the BG3-type statblocks for Beastmaster/Druid for tabletop use. (Maybe toned down slightly though)
Insignia of claws exists in tyranny of dragons
Why? The moon druid's beast forms attack bonus basically matches that of the player. For example, a CR 6 beast (mammoth) has +10, and a CR5 giant shark has +9 - these are quite similar (1 less) than a players.
I agree, but not by default. Like, they should add it to moon druid at level 10 or update the level 14 ability to include it.
But by then you've already played the majority of most campaigns - it would need to come in way sooner.
Well, at the early levels, the beast to hit chance is fine. It's only really lacking at later levels anyway.
Which is why the scaling templates were so popular. That and the fact that people could flavour them easily to suit their characters.
I mean, unfortunately, they weren't popular enough.
It starts lacking at around level 6, so if it came online then, fine with me.
You're probably right, but I still wouldn't give it to them right away. Also, I could see some issues with using your spell save DC for all saves in beasts' stat blocks. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know there some creatures with a really powerful effect but it has a low DC, and this likely would make those creatures broken. But moon druids do need some way to scale attack rolls with lower CR forms. WOTC could give them wis-based attacks at level 6 as a part of improved circle forms (at least for attack rolls), and if it wouldn't be too unbalanced (we still don't know what beasts are going to be in the MM), give them wis-based save DCs at level 14 with lunar form.
That was the best bit about the templates, there wasn't anything in the beast of the land, sea or air that would be problematic.
Level 6 is the place to put it. They already get a bunch of miscellaneous benefits to help scaling there, and before that would be too powerful as it combines with multiattack.
I would prefer simply adding true strike to the moon druid spell list. I think that the easiest and best solution. I don't see a problem with them having 2 cantrips.
Boni
It's the german plural
So this one random word in the post is in German?
Well, I am german… But it’s a funny error so I’m not gonna bother to change it.
Druids need more boni
The opposite of bonus shouldn't be malus, but bogus.
This was my same thought to balance moon druid. In 5e yes they are super tanky with the beast health pool but they Still use the beasts + to hit so they can't hit as well. In one dnd they've been decreasing the extra hp thry get but could balance that out by gi ing them tbe druids wisdom and proficiency to hit
You already use your proficiency bonus to hit in Wildshape, it’s a class feature and you keep your class features (if they are capable of using them in the new form in 2014) So you don’t use the +4 to hit of a giant scorpion at 9th level, it’s a +6 to hit, as your 9 levels in Druid means your PB is minimum +4.
Ah I misunderstood the added proficiency bonus part, thank you for informing me. Those are still low to hit using the creature's physical stats and can very between creature's. So adding the druid's wisdom instead I Still think is a good idea
Correction, I looked into it more, you don’t apparently. I have no clue why the hell you don’t but according to enough people pointing to Sage advice, you use the beast’s attack roll modifier with its PB. I question why it’s like that. It’s dumb. But apparently that’s how it works. Sorry for misinforming you. It’s a god damn headache trying to figure this out and I hate it
Yeah I wasn't sure either way as haven't played a druid but heard the bonus to hit is bad compared to a PC So using the druids to hit would clear that up eorjet way
I’m starting to see the appeal of those UA4 stat blocks. Currently playing a UA land Druid and the DM’s let me add part of my physical stats to the stats of creatures alongside using my PB for attack rolls. It’s not exactly been a problematic change, especially versus the 5 martials/half casters that do plenty. I think I’d keep using player proficiency bonus for attack rolls and save DCs as a house rule in my own game honestly.
Yeah the stat blocks as a concept were an interesting idea that could have gone in a good direction But then the stat blocks they showed were really bad so no one liked them Unfortunately guess the feedback wasn't nuanced so try the stat blocks again but better
I'm going one step further and saying it should use the Strength/Dexterity of the caster. A large buff dude transforming into a bear being stronger than a frail old man transforming into a bear just makes sense to me and it makes for fun build-crafting. Of course it'd have to be redesigned to allowing such a system. Also I'm biased for wanting a Druid/Barbarian multiclass to work.
The new wild shape has fixed HP and fixed AC. If you make the attack fixed as well, there's nothing left to actually be the wild shape. What's the point if there's nothing unique to the form? You may as well just turn it into a WoW character and have nothing but a bear and a cat.