Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Fyrrn 10-13-04, 10:58 AM	Howdy all, My last character died just before the "mid season" break of our campaign, so I've not had much chance to get the hang of playing my new druid. As such, I 've got a few things I'm still unclear on. 1) How do you resolve skill checks when wildshaped? ie. My druid (Fyrrn, 8th level) wildshapes into a dog. I need to make a Spot check. Now, Fyrrn's Spot modifier is +14 (+4 from Wisdom, +8 ranks, +2 from Alertness feat). The skills listed in the 3.5 MM fro Dog say the Spot skill is +5. How do I determine my skill modifier? Do I add the +5 to my own modifier? If it was a listen check, surely a dog's ears would be keener than my own? As the basic stats for a dog in the MM state that a dog's Wisdom is 12 (+1), + they have the Alertness feat (+2), how do they have a +5 Spot modifier?http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/dont-know.gif 2) What are the rules for language whilst in Wildshape? I assume that I obviously can't speak with my party, as I am now a dog, for all intents & purposes. However, can I understand what they are saying to me? I understand I have to cast Speak With Animals or have the feat Speaking Wild Shape to be able to communicate with other dogs (for example)? 3) Isn't a bit daft that you don't gain the Special Qualities of animals you Wildshape into? What's the point of wildshaping into a Wolf if you can't use the Scent ability? IMO, it takes away the point of choosing a lot of animals for wildshaping, limiting the choices to thoses that are only beneficial in combat. I like the idea of being able to wildshape into a brown bear for combat, but then wildshaping into a wolf to track down my prey when my foe escapes into the forest... I just can't think of a reason why a druid would not gain a vastly improved sense of smell when wildshaped into a canine form (for example). Also, a druid wildshaped into a bat (dire, or otherwise) is going to find it near impossible to fly in the pitch darkness without Blindsense , & how long is a druid wildshaped into a porpoise going to last without Hold Breath ? I find it odd that you get the Rage special attack when wildshaped into a badger, despite never having raged before, but you don’t get to be able to smell any better…?! Anyway, thanks for any help in advance.
pres_man 10-13-04, 11:12 AM	1. Read alter self to get some idea about what you get and don't get. Basically for this question you get the animals racial skill bonuses. So for a dog that means you'd get a +4 to jump. For all skill checks use your skills + racial skill bonus gained from the animal shape you are in. 2. From druid wildshape description. A druid loses her ability to speak while in animal form because she is limited to the sounds that a normal, untrained animal can make, but she can communicate normally with other animals of the same general grouping as her new form. (The normal sound a wild parrot makes is a squawk, so changing to this form does not permit speech.) So no you don't have to cast speak with animals when you become animal as long it is of the same group. e.g. wolf could speak to wolves, dire wolves, and dogs. 3. Notice wolves get the track feat as a racial bonus feat. That means that a druid in wildshape of a wolf gets the track feat. Don't waste a feat on track, just become a wolf.
Thorak 10-13-04, 11:34 AM	1) How do you resolve skill checks when wildshaped? ie. My druid (Fyrrn, 8th level) wildshapes into a dog. I need to make a Spot check. Now, Fyrrn's Spot modifier is +14 (+4 from Wisdom, +8 ranks, +2 from Alertness feat). The skills listed in the 3.5 MM fro Dog say the Spot skill is +5. How do I determine my skill modifier? Do I add the +5 to my own modifier? If it was a listen check, surely a dog's ears would be keener than my own? As the basic stats for a dog in the MM state that a dog's Wisdom is 12 (+1), + they have the Alertness feat (+2), how do they have a +5 Spot modifier? You retain your ranks, feats, and Wisdom. And, unless it's a special quality, you gain the dog's bonus on top of that. For a +19 to your Spot in dog form. 2) What are the rules for language whilst in Wildshape? I assume that I obviously can't speak with my party, as I am now a dog, for all intents & purposes. However, can I understand what they are saying to me? I understand I have to cast Speak With Animals or have the feat Speaking Wild Shape to be able to communicate with other dogs (for example)? You can understand what anyone else says, the only thing preventing you from speaking is a lack of vocal chords. Note, though, that you can write things with a claw in the dirt, if you really need to say something and it's not rushed. 3) Isn't a bit daft that you don't gain the Special Qualities of animals you Wildshape into? What's the point of wildshaping into a Wolf if you can't use the Scent ability? IMO, it takes away the point of choosing a lot of animals for wildshaping, limiting the choices to thoses that are only beneficial in combat. I like the idea of being able to wildshape into a brown bear for combat, but then wildshaping into a wolf to track down my prey when my foe escapes into the forest... I just can't think of a reason why a druid would not gain a vastly improved sense of smell when wildshaped into a canine form (for example). Also, a druid wildshaped into a bat (dire, or otherwise) is going to find it near impossible to fly in the pitch darkness without Blindsense , & how long is a druid wildshaped into a porpoise going to last without Hold Breath ? I find it odd that you get the Rage special attack when wildshaped into a badger, despite never having raged before, but you don’t get to be able to smell any better…?! Anyway, thanks for any help in advance. You do get some of those things. You just don't get the special effects the critter gets from living with them naturally. You still smell really well as a wolf, that's why it gets Track as a bonus feat. You just don't get the additional benefits of Scent. The bat, having next-to-useless eyes, can still 'see' fine normally, which is probably due to the sonar. The Druid just can't use it to see behind him, just where he would normally be able to see. And porpoises are still great forms unless you're diving, since they swim quick. And if you're going underwater, just take a fish form; the Aquatic type grants water breathing. You do get the abilities, just not the special effects the creature gains as a result of living with it it's whole life. Kind of like the same way a person polymorphed into a human doesn't gain a bonus feat.
Fyrrn 10-13-04, 01:08 PM	1. Read alter self to get some idea about what you get and don't get. Basically for this question you get the animals racial skill bonuses. So for a dog that means you'd get a +4 to jump. For all skill checks use your skills + racial skill bonus gained from the animal shape you are in. 2. From druid wildshape description. So no you don't have to cast speak with animals when you become animal as long it is of the same group. e.g. wolf could speak to wolves, dire wolves, and dogs. 3. Notice wolves get the track feat as a racial bonus feat. That means that a druid in wildshape of a wolf gets the track feat. Don't waste a feat on track, just become a wolf. Ok, so I basically just need to alter any skill checks depending on what my current wildshaped stats are, ie. my wisdom +dogs+bonuses+feats+ranks, or bears con+bonuses+feats+ranks? As for the wildshape description & communication, what's the point in the Speaking Wild Shape feat in MOW then?
pres_man 10-13-04, 01:21 PM	You retain your ranks, feats, and Wisdom. And, unless it's a special quality, you gain the dog's bonus on top of that. For a +19 to your Spot in dog form. I pretty sure that is wrong. His spot should be +14, now if the dog had gotten a racial bonus on spots, then it would have changed.
Thorak 10-13-04, 01:34 PM	I pretty sure that is wrong. His spot should be +14, now if the dog had gotten a racial bonus on spots, then it would have changed. I did mean if it was a racial bonus, because the other skill amounts the critter has are bought with ranks like any other creature's skills. And I didn't check on dogs and Spot. So yes, it would be +14, because dogs don't have a bonus to Spot, though the average dog has a +5 to it from ranks and ability scores. He would get the +4 to Jump dogs get as a racial bonus, though. As for Speaking Wild Shape, I assume that lets you speak in wildshape form. It's as useful as speaking is in any form; a mute can get by writing stuff down, but it's nowhere near as efficient and easy as speaking.
Fyrrn 10-13-04, 02:03 PM	From Druid Wildshape description: A druid loses her ability to speak while in animal form because she is limited to the sounds that a normal, untrained animal can make, but she can communicate normally with other animals of the same general grouping as her new form. (The normal sound a wild parrot makes is a squawk, so changing to this form does not permit speech.) From Speaking Wild shape feat description: Benefit: While in wild shape , you operate as if you were under a continuous Speak with animals effect with respect to animals of the same kind. For example, if yo use wild shape to take the form of a wolf, you can communicate with with wolves as long as you are in that form. You speak in growls, squawks, chitters, or whatever other sounds such an animal would typically use to communicate with others of it's kind. If you are able to wild shape to become an elemental, you can also communicate with elementals of the same kind as yourself, using their language. This feat does not enable mental communication. I'm struggling to see what this feat gives a druid that he doesn't automatically get anyway...http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/dont-know.gif
john_bakken 10-13-04, 02:54 PM	I'm struggling to see what this feat gives a druid that he doesn't automatically get anyway...http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/dont-know.gif Speaking wild shape is a 3.0 feat. The wildshape description you are using is 3.5. The two don't mix in this case. The speaking wildshape feat was basically rolled into the 3.5 wildshape ability
Ryoohki 10-13-04, 03:13 PM	Yep. To calculate your new skill: INT, WIS, CHR skill: your skill bonus + any racial modifiers the new form gives you STR, DEX, CON skill: number of ranks you have + new form's ability modifier + any bonus from feats or synergy you have + any racial modifers the new form gives you And yeah. The speaking wildshape is an artifact of 3.0 wildshape. Doesn't make sense in 3.5. My druid is 9th level and has kept her wildshape ability hidden from the rest of the party members (with the exception of one person), so I've not had to deal with communicating with others while wildshaped. However, these ideas come to mind: Mindlink (psion power) Rary's telepathic bond (wizard spell) Lesser mindlink (wizard/cleric spell - unless it was dropped from 3.0's splat book) Have a member in your group take ranks in handle animal (you might be able to convince your DM that someone with a lot of ranks could communicate simple terms with you, since you use that to tell animals what to do) Or write/scratch in the dirt as others have suggested. As for underwater, you can still hold your breath for a number of rounds equal to twice your CON score. (or your score if you do more than just one move in a round) That should still be a decent amount of time. At least 10 rounds if you do double moves. Just go up to get air every so often. Kyle
elecgraystone 10-13-04, 03:58 PM	I just can't think of a reason why a druid would not gain a vastly improved sense of smell when wildshaped into a canine form (for example). Also, a druid wildshaped into a bat (dire, or otherwise) is going to find it near impossible to fly in the pitch darkness without Blindsense , & how long is a druid wildshaped into a porpoise going to last without Hold Breath ? I find it odd that you get the Rage special attack when wildshaped into a badger, despite never having raged before, but you don’t get to be able to smell any better…?! Anyway, thanks for any help in advance. I agree. If I polymorph into a drow my weapons get poisoned. :confused: Better yet, If I polymorph into an outsider, I can use martial weapons. :confused: But A can't see in the dark as a cat? :confused: Can't smell(use scent) as a bloodhound? :confused: Sense ANYTHING an an ooze?(no blindsight and no other senses!) :confused: Most of the threads I've been in have agreed in house-ruling that the form gets common sense powers even if they are (EX).(And disallowing some (EX) attacks that don't make sense) :D Hope this helps
elecgraystone 10-13-04, 04:10 PM	You do get the abilities, just not the special effects the creature gains as a result of living with it it's whole life. Kind of like the same way a person polymorphed into a human doesn't gain a bonus feat. How much practice does it take to use low-light vision? You don't need to live your whole life to use passive abilities! If you put on night-vision goggles, you can see in the dark! You didn't have to be born with the ability! Now if you said that I couldn't fly because I've never done it, then I'd agree. But wait, you can! Now if you said that I don't have a climb speed as a snake because I'm not use to not having legs, I'd agree. But wait, you can! Now if you said that I'm not proficeint in my claws as a cat because I don't have natural attacks in my normal form, I'd agree. But you can! I hope you can see how your "result of living with it it's whole life" theory doesn't make any sense! :rolleyes: They should have made a list on powers that were "natural" abilities and are always gained, not just (EX),(SU), and (SA)!
Thorak 10-13-04, 05:08 PM	How much practice does it take to use low-light vision? You don't need to live your whole life to use passive abilities! If you put on night-vision goggles, you can see in the dark! You didn't have to be born with the ability! Now if you said that I couldn't fly because I've never done it, then I'd agree. But wait, you can! Now if you said that I don't have a climb speed as a snake because I'm not use to not having legs, I'd agree. But wait, you can! Now if you said that I'm not proficeint in my claws as a cat because I don't have natural attacks in my normal form, I'd agree. But you can! I hope you can see how your "result of living with it it's whole life" theory doesn't make any sense! :rolleyes: They should have made a list on powers that were "natural" abilities and are always gained, not just (EX),(SU), and (SA)! All critters with the Animal type get Low-Light Vision; it's inherent to the Type. And the druid does gain the Type. And a creature with natural weapons is built to take advantage of them. These are inherent qualities. Using your sonar to sense people behind you, where you aren't aiming it, isn't.
pres_man 10-13-04, 06:03 PM	So what your saying is that if you wild shape into an animal, you get low-light. Not because it is under the special qualities for the animal, but instead because it is something inherent with the type. Hmm, I'll have to think about that.
Fyrrn 10-13-04, 07:04 PM	Sorry! I didn't mean to open a can of worms here, just some stuff doesn't make much sense! If an "quality" or "advantage/disadvantage" changed when wildshaping, I can't see why it shouldn't be allowed. I.E. It makes no sense whatsoever to say that a druid wildshaped into a wolf doesn't get the Scent ability. It's not as though it's something a human/elf/dwarf/gnome/halfling can't already do, it's just that a wolf has a far better sense of smell than a human/elf/etc... does. Ok, so I gain the Track feat, but it still doesn't help me smell the advancing group of zombies, even though as a wolf I should have a far better chance of detecting the approaching smell of rotting flesh than a human would (ie. none, because there's no "Smell" skill). Sorry to bang on about this particular point, but I really do think that Scent should be a feat, & not a special quality. After all, in game terms, it's only an extension of something that all the races have anyway. Except those that can't smell of course! I don't know why "Smell" was left off the skill list - you can have a better sense of hearing by puting ranks in Listen, or better sight by putting ranks in Spot, or can increase both by taking the Alertness feat. Why has smelling got such a raw deal?! Just my 2p's worth anyway! I'm gonna suggest to my DM that Scent should be a feat, just the same as I suggested that Elves should get Point Blank Shot as a bonus feat at 1st level (considering that in every fantasy medium ever, they're supposed to be great archers - & yet a 1st level human fighter can be a better archer than an elf can... but that's another argument... ;) ) At the end of the day, a creature's ability to smell is a natural ability. If it suddenly finds itself with better "equipment" to smell with, why shouldn't it be able to use it? The same premise applies to "Low-light" vision. The wildshaped druid suddenly finds that more light is getting through to his retina - surely he should be able to see further in the dark? Yet "Low-light vision" is listed as a Special Quality, so he doesn't get it?
pres_man 10-13-04, 08:51 PM	Why get low-light and not scent? 1. Low-light doesn't enhance your sight, just extends it in the dark. Scent on the other hand enhances your sense of smell to be almost akin to sight. Since this is a radical change for most humanoids you don't get it. 2. Not all animals get scent, so it is not a feature of the creature Type. Polymorph gives you the type, so you get low-light but not the special quality unique to the monster (not included in the monsters Type) so you don't get scent. 3. Scent is pretty powerful, it severly hampers invisibility. Strong special qualities should not be gained easily. I agree it is a little silly, but the rules were made to simplify things overall. Talk to your DM and see what he thinks, maybe he'll decide you get scent when you become a wolf. But you should warn him that this means you might be able to pick up somebody hiding or invisible within 30 ft pretty easily. Off subject, as for elves being good archers, well on average elves are better archers than humans. They get +2 dex bonus. Humans get an extra feat that they can use to try to balance the playing field (point-blank shot), but this only helps them 30 ft or less shots. Everything past that the elf is going to be superior on average. Also the fact the humans have to train harder (though they do it better than others) to be as good as an average elf already tells you elves are better.
Thorak 10-14-04, 07:00 AM	Sorry! I didn't mean to open a can of worms here, just some stuff doesn't make much sense! If an "quality" or "advantage/disadvantage" changed when wildshaping, I can't see why it shouldn't be allowed. I.E. It makes no sense whatsoever to say that a druid wildshaped into a wolf doesn't get the Scent ability. It's not as though it's something a human/elf/dwarf/gnome/halfling can't already do, it's just that a wolf has a far better sense of smell than a human/elf/etc... does. Ok, so I gain the Track feat, but it still doesn't help me smell the advancing group of zombies, even though as a wolf I should have a far better chance of detecting the approaching smell of rotting flesh than a human would (ie. none, because there's no "Smell" skill). Sorry to bang on about this particular point, but I really do think that Scent should be a feat, & not a special quality. After all, in game terms, it's only an extension of something that all the races have anyway. Except those that can't smell of course! I don't know why "Smell" was left off the skill list - you can have a better sense of hearing by puting ranks in Listen, or better sight by putting ranks in Spot, or can increase both by taking the Alertness feat. Why has smelling got such a raw deal?! Just my 2p's worth anyway! I'm gonna suggest to my DM that Scent should be a feat, just the same as I suggested that Elves should get Point Blank Shot as a bonus feat at 1st level (considering that in every fantasy medium ever, they're supposed to be great archers - & yet a 1st level human fighter can be a better archer than an elf can... but that's another argument... ;) ) At the end of the day, a creature's ability to smell is a natural ability. If it suddenly finds itself with better "equipment" to smell with, why shouldn't it be able to use it? The same premise applies to "Low-light" vision. The wildshaped druid suddenly finds that more light is getting through to his retina - surely he should be able to see further in the dark? Yet "Low-light vision" is listed as a Special Quality, so he doesn't get it? As I said, Low-light Vision isn't a special quality of the creature. It's a quality of the Type, and the Druid explicitly gains the Type of the creature. So he gains Low-light Vision. As for Scent; my group uses Listen, houseruled to be closer to "Sense", and sub it in for smell checks if there's an obvious odor, like rotting flesh. We would probably houserule a bonus to a Scent-having creature due to this, and if you add something similar, that makes good sense. But Scent is more than smelling well. Scent lets you pinpoint the source of even minor scents; you can figure out exactly where that invisible guy is just because he didn't bathe this morning, even if he's 30' away. That, IMHO, takes special training and experience with the enhanced smell's capacity, which a Druid wouldn't gain just by assuming the form.
Fyrrn 10-14-04, 07:34 AM	As I said, Low-light Vision isn't a special quality of the creature. It's a quality of the Type, and the Druid explicitly gains the Type of the creature. So he gains Low-light Vision. Not according to Part 3 of "The Rules Of The Game - Polymorphing" he doesn't. Under the description of Animal Type You Don't get the following - Low Light Vision (Extraordinary Special Quality) Now - here's another log on the fire: The 3.0 Wild shape functions like the Polymorph Self spell, which excludes extraordinary abilities. The Wild Shape description on page 11 of Masters Of The Wild states that a druid does get all the forms extraordinary abilities. This is backed up on page 12 where it states: Detecting: Because the druid can use the extraordinary abilities of the form chosen, she can gain blindsight as a dire bat, or a porpoise. This is the thing that really annoys the hell out of me: 1) The druid starts off in 3.0 unable to use a creatures Extraordinary abilities. 2) Then in Masters Of The Wild (a book written specifically for the druid, ranger, & barbarian classes), the rules allow him to gain these abilities ni wild shape. 3) Then in 3.5 PHB, the rules change again to take those abilities away from him! I assume that we just have to wait for a 3.5 re-release of MOW before the ability is re-written then?! It really does beg the question - What are Wizards playing at? Why should I now go out & buy any future source books, when I know that any rules given in them could be contradicted in another future publication? It's as though they "forgot" that they'd altered the wild shape ability in MOW! In my opinion, it's just a cop-out by Wizards - it was easier for them to say "Wild shape is the same as polymorph", rather than re-print the wild shape description given in MOW. Discuss!
pres_man 10-14-04, 08:33 AM	Not according to Part 3 of "The Rules Of The Game - Polymorphing" he doesn't. Yet according to Part 2 a person who alter selfs into a lizardfolk gets their ability to hold breath which is ... a Special Quality which he says earlier in the text that they don't get. What does this tell us? Skippy doesn't really know what he is talking about. My guess is that both are wrong. You don't get hold breath when you alter into a lizardfolk and you do get low-light when you turn into an animal, any animal. Low-light is a characteristic of the type not the particular animal.
Thorak 10-14-04, 09:17 AM	Like pres-man said; the RotG articles are often full of made-up rules and questionable interpretations. They're best viewed as "officially recommended houserules" than any actual rule addition. Besides, stating that they don't get the benefits of the type specifically contradicts the PHB description of Polymorph which says they do. And the only thing that can contradict the core books and be right in doing so is official Errata, which a RotG article most certainly is not.
Fyrrn 10-14-04, 09:22 AM	Personally, I think that Wizards are getting theselves in a twist. The 3.5 PHB is a revision of the 3.0 PHB, but doesn't take into consideration any supplementary rules from other source books they've released. It's as if those other feats, skills, classes, etc don't exist any more. This is the way I see things should work: The 3.5 PHB is a replacement for the 3.0 PHB, & sourcebooks should still be considered as far as new rules, skills, feat, PrC's, weapons, items, etc are concerned. Obviously, some 3.5 core rule changes may need to be taken into consideration when doing so. It's difficult for me to try & explain my thinking here, so bear with me...! The MOW Wild Shape ability supercedes that of the 3.0 PHB wild shape ability, going more in-depth about the workings of it, & giving examples of how it can be used. The 3.5PHB replaces the 3.0PHB, but this just means that you have a newly-defined set of "core rules" to play with if you are using no other source books. Still with me? Now, unless all those character class books are now to be made totally redundant (Tome & Blood, Song & Silence, MOW, etc), it makes sense that they are still used alongside the 3.5PHB. Some of the spells in those sourcebooks may need to be looked at in detail to ensure that they still fit into the correct spell lists & levels in the new 3.5PHB, but I'd say that they're just as valid as they were in 3.0. Otherwise, we all just have to sit back & wait for those books to be released in 3.5 edition. Why should you still be able to use the feats & spells from S&S, T&B, etc, but not the Wildshape description from MOW? Especially when that description makes more sense than that of the 3.0 & 3.5PHB descriptions of the ability! In theory, the new PHB should have included all the feats, skills, & spells, etc that have been in all the sourcebooks, & updated them. Instead, they've left it for us to make them "fit" into 3.5, & in the process left us with 2 descriptions of the Wildshape ability - & I know which one I think makes more sense! Hope my thinking made sense there!
Thorak 10-14-04, 01:32 PM	Personally, I think that Wizards are getting theselves in a twist. The 3.5 PHB is a revision of the 3.0 PHB, but doesn't take into consideration any supplementary rules from other source books they've released. It's as if those other feats, skills, classes, etc don't exist any more. No it's not. It's an entirely fresh start. Much stayed the same, but 3.0 information and rules have absolutely no relevance in 3.5. There's some suggested rules about converting stuff, but if it doesn't seem to work, it's overruled. Like anything requiring multiple animal companions for a druid, IIRC there was a PrC in MotW that required that, and it's impossible to do in 3.5. This is the way I see things should work: The 3.5 PHB is a replacement for the 3.0 PHB, & sourcebooks should still be considered as far as new rules, skills, feat, PrC's, weapons, items, etc are concerned. Obviously, some 3.5 core rule changes may need to be taken into consideration when doing so. It's difficult for me to try & explain my thinking here, so bear with me...! The MOW Wild Shape ability supercedes that of the 3.0 PHB wild shape ability, going more in-depth about the workings of it, & giving examples of how it can be used. Nope. MoW is 3.0. If 3.5 words things differently, especially regarding Wildshape and Animal Companions, then these rules are to be considered obsolete. Just like Ambidexterity. The 3.5PHB replaces the 3.0PHB, but this just means that you have a newly-defined set of "core rules" to play with if you are using no other source books. Well, yes. And, by the Errata, anything that disagrees with the core rules, like the MotW Wildshape stuff, is wrong. It could suggest alternate rules that are optional, like Unearthed Arcana, but the only thing that can actually change the PHB rules is the Errata. Still with me? Now, unless all those character class books are now to be made totally redundant (Tome & Blood, Song & Silence, MOW, etc), it makes sense that they are still used alongside the 3.5PHB. Some of the spells in those sourcebooks may need to be looked at in detail to ensure that they still fit into the correct spell lists & levels in the new 3.5PHB, but I'd say that they're just as valid as they were in 3.0. Otherwise, we all just have to sit back & wait for those books to be released in 3.5 edition. Those books are all useable, after you convert the contents to 3.5 rules. And if they can't work with the new rules, they're obsolete and cannot be used. And if there's a new book with new rules for the same ability, like say the Complete Warrior's Monkey Grip, that overrules any older version. And the MotW Wildshape stuff can't be converted, because it is based on an entirely different Wildshape mechanic, which IIRC was chiefly different due to a significantly different Polymorph. They're incompatible, and therefore is scrap, as far as 3.5 is concerned. Why should you still be able to use the feats & spells from S&S, T&B, etc, but not the Wildshape description from MOW? Especially when that description makes more sense than that of the 3.0 & 3.5PHB descriptions of the ability! In theory, the new PHB should have included all the feats, skills, & spells, etc that have been in all the sourcebooks, & updated them. Instead, they've left it for us to make them "fit" into 3.5, & in the process left us with 2 descriptions of the Wildshape ability - & I know which one I think makes more sense! Hope my thinking made sense there! Why on earth should the new system include all the supplemental stuff for the old system, especially when changes were made specifically to change things from how those supplemental rules worked? There's one description of Wildshape in 3.5. The one in the PHB. Anything that disagrees must either be an optional rule, or an Errata. Or it's simply wrong. Feel free to use the MotW stuff as an optional houserule variant, but there's absolutely no support for claiming it to be more core than the PHB.
Fyrrn 10-14-04, 02:46 PM	Take a look at the description of Polymorph Other in Tome & Blood (which is official & supercedes the 3.0 PHB description). It states that you do not gain the extraordinary abilities of the new creature. Now take a look at the 3.5PHB description of Polymorph Other, which also states that you do not gain the extraordinary abilities of the new creature. Hmmm, a striking similarity I feel. So why is it impossible to use the MOW Wildshape description? Basically, the 3.0 MOW wildshape ability makes more sense - whether it is "right" or not. In 3.5 edition, my human Druid now has to carry a torch at night in the forest, as he doesn't have low-light vision (as the description explicitly prevents extraordinary qualities), neither can he hunt via scent either, for the same reason. As described in the Sages explanation of Polymorph, in the Rules Of The Game. And don't go saying that that isn't "official", otherwise your arguement on Wildshape, Con modifier & hit points goes out of the window too (even thought I agree with it). As I said previously, I think Wizards basically either "forgot" that they'd written MOW - or were too lazy to consider the MOW wildshape ability & just included the line "as Polymorph". Maybe the old druid was considered to be overpowered, but I fail to see how & why. At least I can win one argument anyway - at the bottom of Page 4 of the 3.5 PHB it clearly states that 3.5 is a revision of the game & not a new edition.http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/tease.gif
Thorak 10-14-04, 03:43 PM	Take a look at the description of Polymorph Other in Tome & Blood (which is official & supercedes the 3.0 PHB description). It states that you do not gain the extraordinary abilities of the new creature. Now take a look at the 3.5PHB description of Polymorph Other, which also states that you do not gain the extraordinary abilities of the new creature. Hmmm, a striking similarity I feel. So why is it impossible to use the MOW Wildshape description? Because, for starters, neither of those are in the least bit relevant to 3.5 whatsoever? I'll also note that, in 3.5, there is no Polymorph Other. Just Polymorph. Just one of the many ways 3.5 is not 3.0. Polymorph Self, which 3.0 Wildshape worked like, and Polymorph Other, were combined into a single spell. If they wanted it, and Wildshape, to work as it did in MotW, I'm sure they would have edited that way rather than in favour of the T&B version. But they didn't. Which should tell you something about their intent when they reworded it for 3.5. They didn't want the MotW changes. If they had, they'd have included them. They're obsolete and to be ignored. Basically, the 3.0 MOW wildshape ability makes more sense - whether it is "right" or not. In 3.5 edition, my human Druid now has to carry a torch at night in the forest, as he doesn't have low-light vision (as the description explicitly prevents extraordinary qualities), neither can he hunt via scent either, for the same reason. As described in the Sages explanation of Polymorph, in the Rules Of The Game. And don't go saying that that isn't "official", otherwise your arguement on Wildshape, Con modifier & hit points goes out of the window too (even thought I agree with it). First, I had proven in several threads that my argument regarding Con and hit points was the only interpretation that made sense, before the RotG article ever came out. Arguing that it didn't meant that you had to create houserules and such just to make the system work. The RotG article was irrelevant, though it was a nice bit of support to the argument that had already been effectively proven regardless. Your argument, however, is baseless. Unless you have something to quote, other than a RotG article which contradicts (and therefore, errs in doing so) the PHB and your own personal opinion? As I said previously, I think Wizards basically either "forgot" that they'd written MOW - or were too lazy to consider the MOW wildshape ability & just included the line "as Polymorph". Maybe the old druid was considered to be overpowered, but I fail to see how & why. The new druid is still considered to be one of the most powerful classes in the game. And what you're discussing is a significant boost. And your opinion that they "forgot" MotW is baseless. Whether they did or not, there's been enough debate about it that if it were a mistake, it would have been Errataed long, long ago. It hasn't, ergo we can assume it's written as they meant it. At least I can win one argument anyway - at the bottom of Page 4 of the 3.5 PHB it clearly states that 3.5 is a revision of the game & not a new edition. Put that down to semantics. I'll allow that it's a revision, but that doesn't mean, in any way, that old books overrule the new core books. Notice the line; "This revision is compatible with all existing products, and those products can be used with the revision with only minor adjustments." Emphasis mine. If you're using a 3.0 book, you need to adjust it to fit into 3.5. The MotW Wildshape bit being one of the things you need to adjust, to fit the 3.5 paradigm. For instance, there's at least one PrC I've heard of (I don't own the book, so can't look it up) which allows the druid to gain more animal companions than normal, by expanding their limit. But it does so by casting Animal Friendship to get the new AC. Since, in 3.5, animal companions work entirely differently, and Druids are limited to a single one, and there's no Animal Friendship spell, that PrC is absolutely incompatible, unless you were to rewrite it from the ground up (at which point, you're not using the MotW version any more, and it's a homebrew class).
Fyrrn 10-14-04, 03:50 PM	Fair enough. Still doesn't help my druid see in the dark any better though, does it...?!http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/wink.gif
Thorak 10-14-04, 06:49 PM	You still get low-light vision. Because it's a Type trait, not an Ex Special Quality of the creature.
Fyrrn 10-14-04, 07:47 PM	I wish Wizards would get their house in order & not confuse the issue with stuff like this. Yes, having read the MM animals get Low-light vision as a trait. However, if you just look at the animal descriptions, low-light vision is listed as an Ex Special Quality, which a druid shouldn't get.http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/wacko.gif So much simpler to use the MOW Wildshape rules...http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/wink.gifhttp://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/grin.gif Just as a slight aside, but on the same Polymorph track, if my gnome sorceror polymorphs into a Mind Flayer, does he get Mind Blast? It's listed as a Special Attack. Furthermore, does he get Psionics, as that's listed as a Special Attack too...?
elecgraystone 10-15-04, 01:55 PM	You still get low-light vision. Because it's a Type trait, not an Ex Special Quality of the creature. No you don't. :weep: It's an (EX) quality you get with the trait type. As stated you don't get (ex) qualitys, only attacks! Please read "Part 3 of "The Rules Of The Game - Polymorphing" ". It explains what you get from every type! A STUPID as it is no senses are gained from any types. :rolleyes: :mymy: :eek: Only attacks! :mad: All passive powers lost but all active powers are gained! :rolleyes: Someone was smoking!
elecgraystone 10-15-04, 01:59 PM	I wish Wizards would get their house in order & not confuse the issue with stuff like this. Yes, having read the MM animals get Low-light vision as a trait. However, if you just look at the animal descriptions, low-light vision is listed as an Ex Special Quality, which a druid shouldn't get.http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/wacko.gif So much simpler to use the MOW Wildshape rules...http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/wink.gifhttp://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/grin.gif Just as a slight aside, but on the same Polymorph track, if my gnome sorceror polymorphs into a Mind Flayer, does he get Mind Blast? It's listed as a Special Attack. Furthermore, does he get Psionics, as that's listed as a Special Attack too...? My drow gets poisoned weapons! :D (EX) attack! :rolleyes: But he's blind in the dark! :rolleyes: Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid! :mad: Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid! :mad: Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid! :mad:
Fyrrn 10-15-04, 02:27 PM	Hence why the MOW Wildshape ability makes more sense, regardless of how wrong it might be.
elecgraystone 10-15-04, 02:43 PM	Hence why the MOW Wildshape ability makes more sense, regardless of how wrong it might be. No argument from me! :weep: I can't figure out WHY they would drop it unless it was a victim of the 3.5 "dumbing down" for morons. :mymy: Or as I like to say, D&D for dumbies! :D Now before someone replies, there WERE things that did need fixing or got better. ;) Too bad that for everything they fixed, they seemed determined to mess something else up! :mad:
Thorak 10-15-04, 06:43 PM	No you don't. :weep: It's an (EX) quality you get with the trait type. As stated you don't get (ex) qualitys, only attacks! Please read "Part 3 of "The Rules Of The Game - Polymorphing" ". It explains what you get from every type! A STUPID as it is no senses are gained from any types. :rolleyes: :mymy: :eek: Only attacks! :mad: All passive powers lost but all active powers are gained! :rolleyes: Someone was smoking! 1> RotG articles, where they disagree with the core rules, are wrong. As is everything but Errata. 2> "The creature's Type and Subtype (if any) change to match the new form". How is this remotely relevant if you don't gain the Type and Subtype qualities? You'd have me believe that changing into a shark doesn't mean I can breathe water, a clear Special Quality listed as part of it's Aquatic Type? Yeah. 3> "...but does not gain the extraordinary special qualities possessed by the new form..." Notice how the emphasis is clearly laid on the special qualities possessed by the form. A shark's form doesn't allow it to breathe water. It's Aquatic type does. By the RAW, you gain the special qualities under the Type, but not any specific ones for the specific creature's form. Trying to argue otherwise is claiming that Wildshaping into fish means you can't breathe water. Which is even more ridiculous than the arguably non-silly things people are complaining about. Skip's just wrong in that article. For instance, when he declares what abilities they do and don't gain from Type, he's making that up entirely. Nothing in the MM states that certain abilities in each type are Ex or not. They're just there. If he's deciding some are and some aren't, he's houseruling. No Type abilities are Ex. They just are, and thus they are gained during Wildshape just like Skip's Lizardman example in part 3 of that RotG article gains it's Hold Breath. There may be a debateable issue with the Su abilities of some types, but none of the types accessible to Druids through Wildshape have any, whether they're Plant, Animal, Aquatic, Elemental, Dragon (with a feat), or what have you So, not only are the Type abilities in theory exempt to Polymorph's restrictions, but none of them are Ex, and none available to a Druid are Su. Which means they wouldn't be barred even if you want to assume they aren't exempt. Now, did you have an actual point, besides an article about houserules that is in no way anything official, and in fact contradicts the MM in several ways (thereby showing itself to be either wrong, or an optional houserule variant)?
Fyrrn 10-15-04, 07:39 PM	Skip's just wrong in that article. For instance, when he declares what abilities they do and don't gain from Type, he's making that up entirely. Nothing in the MM states that certain abilities in each type are Ex or not. They're just there. If he's deciding some are and some aren't, he's houseruling. No Type abilities are Ex. They just are, and thus they are gained during Wildshape just like Skip's Lizardman example in part 3 of that RotG article gains it's Hold Breath. Which is the whole point of what we're saying. Some abilites should be there, and no matter how much you declare the Core rules to be right, the very fact that there's been a revision of them proves that sometimes they are wrong. The point is that some abilities should be described as natural abilities, which the druid would gain, & others should be re-classed as special, or supernatural abilities, which the druid would not gain. Which is why it makes more sense to use the rules in MOW. They aren't wrong, nor are they houserules, but they are official optional rules - which just so happen to be more detailed & make more sense than those in the original core rulebook. Which makes sense seeing as how by the time they were created, people had had chance to see how broken the core rule was. But why would Wizards change rules to match sourcebooks, or include spells from sourcebooks in a new set of core rules, when they could simply revise the core rules & still tell people to go & buy the 3.0 sourceooks & convert them themselves...? Maybe that's why there is no, 3.5MOW, 3.5 T&B, 3.5 S&S, 3.5DotF on the publication schedule? The only thing that changed with 3.5 was the core rulebooks, everything else remained as valid as before - provided there wasn't a 3.5 ruling that prevented it. Nothing in the 3.5 rules prevents the MOW wildshape ability from working anymore than the original 3.0 rules did. Doesn't make it "core rules", but doesn't make it wrong, or house ruling either - it's an official option, that makes more sense. All of the sourcebooks are optional material - even the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting refers back to the Core Rules. FRCS says Druids of Mielikki can wear chain armour, the core rules say they can't. It's not houseruling, it's an official optional rule - neither right or wrong. The whole point of the Core Rules is that you can play D&D with just those books. That doesn't make any other sourcebooks invalid. The point of sourcebooks is that people have had more time to play the game, play with the mechanics, & have come up with other "cool" things to use, & possibly better ways for things to work. Anyway, without even going into detail as to why, my DM agrees with me that it's simply bloody stupid for bats not to get blindsense, wolves not to get scent, porpoises to get hold breath, etc. Maybe now all I need to do is fire off an email to Wizards every hour until they release a 1-page leaflet stating that the MOW description of Wildshape is the correct way to interpret wildshape... Now, did you have an actual point, besides an article about houserules that is in no way anything official, and in fact contradicts the MM in several ways (thereby showing itself to be either wrong, or an optional houserule variant)? As for this comment, how about you get off your high horse sunshine? There is absolutely no need to sound so high & mighty. As far as the pantheon of D&D is concerned, Mr S. Williams is waaaaay above you, so I'd suggest you consider that his views on rulings (however unofficial they may be), hold a hell of a lot more weight than your pontifications. I'd consider the fact that he's had a lot more experience over what's right & wrong than you have, so how about exercising some respect rather than sarcasm when you reply to people's posts? Failing that - get out more. Can you show me anywhere where it states that any article on the website is unofficial & wrong? I can't imagine anywhere better to look than the official Dungeons & Dragons website for new rules, & tips on how the rules work - which is exactly what the Rules Of The Game section is there for, & also where official errata can be downloaded from. Why should you disregard the Rules Of The Game section? It's on the official site, & there solely for the purpose of helping people with the rules. Or should Wizards just post a disclaimer saying - "Can't inerpret the rules? Tough, you're on your own. Although you could ask Thorak..." ?
Fyrrn 10-15-04, 08:58 PM	Of course, the main problem with revising 3.0 came when they realised that in order to make all the cross-references with those "still-useable" sourecebooks still valid, that all the page numbers would have to match those in the 3.0 edition books. Meaning that they couldn't radically change whole sections or descriptions, otherwise none of the old 3.0 cross-references would match. They couldn't include a whole 1 page description of the Wildshape ability, because that would make all the cross-references out by one page! IMO, they'd have been better off calling it 4.0 - & actually getting it right this time! Ah well, at least they're moving in the right direction!
Thorak 10-15-04, 10:11 PM	Which is the whole point of what we're saying. Some abilites should be there, and no matter how much you declare the Core rules to be right, the very fact that there's been a revision of them proves that sometimes they are wrong. The point is that some abilities should be described as natural abilities, which the druid would gain, & others should be re-classed as special, or supernatural abilities, which the druid would not gain. Which is why it makes more sense to use the rules in MOW. They aren't wrong, nor are they houserules, but they are official optional rules - which just so happen to be more detailed & make more sense than those in the original core rulebook. Which makes sense seeing as how by the time they were created, people had had chance to see how broken the core rule was. But why would Wizards change rules to match sourcebooks, or include spells from sourcebooks in a new set of core rules, when they could simply revise the core rules & still tell people to go & buy the 3.0 sourceooks & convert them themselves...? Maybe that's why there is no, 3.5MOW, 3.5 T&B, 3.5 S&S, 3.5DotF on the publication schedule? The only thing that changed with 3.5 was the core rulebooks, everything else remained as valid as before - provided there wasn't a 3.5 ruling that prevented it. Nothing in the 3.5 rules prevents the MOW wildshape ability from working anymore than the original 3.0 rules did. Doesn't make it "core rules", but doesn't make it wrong, or house ruling either - it's an official option, that makes more sense. All of the sourcebooks are optional material - even the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting refers back to the Core Rules. FRCS says Druids of Mielikki can wear chain armour, the core rules say they can't. It's not houseruling, it's an official optional rule - neither right or wrong. The whole point of the Core Rules is that you can play D&D with just those books. That doesn't make any other sourcebooks invalid. The point of sourcebooks is that people have had more time to play the game, play with the mechanics, & have come up with other "cool" things to use, & possibly better ways for things to work. Anyway, without even going into detail as to why, my DM agrees with me that it's simply bloody stupid for bats not to get blindsense, wolves not to get scent, porpoises to get hold breath, etc. Maybe now all I need to do is fire off an email to Wizards every hour until they release a 1-page leaflet stating that the MOW description of Wildshape is the correct way to interpret wildshape... Your interpretation is to use an optional 3.0 set of rules instead of the official 3.5 rules. I won't say there aren't problems with the 3.5 method. But, IMHO, it's better than the 3.0 method, and I see the reasons they made the choice they did. And if they haven't changed it by now, I doubt emailing them a lot will change their minds. As to the old books; a great deal of their material has been and will be revamped with the Complete series. Not all of it, obviously, but most of the stuff they felt they wanted in 3.5 was stuck in those books. Sure, you can convert 3.0 books in as well, but that involves changing them to fit 3.5. Otherwise, you're playing a 3.0/3.5 hybrid, not pure 3.5. There's plenty of stuff in MotW, the Wildshape rules and anything having to do with Animal Companions for starters, which has been made utterly obsolete due to the changes in the spells and abilities they're based on. You've got as much validity with your argument regarding Wildshape as someone would be arguing that druids in 3.5 can have multiple animal companions. The rules are there in MotW. The mechanic changed, though. It's incompatible. Like I said; feel free to use them, but you're houseruling when you do so. As for this comment, how about you get off your high horse sunshine? There is absolutely no need to sound so high & mighty. As far as the pantheon of D&D is concerned, Mr S. Williams is waaaaay above you, so I'd suggest you consider that his views on rulings (however unofficial they may be), hold a hell of a lot more weight than your pontifications. I'd consider the fact that he's had a lot more experience over what's right & wrong than you have, so how about exercising some respect rather than sarcasm when you reply to people's posts? Failing that - get out more. My "high horse" was in response to the "stupid" comments and such from elecgraystone. As for my comments regarding Skip; they're hardly unique on these boards, and they're accurate. Provably so. I respect the designers a great deal. But some of that respect is lost when they write articles which are based on houserules, and treat them as if these houserules are somehow official without releasing them via the Errata. If they had, I'd grumble and houserule myself, but I'd accept their decision. It's their inconsistency and hypocrisy that I'm decrying. Is it so much to ask that articles actually take the rules into account, or describe themselves as optional houserules when they are such? Can you show me anywhere where it states that any article on the website is unofficial & wrong? I can't imagine anywhere better to look than the official Dungeons & Dragons website for new rules, & tips on how the rules work - which is exactly what the Rules Of The Game section is there for, & also where official errata can be downloaded from. Why should you disregard the Rules Of The Game section? It's on the official site, & there solely for the purpose of helping people with the rules. Or should Wizards just post a disclaimer saying - "Can't inerpret the rules? Tough, you're on your own. Although you could ask Thorak..." ? 1> The Errata clearly states that the core books are the primary sources for the rules they contain. And unless that same Errata changes those rules, the primary sources trump any other sources. 2> The RotG article in question contains rules, specifically regarding certain Type charateristics being Ex abilities, which are not listed as such in the MM. It being an article and not an Errata, there are two ways to view this. An optional houserule variant, or an error. That's it. I'm being **** for two reasons. First; WotC designed the Errata to uphold the core books as supreme, and therefore in any rules discussion, we must as well. Second; if WotC staff are then going to start making up rules in defiance of the Errata they've already issued, I don't see how they can expect the general public to not criticize them for being hypocritical and/or not understanding their own rules. Note too that the 3.5 PHB had three creators. I'm sure they didn't agree on everything, and what we have is a compromise. If Skip uses his position with WotC to issue articles detailing his side of things, that's fine. But they're not official, unless he gets them issued as an Errata. They're official houserule variants. Which is fine, Unearthed Arcana is basically all official houserule variants. None of them change the core rules unless the DM chooses to use them, though. Which is my point. Skip may be waaaay above me in the pantheon, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to remind him loudly whenever he screws up, in hopes that he'll learn from the mistake and either correct it, or at least not make it again.
Fyrrn 10-16-04, 11:41 AM	Righto. So, according to the 3.5 core rules a druid gets low-light vision when wildshaped into an animal, because it's a trait of the animal type. Until it's taken away from him in the section of the wildshape description that says he doesn't get any special qualities of the animal type. Or does he get it because it's a trait, regardless of the fact that it's also a special quality...? You might read the rules to mean one thing, someone else may read them & come to a different conclusion. You see, ambiguity still lies in the core rules & it's for that reason that so many posts are made on here. The only answers that get given are opinions or interpretations from those people involved, & the only place you can look to to get a definitive answer is to those people who designed the game. Unfortunately, even that is sometimes ambiguous - take the lizardman example you gave earlier - he apparently gains "Hold Breath", even though that isn't a trait of the humanoid type, or reptilian sub-type. I'm not trying to argue with you here, I'm just pointing out that by the very fact that parts of the core rules are still so ambiguous it means that everyone will have to interpret the rules in a different way - meaning that even where the core rules are involved, there will still be things that are right and wrong.
Beamup 10-16-04, 12:04 PM	Just to throw more fuel on the fire, consider this: Check out the Exalted Wildshape feat from BoED. If you use this, you do get ALL of the (Ex) and (Su) qualities... in fact, you end up getting everything but spell-like abilities. So wildshaping into a normal wolf doesn't get you Scent... but wildshaping into a celestial wolf does. Quite powerful for one feat, isn't it? But it looks rather innocuous at first glance.
Thorak 10-16-04, 01:58 PM	Righto. So, according to the 3.5 core rules a druid gets low-light vision when wildshaped into an animal, because it's a trait of the animal type. Until it's taken away from him in the section of the wildshape description that says he doesn't get any special qualities of the animal type. Or does he get it because it's a trait, regardless of the fact that it's also a special quality...? You might read the rules to mean one thing, someone else may read them & come to a different conclusion. The rules say you don't gain any Extraordinary, Supernatural, or Spell-like traits or abilities. And specifically those provided by the form, as distinct from the Type. And even if you disagree with that last point, which I admit may be a stretch, none of the Animal, Plant, Aquatic, or Elemental Types have any abilities that fall into those prohibited categories. You get Low-Light Vision as an animal not just before it's a Type trait and not one specific to the form (which is a point I admit could be argued either way), but the Low-Light Vision for the Animal type is not Ex, Su, or Sp. It just is. Skip is creating rules with no basis when he chooses some to be Ex and some not. For instance, there's no different between an Animal's Low-Light Vision and an Aquatic creature's Water Breathing. Yet Skip decides, on the basis of no actual rules I've ever seen, that the former isn't allowed, and the latter is. He may have reasons, but they're personal. They're not part of the core rules. You see, ambiguity still lies in the core rules & it's for that reason that so many posts are made on here. The only answers that get given are opinions or interpretations from those people involved, & the only place you can look to to get a definitive answer is to those people who designed the game. Unfortunately, even that is sometimes ambiguous - take the lizardman example you gave earlier - he apparently gains "Hold Breath", even though that isn't a trait of the humanoid type, or reptilian sub-type. I'm not trying to argue with you here, I'm just pointing out that by the very fact that parts of the core rules are still so ambiguous it means that everyone will have to interpret the rules in a different way - meaning that even where the core rules are involved, there will still be things that are right and wrong. The Lizardman gains Hold Breath because it's a non-Ex special trait of the Lizardman. My point is that all the characteristics of at least the Plant, Animal, Aquatic, and Elemental types are similarly non-Ex. Or Su, or Sp. There are some types with Su traits which would be prohibited, but they're not available to a Druid Wildshaping. The core rules aren't ambiguous here. Polymorph states you don't gain Ex, Su, or Sp abilities of the form. None of the traits listed under any Type are Ex, and the only ones with Su aren't available to druids anyway. There's absolutely no reason, by the rules, to consider an Animal's Low-Light Vision an Ex ability. It's not listed as such in the Type. It's a workable houserule. I'm not saying it can't work, and work well. I'm saying it's not core. It's optional, and doesn't overrule what the core rules say; it merely provides an official optional variant. Like Gestalt characters in Unearthed Arcana; they're not core, it's up to a DM to allow them.
Fyrrn 10-16-04, 03:01 PM	Hmmmm.http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/clever-man.gif I see clearly now! I never read the DMG, as I've always tried to maintain my "integrity" as a player by not gleaning info that maybe I shouldn't have. However, I didn't realise that it lists scent as an EX ability, & makes no mention of it as far as Low-light vision is concerned. Maybe it might have made sense for Scent to be clearly labelled with the (Ex) descriptor in the MM... Hold that thought, it does - in the glossary at the back, where it also lists Low-light vision as an (Ex) ability too... I give up. http://smilies.sofrayt.com/^/aiw/closed-topic.gif
Thorak 10-16-04, 10:08 PM	And Hold Breath is variously listed as Ex or not, in for example the Porpoise and Lizardman entries respectively. Just like none of the Type abilities are listed as Ex, when they clearly would be if they were, because all the Su abilities are listed as such. And Besides, a creature's Type is not it's form. And the Polymorph restrictions only limit Ex, Su, and Sp abilities granted by the form. And Skip's article still makes assumptions that have no basis in the core rulebooks. There's plenty of stuff he claims doesn't transfer over that isn't listed in the Glossary as an Ex ability.
Fyrrn 10-16-04, 10:24 PM	But Low-light vision is listed in the DMG as not being (Ex), whereas in the MM it is. Also, I have no idea where Lizard FOlk get Hold Breath from - it not being a trait of the reptilian subtype, nor an (Ex) special ability. That just seems random to me!
Thorak 10-17-04, 11:39 AM	But Low-light vision is listed in the DMG as not being (Ex), whereas in the MM it is. Also, I have no idea where Lizard FOlk get Hold Breath from - it not being a trait of the reptilian subtype, nor an (Ex) special ability. That just seems random to me! It's a racial trait, in their specific description. My point being that qualities aren't inherently Ex, Su, or what have you; that's dependent on the creature. That's why the specific creature and racial descriptions detail which abilities are Ex or Su right within them. For instance, the various standard PC races abilities are all detailed as Ex in the MM. However, the identically-worded Type descriptions in the very same book aren't listed as Ex. Nor are any of the abilities. If it's a typo, it should be Errataed. It hasn't been, therefore I assume the book is correct, and an Animal's low-light vision is not an Ex ability, because it isn't listed as being so. Even if most other cases of the ability are Ex. Just like the Lizardman's Hold Breath isn't Ex, when many others including Porpoises and Whales is. What we need is a system designed by one person. Not three. Because I'm firmly convinced that these problems results from the slightly different personal interpretations of each of the three main designers. Skip's views are already well-detailed in his articles, and don't mesh exactly with the core rules. I'm sure the other two's version are equally different. Thus, when one of the three is the main force behind a new book, it will be weighted towards their interpretation, rather than the middle-of-the-road that the Core books represent. And thus, may contain errors of assumption that aren't true by the Core books.
FunkyTrip 10-18-04, 10:12 AM	I was wondering about Legendary animals. Can you wildshape into them? Personally I don't think so since they are not a different breed, but just enhanced versions of normal animals. And since you will turn in an ordinary average animal... But on the optimization boards you read about druids shaping to legendary ape form all the time.
Thorak 10-18-04, 10:55 AM	I was wondering about Legendary animals. Can you wildshape into them? Personally I don't think so since they are not a different breed, but just enhanced versions of normal animals. And since you will turn in an ordinary average animal... But on the optimization boards you read about druids shaping to legendary ape form all the time. The problem is, IIRC, that "legendary" isn't a template. A Legendary Ape is a creature all it's own, just like a Dire Ape. The general consensus among non-munchkins is that Legendary critters are so rare that no PC would be "familiar" with them to start. So unless you encounter a Legendary Ape at some point in your adventuring, you can't change into one with Wildshape. Not because it's an invalid form, but because it's a form you're not familiar with.
elecgraystone 10-18-04, 11:34 AM	My "high horse" was in response to the "stupid" comments and such from elecgraystone. OK those are fighting words! :mad: Please tell me what I said That was stupid? Was it that I was silly enouph to read the rules CLARIFICATION for polymorph on the WOTC site? :confused: :rolleyes: Was it that I consider content from the MAKERS (WOTC AND skip) of the game official? :confused: :rolleyes: Also, seeing that the MM is the primary sorce of monsters, you can see that it lists the senses as (EX) powers. Taking your "primary sorce is god" theory you use, it trump all but the FAQ. It has scent as (EX). ;) So are you arguing that druids SHOULDN'T get scent? :confused: THAT sound stupid! PS: To Fyrrn, I agree with you 1000% Thanks for defending me while I was away! Keep up the good fight. Also, think I can get some help? I think this "high horse" is top heavy and a good push should knock it over! :D
elecgraystone 10-18-04, 11:54 AM	Since some people seem pretty thick, lets look at the SRD. Animal Type: An animal is a living, nonhuman creature, usually a vertebrate with no magical abilities and no innate capacity for language or culture. Features: An animal has the following features (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). -d8 Hit Dice. -Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (as cleric). -Good Fortitude and Reflex saves (certain animals have different good saves). -Skill points equal to (2 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die. Traits: An animal possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). -Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal). -Low-light vision. -Alignment: Always neutral. -Treasure: None. -Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative herbivore uses its natural weapons as a secondary attack. Such attacks are made with a -5 penalty on the creature’s attack rolls, and the animal receives only 1/2 its Strength modifier as a damage adjustment. -Proficient with no armor unless trained for war. -Animals eat, sleep, and breathe. OK gets low light vision. Now, lets look up low-light vision IN THE SAME SECTION! Low-Light Vision (Ex) : A creature with low-light vision can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of shadowy illumination. It retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions. WOW, it's a (ex) power! Amazing! Now lets look at the others. Blindsense (Ex) : Using nonvisual senses, such as acute smell or hearing, a creature with blindsense notices things it cannot see. The creature usually does not need to make Spot or Listen checks to pinpoint the location of a creature within range of its blindsense ability, provided that it has line of effect to that creature. Any opponent the creature cannot see still has total concealment against the creature with blindsense, and the creature still has the normal miss chance when attacking foes that have concealment. Visibility still affects the movement of a creature with blindsense. A creature with blindsense is still denied its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against attacks from creatures it cannot see. Blindsight (Ex) : This ability is similar to blindsense, but is far more discerning. Using nonvisual senses, such as sensitivity to vibrations, keen smell, acute hearing, or echolocation, a creature with blindsight maneuvers and fights as well as a sighted creature. Invisibility, darkness, and most kinds of concealment are irrelevant, though the creature must have line of effect to a creature or object to discern that creature or object. The ability’s range is specified in the creature’s descriptive text. The creature usually does not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures within range of its blindsight ability. Unless noted otherwise, blindsight is continuous, and the creature need do nothing to use it. Some forms of blindsight, however, must be triggered as a free action. If so, this is noted in the creature’s description. If a creature must trigger its blindsight ability, the creature gains the benefits of blindsight only during its turn. Scent (Ex) : This special quality allows a creature to detect approaching enemies, sniff out hidden foes, and track by sense of smell. Creatures with the scent ability can identify familiar odors just as humans do familiar sights. The creature can detect opponents within 30 feet by sense of smell. If the opponent is upwind, the range increases to 60 feet; if downwind, it drops to 15 feet. Strong scents, such as smoke or rotting garbage, can be detected at twice the ranges noted above. Overpowering scents, such as skunk musk or troglodyte stench, can be detected at triple normal range. When a creature detects a scent, the exact location of the source is not revealed-only its presence somewhere within range. The creature can take a move action to note the direction of the scent. Whenever the creature comes within 5 feet of the source, the creature pinpoints the source’s location. A creature with the Track feat and the scent ability can follow tracks by smell, making a Wisdom (or Survival) check to find or follow a track. The typical DC for a fresh trail is 10 (no matter what kind of surface holds the scent). This DC increases or decreases depending on how strong the quarry’s odor is, the number of creatures, and the age of the trail. For each hour that the trail is cold, the DC increases by 2. The ability otherwise follows the rules for the Track feat. Creatures tracking by scent ignore the effects of surface conditions and poor visibility. Tremorsense (Ex) : A creature with tremorsense is sensitive to vibrations in the ground and can automatically pinpoint the location of anything that is in contact with the ground. Aquatic creatures with tremorsense can also sense the location of creatures moving through water. The ability’s range is specified in the creature’s descriptive text. ALL senses are (ex) abilities FROM THE SRD. THE SRD IS MADE FROM THE MM. (or vise versa) IF THE MM SAID IT ,IT TRUMPS OTHER BOOKS FOR MONSTERS. ???????????????????????????? How could it be clearer? They just got lazy in the type section and didn't put (ex) on low-light/darkvision. They put it under the ability itself. Please note that scent is also not noted under animal, so even is you stick with the "gets type abilities" house-rule, a dog still can't use it! Neither could a bat use blind sight!
Thorak 10-18-04, 02:58 PM	OK those are fighting words! :mad: Please tell me what I said That was stupid? Was it that I was silly enouph to read the rules CLARIFICATION for polymorph on the WOTC site? :confused: :rolleyes: Was it that I consider content from the MAKERS (WOTC AND skip) of the game official? :confused: :rolleyes: Also, seeing that the MM is the primary sorce of monsters, you can see that it lists the senses as (EX) powers. Taking your "primary sorce is god" theory you use, it trump all but the FAQ. It has scent as (EX). ;) So are you arguing that druids SHOULDN'T get scent? :confused: THAT sound stupid! PS: To Fyrrn, I agree with you 1000% Thanks for defending me while I was away! Keep up the good fight. Also, think I can get some help? I think this "high horse" is top heavy and a good push should knock it over! :D You were the one who started calling things "stupid". Not I. And my comment you quoted was referencing where you used the term, not as a way of me insulting you. As for your second post; that's irrelevant, because as you also quote, Low-Light Vision is not quoted as being an Ex ability for the Animal Type. Take a quick gander through the books. Notice how every time an ability is Ex, it's listed as such. Even the PC races, while not listed that way in the PHB, are listed that way in the MM. An Animal's low-light vision is, as written, an exception to the general rule of low-light vision being an Ex ability. Not to mention, this is only if you can somehow show that the Polymorph text at all applies to the Type abilities, which nobody has as yet.
elecgraystone 10-19-04, 07:51 PM	You were the one who started calling things "stupid". Not I. And my comment you quoted was referencing where you used the term, not as a way of me insulting you. As for your second post; that's irrelevant, because as you also quote, Low-Light Vision is not quoted as being an Ex ability for the Animal Type. Take a quick gander through the books. Notice how every time an ability is Ex, it's listed as such. Even the PC races, while not listed that way in the PHB, are listed that way in the MM. An Animal's low-light vision is, as written, an exception to the general rule of low-light vision being an Ex ability. Not to mention, this is only if you can somehow show that the Polymorph text at all applies to the Type abilities, which nobody has as yet. I said that it was stupid that a polymorph into an animal doesn't (by the rules) give you the senses. The second is very relevent. I note that they got lasy and didn't put (ex) by low light vision. All you have to do if look under the ability. WOW, I get low light vision, lets look it up (MM or DMG). "low-Light Vision (Ex) : A creature with low-light vision can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of shadowy illumination. It retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions." Think of is as a feat listing that doesn't say the feat is a fighter feat but the text said it is. the main sorce is right (the feat itself) so it's a fighter feat. The ability said it is an (ex) ability, so it's (ex) even if secondary text (ie type text) doesn't say it. It's not as if the text contridicts itself. One has it as (ex) and one doesn't say. As to the last part, the poly text said that (ex) attacks are gained. No other (ex) abilities are gained. As per the MM and DMG low light vision is (ex). (see quote text)
Fyrrn 12-25-04, 02:55 PM	Hmmm, what happens if I summon an animal (Brown Bear ,or Giant Crocodile for example) & then am knocked unconscious? Does the animal start randomly attacking everyone & everything, or does it somehow "know" which enemy to attack next? The Summon Nature's Ally spell states that a summoned creature attacks enemies to the best of its ability, & that if you can communicate with it you can direct it to do other tasks.