Evard's Menacing Tentacles and animal form [Archive] - Wizards Community

Evard's Menacing Tentacles and animal form [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
eamon
07-09-07, 11:20 AM Evard's Menacing tentacles is a spell from the PHB 2 which causes two tentacles to grow from your shoulders with which you can attack (granting you two additional "natural weapons"). It's a druid spell. Instead of formally granting you natural weapons the spell actually let's the tentacles act sort-of indepentantly. You choose, as a free action, to attack, but the tentacles attack for themselves - meaning that they can attack even when you're spellcasting or performing some other action. They make attacks of opportunities independantly of you too.

Should the druid lose these tentacles upon wild-shaping? How about when shapeshifting (a PHB2 variant which decouples mechanics from form, and simply grants you fixed bonuses on strength and natural armor and natural weaponry)?

Normally, a druid could first wild-shape and then cast this spell using Natural Spell. I've banned Natural Spell, because I want to slightly nerf druids and to force them to make a bit of a choice between casting and shaping. However, it's not my intent to destroy buff-spells, so now I'm in a bit of a quandary - the player of course want's to keep his tentacles when shapechanging, (his argument is that it's a little like barkskin, and that get's to stay too...).

What do you think? Should I let him grow two tentacles before shape-changing and keep them? I'm unwilling to readmit Natural Spell (horrifyingly overpowered feat), but maybe you can think of another solution?
Androcus Divinicus
07-09-07, 11:28 AM I would allow the wildshaped form to have the Menacing Tentacles. But then again, I wouldn't have banned Natural Spell in the first place. Since this is not a discussion on the merits of Natural Spell, though, I'll say this: to my mind, the main plus of these tenacles is that you can use them to still be involved in combat while also casting. Since you've banned Natural Spell, I really don't see any unbalancing effect in allowing the Druid to keep the tentacles from form to form.

Regards,
Justin.
eamon
07-10-07, 09:41 AM No other opinions?
Marcus Majarra
07-10-07, 12:34 PM I would allow the wildshaped form to retain the tentacles. Unless the spell effect and the wildshape are mutually exclusive, I don't see why they should clash.
Androcus Divinicus
07-10-07, 01:14 PM Well ... I'll toss in a devil's advocate to my original statement.

The druid shouldn't retain the tentacles while wildshaped because wildshape, implicit in its very name, causes the form of the druid to change. The tentacles, upon casting are part of the druid's form, and change with all the rest of the character's form. But, to get down to the specifics of why this is so, let's look at the text of the applicable rules. The description of the ability says that it works like polymorph. That spell, in turn says that it works like alter self, and in alter self, we read the following: "You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include ... and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth)." I think the "gross physical qualities" line is significant, and particularly the examples it gives about the presence or absence of wings (or tentacles, one might say), and the specific reference to "number of extremities". Because of the specific text of the spells upon which the wildshape ability is based, it makes logical sense to rule that the wildshaping suppresses the tentacles. If the druid in question then reverts to normal form with duration of the spell remaining, the tentacles are still a part of his normal form, but they are not part of his wildshaped form.

Hope you enjoy this opposing view-point. Keep in mind though, that while I think this is a reasonable position to hold on the issue, I don't think it is the correct one. I stand by my original statement that the tentacles would stick with him through the form change.

J.
Marcus Majarra
07-10-07, 06:16 PM I'm not too fond of that devil's advocate argument. Extrapolated, it could very well mean that wildshape results in the loss of pretty much every transmutation effect.
Ozymandias V.
07-10-07, 07:03 PM The tentacles are a spell effect. They stay just like Mage Armor or Endure Elements would.
Androcus Divinicus
07-11-07, 01:48 AM I'm not too fond of that devil's advocate argument. Extrapolated, it could very well mean that wildshape results in the loss of pretty much every transmutation effect.

I tend to agree ... that's why I disagree with the position. But imo, it is the best justification for not allowing the tentacles to survive the wildshape. I mean, beyond simply going, "I don't wanna, and I'm the DM so deal."

J.
eamon
07-11-07, 04:19 AM Actually, I'm the DM, and I do wanna, but that devil's advocate argument sounded rather convincing before. I'm just going to ignore it however, and also stand by Adrocus Divinicus's original argument.

BTW, just the fact that they are a spell effect is no argument. Clearly, the spell would not cease merely because of a shape change. However, it's quite possible for the spell to become irrelevant. If you gain greater mage armor after gaining mage armor, the normal mage armor is irrelevant (at least until the greater version expires). If you polymorph from one shape to another, and then do so AGAIN, you lose the abilities granted by the first casting of polymorph - the first polymorph isn't dispelled, it's just irrelevant. If you charm someone, who's then dominated... well... you get the idea ;-)
Androcus Divinicus
07-11-07, 04:28 AM Actually, I'm the DM, and I do wanna, but that devil's advocate argument sounded rather convincing before. I'm just going to ignore it however, and also stand by Adrocus Divinicus's original argument.

Well, I didn't mean to imply that you were running your game by arbitrary fiat ... I just meant to say, "Of course you could just Rule 0 this situation, but if you wanted a justification for not allowing the tentacles to survive the shapechange, this is the best I can think of."

I do think that a good argument can be made for supressing the tentacles while wildshaped, but I personally wouldn't do it, because I think that allowing the tentacles to remain is both a) more fun for the player, b) not really unbalancing, and c) supported by the rules (which also support the Natural Spell Feat ;)). Since I tend to operate from the perspective of "the burden of proof should be on the side arguing for greater restriction", I see this as a "lacking any good reason to the contrary, the tentacles stay."

J.
eamon
07-11-07, 04:30 AM Oh yeah, and thanks for the help!

And I just realized, because of the reference to polymorph, that wild shape nowadays actually doesn't refer to polymorph but alternate form, as per the errata (in the MM)! Alternate form simply does: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm
(that's the errata'd text, although even before the errata this was so). It does not refer to anything like extremeties etc.
Phrennzy
07-11-07, 12:50 PM Wild shape lets the Druid change his shape.

The Tentacles are not a part of the Druid. They are a magical effect. They are not formed out of his skin and muscle.

Since Wild Shape changes the Druid's body, and the tentacles are not a part of that body, the tentacles should stay.
lears_fool
07-11-07, 05:54 PM The tentacles are a spell effect. They stay just like Mage Armor or Endure Elements would.
Right there, answered in two short sentences. No further debate necessary ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
eamon 07-09-07, 11:20 AM	Evard's Menacing tentacles is a spell from the PHB 2 which causes two tentacles to grow from your shoulders with which you can attack (granting you two additional "natural weapons"). It's a druid spell. Instead of formally granting you natural weapons the spell actually let's the tentacles act sort-of indepentantly. You choose, as a free action, to attack, but the tentacles attack for themselves - meaning that they can attack even when you're spellcasting or performing some other action. They make attacks of opportunities independantly of you too. Should the druid lose these tentacles upon wild-shaping? How about when shapeshifting (a PHB2 variant which decouples mechanics from form, and simply grants you fixed bonuses on strength and natural armor and natural weaponry)? Normally, a druid could first wild-shape and then cast this spell using Natural Spell. I've banned Natural Spell, because I want to slightly nerf druids and to force them to make a bit of a choice between casting and shaping. However, it's not my intent to destroy buff-spells, so now I'm in a bit of a quandary - the player of course want's to keep his tentacles when shapechanging, (his argument is that it's a little like barkskin, and that get's to stay too...). What do you think? Should I let him grow two tentacles before shape-changing and keep them? I'm unwilling to readmit Natural Spell (horrifyingly overpowered feat), but maybe you can think of another solution?
Androcus Divinicus 07-09-07, 11:28 AM	I would allow the wildshaped form to have the Menacing Tentacles. But then again, I wouldn't have banned Natural Spell in the first place. Since this is not a discussion on the merits of Natural Spell, though, I'll say this: to my mind, the main plus of these tenacles is that you can use them to still be involved in combat while also casting. Since you've banned Natural Spell, I really don't see any unbalancing effect in allowing the Druid to keep the tentacles from form to form. Regards, Justin.
eamon 07-10-07, 09:41 AM	No other opinions?
Marcus Majarra 07-10-07, 12:34 PM	I would allow the wildshaped form to retain the tentacles. Unless the spell effect and the wildshape are mutually exclusive, I don't see why they should clash.
Androcus Divinicus 07-10-07, 01:14 PM	Well ... I'll toss in a devil's advocate to my original statement. The druid shouldn't retain the tentacles while wildshaped because wildshape, implicit in its very name, causes the form of the druid to change. The tentacles, upon casting are part of the druid's form, and change with all the rest of the character's form. But, to get down to the specifics of why this is so, let's look at the text of the applicable rules. The description of the ability says that it works like polymorph. That spell, in turn says that it works like alter self, and in alter self, we read the following: "You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include ... and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth)." I think the "gross physical qualities" line is significant, and particularly the examples it gives about the presence or absence of wings (or tentacles, one might say), and the specific reference to "number of extremities". Because of the specific text of the spells upon which the wildshape ability is based, it makes logical sense to rule that the wildshaping suppresses the tentacles. If the druid in question then reverts to normal form with duration of the spell remaining, the tentacles are still a part of his normal form, but they are not part of his wildshaped form. Hope you enjoy this opposing view-point. Keep in mind though, that while I think this is a reasonable position to hold on the issue, I don't think it is the correct one. I stand by my original statement that the tentacles would stick with him through the form change. J.
Marcus Majarra 07-10-07, 06:16 PM	I'm not too fond of that devil's advocate argument. Extrapolated, it could very well mean that wildshape results in the loss of pretty much every transmutation effect.
Ozymandias V. 07-10-07, 07:03 PM	The tentacles are a spell effect. They stay just like Mage Armor or Endure Elements would.
Androcus Divinicus 07-11-07, 01:48 AM	I'm not too fond of that devil's advocate argument. Extrapolated, it could very well mean that wildshape results in the loss of pretty much every transmutation effect. I tend to agree ... that's why I disagree with the position. But imo, it is the best justification for not allowing the tentacles to survive the wildshape. I mean, beyond simply going, "I don't wanna, and I'm the DM so deal." J.
eamon 07-11-07, 04:19 AM	Actually, I'm the DM, and I do wanna, but that devil's advocate argument sounded rather convincing before. I'm just going to ignore it however, and also stand by Adrocus Divinicus's original argument. BTW, just the fact that they are a spell effect is no argument. Clearly, the spell would not cease merely because of a shape change. However, it's quite possible for the spell to become irrelevant. If you gain greater mage armor after gaining mage armor, the normal mage armor is irrelevant (at least until the greater version expires). If you polymorph from one shape to another, and then do so AGAIN, you lose the abilities granted by the first casting of polymorph - the first polymorph isn't dispelled, it's just irrelevant. If you charm someone, who's then dominated... well... you get the idea ;-)
Androcus Divinicus 07-11-07, 04:28 AM	Actually, I'm the DM, and I do wanna, but that devil's advocate argument sounded rather convincing before. I'm just going to ignore it however, and also stand by Adrocus Divinicus's original argument. Well, I didn't mean to imply that you were running your game by arbitrary fiat ... I just meant to say, "Of course you could just Rule 0 this situation, but if you wanted a justification for not allowing the tentacles to survive the shapechange, this is the best I can think of." I do think that a good argument can be made for supressing the tentacles while wildshaped, but I personally wouldn't do it, because I think that allowing the tentacles to remain is both a) more fun for the player, b) not really unbalancing, and c) supported by the rules (which also support the Natural Spell Feat ;)). Since I tend to operate from the perspective of "the burden of proof should be on the side arguing for greater restriction", I see this as a "lacking any good reason to the contrary, the tentacles stay." J.
eamon 07-11-07, 04:30 AM	Oh yeah, and thanks for the help! And I just realized, because of the reference to polymorph, that wild shape nowadays actually doesn't refer to polymorph but alternate form, as per the errata (in the MM)! Alternate form simply does: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm (that's the errata'd text, although even before the errata this was so). It does not refer to anything like extremeties etc.
Phrennzy 07-11-07, 12:50 PM	Wild shape lets the Druid change his shape. The Tentacles are not a part of the Druid. They are a magical effect. They are not formed out of his skin and muscle. Since Wild Shape changes the Druid's body, and the tentacles are not a part of that body, the tentacles should stay.
lears_fool 07-11-07, 05:54 PM	The tentacles are a spell effect. They stay just like Mage Armor or Endure Elements would. Right there, answered in two short sentences. No further debate necessary ;)