I say book average.
Threre's no AL-specific guideline on this. Completely up to what the DM allows, I'd assume.
You gain the HPs listed in the book. A dire wolf for example has 37 HPs.
As Primarchx states, there is no explicit rule in the PHB, nor any AL-specific guideline for this, so the final determination is up to your DM.
OTOH, the AL uses averages for PCs, so I think a case can be made that the 'average' is the best choice.
The wildshape ability specifically states you replace your stats with those of the creature. All creatures have a stated HP in the book followed by its HD. You don't roll the HPs or take the maximum - you use the stated number.
This is further reinforced on P3 of the ALPG. Characters cannot roll HPs nor does it allow any option to take max HPs
Kalani wrote:
I also cited another rule which prohibits rolling hitpoints.... While that rule implied it was only for HPs gained via leveling, such language is never explicitly used. As such, if you go by the explicit wording - that rule applies to any source of HPs from HD (but not from healing or some other effect).
I ran into this issue over this past weekend, while running Foulness Beneath Mulmaster. The DM looked at the PHB and then ruled that the player use the average but acknowledged that there was no specific langague suggesting the average was the required stat. I have retired using my druids until there is an official rule regarding wildshape HP gain, and I am honestly suprised that 5E has been out for a year now without any official word on this aspect of the Druid class.
The average is the average for a reason. Rolling dice may gain or lose you a few HP but it is unlikely to matter much and, more importantly, you would have to reroll each time you change shape, taking up a lot more time than needed. I guess I fail to see the issue, maybe someone can enlighten me?
As a DM I am also not a fan of rolled dice in this case simply because a streak of bad luck and a set of low rolls may turn the druid tank into a druid shaped grease stain, and that tends to hurt the entire table..
As an AL DM I would encourage the use of the average. But also an AL DM I have the flexibility to determine aspects of the game not explicitly spelled out in the ALPG, PH, etc. Since we're quoting the ALPG now, I'll put forth the following...
You are empowered to make adjustments to the
adventure and make decisions about how the group
interacts with the world of this adventure. This is
especially important and applicable outside of combat,
but feel free to adjust the adventure for groups that are
having too easy or too hard of a time.
....
In short, being the DM isn’t about following the
adventure’s text word-for-word; it’s about facilitating a
fun, challenging game environment for the players.
So feel free to make your suggestions as to how this should be done, but saying one way is right and another is wrong, unless supported explicitly by the canonical source, is not in the spirit of the game.
Coredump00 wrote:
Kalani wrote:
The text of wildshape also says to use the stats of the creature (as written). The stats for a Dire Wolf give a value of 37 HPs (and its HD). By RAW, if you use its stats (as written), you have 37HPs in Dire Wolf form. The HD is given in order to allow DMs to modify a creatures HPs away from average....
Something the DM is not allowed to do in AL (as we are not allowed to modify a creatures stats - spells yes, stats no). If the DM is unable to modify a creatures HPs, why do you think a player would be given a pass on that?
knlndrs wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
knlndrs wrote:
If your concerns about wildshape HPs are your reason not to play a Druid due to "uncertainty", I cannot possibly fathom how terrifying you find the idea of playing a Wild Mage Sorcerer - your entire subclass is predecated on DM fiat.
I suspect the real reason for the poster's stated ambivalence about druid wild-shape HP is that, previously, complaints about a class have led to modifications to a class in order to avoid having players leave due to a 'bad play experience'.
I don't think the poster realizes that, in 5E, the answer to 'this doesn't work the way I think it does' is 'start your own home game and then it will work the way you think it does'.
--
Pauper
I am just still flabbergasted by the idea that a druid would get MAX hp for a whildshape. I just cannot fathom where that originated.
No idea. There is nothing in the rules to support it. You either take the printed (average) Hp or you roll. Rolling HPs from HD is prohibited during level advancement. It makes logical sense this ruling should be extrapolated for wildshape, animal companions, purchased mounts, find steed etc.
Kalani wrote:
imaginaryfriend wrote:
When I have the Druid is my games I run shapechange he always has the book listed average HP. I think its the fairest method.
imaginaryfriend wrote:
Mirtek wrote:
Wildshape was pretty much killed with the AL nerf nuke, anyways.
DMs frequently use max hp as a means to balance encounters. So i can kinda understand the logic. But yeah, druids get enough free HP as it is.
DMs are not encouraged to alter monster HPs. If they're party has a higher APL than the area (or same APL but 6-7 players) you can increase the difficulty by adding more creatures (of the same type).
knlndrs wrote:
I like to think of wildshape as giving you a second HP bar (like in a video game)
Your regular Hp are unaffected (HP bar 1) this bar has a maximum and a current score.
Your wildshape Hp is HP Bar 2. It too has a maximum and a current score and is depleted first. A dire wolf has 37 HPs (maximum) on this second bar but could have less once injured. A brown bear has 32HPs.
Once your second health bar is depleted, you return to human form and your actual HPs are reduced by the overflow damage (any damage left over depletes your first health bar).
Pauper wrote:
knlndrs wrote:
After picking a shape (within the restrictions of AL) you take on its physical stats, as such you will have the hit dice of the listed creature. That leaves two ways to determine how to determine hit point maximum. Either you use the average (which some would say it the only AL aproved way) or you roll. When you roll you take max for the first hit die, then roll the remaining die and add the creatures con modifier times the number of hit die.
Now what I was convinced you meant, and what honestly really threw me, was that a druid could automatically gain the maximum for each of the creatures hit dice. It is clear NOW that is not what you meant. Leaves me to wonder what the issue is.
Does your issue revolve around AL not being strictly clear about wether rolling the hit dice for the creature shape is allowed? And that if rolling is not allowed, it is impossible to ever reach the maximum amount of maximum hitpoints?
Edit: hmm see I should reread MM, I did think monsters got the benefit of max HP on first die too, but if Pauper says they do not..... guess they are not as heroic as players
Kalani wrote:
There is a very good article on the AL website called "DMing and DM empowerment". I recommend all players read it (even if your not a DM). It covers this in depth.
The adventure you are referring to was before they standardized things. All later expeditions say what to add/remove from the encounter. In some cases - they also change creature types (eg. Helmed horror becoming a shield guardian).
Unless specifically stated however, DMs cannot substitute creatures in an encounter but can add/remove more of the same
knlndrs, Welcome to the boards. Sorry folks harshed on you. Your initial posts came across as someone looking for a loophole to exploit, and complaining when others didn't agree. Your later posts paint a somewhat different story. Anyway...
You seem to be misunderstanding a few, key, basic concepts.
Your hit points are determined by your Hit Dice (short for Hit Point Dice). At 1st level, your character has 1 Hit Die, and the die type is determined by your class. You start with hit points equal to the highest roll of that die, as indicated in your class description. (You also add your Constitution modifier, which you will determine in step 3.) This is also your hit point maximum.”
Kalani wrote:
Kalani wrote:
imaginaryfriend wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Not a problem; just making it explicit for the benefit of those who don't necessarily believe me.
--
Pauper
Good gods you guys like to stretch stuff.
Ravix wrote:
AndrewJO wrote:
Aah ok.
AndrewJO wrote:
Primarchx wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Pauper wrote:
imaginaryfriend wrote:
Interesting point, this is something I'd like to ask Crawford honestly.
Ravix wrote:
Pauper wrote:
imaginaryfriend wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
imaginaryfriend wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Kalani wrote:
imaginaryfriend wrote:
So i did notice Kalani used pretty specific phrasing.
'DMs are not encouraged to...'
I agree with imaginary. Encounter balancing is an art form.
My table usually has 6-7 players with very high single target damage and 2 extremely tanky characters, but no area damage.
If the number of creatures is less than/= to half the number of characters , i typically use a standard adjustment of +1 hp per hit die.
The other adjustment i frequently use is that once the PCs storm the dungeon, the NPCs are not robots. At this point they already know a lot about the PCs tactics and they 'reorganize' accordingly.
I did 120 damage to the barbarian in less than a minute, and still didn't get to trigger his orc racial.
Course they have a paladin, life cleric, druid, ranger, and bard that all use healing spells, and a lock that spams armor of agathys.