Do you think a wildshaped druid could be targeted by dominate animal? I have mixed feelings.
Yes, I think they should be able to be affected by the spell. Just like I would say Dominate Person would no longer work on them while wildshaped. Makes sense to me at least.
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
slumgum wrote:
That takes away a massive amount of flavor from the class and doesn't seem to be supported by the rules at all. The Wildshape ability uses the word "transform".
slumgum wrote:
Yes, you retain your intelligence, wisdom, and personality. The ability would be nearly useless if you took on the mind of the animal you transformed into - any aggressive animal like a bear, shark, etc would put your party in jeopardy.
It's fine you want to run your game differently, but I think when you get your hands on the PHB and read the wildshape section you'll see the only reasonable conclusion is the druid becomes a beast.
This one is actually tricky. I was going to say I would rule that dominate animal would not work on a wildshaped druid, but I'm actually not sure. The description of wild shape says they "magically assume the shape of a beast", and it does say "while you are transformed' which I interpret to mean while you are transformed into the shape of a beast, it could go either way. The entry talks about replacing the characters statistics with those of the beast, but rather than saying what beast abilities are transposed onto the character it talks about what statistics from the character override the beast's base statistics. You are limited in what your beast mode form can physically do, but that says nothing about if they count as a humanoid or beast.
The more I think about it, the more my initial reaction makes less sense. I would actually then agree that a wildshaped druid counts as a beast and not a humanoid, but wouldn't really complain if a DM I played under decided differently. Either way you rule, just be consistent and it should be fine.
If I were to write up a MM-style stat block for a Druid, the type would be "humanoid (shapeshifter)", not "beast".
So, let's extend this further: if your wizard transforms you into something using polymorph, are you suddenly no longer susceptible to Hold/Dominate Person, and must be Dominate Beast or Hold/Dominate Monster'ed, now? If I turn the Bard into a dragon, he is only now susceptible to Hold/Dominate Monster... how lovely.
Well, the Polymorph spell specifies the new form can be any beast. Dragons have a creature type of dragon, not beast, so you cannot polymorph hte bard into a dragon, just as you wouldn't be able to polymorph the barbarian into an owlbear as they're monstrosities. The only statistics a polymorphed creature maintains of their old form is their alignment and personality, though unlike a druid's wildshape concentration must be maintained. So yes, I would say a polymorphed creature counts as a beast in all respects, even moreso than a wildshaped druid.
True polymorph let's you be a dragon.
But yes, you would only be suceptable to hold/dominate monster.
Rule of cool says yes in my games.
If when you use this abilities or spells you assume the stat blocks of what you transform into except for the specific elements which are called out not to be changed, how can you argue you're not a beast in the case of wildshape? If you become the stat block of a bear except for WIS, INT and CHA + your fluff personality and "self", for mechanicaly purposes you are a beast. So Hold Person no longer works, but Dominate Animal does. It's also well known to happen to druids in novels, modules, etc.. Even Neverwinter Nights 2 had something similar with a druid circle. Imo this is an established principle and absolutely nothing in the spells or abilities or rules of the PHB would prohibit this from happening, furthermore all evidence points to the fact that it indeed can and should happen.
lawrencehoy wrote:
slumgum wrote:
Oriet wrote:
So would you allow Dominate Person to work on a druid shifted into a bear? Would you allow Dominate Beast to work on a bear that has had the Awaken Spell cast on it?
slumgum wrote:
It seemed pretty ambiguous to me (and everyone else at the table) too.
I think to me the fact that you keep your mental scores here, and that this kind of spell attacks your mentality, is the most compelling argument. So I think I'd say the spell wouldn't work.
Noctaem wrote:
I think what's being forgotten is that what matters is the creature type, not which attribute is targeted or its value. Hold/Dominate Person targets only humanoids, while Hold/Dominate Monster targets any creature, and does so without regard to what the creature's intelligence score is. As such, it doesn't matter if all of a creature's statistics are replaced (such as with Polymorph) or not (as is the case with Wildshape), but what creature type they count as in the new shape.
Carefully looking over Wildshape, Polymorph, and the Monstrous Manual has provided what I think is a clear answer. Wildshape states "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast, but you retain your alignment, personality, and Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores," and then goes on to list that you retain your proficiencies and other features irrelevent to the current discussion. Polymorph says [i]"The target's game statistics, including mental ability scores, are replaced by the statistics of the chosen beast." True Polymorph states the same, but changes "chosen beast" to "new form" (for Creature to Creature).
The Monstrous Manual lists what a creature's game statistics (aka stat block) inlcude: size; type; alignment; armor class; hit points; speed; ability scores; saving throws; skills; vulnerabilties, resistances, and immunities; senses; languages; and challenge. This, at least to me, makes it clear that the creature type for a wildshaped or polymorphed creature becomes that of the new form. A Wildshaped Druid then has a creature type of beast, even if they assume the form of a baboon or ape, while a polymorphed creature only counts as humanoid if transformed into one.
Oriet wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
jaelis wrote:
I'm not arguing that you retain your creature type, but that you retain the benefits of your creature type. I don't know if its fair to call those benefits 'features', but I don't know that it isn't either.
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Talgrath wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
PHB Page 67 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
I was going by the belief that you got to keep the senses, which I thought was what had been stated earlier in the thread? Anyway now that someone has actually posted the right text:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Another little clue, perhaps. The Oath of the Ancients Turn the Faithless ability can target fey and fiends. It says:
"If the creature's true form is concealed by an illusion, shapeshifting, or other effect, that form is revealed while it is turned."
That would make more sense if the shapeshifted creature retained its original fey or fiend type.
jaelis wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Oriet wrote:
Still it's interesting that wildshape states you gain the statistics except for specific elements and the listing for statistics includes not only type but also senses. The rules are contradicting each other.
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Ok but where does it specifically say that it circumvents the general rules for what we're now discussing? It doesn't. The only things that are circumvented from the rules text of Wildshape posted in this thread are:
1. you keep your INT, WIS and CHA + "self"
2. You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source and can use them if the new form is physically capable of doing so.
3. You can't use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense.
We all agree on this. But these don't cover everything being discussed. Which is why I asked if there were any other portions of text that would be exceptions to the general rules.
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
After some pondering, here's what I think. It all depends on how you want to answer the question.
Explicit RAW: No answer, the rules don't explicitly address this.
Implied RAW: Creature type is probably a statistic, and probably not one that is excluded from wildshape. If so, then a wild shape druid counts as a beast. But a given DM might dispute either of those assumptions. (edited)
Rules as intended: We don't know, there isn't any basis to judge at this point.
Overall consistency: IMO, a lot of things fit better if you say a wildshape druid retains his creature type for this purpose at least. Turn the Faithless would seem to work more effectively as intended. The definition of creature type as its fundamental nature would make more sense with the wording and effect of wildshape. And it would be more consistent with the explanation of enchantment effects as affecting your mind and personality. But this category is subjective.
Rule of fun: Could go either way. Having your character dominated by a relatively low level spell is kind of sucky, but it could also be a springboard for interesting adventures.
If racial traits (other than special senses) count as features retained by wildshaping, then do racial physcal ability increases apply to the wildshaped for? (That is, do half-orc druids get +2 Str when wildshaped, or elves get +2 dex, etc.)
Noctaem wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Hm that does seem to be my problem with linking creature type the way that he does as well. The jump from one to the next in the explanation "self = fundamental self = type" just doesn't jive for me when it's then applied to allow or not allow specific spells or effects from working on you. At that point you're attaching a mechanical effect to labels that aren't necessarily related at all.
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
I agree that you could phrase the question in terms of dominate person instead. And I would also be inclined to play that dominate person would work on a wildshaped druid, but I'd still say the most obvious implication of the rules is that it wouldn't work.
lawrencehoy wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Fixed the title
lawrencehoy wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Regardless of what you guys claim fundamental nature may or may not represent, TYPE is a statistic according to the DMG + MM. So unless wildshape specifically says that you don't gain that statisic like the others which it calls out, YOU DO. Nothing you guys can argue changes that fact. You don't get to add statistics that you do or don't gain simply because you don't want to be affected by a spell.
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
I think there's sufficient physical differences between a dog and a hell hound to warrant a different type. The type seems to change based on the origin of the creature and physical attributes.
vs
And there's many more versions of the hell hound that go into even more alien forms. Just google hellhound.
Oriet wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote: