Author Topic: Wild Shape vs Shapechange  (Read 7057 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

zioth

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« on: October 11, 2011, 01:59:55 PM »
I've been thinking of creating a wildshape-based character at epic levels, but I wonder how much it's worth, when Shapechange is so powerful. Here's the comparison I have so far:


Shapechange is better because:

  • Change as a free action once per round. You need two prestige classes (MoMF and Warshaper) to get even close to that with Wild Shape (once per round as move action).
  • Gain supernatural abilities.
  • You don't need a 4th level spell or MoMF7 to gain EX abilities.
  • You can optimize Shapechange and still get full druid casting. To optimize Wild Shape, you have to give up most of your casting ability.
  • You can change to any size from Fine to Collossal. With Wild Shape, you need four epic feats to do this (two with MoMF 10). Not that Colossal's all that useful, since there are so few forms with only 25HD.
  • You can change to almost any creature type. You need ten levels of MoMF to get close with Wild Shape.
  • You have a lot more open feats, since you don't need so many prestige classes.


Wild Shape is better because:

  • It doesn't cap at level 25. This probably outweighs the lack of supernatural abilities eventually.
  • Wilding clasps let you use whatever equipment you want, and at epic levels, they're cheap.
  • Natural Spell lets you take forms that can't ordinarily speak. MoMF 1 is even better, letting you speak in all forms.
  • You can use Nature's Warrior levels to get some bonuses that Shapechange doesn't give you.
  • You can use it more often than Shapechange.
  • It can't be dispelled.


Eventually, Wild Shape wins out. For example, at level 50, you have double the HD cap of Shapechange, and can have full druid casting (at low CL) in addition to powerful Wild Shape. But not a lot of epic campaigns make it to 50.

So what do you think? Did I miss anything? Is Wild Shape worth losing so much casting ability at epic levels, assuming a melee-focused build? At what level, if any, does Wild Shape win?

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2011, 02:05:02 PM »
Wild shape also has the fact that you can get +13 to your effective druid level with it for 1 LA.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

Rebel7284

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2011, 02:09:17 PM »
epic levels, assuming a melee-focused build?

If the DM plays epic anywhere close to RAW, the above doesn't really work.  Sure Wildshaping into a mature adult prismatic dragon is fun at level 50.  Or you can cast an epic spell and end the encounter.
Negative level on a chicken would make it a wight the next day.  Chicken the other wight meat. -borg286

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2011, 02:15:34 PM »
epic levels, assuming a melee-focused build?

If the DM plays epic anywhere close to RAW, the above doesn't really work.  Sure Wildshaping into a mature adult prismatic dragon is fun at level 50.  Or you can cast an epic spell and end the encounter Several years before it happened

FTFY
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

JollyGreenGargant

  • Monkey bussiness
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • Email
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2011, 03:03:55 PM »
Wild shape also has the fact that you can get +13 to your effective druid level with it for 1 LA.
What is this from? Is it a race or template?

EDIT: nvm, its the divine minion template
« Last Edit: October 11, 2011, 03:15:38 PM by JollyGreenGargant »

Bozwevial

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4497
  • Developing a relaxed attitude to danger.
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2011, 03:06:42 PM »
Depending on your interpretation, you could just uncap Shapechange with Reserves of Strength.

zioth

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2011, 03:38:20 PM »
Reserves of Strength sounds good, but a lot of games (including mine) don't allow campaign-world-specific sourcebooks.

I disagree with Rebel7284. A DM who allows a single epic spell to end all encounters is a bad DM, or at least doesn't know how to challenge epic characters. Who would want to play in a game like that?

Even a straight fighter at 30th level can be effective, dealing large amounts of damage and often killing enemies with a single strike.

A colossal wild shape with, say, unarmed monk damage, flurry and Perfect Two Weapon Fighting stacked into it can do 12d8 damage ten times a round. Add on some enchanted gantlets (if your DM allows unarmed damage to work through gauntlets), the huge strength bonus of a colossal form and power attack, and you can get much higher. This is particularly true in a low-wealth campaign, where researching more than a few epic spells is all but impossible.

Also, you can only cast a few epic spells a day, and some are likely to be buffs to get your spellcraft or primary casting stat up. You can wildshape all day.

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2011, 04:01:46 PM »
Epic levels = I don't fkn care anymore, because the game was broken in half well before 20th. :shakefist

I've played in an epic game that went to about 30th level. It was only fun because the DM was incredible, and the PC casters didn't really know what they were doing (they thought Time Stop + Delayed Blast Fireball spam was a good tactic).
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

amalcon

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 30
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2011, 04:18:40 PM »
The biggest advantage of wildshape is the one you don't list:  it's available from level 5, as opposed to level 17 for shapechange.  Wildshape wins from level 5 through 16.

By level 17, it's rocket tag anyway.

OblivionSmurf83

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2011, 04:20:38 PM »
Wild Shape can also be combined with the monstrosity that is the Planar Shepherd's outsider Wild Shape, for uncapped alternate forms that include spell-like abilities. Which you can then combine with Shapeshift.

nijineko

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • two strange quarks short of a graviton...
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2011, 06:30:35 PM »
metamorphic transfer....
arukibito ga michi wo erabu no ka, michi ga arukibito wo erabu no deshou ka?
Never game alone again!
KadoKado! Game for gifts!
The Ultimate Dice Rolling Engine

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2011, 06:53:53 PM »

A colossal wild shape with, say, unarmed monk damage, flurry and Perfect Two Weapon Fighting stacked into it can do 12d8 damage ten times a round. Add on some enchanted gantlets (if your DM allows unarmed damage to work through gauntlets), the huge strength bonus of a colossal form and power attack, and you can get much higher. This is particularly true in a low-wealth campaign, where researching more than a few epic spells is all but impossible.


How is 120D8 Melee damage even a valid tactic in a level 30 game? It's like 500 damage or something, that's what a hood does 20 levels before.

If this is what you want to do I suggest grabbing 20 levels of druid and 10 levels of hood, then you get both.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

CantripN

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1199
  • Constantly talking isn't necessarily communicating
    • Cantrip, Gestalt Gish
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2011, 06:57:47 PM »

A colossal wild shape with, say, unarmed monk damage, flurry and Perfect Two Weapon Fighting stacked into it can do 12d8 damage ten times a round. Add on some enchanted gantlets (if your DM allows unarmed damage to work through gauntlets), the huge strength bonus of a colossal form and power attack, and you can get much higher. This is particularly true in a low-wealth campaign, where researching more than a few epic spells is all but impossible.


How is 120D8 Melee damage even a valid tactic in a level 30 game? It's like 500 damage or something, that's what a hood does 20 levels before.

If this is what you want to do I suggest grabbing 20 levels of druid and 10 levels of hood, then you get both.

Exactly. The higher level you get, you realize casters are playing another sort of game, and you're mostly a bystander if you're a mundane. Maybe a pet.
Read, every day, something no one else is reading. Think, every day, something no one else is thinking. Do, every day, something no one else would be silly enough to do. It is bad for the mind to be always part of unanimity.

zioth

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2011, 07:16:50 PM »
It's not really 500 damage. It's 12d8 plus maybe 20 from power attack and maybe another 20 from strength, plus, say, 6d6 damage and 1 con damage from gauntlets. Against a 40HD enemy, that's an average of 1350 damage per round, and that's not particularly optimized for level 30.

I see your point, that even 1350 damage per round may not be much in a level 30 encounter, but in a low-wealth, non-super-optimized campaign like the one I play in, it might still be viable. Also, it can come with tremendous AC, saves and HP, which the pure casters will have trouble matching. As non-spellcasters go, it seems like a wild shape build isn't a horrible epic option.

Anyway, I think what people here are saying is, I'd better make sure to have full spellcasting, even if it makes my wild shape less spectacular.


So how about this option:
Druid17 to get full spellcasting and access to epic spells, then play with Wild Shape classes, monk or whatever. Caster level will suffer a lot, but if I focus on buffs and no-SR spells, I should be okay. Or am I wrong?

Mixster

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1642
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #14 on: October 11, 2011, 07:21:56 PM »
Even 5k damage per round wouldn't impress me at level 20, I think I recently made a build that ungeared did 12 times that. With magic missiles.
Monks are pretty much the best designed class ever.

JaronK

Meep Meep - Mixster out

weenog

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1706
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2011, 07:56:55 PM »
Also, it can come with tremendous AC, saves and HP, which the pure casters will have trouble matching.

That you could say this even in jest suggests to me that you need to spend far more time reading the spells, feats, and class features, and far less time investing blind faith in what the fluff tells you.  Compare the following two statements.

  • Of Fighter: "Of all the classes, the fighter has the best all-around fighting capabilities (hence the name).
  • Of vampiric touch: "Your touch deals 1d6 points of damage per two caster levels (maximum 10d6). You gain temporary hit points equal to the damage you deal."

Ask yourself which one of those statements has an effect on a character's staying power in a fight.
"We managed to make an NPC puke an undead monster."
"That sounds like a victory to me."

SneeR

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • Sneering
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2011, 08:30:12 PM »
Even 5k damage per round wouldn't impress me at level 20, I think I recently made a build that ungeared did 12 times that. With magic missiles.

I call BS on that. HOW?
The answer to everything:
[spoiler][/spoiler]
SneeR
[spoiler]
I don't know if the designers meant you to take Skill Focus for every feat.
Sounds a little OP.

The monk is clearly the best class, no need to optimize here. What you are doing is overkill.

It's like people who have no idea what a turn signal is. They ruin it for everyone else.
When another driver brandishes a holy symbol and begins glowing with divine light, seek cover or get spattered with zombie brains. I do not see what is so complicated about this.
[/spoiler]

awaken DM golem

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3294
  • PAO'd my Avatar
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2011, 10:34:21 PM »

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #18 on: October 11, 2011, 10:41:25 PM »
Even 5k damage per round wouldn't impress me at level 20, I think I recently made a build that ungeared did 12 times that. With magic missiles.

I call BS on that. HOW?
A Wizard did it.

Handy Links

SneeR

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • Sneering
Re: Wild Shape vs Shapechange
« Reply #19 on: October 11, 2011, 11:12:26 PM »
Even 5k damage per round wouldn't impress me at level 20, I think I recently made a build that ungeared did 12 times that. With magic missiles.
I call BS on that. HOW?
A Wizard did it.
Your wit is blinding.  :psyduck
 :rollseyes

But seriously. How?
The answer to everything:
[spoiler][/spoiler]
SneeR
[spoiler]
I don't know if the designers meant you to take Skill Focus for every feat.
Sounds a little OP.

The monk is clearly the best class, no need to optimize here. What you are doing is overkill.

It's like people who have no idea what a turn signal is. They ruin it for everyone else.
When another driver brandishes a holy symbol and begins glowing with divine light, seek cover or get spattered with zombie brains. I do not see what is so complicated about this.
[/spoiler]