D&D Core Classes [Rebalancing 3.5]

[AndyJames]

The ability to think logically seems to be a natural mental condition to me...

Anyway, let's just agree to disagree. The argument is moot since neither of us are allowing spells as part of Alter Form whether we think it is a house rule or not.

[JaronK]

It's not.  Natural is Physical only.  Mental abilities are all considered "extraordinary."  Just how it goes.

JaronK

[RobbyPants]

So, that being said, what do we want the ranger to get when he wildshapes?  Certainly attacks, natural armor, and movement modes.  What about:
- Pounce?
- Poison?
- Swallow whole (probably not an issue due to the size limitation)?

[JaronK]

I actually think Pounce and other Ex special attacks (exclude spells explicitly... I know of no animals that can cast, but let's just be sure) is fine, so long as it's something like the shapeshift varient.  The current Wildshape Ranger is quite balanced, except that he has a power spike at level 5 when he gets Fleshrakers and he really doesn't go up much from there until he finally gets Legendary Apes.  So, something should be done about that.  A simple fix if you want to keep Wildshape (as opposed to Shapechange) is just to say that the maximum physical stat you can get from Wild Shape is 10+ your Ranger level for any given stat, so a 5th level Ranger can't get more than 15 Str, 15 Dex, and 15 Con when he switches shapes.

JaronK

[AndyJames]

Statement: "If we run the no stat boost variant, allowing the ranger/druid to keep his items worn when Wildshaping (as long as the new form can wear them) would be OK."

Thoughts?

[JaronK]

It could potencially work if he got the (ex) special attacks of his form without the stat boosts.  Maybe the detection abilities too (Blindsense, Scent, etc).  It would be less combat oriented and more utility oriented, but I think still useful enough to keep up with the other options.

JaronK

[Eldariel]

I suggest the Wildshape improves with level. I mean, just because you learn to assume some form doesn't immediately mean you can truly make it as good as an original. Just because you can become a snake doesn't mean you can produce venom ('cause maybe you just aren't good enough to generate more than vestigal venom glands yet), just because you can become a bear doesn't mean your muscles are as big as a bear's ('cause you don't know how to make 'em function that big), just because you can become a Lion doesn't mean you learn to pounce with all your extensions at once (that's more of learning to use a form than anything - seems like something you could make a feat), just because you become a Fleshraker doesn't mean you immediately know how to attack with all your different weapons in the span of 6 seconds (use all your natural attacks in one turn) and just because you can become a bear doesn't mean you learn to hit things while grabbing them (again, a question of learning).

It seems clear to me that all of those things should be beyond the ability of a character who just learned to assume their secondary animal shape. Likewise, it seems clear to me someone who's spent extensive amounts of time in some form/studied some creatures more extensively (that is, gained more levels) should be able to do those things. They all seem like benefits you should gain as your Wildshape-level goes up, just like you gain the ability to Wildshape into bigger/smaller things and more uses of the Wildshape-ability. If we just rewrite the Wildshape progression with the assumption that by default, you gain nothing (except what's written), then it works fine.


I'd also like to point out that Wildshape as it stands

[AndyJames]

Special attacks would be a given, I think. Low Light Vision and Scent shouldn't be a problem.

[JaronK]

Special attacks would be a given, I think. Low Light Vision and Scent shouldn't be a problem.

I think in that case it would be balanced.  Access to movement modes, natural armour, special attacks, and natural weapons seems reasonably balanced with two weapon fighting and archery trees, though I'd guess you still couldn't cast without Natural Spell (which technically you can't get).

JaronK

[AndyJames]

Yes, you can get Natural Spells. It is still Wildshape, so you would still qualify... right?

[Kuroimaken]

Yes, you can get Natural Spells. It is still Wildshape, so you would still qualify... right?

Even if it didn't, we could change that. 

Although, as far as ranger spells go, Natural Spell isn't so huge that you'll always want it (which is good, since "feats you can do without when you're so-and-so class" sounds kinda meh to me).

[JaronK]

Natural Spell currently requires Druid 6, so Rangers can't have it.  We could make it available and that should be balanced, given Ranger spell abilities.

JaronK

[veekie]

So which abilities should the wildshape ranger explicitly get out of wild shape beyond ability increases? Natural weapons are a given, as are some natural armor increases and ability bonuses, what about stuff like overrun, etc.

Are we using the PHB2 wildshape variant as a base or writing a whole new wildshape up from scratch?

[SiggyDevil]

So, that being said, what do we want the ranger to get when he wildshapes?  Certainly attacks, natural armor, and movement modes.  What about:
- Pounce?
- Poison?
- Swallow whole (probably not an issue due to the size limitation)?

Whenever doing so would be level-appropriate with spellcasters and item abilities.

For instance, Poison is SL 3 for Druid and SL 4 for Cleric. Since Druids would be able to put it on an item as early as level 5 and distribute such things amongst their party, a level 5 Ranger should be able to Poison once per encounter or such. Keep in mind that the actual power of poison is derived from the type though.
If such an ability is deemed too powerful for a warrior (which I doubt) then delay it another 2 levels so that it lines up with Cleric.

Likewise, one could hold the same standards for any other character; Rogues could have an unlimited use ability (per encounter maybe) to poison their weapons with many varieties on the spot while attacking, archer-like warriors shoot poisoned arrows, mage-likes cast a ranged Final Fantasy-like poison effect (although it takes longer for effect and not as potent, should also deal damage at the same time).

In this way all classes are essentially capable of very similar tasks but go about it differently. That's how I do things.

[Elennsar]

The problem is that it doesn't balance the classes to do that, it just means that all classes are essentially doing the same stuff.

XdY+Z damage.

Yawn. Can't we actually make the classes distinct so that if you want to do something (poison people, for instance), you go for being a given class?

[SiggyDevil]

This is 3e. Poison isn't damage like in 4e, it's ability damage. Big difference.

The capability of dealing and recovering from ability damage is very important in 3e.

[Elennsar]

Point is, if everyone is doing 15 damage (or 1d4 drain to an ability score of their choice), you have balance by making all options identical.

Yawntastic.

[SiggyDevil]

Beast Form

[Elennsar]

I don't think they should. I just don't think that everyone should be equally capable of it.

As for pounce...great. Can we stop making "I charge" go from a limited but very effective into "and I do it again and again and again"?

That's the problem I have with it. Re-charging should not be a good idea. It feels wrong.

[RobbyPants]

Natural Spell currently requires Druid 6, so Rangers can't have it.  We could make it available and that should be balanced, given Ranger spell abilities.

JaronK

I thought the prereqs were Wis 13+ and wild shape ability.  I agree that a 1/2 caster level ranger probably won't break the game with Natural Spell as printed.  I never touched the feat initially because my intention has always been to use the shapechange druid ACF, getting rid of the need for the feat.

So, as long as it stays wildshape ranger-only, then I think Natural Spell could probably remain as printed.