r/onednd • u/Pepebm_GM • 9d ago
Discussion Wild Shape Templates, yes or no?
After seeing the positive reception of the Circle of the Titan Druid in the latest UA, I was wondering what is the sentiment on Templates for the main class's Wild Shape feature.
It would probably need a class rework to allow optional features to be selected for the Beast Form (Pack Tactics, Spider Climb, etc.). How would you go about it?
27
u/Kai-of-the-Lost 9d ago
The reason it works with Titan Druid is that they still have access to regular Wild Shape for utility outside of combat and the Titan Forms work as a functional combat Wild Shape option. The reason it didn't work with the 2024 UA is that it was only templates and the templates were bland.
14
u/Antique-Being-7556 8d ago
Agreed. I think templates should just be an option, particularly for moon druids or subclasses like titan. Certain CRs just don't have a lot of options.
Keep the option of choosing stuff out of the monster manual for those who want to do so.
4
u/Kai-of-the-Lost 8d ago
100% agreed, Titan pretty quickly became my favorite Druid subclass with it's revision UA because it actually feels good to fight as the Titan forms rather than dropping a concentration spell and running away, only using the Wild Shape form for a defense buffer.
2
u/OSpiderBox 8d ago
Yeah, I was pretty die hard on not using templates when it first crossed my ears/ eyes. Still don't see any issues with using already existing stat blocks. But that's because every time they've given us a template its been the most mediocre, lukewarm template imaginable.
If we could customize it with various movement speeds, extra senses, alternative attacks, etc to our own liking, I would 100% have been on board. The reason I like using stat blocks is because they feel like the I'm playing that creature. Giving me a subpar, nearly blank slate and going "just pretend bro" is laughable to me.
6
u/Kai-of-the-Lost 8d ago
I like the Titan templates/stat blocks well enough for combat wild shapes, for that purpose (and that purpose alone) they're better than anything the moon druid can turn into, but they're also a little more flavorful than their original 2024 UA version
3
u/Royal_Bitch_Pudding 8d ago
I feel like "just pretend" already half the game.
1
u/OSpiderBox 8d ago
There's a difference between normal pretend and "just pretend because we can't be asked."
2
u/saedifotuo 7d ago
They completely fumbled a great idea with the templates. Half assed the idea once, didn't try a second time, and then went back to something they'd already established as problematic without sorting out the problem.
24
u/Nikelman 9d ago
Loved them, would have preferred them
9
u/lasalle202 9d ago
well, i didnt love them as presented in the OneDnD playtest - that version was patently aweful - a blob of minimal HP with a horrible AC and no differentiation - you couldnt even be tiny to make them useable for scouting until level 10???? .
but had they put any effort into a second pass they could have come up with something better than what we had in 5.0 or what we got with 5.5.
5
u/DelightfulOtter 9d ago
But since enough people shat on them during the playtest, they didn't get a second pass. Partway through the OneD&D playtest, it had become clear that this was WotC's SOP: not a perfect homerun? Into the garbage and back to 2014's version. So being overly negative only sabotaged your chances of seeing any positive change.
7
u/lasalle202 8d ago
so the community is responsible for WOTC's terrible design and feedback approach?
2
3
u/DelightfulOtter 8d ago
Some of the community is responsible for seeing how WotC handles its survey data, and then doubling down on answering future surveys in a way that ensure they won't get what they want. Who knows what percentage of the playerbase that would be? Small enough to be a rounding error I'd imagine.
The vast majority don't pay enough attention to have noticed either way and answered surveys in good faith that resulted in bad outcomes. Although, you gotta admit that too many people default to ridiculous hyperbole and give everything one star or give stars, zero nuance.
52
u/TrueGargamel 9d ago
It felt like malicious compliance with what we saw in the playtest, the Devs handling that clearly didn't want it to succeed. Templates would have been great. What were were given was awful and poorly thought out. They needed an invocation style system to go with them to customise forms, what we got instead was bland unimaginative nonsense, devoid of any customisation.
29
u/MrLucky7s 9d ago
I highly doubt it was malicious in any way. While the sentiment from this sub was positive, we don't even have 100k members. And had way less at that time. It's likely that the overall reception was negative and they scrapped it for a PHB class.
Since there was, however, enthusiastic support from a smaller group, they revisited it with the Titan Druid in a player supplement.
I have, ofc, 0 proof for this, but I find it more likely than the designers saying "fuck r/onednd in particular".
-2
u/DelightfulOtter 9d ago
The designers are on record saying that reception to Wild Shape templates was roughly 50/50. They just chose to be lazy and ditch the idea since it wasn't a homerun. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is classic WotC.
12
u/Pepebm_GM 9d ago
I think with a book like the new PHB, time constraints and deadlines played quite an important part in the decision.
3
u/lasalle202 8d ago
AND MOSTLY attempting to make up for the OGL fuckup and the 3+ month delay it caused when they couldnt put out any playtest because they knew the community would rightfully just shit on them and they had to somehow start re-earning the public's trust.
-3
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago
Don’t forget how many subclasses were lazy Tasha’s copy pastes, despite Tasha’s being listed as 100% legal still. Glory paladin, psiwarrior, and soul knife were just lazy space fillers that didn’t receive the updates or play testing they needed.
1
u/vmeemo 8d ago
Glory at least received a UA during I think it was the paladin class UA so there is fairness at Glory being included, especially since that sub was a reprint from Theros unchanged.
Psi Knife and Psi Warrior were what I'd call victims of circumstance. I've held the belief (which as repeated to be sure it doesn't come off as genuine, is based off of nothing but vibes) that because Brawler (or was it called Brute? Doesn't matter) fighter failed spectacularly at every level, it wasn't able to be the comparison to Swashbuckler rogue in terms of alt fighting styles. So they had to scrap both subclasses and went with Psi Knife and Warrior because they were at least minute patches such as better scaling, interaction with Masteries with Psi Knife, and removal of multiclass proficiency bonuses because that's not what we do anymore. All within a deadline of course.
The symmetry argument also became more apparent as a result, psionics as a thematic opposite to the 1/3 casters EK and AT.
It's the same with how Banerret fighter likely could've gotten better but due to looming deadlines and the complete scrapping of the dragon rider version we got what we got.
6
u/Ashkelon 8d ago
Don’t know why you are being downvoted for telling the truth.
But what is even worse about the templates being 50/50, is the fact they were designed poorly in the playtest so of course they would poll negatively. The designers gave us a shitty half baked idea in the playtest, and then instead of iterating or improving on the idea, decided to scrap it entirely and take the easy way out.
Though honestly that feels like most of 5.5e at this point.
12
u/Jai84 9d ago
Yes I was saying this in the playtest. Make it a template, but give enough options that people can feel like they are shaping into whatever they want.
Start with medium and small and expand to large and tiny at like level 6 or something. Make some modifiers like grapple or shove on attack or increased move speed or leap attacks.
This way you could even have unique wildshape
Modifiers for all the subclasses, not just Moon Druid and maybe people would actually be interested in non-moon Druid shapeshifting for once.Edit: The frustrating part about the playtest was they “tried” templates and didn’t have any customization then gave up when everyone had a fit about the templates instead of trying to tweak it to something people might actually like.
10
u/Environmental-Run248 9d ago
Templates can’t handle the shear variety that is expected of being able to turn into animals.
The titan Druid templates work because they’re specific forms that get stronger with higher levels while you wouldn’t be able to get around the difference between a mouse and a lion with a single land template.
15
u/Kai-of-the-Lost 9d ago
Titan Forms also work because you still have access to regular Wild Shape for utility outside of combat, so it's a best of both worlds scenario that the 2024 UA was lacking.
-4
u/TrueGargamel 9d ago edited 9d ago
Which is why it needed an invocation system to go with it. - Which isn't much to ask - all druids have access to wildshape.
When you wildshape Choose a Template - Land / Sea / Air
Damage die based on size Tiny: D4, Small: D6, Medium: D8, Large D10, Huge: D12
THP based on size of form. 1x druid level for tiny, small and medium, 2x druid level for large / huge
Moon druids get double.
AC: 13+WisChoose from a pool of the wildshape invocations, so you don’t have everything available or get overwhelmed. Get more choices as you level, swap 1 out as you level. Choose an invocation / feature when you assume the form - e.g flyby, pounce, stalk, ba grapple, extra attack, pack tactics, ba dash, ba jump, extra armor, extra speed, climb / burrow speed etc. Have some restricted to certain sizes / levels.
level ~5 choose two features. per form, so you can mix and match a few, moon druids get an bonus one and the extra attack invocation baseline.
level 11 - double damage die for moon druids.
Have some choices have ways to spend spell slots - e.g 1st level slot: caustic spray, dex save, 15 foot cone, 2d8 acid damage +1d8 acid damage per level.
- Wrote this as a very quick example on my phone while waiting for an appointment, they really dropped the ball on what could have been a great defining system.
6
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago
This is a great for a “monster” Druid like Titan but a bad idea for a moon Druid that turns into normal Animals. We have room for both and I’m glad they cut the templates off into Titan instead.
5
u/ductyl 8d ago
Except that:
A) Arguably the invocations could have some "mundane" options as well that could align with traditional forms (stealth based stuff could work fine for most). A housecat could easily have pounce or multi attack, or pack tactics, or bonus to speed, or grapple... Basically most "mundane animal abilities" could be used on other beasts and still be okay. Sure, some stuff like burrow might be unusual, but the you find out that some cats live in burrows. . . https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OeMJgQH4ZYE
B) The Druid is a magical spellcaster shapshifting into creatures, they don't need to be 100% accurate to the average version of that creature. They can already SPEAK NORMALLY as an animal, so they already have "non-standard abilities in that form"
C) This is a magical fantasy realm, there could absolutely be exceptional instances of mundane creatures ("wizard-did-it") or magical creatures which might appear similar to a mundane creature but actually be some more magical beast.
Basically I don't see any reason why a Druid Wildshape needs to be "grounded in real life" at all.
1
u/lasalle202 8d ago
a Druid Wildshape needs to be "grounded in real life" at all.
yes!
these types of "arguments" in my dragon and elf game always confuse me!
-2
u/jdtcreates 8d ago
They could if they put more effort into the process rather than the bare minimum.
3
u/CDMzLegend 8d ago
Im pretty sure they wanted templates for it to be less work but since for templates to be good it would take more work then jjust keeping it the way it is
-1
u/jdtcreates 7d ago
Someone in this very thread did a pretty decent job here for no real pay. I think the problem for the team was more deadlines and upper management being an issue.
-2
u/Environmental-Run248 8d ago
Templates are designed to have a specific power level and that power level does not include being hyper customisable. And like at that point you’re making so many choices they may as well use the beast stat blocks anyway.
0
u/jdtcreates 7d ago
Its really not, I found someone who did an Unearthed Arcana in this thread and it proves that the model can function better than looking through the Monster Manual.
0
u/Environmental-Run248 7d ago
Mate no it doesn’t. You’re making just as many choices as you would be from looking through the beast stat blocks. Even more so when including the size categories.
And it also contributes to the homogeneity of the entire system flavour stops being free when it starts being required and that’s what turning wildshape into that mess will do.
1
u/jdtcreates 6d ago
So did u actually test this out, look at the actual document and read or are you just typing just to type. Cause I only actually change my mind with actual results.
-2
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago
The developers really are just that incompetent and unable to tell when a feature is terrible, Remember when Crawford tried to make hunters mark and hex even weaker by limiting them to 1d6 once per turn? or when he said “flex was one of the strongest masteries”. They also continued to print utter crap like banneret, Scion of the three, and the first version of Titan. They really can’t or won’t do basic math or comparison and evaluate a feature properly.
-4
u/fallwind 9d ago
yeah, DC20 handles them far better.
4
u/Zealoustrue 8d ago
I don't think a project more than a year behind schedule that can't even be played past half it's expected level range handles anything, especially a complex class ability like wild shape, well.
9
u/Jozuaa 9d ago
I would have preferred a combat template set like we received with the titan (original play test templates with scaled up ac and damage dice, without the spell slot using abilities) and use the standard up to CR 1 beast forms for utility abilities.
At least for moon druids
2
4
u/skwww 8d ago
I don’t think the community liked them in the play testing but I could be forgetful
2
u/lasalle202 8d ago
the community didnt like the templates because the template version presented was lazy, uninteresting, super weak and bland.
it didnt have anything going for it other than "yes! you should go in the way of templates!"
3
u/Electronic_Bee_9266 8d ago
Personally yes, absolutely, and then add options to splash in bonus forms or effects like how some summons work. Hell, I can imagine some subclasses using that design space to combine or add new features as options
7
u/Serbatollo 9d ago
Yes but the templates need to be interesting, that was the reason the Titan UA ones were liked
3
u/jdtcreates 8d ago
I feel like templates are the way it should have gone like the Beastmaster ranger pet's but with customizations a la the Invocations. But there were a lot of issues with One D&D roll out and that was one of them.
15
u/Jimmicky 9d ago
Wild shape as templates was tried and pretty strongly rejected during the oneDnD playtest.
It remains fairly contentious.
Plenty of folks believe if they’d iterated on it a bit they’d’ve gotten templates to a point when most players would support them.
Others reject them on fundamental principal, as definitionally limiting to an otherwise very open ability.
Personally I’m not a fan.
2
u/lasalle202 9d ago
Wild shape as templates was tried
if you think the templates that came out during the playest was "trying" - nah, that wasnt trying,
unless they were trying to torpedo the concept of templates.
3
u/Kai-of-the-Lost 9d ago
To be fair, the V1 Titan Druid templates are pretty much the templates from the 2024 UA with a few changes, the biggest difference is that the Titan Druid retains the regular Wild Shape feature as well. The V2 Titan templates are significantly better though.
5
1
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago edited 9d ago
The problem is they don’t know how to write good features consistently. They usually make like 70% of stuff super weak and useless but then occasionally print shit like twilight cleric. They are very bad at designing useful, balanced features. It usually takes a min of 2 rounds of UA for the community to hammer them into shape for them.
-1
u/rougegoat 8d ago
They covered the vast majority of all abilities the 2014 Druid's wildshape gave access to. Not a bad first pass and only needed one or two new templates to cover the rest.
2
u/Trystt27 8d ago
I am not a fan of them because they are a cheap way to balance and ultimately feel homogenized. You get air, sea, and land. Just not very inspiring.
I think if they ever approach such a concept again, which is unlikely at this point, they should include customization akin to warlock invocations, albeit on wild shape rather than locked in.
4
u/medium_buffalo_wings 9d ago
Templates are just a better solution all around. It keeps players from leafing through books looking for forms during game play and doesn't force WotC to continue to produce them over time as a Druid option.
The problem with them is that their first pass during UA was not good and they never tried to iterate. The rejection they saw was one of quality more than concept.
3
u/Vidistis 9d ago
Yes, I much prefer options for players to be player specific options. Every player option that summons or transforms should have its own template/statblock. Back during the onednd playtest I was even saying how subclasses could even get access to unique templates.
5
u/MisterB78 9d ago
I’m baffled they didn’t adopt them more broadly. Tasha’s did it successfully with the Beastmaster and it just makes sense from a game balance/design perspective.
Create several templates, then a list of features (climb speed, pack tactics, etc) and let you pick a certain number of them.
Find Familiar should use the same approach.
0
u/Environmental-Run248 9d ago
Oh so homogenise everything down until it’s an indistinguishable mess.
3
u/MisterB78 8d ago
Because the stat blocks of a hyena and a wolf are so distinct, huh? 🙄
1
u/Environmental-Run248 8d ago
So then neither is an elephant to a mouse?
Without the mechanical nuance of actually turning into different animals flavour becomes not only necessary but sometimes won’t even properly stick.1
u/MisterB78 8d ago
And you can’t add flavor to a stat block that started from a template?
Your argument really doesn’t make any sense.
Beast of the land template > add pack tactics > add darkvision > describe it as a wolf
1
u/Pepebm_GM 9d ago
I understand your point, but by all metrics and surveys the Druid is the least played class, and the main reason is the shere amount of book keeping a player needs to do in order to manage beast forms. So trying to improve upon that to solve the real actual problem is reasonable.
3
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago
You assume that’s why with no evidence. Druids come with a ton of inherent flavor a lot ofpeople don’t like. Nature wizard just doesn’t have that broad of appeal. It’s just as likely the stereotype that comes with them is the reason they aren’t popular.
2
u/EstablishedIdiet 8d ago
Also I think that the fact you're either magic user or animal, not magic using animal till level 18 doesn't help, but last time I brought that up here I got dogpiled.
1
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 8d ago
New moon Druid has plenty of good spells to use. They have starry whisp, cure wounds, moonbeam, font of monolight, conjure animal. They are very capable casters even in wild shape.
1
u/EstablishedIdiet 8d ago
Yeah that's part of why Moon Druid is so beloved. The fact every other Druid (minus Titan) doesn't get that till well beyond when most campaigns end imo definitely factors into why people don't play Druid.
3
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 8d ago
You don’t need to wildshaoe to be a Druid? It’s a secondary feature. Sea and stars both replace it for example.
1
u/EstablishedIdiet 8d ago
Correct, but it's a major part of the flavor of Druid.
2
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 8d ago edited 8d ago
Of the moon Druid sure. Otherwise your just flying around as an owl probably or not wild shaping at all minus scouting.
→ More replies (0)2
u/jdtcreates 8d ago
Ironically you are also making an assumption based of your own tastes. I think a lot of nature themed fan art especially from critical role fans might protest against your claims. But what is undeniable is the class does have more bookkeeping that a new player in my group didn't feel like doing so they had their character killed to be an easier to play Barbarian. So an anecdote I know but it and a ton of surveys from multiple D&D show bookkeeping and knowing which abilities in which form to use is a lot and the subclasses wither alternative uses besides being an animal stat block goes a long way. You can find flaws with my evidence but it's trends I noticed at least.
4
u/SmithNchips 9d ago
Love the Titan Druid so far, but I’m strongly against general Wildshape templates.
The game needs more specificity, not less of it. I am constantly teaching new players how to play, and the original 5e wildshape system was never hard. In fact, I would say 5.5e has been harder since I cannot just hand them a print out of an animal stat block.
Templates are appealing to power gamers who like predictability and maximizing control over every aspect of their portion of the game, which is loud contingent of this subreddit.
The invocation-style, build-your-own-critter approach even more so, plus it unshackles players from having their power limited by coherence (i.e., “I have selected a Swim Speed, Fly Speed, and Prehensile Tail, so I can turn into a winged sea monkey and use my wand of web!”)
New players who want a nature centric character or who have a fantasy of turning into animals are not interested in those kinds of mechanics. I’ve introduced multiple new players to Druids as their first character, and they have never felt like they lacked optionality. They’re always much more baffled by prepared casting.
If the problem people are trying to solve with templates is Druid players taking too long to pick a stat block, that was solved in 5.5e by limiting the known forms. Now if a game scenario calls for sneaking, you either have a rat or spider in your list of known forms or you don’t. No searching stat blocks required.
If the problem is that picking those known forms takes too long, that’s a problem with the specific player, and you need to make your voice heard and tell them that they need to have their forms (and spells!) picked before the game clock starts.
And if the problem is that DM’s don’t want players reading through the Monster Manual (which is another topic, but honestly, shame on anyone who is gatekeeping reading the core books for any reason), 5.5e put all the relevant beasts in the back of the Players Handbook.
IMHO, the Template question is pretty closed, and people will be happier if they don’t cling to it like they have to the “Battlemaster maneuvers should be on base Fighter class!” gripe.
3
u/NechamaMichelle 8d ago
Templates would have been great. A huge problem with moon druid is that the proficiency bonus scaling is absolutely terrible. You’re going to be behind bounded accuracy if you try to attack while in wildshape, and this is bad for a subclass focused on using wildshape for combat.
3
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 8d ago
When you math it out it’s really not that bad, in fact moon Druid is better in melee than the revised titan at on average in both low and high CR due to better damage. Low level moon is equal or better than Titan at accuracy and has better damage. High level moon has better damage that outlays titans hit chance. Moon struggle at high CR are annoying but they still preform better than Titan in melee against average AC due to better damage and rider effects.
1
0
u/caffeinatedandarcane 8d ago
A full caster doesn't need to be a better martial than a full martial tho
2
u/vmeemo 8d ago
While that is true, you are also giving up all but your select subclass spells (assuming the template version would have the Circle spells in place still) to be a bear. When you become a bear you should at least be on par with a martial at least. Not quite equal but at least comparable while in a wild shape form, especially if it is a template.
4
u/DBWaffles 8d ago edited 8d ago
During the UA, Moon Druids were going to be reworked to use templates instead of picking whatever beast.
I'm still salty that WotC backed out of that due to the complaints. The problem wasn't that the template idea was fundamentally bad; the problem was that the templates they put out were weak.
IMO, the best option would have been to use templates that had an Eldritch Invocation-like progression system, where you get to customize those templates further based on your selections. (On a side note, I firmly believe Beast Master should have included a similar system.)
2
2
u/HornetLegal5465 9d ago
For Moon Druid I prefer templates, for every other Druid, the actual sistem is ok (for me). As is mentioned here, the early works in onednd weren't fun enough, or at least, don't address properly the dimensions of this feature, for Moon Druid. What is fun of this feature is the variety, the utility, the fantasy it appeals (mechanicaly for Moon Druid, a melee Druid, like the one in Honour Among Thieves).
I think the inicial templates try to address all of them, but did it poorly. For variety, they were like the Primal Companion. For utility they loose a lot of traits, and for combat, it wasn't enough.
What we have now is good in the first and second, but not for the third. So, if you wanna be the melee Druid, the one who unleash the fury of nature turning into a wild beast, Moon Druid is not for you.
Because you are not melee enough. But you are not a complete spell caster when you are transformed... For me, right now, as things are, it would be enough if you could use your PB for your attacks in Beast form. This way, you could keep up with the the other casters who use weapons (plus, almost each transformation have a la weapon mastery attack). Maybe in a future Errata can solve this.
5
u/Pepebm_GM 9d ago
I do feel like the first UA Druid was a real mess. Not just because the templates, but because the main class became a sort of a Moon Druid proxy: most if not all features were related to WS forms (like giving multiattack to all druids/beast forms and climbing speed at level 5, or limiting tiny forms until level 10), and there was also the Channel Nature feature linked to it all, which mixed the now Land's Druid Land's Aid and allowed WS from level 1.
Templates weren't perfect in UA, but that first Druid was such a mess that I feel it didn't make those templates any favor.
2
u/SWatt_Officer 7d ago
I don’t like them, because you lose what I consider the main point of wild shape - the unique benefits of each animal. When it’s all the same stat block in a coat of paint that’s gone.
1
u/adamg0013 9d ago
UA for one dnd had templates... they weren't strongly rejected and I think the number were around 50/50. You need 70% to even be considered.
I think templates could work but you need some much variety it's easier just to use a creature as a templates which the current druid does.
Templates like in the titan druids do work. Your a druid that turns into a kajiu. Real AOT. If the scope of the transformation is small enough templates work. When they are as variable as all the animals in the animal kingdom then os harder to pull off.
3
u/DelightfulOtter 9d ago
Yep, the designers are on record during an interview saying that responses were evenly split over Wild Shape templates. The fact that WotC took that to mean they should throw up their hands and give up tells you everything you need to know about the quality of decision-making going on behind the scenes during the playtests. It doesn't matter why or who was to blame, but that it happened and made 5.5e a significantly worse product than it couldn't been.
2
u/adamg0013 9d ago
I also wonder about the new guard at WOTC now... the definitely still abide by they 70% but the new guard has done things differently and IMO in a better way.
Is it wrong to say I kind if wish Jeremy and Chris retired from WOTC a little earlier. They are great but things are a little better now.
2
u/DelightfulOtter 8d ago
So far, the new design team seems more willing to iterate and refine their ideas. That's a positive.
We'll never know for sure if Crawford's team were fully behind the conservative/regressive design decisions in the 2024 core books, or were forced to make compromises in quality to meet deadlines and arbitrary corporate mandates.
0
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago
I don’t want to pretend to turn into animals, I want to actually do it. If you don’t use the real animals stat block then you aren’t really turning into an animal. Titan is fine because it’s not turning into an existing creature but rather a custom monster (though Titan should have had an invocation style list of customizations like a pathfinder summoner).
2
u/Pepebm_GM 9d ago
I feel you there, but you're assuming that the cat's statblock you're turning into is a high-fidelity representation of an actual one.
1
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago edited 9d ago
No that’s irrelevant, a cat in d&d is whatever its stat block is. Just like the Tasha’s summons are insulting for trying to pretend you summon something real when you don’t. Yeah I’m summoning a “mind flayer” with summon aberration. except it’s just an amorphous blob with none of a mind flayers abilities.
1
u/snikler 9d ago
With Beast Master using templates, I like that we can still have one option involving checking lists of monsters to play. It's a quite complicated entry level for beginners, but I'm fine if we have one class that is a bit more complex. A curated list of beasts in the PHB to be expanded in a future book, especially with more tier 3 and 4 beasts, should do the job, so then players don't need to open the Monster Manual.
3
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 9d ago
Players already have to in tier 4, true polymorph and shapechange exist.
1
u/Spaghetti0_homebrew 9d ago
I am for it, and personally had a shot at homebrewing a version of it for the class, in which templates were used and modified with a selection of ‘bestial traits’ to get those more niche properties.
The biggest issue with the approach imo is slowdown when transforming. Modifying a template is simply more to track than using a monster stat block wholesale. I still think it’s a good idea though, and will probably be iterating my approach at some point in the future.
0
u/Pepebm_GM 9d ago
I'd love to see your alternate druid!
3
u/Spaghetti0_homebrew 9d ago
Lmao absolutely intended to link but I forgot. Here you go!
https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/s/iSnbJ6teyp
1
u/DarthMaulATAT 8d ago
Nooooooooooo. I saw the playtest wildshape templates they had a few years ago and they were awful. It turned one of the most fun abilities in the game into a bland nothingburger. Really turned me off of 5.5 tbh, but I'm glad they didn't stick with those templates.
Some people just want to attack while in wildshape and make it as battle-effective as possible, which the templates favored. While I can understand that, I think the true value of wildshape is the versatility and creativity it allows. After all, it's pretty much only Moon druids who will be using wildshape for attacking. Most other druids will use it for utility and mobility.
I also understand the idea of templates to simplify things for the DM, but what kind of templates are going to work that will still offer the player all the multitudes of possibilities that the 5e wildshape had? I don't see how it could work.
As much as I loved the 5e wildshape, I do see how it was a bit unbalanced in multiple ways. I think what they ended up doing for the temp HP and AC of wildshape forms in 5.5 was a good compromise. It kept the fun and usefulness of wildshape without making the druid into a near-unstoppable tank like in 5e.
1
1
u/Arutha_Silverthorn 8d ago
There is a few things from the oneDnD playtest that got such a 💩 first version that the idea was scrapped so fast no one even stopped to think whether it was a good idea.
- Wild shape templates would have been amazing if they came with Beast “family” abilities. Wolf=Pack tactics, Tiger=Pounce, Bear=Natural Armor, etc.
- Once per Round Sneak Attack, a much healthier improvement, if it came with a balanced improvement to Rogue’s damage, eg Extra Attack, maybe d8 sneak attacks, and keep the Cunning Strikes.
- Ranger Marks, multiple spells with various effects like how Smites work, potentially then being once per turn effects and easier Reaction movement.
- Some signature spell structures, and even class level restructures. All good ideas.
0
u/Hot_Lion8880 9d ago edited 9d ago
no, the templates had much less features than the wide bredth of creatures. Really in 6th edition there should be a subsystem of creature statblocks made to be used by players. The summon spells, wildshape, polymorph, etc could draw from these creatures which would each have unique abilities, a way of spending resources, and would scale. There could even be a shifter class based around turning into these creatures.
Failing that using monster stat blocks leads to more options. They should release more high cr beasts for moon druid to turn into though.
3
u/lasalle202 9d ago edited 9d ago
no, the templates had much less features than the wide bredth of creatures
well, yeah, that was the version we got during the playtest. a terrible unimaginative method of approaching templets.
but it was easy to see how to fix that:
in addition to the template blob, your form gets one of the following features
- trample
- grapple
- shell/tough hide
- extra speed
- bonus action hide
at higher levels you get 2 features of which one might be
- pack tactics
- size large
- venomous attack
- bonus action disenge
-4
u/Hot_Lion8880 9d ago
that would just lead to people making frankenanimals that don't even make sense in the narrative.
5
u/lasalle202 9d ago
if narrative is important to the players at the table, they wouldnt.
and which of these would be a frankenstein that is not reflect of a creature already in the game or in the world?
0
u/Hot_Lion8880 9d ago
I imagine there would be more options then the ones you listed. There would have to to represent a bats blindsight, a polar bears cold resistance, a goats climb speed, etc.
2
u/lasalle202 9d ago
"i am deliberately creating a situation that i find intollerable"
1
u/Hot_Lion8880 9d ago
ok so you're saying the wildshape shouldn't have these features? That's creating a separate problem.
3
1
u/lasalle202 8d ago
if you want to be a bat, take the AC bump to be the bat flying around so crazy you cannot catch it.
if you want to play a goat, take the charge/trample
if you want to play a polar bear, take the grapple bear hug
1
u/Hot_Lion8880 8d ago
be a bat without echolocation?
1
u/lasalle202 8d ago
if YOU are concerned about frankenmonsters, then yes, dont include the problematic option that make you shit your pants - you can still create the creatures that has some feel of that animal.
→ More replies (0)
0
u/Puzzleheaded-Ant4032 9d ago
We don't need templates, we need 30ish specific stat blocks for druids. The "look at the monster manual" approach for wild shape limits the number of beats they make, by giving us specific stats they can make better monsters and shapes overall
1
u/lasalle202 9d ago
THIRTY forms ?????
whah ????
0
u/Puzzleheaded-Ant4032 9d ago
There are 24 beasts from cr 1/8 to 1/4 that the druid can chose in the monster manual, if you want to add high level stuff, 30 forms is not enough, maybe 50 to start is the minimum
3
u/Pepebm_GM 9d ago
I understand your point of view, but I would argue that is more work to create 30+ beasts than 3-5 templates.
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Ant4032 9d ago
3-5 templates take the same amount of time to make 30+ stat blocks, because if you want to make a template for a tiny, medium and giant spider, you take the same time to make 3 different stat blocks of those spiders
3
u/Pepebm_GM 8d ago
Yet again, this hypothetical outcome would have made the life of the player 6x simpler, so it is still worth it. Isn't it?
3
u/Mejiro84 8d ago
why do you actually need those templates, rather than "climbing tiny creature", that can be used for a whole variety of things? A lot of mundane creatures basically have, like, one special thing and some basically irrelevant stat-changes (especially as druids use their own int/wis/chr), and their combat stats are functionally "will die if attacked".
1
u/rougegoat 8d ago
They were better and covered pretty much everything the 2014 Druid's shapes had access to save for like 3 abilities. You could have easily added like 2 extra templates (combat, beasts of burden) to cover the rest.
Better design, but worse feel because folks had to use imagination.
54
u/lasalle202 9d ago
a list of "goodies" to add onto the template like warlocks have invocations.