Why Can't you Wild Shape III into a Huge Wolf?


Advice


Title pretty much says it all.

I am aware that you have to take the shape of a bestiary statted out animal, but my question is why.

The normal statted out Wolf gives you the abilites a large one would have (bite 1d6 medium plus trip, scent, and low-light vision, 50 feet of movement) and you can also pick the large one, Dire Wolf, and get stuff as well. Why not just scale natural attacks one more (2d6 from 1d8) and give the abilities of a wolf?

Note this applies to more animals, just using wolf as an example.

Is there a specific reason we can't just get the size animal we want (using Beast Shape) and getting the size modifierds, then checking the base statted out creature for the allowed abilities/base natural attacks to scale with size? Is there like a really broken combo somewhere I'm overlooking? It just seems silly that, keeping this example, a Wolf themed Druid has to either stop at Large or switch themes once they unlock Beast Shape 3.

Idk if Advice was the best place to post this (I dont post that often '_>') thanks though!

-Edit-

Conversely, why can't someome do that in reverse? Like playing a small T-Rex.. I know the Eagle Shaman or whatever its called got the specific errata to be able to play a Young Roc.

Do you think it would destroy game balance in any sense to just allow them to choose a size and animal in a homebrew game? If so, why?


- Because there aren't huge wolves to turn into.
- Because then you could turn into a fine-sized wolf, and things get silly.
- Because it provides consistent rules for balance reasons.
- Because it puts limitations on a powerful ability.

You can do what you want in home games, and it's unlikely that it would break things too much to give a Druid a single preferred form for this, provided that form is reasonable. A huge-sized raptor is probably broken.

If you allow it universally, then you get extra bookkeeping as the Druid uses "tiny-sized tiger" instead of "cat".


QuidEst wrote:

- Because there aren't huge wolves to turn into.

- Because then you could turn into a fine-sized wolf, and things get silly.
- Because it provides consistent rules for balance reasons.

- But they can exist. Granted, through templates, which I'm not suggesting people can use. But they do exist.

- Is there honestly a problem with being a Tiny wolf? There are many tiny creatures to turn into, and most of them would be statisitcally better than wolves.

- I'm still hard pressed to find a single example where this would cause a balance issue. They can already assume the form of creatures the same size, usually with more abilites.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

In a home game, I allow Wild Shape to choose any animal that actually exists in world. So if there are Huge wolves running around, you could be one. But, if they don't exist, you can't.


ryric wrote:
In a home game, I allow Wild Shape to choose any animal that actually exists in world. So if there are Huge wolves running around, you could be one. But, if they don't exist, you can't.

I agree that this is a good houserule fix, but I guess I just don't see why that isn't how it works anyways. Just pick a size allowed, gain the size bonuses, pick an animal, gain the animals attacks and abilities allowed by the shapechange.

I know it sounds like babyraging over it, but I just want insight as to why it's not the way it works.


Gabuman wrote:
QuidEst wrote:

- Because there aren't huge wolves to turn into.

- Because then you could turn into a fine-sized wolf, and things get silly.
- Because it provides consistent rules for balance reasons.

- But they can exist. Granted, through templates, which I'm not suggesting people can use. But they do exist.

- Is there honestly a problem with being a Tiny wolf? There are many tiny creatures to turn into, and most of them would be statisitcally better than wolves.

- I'm still hard pressed to find a single example where this would cause a balance issue. They can already assume the form of creatures the same size, usually with more abilites.

- The rules support statting them up, sure, but that's not the same as huge-sized wolves existing in the game's world.

- Mechanically, no. Fluff-wise, sure, I don't want the Druid picking a fine-sized cheetah scouting form because it's a bit better than a real animal- that breaks immersion for the whole table in most games that aren't intentionally silly.

- Better move speeds on really small animals, scaling up a few creatures with lots of natural attacks up (raptor, octopus, etc.)

I'm not saying it shouldn't be allowed in a home game, but it'd be bad to have as the default way the system works.

Scarab Sages

Gabuman wrote:
ryric wrote:
In a home game, I allow Wild Shape to choose any animal that actually exists in world. So if there are Huge wolves running around, you could be one. But, if they don't exist, you can't.

I agree that this is a good houserule fix, but I guess I just don't see why that isn't how it works anyways. Just pick a size allowed, gain the size bonuses, pick an animal, gain the animals attacks and abilities allowed by the shapechange.

I know it sounds like babyraging over it, but I just want insight as to why it's not the way it works.

I'd imagine because it is so easily abused. Size makes a lot of difference for things like abilities, number of attacks and attack types. I'm certain I could add or subtract size from available animals and create unintended encounter destroyers. So it is understandable for the rules to be written in an attempt to prevent that very thing.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Yeah, while a wolf might not be a problem, there is almost certainly something that would be if it could be any size you want. We already have an issue with animal companions and wild shape overly favoring things like big cats. I don't think we need to make the system easier to break by default.


QuidEst wrote:


- The rules support statting them up, sure, but that's not the same as huge-sized wolves existing in the game's world.
- Mechanically, no. Fluff-wise, sure, I don't want the Druid picking a fine-sized cheetah scouting form because it's a bit better than a real animal- that breaks immersion for the whole table in most games that aren't intentionally silly.

- Better move speeds on really small animals, scaling up a few creatures with lots of natural attacks up (raptor, octopus, etc.)

I'm not saying it shouldn't be allowed in a home game, but it'd be bad to have as the default way the system works.

- This point is pretty much done xD we agree it can be statted, but we disagree on whether or not we should be able to take its form.

- I see what you are saying, but how much better is a Cheetah than something else? It still only has a run speed of 50. You could sprint once per hour and I found a few tiny animals with 40 ft move pretty easily (I am at work so I cant thoroughly look atm)

- It is worth noting that the speed on every animal I've checked between base and Dire forms don't actually get speed ups (havent checked fliers though) and the large template doesn't change speed either so even if someome tried to argue that route, it wouldn't make a speed difference. As for natural attacks, I see what you are saying, but by the time you get beast shape 3, getting 5 attacks isn't AS busted as right at level 4 with the raptor...I realize that is a weak point, but a raptor/octopus wouldn't be the end all combat fighter if Huge.

Lorewalker wrote:
I'd imagine because it is so easily abused. Size makes a lot of difference for things like abilities, number of attacks and attack types. I'm certain I could add or subtract size from available animals and create unintended encounter destroyers. So it is understandable for the rules to be written in an attempt to prevent that very thing.

What abilties get altered by size that are allowed by Beast Shape 3? Number of attacks is static based off number of natural weapons. Again, I know a large raptor would still get 5. I just can't think of a different sized animal that would wreck an encounter of proper level.

Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, while a wolf might not be a problem, there is almost certainly something that would be if it could be any size you want. We already have an issue with animal companions and wild shape overly favoring things like big cats. I don't think we need to make the system easier to break by default.

Favoring big cats makes it sound like it's inherently flawed, ya know?


If players don't find any hypothetical broken combos that may or may not exist, if giant raptors and tiny tigers are balanced for your games, and if the results don't hurt immersion for the other players, then there's really no issue with the GM house-ruling it. Those things are not going to all be broadly true, and the Druid certainly doesn't need extra power/flexibility, so that's a big part of why the rules are the way they are.

Scarab Sages

Gabuman wrote:
What abilties get altered by size that are allowed by Beast Shape 3? Number of attacks is static based off number of natural weapons. Again, I know a large raptor would still get 5. I just can't think of a different sized animal that would wreck an encounter of proper level.

I don't mean to say that size directly modifies number of attacks. I mean that number of attacks are factored with size(amount of damage per attack) when the creature is created by a developer. This also goes with abilities such as grab and trip, as CMB is increased with size and also they are limited in what size categories they work on based on the creature size. Pounce only gets better the harder a creature hits, so take a normally weak creature with a bunch of attacks and pounce then use an optimized PCs strength and BAB... suddenly you're a monster.

The deinonychus huge form has four attacks and pounce. It is normally medium. Make it huge and you get... pounce, 60 foot movement, scent, low-light vision +6 strength, -4 dex, +6 natural armor, 2x talons 3d6 + str, bite 2d6 + str, forclaws -5 to hit 1d8 + str and each attack has 10 foot reach. This is before feats and picked up at 8th level, -2 AC, +2 CMB/CMD.

The dire tiger huge form has 3 attacks(or 5), grab and pounce. It gets low-light vision, scent, pounce 40 ft movement +6 strength, -4 dex, +6 natural armor, 2x claws 2d6 + str, bite 3d6 + str all attacks have grab and 10 ft reach. On a pounce or during a grapple they get an additional 2x claws 2d6 + str and can grab up to huge creatures, -2 AC, +2 CMB/CMD(+6 CMB on a grapple).

At 8th level some characters only get one attack and with medium sized weapons, most max at two, and those with three don't typically hit that hard. And many huge animals are less powerful. The allosaurus, basically a huge cat stat-wise, is one of the best animals at the size naturally and even it is less powerful than becoming a huge version of a large cat.

Lets not get started on the madness of allowing a giant octopus form to increase to huge... or the interactions of the poison ability with Polymorph effects and the nasty poisons on large or smaller creatures suddenly huge...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are many examples of how it could get unbalancing listed above. You just have to do things "within reason" when you want to bend the rules so you don't break the game. Here is an example of bending the rules in a way that makes reasonable sense from an older thread I posted in...

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2tq0g?Why-cant-druids-wild-shape-into-polar-bea rs#35:

People get bent around the rules and freak out about things, that are restricted by the RAW, that really don't hurt the balance in any way...
Wild Shape says you can become any animal you are familiar with. Lets go with the Constrictor Snake... it basically represents your average python. What about the Anaconda? Would the GM use the advanced versions for higher level characters? That makes them real in the game does it not? The Constrictor Snake can be enlarged to a Large or Huge creature resembling an Anaconda. How does this break the balance of the game when a character could also turn into an Allosaurus(Huge)that gains Pounce, Grab and Rake!?

On the other hand, people talk of the Huge Tiger thing...
Realistically, there has NEVER been an Elephant sized(Huge) tiger... the great thing about this game is that they can exist if a GM wants a species of elephant sized tigers! Or any other animal the GM wants to exist in HIS world.

Player: "Hey GM, in this game are there Large and Huge Anacondas? Im playing a Serpent Shaman and there is nothing left that fits my specific abilities and theme beyond the Emperor Cobra?"

GM: "Of course there are. You guys will be in swamps most of the campaign."

Player: "So could I Wild Shape into those creatures when Im able to, if Im familiar with them, even though they aren't in the bestiary?"

Gm: "That rule is stupid. There is an exception for the Eagle Shaman turning into a freakin Roc so Im OK with that."

Player: :D

....problem solved. When it comes down to it, the game is about having fun people. Bend the rules to your will, drive them before you and hear the lamentations of their women!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Mainly, because Huge wolves don't exist and wild shape isn't a size-changing power.

If you want druids to be able to wildshape into Huge wolf-like creatures, stat up a Huge, wolf-like creature. Done.


Thanks for the input everyone. I have been shown some fringe power-game scenarios where it can be unbalanced, which explains the weird rule. I, still, think it is a silly stipulation on the rules (and our DM has already said how he would bend that rule as well - similar to what the Tyrant Lizard King said too.)

Still, thank you all for the insight on this matter :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Polar bears used to be an illegal beast shape form since they were simply grizzly bears with the advanced template applied to them.

Then it suddenly became a legal option when they released complete stats for the polar bear in the Bestiary V. However, upon close examination, the new polar bear statblock is basically just the normal grizzly bear stats with the advanced template applied to it!

So you couldn't turn into a polar bear before, but now you can, because...reasons...

*rolls eyes*

EDIT
For reference: Bestiary polar bear versus Bestiary V polar bear


Gabuman wrote:
ryric wrote:
In a home game, I allow Wild Shape to choose any animal that actually exists in world. So if there are Huge wolves running around, you could be one. But, if they don't exist, you can't.

I agree that this is a good houserule fix, but I guess I just don't see why that isn't how it works anyways. Just pick a size allowed, gain the size bonuses, pick an animal, gain the animals attacks and abilities allowed by the shapechange.

I know it sounds like babyraging over it, but I just want insight as to why it's not the way it works.

It's called rules of the game. That's all the insight that you need. It's not a science course, not a simulation, it's a game that permits you to do certain things, and forbids all others. Because that's how you structure a game. And one of those rules is that you can't use templates with the spell.. save for specific exceptions created to stop the tears of Eagle Shaman Druids.

Scarab Sages

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gabuman wrote:
ryric wrote:
In a home game, I allow Wild Shape to choose any animal that actually exists in world. So if there are Huge wolves running around, you could be one. But, if they don't exist, you can't.

I agree that this is a good houserule fix, but I guess I just don't see why that isn't how it works anyways. Just pick a size allowed, gain the size bonuses, pick an animal, gain the animals attacks and abilities allowed by the shapechange.

I know it sounds like babyraging over it, but I just want insight as to why it's not the way it works.

It's called rules of the game. That's all the insight that you need. It's not a science course, not a simulation, it's a game that permits you to do certain things, and forbids all others. Because that's how you structure a game. And one of those rules is that you can't use templates with the spell.. save for specific exceptions created to stop the tears of Eagle Shaman Druids.

I mean... is this helpful? Why would you put down someone's want to understand why a limitation was baked into an ability? Because I'll tell you this... the developer surely spent time thinking about why to do so... why shouldn't a player or GM?

If you want to go further than playing pure RAW of the game then you need to do more than read words on a page. When you start questioning why is when you start to see just how flexible the game is and where it can be improved and where it already works even if it seems odd. Then you can create your own rules and options that fit inside of the game instead of breaking the game.

I will point out that this is the advice forums(maybe you did not notice.. I know that I don't always look at the tag before writing to my embarrassment).


Lorewalker wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Gabuman wrote:
ryric wrote:
In a home game, I allow Wild Shape to choose any animal that actually exists in world. So if there are Huge wolves running around, you could be one. But, if they don't exist, you can't.

I agree that this is a good houserule fix, but I guess I just don't see why that isn't how it works anyways. Just pick a size allowed, gain the size bonuses, pick an animal, gain the animals attacks and abilities allowed by the shapechange.

I know it sounds like babyraging over it, but I just want insight as to why it's not the way it works.

It's called rules of the game. That's all the insight that you need. It's not a science course, not a simulation, it's a game that permits you to do certain things, and forbids all others. Because that's how you structure a game. And one of those rules is that you can't use templates with the spell.. save for specific exceptions created to stop the tears of Eagle Shaman Druids.

I mean... is this helpful? Why would you put down someone's want to understand why a limitation was baked into an ability? Because I'll tell you this... the developer surely spent time thinking about why to do so... why shouldn't a player or GM?

If you want to go further than playing pure RAW of the game then you need to do more than read words on a page. When you start questioning why is when you start to see just how flexible the game is and where it can be improved and where it already works even if it seems odd. Then you can create your own rules and options that fit inside of the game instead of breaking the game.

I will point out that this is the advice forums(maybe you did not notice.. I know that I don't always look at the tag before writing to my embarrassment).

Because opening the ability to one template, opens it to others, you'll get questions such as Why can't I shapeshift into a huge vampiric werewolf? Mad alchemist Fred has a herd of them so they exist!

Scarab Sages

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Because opening the ability to one template, opens it to others, you'll get questions such as Why can't I shapeshift into a huge vampiric werewolf? Mad alchemist Fred has a herd of them so they exist!

Well... how do you know that is a bad thing if you never questioned why the rule existed in the first place? Which places you in the same seat you were denigrating just a post ago. I fear perhaps you are playing a game of Chicken Little at the expense of the OP.


In game design terms, a mid-level druid already has dozens of wild shape options available at any time. Allowing size-altered creatures would create hundreds more options, all of which require extra work to recalculate stats that are modified by the size change. The rule probably exists for the sake of sanity and simplicity.

Still, a good GM might allow a specific variant if it makes sense and isn't unbalancing.


Well, if you can find a huge creature to wild shape into that, mechanically, is similar enough to what a huge sized wolf could do (bite attack, improved trip, scent), fluff it to be a huge wolf, if DM allows.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Because opening the ability to one template, opens it to others, you'll get questions such as Why can't I shapeshift into a huge vampiric werewolf? Mad alchemist Fred has a herd of them so they exist!

Just wanna make you aware of something I had said earlier in the post

Gabuman wrote:
But they can exist. Granted, through templates, which I'm not suggesting people can use. But they do exist.

I know that adding templates would be bad for extremely obvious reasons. I put that in the beginning to stop people from thinking that this was just some babyrage about wanting to beast shape into some crazy fey creature half dragon raptor.

Clearly, you didn't even read my question to completion. I asked why you couldn't choose a size allowed through your beast shape spell (at 3 it would be diminutive - huge), choose an animal, and then gain the appropriate natural attacks / special abilities. Nothing about templates.

Also, thanks Lorewalker for the input earlier.

Matthew Downie wrote:

In game design terms, a mid-level druid already has dozens of wild shape options available at any time. Allowing size-altered creatures would create hundreds more options, all of which require extra work to recalculate stats that are modified by the size change. The rule probably exists for the sake of sanity and simplicity.

Still, a good GM might allow a specific variant if it makes sense and isn't unbalancing.

I can see that as being problematic too. That being said, it could be a stipulation that the player would have to be able to quickly identify the abilities provided (making them have to do their homework to be prepared)

KahnyaGnorc wrote:
Well, if you can find a huge creature to wild shape into that, mechanically, is similar enough to what a huge sized wolf could do (bite attack, improved trip, scent), fluff it to be a huge wolf, if DM allows.

Yeah this is always a quick and easy fix. I was just hoping there was a reasoning as to why we had to resort to the reflavor. Some people have already given enough insight to explain why. Even though I don't totally agree with the rule as is, I understand the reason it needs limitations for the RAW.

*edited to fix beast shape 3 size range*

Sovereign Court

That rule is the way it is for (I think) two reasons;

1) Druids don't just wildshape into any form they can imagine, they change into natural creatures that they're familiar with. So the form has to already exist. In a campaign with no dinosaurs, druids shouldn't be able to wild shape into them either.

So what about when the bestiary says "to make X, take Y and add this template" - that would be a good one for asking the GM.

2) There's usually more to designing a monster than taking a chassis and adjusting its size up and down with templates. Special abilities get added, the number of natural weapons changes and so forth. So while a template is a quick and dirty way for the GM to generate some variant monsters, it's maybe a bit too coarse-grained method to use for player characters.

After all, it isn't nearly as important that all the dinosaurs are perfectly balanced with each other, than that the PCs are still playing in the same ballpark. If you could take any creature, AND that creature adjusted up or down in size 1-3 steps, you can probably find some "perfect" creatures that vastly outperform most published monsters and get all the other players talking about how druids are total OP BS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since stats are entirely based on the stats granted by Wild Shape, I see no problem with a huge wolf form (or any other). After all your animal companion could be a huge wolf with little effort.

The only "statting up" for the creature you would need to do is to find the damage of the bite attack, which is not an abnormal thing to need to figure out.

In short, I'd allow it.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why Can't you Wild Shape III into a Huge Wolf? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.