Wild Shape Build - question on Wilding (Complete Warrior)

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I'm in the middle of a Wild Shape Build thought experiment, and came across
the following dilemma:

So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability... consider a
character that's initially: Druid 5 / Ranger 1. He takes a level
of Warshaper. Then he dies and is 'Raised, losing a level. From
a previous Sage Advice, he supposedly loses his highest level, which
is his fifth level of Druid. What happens?

(a) he still qualifies for Warshaper, since his Wilding abillity (from
his Warshaper class) gives him effectively the Wild Shape ability
of a 5th level Druid.

(b) he no longer qualifies for Warshaper, so all of the abilities he
gains from that class, other than hit points and weapon proficiencies
(and maybe skill points -- I can't remember) go dormant..

(c) that Sage Ruling was stupid; you should lose the last class level
you gained, preventing all of this messiness.

(d) losing levels is stupid; just make the Negative Level permanent until
bought off (and don't allow gaining of levels until it is).


I'm leaning toward (a), and maybe (d), but I'd like to know what the
rest of the newsgroup thinks...

Donald
13 answers Last reply
More about wild shape build question wilding complete warrior
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Donald Tsang wrote:
    > I'm in the middle of a Wild Shape Build thought experiment, and came
    > across the following dilemma:
    >
    > So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability... consider a
    > character that's initially: Druid 5 / Ranger 1. He takes a level
    > of Warshaper. Then he dies and is 'Raised, losing a level. From
    > a previous Sage Advice, he supposedly loses his highest level, which
    > is his fifth level of Druid. What happens? ...
    >
    > (c) that Sage Ruling was stupid; you should lose the last class level
    > you gained, preventing all of this messiness.

    IIRC, this was the consensus the last time this topic came up. Also, the
    ruling may not be relevant anymore anyway; IIRC, it was pre-3.5.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    >> Donald Tsang wrote:
    So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability...

    Slightly off topic...but are you sure? I know the Nature's warrior
    does, but I don't think that the Warshaper has Wilding.
    (:< shame...my Druid 20/Warshaper 4 would love it.

    Rich
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Bradd W. Szonye <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote:
    >Donald Tsang wrote:
    >> So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability... consider a
    >> character that's initially: Druid 5 / Ranger 1. He takes a level
    >> of Warshaper. Then he dies and is 'Raised, losing a level. From
    >> a previous Sage Advice, he supposedly loses his highest level, which
    >> is his fifth level of Druid. What happens? ...
    >>
    >> (c) that Sage Ruling was stupid; you should lose the last class level
    >> you gained, preventing all of this messiness.
    >
    >IIRC, this was the consensus the last time this topic came up. Also, the
    >ruling may not be relevant anymore anyway; IIRC, it was pre-3.5.

    The last time this topic came up was post-3.5, and we noted that at the
    time. But I don't think it was exactly _consensus_.

    Anyway, I'm hoping that people will answer (a) or (b), given the
    assumption that one is still using that ruling, and then optionally
    choose (c) or (d) as a side-option.

    What would you rule, given only (a) and (b) as options?

    Donald
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Donald Tsang <tsang@soda.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote:
    > Bradd W. Szonye <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote:
    >>Donald Tsang wrote:
    >>> So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability... consider a
    >>> character that's initially: Druid 5 / Ranger 1. He takes a level
    >>> of Warshaper. Then he dies and is 'Raised, losing a level. From
    >>> a previous Sage Advice, he supposedly loses his highest level, which
    >>> is his fifth level of Druid. What happens? ...
    >>>
    >>> (c) that Sage Ruling was stupid; you should lose the last class level
    >>> you gained, preventing all of this messiness.
    >>
    >>IIRC, this was the consensus the last time this topic came up. Also, the
    >>ruling may not be relevant anymore anyway; IIRC, it was pre-3.5.
    >
    > The last time this topic came up was post-3.5, and we noted that at the
    > time. But I don't think it was exactly _consensus_.
    >
    > Anyway, I'm hoping that people will answer (a) or (b), given the
    > assumption that one is still using that ruling, and then optionally
    > choose (c) or (d) as a side-option.
    >
    > What would you rule, given only (a) and (b) as options?

    I wouldn't do either. The 'easiest, most obvious' thing to do here is
    remove the last-gained level, in all particulars. That is, (c).

    > (a) he still qualifies for Warshaper, since his Wilding abillity (from
    > his Warshaper class) gives him effectively the Wild Shape ability
    > of a 5th level Druid.

    This allows you to qualify for something you (currently) lack prereqs
    for. In this case, it means that you could conceivably level, take the
    PrC, lose your 'highest class level' (no longer qualify), then level
    *differently*. It might be in Warshaper, it might be in another class
    entirely.

    Adding a rule to disallow this means you're adding special cases to the
    rules ("you can have levels in a prestige class you aren't qualified for
    in this presumably odd situation"). Adding special cases to rules is
    rarely a good thing.

    > (b) he no longer qualifies for Warshaper, so all of the abilities he
    > gains from that class, other than hit points and weapon
    > proficiencies (and maybe skill points -- I can't remember) go
    > dormant..

    *Possibly*, but which parts are considered class abilities? Again, you
    could conceivably pursue a different class (possibly qualifying for
    Warshaper again another way). Also again, you're introducing special
    case behavior. Finally, remembering what applies and what doesn't is a
    pain in the ass.

    > (c) that Sage Ruling was stupid; you should lose the last class level
    > you gained, preventing all of this messiness.

    This is the simplest overall, if you noted the changes made on leveling
    (how many hit points, where skill points when, what feats, spells
    learned, etc.) It means that you continue to have a legal and
    conforming character (the other two cases don't).

    This is probably the best solution, all things considered.

    > (d) losing levels is stupid; just make the Negative Level permanent
    > until bought off (and don't allow gaining of levels until it is).

    'Bought off' presumably by spending experience to regain a level? I'd
    be willing to consider this one. You're still penalized by the drain.
    It's slightly easier to recover from, in that you're still a little
    better off than if you'd actually lost the level, but also harder to
    recover from because you're still the higher level and gain less
    experience per encounter. The two feel about the same magnitude (says
    the sleepy hacker), or close enough to not much matter.

    This case is simpler if you don't have the leveling information. It
    still provides a legal, conforming character.


    I'd definitely go for (c), I'd consider (d) if I thought it made things
    simpler. I wouldn't go for (a) or (b).


    Keith
    --
    Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
    keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
    keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
    http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Brief summary: A PC loses a prestige class requirement, but the prestige
    class itself can fulfill the requirement. Does he lose the class or not?

    Donald Tsang wrote:
    > What would you rule, given only [those two] options?

    First, double-check whether you can actually lose prestige class
    benefits. That was the rule in D&D 3.0, but IIRC they changed the rule
    in D&D 3.5. Or they accidentally omitted it.

    If so, I would not permit the "bootstrapping" option. A prestige class
    or feat cannot supply its own prerequisites.

    That said, this situation wouldn't come up in my game in the first
    place, because I always roll back the /last/ level, not the /highest/
    level, when a character loses a level.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    eyebyte <rbrouwer@rogers.com> wrote:
    >>> Donald Tsang wrote:
    >So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability...
    >
    >Slightly off topic...but are you sure? I know the Nature's warrior
    >does, but I don't think that the Warshaper has Wilding.
    >(:< shame...my Druid 20/Warshaper 4 would love it.

    I didn't have my CW with me at work today. You could be right. In
    fact, you're certainly right, since Warshaper doesn't even require
    the Wild Shape class ability.

    This is (slightly) even more interesting: a single-classed Druid
    has to make 6th level to qualify for Nature's Warrior (due to BAB
    requirements), but once he takes it, could theoretically drop to
    4th level in Druid and still qualify, since NW is a full-BAB class.

    Anyway, if the "bootstrapping" works, one could theoretically drop
    the character's Druid level to 3 (by having two levels of Nature's
    Warrior, though it's not clear from memory whether a second level
    of NW is better than a fourth level of Druid anyway), take five
    levels of Warshaper, and then go for a full ten levels of Master
    of Many Forms. You end up with a BAB of only +14, but with an
    insanely-powerful Wild Shape ability, who cares? You'll most likely
    be using natural weapons, which don't gain iterative attacks anyway...

    Donald
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Donald Tsang wrote:
    > I'm in the middle of a Wild Shape Build thought experiment, and came across
    > the following dilemma:
    >
    > So the Warshaper (from CW) has this Wilding ability... consider a
    > character that's initially: Druid 5 / Ranger 1. He takes a level
    > of Warshaper. Then he dies and is 'Raised, losing a level. From
    > a previous Sage Advice, he supposedly loses his highest level, which
    > is his fifth level of Druid. What happens?
    >
    > (a) he still qualifies for Warshaper, since his Wilding abillity (from
    > his Warshaper class) gives him effectively the Wild Shape ability
    > of a 5th level Druid.
    >
    > (b) he no longer qualifies for Warshaper, so all of the abilities he
    > gains from that class, other than hit points and weapon proficiencies
    > (and maybe skill points -- I can't remember) go dormant..
    >
    > (c) that Sage Ruling was stupid; you should lose the last class level
    > you gained, preventing all of this messiness.
    >
    > (d) losing levels is stupid; just make the Negative Level permanent until
    > bought off (and don't allow gaining of levels until it is).
    >
    >
    > I'm leaning toward (a), and maybe (d), but I'd like to know what the
    > rest of the newsgroup thinks...
    >
    > Donald

    My casual perusal of both 3.0 & 3.5 FAQ as well as the 3.5 core books didn't
    turn up anything other than he loses his highest level, which as you
    point out
    is druid. The outcome of this is result B: he keeps HD & profs. but
    gets no
    other benefits of the prestige class until the lost druid level is
    regained (or
    another level in a different qualifying class is gained, assuming you can
    find one somewhere).

    Prestige classes, like feats, have prerequisites. If you no longer meet the
    prerequisites, you don't get the special abilities.
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Some Guy wrote:
    > My casual perusal of both 3.0 & 3.5 FAQ as well as the 3.5 core books
    > didn't turn up anything other than he loses his highest level, which
    > as you point out is druid.

    That ruling was questionable at best, and entirely unnecessary if you
    take the trivial step of keeping track of your class progression.

    > The outcome of this is result B: he keeps HD & profs. but gets no
    > other benefits of the prestige class until the lost druid level is
    > regained ....

    There is no such rule for prestige classes. RTFM, and read the thread,
    which has already covered this.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
    > Some Guy wrote:
    >
    >>My casual perusal of both 3.0 & 3.5 FAQ as well as the 3.5 core books
    >>didn't turn up anything other than he loses his highest level, which
    >>as you point out is druid.
    >
    >
    > That ruling was questionable at best, and entirely unnecessary if you
    > take the trivial step of keeping track of your class progression.
    >

    Since it's not been specifically replaced by a different ruling, it
    still applies.

    >
    >>The outcome of this is result B: he keeps HD & profs. but gets no
    >>other benefits of the prestige class until the lost druid level is
    >>regained ....
    >
    >
    > There is no such rule for prestige classes. RTFM, and read the thread,
    > which has already covered this.

    If you don't meet the prereqs for a class, you can't take it. This is
    exactly the
    same thing that happens if you have a feat which requires prerequisites that
    you lose via level loss. You don't lose the feat, but you can't use it
    until you
    re-qualify.

    I do remember reading something about this, but since I don't remember where
    I'll have to dig around until I find the cite.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Some Guy <someguy@thedoor.gov> wrote:
    >>> My casual perusal of both 3.0 & 3.5 FAQ as well as the 3.5 core
    >>> books didn't turn up anything other than he loses his highest level,
    >>> which as you point out is druid.

    Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
    >> That ruling was questionable at best, and entirely unnecessary if you
    >> take the trivial step of keeping track of your class progression.

    > Since it's not been specifically replaced by a different ruling, it
    > still applies.

    It has been replaced by an entirely new /rule/, which I have already
    cited. And it was questionable even when it was still relevant.

    >>> The outcome of this is result B: he keeps HD & profs. but gets no
    >>> other benefits of the prestige class until the lost druid level is
    >>> regained ....

    >> There is no such rule for prestige classes. RTFM, and read the
    >> thread, which has already covered this.

    > If you don't meet the prereqs for a class, you can't take it. This is
    > exactly the same thing that happens if you have a feat which requires
    > prerequisites that you lose via level loss.

    No, it isn't, because feats have a rule that makes them temporarily
    useless in that situation, and prestige classes don't.

    > You don't lose the feat, but you can't use it until you re-qualify.

    Correct, but that is irrelevant to prestige classes.

    By the way, which aspects of the prestige class become useless, in your
    estimation? Should you lose supernatural class features? BAB and BSB? If
    you say no, then please cite the rule that lets you keep those stats but
    not other class features. If you say yes, then justify why it's
    reasonable, especially since it didn't work that way in D&D 3.0.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
    > Some Guy <someguy@thedoor.gov> wrote:
    >
    >>>>My casual perusal of both 3.0 & 3.5 FAQ as well as the 3.5 core
    >>>>books didn't turn up anything other than he loses his highest level,
    >>>>which as you point out is druid.
    >
    >
    > Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
    >
    >>>That ruling was questionable at best, and entirely unnecessary if you
    >>>take the trivial step of keeping track of your class progression.
    >
    >
    >>Since it's not been specifically replaced by a different ruling, it
    >>still applies.
    >
    >
    > It has been replaced by an entirely new /rule/, which I have already
    > cited. And it was questionable even when it was still relevant.
    >

    Actually, you've cited a *lack* of a rule, not a new rule. As to its being
    questionable, sure, I'll agree with that. But disagreeing with a rule and
    saying the rule is now different aren't the same thing.

    >
    >>>>The outcome of this is result B: he keeps HD & profs. but gets no
    >>>>other benefits of the prestige class until the lost druid level is
    >>>>regained ....
    >
    >
    >>>There is no such rule for prestige classes. RTFM, and read the
    >>>thread, which has already covered this.
    >
    >
    >>If you don't meet the prereqs for a class, you can't take it. This is
    >>exactly the same thing that happens if you have a feat which requires
    >>prerequisites that you lose via level loss.
    >
    >
    > No, it isn't, because feats have a rule that makes them temporarily
    > useless in that situation, and prestige classes don't.
    >

    Sure they do.

    >
    >>You don't lose the feat, but you can't use it until you re-qualify.
    >
    >
    > Correct, but that is irrelevant to prestige classes.
    >

    Actually, it's not.

    > By the way, which aspects of the prestige class become useless, in your
    > estimation? Should you lose supernatural class features? BAB and BSB? If
    > you say no, then please cite the rule that lets you keep those stats but
    > not other class features. If you say yes, then justify why it's
    > reasonable, especially since it didn't work that way in D&D 3.0.

    It did work that way in 3.0. However, I've yet to find the cite that I
    remember so I will not comment further until I can locate it.
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Some Guy <someguy@thedoor.gov> wrote:
    > However, I've yet to find the cite that I remember so I will not
    > comment further until I can locate it.

    If only you did that in all rules discussions!
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
    > Some Guy <someguy@thedoor.gov> wrote:
    >
    >>However, I've yet to find the cite that I remember so I will not
    >>comment further until I can locate it.
    >
    >
    > If only you did that in all rules discussions!


    Bradd: "WWRRROOWWWW!! Hiss, hiss, spit!"

    Someone's being catty...

    Which is why you're still my favorite RGFDer, Bradd.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Build Video Games