There's currently a raging debate going on in a 5e D&D Facebook group I'm in.
Simply put, a question was asked as to whether or not a Faerie (UA) Druid should be able to use its Faerie Flight whilst in Wild Shape.
The "retains the use of Racial Traits" part of Wild Shape would imply that it can but Wild Shape is written such that there's intent to disallow access to flight in the early levels. And a flying Mammoth just feels silly... thematically accurate for the playful and tricksy nature of the Fae, but silly nonetheless.
I personally don't think it's intended. I see why some disagree and believe it's allowed, I simply don't agree. It's clearly something that was not intended as none of the races had access to innate "magical" flight that "doesn't require wings" when Wild Shape was written.
Wildshape = cannot change into any beast with flight until 8th level.
Also, you retain the benefits of racial features.
Bottom line, RAW is you can fly no matter what you change into.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
DM's call. RAW, you only retain the benefit of class/race/etc. features "if the new form is physically capable of doing so." A DM is well within their rights to decide that a mammoth is not physically capable from benefiting from a faerie's magical flight.
I wouldn't say that ruling that a magical ability has physiological requirement would be "well within" a DMs right. The intent and function of Wild Shape is that you keep almost everything from your character sheet other than ability scores, creature type, and size, unless its something that references a body part you no longer have. If Faeries fly with magic instead of wings, that should be no problem for a mammoth that has that same magic.
I wouldn't say that ruling that a magical ability has physiological requirement would be "well within" a DMs right. The intent and function of Wild Shape is that you keep almost everything from your character sheet other than ability scores, creature type, and size, unless its something that references a body part you no longer have. If Faeries fly with magic instead of wings, that should be no problem for a mammoth that has that same magic.
The requirement isn't physiological; it's physical. That's a pretty significant distinction. What makes you think magic that can lift a faerie is also capable of lifting a mammoth?
I'm not familiar with the UA feature in question, but unless it lets a "small or medium creature" fly, I don't know why you'd assume there's any interaction with size or weight at all, considering that magical flight and spells don't ordinarily interact with that unless specified.
The argument can be made either way. I can understand not allowing it because as it stands it seems like an unintentional manipulation of the rules. That being said, I would allow it since it is magical flight.
I guess I'm just failing to understand what it is about the Fairy's magical flying that you think is different (if anything) from a Storm Sorcerer's Tempestuous Magic, a Genie Warlock's Elemental Gift, a Tempest Cleric's Stormborn, a Twilight Cleric's Steps of Night, a Totem Barbarian's Eagle Totem flight, a Psi Warrior Fighter's Psi-Powered Leap, or any other instance of magical flight that doesn't describe needing wings or checking for character size.
Magical flight is magical flight is magical flight. Wild Shape in no way suggests that it takes away your race features, quite the opposite. It in no way suggests it takes away magical abilities that don't require spellcasting. So where's the temptation to even open the door to questioning if this is allowed, it should be uncontroversial.
For me, it's more about the fact that it is in a UA, and thusly is still being worked on. The other abilities you described are situational flight (even if the situation is potentially going to be 'always') and are from other classes. The designers of the game have gone on record as saying they don't take multiclassing into account when they designing things for the game. The Faeries flight is the first of its kind so it is understandable that people would be cautious. RAW you are right, there is nothing preventing the flight while in wild shape, but it is well within the DM's ability to disallow that interaction.
For me, it's more about the fact that it is in a UA, and thusly is still being worked on. The other abilities you described are situational flight (even if the situation is potentially going to be 'always') and are from other classes. The designers of the game have gone on record as saying they don't take multiclassing into account when they designing things for the game. The Faeries flight is the first of its kind so it is understandable that people would be cautious. RAW you are right, there is nothing preventing the flight while in wild shape, but it is well within the DM's ability to disallow that interaction.
A Faerie Druid is not a multiclass. The way abilities interact with a class is an important factor when designing a new race. Hopefully they will make adjustments before the Faerie gets published.
I guess I'm just failing to understand what it is about the Fairy's magical flying that you think is different (if anything) from a Storm Sorcerer's Tempestuous Magic, a Genie Warlock's Elemental Gift, a Tempest Cleric's Stormborn, a Twilight Cleric's Steps of Night, a Totem Barbarian's Eagle Totem flight, a Psi Warrior Fighter's Psi-Powered Leap, or any other instance of magical flight that doesn't describe needing wings or checking for character size.
Magical flight is magical flight is magical flight. Wild Shape in no way suggests that it takes away your race features, quite the opposite. It in no way suggests it takes away magical abilities that don't require spellcasting. So where's the temptation to even open the door to questioning if this is allowed, it should be uncontroversial.
Every single one of the examples you listed are class features, which we know work for any creature that has the relevant class, because that's how classes work. We only know fairies' flight works for fairies, because it's a racial feature, and that's how races work. The text doesn't describe how the magic works; the text assumes that it's only ever going to apply to a fairy. Could it work for a mammoth? Sure! But there's no reason to assume it would. There is quite literally zero textual support in either direction. There's simply no information provided regarding whether or not a fairy's flight magic is physically capable of lifting anything other than a fairy. That means it is entirely up to the DM to decide. That should be uncontroversial.
But, I would absolutely not commit to allowing the other examples you mentioned. I'd take it all on a case-by-case basis and decide what best reflects what the mechanics are trying to model within the fiction of the story.
For me, it's more about the fact that it is in a UA, and thusly is still being worked on. The other abilities you described are situational flight (even if the situation is potentially going to be 'always') and are from other classes. The designers of the game have gone on record as saying they don't take multiclassing into account when they designing things for the game. The Faeries flight is the first of its kind so it is understandable that people would be cautious. RAW you are right, there is nothing preventing the flight while in wild shape, but it is well within the DM's ability to disallow that interaction.
A Faerie Druid is not a multiclass. The way abilities interact with a class is an important factor when designing a new race. Hopefully they will make adjustments before the Faerie gets published.
I agree, removing the fact that it is magical flight would be enough for me to not allow it. After all, a changeling's transformation ability is mundane but wouldn't be reasonable for a creature to possess because it is physically not a changeling. The same sort of justification would work for this. Or a simplier example, like Aarakocra and their wings.
For me, it's more about the fact that it is in a UA, and thusly is still being worked on. The other abilities you described are situational flight (even if the situation is potentially going to be 'always') and are from other classes. The designers of the game have gone on record as saying they don't take multiclassing into account when they designing things for the game. The Faeries flight is the first of its kind so it is understandable that people would be cautious. RAW you are right, there is nothing preventing the flight while in wild shape, but it is well within the DM's ability to disallow that interaction.
A Faerie Druid is not a multiclass. The way abilities interact with a class is an important factor when designing a new race. Hopefully they will make adjustments before the Faerie gets published.
I agree, removing the fact that it is magical flight would be enough for me to not allow it. After all, a changeling's transformation ability is mundane but wouldn't be reasonable for a creature to possess because it is physically not a changeling. The same sort of justification would work for this. Or a simplier example, like Aarakocra and their wings.
Yeah, we are on the same page. I am sure that they did not intend to have flying Wildshaped Druids before level 8, but they left this one wide open to abuse.
Saga I know you’re better at reading comprehension than that. The textual support for applying a fairies racial features to a wild shaped mammoth are the fact that wild shape explicitly says in no uncertain terms that the druid retains its racial features while wild shaped.
I swear to God they should just errata druid to remove wild shape because everybody loses their goddamn minds whenever they try to apply it to even the most basic of interactions. You retain your race features. The fairy has magical flight as a race feature. That race feature is explicitly described as not having anything to do with the fairy having wings. Therefore there is absolutely zero raw support for not allowing that fairy to retain the benefit of that feature while it is wild shaped as a mammoth. End of story, seriously.
Saga I know you’re better at reading comprehension than that. The textual support for applying a fairies racial features to a wild shaped mammoth are the fact that wild shape explicitly says in no uncertain terms that the druid retains its racial features while wild shaped.
No, it doesn't. It says in no uncertain terms that the druid retains its racial features while wild shaped provided the new form is physically capable of benefiting from them. It doesn't provide any guidance for how to determine whether or not the new form is physically capable of benefiting from this, that, or the other thing, which lands it squarely in the DM's corner to adjudicate. You can't just ignore a significant portion of the text because you don't like it when DMs have to make their own decisions.
You have yet to describe to me a single example oF ANY magical flight feature in any way giving one wet toot about its subjects physical properties. Not only that, the fairy’s own feature is written in a way that makes it explicit that it ITSELF does not care about physical features. There is precisely zero support for deeming the fairy’s magical flight to be physically dependent, unless you’re going to tell me that other magical race features like Lucky or Healing Hands or what have you are similarly physical dependent (in which case I’d accuse you of having crappy over-restrictive ideas about what makes a body physically capable of benefiting from a magical ability, to the point that you’re making Wild Shape into an empty promise to retain an empty category of acceptable race features).
The fairy flight may be a crappy too-strong UA feature, most are at this point. But as written, it is NOT a physically-dependent race feature, under any reasonable interpretation. There’s no two sides to this coin, you are taking a blatantly unreasonable position that this is the ONLY physically-dependent magical flight to be found in 5E.
You have yet to describe to me a single example oF ANY magical flight feature in any way giving one wet toot about its subjects physical properties. Not only that, the fairy’s own feature is written in a way that makes it explicit that it ITSELF does not care about physical features. There is precisely zero support for deeming the fairy’s magical flight to be physically dependent, unless you’re going to tell me that other magical race features like Lucky or Healing Hands or what have you are similarly physical dependent (in which case I’d accuse you of having crappy over-restrictive ideas about what makes a body physically capable of benefiting from a magical ability, to the point that you’re making Wild Shape into an empty promise to retain an empty category of acceptable race features).
The fairy flight may be a crappy too-strong UA feature, most are at this point. But as written, it is NOT a physically-dependent race feature, under any reasonable interpretation. There’s no two sides to this coin, you are taking a blatantly unreasonable position that this is the ONLY physically-dependent magical flight to be found in 5E.
CC, I am literally not arguing that it's "a physically-dependent race feature" or whatever. I'm saying the game gives jack-all information about what "physically capable" even means, so the DM has to make a decision. You are arguing against a point I'm not making.
It is magical flight not dependent on the physical appendages necessary for flight. I'd say it is not an ability lost when wild shaped. I'd also say this is not really a big deal. If the PC could fly while not an animal, allowing the PC to fly while they are one is not that different, and you would still not have the high speeds granted by a lot of the popular flying beasts until they hit level 8.
There's currently a raging debate going on in a 5e D&D Facebook group I'm in.
Simply put, a question was asked as to whether or not a Faerie (UA) Druid should be able to use its Faerie Flight whilst in Wild Shape.
The "retains the use of Racial Traits" part of Wild Shape would imply that it can but Wild Shape is written such that there's intent to disallow access to flight in the early levels. And a flying Mammoth just feels silly... thematically accurate for the playful and tricksy nature of the Fae, but silly nonetheless.
I personally don't think it's intended. I see why some disagree and believe it's allowed, I simply don't agree. It's clearly something that was not intended as none of the races had access to innate "magical" flight that "doesn't require wings" when Wild Shape was written.
Thoughts?
Wildshape = cannot change into any beast with flight until 8th level.
Also, you retain the benefits of racial features.
Bottom line, RAW is you can fly no matter what you change into.
DM's call. RAW, you only retain the benefit of class/race/etc. features "if the new form is physically capable of doing so." A DM is well within their rights to decide that a mammoth is not physically capable from benefiting from a faerie's magical flight.
I wouldn't say that ruling that a magical ability has physiological requirement would be "well within" a DMs right. The intent and function of Wild Shape is that you keep almost everything from your character sheet other than ability scores, creature type, and size, unless its something that references a body part you no longer have. If Faeries fly with magic instead of wings, that should be no problem for a mammoth that has that same magic.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The requirement isn't physiological; it's physical. That's a pretty significant distinction. What makes you think magic that can lift a faerie is also capable of lifting a mammoth?
Bigger body bigger magic, waaaaagh!
I'm not familiar with the UA feature in question, but unless it lets a "small or medium creature" fly, I don't know why you'd assume there's any interaction with size or weight at all, considering that magical flight and spells don't ordinarily interact with that unless specified.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The argument can be made either way. I can understand not allowing it because as it stands it seems like an unintentional manipulation of the rules. That being said, I would allow it since it is magical flight.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
I guess I'm just failing to understand what it is about the Fairy's magical flying that you think is different (if anything) from a Storm Sorcerer's Tempestuous Magic, a Genie Warlock's Elemental Gift, a Tempest Cleric's Stormborn, a Twilight Cleric's Steps of Night, a Totem Barbarian's Eagle Totem flight, a Psi Warrior Fighter's Psi-Powered Leap, or any other instance of magical flight that doesn't describe needing wings or checking for character size.
Magical flight is magical flight is magical flight. Wild Shape in no way suggests that it takes away your race features, quite the opposite. It in no way suggests it takes away magical abilities that don't require spellcasting. So where's the temptation to even open the door to questioning if this is allowed, it should be uncontroversial.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
For me, it's more about the fact that it is in a UA, and thusly is still being worked on. The other abilities you described are situational flight (even if the situation is potentially going to be 'always') and are from other classes. The designers of the game have gone on record as saying they don't take multiclassing into account when they designing things for the game. The Faeries flight is the first of its kind so it is understandable that people would be cautious. RAW you are right, there is nothing preventing the flight while in wild shape, but it is well within the DM's ability to disallow that interaction.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
A Faerie Druid is not a multiclass. The way abilities interact with a class is an important factor when designing a new race. Hopefully they will make adjustments before the Faerie gets published.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Every single one of the examples you listed are class features, which we know work for any creature that has the relevant class, because that's how classes work. We only know fairies' flight works for fairies, because it's a racial feature, and that's how races work. The text doesn't describe how the magic works; the text assumes that it's only ever going to apply to a fairy. Could it work for a mammoth? Sure! But there's no reason to assume it would. There is quite literally zero textual support in either direction. There's simply no information provided regarding whether or not a fairy's flight magic is physically capable of lifting anything other than a fairy. That means it is entirely up to the DM to decide. That should be uncontroversial.
But, I would absolutely not commit to allowing the other examples you mentioned. I'd take it all on a case-by-case basis and decide what best reflects what the mechanics are trying to model within the fiction of the story.
I agree, removing the fact that it is magical flight would be enough for me to not allow it. After all, a changeling's transformation ability is mundane but wouldn't be reasonable for a creature to possess because it is physically not a changeling. The same sort of justification would work for this. Or a simplier example, like Aarakocra and their wings.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Yeah, we are on the same page. I am sure that they did not intend to have flying Wildshaped Druids before level 8, but they left this one wide open to abuse.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Saga I know you’re better at reading comprehension than that. The textual support for applying a fairies racial features to a wild shaped mammoth are the fact that wild shape explicitly says in no uncertain terms that the druid retains its racial features while wild shaped.
I swear to God they should just errata druid to remove wild shape because everybody loses their goddamn minds whenever they try to apply it to even the most basic of interactions. You retain your race features. The fairy has magical flight as a race feature. That race feature is explicitly described as not having anything to do with the fairy having wings. Therefore there is absolutely zero raw support for not allowing that fairy to retain the benefit of that feature while it is wild shaped as a mammoth. End of story, seriously.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
No, it doesn't. It says in no uncertain terms that the druid retains its racial features while wild shaped provided the new form is physically capable of benefiting from them. It doesn't provide any guidance for how to determine whether or not the new form is physically capable of benefiting from this, that, or the other thing, which lands it squarely in the DM's corner to adjudicate. You can't just ignore a significant portion of the text because you don't like it when DMs have to make their own decisions.
You have yet to describe to me a single example oF ANY magical flight feature in any way giving one wet toot about its subjects physical properties. Not only that, the fairy’s own feature is written in a way that makes it explicit that it ITSELF does not care about physical features. There is precisely zero support for deeming the fairy’s magical flight to be physically dependent, unless you’re going to tell me that other magical race features like Lucky or Healing Hands or what have you are similarly physical dependent (in which case I’d accuse you of having crappy over-restrictive ideas about what makes a body physically capable of benefiting from a magical ability, to the point that you’re making Wild Shape into an empty promise to retain an empty category of acceptable race features).
The fairy flight may be a crappy too-strong UA feature, most are at this point. But as written, it is NOT a physically-dependent race feature, under any reasonable interpretation. There’s no two sides to this coin, you are taking a blatantly unreasonable position that this is the ONLY physically-dependent magical flight to be found in 5E.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It is a weird situation, but there is no mechanical reason the fairy can't fly while Wild shaped.
CC, I am literally not arguing that it's "a physically-dependent race feature" or whatever. I'm saying the game gives jack-all information about what "physically capable" even means, so the DM has to make a decision. You are arguing against a point I'm not making.
It is magical flight not dependent on the physical appendages necessary for flight. I'd say it is not an ability lost when wild shaped. I'd also say this is not really a big deal. If the PC could fly while not an animal, allowing the PC to fly while they are one is not that different, and you would still not have the high speeds granted by a lot of the popular flying beasts until they hit level 8.
Haha, it looks like opinions are as divided here as they were on the Facebook group.
Thanks for all the input, folks. I appreciate the different points of view on the matter.