Lately I've been thinking (not so much for an actual character, more simple curiosity), would you be able to remain in Arcane Armour as a Moon Druid wildshaped? Usually, you have to ditch any armour you're in before wildshaping, but with the Arcane Armour theres this little section:
"The armor attaches to you and can’t be removed against your will. It also expands to cover your entire body, although you can retract or deploy the helmet as a bonus action. The armor replaces any missing limbs, functioning identically to a body part it is replacing."
In my head it would expand when you become a Giant Octopus, allowing you to wear your armour when Wildshaped, but I'm curious to see how other peple would read this. there's a similar section detailing magical armour:
"In most cases, a magic item that's meant to be worn can fit a creature regardless of size or build. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they magically adjust themselves to the wearer. Rare exceptions exist. If the story suggests a good reason for an item to fit only creatures of a certain size or shape, you can rule that it doesn't adjust. For example, drow-made armor might fit elves only. Dwarves might make items usable only by dwarf-sized and dwarf-shaped folk."
In this one, there's definitely more room for the DM to rule as they wish (although DMs obviously have full control on any ruling at their tables).
As much as RAW answers, I'm interested to see how people see this from a RAI perspective. And also Rule of Cool.
Lately I've been thinking (not so much for an actual character, more simple curiosity), would you be able to remain in Arcane Armour as a Moon Druid wildshaped? Usually, you have to ditch any armour you're in before wildshaping, but with the Arcane Armour theres this little section:
"The armor attaches to you and can’t be removed against your will. It also expands to cover your entire body, although you can retract or deploy the helmet as a bonus action. The armor replaces any missing limbs, functioning identically to a body part it is replacing."
In my head it would expand when you become a Giant Octopus, allowing you to wear your armour when Wildshaped, but I'm curious to see how other peple would read this. there's a similar section detailing magical armour:
"In most cases, a magic item that's meant to be worn can fit a creature regardless of size or build. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they magically adjust themselves to the wearer. Rare exceptions exist. If the story suggests a good reason for an item to fit only creatures of a certain size or shape, you can rule that it doesn't adjust. For example, drow-made armor might fit elves only. Dwarves might make items usable only by dwarf-sized and dwarf-shaped folk."
In this one, there's definitely more room for the DM to rule as they wish (although DMs obviously have full control on any ruling at their tables).
As much as RAW answers, I'm interested to see how people see this from a RAI perspective. And also Rule of Cool.
In terms of RAW, RAI, and RAF (Rules As Fun, aka Rule of Cool+Rule of Funny), Wild Shape specifically lets you leave your armor intact when you shape - the reason you usually don't want to is that you're wearing armor that won't fit your new shape, but it's explicitly allowed by the ability. From an Arcane Armor perspective, with or without Wild Shape you need a house rule from the DM on what constitutes Armor (similarly to how Forge Clerics need specific answers on being allowed to build a suit of plate piecemeal) - is it sufficient to have just a gauntlet that expands out when you want? Or a boot? A belt? Whatever the minimum answer is, that's the item that has to fit both your old body and your new one. When you have Arcane Armor expand, it adapts to whatever your body type is.
If I'm the DM, AA is such a core subclass feature that I would 100% rule a very generous minimum armor of "if you build a genuine suit of armor for yourself, any scrap large enough for you to recognize as a piece of the armor counts - it's more about what your character thinks of as armor than anything else", allowing you to e.g. carve a suit of half-plate from ironwood, then carve out a piece of it to wear as a necklace that would expand on demand.
Not only should this work RAW, its an incredibly cool idea. There are some potential issues with specific armor features, but the armor as a baseline should work. The relevant rules texts are:
You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source and can use them if the new form is physically capable of doing so.
You choose whether your equipment falls to the ground in your space, merges into your new form, or is worn by it. Worn equipment functions as normal, but the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment, based on the creature’s shape and size.
The armor attaches to you and can’t be removed against your will. It also expands to cover your entire body, although you can retract or deploy the helmet as a bonus action. The armor replaces any missing limbs, functioning identically to a limb it replaces.
So we know that you can keep you armor on, and it can remain functional if it fits. And the Arcane armor magically fits you.
The only features that might not work are features that are tied to specific body parts. For example, a snake can't use Thunder Gauntlets, since it lacks arms for gauntlets. An Octopus is probably a bit up to DM interpretation - Are Tentacles arms? Legs? Neither? Since Tentacles don't have hands, do they have Gauntlets? Etc, etc.
I really think you are all overstating how RAW this all is. While the idea sounds fun, I would strongly advise against getting too attached to the concept before asking your DM for a ruling on how it will work.
The powers of Arcane Armor start with a "suit of armor you are wearing". A suit of armor - not a belt or a necklace. It must be the whole suit of armor - being one of the listed types of armor on the equipment list.
Then it must be armor that you are wearing, not just armor that is vaguely in contact with your skin. The armor must already fit your form in order for you to be wearing it before it then activates its additional features.
Then you are relying on the sentence "expands to cover your entire body" to allow really a lot. Remember that this phrase is used as a modifier to to a "suit of armor you are wearing". It means that this armor which already fits you now expands to cover all the bits of your body that it previously didn't - like a space suit or diving suit level of coverage (though this increased coverage does not increase AC, it is just cosmetic). This sentence does not mean that you can tape some plate mail to the leg of a mammoth and it suddenly reforms into a perfectly designed suit of mammoth armor.
Druid Wildshape is generally not expected to work with armor. Most animals can't function with armor at all. Warhorses must be trained extensively to handle barding - which does not cover anything like all of their flesh. An octopus, meanwhile, seems a uniquely terrible idea for a creature to encase in steel and expect it to function. Armor is completely the opposite of an octopus' squishy, near fluid nature. If the octopus can't successfully "wear" a normal suit of armor then it will not qualify to have that armor expand over its body.
I'm not here to ruin everyone's fun - but if a player came to my table with a multiclass druid-armorer and expected to turn into an armored animal then it would be a hard "obviously not" from me. You are going to want to get DM pre-approval before you start down this path.
There was another thread a while back about this exact question and what “expands to cover your body” and “form-fitting” actually mean. No consensus was achieved.
Personally, I think the arcane armor description definitely would allow it to accommodate a wild-shaped form.
I'm totally on the side of allowing this at my table. Moon druids are somewhat OP in Tier 1, and then it's somewhat balanced after that as the beast forms begin to be on par with other character classes' abilities. And then it drops off further after that as a strategy.
In my opinion, this would be a nice bump to maintain the viability of the strategy for awhile (still not world-ending or anything), and they give up a huge chunk of spellcasting power to do it. unless I'm missing something big, I don't see how it ruins the power balance enough to say no to it.
(And that's despite me recognizing that the RAW come up somewhat short in outright allowing this.)
I really think you are all overstating how RAW this all is. While the idea sounds fun, I would strongly advise against getting too attached to the concept before asking your DM for a ruling on how it will work.
Just to clarify what I mean by "should work RAW" (instead of "absolutely does work RAW") - I mean that the based on my interpretation of the features, no homebrew or home rules should be required to make this work. I could have worded that first part better, but I'm happy with the rest of the post. I do still think the wording of the features does inherently support the interaction, but definitely I'll admit that I could see a different DM coming to a different conclusion about the wording of Arcane Armor, as you have in your post.
From a balance perspective, this would be pretty OP. A Moon Druid, which is already hard to kill, now has an extra pool of HP protected by 18 AC from plat email (yes, you can get non-metallic plate mail). So now, you can multiattack, keep up your concentration on that Flaming Sphere, and not worry because not much can get through that 18 AC.
I really wouldn't be concerned about balance with this interaction. Moon druid multiclasses are held back by Moon Druid's inherent scaling. A brown bear is amazing at level 2, but its pretty mediocre at level 5. That pattern is going to repeat across all levels. Moon druids rely on hitting their spikes and scaling consistently in order for their Wild Shapes to stay relevant, and losing 3 levels is a pretty big penalty that is going to really harm the power of their shapes.
Grabbing AC for free could be dangerous, but that 3 level dip just means you are gonna be slapping some extra AC on an underleveled Moon druid. Nothing is gonna break.
No, this is not. You're determining this without even considering all the rules in play.
Arcane Armor has specific rules that might suggest it works - equating "expands to cover" with "radically changes form to fit a completely different body" is a stretch, especially considering the context that Regent brings up. Technically the armor could expand in size without changing form at all until it was big enough to fit your new body inside it. It would still fit the wording but would obviously not be functional.
Wildshape has specific rules that clearly says this does not work, primarily a line everyone seems to have skipped over: "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form, and any equipment that the new form can’t wear must either fall to the ground or merge with it." This is very clear language. Your equipment doesn't change size or shape. No room for exceptions, that's just what happens when you wildshape.
Which is the more specific rule that overrides the other? That is a call that only the DM can make. There is no RAW process to resolve this conflict outside of the adjudication powers granted to the DM. Anyone claiming that either way is definitively how it works is taking the liberty of making that ruling. We did this for like 10 pages the last time it came up and that's pretty much where it landed.
Would I allow it? I'm not sure. Purely looking at the rules I would say wildshape wins out if only because it is worded more clearly, and balance-wise beasts are notorious for having terrible AC and wildshape has been balanced around that. But Druid/Artificer is otherwise a pretty bad combination and honestly it would need all the help it can get. Your stats would be spread thin and you'd be at least 3 levels behind a normal Moon druid.
The armor attaches to you and can’t be removed against your will. It also expands to cover your entire body, although you can retract or deploy the helmet as a bonus action. The armor replaces any missing limbs, functioning identically to a limb it replaces.
The relevant rule from Wildshape is:
You choose whether your equipment falls to the ground in your space, merges into your new form, or is worn by it. Worn equipment functions as normal, but the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment, based on the creature’s shape and size. Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form, and any equipment that the new form can’t wear must either fall to the ground or merge with it. Equipment that merges with the form has no effect until you leave the form.
Those are not *all* the relevant rules. The relevant rules for Arcane Armor are the full section for that feature including the phrases "a suit of armor you are wearing" and "You gain the following benefits while wearing this armor".
If you are not wearing the armor then it has no power to change. If the octopus you are turning into cannot wear the armor then the armor cannot be worn by the octopus and it cannot change to fit them. The DM decides what creatures can and cannot wear armor - regardless of the expanding nature of that armor.
Now it is possible that the phrase "expands to cover your entire body" includes complete transformation of shape and nature into an entirely unrelated suit of armour that is appropriate for an octopus, but to claim that this is the only possible interpretation of that phrase is absurd.
The only changing verb here is "expand to cover" - not shrink, not change shape - just expand to cover. In my reading of the entire feature, this phrase means that the existing suit of plate armor is still entirely present and in the same shape and format before the expansion - just that now it expands to cover your neck and wrists and face and back of knees and so on. The armor is still the exact same suit of plate armor it was before the "expanding to cover" but it is now covering more.
If you change into a different creature then that form must be able to actually wear the armor before anything else happens. If you change into a form which cannot wear the plate armor then the plate armor cannot be worn and cannot expand to cover it.
Again, I am not saying this to prove that my interpretation is the only RAW truth. But if the interpretation of RAW is not universally agreed on, then any player should be strongly advised to get their DM to sign off on a character build before the player spends weeks or months of effort building their character in that direction.
I think this is well into the DM fait territory per the relevant wording of Wildshape "...the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment". So ultimately the decision is not RAW per say. That said, having never seen this combo at a table, what are the problematic gameplay implications? (to my mind increased AC could be an issues in some cases).
As a side note I had a player want to run an artificer/druid type character. After discussing it with the player, we chose to us the Circle of the Forge Druid from 'Exploring Eberron', with a bit of a reflavor. Though non-official, it seemed the easiest way to implement the concept in that particular game. Just something to think about if your DM might be amenable to secondary sources. ( I know some DMs may not allow the book, but it never hurts to ask).
Some implications assuming only a 3 level dip in Artificer
AC being 18 with plate on an already healthy pool of additional HP
+5 Speed permanent -OR- +3 Temp HP PB times / day
Infusions: you can infuse your armor and keep it on now
+1 AC, making a bear with a 19 AC
Ability to add your Int modifier (minimum of +1 for multiclass) to up to 6 Str checks/saves (grapples get even stronger on your Octopode) per day
Ability to add your Int modifier to any failed concentration save up to 4 times per day
+1 to your attacks/damage (opened up in a whole new can of worms in next bullet points)
Undisputed: 90/300 ft. ranged attack that deals 2d6 lightning damage (can be made +1 with infusion, and can use Str or Dex or Int for attack and damage)
Undisputed because it can appear on the chest piece and shoot, no arms or wielding required. -OR-
Questionable: Melee attacks that deal 1d8 thunder damage (can be made +1 with infusion, and can use Str or Dex or Int for attack and damage) that impose disadvantage on attacks made on anyone but you.
This one is questionable, as you would need to assume the Wildshape form can wield the thunder gauntlets. But those arguing that "covers your whole body" means it covers any body that you can ever have I'm sure would say you get this no problem.
So, it is in no way an insignificant bump in the power level. You would also get the ability to have your Homunculus Servant make attacks as a bonus action on your turn, but that can be done regardless of if the armor transfers to your Wildshape form or not.
cool to see it laid out like that--thanks! Even looking at it, I maintain the increase in power is on par with what you give up--ie: ASI (delayed, anyway), full spellcasting levels, being able to focus on fewer ability scores).
It's not going to work for every group, but I don't suspect it will break most situations.
I wouldn't grant the use of the gauntlets. The armor may alter to fit an octopus' arm or a wolf's paw, but I'd rule in most cases that the beast forms can't actually use it. (I guess apes, etc.?)
Some implications assuming only a 3 level dip in Artificer
AC being 18 with plate on an already healthy pool of additional HP
+5 Speed permanent -OR- +3 Temp HP PB times / day
Infusions: you can infuse your armor and keep it on now
+1 AC, making a bear with a 19 AC
Ability to add your Int modifier (minimum of +1 for multiclass) to up to 6 Str checks/saves (grapples get even stronger on your Octopode) per day
Ability to add your Int modifier to any failed concentration save up to 4 times per day
+1 to your attacks/damage (opened up in a whole new can of worms in next bullet points)
Undisputed: 90/300 ft. ranged attack that deals 2d6 lightning damage (can be made +1 with infusion, and can use Str or Dex or Int for attack and damage)
Undisputed because it can appear on the chest piece and shoot, no arms or wielding required. -OR-
Questionable: Melee attacks that deal 1d8 thunder damage (can be made +1 with infusion, and can use Str or Dex or Int for attack and damage) that impose disadvantage on attacks made on anyone but you.
This one is questionable, as you would need to assume the Wildshape form can wield the thunder gauntlets. But those arguing that "covers your whole body" means it covers any body that you can ever have I'm sure would say you get this no problem.
So, it is in no way an insignificant bump in the power level. You would also get the ability to have your Homunculus Servant make attacks as a bonus action on your turn, but that can be done regardless of if the armor transfers to your Wildshape form or not.
Couple of notes:
The weapon attacks are stuck at 1 attack, no matter your wild shape form. They will never work with multiattack. Lightning Launcher also cannot use Str to attack, so you'll need to be focusing Int on a class with a majority of moon druid levels. Your weapons are extremely underwhelming for a level 7+ character.
The octopus grapple is unaffected by the Armor of Magical Strength, as it doesn't make any strength checks. The grapple applies on a successful attack roll (locked in at a measly +5 to hit), and the escape DC is explicitly defined rather than using a contested check.
You are limited to a single infusion on your armor.
The main boost is going from 11 AC -> 19 AC. Which yea, that's a pretty significant boost if it were on a strong creature, but stacking AC on an otherwise fairly underpowered creature doesn't really do much for you. Even using extra AC to protect concentration is diminished from the fact that your spellcasting progression is lagging behind.
Honestly, I think the more powerful option with this combo is just slapping 2 levels of druid onto a higher leveled Armorer, just to be able to give a brownbear's HP cushion in combat. But I still don't think it crosses into dangerous territory - there are plenty of existing builds that would still overshadow this.
I mean, I don't know what else to tell you. Nothing in your post sounds even remotely powerful. A single 2d6 ranged attack falls off pretty hard past level 5. Transforming into a CR 5 Giant Crocodile with 19 AC and a weak ranged attack as a level 18-20 PC is extremely underpowered. Compare a basic moon druid at those levels with Beast Spells and eventually their amazing capstone. Its not even close.
This is a cool, evocative concept that could be fun to play and is still functional at an average table, but its just flat out not that powerful.
Looking at the benefits laid out here it seems... suboptimal? From an RP perspective if a player wanted to do it I would probably allow it as nothing seems broken, and the loss of higher level druid benefits is a balancing factor.
You choose whether your equipment falls to the ground in your space, merges into your new form, or is worn by it. Worn equipment functions as normal, but the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment, based on the creature’s shape and size. Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form, and any equipment that the new form can’t wear must either fall to the ground or merge with it. Equipment that merges with the form has no effect until you leave the form.
The line in blue is referring to normal equipment, not magical Arcane Armor. If you have Arcane Armor that can expand to cover your entire body then your equipment does change size and shape to match your new form.
What? Gonna need a citation on this. Equipment is equipment whether it's magical or mundane - this is how the word is used everywhere. Arcane Armor is still armor and does not have any special rules that say it is suddenly not equipment anymore. You are reading the AA rules as broadly as possible and reading the wildshape rules as narrowly as possible to fit how you want them to work.
Let me try this again. You're saying AA has specific rules that override the general rule posed by wildshape. I'm saying it is equally valid to say that wildshape has specific rules that override the general rule of AA. There is no way to determine which rule overrides the other without DM intervention.
You choose whether your equipment falls to the ground in your space, merges into your new form, or is worn by it. Worn equipment functions as normal, but the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment, based on the creature’s shape and size. Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form, and any equipment that the new form can’t wear must either fall to the ground or merge with it. Equipment that merges with the form has no effect until you leave the form.
The line in blue is referring to normal equipment, not magical Arcane Armor. If you have Arcane Armor that can expand to cover your entire body then your equipment does change size and shape to match your new form.
What? Gonna need a citation on this. Equipment is equipment whether it's magical or mundane - this is how the word is used everywhere. Arcane Armor is still armor and does not have any special rules that say it is suddenly not equipment anymore. You are reading the AA rules as broadly as possible and reading the wildshape rules as narrowly as possible to fit how you want them to work.
Let me try this again. You're saying AA has specific rules that override the general rule posed by wildshape. I'm saying it is equally valid to say that wildshape has specific rules that override the general rule of AA. There is no way to determine which rule overrides the other without DM intervention.
Sure there is. The wild shape rules speak of "equipment." Anything that only affects a smaller subset of equipment is definitionally more specific and will override wild shape's language. Magical equipment is assumed to adjust to fit the wearer's body type. Arcane armor expands to cover your entire body. Since "magical equipment" and "arcane armor" are more specific than "equipment," there's no ambiguity.
Because magical equipment is magical so it doesn't fall under equipment?
Nothing I wrote even remotely implies this. Obviously magical equipment falls under equipment. But a rule that specifies "magical equipment" is obviously more specific than a rule that affects "equipment" in general, and specific beats general.
I am not interested in arguing about whether or not the shape-changing properties of magical armor allow it to be used by wild-shaped druids (I do not use that rule in my game anyway). But someone actually suggested "well this rule is about equipment in general and this other rule is about specifically magical equipment, so there's just no way to tell which is specific and which is general," which is so obviously false that I had to say something.
I mean, I don't know what else to tell you. Nothing in your post sounds even remotely powerful. A single 2d6 ranged attack falls off pretty hard past level 5. Transforming into a CR 5 Giant Crocodile with 19 AC and a weak ranged attack as a level 18-20 PC is extremely underpowered. Compare a basic moon druid at those levels with Beast Spells and eventually their amazing capstone. Its not even close.
This is a cool, evocative concept that could be fun to play and is still functional at an average table, but its just flat out not that powerful.
Okay, then lets look at just level 5. A Brown Bear with 19 AC, a 2d6 lightning damage ranged attack option, multiattack, and a Flaming Sphere bonus action. So, you have a +6 to hit on your multiattacks, which is the absolute best any other martial can do if they used their ASI to +2 their Str/Dex, so call this a draw, you deal 1d8+4 + 2d6+4, which is comparable to any damage they would be doing with two attacks on a 2H weapon, you have an AC of 19 which is 1 better than a Fighter/Paladin in full plate without a shield (which they can't use with a 2H weapon anyway) + 2d6 (or 1/2 on a Dex save) which the Fighter/Barbarian/Paladin have no answer to.
This is going to outpace any level 5 Fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin (unless maybe they're smiting every turn) as you have a +1 bonus to AC over them, plus the damage from Flaming Sphere, oh and you have an extra 34 HP which none of them have an answer for. It might not be anything crazy powerful at level 20, but at level 5, you're drastically outpacing them. You're taking the Moon Druid's OP-ness at tier-1 and extending it into tier-2.
Just to clarify some numbers:
You can't prepare Flaming Sphere as a Druid 2/ Armorer 3. You're stuck preparing 1st level spells, while other casters are already on 3rd levels spells and even half casters can learn/prepare 2nd levels. That's one reason why a split like this is so rough.
Martials have a +7, not a +6. They get +3 from Proficiency and +4 from main stat (unless they grab a feat in place of an ASI, but that doesn't help your argument, with how powerful feats can be). They also have passive damage boosts like fighting styles or reckless attack that push them further ahead.
Running the numbers, literally every martial and every half caster is doing more damage than a brown bear, whether they went the feat route or the ASI route. Monks, Rogues, Rangers, even pure Armorers. Shield builds, ranged builds, you name it. They all put out more damage than the brown bear - and all without expending any resources. Once you start actually spending ki, smites, action surges, rages, etc... this multiclass just can't keep up.
The more I go through the math on this build, the more it becomes clear that this is far from overpowered - its actually fairly underpowered. You're a very sturdy sack of meat points with weak martial damage and weak magic/utility. Even if you bump yourself to 6 to add in flaming sphere to your combo, you aren't closing the gap enough, because other classes are also growing in power - more feats, more spells, auras, subclass abilities, etc.
And for the OP and others who like the idea, I really am not trying to dunk on this combo as hard as this post is making it sound. I don't think you need to optimize your character to have a good game of D&D, and I think this combo is still functional enough to not completely weigh down your party. I just really want to dispel the notion that this combo could somehow be overpowered or dangerous. I don't want a DM rejecting the idea out of fear - if they truly have the interpretation that the features are incompatible, then that's their decision. But just know that the combo isn't going to break anything, and depending on the table, you might even need to throw this player a bone in order for them to keep up with the rest of their party.
And for the OP and others who like the idea, I really am not trying to dunk on this combo as hard as this post is making it sound. I don't think you need to optimize your character to have a good game of D&D, and I think this combo is still functional enough to not completely weigh down your party. I just really want to dispel the notion that this combo could somehow be overpowered or dangerous. I don't want a DM rejecting the idea out of fear - if they truly have the interpretation that the features are incompatible, then that's their decision. But just know that the combo isn't going to break anything, and depending on the table, you might even need to throw this player a bone in order for them to keep up with the rest of their party.
Yep, my train of thought is not to create an optimised build, but one that would be fun to play (although the two aren't incompatible). And I largely posted here because of the ambiguity - I wanted to see how the majority of DMs would rule if at their own table - interesting to see the range of answers.
However, my own input for optimisation would be to largely ignore the Lightning Launcher and rely on the wepaons provided by your new form. To use the example of the Giant Croc someone mentioned earlier, Bite and Tail will deal a lot more damage than the armourer weapons. I would also strongly consider whether Guardian might be more attractive than Infiltrator for an Armour Model. Temp HP (EDIT: although only a little now I think about it) and high AC adds a large pool of durability, plus what are essentially a large number of extra HP.
Pick up some good Defender abilities (it's probably not viable to keep using Thunder Gauntlets for long and some DMs might rule you can't use the things anyway) like the Sentinel feat (this is why I picked out Giant Octopus as my example creature - it functions really well with 15ft reach to control, or at least deincentivise, large areas with opportunity attacks). Converting low level spell slots into Goodberries has always been a strategy of mine for Moon Druids. Survive in your form for the combat then eat them afterwards to top you back up. Also, distribute them among the party to make up for the fact that you can't Healing Word the party when wild-shaped.
The build will have lackluster damage for many people but (and I have yet to do the maths, I'll edit it in with details when I finish it) excellent tanking abilities to help keep the rest of the party alive.
EDIT: At 5th level (Armourer/3, Druid/2), wildshaping into a brown bear (not my favourite choice but it seems like a standard pick), you get:
-34*2 (bear wildshape HP) + 3*3 (Temp HP from Guardian) + 38 (assuming Con 14) HP. Total of 115 HP. Plus whatever you spend in spell slots on healing.
-17 (assuming splint by level 5) + 1 (Enhanced Armour) AC. Total 18. IMprovement on borwn bear of +7.
-8.5 (Bite) + 11 (Claws) DPR. Total 19.5 damage.
Assuming V Human to pick up the Sentinel feat to draw some more attacks.
At 7th level, I would use Giant Octopus moving HP up to 165 (Octopus has more HP plus your own gains). DPR actually goes down to 10 (one Tentacle attack) but you get an excellent Grapple effect rider and 15ft reach. This locks down enemies very well and keeps melee focussed monsters (that is, most monsters) largely out of use for at least a round. 15ft reach also now applies to opportunity and you're going reliably get opportunity attacks - especially if you're in between your ranged allies and apporaching enemies. You can grapple them on opportunity attacks as well, partially making Sentinel redundant, but hey ho! If you don't get opportunity attacks it's because they're attacking you (which is what we want) or because they're standing more than 15ft away from you (moving closer sounds sensible here - most rooms are small enough for 10ft speed not to matter too much. If they do, go Infiltrator and boost to 15ft. strongly conisder Dashing).
AC remains the same, unless you've upped your armour to Plate in which case, 19 AC. The biggest draw of the three level dip is to get yourself a 35% increase in AC (and therefore in effective HP). Though I'd defintely mention now that Barskin exists and gets AC to 16. So the AC improvement is only actually 15%. Still potent, but worth questioning whether it's worth taking three levels for. Oh, and put your other infusion into something you can give to another party member. +1 sword if you haven't got one, or Bags of Holding are always handy. We're also using metal armour here, which is another thing you'd have to clear with your DM given the druidic elements.
The build is very DM-dependent and more focussed on being fun to play than actual optimisation potential.
Lately I've been thinking (not so much for an actual character, more simple curiosity), would you be able to remain in Arcane Armour as a Moon Druid wildshaped? Usually, you have to ditch any armour you're in before wildshaping, but with the Arcane Armour theres this little section:
"The armor attaches to you and can’t be removed against your will. It also expands to cover your entire body, although you can retract or deploy the helmet as a bonus action. The armor replaces any missing limbs, functioning identically to a body part it is replacing."
In my head it would expand when you become a Giant Octopus, allowing you to wear your armour when Wildshaped, but I'm curious to see how other peple would read this. there's a similar section detailing magical armour:
"In most cases, a magic item that's meant to be worn can fit a creature regardless of size or build. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they magically adjust themselves to the wearer. Rare exceptions exist. If the story suggests a good reason for an item to fit only creatures of a certain size or shape, you can rule that it doesn't adjust. For example, drow-made armor might fit elves only. Dwarves might make items usable only by dwarf-sized and dwarf-shaped folk."
In this one, there's definitely more room for the DM to rule as they wish (although DMs obviously have full control on any ruling at their tables).
As much as RAW answers, I'm interested to see how people see this from a RAI perspective. And also Rule of Cool.
Chilling kinda vibe.
In terms of RAW, RAI, and RAF (Rules As Fun, aka Rule of Cool+Rule of Funny), Wild Shape specifically lets you leave your armor intact when you shape - the reason you usually don't want to is that you're wearing armor that won't fit your new shape, but it's explicitly allowed by the ability. From an Arcane Armor perspective, with or without Wild Shape you need a house rule from the DM on what constitutes Armor (similarly to how Forge Clerics need specific answers on being allowed to build a suit of plate piecemeal) - is it sufficient to have just a gauntlet that expands out when you want? Or a boot? A belt? Whatever the minimum answer is, that's the item that has to fit both your old body and your new one. When you have Arcane Armor expand, it adapts to whatever your body type is.
If I'm the DM, AA is such a core subclass feature that I would 100% rule a very generous minimum armor of "if you build a genuine suit of armor for yourself, any scrap large enough for you to recognize as a piece of the armor counts - it's more about what your character thinks of as armor than anything else", allowing you to e.g. carve a suit of half-plate from ironwood, then carve out a piece of it to wear as a necklace that would expand on demand.
Not only should this work RAW, its an incredibly cool idea. There are some potential issues with specific armor features, but the armor as a baseline should work. The relevant rules texts are:
So we know that you can keep you armor on, and it can remain functional if it fits. And the Arcane armor magically fits you.
The only features that might not work are features that are tied to specific body parts. For example, a snake can't use Thunder Gauntlets, since it lacks arms for gauntlets. An Octopus is probably a bit up to DM interpretation - Are Tentacles arms? Legs? Neither? Since Tentacles don't have hands, do they have Gauntlets? Etc, etc.
I really think you are all overstating how RAW this all is. While the idea sounds fun, I would strongly advise against getting too attached to the concept before asking your DM for a ruling on how it will work.
The powers of Arcane Armor start with a "suit of armor you are wearing". A suit of armor - not a belt or a necklace. It must be the whole suit of armor - being one of the listed types of armor on the equipment list.
Then it must be armor that you are wearing, not just armor that is vaguely in contact with your skin. The armor must already fit your form in order for you to be wearing it before it then activates its additional features.
Then you are relying on the sentence "expands to cover your entire body" to allow really a lot. Remember that this phrase is used as a modifier to to a "suit of armor you are wearing". It means that this armor which already fits you now expands to cover all the bits of your body that it previously didn't - like a space suit or diving suit level of coverage (though this increased coverage does not increase AC, it is just cosmetic). This sentence does not mean that you can tape some plate mail to the leg of a mammoth and it suddenly reforms into a perfectly designed suit of mammoth armor.
Druid Wildshape is generally not expected to work with armor. Most animals can't function with armor at all. Warhorses must be trained extensively to handle barding - which does not cover anything like all of their flesh. An octopus, meanwhile, seems a uniquely terrible idea for a creature to encase in steel and expect it to function. Armor is completely the opposite of an octopus' squishy, near fluid nature. If the octopus can't successfully "wear" a normal suit of armor then it will not qualify to have that armor expand over its body.
I'm not here to ruin everyone's fun - but if a player came to my table with a multiclass druid-armorer and expected to turn into an armored animal then it would be a hard "obviously not" from me. You are going to want to get DM pre-approval before you start down this path.
There was another thread a while back about this exact question and what “expands to cover your body” and “form-fitting” actually mean. No consensus was achieved.
Personally, I think the arcane armor description definitely would allow it to accommodate a wild-shaped form.
I'm totally on the side of allowing this at my table. Moon druids are somewhat OP in Tier 1, and then it's somewhat balanced after that as the beast forms begin to be on par with other character classes' abilities. And then it drops off further after that as a strategy.
In my opinion, this would be a nice bump to maintain the viability of the strategy for awhile (still not world-ending or anything), and they give up a huge chunk of spellcasting power to do it. unless I'm missing something big, I don't see how it ruins the power balance enough to say no to it.
(And that's despite me recognizing that the RAW come up somewhat short in outright allowing this.)
Just to clarify what I mean by "should work RAW" (instead of "absolutely does work RAW") - I mean that the based on my interpretation of the features, no homebrew or home rules should be required to make this work. I could have worded that first part better, but I'm happy with the rest of the post. I do still think the wording of the features does inherently support the interaction, but definitely I'll admit that I could see a different DM coming to a different conclusion about the wording of Arcane Armor, as you have in your post.
I really wouldn't be concerned about balance with this interaction. Moon druid multiclasses are held back by Moon Druid's inherent scaling. A brown bear is amazing at level 2, but its pretty mediocre at level 5. That pattern is going to repeat across all levels. Moon druids rely on hitting their spikes and scaling consistently in order for their Wild Shapes to stay relevant, and losing 3 levels is a pretty big penalty that is going to really harm the power of their shapes.
Grabbing AC for free could be dangerous, but that 3 level dip just means you are gonna be slapping some extra AC on an underleveled Moon druid. Nothing is gonna break.
No, this is not. You're determining this without even considering all the rules in play.
Arcane Armor has specific rules that might suggest it works - equating "expands to cover" with "radically changes form to fit a completely different body" is a stretch, especially considering the context that Regent brings up. Technically the armor could expand in size without changing form at all until it was big enough to fit your new body inside it. It would still fit the wording but would obviously not be functional.
Wildshape has specific rules that clearly says this does not work, primarily a line everyone seems to have skipped over: "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form, and any equipment that the new form can’t wear must either fall to the ground or merge with it." This is very clear language. Your equipment doesn't change size or shape. No room for exceptions, that's just what happens when you wildshape.
Which is the more specific rule that overrides the other? That is a call that only the DM can make. There is no RAW process to resolve this conflict outside of the adjudication powers granted to the DM. Anyone claiming that either way is definitively how it works is taking the liberty of making that ruling. We did this for like 10 pages the last time it came up and that's pretty much where it landed.
Would I allow it? I'm not sure. Purely looking at the rules I would say wildshape wins out if only because it is worded more clearly, and balance-wise beasts are notorious for having terrible AC and wildshape has been balanced around that. But Druid/Artificer is otherwise a pretty bad combination and honestly it would need all the help it can get. Your stats would be spread thin and you'd be at least 3 levels behind a normal Moon druid.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Those are not *all* the relevant rules. The relevant rules for Arcane Armor are the full section for that feature including the phrases "a suit of armor you are wearing" and "You gain the following benefits while wearing this armor".
If you are not wearing the armor then it has no power to change. If the octopus you are turning into cannot wear the armor then the armor cannot be worn by the octopus and it cannot change to fit them. The DM decides what creatures can and cannot wear armor - regardless of the expanding nature of that armor.
Now it is possible that the phrase "expands to cover your entire body" includes complete transformation of shape and nature into an entirely unrelated suit of armour that is appropriate for an octopus, but to claim that this is the only possible interpretation of that phrase is absurd.
The only changing verb here is "expand to cover" - not shrink, not change shape - just expand to cover. In my reading of the entire feature, this phrase means that the existing suit of plate armor is still entirely present and in the same shape and format before the expansion - just that now it expands to cover your neck and wrists and face and back of knees and so on. The armor is still the exact same suit of plate armor it was before the "expanding to cover" but it is now covering more.
If you change into a different creature then that form must be able to actually wear the armor before anything else happens. If you change into a form which cannot wear the plate armor then the plate armor cannot be worn and cannot expand to cover it.
Again, I am not saying this to prove that my interpretation is the only RAW truth. But if the interpretation of RAW is not universally agreed on, then any player should be strongly advised to get their DM to sign off on a character build before the player spends weeks or months of effort building their character in that direction.
I think this is well into the DM fait territory per the relevant wording of Wildshape "...the DM decides whether it is practical for the new form to wear a piece of equipment". So ultimately the decision is not RAW per say. That said, having never seen this combo at a table, what are the problematic gameplay implications? (to my mind increased AC could be an issues in some cases).
As a side note I had a player want to run an artificer/druid type character. After discussing it with the player, we chose to us the Circle of the Forge Druid from 'Exploring Eberron', with a bit of a reflavor. Though non-official, it seemed the easiest way to implement the concept in that particular game. Just something to think about if your DM might be amenable to secondary sources. ( I know some DMs may not allow the book, but it never hurts to ask).
cool to see it laid out like that--thanks! Even looking at it, I maintain the increase in power is on par with what you give up--ie: ASI (delayed, anyway), full spellcasting levels, being able to focus on fewer ability scores).
It's not going to work for every group, but I don't suspect it will break most situations.
I wouldn't grant the use of the gauntlets. The armor may alter to fit an octopus' arm or a wolf's paw, but I'd rule in most cases that the beast forms can't actually use it. (I guess apes, etc.?)
Couple of notes:
The main boost is going from 11 AC -> 19 AC. Which yea, that's a pretty significant boost if it were on a strong creature, but stacking AC on an otherwise fairly underpowered creature doesn't really do much for you. Even using extra AC to protect concentration is diminished from the fact that your spellcasting progression is lagging behind.
Honestly, I think the more powerful option with this combo is just slapping 2 levels of druid onto a higher leveled Armorer, just to be able to give a brownbear's HP cushion in combat. But I still don't think it crosses into dangerous territory - there are plenty of existing builds that would still overshadow this.
I mean, I don't know what else to tell you. Nothing in your post sounds even remotely powerful. A single 2d6 ranged attack falls off pretty hard past level 5. Transforming into a CR 5 Giant Crocodile with 19 AC and a weak ranged attack as a level 18-20 PC is extremely underpowered. Compare a basic moon druid at those levels with Beast Spells and eventually their amazing capstone. Its not even close.
This is a cool, evocative concept that could be fun to play and is still functional at an average table, but its just flat out not that powerful.
Looking at the benefits laid out here it seems... suboptimal? From an RP perspective if a player wanted to do it I would probably allow it as nothing seems broken, and the loss of higher level druid benefits is a balancing factor.
What? Gonna need a citation on this. Equipment is equipment whether it's magical or mundane - this is how the word is used everywhere. Arcane Armor is still armor and does not have any special rules that say it is suddenly not equipment anymore. You are reading the AA rules as broadly as possible and reading the wildshape rules as narrowly as possible to fit how you want them to work.
Let me try this again. You're saying AA has specific rules that override the general rule posed by wildshape. I'm saying it is equally valid to say that wildshape has specific rules that override the general rule of AA. There is no way to determine which rule overrides the other without DM intervention.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Sure there is. The wild shape rules speak of "equipment." Anything that only affects a smaller subset of equipment is definitionally more specific and will override wild shape's language. Magical equipment is assumed to adjust to fit the wearer's body type. Arcane armor expands to cover your entire body. Since "magical equipment" and "arcane armor" are more specific than "equipment," there's no ambiguity.
Nothing I wrote even remotely implies this. Obviously magical equipment falls under equipment. But a rule that specifies "magical equipment" is obviously more specific than a rule that affects "equipment" in general, and specific beats general.
I am not interested in arguing about whether or not the shape-changing properties of magical armor allow it to be used by wild-shaped druids (I do not use that rule in my game anyway). But someone actually suggested "well this rule is about equipment in general and this other rule is about specifically magical equipment, so there's just no way to tell which is specific and which is general," which is so obviously false that I had to say something.
Just to clarify some numbers:
The more I go through the math on this build, the more it becomes clear that this is far from overpowered - its actually fairly underpowered. You're a very sturdy sack of meat points with weak martial damage and weak magic/utility. Even if you bump yourself to 6 to add in flaming sphere to your combo, you aren't closing the gap enough, because other classes are also growing in power - more feats, more spells, auras, subclass abilities, etc.
And for the OP and others who like the idea, I really am not trying to dunk on this combo as hard as this post is making it sound. I don't think you need to optimize your character to have a good game of D&D, and I think this combo is still functional enough to not completely weigh down your party. I just really want to dispel the notion that this combo could somehow be overpowered or dangerous. I don't want a DM rejecting the idea out of fear - if they truly have the interpretation that the features are incompatible, then that's their decision. But just know that the combo isn't going to break anything, and depending on the table, you might even need to throw this player a bone in order for them to keep up with the rest of their party.
Yep, my train of thought is not to create an optimised build, but one that would be fun to play (although the two aren't incompatible). And I largely posted here because of the ambiguity - I wanted to see how the majority of DMs would rule if at their own table - interesting to see the range of answers.
However, my own input for optimisation would be to largely ignore the Lightning Launcher and rely on the wepaons provided by your new form. To use the example of the Giant Croc someone mentioned earlier, Bite and Tail will deal a lot more damage than the armourer weapons. I would also strongly consider whether Guardian might be more attractive than Infiltrator for an Armour Model. Temp HP (EDIT: although only a little now I think about it) and high AC adds a large pool of durability, plus what are essentially a large number of extra HP.
Pick up some good Defender abilities (it's probably not viable to keep using Thunder Gauntlets for long and some DMs might rule you can't use the things anyway) like the Sentinel feat (this is why I picked out Giant Octopus as my example creature - it functions really well with 15ft reach to control, or at least deincentivise, large areas with opportunity attacks). Converting low level spell slots into Goodberries has always been a strategy of mine for Moon Druids. Survive in your form for the combat then eat them afterwards to top you back up. Also, distribute them among the party to make up for the fact that you can't Healing Word the party when wild-shaped.
The build will have lackluster damage for many people but (and I have yet to do the maths, I'll edit it in with details when I finish it) excellent tanking abilities to help keep the rest of the party alive.
EDIT: At 5th level (Armourer/3, Druid/2), wildshaping into a brown bear (not my favourite choice but it seems like a standard pick), you get:
-34*2 (bear wildshape HP) + 3*3 (Temp HP from Guardian) + 38 (assuming Con 14) HP. Total of 115 HP. Plus whatever you spend in spell slots on healing.
-17 (assuming splint by level 5) + 1 (Enhanced Armour) AC. Total 18. IMprovement on borwn bear of +7.
-8.5 (Bite) + 11 (Claws) DPR. Total 19.5 damage.
Assuming V Human to pick up the Sentinel feat to draw some more attacks.
At 7th level, I would use Giant Octopus moving HP up to 165 (Octopus has more HP plus your own gains). DPR actually goes down to 10 (one Tentacle attack) but you get an excellent Grapple effect rider and 15ft reach. This locks down enemies very well and keeps melee focussed monsters (that is, most monsters) largely out of use for at least a round. 15ft reach also now applies to opportunity and you're going reliably get opportunity attacks - especially if you're in between your ranged allies and apporaching enemies. You can grapple them on opportunity attacks as well, partially making Sentinel redundant, but hey ho! If you don't get opportunity attacks it's because they're attacking you (which is what we want) or because they're standing more than 15ft away from you (moving closer sounds sensible here - most rooms are small enough for 10ft speed not to matter too much. If they do, go Infiltrator and boost to 15ft. strongly conisder Dashing).
AC remains the same, unless you've upped your armour to Plate in which case, 19 AC. The biggest draw of the three level dip is to get yourself a 35% increase in AC (and therefore in effective HP). Though I'd defintely mention now that Barskin exists and gets AC to 16. So the AC improvement is only actually 15%. Still potent, but worth questioning whether it's worth taking three levels for. Oh, and put your other infusion into something you can give to another party member. +1 sword if you haven't got one, or Bags of Holding are always handy. We're also using metal armour here, which is another thing you'd have to clear with your DM given the druidic elements.
The build is very DM-dependent and more focussed on being fun to play than actual optimisation potential.
Chilling kinda vibe.