The difference between the items and the feature is that they literally use none of the same words to describe what they're doing? That's hardly just "interpretation." Thanks for the debate thus far, though, hopefully some readers were educated or entertained along the way!
Wildshape asks you to replace some "game statistics", which include your physical ability scores. These items/abilities ask for the same treatment. As i noted above, none indicates that ASIs should be turned off, only one affirms that they're not (along with providing some additional caveats). If you cannot answer the question, don't just sweep it under the rug.
There is no question in what you just typed.
The instruction to replace your stats is in the first bullet point. The instruction that class abilities still apply is in a later bullet point. And since it does actually add to the 'what happens' list in the first bullet point, which otherwise seems all inclusive, it follows that said instruction is to be done subsequently.
The question is whether stats from feats and/or ASI's count as class abilities or not. No one seems to have the opinion that other aspects of feats do not qualify, which is what I have been getting at with the Athlete feat question.
The order of the list world only matter if the level of specificity was the same. One of the first rules is specific beats general. Replacing your stats is much more specific than applying class and racial features, IMHO.
As for the rest, I don't find your arguments compelling. You are right that your game statistics are more than just your scores, but if someone asked me for my characters stats, I would include the increases from ASIs in that. If they are replaced, even if they are a continuously applied bonus... Well, they are still being applied, but to your character's stats.
You also still haven't addressed the common sense aspect: why would the fact that you've built up some muscles on your body mean that the beast's body has more muscles? And why would that only apply to class and racial ASIs, not the increased score you may have put there from the array or rolling? It makes zero sense, and would completely break my suspension of disbelief.
The question is whether stats from feats and/or ASI's count as class abilities or not. No one seems to have the opinion that other aspects of feats do not qualify, which is what I have been getting at with the Athlete feat question.
No, it's a question of order. Let me give another example
A battle master has a subclass feature of "You learn three maneuvers". If you wild shape, do you at the time you take on a wild shape learn three maneuvers? No, you only learned the maneuvers at the time you leveled up, but you retain the knowledge of the maneuvers even if you have wild shape. The learning is a class feature, but it's a one-time benefit that is not repeated.
In that model, the ASI was a one-time adjustment that has already occurred, so it is overwritten.
As for the rest, I don't find your arguments compelling. You are right that your game statistics are more than just your scores, but if someone asked me for my characters stats, I would include the increases from ASIs in that. If they are replaced, even if they are a continuously applied bonus... Well, they are still being applied, but to your character's stats.
...
I am so happy to hear you've come around and agree with us!!!!! Your character's statistics while Wild Shaped are the Tiger's as it benefits from your retained class and race features! And you seem agree that should include your ASIs in any calculation of your "character stats", including "your [ability] scores"! So, you agree that while Wild Shaped, your Tiger's ability scores benefit from your ASIs!!!!
Wonderful when we can work through things and find common ground, great job everyone.
As for the rest, I don't find your arguments compelling. You are right that your game statistics are more than just your scores, but if someone asked me for my characters stats, I would include the increases from ASIs in that. If they are replaced, even if they are a continuously applied bonus... Well, they are still being applied, but to your character's stats.
...
I am so happy to hear you've come around and agree with us!!!!! Your character's statistics while Wild Shaped are the Tiger's as it benefits from your retained class and race features! And you seem agree that should include your ASIs in any calculation of your "character stats", including "your [ability] scores"! So, you agree that while Wild Shaped, your Tiger's ability scores benefit from your ASIs!!!!
Wonderful when we can work through things and find common ground, great job everyone.
No, not at all. My stats include the increases applied. When they are replaced, they are gone. The ASIs don't get applued again.
Nice try at trying to twist my words, but no cigar.
The question is whether stats from feats and/or ASI's count as class abilities or not. No one seems to have the opinion that other aspects of feats do not qualify, which is what I have been getting at with the Athlete feat question.
No, it's a question of order. Let me give another example
A battle master has a subclass feature of "You learn three maneuvers". If you wild shape, do you at the time you take on a wild shape learn three maneuvers? No, you only learned the maneuvers at the time you leveled up, but you retain the knowledge of the maneuvers even if you have wild shape. The learning is a class feature, but it's a one-time benefit that is not repeated.
In that model, the ASI was a one-time adjustment that has already occurred, so it is overwritten.
You learn how to be faster, stronger, whatever. But so does a leveled animal
You also learn things like how to jump on a shorter start. That is a physical ability but also is deemed to still be there (if you have the feat).
Leaning a "skill", like a technique to jump further without a run up, is different to building more muscles, making your body more nimble, or your body becoming more durable.
Also, a DM could well say that the ability from the great doesn't apply, because the body shape of the beast is significantly different to the character so the techniques don't apply.
Ah well, guess it was too much to hope that you meant what you said. I do agree that increases from ASI are part of "statistics," which is why (to go back to the Gauntlets of Ogre Power hypotehical) the Tiger's statistics aren't the static block from the MM, but rather that block as modified by your ASI and every other class feature you're explicitly directed to retain and apply to it. You're almost there, if you'll just walk through the door and join me...
So to summarize what the actual disagreement is here, we will take an Orc Druid, level 8, who started with a roll of 15 in their strength, then applied racial bonus, took the Athlete feat for +1 Str at lvl 4, and used an ASI at lvl 8 for +2 Str.
CC believes that the strength of this character is:
15 +2 racial +1 athlete +2 ASI(STR)
Most of the rest of us believe that the strength of this character is 20.
The result of CC's interpretation of that attribute as an ongoing composite of various bonuses is that when this orc druid turns into a wolf then their strength would become:
12 wolf +2 racial +1 athlete +2 ASI (I'm not actually certain if CC would add the +2 racial, they can clarify if they wish).
The other camp believes the attribute called Strength is replaced from 20 (lvl8 orc druid) to 12 (wolf). [To answer Kotath's question, the wolf keeps the other benefits from the Athlete feat, because that's what the rules say]
I personally don't believe that the text of the books at all supports CC's interpretation of attribute as composite base plus ongoing bonuses, but I don't think there is anything further to argue about it. We have reached the stage of both camps quoting the same rule text and claiming that it supports their argument not the opponents'.
I'm going to check out of the discussion here with my final contribution being that if you do subscribe to CC's attribute-bonus concept, then you can go ahead and add ASIs to wildshape physical stats. I think it is not correct, that the lead designer of the game disagrees with it fundamentally, that the effect of adding the ASI to the new form remains incredibly complex and unclear, and that it is a minority belief which will result in significant disagreement when you play with others. If you believe that an attribute is no more complex than its current value, then you obviously do not apply ASIs to wildshape forms.
Also, a DM could well say that the ability from the great doesn't apply, because the body shape of the beast is significantly different to the character so the techniques don't apply.
Yes, the "physically capable" clause is the only valid exit ramp I recognize from my interpretation, and is something each DM must make a call on on their own, because "physically capable" isn't defined in a core rulebook. See post #63.
Ah well, guess it was too much to hope that you meant what you said. I do agree that increases from ASI are part of "statistics," which is why (to go back to the Gauntlets of Ogre Power hypotehical) the Tiger's statistics aren't the static block from the MM, but rather that block as modified by your ASI and every other class feature you're explicitly directed to retain and apply to it. You're almost there, if you'll just walk through the door and join me...
Again, I disagree with your interpretation of the rules, and it makes zero sense that your bigger muscles translate to bigger muscles on the creature you change into.
I don't disagree that your strength "is 20." But it "is 20" in the same way that your AC "is 16", a single number which is a sum of multiple base scores and other modifiers.
I think the core disagreement is whether you think an ASI (and a race ASI, and a feat which provides a +1) is increasing that sum, or just increased it in the past. I don't see any problems caused by it increasing, but your camp sees that interaction with Wild Shape as a problem. My concern for your camp is, what happens if you change races, lose levels, or otherwise retrain the feat/ASI... do you really feel it's no longer "part of" your ability score's sum, and that you'd keep its benefit even after losing it? Also, your reading just seems more complicated.
But yes, the camp lines are drawn. What it has to do with Rage is, if you think ASI was a one-time class feature with no ongoing application, or if Tiger stats are locked in place like a Gauntlets of Ogre Power with no ability to be modified regardless of your features... what other class/race features do you feel that way about? Tough? Mobile? Bloodhunter Mutant Mutagens like Potency? Barbarian AC calculations or Rage damage bonuses?
But yes, the camp lines are drawn. What it has to do with Rage is, if you think ASI was a one-time class feature with no ongoing application, or if Tiger stats are locked in place like a Gauntlets of Ogre Power with no ability to be modified regardless of your features... what other class/race features do you feel that way about? Tough? Mobile? Bloodhunter Mutant Mutagens like Potency? Barbarian AC calculations or Rage damage bonuses?
For me, it mainly comes down to how relevant the abilities/features are. For example:
So, as I said for a Strength ASI, this (to me) is because you have honed your body, increased you muscle mass and become physically stronger. It makes little sense that said training has made your Wild Shape form stronger, too. You are in control of the shape you create, so if you could make it a rat with bulging muscles, there is no reason you couldn't do that before the ASI. It makes no sense, which helps to inform my decision that when "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast", you would not add your ASIs back on*.
Tough, I would not say increases the beast's HP, just as your Hit Points Class Feature doesn't, because there is a very specific rule in Wild Shape which says "When you transform, you assume the beast’s hit points and Hit Dice".
Mobile, I am not sure about the speed bump, but the other two are more of a skill than a physical ability and would still be valid. For the speed bump, I think it would be up to someone to convince me that this wasn't a development of muscles in the legs, and instead was a skill whereby you know how to move faster, and that said skill was transferable to the animal form.
* Note: Throughout all of this, I have seen nothing to counter this argument. Why would the rat body be stronger just because you have built muscles on your human/elven/orcish body? If you can produce a bestial body with those extra muscles using Wild Shape, why could you not do so before? If your strength in your normal body affects the strength of the bestial body, why is it only the ASIs which do so and not the high values from the rolls, array or point buy? None of these make any sense, to me. There is too much conflict IMHO to justify using this interpretation over the more commonly held view (which is also backed by JC).
Also, when we come down to the point about changing race or class... These are non-standard, rare events which would need handling with the help of your DM, and are always going to result in weirdness and inconsistencies. For instance, if you change race due to being Reincarnated, why would you suddenly forget your Elf Weapon Training or Dwarven Combat Training? Why would you gain them if you became that race, when you never received that training? DM intervention (or at least a good explanation) is required to make these work without breaking the suspension of disbelief.
Okay, want a belabored and detailed explanation for why ASI (like every other class and race feature) are ongoing functions, rather than one-time math?
1: Occam's Razor
The most straightforward way to phrase my position: "An Ability Score Increase increases one ability score of your choice"
The most straightforward way to phrase your position: "An Ability Score Increase provides a one-time increase to one ability score of your choice, but no increase to that score in the event that that score is replaced by a new score."
The text of the ability: "When you reach 4th level... you can increase one ability score of your choice..."
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This can be said the other way around.
The simplest way to phrase your position in line with other abilities in the rules: "An ASI provides a bonus to one score of your choice"
The simplest way to phrase my position: "An ASI increases one ability score of your choice"
What you are basically trying to say is that only your reading of the words on the page makes any sense, which is bovine smelly stuff.
2: "Features" in general are ongoing, constantly-applying benefits of your character
This to some extent is obvious: if you gain a feature at level 1, you don't lose it when you're no longer level 1, it continues to be a part of your character. But if you need that spelled out:
Your race also increases one or more of your ability scores, which you determine in step 3. Note these increases and remember to apply them later.
"Increases" is present indicative tense. "Apply them" is ongoing.
Or, "apply them later" indicates that you need to add them to the score at a later date. It does not necessarily mean it is an ongoing effect.
Edit: Note that at that point in the character creation process, you do not have any ability scores, so you cannot apply any increases. Ability score generation comes 2 steps later later, following the process in the PHB.
Let us say you are moving offices. You will be given a box for your stuff. I hand you a label and tell you to remember to apply it to the box later, I am not saying you will need to continually apply it to the box, but that when you get the box you need to stick the label on it.
So, again, both interpretations have validity.
Your character receives a number of benefits from your choice of class. Many of these benefits are class features — capabilities (including spellcasting) that set your character apart from members of other classes.
Class features are "capabilities," not past accomplishments. Again, these features "set your character apart" in an ongoing tense.
Fair point, but not a strong one.
On your character sheet, record all the features that your class gives you at 1st level.
"Gives you," not "has given you" or "gave you." Class features are ongoing, and you continue to benefit from them, not just at the time they are unlocked.
Again, you are taking only a single possible interpretation. I could well say "On a sheet of paper, record all the presents that Father Christmas gives you". This doesn't make the giving ongoing. Santa is not continually giving you a present, but handing them to you in discrete instances.
When your character gains a level, his or her class often grants additional features, as detailed in the class description. Some of these features allow you to increase your ability scores, either increasing two scores by 1 each or increasing one score by 2.
"Increasing", "features allow you to increase." Verb tense on these again describes a feature providing an ongoing increase, not a one time increase which is done and over with.
Again, this can just as easily be read as a one-off increase.
If I said, "When I snap my fingers, you can increase the amount of water in these jugs, either increasing the amount in two jugs by 1l, or increasing the amount in one jug by 2l", it would be pretty clear that I was giving you a one-off action, not an ongoing ability or right to increase them whenever you wanted.
Each class entry in this chapter includes a table summarizing the benefits you gain at every level, and a detailed explanation of each one.
Features are described as "benefits you gain at every level." No class, nor the introduction, ever introduces the concept of a feature/benefit you lose, or which you only gain temporarily in one level but lose in later levels.
I could go on, but this is already dragging, and you get the idea. Class Features are, in general, benefits you gain that provide an enduring benefit to your character. ASI are a class feature. Absent any language telling you that ASI are NOT an enduring benefit, they should be treated the same as every other feature, providing benefits now and in the future, as long as they are retained.
Of course not, because you don't lose abilities. However, the enduring ability you have gained is a higher ability score in your stats. If that score is then temporarily overwritten, you haven't lost that ability, any more than you have lost proficiency in a weapon if you don't have that weapon. You no longer have access to that increased stat, but you still have it waiting for when you can use it again (i.e. when you are back in the body that stat applies to).
3. It's a distinction without a difference anyway
We're getting into some real Quine "what's the meaning of rabbit?" territory with all this talk of ASI being a lasting feature that either has provided a +2 increase but provides no current increase, vs. ASI being a lasting feature that provides a +2 increase. Either way, in every context OTHER than Wild Shape, your Constitution is +2 above what it would be if you hadn't taken the feat. ASI doesn't dive into belaboring one interpretation over another. Wild Shape provides no language telling you how to interpret your retained +2 Constitution ASI. What does increase "really" mean? Well, it means whatever it's useful for it to mean.
I don't think it's useful to consider an ASI to have given a past increase which is no longer live. I write "Druid 4: ASI +2 Con" on my character sheet next to every other feature providing an ongoing benefit, and its useful to treat that +2 Con as the same ongoing benefit. It's reasonable too; like I suggested a few posts further up... what if your DM lets you retrain feats? What if you get Wished or cursed to a lower level, and lose the class level that provided that ASI? Would it really be realistic to argue to your DM "you can take away that ASI, but it already increased my score so it doesn't matter!" Or, Wished or Reincarnated to change yourself from a Yuan Ti to a Half Orc... are you keeping your "past" Yuan-Ti mental ability score increases because they "already happened," and aren't a present and ongoing race feature that's being replaced by your new Half Orc ASI? No, it's not a reasonable position that any player would take.
I have addresses the rare and complicated situation of changing race/class or Wishing yourself back levels (although, why on earth would you?!).
Bending over backwords to assume an unwritten "it already happened, and provides no future increase!" limitation on ASI is complicated linquistically (see 1), treats ASI differently from all other class features without any text suggesting you should do so (see 2), and doesn't seem useful/reasonable in any other context you're likely to interact with an ASI (see 3). Just about the ONLY use that such an interpretation gives you, is to nerf Wild Shape...
It would take one sentence of erratain Wild Shape to make your desired restriction explicit ("Your Beast's physical ability scores cannot be improved by your race, class, or other features."),
I see both options as equally linguistically valid. It would take one sentence of errata to make your desired interpretation explicit, and there are multiple ways. For instance:
In the first wild shape bullet point, add "You retain any ability score increases to your Strength, Dexterity and Constitution"
Change the ASI text to read something along the lines of "When you reach 4th level... you gain a bonus to one ability score of your choice of 2, or you gain a bonus to two ability scores of your choice of 1".
In the 4th bullet point, add "You may apply any ASI you have taken to the stats of your new form".
but it takes pages and pages of interpretation of unwritten rules in multiple chapters to provide that rule in the currently published PHB.
Only if you willingly blind yourself to alternative, linguistically valid interpretations of the written rules, as noted above.
I'm willing to accept that there might occasionally be an unwritten assumption in the PHB, when making it explicit would have required a wasteful amount of space, but... come on.
This is the weakest argument of all. The rules of D&D are fairly well known for being badly written and open to multiple interpretations.
This rule COULD have been printed very simply, but wasn't? Wild Shape printed a similar exception for senses, but didn't for ability scores? After 6 years of having the chance to do so? Come onnnnn
Maybe they thought the explicit "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast" was enough to avoid confusion.
All else being equal, I could accept that there are 2 equally valid interpretations and a DM's call on the badly-written rules. However, when one would mean the form you become gaining the benefit of the extra muscles you have developed on your own body, and JC has published an opinion which supports the other option, I think the weight of the argument swings strongly against applying ASIs to the bestial form.
Ah well, guess it was too much to hope that you meant what you said. I do agree that increases from ASI are part of "statistics," which is why (to go back to the Gauntlets of Ogre Power hypotehical) the Tiger's statistics aren't the static block from the MM, but rather that block as modified by your ASI and every other class feature you're explicitly directed to retain and apply to it. You're almost there, if you'll just walk through the door and join me...
Again, I disagree with your interpretation of the rules, and it makes zero sense that your bigger muscles translate to bigger muscles on the creature you change into.
Would Hercules or Thor transformed into animal forms be any less divine? If you worked out as a humanoid, why would you not turn into an animal that had similarly worked out? You are turning into an adult of whatever species, not into a newborn, and the main reason stat blocks are 'blocks' rather than modifiers to rolled numbers is that it is easier and faster and more than sufficient for most situations.
I don't find this very persuasive. If you can transform into an animal who has "worked out", then why only if you've had an ASI? The druid is choosing the form he WSs into, so why is he unable to choose that the animal has bigger muscles? And why isn't the druid with 6 strength not transformed into a weakened version of the animal?
If a god transformed into an animal, that's blatantly a completely different matter. A god could realistically be expected to be able to choose whatever shape he wants without the restrictions placed on mortals, so could choose to be a weedy lion or a buff rabbit (or, even, a newborn). However, if a L10 human druid could transform into a muscular vole, why does that depend on the condition of the muscles of his human body?
There is no magic involved in an ASI, just hard work over time, whether in increasing muscle mass or training one's mind. To carry that over to the wild shaped form is frankly, in my opinion, ludicrous.
This ASI argument is funny. By this logic a 9 STR Druid who uses their ASI to boost their STR to a flat zero is stronger in wildshape than a druid with a flat 16 STR. Funny stuff.
This ASI argument is funny. By this logic a 9 STR Druid who uses their ASI to boost their STR to a flat zero is stronger in wildshape than a druid with a flat 16 STR. Funny stuff.
How is that any different from a beast sidekick with a 9 str before ASI's being stronger than a non-leveled 'normal' beast of the same species?
because the SIDEKICK RULES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH WILDSHAPE
So wild shaping into a Wolf, for example, would set your STR to a hard 12. ASI and Feat increases, as they are passive increases, wouldn't. An external increase - ie. a magic item worn that adds a bonus if DM allows it - would.
Basic order of operations: ASI/Feat -> Wild Shape -> Magic Item(s)
ASI/Feat bonuses augment base stats which are then overwritten by Wild Shape which is then increased by magical effects.
Yeah, I was only talking about the HP and Ability Score modifying parts of feats. The rest of the feat should still apply if it makes sense for the Wild Shape form. That's my interpretation based on the response in Sage Advice; Tough only affects HP, after all.
If it is just 'hard work over time,' why is there no downtime option to build up stats? Why are ASI's tied to class and level in that class?
To me, an ASI is only at a specific level because it is gamified. You have been building strength, for instance, over the last few months and have finally got to the point where it is able to be represented in-game by a stat bump. They could, I suppose, show this as approximately a half-point stat bump per level (for most classes), but instead they represent it as 2 points (i.e. enough to definitely make a difference in game) every 4 levels.
I know that some view it differently. For instance, some say that you spend some downtime training after a level up to gain the class features of that level. In that case, you would be training in that downtime to get your ASI. However, you cannot say "I'm a level 1 fighter, but I want to train for my ASI now", just as you can't say "I'm a level 1 fighter, I want to train for my extra attack now".
This is the reason you can't just train for it*. Certain features occur at certain levels, because that's how the game is designed. There are plenty of other things you could say the same for.
* Of course, https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/other-rewards#Training gives rules around training which can be given as rewards. However, these are supposed to be very rare. As this lists training for a feat as a reward, and an ASI is equivalent to a feat, I would say that this would be an option.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The difference between the items and the feature is that they literally use none of the same words to describe what they're doing? That's hardly just "interpretation." Thanks for the debate thus far, though, hopefully some readers were educated or entertained along the way!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The order of the list world only matter if the level of specificity was the same. One of the first rules is specific beats general. Replacing your stats is much more specific than applying class and racial features, IMHO.
As for the rest, I don't find your arguments compelling. You are right that your game statistics are more than just your scores, but if someone asked me for my characters stats, I would include the increases from ASIs in that. If they are replaced, even if they are a continuously applied bonus... Well, they are still being applied, but to your character's stats.
You also still haven't addressed the common sense aspect: why would the fact that you've built up some muscles on your body mean that the beast's body has more muscles? And why would that only apply to class and racial ASIs, not the increased score you may have put there from the array or rolling? It makes zero sense, and would completely break my suspension of disbelief.
No, it's a question of order. Let me give another example
A battle master has a subclass feature of "You learn three maneuvers". If you wild shape, do you at the time you take on a wild shape learn three maneuvers? No, you only learned the maneuvers at the time you leveled up, but you retain the knowledge of the maneuvers even if you have wild shape. The learning is a class feature, but it's a one-time benefit that is not repeated.
In that model, the ASI was a one-time adjustment that has already occurred, so it is overwritten.
I am so happy to hear you've come around and agree with us!!!!! Your character's statistics while Wild Shaped are the Tiger's as it benefits from your retained class and race features! And you seem agree that should include your ASIs in any calculation of your "character stats", including "your [ability] scores"! So, you agree that while Wild Shaped, your Tiger's ability scores benefit from your ASIs!!!!
Wonderful when we can work through things and find common ground, great job everyone.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
No, not at all. My stats include the increases applied. When they are replaced, they are gone. The ASIs don't get applued again.
Nice try at trying to twist my words, but no cigar.
Leaning a "skill", like a technique to jump further without a run up, is different to building more muscles, making your body more nimble, or your body becoming more durable.
Also, a DM could well say that the ability from the great doesn't apply, because the body shape of the beast is significantly different to the character so the techniques don't apply.
Ah well, guess it was too much to hope that you meant what you said. I do agree that increases from ASI are part of "statistics," which is why (to go back to the Gauntlets of Ogre Power hypotehical) the Tiger's statistics aren't the static block from the MM, but rather that block as modified by your ASI and every other class feature you're explicitly directed to retain and apply to it. You're almost there, if you'll just walk through the door and join me...
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
So to summarize what the actual disagreement is here, we will take an Orc Druid, level 8, who started with a roll of 15 in their strength, then applied racial bonus, took the Athlete feat for +1 Str at lvl 4, and used an ASI at lvl 8 for +2 Str.
CC believes that the strength of this character is:
15 +2 racial +1 athlete +2 ASI(STR)
Most of the rest of us believe that the strength of this character is 20.
The result of CC's interpretation of that attribute as an ongoing composite of various bonuses is that when this orc druid turns into a wolf then their strength would become:
12 wolf +2 racial +1 athlete +2 ASI (I'm not actually certain if CC would add the +2 racial, they can clarify if they wish).
The other camp believes the attribute called Strength is replaced from 20 (lvl8 orc druid) to 12 (wolf). [To answer Kotath's question, the wolf keeps the other benefits from the Athlete feat, because that's what the rules say]
I personally don't believe that the text of the books at all supports CC's interpretation of attribute as composite base plus ongoing bonuses, but I don't think there is anything further to argue about it. We have reached the stage of both camps quoting the same rule text and claiming that it supports their argument not the opponents'.
I'm going to check out of the discussion here with my final contribution being that if you do subscribe to CC's attribute-bonus concept, then you can go ahead and add ASIs to wildshape physical stats. I think it is not correct, that the lead designer of the game disagrees with it fundamentally, that the effect of adding the ASI to the new form remains incredibly complex and unclear, and that it is a minority belief which will result in significant disagreement when you play with others. If you believe that an attribute is no more complex than its current value, then you obviously do not apply ASIs to wildshape forms.
I can't remember how this all relates Rage.
Yes, the "physically capable" clause is the only valid exit ramp I recognize from my interpretation, and is something each DM must make a call on on their own, because "physically capable" isn't defined in a core rulebook. See post #63.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Again, I disagree with your interpretation of the rules, and it makes zero sense that your bigger muscles translate to bigger muscles on the creature you change into.
I don't disagree that your strength "is 20." But it "is 20" in the same way that your AC "is 16", a single number which is a sum of multiple base scores and other modifiers.
I think the core disagreement is whether you think an ASI (and a race ASI, and a feat which provides a +1) is increasing that sum, or just increased it in the past. I don't see any problems caused by it increasing, but your camp sees that interaction with Wild Shape as a problem. My concern for your camp is, what happens if you change races, lose levels, or otherwise retrain the feat/ASI... do you really feel it's no longer "part of" your ability score's sum, and that you'd keep its benefit even after losing it? Also, your reading just seems more complicated.
But yes, the camp lines are drawn. What it has to do with Rage is, if you think ASI was a one-time class feature with no ongoing application, or if Tiger stats are locked in place like a Gauntlets of Ogre Power with no ability to be modified regardless of your features... what other class/race features do you feel that way about? Tough? Mobile? Bloodhunter Mutant Mutagens like Potency? Barbarian AC calculations or Rage damage bonuses?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
For me, it mainly comes down to how relevant the abilities/features are. For example:
* Note: Throughout all of this, I have seen nothing to counter this argument. Why would the rat body be stronger just because you have built muscles on your human/elven/orcish body? If you can produce a bestial body with those extra muscles using Wild Shape, why could you not do so before? If your strength in your normal body affects the strength of the bestial body, why is it only the ASIs which do so and not the high values from the rolls, array or point buy? None of these make any sense, to me. There is too much conflict IMHO to justify using this interpretation over the more commonly held view (which is also backed by JC).
Also, when we come down to the point about changing race or class... These are non-standard, rare events which would need handling with the help of your DM, and are always going to result in weirdness and inconsistencies. For instance, if you change race due to being Reincarnated, why would you suddenly forget your Elf Weapon Training or Dwarven Combat Training? Why would you gain them if you became that race, when you never received that training? DM intervention (or at least a good explanation) is required to make these work without breaking the suspension of disbelief.
I'm also going to address this now that I am at a computer rather than on my phone
This can be said the other way around.
The simplest way to phrase your position in line with other abilities in the rules: "An ASI provides a bonus to one score of your choice"
The simplest way to phrase my position: "An ASI increases one ability score of your choice"
What you are basically trying to say is that only your reading of the words on the page makes any sense, which is bovine smelly stuff.
Or, "apply them later" indicates that you need to add them to the score at a later date. It does not necessarily mean it is an ongoing effect.
Edit: Note that at that point in the character creation process, you do not have any ability scores, so you cannot apply any increases. Ability score generation comes 2 steps later later, following the process in the PHB.
Let us say you are moving offices. You will be given a box for your stuff. I hand you a label and tell you to remember to apply it to the box later, I am not saying you will need to continually apply it to the box, but that when you get the box you need to stick the label on it.
So, again, both interpretations have validity.
Fair point, but not a strong one.Again, you are taking only a single possible interpretation. I could well say "On a sheet of paper, record all the presents that Father Christmas gives you". This doesn't make the giving ongoing. Santa is not continually giving you a present, but handing them to you in discrete instances.
Again, this can just as easily be read as a one-off increase.
If I said, "When I snap my fingers, you can increase the amount of water in these jugs, either increasing the amount in two jugs by 1l, or increasing the amount in one jug by 2l", it would be pretty clear that I was giving you a one-off action, not an ongoing ability or right to increase them whenever you wanted.
Again, "increases", one time action, is an equally valid reading.
Of course not, because you don't lose abilities. However, the enduring ability you have gained is a higher ability score in your stats. If that score is then temporarily overwritten, you haven't lost that ability, any more than you have lost proficiency in a weapon if you don't have that weapon. You no longer have access to that increased stat, but you still have it waiting for when you can use it again (i.e. when you are back in the body that stat applies to).
I have addresses the rare and complicated situation of changing race/class or Wishing yourself back levels (although, why on earth would you?!).
I see both options as equally linguistically valid. It would take one sentence of errata to make your desired interpretation explicit, and there are multiple ways. For instance:
Only if you willingly blind yourself to alternative, linguistically valid interpretations of the written rules, as noted above.
This is the weakest argument of all. The rules of D&D are fairly well known for being badly written and open to multiple interpretations.
Maybe they thought the explicit "Your game statistics are replaced by the statistics of the beast" was enough to avoid confusion.
All else being equal, I could accept that there are 2 equally valid interpretations and a DM's call on the badly-written rules. However, when one would mean the form you become gaining the benefit of the extra muscles you have developed on your own body, and JC has published an opinion which supports the other option, I think the weight of the argument swings strongly against applying ASIs to the bestial form.
I don't find this very persuasive. If you can transform into an animal who has "worked out", then why only if you've had an ASI? The druid is choosing the form he WSs into, so why is he unable to choose that the animal has bigger muscles? And why isn't the druid with 6 strength not transformed into a weakened version of the animal?
If a god transformed into an animal, that's blatantly a completely different matter. A god could realistically be expected to be able to choose whatever shape he wants without the restrictions placed on mortals, so could choose to be a weedy lion or a buff rabbit (or, even, a newborn). However, if a L10 human druid could transform into a muscular vole, why does that depend on the condition of the muscles of his human body?
There is no magic involved in an ASI, just hard work over time, whether in increasing muscle mass or training one's mind. To carry that over to the wild shaped form is frankly, in my opinion, ludicrous.
This ASI argument is funny. By this logic a 9 STR Druid who uses their ASI to boost their STR to a flat zero is stronger in wildshape than a druid with a flat 16 STR. Funny stuff.
because the SIDEKICK RULES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH WILDSHAPE
I would use this as a precedent:
SA-Compendium.pdf (wizards.com)
So wild shaping into a Wolf, for example, would set your STR to a hard 12. ASI and Feat increases, as they are passive increases, wouldn't. An external increase - ie. a magic item worn that adds a bonus if DM allows it - would.
Basic order of operations: ASI/Feat -> Wild Shape -> Magic Item(s)
ASI/Feat bonuses augment base stats which are then overwritten by Wild Shape which is then increased by magical effects.
Yeah, I was only talking about the HP and Ability Score modifying parts of feats. The rest of the feat should still apply if it makes sense for the Wild Shape form. That's my interpretation based on the response in Sage Advice; Tough only affects HP, after all.
To me, an ASI is only at a specific level because it is gamified. You have been building strength, for instance, over the last few months and have finally got to the point where it is able to be represented in-game by a stat bump. They could, I suppose, show this as approximately a half-point stat bump per level (for most classes), but instead they represent it as 2 points (i.e. enough to definitely make a difference in game) every 4 levels.
I know that some view it differently. For instance, some say that you spend some downtime training after a level up to gain the class features of that level. In that case, you would be training in that downtime to get your ASI. However, you cannot say "I'm a level 1 fighter, but I want to train for my ASI now", just as you can't say "I'm a level 1 fighter, I want to train for my extra attack now".
This is the reason you can't just train for it*. Certain features occur at certain levels, because that's how the game is designed. There are plenty of other things you could say the same for.
* Of course, https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/other-rewards#Training gives rules around training which can be given as rewards. However, these are supposed to be very rare. As this lists training for a feat as a reward, and an ASI is equivalent to a feat, I would say that this would be an option.