I'm not sure what Tabaxi/Lizardfolk are to do with this beyond other races.
RAW, I don't think there is a real answer. Nor did a Google turn up anything beyond speculation.
My judgement is this: RAW, there is nothing stopping it. Animals can be tattooed (IRL), and it doesn't say tattoos can't be maintained through the transformation. Therefore, RAW implicitly allows it.
On the other hand, the rules around wildshaping are clearly intended that you become that animal - not a Disney’s Robin Hood bearing weapons etc, but that you become a normal lion (or whatever). The entire scope of allowing you to keep items is basically "Not really, but it's up to your DM".
I'd say the RAW is vague-to-silent on the matter and so is a yes by default.
RAI is also vague but leans to no.
Lore wise, your entire body transforms. It's not just skin level changes (as discussed before) and entire organs, bones, etc disappear and appear. You are fundamentally changing. I'd say the tattoo disappears during wildshape. If we were to decide that it didn't, I'd insist that it shows on your animal form too - pretending to be a normal animal would be out and NPCs who know you get advantage on perception checks to identify you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think the question is more about the wording of the tattoo's and the insignia's effect.
Eldritch Claw Tattoos only augment unarmed strikes, while Insignia of Claws augments unarmed strikes and natural weapons.
RAW I would say, Brown Bear's claws and bite are natural weapons but not unarmed strikes. So, the tattoo would not work, but the insignia does.
All creatures can make unarmed strikes. You're 100% correct that natural weapons and unarmed strikes are distinct things and furthermore you're 100% correct that a bear's claws and bite are natural weapons but not unarmed strikes. However, as can come up for a Monk/Druid and/or for a Druid with the Unarmed fighting style, turning into a bear doesn't suddenly stop you from being allowed to make the standard unarmed strike 100% of all creatures can make.
I think the question is more about the wording of the tattoo's and the insignia's effect.
Eldritch Claw Tattoos only augment unarmed strikes, while Insignia of Claws augments unarmed strikes and natural weapons.
RAW I would say, Brown Bear's claws and bite are natural weapons but not unarmed strikes. So, the tattoo would not work, but the insignia does.
All creatures can make unarmed strikes. You're 100% correct that natural weapons and unarmed strikes are distinct things and furthermore you're 100% correct that a bear's claws and bite are natural weapons but not unarmed strikes. However, as can come up for a Monk/Druid and/or for a Druid with the Unarmed fighting style, turning into a bear doesn't suddenly stop you from being allowed to make the standard unarmed strike 100% of all creatures can make.
That is of course correct, I just assumed, this was not the question ;)
Others are right: there's nothing definitive about tattoos in WS one way or the other. I do believe it's an open question whether any unique phenotypical traits (e.g., body type, hair/eye color, etc.) of the druid remain during WS. Examples: druid x is an ectomorph, so does that mean the bear x WSs into appears as an ectomorphic bear? Or druid x has a scar (similar to a tattoo) on his face, does that mean the bear x WSs into also has a scar on its face? After thinking about this, my gut tells me no: phenotypical traits of the druid do not translate into its WS beast.
However, if you think it's at least an open question whether some phenotypical traits of the druid carry over into WS form, the closest guidance in the WS RAW is the last part about equipment. Per the RAW, the only equipment that survives in WS is that which fits the form of the WS beast without the equipment changing size. Suppose your druid WSs into a bear. It's hard to imagine any equipment, e.g., boots, armor, helmet, necklace, etc., that fits both a druid and a bear without the equipment changing in size. But tattoos stretch on the surface of skin. Does the matter? Here's what Tasha's says about magic tattoos changing form/shape:
Magic tattoos are initially bound to magic needles, which transfer their magic to a creature. Once inscribed on a creature's body, damage or injury doesn't impair the tattoo's function, even if the tattoo is defaced.
So, if a tattoo undergoes a change, the RAW says this doesn't impair the tattoo's function. This makes a decent case that magic tattoos do carry over to WS. But one might say: but you can't see a tattoo on a (hairy) bear. Does that matter? I'd say, probably not. They still have a tattoo even though it's not visible. (Also: someone might be very hairy and their hair completely covers up their tattoo. They still a tattoo.)
Lets supose im a Druid Circle of the Moon, and i can have acess to Eldritch Claw Tattoo and Insignia of Claws
When i shape to a Brown Bear, i receive the bonnus from those magic itens?
Or they are exclusive to Tabaxi/Lizardfolks type of attacks?
I'm not sure what Tabaxi/Lizardfolk are to do with this beyond other races.
RAW, I don't think there is a real answer. Nor did a Google turn up anything beyond speculation.
My judgement is this: RAW, there is nothing stopping it. Animals can be tattooed (IRL), and it doesn't say tattoos can't be maintained through the transformation. Therefore, RAW implicitly allows it.
On the other hand, the rules around wildshaping are clearly intended that you become that animal - not a Disney’s Robin Hood bearing weapons etc, but that you become a normal lion (or whatever). The entire scope of allowing you to keep items is basically "Not really, but it's up to your DM".
I'd say the RAW is vague-to-silent on the matter and so is a yes by default.
RAI is also vague but leans to no.
Lore wise, your entire body transforms. It's not just skin level changes (as discussed before) and entire organs, bones, etc disappear and appear. You are fundamentally changing. I'd say the tattoo disappears during wildshape. If we were to decide that it didn't, I'd insist that it shows on your animal form too - pretending to be a normal animal would be out and NPCs who know you get advantage on perception checks to identify you.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think the question is more about the wording of the tattoo's and the insignia's effect.
Eldritch Claw Tattoos only augment unarmed strikes, while Insignia of Claws augments unarmed strikes and natural weapons.
RAW I would say, Brown Bear's claws and bite are natural weapons but not unarmed strikes. So, the tattoo would not work, but the insignia does.
All creatures can make unarmed strikes. You're 100% correct that natural weapons and unarmed strikes are distinct things and furthermore you're 100% correct that a bear's claws and bite are natural weapons but not unarmed strikes. However, as can come up for a Monk/Druid and/or for a Druid with the Unarmed fighting style, turning into a bear doesn't suddenly stop you from being allowed to make the standard unarmed strike 100% of all creatures can make.
That is of course correct, I just assumed, this was not the question ;)
Others are right: there's nothing definitive about tattoos in WS one way or the other. I do believe it's an open question whether any unique phenotypical traits (e.g., body type, hair/eye color, etc.) of the druid remain during WS. Examples: druid x is an ectomorph, so does that mean the bear x WSs into appears as an ectomorphic bear? Or druid x has a scar (similar to a tattoo) on his face, does that mean the bear x WSs into also has a scar on its face? After thinking about this, my gut tells me no: phenotypical traits of the druid do not translate into its WS beast.
However, if you think it's at least an open question whether some phenotypical traits of the druid carry over into WS form, the closest guidance in the WS RAW is the last part about equipment. Per the RAW, the only equipment that survives in WS is that which fits the form of the WS beast without the equipment changing size. Suppose your druid WSs into a bear. It's hard to imagine any equipment, e.g., boots, armor, helmet, necklace, etc., that fits both a druid and a bear without the equipment changing in size. But tattoos stretch on the surface of skin. Does the matter? Here's what Tasha's says about magic tattoos changing form/shape:
So, if a tattoo undergoes a change, the RAW says this doesn't impair the tattoo's function. This makes a decent case that magic tattoos do carry over to WS. But one might say: but you can't see a tattoo on a (hairy) bear. Does that matter? I'd say, probably not. They still have a tattoo even though it's not visible. (Also: someone might be very hairy and their hair completely covers up their tattoo. They still a tattoo.)
Talk with your DM lol
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s and stopped in the mid-80s. Started immersing myself into 5e in 2023