So wild shape states you either drop the stuff, meld it into your skin OR wear it (at DM discretion at if it would be plausible)
My question is could a druid merge everything BUT armour and wear it if it's magic?
I'm a DM and the party got some Hide armour of gleaming at the end of the session and the druid asked if that would work.
I am a newb DM and still learning. What is the general consensus amongst other dms to rule this. Would having a druid wild shape and merge everything but the Hide armour, that changes to fit the beast, be against the rules/op or would it be fine
1) A wild shaping druid decides what happens to each object they're wearing individually - they can make one decision for their armour and a separate decision for their hat, for example.
2) The "standard" stock ruling is that magic items reshape to fit the wearer (DMG p140), which means magic armour will accommodate Wild Shape.
3) To be clear, your Druid shouldn't need it to be Hide - WOTC has made it explicitly clear that as the DM, you're expected to accommodate non-metal armor of any sort for your druid. The ban on metal armor is intended to be flavor, not a mechanical balancing act of removing certain armor suits from play for the druid.
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.
It doesn't say or even imply that wearable magic items adjust to completely different anatomy. So armor that fits a human could potentially be worn by a giant, but not necessarily an octopus.
It also says "in most cases" so the DM can veto whatever they want with out having to make a special house rule about it.
If the wild shape doesn't have the same arrangement of limbs (2 limbs at shoulder, 2 at hips, etc), I wouldn't expect to be able to adjust. Biped to quadrupled isn't as big a leap, but up to DM.
2) The "standard" stock ruling is that magic items reshape to fit the wearer (DMG p140), which means magic armour will accommodate Wild Shape.
And Wild Shape specifically says:
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.
I think that it is pretty clear from this that even whether magic armor mystically or otherwise resizes for a new owner, it doesn't do that when the owner Wild Shapes.
I think that it is pretty clear from this that even whether magic armor mystically or otherwise resizes for a new owner, it doesn't do that when the owner Wild Shapes.
The wild shape power does not cause armor to change shape, but it doesn't prevent some other effect causing a change in shape.
I think that it is pretty clear from this that even whether magic armor mystically or otherwise resizes for a new owner, it doesn't do that when the owner Wild Shapes.
The wild shape power does not cause armor to change shape, but it doesn't prevent some other effect causing a change in shape.
I bolded a section in the actual text of Wild Shape that disagrees with you.
I think that it is pretty clear from this that even whether magic armor mystically or otherwise resizes for a new owner, it doesn't do that when the owner Wild Shapes.
The wild shape power does not cause armor to change shape, but it doesn't prevent some other effect causing a change in shape.
I bolded a section in the actual text of Wild Shape that disagrees with you.
Surely you can agree that the obvious interpretation of the Wild Shape text is that Wild Shape does not cause gear to change its shape to fit your new form, not that it somehow prevents gear that otherwise would change to fit your new form from doing so.
No, what I'd say is that the gear doesn't change its shape, no matter the cause, when you wild shape. Remember "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form..."
I think we actually have a case of specific vs. general here. Generally, magic items resize to fit their owners. Except when they wild shape.
No, what I'd say is that the gear doesn't change its shape, no matter the cause, when you wild shape. Remember "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form..."
I think we actually have a case of specific vs. general here. Generally, magic items resize to fit their owners. Except when they wild shape.
Or, generally, a druid's equipment doesn't change size or shape to match the new form, but if the equipment happens to be magical, then in that specific case it can. The base descriptions of class/subclass features don't take magic items into account (and refer to them specifically when it is a factor.) Come to think of it, none of the PHB classes & subclasses mention magic items at all.
I guess it depends on which specific is more specific to you. You could see the DMG explanation of magic equipment as more specific than a class feature description in the PHB, or you could see class features as more specific than a general description of a specific category of equipment - magic items.
Thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that only applies to some characters some of the time, whereas the rule that applies to all magic items most of the time is the specific one seems completely backwards to me. Can you explain how you came up with that?
But even so, the rule on magic items doesn’t actually say that they automatically adjust to fit any creature that tries to wear them. In fact, there is some quite telling text in the Wearing and Wielding Magic Items section (BR):
When a nonhumanoid tries to wear an item, use your discretion as to whether the item functions as intended. A ring placed on a tentacle might work, but a creature with a snakelike tail instead of legs can't wear boots.
So even if the magic item rules did take precedence over the Wild Shape rules, they still tell you that beasts can’t necessarily wear an item… just like Wild Shape. Huh. Imagine that.
So even if the magic item rules did take precedence over the Wild Shape rules, they still tell you that beasts can’t necessarily wear an item… just like Wild Shape. Huh. Imagine that.
I don't think there's a reasonable interpretation for the magic item rules not taking precedence over the wild shape rules, but I agree that the magic item rules don't clearly indicate whether armor can fit itself to a beast.
Thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that only applies to some characters some of the time, whereas the rule that applies to all magic items most of the time is the specific one seems completely backwards to me. Can you explain how you came up with that?
No, it's thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that applies to all armor generally, whereas the rule that applies to magic armor specifically is the specific rule. I know that you of all people know that obviousness isn't RAW, but I really would expect you to find the intent of Wild Shape obvious: Wild Shape doesn't somehow magically allow your gear to fit your new form, but why on earth would it block a feature of a specific armor that says it does alter itself to fit? That just doesn't make sense, either from a design perspective or from a narrative one.
The topic of whether or not all magical armor would reshape itself to fit your bear form or whatever isn't particularly relevant, and I have no horse in that race.
I suppose you could figure that the druid drops (some of) their magic equipment, and if that magic equipment could reasonably enough fit onto their wildshaped morphology, then the magic item would then adjust to fit if you put it onto the now-wildshaped druid, as it would if you tried to put it on a regular creature of the same kind. If it passes that test, you can skip the drop & put back on steps next time they wildshape into that same or a similar kind of creature.
Thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that only applies to some characters some of the time, whereas the rule that applies to all magic items most of the time is the specific one seems completely backwards to me. Can you explain how you came up with that?
No, it's thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that applies to all armor generally, whereas the rule that applies to magic armor specifically is the specific rule. I know that you of all people know that obviousness isn't RAW, but I really would expect you to find the intent of Wild Shape obvious: Wild Shape doesn't somehow magically allow your gear to fit your new form, but why on earth would it block a feature of a specific armor that says it does alter itself to fit?
Mostly because two rules tell us that magic items don’t alter themselves to fit: Wild Shape, AND the magic item rules that you are saying are more specific.
Wild Shape doesn’t carve out any exceptions for magic items. It says your equipment doesn’t change to fit. And Wild shape is a rule that applies specifically to the equipment druids who wild shape, not to armor generally. Again, obviousness isn’t a test, and that is good because a few people seem to think that a rule that covers all magic items (and for that matter, nearly identical to the rule for mundane fit) for all characters is more specific than one that applies to a the items of a specific class in a specific situation. It’s baffling.
But even more importantly, and as I’ve already pointed out, wild shape forms (nonhumanoid forms) already have text in that other rule too. Both rules tell us that non-humanoids can only wear what the DM decides. There is no conflict.
Wild Shape doesn’t carve out any exceptions for magic items. It says your equipment doesn’t change to fit.
The description of Wild Shape says what the Wild Shape ability does. Magic armor changing shape is not a property of the wild shape ability.
It isn’t a specific property of magic items either. Remember (notwithstanding the nonhumanoid paragraph further in the section):
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.
So magically changing size is not even a requirement of any magic item. They could simply be adjustable to humanoid creature sizes.
Unless y’all are saying that magic items go from ‘could be adjustable’ to ‘must magically change size’ because of a different rule that says that your equipment doesn’t change size when you wild shape. I don’t know how to interpret that, especially considering that later paragraph on nonhumanoids.
Wild Shape doesn’t carve out any exceptions for magic items. It says your equipment doesn’t change to fit.
The description of Wild Shape says what the Wild Shape ability does. Magic armor changing shape is not a property of the wild shape ability.
It isn’t a specific property of magic items either. Remember (notwithstanding the nonhumanoid paragraph further in the section):
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.
So magically changing size is not even a requirement of any magic item. They could simply be adjustable to humanoid creature sizes.
That's for changing shape. Changing size is absolutely standard. Here's your quote with more context, and I've added some emphasis.
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, armor made by the drow might fit elves only. Dwarves might make items usable only by dwarf-sized and dwarf-shaped characters.
So by explicit RAW, the de facto common standard is that magic items change size, and rarely, a DM might have one not change size. In terms of fundamentally non-humanoid body shapes (e.g. a bear is basically a humanoid, but a snake is not), it depends on the item and the body shape.
Unless y’all are saying that magic items go from ‘could be adjustable’
Are adjustable by default, per the DMG. That's not even just magic items, incidentally. Lest we forget, totally mundane gear works this way, too, just within tighter limits.
All Medium Humanoids being able to share armor suits is a deliberate design decision WOTC made because they thought it would make looting more fun. The linked text leads into discussion of an optional, variant rule for more realism, where armor has to actually fit you. The default is that it doesn't.
to ‘must magically change size’ because of a different rule that says that your equipment doesn’t change size when you wild shape.
Unless you're reading Wild Shape to somehow stop magic items from doing what they do, they should behave normally. What the rule you're referring to actually says is that Wild Shape doesn't change the item's size, not that it somehow stops the item from using size-changing properties it might have. For example, if you're wearing a spandex banana hammock and wild shape into a gorilla, now you're wearing a much tighter banana hammock, but spandex won't lose its ability to stretch just because you Wild Shaped.
I don’t know how to interpret that, especially considering that later paragraph on nonhumanoids.
You mean the one explicitly stating that what stops a snake from wearing boots is the complete lack of feet? The one implicitly stating that if you have any sort of feet, magic boots will work fine? The one basically straight-up saying that Druids can Wild Shape and so long as they still have something close to the right body parts, their magic gear will work fine on them? I suggest interpreting it to mean what it says.
It's still baffling that you're arguing that "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form," means something otherwise. Magic items are just like all equipment in that they're meant to fit a variety of humanoids, so you are really trying to argue that this applies to one of those but not the other? For what reason? It can't be "because magic" since the magic item rule doesn't require that to be how magic items adjust.
It's still baffling that you're arguing that "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form," means something otherwise. Magic items are just like all equipment in that they're meant to fit a variety of humanoids, so you are really trying to argue that this applies to one of those but not the other? For what reason? It can't be "because magic" since the magic item rule doesn't require that to be how magic items adjust.
The wild shape feature is a specific rule going over how wild shape works with how equipment works with the feature. While the feature does state equipment doesn’t resize, I could easily see the interpretation being restricted to nonmagical equipment. There’s almost no information in the PHB regarding magic items anyways. I can also see how a DM would interpret this as meaning nothing can interpret the wild shape resize clause but I don’t think it’s intended. It’s seems overly restrictive and even somewhat punitive to an extent.
frankly I think easier to imagine magical resizing clothing working with a creature that can change sizes vs magical resizing equipment not changing size because it’s a different creature changing size. Especially since wildshape gives you the option to use the equipment. I doubt WOTC wrote that part in to waste space unless there was equipment that could be used.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So wild shape states you either drop the stuff, meld it into your skin OR wear it (at DM discretion at if it would be plausible)
My question is could a druid merge everything BUT armour and wear it if it's magic?
I'm a DM and the party got some Hide armour of gleaming at the end of the session and the druid asked if that would work.
I am a newb DM and still learning. What is the general consensus amongst other dms to rule this. Would having a druid wild shape and merge everything but the Hide armour, that changes to fit the beast, be against the rules/op or would it be fine
1) A wild shaping druid decides what happens to each object they're wearing individually - they can make one decision for their armour and a separate decision for their hat, for example.
2) The "standard" stock ruling is that magic items reshape to fit the wearer (DMG p140), which means magic armour will accommodate Wild Shape.
3) To be clear, your Druid shouldn't need it to be Hide - WOTC has made it explicitly clear that as the DM, you're expected to accommodate non-metal armor of any sort for your druid. The ban on metal armor is intended to be flavor, not a mechanical balancing act of removing certain armor suits from play for the druid.
Specifically, the DMG says:
It doesn't say or even imply that wearable magic items adjust to completely different anatomy. So armor that fits a human could potentially be worn by a giant, but not necessarily an octopus.
It also says "in most cases" so the DM can veto whatever they want with out having to make a special house rule about it.
If the wild shape doesn't have the same arrangement of limbs (2 limbs at shoulder, 2 at hips, etc), I wouldn't expect to be able to adjust. Biped to quadrupled isn't as big a leap, but up to DM.
And Wild Shape specifically says:
I think that it is pretty clear from this that even whether magic armor mystically or otherwise resizes for a new owner, it doesn't do that when the owner Wild Shapes.
Difference between resizing and changing shape that much.
A better idea is to get some of the non-shape ac stuff.
Cloak of Protection, Badge of the Watch, Ioun Stone of Protection, Jewel of Three Prayers, that kind of thing.
The wild shape power does not cause armor to change shape, but it doesn't prevent some other effect causing a change in shape.
I bolded a section in the actual text of Wild Shape that disagrees with you.
Surely you can agree that the obvious interpretation of the Wild Shape text is that Wild Shape does not cause gear to change its shape to fit your new form, not that it somehow prevents gear that otherwise would change to fit your new form from doing so.
No, what I'd say is that the gear doesn't change its shape, no matter the cause, when you wild shape. Remember "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form..."
I think we actually have a case of specific vs. general here. Generally, magic items resize to fit their owners. Except when they wild shape.
Or, generally, a druid's equipment doesn't change size or shape to match the new form, but if the equipment happens to be magical, then in that specific case it can. The base descriptions of class/subclass features don't take magic items into account (and refer to them specifically when it is a factor.) Come to think of it, none of the PHB classes & subclasses mention magic items at all.
I guess it depends on which specific is more specific to you. You could see the DMG explanation of magic equipment as more specific than a class feature description in the PHB, or you could see class features as more specific than a general description of a specific category of equipment - magic items.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
Thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that only applies to some characters some of the time, whereas the rule that applies to all magic items most of the time is the specific one seems completely backwards to me. Can you explain how you came up with that?
But even so, the rule on magic items doesn’t actually say that they automatically adjust to fit any creature that tries to wear them. In fact, there is some quite telling text in the Wearing and Wielding Magic Items section (BR):
So even if the magic item rules did take precedence over the Wild Shape rules, they still tell you that beasts can’t necessarily wear an item… just like Wild Shape. Huh. Imagine that.
I don't think there's a reasonable interpretation for the magic item rules not taking precedence over the wild shape rules, but I agree that the magic item rules don't clearly indicate whether armor can fit itself to a beast.
No, it's thinking that Wild Shape is the general rule that applies to all armor generally, whereas the rule that applies to magic armor specifically is the specific rule. I know that you of all people know that obviousness isn't RAW, but I really would expect you to find the intent of Wild Shape obvious: Wild Shape doesn't somehow magically allow your gear to fit your new form, but why on earth would it block a feature of a specific armor that says it does alter itself to fit? That just doesn't make sense, either from a design perspective or from a narrative one.
The topic of whether or not all magical armor would reshape itself to fit your bear form or whatever isn't particularly relevant, and I have no horse in that race.
I suppose you could figure that the druid drops (some of) their magic equipment, and if that magic equipment could reasonably enough fit onto their wildshaped morphology, then the magic item would then adjust to fit if you put it onto the now-wildshaped druid, as it would if you tried to put it on a regular creature of the same kind. If it passes that test, you can skip the drop & put back on steps next time they wildshape into that same or a similar kind of creature.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
Mostly because two rules tell us that magic items don’t alter themselves to fit: Wild Shape, AND the magic item rules that you are saying are more specific.
Wild Shape doesn’t carve out any exceptions for magic items. It says your equipment doesn’t change to fit. And Wild shape is a rule that applies specifically to the equipment druids who wild shape, not to armor generally. Again, obviousness isn’t a test, and that is good because a few people seem to think that a rule that covers all magic items (and for that matter, nearly identical to the rule for mundane fit) for all characters is more specific than one that applies to a the items of a specific class in a specific situation. It’s baffling.
But even more importantly, and as I’ve already pointed out, wild shape forms (nonhumanoid forms) already have text in that other rule too. Both rules tell us that non-humanoids can only wear what the DM decides. There is no conflict.
The description of Wild Shape says what the Wild Shape ability does. Magic armor changing shape is not a property of the wild shape ability.
It isn’t a specific property of magic items either. Remember (notwithstanding the nonhumanoid paragraph further in the section):
So magically changing size is not even a requirement of any magic item. They could simply be adjustable to humanoid creature sizes.
Unless y’all are saying that magic items go from ‘could be adjustable’ to ‘must magically change size’ because of a different rule that says that your equipment doesn’t change size when you wild shape. I don’t know how to interpret that, especially considering that later paragraph on nonhumanoids.
When a nonhumanoid tries to wear an item, use your discretion as to whether the item functions as intended. A ring placed on a tentacle might work, but a yuan-ti with a snakelike tail instead of legs has no way to wear magic boots.
That's for changing shape. Changing size is absolutely standard. Here's your quote with more context, and I've added some emphasis.
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, armor made by the drow might fit elves only. Dwarves might make items usable only by dwarf-sized and dwarf-shaped characters.
So by explicit RAW, the de facto common standard is that magic items change size, and rarely, a DM might have one not change size. In terms of fundamentally non-humanoid body shapes (e.g. a bear is basically a humanoid, but a snake is not), it depends on the item and the body shape.
Are adjustable by default, per the DMG. That's not even just magic items, incidentally. Lest we forget, totally mundane gear works this way, too, just within tighter limits.
In most campaigns, you can use or wear any equipment that you find on your adventures, within the bounds of common sense. For example, a burly half-orc won’t fit in a halfling’s leather armor, and a gnome would be swallowed up in a cloud giant’s elegant robe.
All Medium Humanoids being able to share armor suits is a deliberate design decision WOTC made because they thought it would make looting more fun. The linked text leads into discussion of an optional, variant rule for more realism, where armor has to actually fit you. The default is that it doesn't.
Unless you're reading Wild Shape to somehow stop magic items from doing what they do, they should behave normally. What the rule you're referring to actually says is that Wild Shape doesn't change the item's size, not that it somehow stops the item from using size-changing properties it might have. For example, if you're wearing a spandex banana hammock and wild shape into a gorilla, now you're wearing a much tighter banana hammock, but spandex won't lose its ability to stretch just because you Wild Shaped.
You mean the one explicitly stating that what stops a snake from wearing boots is the complete lack of feet? The one implicitly stating that if you have any sort of feet, magic boots will work fine? The one basically straight-up saying that Druids can Wild Shape and so long as they still have something close to the right body parts, their magic gear will work fine on them? I suggest interpreting it to mean what it says.
Absolutely False.
It's still baffling that you're arguing that "Your equipment doesn’t change size or shape to match the new form," means something otherwise. Magic items are just like all equipment in that they're meant to fit a variety of humanoids, so you are really trying to argue that this applies to one of those but not the other? For what reason? It can't be "because magic" since the magic item rule doesn't require that to be how magic items adjust.
The wild shape feature is a specific rule going over how wild shape works with how equipment works with the feature. While the feature does state equipment doesn’t resize, I could easily see the interpretation being restricted to nonmagical equipment. There’s almost no information in the PHB regarding magic items anyways. I can also see how a DM would interpret this as meaning nothing can interpret the wild shape resize clause but I don’t think it’s intended. It’s seems overly restrictive and even somewhat punitive to an extent.
frankly I think easier to imagine magical resizing clothing working with a creature that can change sizes vs magical resizing equipment not changing size because it’s a different creature changing size. Especially since wildshape gives you the option to use the equipment. I doubt WOTC wrote that part in to waste space unless there was equipment that could be used.