Companion forms and spellcasting

[Marcloure]

As discussed on Discord:

1. What is the current situation about casting spells? Wild Shape says that you keep you mana, know the spells of the creature, so on and on, but doesn't say that you can't cast spells if the form can't. So I suppose you can?
2. What is the DC for elemental spells? They use charisma to cast spells, so it's based on the caster's Charisma and the caster proficiency for the elemental spells, and the caster's spellcasting ability for the caster's spells (like multiclassing in RAW)?

How I interpret this:

1. I would say you can cast spells. Wild Shape says you keep your features and doesn't say you can't cast spells. But it is weird anyway, because it also says "you keep you mana and mana limit", so it feels like this shouldn't be the case if the form can't cast spells.
2. You use Charisma and your proficiency for the elemental spells, and your spellcasting ability for your spells. But that is totally me extrapolating from RAW multiclassing

Kryx commented:

I'm not 100% certain what is written is really how it should be. This somewhat depends on the dreaded spell components issue

A bear has arms and a mouth, so it can likely fulfill the requirements for many spells that don't require specific words. But if we're strict on verbal and physical gestures then they couldn't

Also, about companion's balance, itamarcu said:

I'd also want to consider - if we allow some companion-shapes to cast spells but not all of them, are we functionally making these bad options for most players?

That is one of my concerns as well. Why would someone turn into an animal if they could become an elemental which keep spells?

[ghost]

I think the first thing to focus on is the Somatic component. As presented in the rules, we have this:

"Most spells require forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures."

Now we should just have to rule on whether or not a bear can do "forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures". If we rule they do, they should be able to cast spells while Wild Shape. I think the ruling can be as simple as "They are Druids, therefore they can because they are Nature Spellcasters" or something like that. I would say they should be able to, just because they are Druids, or just because Companion forms are able to cast spells if the spellcaster is a Druid. Maybe not all spellcasters know how to cast a spell when wild shaped.

On the Elemental spells DC issue, I'd say just say that Charisma should be used since it's not part of the Druid but part of a theme. Since any spellcaster will have these rules, it makes sense that the creature uses Charisma. Another possibility could be saying that a spellcaster can cast their own spells using their own spellcasting modifier, but would need to use Charisma to cast the spells the Elementals have.

[Paulorpribeiro]

I think what itamarcu said is key here, I will quote again

I'd also want to consider - if we allow some companion-shapes to cast spells but not all of them, are we functionally making these bad options for most players?

If we don't want to make some forms strictly better than others (some form can cast while others cant) then we need to make this decision based entirely on balance an let the fluf to the DM/player.

Casting spells in wild shape should be made into a class feature for the naturalist, or a feat for anyone who wants it or an augment to the wild shape spell.
The discussion about spell components here will poison the debate an will lead to things such as, can bats cast target spells, since they can't "see" further than 60 ft or can snakes cast somatic spells since they don't have hands and so on. Every imaginable form can cast if the caster has a feature that says so because he retains his features, if he doesnt, the spell should say "if you dont have a feature that specifically allows you to cast in that form, you cant". Exception could be made for Inteligent humanoids I guess, but once the rule is broken, it starts to get complicated... Elementals could be able to cast spells of their element as standard and follow the feature rule to cast other spells.

On wild shape caster using charisma, it makes cha casting classes better at wild shaping, which I don't think is the intention. I think if the form can cast spells, it should use the caster's casting score

[mlenser]

I'll save my deep dive into this for tomorrow, but your spellcasting ability would not change as part of any transformation. You would just gain access to new spells.

[mlenser]

So I think Wild Shape is problematic due to #285, but lets take that discussion there.

Depending on the outcome of that we can then determine what to do here.

[Marcloure]

Thematically, these questions will also depend on what it means to change form. Are you becoming that thing literally, or just gaining its form and powers?

If you become that thing literally, then a bear doesn't cast spells, and a Fire Elemental only knows the spells it knows and casts it with Charisma (intrinsic power).

If the caster is just assuming that form, then maybe it should retain its own powers and cast with its standard spellcasting ability. A wizard that assumes the form of a Fire Elemental will be better or worse depending on how good or bad his own spellcasting ability is, since the power is not intrinsic to the Wizard, but simulated by their arcana. The more faithful a Cleirc, better is the storm elemental they can turn into.

[shemetz]

Personally I would prefer if Wild Shapes simply could not use spells that the spellcaster knows - or if they do, it should cost either extra resources or some high level feat. Maneuvers should potentially go the same way.

Not only is it much easier to balance each companion in a vacuum - I also just feel like Wild Shape is meant to be a transformation from your main form to a different form, and not a simple buff. Transformations need to have actual drawbacks - you gain the powers of your new form but you lose the powers of your old form. Compare it to Wind Walk, Gaseous Form, Polymorph - they have serious drawbacks that prevent the character from using their normal abilities while in the special form.

[mlenser]

Are you becoming that thing literally, or just gaining its form and powers?

We discussed this last time we made a change to Wild Shape and the answer is becoming the thing. Otherwise Bestial Transformation exists.

But there are some limitations on mana/stamina and now HP/HD for thematic and balance reasons.

---

Transformations need to have actual drawbacks - you gain the powers of your new form but you lose the powers of your old form. Compare it to Wind Walk, Gaseous Form, Polymorph - they have serious drawbacks that prevent the character from using their normal abilities while in the special form.

I think Wild Shape and other transformations are different than these spells. Wild Shape should have some drawbacks, but you are still you (by retaining your Int/Wis/Cha). In RAW you can still maintain concentration on a spell and still retain all your features (including spells). You just can't use spells while transformed until 18th level in RAW.

---

Spellcasting

I had a thought earlier today: just make spellcasting in the new form a feat. It's a bit of a tax, but flying in the air and casting spells is very powerful so the tax is needed.

It should use the caster's normal spellcasting, not the monsters.

[shemetz]

I agree, a feat should make this work well enough! I think the feat should be 8th or 12th level (when the druid might be able to obtain "normal" wings), but I don't know enough to say for sure.

How about maneuvers and concoctions? Would there be similar limits on them?

I think concoctions should definitely be limited (as they allow ranged attacks), and maneuvers... I don't know. Full-caster druids can't get maneuvers by leveling up (IIRC) so I wouldn't want the wild shapes to be balanced around the player being expected to add extra maneuver options and dice to the wild shape.

[mlenser]

I think the feat should be 4th level, which is the same as flying is restricted by RAW. Naturalists can then use it for the shapes that they can get at 2nd level and other classes can use it at 5th level when they can get the spells. This aligns with the other Fly options which is around 5th level, but has the cost of a feat so I believe the level is appropriate.

Concoction creation requires manual manipulation with hands so I'd say that's off the table. A bear could maybe grab a potion and drink it - I'll leave that up to the GM.

Maneuvers should be fully allowed.

[shemetz]

Other flight options require concentration, though (unless you count Webshooter/vines) - this Wild Shape doesn't, which is an important benefit.

[mlenser]

The feat doesn't give flight. That's part of the base kit.

There is a connection there, but I don't think this should cost more than a feat. We already have other cases of feats improving a specific spell. The comparison on #285 is pretty balanced with the cost of a feat, imo. Sure, Wild Shape has some benefits, but realistically for the spell case case we're looking at:

Wild Shape (Blood Hawk)

• Fly 60 feet for 2 hours
• +12 temporary hit points for 2 hours
• AC either the same or reduced by 1 or 2 if you have high AC (it's 14)
• Advantage on Perception that relies on sight
• (COST) 1 feat

Levitate (Fly)

• Fly 60 feet for 10 minutes

False Life

• ~22 temporary hit points for 2 hours

[shemetz]

This seems alright to me. I'm just slightly concerned about the fact that this allows someone to simultaneously fly and cast offensive concentration spells (e.g. Animate Flames or Wall of Force), giving them the ability to contribute to the fight with powerful spells while keeping themselves out of harm's way.

Without this, the only other way to do it (without another spellcaster) is to take feats that grant permanent flight, which appear at tier 2 or 3. Hence, I suggested making it higher level. I might be worried about it too much though (and the fact that dealing just a bit of damage to you can make you drop from the air is still a big weakness).

[mlenser]

• Themes
  • Spells that let you change form like Wild Shape, Tree Shape, Fire Form, etc have had their wording rewritten to clarify and simply. Additionally, spellcasting is not allowed while transformed. #277
  • Beast
    • Beast Spells added as a 6th level feat to cast spells while transformed via Wild Shape #277
  • Plants
    • Tree Spells added as a 6th level feat to cast spells while transformed via Tree Shape #277

[Paulorpribeiro]

You are missing a talent or something to cast in elemental form I think. Also, I believe the elemental forms should be able to cast their theme spells (the spell in their companion stat block) by default. A lot of the power of the fire elemental form is being able to cast spells and apply burn for example

[Marcloure]

They already deal as much or more damage than other forms. Fire elemental can pass through creatures, ignite them on hit, deals the same 2d8+4 damage at 3 mana, so on. I don't think they need spells on top of it, otherwise elementals are much, much better.

[Paulorpribeiro]

Ah, ok, I didnt realize they ignite on hit now.
Either way, there is a feat missing to allow caster to use spells in elemental form. They can't use the beast or the plant feat.

[mlenser]

I'm probably going to remove the elemental forms. That's why I didn't add feats yet.