If a Druid sees an animal’s corpse, can they Wild Shape into that animal?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







15












$begingroup$


The Druid’s Wild Shape feature says:




you can use your action to magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before.




However, if a Druid sees the creature’s corpse, can they turn into a living version of the creature?






dnd-5e class-feature druid wild-shape







share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Related: Is a dead creature's body considered an “object”?
    $endgroup$
    – Sdjz
    12 hours ago


















15












$begingroup$


The Druid’s Wild Shape feature says:




you can use your action to magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before.




However, if a Druid sees the creature’s corpse, can they turn into a living version of the creature?






dnd-5e class-feature druid wild-shape







share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Related: Is a dead creature's body considered an “object”?
    $endgroup$
    – Sdjz
    12 hours ago














15












15








15





$begingroup$


The Druid’s Wild Shape feature says:




you can use your action to magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before.




However, if a Druid sees the creature’s corpse, can they turn into a living version of the creature?






dnd-5e class-feature druid wild-shape







share|improve this question











$endgroup$




The Druid’s Wild Shape feature says:




you can use your action to magically assume the shape of a beast that you have seen before.




However, if a Druid sees the creature’s corpse, can they turn into a living version of the creature?






dnd-5e class-feature druid wild-shape




dnd-5e class-feature druid wild-shape






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago









V2Blast

26.3k591161




26.3k591161










asked 13 hours ago









MrHiTechMrHiTech

871323




871323








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Related: Is a dead creature's body considered an “object”?
    $endgroup$
    – Sdjz
    12 hours ago














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Related: Is a dead creature's body considered an “object”?
    $endgroup$
    – Sdjz
    12 hours ago








3




3




$begingroup$
Related: Is a dead creature's body considered an “object”?
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
12 hours ago




$begingroup$
Related: Is a dead creature's body considered an “object”?
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
12 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















20












$begingroup$

On a literal reading, no



Corpses are objects. Jeremy Crawford has unofficially advised as much on Twitter:




A non-undead corpse isn't considered a creature. It's effectively an object.




And see Is a dead creature's body considered an "object"? which addresses this.



A beast is a type of creature. So, having seen an animal's corpse, you haven't seen a beast.



From an in-universe point of view, you could perhaps justify this by saying the Druid needs to see how the beast moves before turning into it.



Many DMs might rule you could



My above answer is a painfully literal reading of the rules, and I personally would allow a Druid who'd seen an animal's corpse to turn into it.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 3




    $begingroup$
    A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Steel
    12 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
    $endgroup$
    – 3C273
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
    $endgroup$
    – Aeyt
    3 hours ago



















6












$begingroup$

I am not aware of any written rules to support this answer, so we'll have to go with what makes sense.



You can Wild Shape into the shape of dead animals.



It seems overly pedantic to assume that the beast is no longer similar enough to itself when it was alive that you don't gain what you need to be able to morph into it. Especially since you only need to see it in order to use the ability (rather than needing to touch a living, breathing thing).



And just to throw in the "plain English interpretation", the corpse is still the "shape of a beast" that you have seen before; you saw the "shape of a beast"(assuming that it hasn't been butchered or something similarly disfiguring).






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
    $endgroup$
    – Vigil
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Vigil fixed, thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – goodguy5
    12 hours ago












Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144972%2fif-a-druid-sees-an-animal-s-corpse-can-they-wild-shape-into-that-animal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









20












$begingroup$

On a literal reading, no



Corpses are objects. Jeremy Crawford has unofficially advised as much on Twitter:




A non-undead corpse isn't considered a creature. It's effectively an object.




And see Is a dead creature's body considered an "object"? which addresses this.



A beast is a type of creature. So, having seen an animal's corpse, you haven't seen a beast.



From an in-universe point of view, you could perhaps justify this by saying the Druid needs to see how the beast moves before turning into it.



Many DMs might rule you could



My above answer is a painfully literal reading of the rules, and I personally would allow a Druid who'd seen an animal's corpse to turn into it.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 3




    $begingroup$
    A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Steel
    12 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
    $endgroup$
    – 3C273
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
    $endgroup$
    – Aeyt
    3 hours ago
















20












$begingroup$

On a literal reading, no



Corpses are objects. Jeremy Crawford has unofficially advised as much on Twitter:




A non-undead corpse isn't considered a creature. It's effectively an object.




And see Is a dead creature's body considered an "object"? which addresses this.



A beast is a type of creature. So, having seen an animal's corpse, you haven't seen a beast.



From an in-universe point of view, you could perhaps justify this by saying the Druid needs to see how the beast moves before turning into it.



Many DMs might rule you could



My above answer is a painfully literal reading of the rules, and I personally would allow a Druid who'd seen an animal's corpse to turn into it.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 3




    $begingroup$
    A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Steel
    12 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
    $endgroup$
    – 3C273
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
    $endgroup$
    – Aeyt
    3 hours ago














20












20








20





$begingroup$

On a literal reading, no



Corpses are objects. Jeremy Crawford has unofficially advised as much on Twitter:




A non-undead corpse isn't considered a creature. It's effectively an object.




And see Is a dead creature's body considered an "object"? which addresses this.



A beast is a type of creature. So, having seen an animal's corpse, you haven't seen a beast.



From an in-universe point of view, you could perhaps justify this by saying the Druid needs to see how the beast moves before turning into it.



Many DMs might rule you could



My above answer is a painfully literal reading of the rules, and I personally would allow a Druid who'd seen an animal's corpse to turn into it.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



On a literal reading, no



Corpses are objects. Jeremy Crawford has unofficially advised as much on Twitter:




A non-undead corpse isn't considered a creature. It's effectively an object.




And see Is a dead creature's body considered an "object"? which addresses this.



A beast is a type of creature. So, having seen an animal's corpse, you haven't seen a beast.



From an in-universe point of view, you could perhaps justify this by saying the Druid needs to see how the beast moves before turning into it.



Many DMs might rule you could



My above answer is a painfully literal reading of the rules, and I personally would allow a Druid who'd seen an animal's corpse to turn into it.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 hours ago









V2Blast

26.3k591161




26.3k591161










answered 12 hours ago









VigilVigil

6,6303184




6,6303184








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Steel
    12 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
    $endgroup$
    – 3C273
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
    $endgroup$
    – Aeyt
    3 hours ago














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
    $endgroup$
    – Blake Steel
    12 hours ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
    $endgroup$
    – 3C273
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
    $endgroup$
    – Aeyt
    3 hours ago








3




3




$begingroup$
A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
$endgroup$
– Blake Steel
12 hours ago




$begingroup$
A little support for the "no" RAW answer: sageadvice.eu/2015/05/14/corpse-creature-or-object
$endgroup$
– Blake Steel
12 hours ago




3




3




$begingroup$
I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
$endgroup$
– 3C273
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
I'd like to point out how much I smiled at the admission of how painfully literal the RAW reading is. Enjoy many a +1, good sir.
$endgroup$
– 3C273
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
$endgroup$
– Aeyt
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
Let's try to remember that both Sage Advice and Twitter are not official rulings. They are opinions, perhaps very well informed opinions, but opinions all the same. It's not equal to the official rules saying one thing or another.
$endgroup$
– Aeyt
3 hours ago













6












$begingroup$

I am not aware of any written rules to support this answer, so we'll have to go with what makes sense.



You can Wild Shape into the shape of dead animals.



It seems overly pedantic to assume that the beast is no longer similar enough to itself when it was alive that you don't gain what you need to be able to morph into it. Especially since you only need to see it in order to use the ability (rather than needing to touch a living, breathing thing).



And just to throw in the "plain English interpretation", the corpse is still the "shape of a beast" that you have seen before; you saw the "shape of a beast"(assuming that it hasn't been butchered or something similarly disfiguring).






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
    $endgroup$
    – Vigil
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Vigil fixed, thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – goodguy5
    12 hours ago
















6












$begingroup$

I am not aware of any written rules to support this answer, so we'll have to go with what makes sense.



You can Wild Shape into the shape of dead animals.



It seems overly pedantic to assume that the beast is no longer similar enough to itself when it was alive that you don't gain what you need to be able to morph into it. Especially since you only need to see it in order to use the ability (rather than needing to touch a living, breathing thing).



And just to throw in the "plain English interpretation", the corpse is still the "shape of a beast" that you have seen before; you saw the "shape of a beast"(assuming that it hasn't been butchered or something similarly disfiguring).






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
    $endgroup$
    – Vigil
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Vigil fixed, thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – goodguy5
    12 hours ago














6












6








6





$begingroup$

I am not aware of any written rules to support this answer, so we'll have to go with what makes sense.



You can Wild Shape into the shape of dead animals.



It seems overly pedantic to assume that the beast is no longer similar enough to itself when it was alive that you don't gain what you need to be able to morph into it. Especially since you only need to see it in order to use the ability (rather than needing to touch a living, breathing thing).



And just to throw in the "plain English interpretation", the corpse is still the "shape of a beast" that you have seen before; you saw the "shape of a beast"(assuming that it hasn't been butchered or something similarly disfiguring).






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



I am not aware of any written rules to support this answer, so we'll have to go with what makes sense.



You can Wild Shape into the shape of dead animals.



It seems overly pedantic to assume that the beast is no longer similar enough to itself when it was alive that you don't gain what you need to be able to morph into it. Especially since you only need to see it in order to use the ability (rather than needing to touch a living, breathing thing).



And just to throw in the "plain English interpretation", the corpse is still the "shape of a beast" that you have seen before; you saw the "shape of a beast"(assuming that it hasn't been butchered or something similarly disfiguring).







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 hours ago









V2Blast

26.3k591161




26.3k591161










answered 12 hours ago









goodguy5goodguy5

9,93623678




9,93623678












  • $begingroup$
    I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
    $endgroup$
    – Vigil
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Vigil fixed, thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – goodguy5
    12 hours ago


















  • $begingroup$
    I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
    $endgroup$
    – Vigil
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Vigil fixed, thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – goodguy5
    12 hours ago
















$begingroup$
I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
$endgroup$
– Vigil
12 hours ago




$begingroup$
I assume you mean Wild Shape rather than Shapechange?
$endgroup$
– Vigil
12 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Vigil fixed, thanks!
$endgroup$
– goodguy5
12 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Vigil fixed, thanks!
$endgroup$
– goodguy5
12 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144972%2fif-a-druid-sees-an-animal-s-corpse-can-they-wild-shape-into-that-animal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

Image
Engineer refusing to file/disclose patents Extending the spectral theorem for bounded self adjoint operators to bounded normal operators Do varchar(max), nvarchar(max) and varbinary(max) columns affect select queries? Why is it that I can sometimes guess the next note? What linear sensor for a keyboard? Why don’t women say שלא עשני גויה and שפחה, according to Ashkenazim? Did arcade monitors have same pixel aspect ratio as TV sets? anything or something to eat Query about absorption line spectra Can I use my Chinese passport to enter China after I acquired another citizenship? Fuse symbol on toroidal transformer Create all possible words using a set or letters Does the Mind Blank spell prevent the target from being frightened? Can I sign legal documents with a smiley face? When quoting, must I also copy hyphens used to divide words that continue on the next line? Hot bath for aluminium engine block and heads Journal losing indexing services Is it possib
Read more

Bunad

Image
Tradisjonelle folkedrakter frå Aust-Telemark, truleg frå 1880-åra. Drakter som dette er grunnlaget for moderne bunadar. Foto: Axel Lindahl Bunad frå Eggedal i Buskerud fotografert i 1906. Bunad (frå kledebunad , der norrønt «búnaðr» har same rot som (føre)bu) er ei samnemning brukt om klesdrakter i tradisjonell nordisk stil — ofte utvikla frå folkedrakter, men likevel i ein eigen tradisjon. Ein bunad er typisk ei forseggjort og kostbar drakt, med mykje broderi, og med handsmidde smykke i gull eller sølv, særleg dei særeigne søljene, som obligatorisk prynad i tillegg. Bunad og bunadbruk er eit debattemne med mange ulike oppfatningar, til dømes om kva som er ein bunad, og om ein kan endra på utforminga av draktene eller ikkje. Den norske bunadrørsla går tilbake til folkedansrørsla og føregangsfolk som Hulda Garborg og Klara Semb. I dag blir bunad brukt som nasjonaldrakt. Festbunad er likestilt med galla-antrekk, og ofte nytta ved særskilde høve, som konfirmasjonar eller d
Read more

Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

Image
FæreyjarHestar færeyskahjaltlandshestinumíslenski hesturinnBretlandskolanámumenskuWikipediafæreyskuWikipediaRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeysku Færeyskur hestur Úr Wikipediu, frjálsa alfræðiritinu Jump to navigation Jump to search Rani og Grani. Grani í vetrarfeldi. Færeyski hesturinn (færeyska: Føroyska rossið ) er hestur sem hefur lifað í Færeyjum í hundruði ára. Hann er smágerður, 120-132 cm á hæð, og helst skyldur hjaltlandshestinum. Hlutverk hans var að draga vagna og plóg og bera klyfjar. Hann hefur fjórar gangtegundir eins og íslenski hesturinn (þar með talið tölt) og er með fjölda litaafbrigði. Nú til dags er hann notaður til frístunda. Í lok 19. aldar voru til um 800 hross. Mörg þeirra voru seld til Bretlands til að vinna í kolanámum og um 1960 voru aðeins nokkrir hestar eftir. Átak var gert í að varðveita hestinn og eru nú til 70-80 hross í Færeyjum. [1] Heimild |   Wikimedia Commons er með margmiðlunarefni sem te
Read more