If a druid in Wild Shape swallows a creature whole, then turns back to her normal form, what happens?What...

Why might Google Analytics report a sudden, but persistent, drop in bounce rate (70% to 12%)

Could quantum mechanics be necessary to analyze some biology scenarios?

Sometimes a banana is just a banana

Do my Windows system binaries contain sensitive information?

How can I handle a player who pre-plans arguments about my rulings on RAW?

How to approximate rolls for potions of healing using only d6's?

Does music exist in Panem? And if so, what kinds of music?

Is there a frame of reference in which I was born before I was conceived?

How to visualize a Cayley graph in this style?

How would we write a misogynistic character without offending people?

Do commercial flights continue with an engine out?

What's the purpose of these copper coils with resistors inside them in A Yamaha RX-V396RDS amplifier?

You'll find me clean when something is full

Where was Karl Mordo in Infinity War?

What do the pedals on grand pianos do?

"Murder!" The knight said

It took me a lot of time to make this, pls like. (YouTube Comments #1)

What is this waxed root vegetable?

If a druid in Wild Shape swallows a creature whole, then turns back to her normal form, what happens?

Must a tritone substitution use a dominant seventh chord?

What are these green text/line displays shown during the livestream of Crew Dragon's approach to dock with the ISS?

Called into a meeting and told we are being made redundant (laid off) and "not to share outside". Can I tell my partner?

How to add multiple differently colored borders around a node?

Why is this code uniquely decodable?



If a druid in Wild Shape swallows a creature whole, then turns back to her normal form, what happens?


What happens when a creature that has swallowed another creature is polymorphed?What would happen if somebody ate a wild-shaped Druid, and then the Druid changed back inside them?Can a Druid use Conjure Animals to conjure a new creature and then Wild Shape into it?If a druid in wild shape is over healed, does it carry over to normal form?What would happen if somebody ate a wild-shaped Druid, and then the Druid changed back inside them?Do removed parts of a Druid's Wild Shape form persist after said Druid exits Wild Shape?Can a were-creature druid Wild Shape when in hybrid form?Can Wild Shape provide Darkvision to a human Druid?Druid Wild Shape to Wild ShapeDruid Wild Shape and physical statsCan a wild-shaped druid turn back to normal form and immediately attack?Can a druid use Wild Shape in order to escape her restraints?













14












$begingroup$


Our goblin druid posed a question today which made our DM bluescreen:



"If I turned into a giant toad, swallowed a Medium-sized creature whole, and then turned back, what happens?"



The goblin druid is a Small creature, and the giant toad is a Large creature. The creature being swallowed is Medium-sized.



This is essentially the inverse of this question, though not quite a duplicate because it's the eating creature doing the shapeshifting rather than the eaten one. Closely related to this question, with the primary difference being wildshape by a willing druid vs polymorph of an unwilling monster.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Given the [rules-as-written] tag, are you looking for a strict literalist interpretation of the rules, even when it leads to absurd interpretations? Or is it just meant as a regular rules question?
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We are most interested in whether there is any rule around this, since neither linked question cites strict rules. Absurd is fine (the situation is somewhat absurd to begin with :) ).
    $endgroup$
    – thatgirldm
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Linky: twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981248594836520960
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua
    48 mins ago
















14












$begingroup$


Our goblin druid posed a question today which made our DM bluescreen:



"If I turned into a giant toad, swallowed a Medium-sized creature whole, and then turned back, what happens?"



The goblin druid is a Small creature, and the giant toad is a Large creature. The creature being swallowed is Medium-sized.



This is essentially the inverse of this question, though not quite a duplicate because it's the eating creature doing the shapeshifting rather than the eaten one. Closely related to this question, with the primary difference being wildshape by a willing druid vs polymorph of an unwilling monster.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Given the [rules-as-written] tag, are you looking for a strict literalist interpretation of the rules, even when it leads to absurd interpretations? Or is it just meant as a regular rules question?
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We are most interested in whether there is any rule around this, since neither linked question cites strict rules. Absurd is fine (the situation is somewhat absurd to begin with :) ).
    $endgroup$
    – thatgirldm
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Linky: twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981248594836520960
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua
    48 mins ago














14












14








14





$begingroup$


Our goblin druid posed a question today which made our DM bluescreen:



"If I turned into a giant toad, swallowed a Medium-sized creature whole, and then turned back, what happens?"



The goblin druid is a Small creature, and the giant toad is a Large creature. The creature being swallowed is Medium-sized.



This is essentially the inverse of this question, though not quite a duplicate because it's the eating creature doing the shapeshifting rather than the eaten one. Closely related to this question, with the primary difference being wildshape by a willing druid vs polymorph of an unwilling monster.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




Our goblin druid posed a question today which made our DM bluescreen:



"If I turned into a giant toad, swallowed a Medium-sized creature whole, and then turned back, what happens?"



The goblin druid is a Small creature, and the giant toad is a Large creature. The creature being swallowed is Medium-sized.



This is essentially the inverse of this question, though not quite a duplicate because it's the eating creature doing the shapeshifting rather than the eaten one. Closely related to this question, with the primary difference being wildshape by a willing druid vs polymorph of an unwilling monster.







dnd-5e rules-as-written druid wild-shape






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 20 hours ago









V2Blast

23.4k375147




23.4k375147










asked 20 hours ago









thatgirldmthatgirldm

15.3k25671




15.3k25671








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Given the [rules-as-written] tag, are you looking for a strict literalist interpretation of the rules, even when it leads to absurd interpretations? Or is it just meant as a regular rules question?
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We are most interested in whether there is any rule around this, since neither linked question cites strict rules. Absurd is fine (the situation is somewhat absurd to begin with :) ).
    $endgroup$
    – thatgirldm
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Linky: twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981248594836520960
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua
    48 mins ago














  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Given the [rules-as-written] tag, are you looking for a strict literalist interpretation of the rules, even when it leads to absurd interpretations? Or is it just meant as a regular rules question?
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    20 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We are most interested in whether there is any rule around this, since neither linked question cites strict rules. Absurd is fine (the situation is somewhat absurd to begin with :) ).
    $endgroup$
    – thatgirldm
    20 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Linky: twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981248594836520960
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua
    48 mins ago








4




4




$begingroup$
Given the [rules-as-written] tag, are you looking for a strict literalist interpretation of the rules, even when it leads to absurd interpretations? Or is it just meant as a regular rules question?
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
20 hours ago




$begingroup$
Given the [rules-as-written] tag, are you looking for a strict literalist interpretation of the rules, even when it leads to absurd interpretations? Or is it just meant as a regular rules question?
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
20 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
We are most interested in whether there is any rule around this, since neither linked question cites strict rules. Absurd is fine (the situation is somewhat absurd to begin with :) ).
$endgroup$
– thatgirldm
20 hours ago




$begingroup$
We are most interested in whether there is any rule around this, since neither linked question cites strict rules. Absurd is fine (the situation is somewhat absurd to begin with :) ).
$endgroup$
– thatgirldm
20 hours ago












$begingroup$
Linky: twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981248594836520960
$endgroup$
– Joshua
48 mins ago




$begingroup$
Linky: twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981248594836520960
$endgroup$
– Joshua
48 mins ago










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















12












$begingroup$

When a target of an effect ceases to be a valid target it is no longer affected



A giant toad can swallow a creature, your druid cannot - as per the effect, I mean. Obviously, the druid can swallow things that a goblin could swallow - things I don't want to think about.



As the druid transforms from giant toad to goblin the swallowing ends. Feel free to describe how this happens in as much nauseating detail as you like.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










  • 7




    $begingroup$
    The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
    $endgroup$
    – the dark wanderer
    12 hours ago






  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
    $endgroup$
    – Joshua
    52 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    49 mins ago





















9












$begingroup$

Lack of specific rules means DM has to decide.



But let's help him by considering options, shall we?




  1. If the creature is harmed, but the druid is not:

    Whether you inflict massive damage, or just decide the creature disappears to nothingness - this means the Giant Frog becomes a killing machine. A level 4 moon druid probably does not need that kind of help.


  2. If the druid is harmed, but the creature is not:

    Then swallowing a creature becomes very risky. It removes the Giant Frog's main ability, and encourages the druid to stick to other combat forms. Bears and wolves. Yawn.


  3. If both the druid, and the the creature are harmed (such as suggested here):

    Then swallowing a creature becomes a valid, sacrificial move - that may have its narrative interest. However, the DM should ensure it can't be exploited too easily: killing a BBEG with that method only to have the druid back on his feet with a healing kit should feel like cheating.


  4. If neither the druid, nor the the creature is harmed:

    Game continues as usual, with many messy descriptions but few mechanical impacts.



Obviously #4 seems the most safe and sensible option to me - but #3 may lead to interesting situations if handled properly. This is only opinion though.



On a side note: in-game attempts to swallow bigger and bigger preys could be a semi-safe, fun way to find out the answer, if the DM is reluctant on giving mechanical details right away - and the druid has off-time to experiment.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    4 hours ago



















7












$begingroup$

RAW - the only interpretation can be taken from the equipment section of the Wildshape description (emphasis mine):




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.




Albeit, this is referencing equipment that is worn by the druid when shifting into a beast form. So for example, your gnome druid would not be able to keep wearing its leather armour - the toad form is too big to wear it. So it must either be dropped, or merge with the transformation.



This could work the same way in reverse. Upon transforming back into the gnome, the medium creature would either be merged with your PC, or dropped (i.e., regurgitated).



Again, this will probably have to be ruled by your DM.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
    $endgroup$
    – Tom
    12 hours ago



















4












$begingroup$

What happens is called flatus or indigestion



The character ate a large meal without allowing time to digest it as a giant frog. Had they stayed in that form longer, the normal frog digestion would render this problem moot.



But since they switched back to humanoid form too quickly, they are not just "full" but "really full" along the lines of eating three pizzas. Expect a passage of wind anon.



RAW there isn't an answer for this.



I thus recommend the above ruling to fill in the gap that RAW failed to foresee, which was "eating something bigger than your head."



At a time like this, rely on RAF rather than RAW.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    -1












    $begingroup$

    I remember this question (or a similar one) popping up in a campaign I was in. I believe our DM said that though it's a DM call, he basically sees it as a logical question.



    First, note that a toad swallows its food whole. That said, until it's digested, the meal is still in one huge piece. Also, how long took place between eating and transforming? Third, what kind of medium monster was it?



    All in all he viewed that as what would actually happen, given everything in consideration, if your giant toad swallowed a deer, then transformed back to a goblin right away, chances are, his head would explode, but if the toad ate the deer and turned back an hour later, then he'd be more lenient to say it's digesting fine.



    What's interesting is if your goblin turned into something able to eat a giant toad, then turned back, he'd have the transformation go off as you barf out the toad, resulting in your goblin looking like living toad poop.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$













      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%2f142368%2fif-a-druid-in-wild-shape-swallows-a-creature-whole-then-turns-back-to-her-norma%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      5 Answers
      5






      active

      oldest

      votes








      5 Answers
      5






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      12












      $begingroup$

      When a target of an effect ceases to be a valid target it is no longer affected



      A giant toad can swallow a creature, your druid cannot - as per the effect, I mean. Obviously, the druid can swallow things that a goblin could swallow - things I don't want to think about.



      As the druid transforms from giant toad to goblin the swallowing ends. Feel free to describe how this happens in as much nauseating detail as you like.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










      • 7




        $begingroup$
        The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
        $endgroup$
        – the dark wanderer
        12 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        3 hours ago












      • $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
        $endgroup$
        – Joshua
        52 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        49 mins ago


















      12












      $begingroup$

      When a target of an effect ceases to be a valid target it is no longer affected



      A giant toad can swallow a creature, your druid cannot - as per the effect, I mean. Obviously, the druid can swallow things that a goblin could swallow - things I don't want to think about.



      As the druid transforms from giant toad to goblin the swallowing ends. Feel free to describe how this happens in as much nauseating detail as you like.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










      • 7




        $begingroup$
        The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
        $endgroup$
        – the dark wanderer
        12 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        3 hours ago












      • $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
        $endgroup$
        – Joshua
        52 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        49 mins ago
















      12












      12








      12





      $begingroup$

      When a target of an effect ceases to be a valid target it is no longer affected



      A giant toad can swallow a creature, your druid cannot - as per the effect, I mean. Obviously, the druid can swallow things that a goblin could swallow - things I don't want to think about.



      As the druid transforms from giant toad to goblin the swallowing ends. Feel free to describe how this happens in as much nauseating detail as you like.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      When a target of an effect ceases to be a valid target it is no longer affected



      A giant toad can swallow a creature, your druid cannot - as per the effect, I mean. Obviously, the druid can swallow things that a goblin could swallow - things I don't want to think about.



      As the druid transforms from giant toad to goblin the swallowing ends. Feel free to describe how this happens in as much nauseating detail as you like.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 19 hours ago









      Dale MDale M

      108k21278479




      108k21278479



      Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.




      Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.









      • 7




        $begingroup$
        The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
        $endgroup$
        – the dark wanderer
        12 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        3 hours ago












      • $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
        $endgroup$
        – Joshua
        52 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        49 mins ago
















      • 7




        $begingroup$
        The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
        $endgroup$
        – the dark wanderer
        12 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        3 hours ago












      • $begingroup$
        @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
        $endgroup$
        – Joshua
        52 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
        $endgroup$
        – Rubiksmoose
        49 mins ago










      7




      7




      $begingroup$
      The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
      $endgroup$
      – the dark wanderer
      12 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      The target is still valid. It's just the source that's no longer present, and doesn't always lead to effects ending.
      $endgroup$
      – the dark wanderer
      12 hours ago




      5




      5




      $begingroup$
      Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      4 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Citing valid target rules would help improve this.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      4 hours ago




      4




      4




      $begingroup$
      To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
      $endgroup$
      – Rubiksmoose
      3 hours ago






      $begingroup$
      To add to this, citing literally any rule would improve this. Right now it is completely unsupported. This is important because the points in here are both contentious and non-obvious, but by not citing anything you make it seem like it is completely supported by the rules. Please add some support for this answer. -1 from me until that is added.
      $endgroup$
      – Rubiksmoose
      3 hours ago














      $begingroup$
      @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua
      52 mins ago




      $begingroup$
      @Rubiksmoose: All answers are speculating. Dale M either got what's probably the best play answer by reasoning it out or guessing. c.f. Bash's #4 already.
      $endgroup$
      – Joshua
      52 mins ago












      $begingroup$
      @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
      $endgroup$
      – Rubiksmoose
      49 mins ago






      $begingroup$
      @Joshua the difference between Bash's answer and this one is that this one implies that the rules agree with it but then never cites the rules they are talking about. When you claim something is fact you have to back it up. We even have guidelines on how to do that. The fact that this answer isn't meeting them is born out by the little message below it.
      $endgroup$
      – Rubiksmoose
      49 mins ago















      9












      $begingroup$

      Lack of specific rules means DM has to decide.



      But let's help him by considering options, shall we?




      1. If the creature is harmed, but the druid is not:

        Whether you inflict massive damage, or just decide the creature disappears to nothingness - this means the Giant Frog becomes a killing machine. A level 4 moon druid probably does not need that kind of help.


      2. If the druid is harmed, but the creature is not:

        Then swallowing a creature becomes very risky. It removes the Giant Frog's main ability, and encourages the druid to stick to other combat forms. Bears and wolves. Yawn.


      3. If both the druid, and the the creature are harmed (such as suggested here):

        Then swallowing a creature becomes a valid, sacrificial move - that may have its narrative interest. However, the DM should ensure it can't be exploited too easily: killing a BBEG with that method only to have the druid back on his feet with a healing kit should feel like cheating.


      4. If neither the druid, nor the the creature is harmed:

        Game continues as usual, with many messy descriptions but few mechanical impacts.



      Obviously #4 seems the most safe and sensible option to me - but #3 may lead to interesting situations if handled properly. This is only opinion though.



      On a side note: in-game attempts to swallow bigger and bigger preys could be a semi-safe, fun way to find out the answer, if the DM is reluctant on giving mechanical details right away - and the druid has off-time to experiment.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago
















      9












      $begingroup$

      Lack of specific rules means DM has to decide.



      But let's help him by considering options, shall we?




      1. If the creature is harmed, but the druid is not:

        Whether you inflict massive damage, or just decide the creature disappears to nothingness - this means the Giant Frog becomes a killing machine. A level 4 moon druid probably does not need that kind of help.


      2. If the druid is harmed, but the creature is not:

        Then swallowing a creature becomes very risky. It removes the Giant Frog's main ability, and encourages the druid to stick to other combat forms. Bears and wolves. Yawn.


      3. If both the druid, and the the creature are harmed (such as suggested here):

        Then swallowing a creature becomes a valid, sacrificial move - that may have its narrative interest. However, the DM should ensure it can't be exploited too easily: killing a BBEG with that method only to have the druid back on his feet with a healing kit should feel like cheating.


      4. If neither the druid, nor the the creature is harmed:

        Game continues as usual, with many messy descriptions but few mechanical impacts.



      Obviously #4 seems the most safe and sensible option to me - but #3 may lead to interesting situations if handled properly. This is only opinion though.



      On a side note: in-game attempts to swallow bigger and bigger preys could be a semi-safe, fun way to find out the answer, if the DM is reluctant on giving mechanical details right away - and the druid has off-time to experiment.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago














      9












      9








      9





      $begingroup$

      Lack of specific rules means DM has to decide.



      But let's help him by considering options, shall we?




      1. If the creature is harmed, but the druid is not:

        Whether you inflict massive damage, or just decide the creature disappears to nothingness - this means the Giant Frog becomes a killing machine. A level 4 moon druid probably does not need that kind of help.


      2. If the druid is harmed, but the creature is not:

        Then swallowing a creature becomes very risky. It removes the Giant Frog's main ability, and encourages the druid to stick to other combat forms. Bears and wolves. Yawn.


      3. If both the druid, and the the creature are harmed (such as suggested here):

        Then swallowing a creature becomes a valid, sacrificial move - that may have its narrative interest. However, the DM should ensure it can't be exploited too easily: killing a BBEG with that method only to have the druid back on his feet with a healing kit should feel like cheating.


      4. If neither the druid, nor the the creature is harmed:

        Game continues as usual, with many messy descriptions but few mechanical impacts.



      Obviously #4 seems the most safe and sensible option to me - but #3 may lead to interesting situations if handled properly. This is only opinion though.



      On a side note: in-game attempts to swallow bigger and bigger preys could be a semi-safe, fun way to find out the answer, if the DM is reluctant on giving mechanical details right away - and the druid has off-time to experiment.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      Lack of specific rules means DM has to decide.



      But let's help him by considering options, shall we?




      1. If the creature is harmed, but the druid is not:

        Whether you inflict massive damage, or just decide the creature disappears to nothingness - this means the Giant Frog becomes a killing machine. A level 4 moon druid probably does not need that kind of help.


      2. If the druid is harmed, but the creature is not:

        Then swallowing a creature becomes very risky. It removes the Giant Frog's main ability, and encourages the druid to stick to other combat forms. Bears and wolves. Yawn.


      3. If both the druid, and the the creature are harmed (such as suggested here):

        Then swallowing a creature becomes a valid, sacrificial move - that may have its narrative interest. However, the DM should ensure it can't be exploited too easily: killing a BBEG with that method only to have the druid back on his feet with a healing kit should feel like cheating.


      4. If neither the druid, nor the the creature is harmed:

        Game continues as usual, with many messy descriptions but few mechanical impacts.



      Obviously #4 seems the most safe and sensible option to me - but #3 may lead to interesting situations if handled properly. This is only opinion though.



      On a side note: in-game attempts to swallow bigger and bigger preys could be a semi-safe, fun way to find out the answer, if the DM is reluctant on giving mechanical details right away - and the druid has off-time to experiment.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 4 hours ago









      V2Blast

      23.4k375147




      23.4k375147










      answered 4 hours ago









      BashBash

      1,104117




      1,104117








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago














      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
        $endgroup$
        – NautArch
        4 hours ago








      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      4 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      I really like your assessment of the potential outcomes to help determine how to adjudicate at the table.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      4 hours ago











      7












      $begingroup$

      RAW - the only interpretation can be taken from the equipment section of the Wildshape description (emphasis mine):




      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.




      Albeit, this is referencing equipment that is worn by the druid when shifting into a beast form. So for example, your gnome druid would not be able to keep wearing its leather armour - the toad form is too big to wear it. So it must either be dropped, or merge with the transformation.



      This could work the same way in reverse. Upon transforming back into the gnome, the medium creature would either be merged with your PC, or dropped (i.e., regurgitated).



      Again, this will probably have to be ruled by your DM.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$









      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
        $endgroup$
        – Tom
        12 hours ago
















      7












      $begingroup$

      RAW - the only interpretation can be taken from the equipment section of the Wildshape description (emphasis mine):




      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.




      Albeit, this is referencing equipment that is worn by the druid when shifting into a beast form. So for example, your gnome druid would not be able to keep wearing its leather armour - the toad form is too big to wear it. So it must either be dropped, or merge with the transformation.



      This could work the same way in reverse. Upon transforming back into the gnome, the medium creature would either be merged with your PC, or dropped (i.e., regurgitated).



      Again, this will probably have to be ruled by your DM.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$









      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
        $endgroup$
        – Tom
        12 hours ago














      7












      7








      7





      $begingroup$

      RAW - the only interpretation can be taken from the equipment section of the Wildshape description (emphasis mine):




      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.




      Albeit, this is referencing equipment that is worn by the druid when shifting into a beast form. So for example, your gnome druid would not be able to keep wearing its leather armour - the toad form is too big to wear it. So it must either be dropped, or merge with the transformation.



      This could work the same way in reverse. Upon transforming back into the gnome, the medium creature would either be merged with your PC, or dropped (i.e., regurgitated).



      Again, this will probably have to be ruled by your DM.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      RAW - the only interpretation can be taken from the equipment section of the Wildshape description (emphasis mine):




      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.




      Albeit, this is referencing equipment that is worn by the druid when shifting into a beast form. So for example, your gnome druid would not be able to keep wearing its leather armour - the toad form is too big to wear it. So it must either be dropped, or merge with the transformation.



      This could work the same way in reverse. Upon transforming back into the gnome, the medium creature would either be merged with your PC, or dropped (i.e., regurgitated).



      Again, this will probably have to be ruled by your DM.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 19 hours ago









      BenBen

      10.8k1566134




      10.8k1566134








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
        $endgroup$
        – Tom
        12 hours ago














      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
        $endgroup$
        – Tom
        12 hours ago








      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
      $endgroup$
      – Tom
      12 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      I like this answer because it gives choice. That's always a good feature to have in a game.
      $endgroup$
      – Tom
      12 hours ago











      4












      $begingroup$

      What happens is called flatus or indigestion



      The character ate a large meal without allowing time to digest it as a giant frog. Had they stayed in that form longer, the normal frog digestion would render this problem moot.



      But since they switched back to humanoid form too quickly, they are not just "full" but "really full" along the lines of eating three pizzas. Expect a passage of wind anon.



      RAW there isn't an answer for this.



      I thus recommend the above ruling to fill in the gap that RAW failed to foresee, which was "eating something bigger than your head."



      At a time like this, rely on RAF rather than RAW.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$


















        4












        $begingroup$

        What happens is called flatus or indigestion



        The character ate a large meal without allowing time to digest it as a giant frog. Had they stayed in that form longer, the normal frog digestion would render this problem moot.



        But since they switched back to humanoid form too quickly, they are not just "full" but "really full" along the lines of eating three pizzas. Expect a passage of wind anon.



        RAW there isn't an answer for this.



        I thus recommend the above ruling to fill in the gap that RAW failed to foresee, which was "eating something bigger than your head."



        At a time like this, rely on RAF rather than RAW.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$
















          4












          4








          4





          $begingroup$

          What happens is called flatus or indigestion



          The character ate a large meal without allowing time to digest it as a giant frog. Had they stayed in that form longer, the normal frog digestion would render this problem moot.



          But since they switched back to humanoid form too quickly, they are not just "full" but "really full" along the lines of eating three pizzas. Expect a passage of wind anon.



          RAW there isn't an answer for this.



          I thus recommend the above ruling to fill in the gap that RAW failed to foresee, which was "eating something bigger than your head."



          At a time like this, rely on RAF rather than RAW.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          What happens is called flatus or indigestion



          The character ate a large meal without allowing time to digest it as a giant frog. Had they stayed in that form longer, the normal frog digestion would render this problem moot.



          But since they switched back to humanoid form too quickly, they are not just "full" but "really full" along the lines of eating three pizzas. Expect a passage of wind anon.



          RAW there isn't an answer for this.



          I thus recommend the above ruling to fill in the gap that RAW failed to foresee, which was "eating something bigger than your head."



          At a time like this, rely on RAF rather than RAW.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 4 hours ago

























          answered 19 hours ago









          KorvinStarmastKorvinStarmast

          80.7k19252435




          80.7k19252435























              -1












              $begingroup$

              I remember this question (or a similar one) popping up in a campaign I was in. I believe our DM said that though it's a DM call, he basically sees it as a logical question.



              First, note that a toad swallows its food whole. That said, until it's digested, the meal is still in one huge piece. Also, how long took place between eating and transforming? Third, what kind of medium monster was it?



              All in all he viewed that as what would actually happen, given everything in consideration, if your giant toad swallowed a deer, then transformed back to a goblin right away, chances are, his head would explode, but if the toad ate the deer and turned back an hour later, then he'd be more lenient to say it's digesting fine.



              What's interesting is if your goblin turned into something able to eat a giant toad, then turned back, he'd have the transformation go off as you barf out the toad, resulting in your goblin looking like living toad poop.






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.






              $endgroup$


















                -1












                $begingroup$

                I remember this question (or a similar one) popping up in a campaign I was in. I believe our DM said that though it's a DM call, he basically sees it as a logical question.



                First, note that a toad swallows its food whole. That said, until it's digested, the meal is still in one huge piece. Also, how long took place between eating and transforming? Third, what kind of medium monster was it?



                All in all he viewed that as what would actually happen, given everything in consideration, if your giant toad swallowed a deer, then transformed back to a goblin right away, chances are, his head would explode, but if the toad ate the deer and turned back an hour later, then he'd be more lenient to say it's digesting fine.



                What's interesting is if your goblin turned into something able to eat a giant toad, then turned back, he'd have the transformation go off as you barf out the toad, resulting in your goblin looking like living toad poop.






                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.






                $endgroup$
















                  -1












                  -1








                  -1





                  $begingroup$

                  I remember this question (or a similar one) popping up in a campaign I was in. I believe our DM said that though it's a DM call, he basically sees it as a logical question.



                  First, note that a toad swallows its food whole. That said, until it's digested, the meal is still in one huge piece. Also, how long took place between eating and transforming? Third, what kind of medium monster was it?



                  All in all he viewed that as what would actually happen, given everything in consideration, if your giant toad swallowed a deer, then transformed back to a goblin right away, chances are, his head would explode, but if the toad ate the deer and turned back an hour later, then he'd be more lenient to say it's digesting fine.



                  What's interesting is if your goblin turned into something able to eat a giant toad, then turned back, he'd have the transformation go off as you barf out the toad, resulting in your goblin looking like living toad poop.






                  share|improve this answer








                  New contributor




                  Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  $endgroup$



                  I remember this question (or a similar one) popping up in a campaign I was in. I believe our DM said that though it's a DM call, he basically sees it as a logical question.



                  First, note that a toad swallows its food whole. That said, until it's digested, the meal is still in one huge piece. Also, how long took place between eating and transforming? Third, what kind of medium monster was it?



                  All in all he viewed that as what would actually happen, given everything in consideration, if your giant toad swallowed a deer, then transformed back to a goblin right away, chances are, his head would explode, but if the toad ate the deer and turned back an hour later, then he'd be more lenient to say it's digesting fine.



                  What's interesting is if your goblin turned into something able to eat a giant toad, then turned back, he'd have the transformation go off as you barf out the toad, resulting in your goblin looking like living toad poop.







                  share|improve this answer








                  New contributor




                  Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.









                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer






                  New contributor




                  Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.









                  answered 12 hours ago









                  Victor BVictor B

                  1909




                  1909




                  New contributor




                  Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.





                  New contributor





                  Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  Victor B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






























                      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%2f142368%2fif-a-druid-in-wild-shape-swallows-a-creature-whole-then-turns-back-to-her-norma%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

                      Installing LyX: “No textclass is found.”LyX installation error- text class not found- 'Reconfigure' or...

                      (1602) Indiana Índice Designación y nombre Características orbitales Véase...

                      Universidad Autónoma de Occidente Índice Historia Campus Facultades Programas Académicos Medios de...