Some planar shepherd questions won't generate good answers when the questions are about the class's abilities' interactions with planes outside the Eberron campaign setting. That means, as always,
Ask the DM
The Wilderness of the Beastlands has never received the attention the higher profile planes receive. Like the previous question about the Outlands, the planar shepherd who picks a fictionally underdeveloped plane1 with which to link is at no particular advantage over a planar shepherd who picks a fictionally well-developed plane.2 A planar shepherd who picks an unpopular plane just leaves more of his options up to the DM.
The Beastlands' Magical Beasts
There's just one.
In addition, native to the Beastlands is the beast dragon (Dragon #321 50-1), a dragon with the extraplanar subtype, and the dread blossom swarm (MM3 45), a plant. No single template changes dragons or plants to magical beasts, however.
Template Shenanigans
There's no template that makes an animal into a magical beast by making it more beastlandish, but that's okay because the Beastlands specifically calls out the template celestial, which "can be added to any corporeal animal, aberration, animal, dragon, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, plant, or vermin of good or neutral alignment" (MM 31), so that template's pretty wide-ranging.
And while it's interesting that the Beastlands "is the home of many beasts of legend--superior versions of powerful animals, beasts, and magical beasts" (MP 142), that doesn't let the Beastlands-attuned planar shepherd break the rules of the template monster of legend, which says that it "can be added to any animal, beast, magical beast, or monstrous humanoid .... The creature’s type changes to outsider [not magical beast], though the monster of legend’s home plane is the Material Plane" (MM2 213), not the Beastlands. So what, exactly, that sentence means is up to the DM; perhaps the DM'd be willing to homebrew some creatures, convert some from a previous edition, or allow 3rd-party sources to satisfy this note.
But ask the DM if the planar shepherd's level 3 wild shape special ability that permits him "to change into a magical beast native to [the] chosen plane" and "includes creatures whose type changes to magical beast as the result of applying a template" (FE 106) also includes templates other than the examples celestial or fiendish. If yes, there are templates that can be added to animals to change their types to magical beasts. In my opinion, those appropriate for Beastlands animals include the following:
- chimeric creature (MM2 206).
- kaiju (Dragon #289 68-71). Note: Using wild shape to assume the form of one, though, is quite the challenge.
- monstrous beast (SS 122).
- valicorn ("Ghostwalk Web Enhancement" 4-5).
- winged creature (SS 137).
Any of these could satisfy the "beasts of legend" flavor text of the Beastlands.
The Beastlands' Native Outsiders
In Dungeons and Dragons, 3rd Edition the following outsiders are native to the Beastlands:
Some neutral good angels. According to the Monster Manual, one of the sources of "neutral good angels [is]... the Beastlands" (MM 10).
After the Monster Manual Wizards of the Coast published no further angels.
- The hollyphant (BE 176-7).
- The spirit of the wild (Dungeon #148 25)
- The xap-yaup energon (PlH 122).
Unlike many planes, the Beastlands never received their iconic creatures--the plane's popularity never even spawned a race as sparsely detailed as the rilmani from the Outlands or the demodands of Carceri. The closest I could find from earlier editions are the mortai, converted to Dungeons and Dragons, 3rd Edition here, and, honestly, I don't think they count.
live in Remains Different from native to
It's obvious you want the answer to be different, but Jack Lesnie's correct when he says that these terms mean different things. Seriously.
- "Lawful good angels hail from the plane of Celestia, neutral good angels from the plane of Elysium or the Beastlands, and chaotic good angels from plane of Arborea" (MM 10).
- "Archons are celestials from the plane of Celestia" (MM 10).
- "The eladrins are a celestial race native to the plane of Arborea" (MM 93).
- "Guardinals are a celestial race native to the plane of Elysium" (MM 141).
- "Lillends are mysterious visitors from the plane of Ysgard" (MM 168).
...And so on. An outsider's entry tells the reader what plane a creature's native to. All the other times when a creature is mentioned as hanging out on another plane, such a creature can only live in another plane. He's not native to it.
- While I find researching these questions interesting, there just isn't that much information about Arborea, Bytopia, Ysgard, Pandemonium, Carceri, and the like.
- In fact, short of the Abyss, Celestia, Baator, Limbo, and Mechanus, not a lot's been said about many planes.
Yes it does
Yes, you can add beast forms to your Wild Shape repertoire of beasts seen by casting conjure animals. The spell explicitly says the conjured creatures literally are beasts, and a creature of the type beast is all Wild Shape needs you to see in order to add its form to your repertoire.
Though someone might by tempted to quibble that they're not real beasts because they're really fey spirits clothed in the shape of beasts, look at it this way: First the Druid conjures a bunch of spirits that take on the form and behaviour of the real beasts they look like. The creatures so conjured proceed to behave and look exactly like the real thing. What better opportunity is there for a shapechanger to learn a new form to wear, than to see a nature spirit do the exact same thing as they're wanting to learn to do?
But it's of limited use
What you might actually run afoul of is limitations on metagaming, or a DM whose setting doesn't include just any creature you can think of (even if it's in the Monster Manual).
- A DM who wants to limit metagaming would be within their rights to ask you to justify your choice. If you try to summon a Giant Owl but your druid has never seen one before, a DM could easily say "How do you know those exist? You've never seen one. How is your druid "choosing" an animal (s)he has never seen or heard of before?"
- A DM who has developed a custom setting isn't straightjacketed by the Monster Manual and doesn't have to include everything in it. Giant Owls might not exist in a DM's campaign.
This also means that this is much less of a loophole than it might seem — after all, how big is the difference between the set of creatures a druid has personally seen and the set of creatures the druid knows about well enough to deliberately try to conjure? I can't imagine it's a very large number.
But in principle, yes, a conjured animal inhabited by a fey spirit is plenty to learn that form from. Just mind that, if you can conjure a particular animal, it's highly likely your druid has already seen it anyway. This makes this method of acquiring new forms both limited in utility and not much of a loophole to worry about, either way.
Best Answer
Yes, but the game doesn't tell you which. As long as your Druid isn't a newborn baby, they've likely seen some beasts in their life (especially during and after their Druid training!), and therefore can Wild Shape into those beasts.
Your background is probably the best guide to what creatures you've likely seen, as your background will imply a region that's familiar to you. Any beast common to the region in which you grew up and trained is a beast you've likely seen many times, and uncommon ones are likely to have been seen once or twice too.
This is all between you and your DM, of course, because the game doesn't rigidly define a list or rigidly define a way to create one. You're two reasonable people who enjoy playing games together though, so I'm sure you'll figure out an enjoyable, reasonable set of beasts that you can agree makes sense for a nature-loving outdoorsy person to have ever seen in their life.