Can I do this with alter self?

[Pielorinho]

That's an interesting one... but really to be consistent/balanced you'd have to apply such rules to all spells. Making the spell True Strike much much more useless at first level.

I think the difference is that true strike is a very rigid, limited spell: it provides a clear, brief, well-defined bonus. Alter self etc. provide pretty much any bonus you can find, for a pretty long time. It makes more sense to me to limit the shapeshifting spells in a unique fashion in order to compensate for their extreme flexibilitly.

And what's the numerical bonus of flight?

And what about land speed? A 50 land speed is a bonus of +20 (usually), so you can't get that until level 20? Seems a bit.. unfair.

I don't think his system treats either of those as numerical bonuses; I was using shorthand. The relevant bits of his system (which is really work a look) are as follows:

Speed: Same as the assumed shape. The base creature gains additional movement types as the assumed shape, such as a Fly speed, Swim speed, or Climb speed, if they are nonmagical.
...
The base creature loses any natural armor bonus it has, and gains any natural armor bonus of the assumed shape, with the following limit: the base creature may not gain a natural armor bonus higher than the caster level of the effect that caused the polymorphing. If a shape is assumed that would normally possess a natural armor bonus that exceeds this limit, the bonus is lowered to equal the caster level.
...
Abilities: The base creature loses all racial modifiers to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, and gains the racial modifiers to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution belonging to the assumed shape. The base creature may not gain a racial bonus to any ability score that is greater than the caster level of the effect that caused the polymorphing. If a shape is assumed that would normally possess a racial ability score bonus that exceeds this limit, the bonus is lowered to equal the caster level.

So really I think it's only ability scores and natural armor that face this restriction. We played with these rules, and that was generally enough.

It's got some serious advantages:
-Druids no longer have strength or dexterity as dump stats, since their base ability scores are reflected in their shapeshifted scores.
-Certain forms are not ridiculously good at low levels (e.g., brown bear at eighth level), but they're still quite nice.
-For the most part, charts like Mistwell's become less important, since you've got these caps on what bonuses you can get.

I played a druid for several levels (like 11-14, maybe) using these rules. They worked very well: the main drawback is that figuring out shapeshifted stats was something of a pain in the butt. I ended up writing an excel spreadsheet that would help out.

Daniel

 

[Infiniti2000]

But I have to ask, do we really need to censure ourselves for this kind of imaginary player who may or may not exist? And even if they do exist, why is it a positive to deny them what they're looking for?

That player does exist. Calling him imaginary is calling me a liar when I stated I have seen it many times. And read my first response. It's neither positive nor negative, I just don't like it. If a player wants to read all the monster stats and the DM's okay with it, then fine. I still don't like it. And, I'm amazed that everyone else posting in this thread likes it.

I think the mere idea of putting spoiler tags on this kind of information is the first step down a slippery slope that can only lead to complete inanity.
...At some point, the reader has to accept responsibility for themselves. If a player who does not want to metagame reads information that can aid in metagaming, it's their responsibility not to metagame, not ours to censure ourselves so they can't.

The slippery slope here is all imaginary. It's not a first step at all. If it were, then the first step was to put spoiler blocks around, say, any detailed discussion involving the RttToEE. Maybe you still don't understand my point?

Would you prefer needing to dig through the relevant books during a session, slowing down gameplay?

Well, if you allow the player to paw through all the monster books and modules during the game, why isn't he DMing? When they encounter a monster, do you just give them the appropriate stat card of what they are fighting? Or, maybe, you are just making an incorrect inference?

 

[gabrion]

The slippery slope here is all imaginary. It's not a first step at all. If it were, then the first step was to put spoiler blocks around, say, any detailed discussion involving the RttToEE. Maybe you still don't understand my point?

I don't think this is a slippery slope issue either, because acts of ridiculousness usually don't catch on as hot trends. If we all start doing something as silly as hiding optimization info in sblocks, most people will (thankfully) just scratch their heads and go on with their regular posting.

I think everyone understands your point, it's just lacks any kind of compelling reasoning. Players looking for ways to twink their characters are going to find those ways (and I don't mind that in the first place). The thing you're missing is that there are two kinds of people who can stumble across the kind of info in this thread:

1) Players who are reading the forums for the heck of it and stumble across information about min/maxing
2) Players who are actively searching for optimization techniques for their characters.

The first group of players come across this stuff by chance, and it usually doesn't affect their personal style of play. The second group of players is going to seek out the info they want whether or not you put it in sblocks, so there really isn't too much to be concerned about.

Lastly, the comparison with RttToEE is a really, really bad one. The reason we put plot stuff in sblocks is because it can actually ruin someone's fun if they find out what will happen in a game before it happens. Optimization techniques on the other hand are simply styles of play that people, when they come across them, can embrace or reject. Either choice doesn't result in spoiling the plot of any game they're in.

Well, if you allow the player to paw through all the monster books and modules during the game, why isn't he DMing? When they encounter a monster, do you just give them the appropriate stat card of what they are fighting? Or, maybe, you are just making an incorrect inference?

Well you see, some of us like playing the game by the rules more often than not. Read alter self and you'll see that it allows the caster to:

assume the form of a creature of the same type as your normal form. The new form must be within one size category of your normal size. The maximum HD of an assumed form is equal to your caster level, to a maximum of 5 HD at 5th level. You can change into a member of your own kind or even into yourself.

So yes, a player can search through the MM and find which creatures match this set of criteria. If a form is a valid one for alter self, then guess what, they can turn into it!

 

[ceratitis]

personaly i think this debate is just being rehashed, cant we just agree to disagree?
we each play in our own style, min/maxing players will hit the wotc boards and find all they want and i think most of the posters here at this board are exepienced players to whatever degree and we've all 'sined' in metagaming. we'll never have the wonder of meeting gnolls or bugbears for the first time again.
i like the concept of allowing char knowledge eithe from the skill or personal encounters, i think no dm will allow a 5th level bard with no knowledge of the planes and no such encounters to alterself into a outerplanner creature.
Z

 

[Baron Opal]

Alter Self lets you turn into a troglodyte and gain +6 nat armor. Now my stats don't change, and I also don't get the trogs stink ability, so I'm still party friendly. As far as I can tell, there are no mechanical drawbacks to using alter self this way...is there anything I'm missing?

You are correct. The main disadvantage with the spell is social. You now look like a member of a race which is usually hostile to PC races to the point of eating them.

I play Arcana Evolved now, mostly, but if I was playing D&D I would have to rewrite the spell to cover two eventualities: using the spell for disguise and using it for abilities. I would come up with a list of 6-10 abilities and each use of the spell give you one ability. Higher levels may give you more than one (1/5 levels, or so).

I would treat polymorph similarly, BTW.

 

[ARandomGod]

I played a druid for several levels (like 11-14, maybe) using these rules. They worked very well: the main drawback is that figuring out shapeshifted stats was something of a pain in the butt. I ended up writing an excel spreadsheet that would help out.

Hrm.

I've now read those rules through, and I'll admit that I really like them.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

That player does exist. Calling him imaginary is calling me a liar

Back down off the indignation, captain. My response was to your own text:

I've tried to say this before, but my complaint isn't about the fact that you created those stats or are giving them to people, it's not even about you specifically (because I quite frankly trust you), it's about someone else, someone unspecified, perhaps not even a member here yet, who desires to metagame.

You're trying to fix a problem to help someone who may not even be here. Who may never come here for all we know.

And read my first response. It's neither positive nor negative, I just don't like it.

Semantics.

If a player wants to read all the monster stats and the DM's okay with it, then fine. I still don't like it. And, I'm amazed that everyone else posting in this thread likes it.

*shrug* I DM with a DM as a player. He reads monster stats all the time. It doesn't impact his playing at all. Although not DMs, I trust the other players just as much. Which gets back to the point that the problem is with metagaming players, not with information available on a messageboard designed to disseminate information.

The slippery slope here is all imaginary. It's not a first step at all. If it were, then the first step was to put spoiler blocks around, say, any detailed discussion involving the RttToEE. Maybe you still don't understand my point?

I understand it just fine. I disagree with it. The slippery slope is anything but imaginary. Once we start trying to protect people from themselves, it can only get worse. If one goes to a messageboard focused on the mechanics of the game, one should not be surprised to find detailed information on the mechanics of the game.

Well, if you allow the player to paw through all the monster books and modules during the game, why isn't he DMing?

I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that my players paw through the MM during play. They usually have a list of critters for Alter Self just like the one posted in this thread.

When they encounter a monster, do you just give them the appropriate stat card of what they are fighting?

No.

Or maybe, you are just making an incorrect inference?

Pot, meet Kettle.

 

[Pielorinho]

Moderator's Notes:

Everyone, please follow two cardinal rules:
1) Address the argument, not the arguer.
2) if you think someone is posting offensively, report it to the moderators, instead of responding to it in kind.
3) Remain courteous, civil, and respectful at all times.

Wait--let me come in again.

Daniel