Characters- Ongoing Druid Debate

[Ballard_Alvar]

You've got a point, since it only counts Druid level, not total HD. Otherwise, though...I don't see what you're trying to say. I do believe I was agreeing with you, except that Su abilities are cast at CL=HD, not CL= class level.

[font=&quot].[/font] . . eh, sorry, I’m used to people arguing with me. I was just validating Mirivor's question because a wizard is still limited by the spell's cap. I also didn't catch the "usually" part of your statement - which slightly altered the context to a more agreeable one.
ohh well.- no worries.

 

[Ballard_Alvar]

Druid Love

Sometimes I think I am the only one that has Love for the Druid; to day this thread got to page 3. - - Sad panda.

Speaking of Pandas, I don't think they would be a terrible Wild shape form. has there been a printing with one or does anyone have a homebrew stated up?

 

[The Souljourner]

I'm with those who say polymorph isn't a size changing spell. It changes you into a normal sized *whatever*, which can then be increased in size by some other spell. I am quite certain the intention of the no stacking rule is to prevent spells that explicitly increase your size (a la animal growth or Enlarge) from stacking, which, as has been pointed out, is why the no stacking rule is explicitly stated in each of those spells, but not in polymorph.

-The Souljourner

 

[IcyCool]

I'm with those who say polymorph isn't a size changing spell. It changes you into a normal sized *whatever*, which can then be increased in size by some other spell. I am quite certain the intention of the no stacking rule is to prevent spells that explicitly increase your size (a la animal growth or Enlarge) from stacking, which, as has been pointed out, is why the no stacking rule is explicitly stated in each of those spells, but not in polymorph.

-The Souljourner

I agree.

 

[Tetsubo]

You can't turn into Advanced versions of a form you are able to wildshape into.

But a 16th level Druid could change into a Dire Tiger...

Mike

I've never understood that. Can you explain why an Advanced form isn't allowed but a Dire version is?

 

[azmodean]

I'm with those who say polymorph isn't a size changing spell. It changes you into a normal sized *whatever*, which can then be increased in size by some other spell. I am quite certain the intention of the no stacking rule is to prevent spells that explicitly increase your size (a la animal growth or Enlarge) from stacking, which, as has been pointed out, is why the no stacking rule is explicitly stated in each of those spells, but not in polymorph.

I can't agree with this, it seems pretty straightfoward that polymorph changes your size, therefore it qualifies as a size-changing effect.
Example: medium druid.
Before spell: what size are you?
druid: medium
after spell: what size are you?
druid/polar bear: groooowl
after casting tounges: large

before you cast the spell you're medium (unless you already have a size-altering effect in place). After the spell you're large, it seems to me that your size has been changed by the spell.
I'm quite sure the intent of the no stacking rule is to keep PC types from becoming huge through the combination of multiple weaker spells, as it is an extremely unbalancing ability.

 

[Tetsubo]

I can't agree with this, it seems pretty straightfoward that polymorph changes your size, therefore it qualifies as a size-changing effect.
Example: medium druid.
Before spell: what size are you?
druid: medium
after spell: what size are you?
druid/polar bear: groooowl
after casting tounges: large

before you cast the spell you're medium (unless you already have a size-altering effect in place). After the spell you're large, it seems to me that your size has been changed by the spell.
I'm quite sure the intent of the no stacking rule is to keep PC types from becoming huge through the combination of multiple weaker spells, as it is an extremely unbalancing ability.

I think one of the problems here is that D&D takes the stance that Size = Power. Which of course is silly. A Large Giant isn't as powerful as a Small 20th level Halfling Sorcerer. If size wasn't tied to power this wouldn't be an issue for a Druid's Wildshape ability. But it is in D&D. I don't see the Wildshape ability as a size altering form of magic. It just so happens that the stronger animal forms are larger in D&D. I don't think the problem is with Wildshape, I think it's with the basic D&D rules. Which I'm not going to rewrte. So I just rule that Wildshape isn't a form of size altering magic. Even if the users size does change...

 

[Ballard_Alvar]

My Roomate (the lawyer) always likes to argue the opposite side and play devil's advocate. He made the argument that WS is only size altering if you alter your size. meaning if you human WS to a Black bear then you're still a valid target for Animal Growth.

He then proceeded to make the arguement that the reason why the disclaimer: Effects that increase size do not stack is not written in the text was because size is not always increased with WS. you could be small and decreese size. for example.

IMO the Natural Form argument is stronger, although I could just as easily see it his way - if polymorph said something about changing size.-- I think it just says: Take the form of. . .

Lastly, in reply to my post about the panda stats (What do Yall think?):

Panda Bear
Medium Animal

Hit Dice: 4d8+8 (26 HP)
Initiative: +1
Speed: 30'(Walk), 20' Climb
Armor Class: 14(+1 Dex, +3 natural), Touch 11, Flat Footed 13
Base Attack/Grapple: +3/+8
Atack: Claw +8 (1d4+5)
Full Attack: 2 claws (1d4+5), Bite (1d6+2)
Space/Reach: 5'/5'
Special Attacks: Improved Grapple
Special Qualities: Lowlight Vision, Scent
Saves: Fort +6, Ref +1, Will +4
Abilites: Str 21, Dex 13, Con 15, Int 2, Wis 10, Cha 8
Skills: Climb +5, Listen +5, Spot +3, Survival +5
Feats:Endurance, Track
Environment: Tropical Forests
Organization: Solitary (Or Pair)
Challenge Rating: 3
Advancement: 5-6 HD(Medium), 7-8(Large)
Level Adjustment: - (+2 chohort)
The Panda bear is a Jungle-dwelling omnivore that usually is not dangerous unless an interloper threatens its cubs or food supply.

Panda bears can be pure black, albino, but mostly Black and White in color and are rarely more than 6 feet long.


Skills: Panda bears have poor eyesite but gain a +2 bonus to survival checks to track prey, and a +2 to listen checks due to their keen hearing.


Combat


Improved Grab: When a Panda Bear hits with a claw attack, he may initiate a graple as a free action. He gains a +4 Racial Bonus on this roll.


Panda bears rip prey with their claws and teeth.

[font=&quot][/font][font=&quot][/font]

 

[The Souljourner]

before you cast the spell you're medium (unless you already have a size-altering effect in place). After the spell you're large, it seems to me that your size has been changed by the spell.
I'm quite sure the intent of the no stacking rule is to keep PC types from becoming huge through the combination of multiple weaker spells, as it is an extremely unbalancing ability.

So a large-sized giant polymorphed into a large-sized bear can be animal growthed, but the same is not true if he started out as a human? So... *sometimes* Polymorph stacks with animal growth and sometimes it doesn't? No way. Doesn't make sense.

Form altering spells don't count as size altering spells, because they never specifically say they change your size. They just "reset" it to whatever is normal for the form you take.

I understand your reasoning that the PC's size is different after casting the spell... but I really don't believe they intended polymorph or wild shape to not stack with the size altering spells. Yes, they didn't want you to be able to cast Enlarge on someone who has cast Righteous Might (I think that's the cleric spell that makes you bigger)... but that's two spells that specifically say that they make you "one size category larger". Polymorph doesn't work that way.

As for the lawyer who said that they didn't put the no stacking rule on polymorph because it doesn't always change your size - that's false logic. If it didn't change your size, then the rule wouldn't come into effect, so there's no reason not to put it there if they intended it to be there. Since they didn't put it there, we must assume they believe as I do, that it is not a size altering effect.

-The Souljourner

 

[Ballard_Alvar]

As for the lawyer who said that they didn't put the no stacking rule on polymorph because it doesn't always change your size - that's false logic. If it didn't change your size, then the rule wouldn't come into effect, so there's no reason not to put it there if they intended it to be there. Since they didn't put it there, we must assume they believe as I do, that it is not a size altering effect.

-The Souljourner

I agree with you, as ours is the point i've been arguing all along. However, one could argue that if by result of the spell the size of the character, albeit human or bear, changed size, then the disclaimer would come into effect(assuming this is a general rule). That said, By his reasoning, should a human change into a form that was the same size as his current form, then his size has not changed as a result of a spell, and could be subject to the effects of a size altering spell, ie Animal growth. Now, as a brown bear with AG cast on it has a Strength of 27, you might be better off shifting to a polar bear(Str 29), and not AG.

Again, I read it as a Form altering, but it could easily be manipulated otherwise to another plauseable argument.

What Are Hyp's Thoughts?