Does Polymorph restrict size-changes?

[Nareau]

By the RAW, it appears that Polymorph only allows the caster to go up or down by 1 size.

This spell functions like alter self, except that...

You 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.

Am I missing something? Would it be terrible to house-rule this? Doesn't this restriction hurt small spellcasters a lot?

Spider

 

[MatthewJHanson]

You can’t cause a subject to assume a form smaller than Fine

I've always inturpreted this line to replace the size clause form alter self, so that polymorph would let you assume any size fine or larger.

The only other interpetation for it that I see, is that generally less restricitive polymorphy would not allow characters who are already Fine to become smaller, where as alterself would (Microscopic?).

The second inturpetation seemed silly to me, which is why I go with the first.

 

[Saeviomagy]

If the size clause from alter self carries over, then by the same logic, the hit dice limit does too, and so does the restriction that you may only take a form that is the same type as your own.

IOW - the limitations for polymorph are

aberration, animal, dragon, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, ooze, plant, vermin OR your own type

sizes fine to awesome+++ (or whatever the largest possible size is)

hit dice of up to caster level (max 15)

no incorporeal

no gaseous

These replace the restrictions of alter self.

The only alternate ruling possible (assuming you want any sort of consistancy) is that the restrictions are

hit dice up to caster level (maximum of 5)

your own type

within one size category

 

[Iku Rex]

If the size clause from alter self carries over, then by the same logic, the hit dice limit does too, and so does the restriction that you may only take a form that is the same type as your own.

Bad logic. :\

The rules for spell chains says basically say that the text of alter self applies to polymorph except when contradicted by the text of polymorph. The two alter self rules you mention are both replaced by new rules in polymorph. The maximum allowed HD of an assumed cannot be both "5" and "15" at the same time. You could argue that the "type rule" isn't explicitly contradicted, but that's not a problem since polymorph does explicitly say that you can change into "any of the following types" in addition to your normal type, expanding on the rule from alter self.

However, there's no reason polymorph can't mention that "you can't be smaller than the smallest size possible" while at the same time maintaining the size restrictions from alter self. At best you could say that the nonsense rule in polymorph replaces the downward restriction in alter self, leaving you with the 3.0 rule spread out over both spells (with "Fine" replacing "Diminutive").

The new form can range in size from [Fine] to one size larger than the subject’s normal form. -- 3.0 polymorph other

 

[Plane Sailing]

However, there's no reason polymorph can't mention that "you can't be smaller than the smallest size possible" while at the same time maintaining the size restrictions from alter self.

Well, apart from the gap in logic it produces. There would be absolutely no point in saying "you can't be smaller than the smallest size possible", since you just can't. Thus this phrase must have a different intention.

The new form can range in size from [Fine] to one size larger than the subject’s normal form. -- 3.0 polymorph other

A particularly interesting quote, it illustrates that in 3.0 there was a clear maximum size restriction for polymorph, and that in 3.5 they didn't put that upper size restriction in.

Sure sounds like they were aiming for HD only limitation to me (and thats the way we play it. Has it caused any problems? Nope).

Cheers

 

[Plane Sailing]

I suppose it depends upon the weight one puts upon the word 'like'.

If you will excuse my hyperbole (just used to think about opposite ends of a possible scale), does one consider it to be a mere simile (a traditional usage of the word like) making it an illustrative thing, or does one consider it to mean "exactly equivalent to".

I can see how that phrase on its own could be read shading in either direction.

Cheers

 

[Thanee]

All about Polymorphing - Part 1
All about Polymorphing - Part 2
All about Polymorphing - Part 3
All about Polymorphing - Part 4

Enjoy!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Iku Rex]

Well, apart from the gap in logic it produces. There would be absolutely no point in saying "you can't be smaller than the smallest size possible", since you just can't. Thus this phrase must have a different intention.

The phrase doesn't make any more sense with another interpretation. It remains nonsense no matter how you turn it.

If you want to focus on intent rather than RAW then I suggest you ask yourself what kind of confused mind would convey "you can be any size you want " by writing "you can't be smaller than Fine" [the - by definition - smallest size possible]. It doesn't make sense.

However, if you combine the phrase in question with rule carried over from alter self you get pretty much the 3.0 rule. This "intent" makes sense.

A particularly interesting quote, it illustrates that in 3.0 there was a clear maximum size restriction for polymorph, and that in 3.5 they didn't put that upper size restriction in.

Uh, yes, they did. The new form must be within one size category of your normal size. -- polymorph, through alter self.

I suppose it depends upon the weight one puts upon the word 'like'.

If you will excuse my hyperbole (just used to think about opposite ends of a possible scale), does one consider it to be a mere simile (a traditional usage of the word like) making it an illustrative thing, or does one consider it to mean "exactly equivalent to".

I can see how that phrase on its own could be read shading in either direction.

I too can see how it on its own could be read in either direction. Fortunately it's used in quite a lot of spells (example: planar ally spells), and the PH (page 181, "spell chains") explains how spells like that are supposed to work.

Even if there weren't other spell examples and a PH rule to clear things up, polymorph pretty obviously depends on alter self for a number of rules that aren't repeated. The only reasonable interpretation is that the alter self rules apply unless otherwise noted.

 

[Iku Rex]

By the RAW, it appears that Polymorph only allows the caster to go up or down by 1 size.

All about Polymorphing - Part 1
All about Polymorphing - Part 2
All about Polymorphing - Part 3
All about Polymorphing - Part 4

Enjoy!

(Note OP. "By the RAW". )

 

[Thanee]

I think it's meant like this:

This spell functions like alter self, except that you change the willing subject into another form of living creature.

This part effectively removes the size restriction, because you can change the subject into another form of living creature, and living creatures differ in size (yes, it's ambiguous and highly vague), so the "except"-part also includes the removal of the Alter Self size restriction.

Then it goes on to place new restrictions (type and such). One of those is:

You can’t cause a subject to assume a form smaller than Fine.

It also limits the lower end of the size scale to Fine. The upper limit is not restricted.

So, you can assume a form from Fine to Colossal (the maximum size category).

This is also what they have written in the RotG article (Part 3).

Bye
Thanee