Does Polymorph restrict size-changes?

[ThirdWizard]

Actually, Iku's post #60 is probably the best suggested reason for the current wording of polymorph.

 

[Iku Rex]

Ya got that one backwards. I want "smaller than fine" to replace "within one size category," as the size-limitation clause, not the other way around.

You're right - brain fart. (Will edit post to avoid any future confusion.)

No. It's a corresponding item because both clauses deal with the very specific topic of size changes. It's supposed to be replaced because of the word "except".

My reasoning is this: "New info in Polymorph overrides what's in Alter Self when they deal with the same subject."

You could declare any alter self rule "replaced" by simply defining it as "rule concerning the subject of what you can and can't do with the spell". Polymorph has plenty of rules on that subject you could line it up with. Anything goes.

More reasonably you could define the polymorph rule as a rule on the subject of "how small can you become with polymorph", and then only the downward size limitation is replaced.

How about this: The subject of the alter self rule in question is "whether or not the new form must be within one size category of your normal size". No corresponding polymorph rule there.

Your approach to finding the "subject" of a rule is arbitrary and can be used to get rid of any alter self rule. (Unless it's actually repeated in polymorph.)

The correct method, as per the rules in the Player's Handbook, is that the alter self rules apply unless polymorph says differently.

Are you willing to apply your "subject of rule" method on polymorph any object and shapechange with regards to inheritance from polymorph? You're going to have to get pretty creative to avoid silly results...

Let me ask you some clarifying questions on your position:
1) Can a wizard polymorph into himself?

Yes.

Alter self says "you can change into a member of your own kind or even into yourself". This rule is not overruled by any rule in polymorph, making it part of the spell.

(Subject of rule: "Which forms you can change into". Since polymorph has rules on this subject, and does not repeat the rule from alter self, you presumably think the correct answer is "no"?)

2) Can polymorph change the target into something with more than 5 HD?

Yes.

According to polymorph the maximum HD for the new form is "15", overruling alter self stating that the maximum HD is "5".

3) Can a vampire wizard cast Alter Self, and become incorporeal by assuming the form of a Wraith?

I'd have said "yes" if not for Hypersmurf's post. Since wraiths are incorporeal due to their subtype, and you don't get the subtype, then "no". If the new form had some explicit natural ability to become/be incorporeal it'd be trickier, but OTTOMH I'd say "yes".

(I see no by-the-rules reason why the vampire can't become a corporeal wraith with alter self. It can't do that with polymorph, even if it had worked on undead targets or permitted undead forms.)

If I understand your argument correctly, you believe that the explicit allowances and limitations in Polymorph should be applied concurrently with the allowances and limitations set forth in Alter Self. Hence, your conclusion that "one size category" should be applied alongside "no smaller than fine." Am I restating your position correctly?

Look like it, yes.

 

[Thanee]

Actually, Iku's post #60 is probably the best suggested reason for the current wording of polymorph.

Only if you apply circular logic (that is only look at those that conform with the result you are looking for).

If (under the assumption, that all Alter Self restrictions on the form are inherited) they wanted to remove the downward restriction (if we split the one-step size restriction up into two seperate restrictions), they should have said so. They didn't ("no form smaller than Fine" is not the same type of limit as "minus one size category", it would just say, that Fine creatures cannot become any smaller, while every creature bigger than Fine can become one size category smaller; as someone said earlier), so either the downward restriction from Alter Self is still in place, or the whole restriction (normal size plus/minus one) is overruled.

Besides, there is still no explicit () rule, that removes the 5 HD limit from Alter Self in that interpretation. You just assume, since the 15 HD limit would be redundant otherwise, that therefore the 5 HD must be overruled. But it isn't. There is no rule, that says, the 5 HD limit is not in place anymore. And certainly no explicit rule. Same with type.

And it's really just circular logic. You start with the result (3.0 Polymorph size restriction) and take that as a given, then only look at the solutions, which lead to that result.

Really, that's just exactly what he himself calls:

Bad logic.

Bye
Thanee

 

[ThirdWizard]

Only if you apply circular logic (that is only look at those that conform with the result you are looking for).

It seems like a very good guess at the thought process of the designer, though. Because, the current wording ("smaller than Fine") is just flat out weird. It would not enter most people's mind to explain "any size" as "can't be smaller than this" unless they were working with some information that we arn't privy to, and I think that explaination works for me as to why someone would, in their right mind at least, word it like that. I will also say that it was probably some editor somewhere and not the origional writer that created that text.

Personally, I don't care how it works, because in our games we use it as a utility spell exclusively, except in the case of wild shape or other abilities that draw on it, mostly for versimilitude and we don't want to run around as annis hags in our heroic fantasy. But, that's personal preference.

 

[Thanee]

It seems like a very good guess at the thought process of the designer, though. Because, the current wording ("smaller than Fine") is just flat out weird.

Yeah, that most certainly is.

I just don't know why someone would remove the original, totally clear rule, for this stuff, if they meant to say the same. Even if you have part of it in Alter Self, that makes no sense, even moreso, since Alter Self does not state two seperate limitations.

That really makes no sense at all to me, and is much less believable, than that they wanted to get rid of the size restriction completely (which all other sources also hint at), mostly to not overpenalize small casters (which the 3.0 version absolutely did).

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

Yeah, that most certainly is.

I just don't know why someone would remove the original, totally clear rule, for this stuff, if they meant to say the same. Even if you have part of it in Alter Self, that makes no sense, even moreso, since Alter Self does not state two seperate limitations.

That really makes no sense at all to me, and is much less believable, than that they wanted to get rid of the size restriction completely (which all other sources also hint at), mostly to not overpenalize small casters (which the 3.0 version absolutely did).

What you are doing here is trying to rationalize why the wording is written as it is as opposed to just using the wording as written.

The original rule was just as clear as this one. The original rule for Polymorph Self was "as Polymorph Other".

The new rule for Polymorph is "as Alter Self".

Are you claiming that Polymorph Other was clear in the original text and Polymorph Self was unclear in the original text?


From my perspective, Polymorph Other became Baleful Polymorph (with new HD and size restrictions) and Polymorph Self became Polymorph (with the ability to cast on willing others and Alter Self as the base spell as opposed to Polymorph Other).

But regardless of how you view this, it is just as clear now as it was then. Just different limitations.

 

[Thanee]

The original rule was just as clear as this one. The original rule for Polymorph Self was "as Polymorph Other".

But Polymorph Self didn't introduce any new rules on top of Polymorph Other, so that's not even close to be the same relation.

Polymorph introduces three new restrictions, one for HD, one for type, one for size (all three are less restrictive, if reading the size restriction as Fine to unlimited, basically, or two do and one is just silly ).

Either those apply in addition to the ones from Alter Self, or they replace them.

Having just one-half of a restriction being replaced (especially by one, that doesn't even work the same way) is not really reasonable.

Bye
Thanee