New FAQ: Polymorph issues solved

[Artoomis]

And Polymorph says "This spell functions like alter self, except ...". There is no exception permitting templates, so they're still forbidden.

Actually, this appears to be a rule change/clarification.

In other words, errata published in the FAQ. <sigh> Now we have to decide did they REALLY mean to change Alter Self or was this just an errror?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Actually, this appears to be a rule change/clarification.

In other words, errata published in the FAQ. <sigh> Now we have to decide did they REALLY mean to change Alter Self or was this just an errror?

Regardless of whether the FAQ is a legal location for changes to the rules, it's not called out as a change. Therefore it is an error.

 

[Len]

Actually, this appears to be a rule change/clarification.

In other words, errata published in the FAQ. <sigh> Now we have to decide did they REALLY mean to change Alter Self or was this just an errror?

But then the quote "Again, the rules don’t explicitly prevent this" doesn't make sense. They changed the rule to say what it already said, but it really didn't...

I'll go for just-an-error - my brain hurts less that way.

 

[Artoomis]

But then the quote "Again, the rules don’t explicitly prevent this" doesn't make sense. They changed the rule to say what it already said, but it really didn't...

I'll go for just-an-error - my brain hurts less that way.

Mine, too. I wonder if this will be fixed in the next version of the FAQ?

 

[Cheiromancer]

Did we come to any conclusion the last time we discussed the official role of the FAQ and the rulings therein?

I know we tend to get very hot under the collar, and make threads with hundreds of posts and multiple mod warnings/bannings/lockings ... but I forget what the end result turns out to be.

Whatever it is, let's just restate it and save ourselves some trouble.

 

[Nail]

I'll go for just-an-error - my brain hurts less that way.

Me too.

I'm happy to see the "advanced creatures" bit (or party's sorcerer will be pleased), but the "templates" bit is completely bogus and erroneous.

 

[dcollins]

Did we come to any conclusion the last time we discussed the official role of the FAQ and the rulings therein?

No -- heck, we almost got the whole bloomin' forum shut down.

 

[billd91]

I think the problem comes because they're over-generalizing to all of the shapechanging spells with the wording of the answers. They'd have been better off with more explicit coverage of each spell.

Alter Self specifically rules out templates, but the spell is limited to changes within the same creature type anyway.

Polymorph expands the creature types available, but doesn't include undead (and is silent on the subject of templates). Yet, they use shapechanging into a vampire as an example for justifying changing into a templated creature. Presumably, that works just fine for shapechange but for neither polymorph nor alter self since an undead creature is not allowed for either case.

But I don't see a necessary problem with using a templated creature for polymorph even if polymorph is generally based on alter self. I see the broadening of the creature types as being enough of a justification for allowing the additional complexity, especially if that template changes the creature's type to a legal type under polymorph. And, truthfully, the FAQ does leave it open as an option a DM doesn't have to follow on the fly since it suggests that the player be made responsible for kitting up the stats to avoid the slowing of game time.

 

[Scion]

From what I recall polymorphs main limitation is on hd.. so if one allowed templates it could get very insane, very quickly as most templates do not add hd, they add to CR or LA.

So, you could find the meanest creature of the highest hd you were allowed and then tack on a half dozen templates..

That definately seems like a problem to me.

As someone said earlier, I think they need to scrap the whole thing and start fresh. There are some good things in there and a whole lot of bad and a good amount of inconsistancies (why isnt a halfdragon a creature? from a world perspective all anyone knows is that for some reason you cannot polymorph into them.. but you can polymorph into either of the two parts, isnt that strange).

Here we come 4.0

 

[Nail]

From what I recall polymorphs main limitation is on hd.. so if one allowed templates it could get very insane, very quickly as most templates do not add hd, they add to CR or LA.

So, you could find the meanest creature of the highest hd you were allowed and then tack on a half dozen templates..

That definately seems like a problem to me.

Exactly.


A problem I intend on exploiting, should our group use this silly FAQ-thingy.