OFFICAL ERRATA: Hit points *DO NOT* change in polymorph

[jgsugden]

There is a precedent for hit points being absolutely independent of the Con score of a creature.

A wizard/sorceror's familiar has half of the wizard/sorceror's hit points, rounded down. The familiar could have a con of 1 or 20, but that won't change the familiar's hit points.

Thus, it seems quite possible that a polymorph spell also does not change hit points, regardless of whether the con of the new form is 1 or 20.

No, the familiar rules provide an exception to the normal rule. It is a special case. It is not a general use.

In polymorph, the rules refer to the general case definition of hit points. Not a specialized exception. In order for us to apply a specialized exception, it needs to be stated. One was not stated in this case.

In order to retain something, it must not be exchanged for something new. Here, in order to retain your hit points, you can't put a new hit point total in there. Hit points is a game defined term. We have to use their general definition unless a specific exception is made. One was not made.

Let's be honest and put aside all bias for the moment. If this language appeared clearly in the original material, *nobody* would have thought there was a reasonable argument for changing hit points when constitution changes. They'd have read the plain meaning - hit points remain the same - and come to the same conclusion - the hit point total after a polymorph is the same as the hit point total before a polymorph.

 

[Thanee]

*LOL*

Didn't they just recently clarify it the other way around (FAQ)?

Bye
Thanee

 

[jgsugden]

*LOL*

Didn't they just recently clarify it the other way around (FAQ)?

Bye
Thanee

The Sage said that he didn't see any reason why hit points would not change. Apparently, he did not bother to read the alter self description. If he had, he would at least have *seen* an issue worth discussing in his answer. The Sage has an ... interesting ... history with regards to finding all the rules on an issue. He also has a ... noteworthy ... history regarding the use of rules not present in the books. His articles and advice therefor tends to be ... thought evoking.

Awwww .. screw being tactful. His advice sometimes sucks.

 

[Caliban]

The Sage said that he didn't see any reason why hit points would not change. Apparently, he did not bother to read the alter self description. If he had, he would at least have *seen* an issue worth discussing in his answer. The Sage has an ... interesting ... history with regards to finding all the rules on an issue. He also has a ... noteworthy ... history regarding the use of rules not present in the books. His articles and advice therefor tends to be ... thought evoking.

Awwww .. screw being tactful. His advice sometimes sucks.

To be honest, before the errata I would have ruled the same way the Sage did. The Polymorph spell description indicates that your hit points would change, even when taking into account the Alter Self description.

Bashing on the Sage for an answer he gave before the Errata changed the rule is pretty poor form, to put it tactfully.

 

[anon]

So, then, assuming that HPs don't change when poly'd or Wildshaped, what happens when you take Con damage?

Do we now actually have two Con scores? One for HPs (our "normal" retained score) and one for Saves (our "new" score)?

How elegant.

 

[jgsugden]

To be honest, before the errata I would have ruled the same way the Sage did. The Polymorph spell description indicates that your hit points would change, even when taking into account the Alter Self description.

Bashing on the Sage for an answer he gave before the Errata changed the rule is pretty poor form, to put it tactfully.

The errarta changed nothing. Your reading was flawed. The polymorph spell did not indicate hit points would change. The alter self limitation on hit points had to be applied to polymorph when using game definitions, plain English definitions for terms that were not game defined and the established rules of construction for the English language. The Sage blew it. A lot of gamers blew it. But, mostly, WotC blew it by making it so obtuse that it was hard to understand. This errata is a clarification, but it is not a change.

The Sage took on a responsibility when he took on his position. Failure to note an obvious point of contention when answering this question was a failure to meet that responsibility. Heck, it had been tossed back and forth over the internet on dozens of threads on many boards for many months. If he were in touch with the rules that people were asking, he would have to have seen it.

 

[Caliban]

The errarta changed nothing. Your reading was flawed.

Boy, you are acting like a jerk today. I think I've had enough.

 

[Planesdragon]

Let's be honest and put aside all bias for the moment. If this language appeared clearly in the original material, *nobody* would have thought there was a reasonable argument for changing hit points when constitution changes. They'd have read the plain meaning - hit points remain the same - and come to the same conclusion - the hit point total after a polymorph is the same as the hit point total before a polymorph.

*blink, blink*

Your HP changes if you take Constitution damage. In a like vein, you gain bonus HP if you get a bonus to your constitution score.

3.5 Polymorph is a heck of a rules-hack on the game, and is IMO symptematic of a greater problem: inelegance in rules extension, brought about by making the roleplaying game more of a one-unit wargame.

(Best example of this: why are there serious transumation spells with durations measured in minutes?)

If you're reincarnated as a bear, you should have the exact same stats as if you were raised from the dead and polymorphed into a bear. But, with polymorph as it is, you don't apply the ability score modifiers or even defeinitly change your HP--you change your ability scores to match the average of the creature type, and your HP total may or may not remain the same.

We don't buy the D&D core books because we want ambiguous statements. We want crystal clear answers one way or the other, so we know which "interpretation" is official and which one is a variant rule from core.

 

[Plane Sailing]

It seems to me that the only way of truly clarifying this issue would be for them to break the (IMO stupid) link between Alter Self and Polymorph. Spend the extra few pence of ink to describe each spell fully and independently.

To date it has not been sufficiently clarified what their original intention was (evident in the fact that individuals of sound mind and good character can come to differing conclusions in good conscience).

Cheers

 

[Darklone]

I disagree... I think they could have written Polymorph as Alter Self upgrade without making no sense or confusing everyone (and serving us a lot of fun here for discussion!).