Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 647813" data-attributes="member: 1757">I'm with Dwarmaj that shape change (or worse still, the druid's epic wildshape feats) are far more &quot;broken&quot; than the shifter any day, which is to say that the latter PrC is perfectly reasonable, perhaps a little underpowered, even.As for templated and advanced creatures: I think it's obvious (as drnuncheon's post makes clear) that the latter should be right out. I think that ruling that templated creatures are not average for their species is perfectly reasonable as well; the argument could go either way, but given that it CAN go either way, DM fiat counts for something here.Even under the most liberal reading of the rules, the paragon template should be right out. Paragons are near-unique, perfect representations of their species. How &quot;average&quot; is that? The paragon represents the opposite of average, in many ways, and as such should be disallowed as an assumable form.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ruleslawyer, post: 647813, member: 1757"] I'm with Dwarmaj that shape change (or worse still, the druid's epic wildshape feats) are far more "broken" than the shifter any day, which is to say that the latter PrC is perfectly reasonable, perhaps a little underpowered, even. As for templated and advanced creatures: I think it's obvious (as drnuncheon's post makes clear) that the latter should be right out. I think that ruling that templated creatures are not average for their species is perfectly reasonable as well; the argument could go either way, but given that it CAN go either way, DM fiat counts for something here. Even under the most liberal reading of the rules, the paragon template should be right out. Paragons are near-unique, perfect representations of their species. How "average" is that? The paragon represents the opposite of average, in many ways, and as such should be disallowed as an assumable form. [/QUOTE]

Verification