D&D 5E The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D

[dave2008]

The monster stat block for T-rex should give an intelligence range - which it does, at 2 - and the poly'ed character uses that.

It's the stat block that's likely wrong here - the range should maybe be 3-8 - but not the spell.

I was asking for a response from someone who wanted more rules, not player & DM freedom. I'm fine with how it is worded. I was just curious what the other side wants.

 

[dave2008]

I get that, but, then don't bother putting in the Int change then. If you want the character to act like an animal, maybe force Wisdom saves to take actions. The more "Out of character" for that animal, the higher the save DC. Otherwise, your action is determined randomly. Or, better yet, a chart with half a dozen options, make a Wis save - flat DC - maybe a 10 or thereabouts and if you save, you can choose your action from the list, otherwise, it's a random roll.

Note, I'm not above lowering the DC down to, say, 5. That way, most of the time, you get to do what you want, but, once in a while, you don't.

Again, I appreciate that is what you want and it would be useful to you and I am sure others as well. However, that amount of rules feels like a straight jacket to me.

 

[Cadence]

It is very unlikely that D&D--which grows and changes far more slowly than MTG ever thought of doing--would ever reach that point. MTG retains cards first printed in 1993. The game is pushing 30 years old at this point. No edition of D&D has ever run longer than--what, 10, 11 years? 15 tops? And 5e is already gearing up to make sure that trend continues.

As an aside...

The changes at 6th edition in 1999 for MtG were massive (the stack) and strike me as D&D edition change level. The ones in 2010 were pretty big (combat damage not on the stack, mana burn goes away) although not nearly as big (maybe rises to half edition level when combined with everything else since 1999?).

There are quite a few cards in MtG that have printings that are substantially different and hundreds (thousands?) that have had type changes. They are all only playable because the writing on the printed card doesn't matter - only the name of the card and what is on gatherer scryfall count.

 

[Garthanos]

Polymorph worked best in 1e when it was a strictly-offensive thing to do to someone else, that no creature would willingly undergo, and that had a risk of killing the target outright. Polymorphing one's self was safer but had its own limitations (and needed more, it's still broken as written); but most important, it was only the caster who could use it, meaning the caster then had to be the one taking whatever risks the poly'ed form was being used for.

Allowing polymorph on allies without risk or drawback is simply broken.

Yes the attack form of polymorph is a bit more under control

 

[Garthanos]

I suspect you'd not be impressed were the Polymorph stat block less advantageous to the PCs than the MM one.

More practically, that would require duplicating the stat blocks for every single monster - the natural form and the polymorph form.

or restricting it to some soul form from a smaller list (with cosmetic differences, ie you can become or transform someone into a bird - here is generic bird stats, its a bird from past era and recognizable as magical if you want it to seem like a modern crow you make a separate deception check like you make a (wis)disguise check and the like)

I can definitely see those trying to make sure implied limits, such as they might be, on overpowered over versatile magics are "enforced".

 

[Undrave]

Yeah, let's remove more options from the game.

If the option is full of cheese and a ruling nightmare? Yes, do get rid of it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If the option is full of cheese and a ruling nightmare? Yes, do get rid of it.

And fixing it in your own game isn't an option? It needs to be removed for everyone?

 

[Undrave]

And fixing it in your own game isn't an option? It needs to be removed for everyone?

SHRUG

We're just talking here. I don't see what's so essential about True Polymorph that it absolutely needs to stay in the game for it to be D&D.

 

[Micah Sweet]

SHRUG

We're just talking here. I don't see what's so essential about True Polymorph that it absolutely needs to stay in the game for it to be D&D.

I'm not looking to remove any option from D&D. Change it, maybe, but not remove.

 

[James Gasik]

And fixing it in your own game isn't an option? It needs to be removed for everyone?

Isn't the opposite also true though? If D&D One 5.5 Update Non-Edition Edition removed limitations from polymorph, couldn't you always put them back? Or impose even greater limitations if the spell seems overpowered for your game?

When I had the spell, I could rarely get any ally to accept it, since it caused them to lose their own abilities, and in effect, prevent them from playing their character, but instead take control of an NPC. So I don't really understand why, with all it's limitations, including no high CR Beasts available for use, anyone has a real problem with the spell being overpowered.