• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Ways you can Abuse a Shifter

Similarly, you could shift into a diamond as big as a horse, or an exquisite necklace, and have your friends sell you for ready cash.

Which crime would this be considered ?! Slavery or Con job ?! I can just see it... perfect assassin indeed. Sell whatever Target likes to him... at night ( a little cramped and bent) the shifter/object shifts into something nasty and bye bye Target.

As for the change only into what you´ve seen its very good for the players... the DM will THINK a lot before sending any wierd Demons or Creatures against the Players !!! The shifter will have to write down a big list of things seen too !! :)
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Shard O'Glase said:
Regen is ex, celestials unless things are changed in an errata have no weakness in that regen so everything does subdual damage to them. You only revert in form if killed, being knocked unconscious isn't mentioned as a way to do it. Therefore if turned into a celestial you are effectively unkillable except from non-hp loss deaths, like disinigrate.

This has actually been errataed (check the DnDFAQ on the Wizards site). Planetars and solars have fast healing, and not regeneration. Makes sense, since creatures with regeneration are usually susceptible to some form of attack, and have it listed in the description, but this was missing for the celestials.
 

Shifter nonsense

Frankly, the shifter is weak, especially compared to a wizard of equivalent level. I have no idea why you think there is such a huge need to prevent abuse.
 

Re: Shifter nonsense

Kwalish Kid said:
Frankly, the shifter is weak, especially compared to a wizard of equivalent level. I have no idea why you think there is such a huge need to prevent abuse.
I think in general you're mostly right however when you give a character the ability to change into and equip any monster there are sooooo many monsters that if you just make it something of a Carte Blanche then there are bound to be some loop holes. One example:

In the New and Improved List of ECL's(tm):) the roper is list as ECL 18 no one who's encountered one disagrees (check the 500+ posts on that subject and see if the Roper ever comes up) A shifter can turn into one at level 10 (class lvl 5), ALL of the ropers abilities are Extraordinary. So what's the difference between a level 10 Shifter who chooses to be a Roper most of the time and a person starting in a level 18 campaign who wants to be a Roper? Only the fact that the shifter is more flexible and got there 8 levels earlier.

Even neglecting (the somewhat silly, but revealing) argument of a PC Roper, I think at 10th level being able to turn into something with SR 28, 6 attacks a round each doing 2d8 Str damage(DC 18 Fort save), is concievably abusive.
 

Re: Shifter nonsense

Kwalish Kid said:
Frankly, the shifter is weak, especially compared to a wizard of equivalent level. I have no idea why you think there is such a huge need to prevent abuse.

I'm glad the errataed the celestial regen thing, as mentioned in an above post, but shifters are still way abusive. On a basic level they are about equiv to other classes of their level. But, anyone with a good knowledge of the monster manuel can get a lot of bang for their buck out of this. There are so many possibilities this class is almost impossible to accurately guage their power.
 

Re: Re: Shifter nonsense

Shard O'Glase said:


I'm glad the errataed the celestial regen thing, as mentioned in an above post, but shifters are still way abusive. On a basic level they are about equiv to other classes of their level. But, anyone with a good knowledge of the monster manuel can get a lot of bang for their buck out of this. There are so many possibilities this class is almost impossible to accurately guage their power.

That's one of the reasons our Shifter hqas come up with role playing reasons for his new shapes. It's really cool and adds layers to his character. Personally, I'd have problems with a player that specifically went through the MM and other monster books looking for the best of each catogory for the Shifter.
 

Greatwyrm said:

As far as the power of the Shifter, look at what you have to give up. 10 levels of being a Druid (in most cases). You don't get ANY further spell advancement.

Note that a Psychic Warrior can meet the Shifter req. at 10th level and the Shifter's many forms are probably better than the Psy War's Psionic advancement, but giving up all those psionic feats hurts a little.
 

Dark Psion said:


Note that a Psychic Warrior can meet the Shifter req. at 10th level and the Shifter's many forms are probably better than the Psy War's Psionic advancement, but giving up all those psionic feats hurts a little.

Huh, I always thought it was a high levels that psychic warriors shine the most.
 

Remember, the shifter can only assume the forms of creatures with which he is familiar . According to the sage, combat with a creature or a few hours of actual contact (visual study, etc.) would suffice -- not simply reading about the creature in a book. Thus the forms a shifter can take are completely limited by the DM. A player can't simply pick any monster from any book...
 

Yeah, that's great what the sage says. It would be even nicer if that was in the book, instead of just a ruling on how the sage would handle familiarity. But I bet even the sage would allow some kind of knowledge skill to do it. Knowledge nature rolls to cover animals, knowledge planes for outsiders etc. It is pretty hard to determine every monster you've seen in your life, the big bad monsters sure, but your backgorund and every day existence will likely cover a wide range of encounters. Also as for the sages ruling I personally don't think it jives with the intent of the wording in the book. The wording there mentioned something about a druid in tropical lands not turning into a polar bear. But it almost seemed to imply that animals from that region you would likely be familiar with, even if you hadn't fought it or studdied it for hours. I think if they intended the sages reading on that text they would of been a bit more explicit in what they meant by such a semingly easy to achieve term like familiar. I guess what I'm saying is if they expected the druid/shifter whatever to kow as much as the sage impies they would of likely said somehting lie you nead hard knowledge of a creature your going to change into like the knowledge you'd gain form fighting it, or from hours of personal observation, and not the type of knowledge gained from stories or a book. By using the term familiar they seem to imply a much less stringent requiremnet than the sage says.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top