Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sunseeker" data-source="post: 6210337">I'll preface with: I sincerely prefer Pathfinder in this regard.  The spell text is significantly shorter and much clearer in what exactly happens.  Yes yes I know that this is a 3.5 not a 3.75 thread but the two are far too similar to make the distinction worth anything significant.First, this is inaccurate by the 3.5 SRD spell description linked in the OP, to quote:So, basically what the spell text is saying is 100% contradictory to what you are claiming it says.  Your elf flesh is not altered into simply appearing to be a hard, chitenous exoskeleton, it literally BECOMES a hard chitinous exoskeleton. Your dainty elfy fingers do not simply appear to be razor-sharp claws, they BECOME razor sharp claws.  Your pretty elf teeth do not simply appear to be gruesome mandibles nor do they simply give off the latent potential of a bite attack.  You have 100% functional mandibles that give you a 100% natural bite attack.You may be reading too much into this line, where I do not gain any particular extraordinary qualities of species I transformed into.  I personally find this line almost contradictory to the previous one, which is why I prefer Pathfinder.  If my skin becomes true chitenous armor, then when my eyes become buggy, how come they don't work like it?  I find it jarring.  Again: this is why I rule as such at my table.Actually, you gain quite a few, but all of them physical and related to your actual magical transformation into a physical member of the species.  Those are extraordinary, often supernatural qualities.  Given that every species is capable of reproduction, I wouldn't consider the ability to reproduce any more spectacular than a natural bite attack.  Hence why IMO if you gain a natural claw or bite, or even flight, you would certainly be functional downstairs.Which was not something I disagreed with.  Perhaps suggesting that You're saying that those are extra-ordinary qualities, not the rules.  I'm saying that given that every species has reproductive qualities, these are not "rare and species-exclusive" abilities that would be restricted by the rules text.  Hence, I do not feel that when transforming into another species or the opposite sex or both, that these would not be traits you do not gain.  Further, if we want to get really nitty-gritty, males of mammalian species DO produce milk, their capabilities are simply underdeveloped.  How is this different from transforming from a species with wings that do not allow it to fly(say, a Tiefling) to a species with wings that do(such as a Strix)?  Further, if we want to get scientific about it, the testes and the ovaries are same organ, altered through specific processes during birth to become one or the other.  If "Alter-self" can turn my skin into chitenous armor, I don't see why it can't turn my testes into ovaries or vice-versua.  Though, again, I've pointed out the inconsistencies within the rules themselves.  If my skin is physically transforming into chiton, why are my eyes somehow only altering in shape but not quality?  Again: this is why I like the Pathfinder rules, they are more internally consistent.I don't find your argument that sexual organs are "deep change in your essential nature" to be convincing.  The rules merely state that type and species really remain the same.  There is really nothing said about your sex.Frankly, from the quotes I've provided, I don't believe it is I who has a misunderstand of the spell.  Actually the text is quite specific that you do, including but not limited to:Natural armor.Natural attacks.Movement speeds.Modes of Movement(flight, tunneling).Gross Physical qualities.   That is quite simply, FALSE, flat on it's face, false.  I suggest you re-read the rules text, particularly the sections I've quoted above, where you gain quite a bit of traits related to that physical appearance.   But my point had nothing to do with skill, only capability.  For the most part, that opens up supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.Reproduction certainly isn't supernatural, it's not spell-like, and I would consider reproduction far more mundane than even poison.  The base words of "extraordinary" are "extra" and "ordinary", which mean essentially "out of the ordinary".  Would you suggest that reproduction is out of the ordinary, something that does not happen on a regular basis, or possibly even abnormal?  I would not.  It is as natural to every species as is breathing or eating.  Perhaps with magical creatures, such as dragons, demons(not devils though, as Succubi and others can freely get pregnant as mortals do), or angels this would not apply since their mode of reproduction is magical.  But reproduction is hardly a miracle, and certainly not an extraordinary ability of the vast majority of species.</blockquote>

Verification