|
Hear me, hear me, for I am the king of all, even though you never listen to me! Bwaah!
Joking aside, I personally find the split-up of polymorphing into several forms adequate. However, I too am bugged with the stale enhancement bonus and such. Preferably you'd get to choose a certain type of creature (such as animal) at the CR of CL-2. CL-2, you ask? See page 103, Adding NPCs. A NPC's CR is equal to level-2. That's where I got it. I'm using it as a guideline.
Then of course one could cap the certain spell, such as beast shape I to max CR 6, beast shape II to max CR 9.. +3 every time, see?
This would of course need the monsters first. Possibly the shapechanger could become *exactly* like the monster, retaining only mental stats, hit points and skill points. Then, however, you should carefully look what kind of magic users you are creating.
the enhancement bonuses to stats are more useful than they might seem, thanks to Paizo's new item slot rules, but still a little underwhelming. The Natural Armor *does* need to be better.
It has been my experience that it is rare that a straight wizard/sorcerer has Strength or Dex boosting items. Since the new polymorph spells are personal only, the enhancement bonuses work. Though I am not quite so sure about the enhancement bonus when applied to the Druid. I plan to playtest this and see how it works.
Wow. They should just revert to the old polymorph and draconic polymorph. I mean, there solution is actually horrible, though it does simplify things. I mean, splitting it up is just bad. I mean, bad BAD.
Paizo, just do polymorph and maybe something like greater polymorph (so as not to overstep the OGL into draconic polymorph). And get rid of the enhancement stuff. I understood the polymorph rules in 3.5 very well, and a shapeshifter who becomes used to the rules can do it in a split second. There doesn't need to be yet another fix to it by Paizo.
Also, the Best Shapes etc are vague about some things. For example, it says that if it "has the listed ability" you gain it. What if you find an animal with fly 60ft and it works for BS1? Would you gain the 60ft speed, the 30ft speed or none? Another reason to scrap it.
Overall, I am undecided on the new spells. I think I would prefer one set of spells (Beast Shape, Elemental body, etc.) that scaled with level. At 5th level you get the bebefits of Beast Shape I, and 7th level, Beast shape II, ans so forth. It helps sorcerers with the limted spell's know and allows for some scaling of power.
Overall, I am undecided on the new spells. I think I would prefer one set of spells (Beast Shape, Elemental body, etc.) that scaled with level. At 5th level you get the bebefits of Beast Shape I, and 7th level, Beast shape II, ans so forth. It helps sorcerers with the limted spell's know and allows for some scaling of power.Wow. They should just revert to the old polymorph and draconic polymorph. I mean, there solution is actually horrible, though it does simplify things. I mean, splitting it up is just bad. I mean, bad BAD.
Paizo, just do polymorph and maybe something like greater polymorph (so as not to overstep the OGL into draconic polymorph). And get rid of the enhancement stuff. I understood the polymorph rules in 3.5 very well, and a shapeshifter who becomes used to the rules can do it in a split second. There doesn't need to be yet another fix to it by Paizo.
Also, the Best Shapes etc are vague about some things. For example, it says that if it "has the listed ability" you gain it. What if you find an animal with fly 60ft and it works for BS1? Would you gain the 60ft speed, the 30ft speed or none? Another reason to scrap it.
I like the idea of scaling them, so that casters (especially Sors) need nod spend a crapload of slots just to turn into different things. Also, ideas on names to cover the other creature types:
Alien Form - Aberration, OozeFaerie Form - Fey
Monstrous Form - Monstrous Humanoid
I am not sure as to what they would give for the listed abilities, just throwing the names out there.
I like where the Polymorphing is going (and I’ve used and legally-abused them before).
Adding some lower level and lower powered versions would be useful (turning into an ogre with lesser bonuses than Giant Form 1 should be possible before level 13) and differentiating the bonus type would be nice.
Polymorph Other should simply be called Polymorph since it seems that it can be used by the caster and it kind of confuses the point. Again, a lower level (and bonuses) version usable only by the caster might be good.
All in all a good job IMO.
I kind of like how Sorcerer Bloodline transformations follow him when he Polymorphs (since they are class features). I imagine Draconic bat-winged giant snakes with claws and other oddities.
on wildshaping druids:
Give them at least new feats to enhance their wildshaping. Like
- something akin to augment summoning that boost ability scores
- feats to allow to wildshape into other types
(Dragon of nature: can use wildshape to use dragon form)
- and give morphed character some landspeed! (Your dwarf turns into a gepard with 20' movement.)
|
Polymorph is such a difficult spell to balance. I don't like the alpha 2 option because it robs the spell of a lot of its flavor. I also empathize with Sorcerers who have limited spell slots. I don't know that I have a better solution though. I DO think that if you are playing a socerer with an abyssal blodline, you should be able to shapchange into Demons with polymorph with limitations on the types of abilities you gain. That said, I just don't know that there is a way to do it without it being broken. Its just too hard to make a spell that can account for the game balance of every monster ever published.
So all of that said, I think what Jason is doing is better than eliminating the spell all together. I just wish that there was a way to do it that allowed you to actually take on more abilities of the assumed form. I will watch how these develop, and honestly I think part of my distaste with the change is the limited number of options at present. Once they add in some more types it might be better.
I don't like that polymorph is gone.I am sorry that you feel that way, but considering its problems, polymorph, as a single spell, will not be coming back.
It sure is disheartening to see a lead designer with such a closed mind on the subject.
I'm afraid that your changes haven't alleviated any of the old problems with Polymorph and have managed to create a more cumbersome and unwieldly mechanic. They've just shifted into new problems, as pointed out by other posters here. You're trying to use rules where a GM should adjudicate. . .this is a very bad idea. If a GM allows a player to abuse a spell or game mechanic, that is on him or her, not the system.
You've also neglected to think of the Sorcerer when it comes to having 25 different spell types (as pointed out by other posters here). I guess having this many spells makes great filler when you're writing a new book, but it isn't solving any problems.
I'm just a potential customer, so take what you will from my comments, but I hope you re-open your mind to new ideas on this subject. There are many players and GM's who've not had a problem with the old mechanics. . . what are they doing differently ? Examine that and you'll find a better solution if you're hell bent on a change. In my opinion, however, the old system was fine.
|
Please avoide the snide commentary here - frankly, the closed mind seems to be yours (and in other posts you have made).
The thing about polymorph is that it is complex to adjudicate, and can be abused while remaining within the letter of the rules. Jason has addressed this issue in the rules and in the thread above. While I don't doubt that the polymorph substitutes presented here could be made a bit less complicated (especially the higher level ones) the basic premise to me seems sound - a reasonably predictable outcome, scaled to level.
In answer to the posts above who have commented about the bonuses to ability scores being Enhancement bonuses. Remember the changes to magical items that "enhance" ability scores will make the bonuses from the polymorth school more acceptable.
As most characters will now only have one Physical ability enhanced and one mental ability enhanced by magic items, the bonuses granted to you by another form become very useful.
I like the feel of the new polymorth spells, as a DM I had massive issues with Shapechange and Polymorth when a villain had them in his stat block. The new spells make it very easy for me.
The druid in our group is unfortunately dead so our play testing has its limits, but I played a Druid for a long time my self in 3.5 and even I thought my wildshape was too over powered. Don't get me started on my Gnome Sorcerer and his use of Polymorth to change his familiar into a Behir. Anything that makes the rules the same for all players is a bonus in my eyes.
Jason, Have a gold star and a house point for the fix to a complicated rule for DMs and one open to abuse by players (thank god my players never used to abuse it, they left that to me).
|
|
Polymorph (and Summon spells) will never be 'fixable' under 3.5 rules, IMO. The disparity between PC racial and class abilities and monster powers is too great, and every single monster book introduces new critters that plunge to new levels of brokenness.
The problem isn't shapechanging, or summoning, or PCs playing monsters, or monsters-as-cohorts/familiars/dominated flunkies. It's monsters using such radically different 'balance' mechanisms that an 8 HD outsider could have the power to cast Wish as an SLA 3/day.
Until a version of D&D is written that does the exact opposite of what 4E is doing and moves monster creation to a mechanics set that is balanced against PC classes and races, spells that turn PCs into monsters (or allow them to summon or control or play them) are always going to be a sucking chest wound of badness.
For Summoning, they might as well just go the 'Astral Construct' route, and the same for Shapeshifting, since giving a PC the ability to turn into a monster (or summon one, or control one) is just too broken when the monsters are designed using a completely different metric for what is appropriate.
Please avoide the snide commentary here - frankly, the closed mind seems to be yours (and in other posts you have made).
The thing about polymorph is that it is complex to adjudicate, and can be abused while remaining within the letter of the rules. Jason has addressed this issue in the rules and in the thread above. While I don't doubt that the polymorph substitutes presented here could be made a bit less complicated (especially the higher level ones) the basic premise to me seems sound - a reasonably predictable outcome, scaled to level.
If you find my commentary snide, I think that is on you, friend. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't make me snide. :) I'm simply speaking my mind. When someone says "that is final", it is pretty indicative of a closed mind. I have said no such thing, and am more than open to changes, just not the ones presented in the Alpha 2 document.
I don't find polymorph or any of the other shifting spells in their 3.5 form at all difficult to adjudicate, which is probably why I have problems coming up with ways to "make it better". In this system you add in at least 9-12 additional spells with their own rulesets. (if this, then that, etc. ad nausium). It is far simpler and more intuitive, for me anyway, to turn to the "unicorn" page in the MM and use those stats, or whatever creature I decide to be. Takes no more time to do that than to readjust my ability scores.
This system is also pretty unbalanced when it comes to size differences. If a player has a gnome wizard with an 8 strength and he becomes a huge bear. . .his strength is only a 14? That bear might collapse under its own weight!
Someone on one of these threads had a stellar idea of having 'known shapes' and keeping them on 3x5 cards. I think that goes a long way to keeping things manageable, and doesn't needlessly complicate the game.
Actually, Sarhuin, the reason your post comes across as snide is that your comment about 'closed minds' is completely unnecessary to make your point. If you have something to add to the conversation (and it seems you do), by all means, go nuts.
But the comments about people's minds being closed, and so on, are useless, inflammatory, and unpleasant. I think that's what we can all do without.
O
Actually, Sarhuin, the reason your post comes across as snide is that your comment about 'closed minds' is completely unnecessary to make your point. If you have something to add to the conversation (and it seems you do), by all means, go nuts.
But the comments about people's minds being closed, and so on, are useless, inflammatory, and unpleasant. I think that's what we can all do without.
O
Understood. Though, how can I express my dismay at seeing a statement that is absolute in a thread discussing changes? When someone tells me that something is going to be one way, no questions asked, it makes me feel like my thoughts and feedback are useless and will be ignored.
That is what I am trying, perhaps poorly, to express. I feel that a single polymorph spell can work (and does), and that if changes do need to be made it can be done within the rules of a single spell, not with ~26 (if you give 4 levels to every creature type) separate spells.
That is what I am trying to express.
|
Contributor
|
Polymorph (and Summon spells) will never be 'fixable' under 3.5 rules, IMO. The disparity between PC racial and class abilities and monster powers is too great, and every single monster book introduces new critters that plunge to new levels of brokenness.
The problem isn't shapechanging, or summoning, or PCs playing monsters, or monsters-as-cohorts/familiars/dominated flunkies. It's monsters using such radically different 'balance' mechanisms that an 8 HD outsider could have the power to cast Wish as an SLA 3/day.
Until a version of D&D is written that does the exact opposite of what 4E is doing and moves monster creation to a mechanics set that is balanced against PC classes and races, spells that turn PCs into monsters (or allow them to summon or control or play them) are always going to be a sucking chest wound of badness.
For Summoning, they might as well just go the 'Astral Construct' route, and the same for Shapeshifting, since giving a PC the ability to turn into a monster (or summon one, or control one) is just too broken when the monsters are designed using a completely different metric for what is appropriate.
I don't often do this, but: QFT!
|
Actually, Sarhuin, the reason your post comes across as snide is that your comment about 'closed minds' is completely unnecessary to make your point. If you have something to add to the conversation (and it seems you do), by all means, go nuts.
But the comments about people's minds being closed, and so on, are useless, inflammatory, and unpleasant. I think that's what we can all do without.
O
Understood. Though, how can I express my dismay at seeing a statement that is absolute in a thread discussing changes? When someone tells me that something is going to be one way, no questions asked, it makes me feel like my thoughts and feedback are useless and will be ignored.
That is what I am trying, perhaps poorly, to express. I feel that a single polymorph spell can work (and does), and that if changes do need to be made it can be done within the rules of a single spell, not with ~26 (if you give 4 levels to every creature type) separate spells.
That is what I am trying to express.
Actually - he did't tell you/us the way it is going to be- he did tell us the way it is NOT going to be. I didn't get the expression that the PFRPG's 2.0 take on polymorph is any more final than 1.0 take on skills - only that it will not revert to the way it was AND not ton one spell.
As an alternative, has anyone looked into using the FormBinding rules from Dreamscarred Press?
They are located in the book "Untapped Potential" and are VERY cool.
|
|
If you find my commentary snide, I think that is on you, friend. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't make me snide. :) I'm simply speaking my mind. When someone says "that is final", it is pretty indicative of a closed mind. I have said no such thing, and am more than open to changes, just not the ones presented in the Alpha 2 document.
I don't have a problem with you disagreeing, I have a problem with the "closed minds" stuff, which is incredibly judgemental, and the insinuation it is a cynical ploy to pad out the PF rulesbook. Actually, I have quite major issues with the complexity of the suggested solution in PF, but I agree with the overall aim.
There is a lot of this stuff going on on these boards. If you want to get your point across, it is not a good idea to insult the person you are making it to - not me, Jason.
|
|
I'd like to reiterate Walking Dad's suggestion to give the shape-changing spells some landspeed effects.
I also want to point out that the old Polymorph spell may be easy for some DMs to judge in a balanced manner on the fly. However, these rules sets will (or could) also be used for tournament style play. For that reason, groundrules have to be more clearly defined in the interests of fairness for hundreds or thousands of gamers and DMs of varying strengths participating under the same system. This has been discussed at length elsewhere.
For Summoning, they might as well just go the 'Astral Construct' route, and the same for Shapeshifting, since giving a PC the ability to turn into a monster (or summon one, or control one) is just too broken when the monsters are designed using a completely different metric for what is appropriate
D20 Modern went this route with the summoning spells, replacing summon monster with summon vivilor.
Director of Game Design
|
Hey there Everybody,
While I can certainly understand a number of the points made in this thread, I have to disagree with a couple. 3.5 Polymorph is a difficult to adjudicate and easily abused spell. There is a reason it has been modified no less than three times since 2000. While I completely understand that many of you, as a GM have an easy time making this spell work, many do not. That said, if the old version works fine for you, feel free to continue using it. I won't be coming to your house to stop you.. probably :-).
The problem with the 3.5 version is that it is based off a system that is designed to create monsters and challenges for the PCs, not one that is designed to enhance PCs (for that we have classes and spells). There is no simple guideline that allows for this to work without significant GM adjudication. While I am strongly in favor of GM control, this spell causes more headaches than it solves. Even the more common forms lead to some really over inflated ability scores and powers. That is not to say there are not problems with the system I have designed (spider eater poison is a good example), but on the whole, this codifies the issue into a more managable system. The spells can be, to a greater extent, balance to spells of a similar level. Its not perfect. Sorcerers do get less use out of these chains (although they can always swap out the lower level version as they get higher ones). Some monster abilities are still problematic.
So, while I am not 100% satisfied with the new system, I am much more satisfied with it than the old system. Hence, I do not believe we will be going back to the old system. Some of you might feel this is "closed minded" and that is your perogative. It is my perogative to make the changes that I believe are in the system's best interest. That said, I am, as always, interested in your comments and feedback to help me fine tune this massive rules system.
I hope that clears some things up.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
While I can see the benefits to using the pathfinder alpha system, it's just too much to have so many spells cover shape changing.
I understand where Jason is comming from, but I would much rather see a the original spells modified and brought into line (and thus be closer to the 3.5 system). Even though the shape change spell has changed who knows how many times since 3e came out, I don't think that's proof they can't be fixed.
Here's where I'd start:
Alter Self: Put a limitation on the gain to natural armor (maybe maxing it out at +3) and this spell is fine. About the only abuse I've seen from Alter Self comes from selecting creatures with high natural armors.
Polymorph Self:
Change the spell so all items worn morph with the caster and become unuseable/inert when you polymorph and you have a very good start. A lot of these forms aren't so great if the target can't add on the host of magic items a typical D&D character possesses.
Polymorph Any Object: Rewrite the spell for durations so any beneficial shape change only lasts for 1 min/level and keep the item morphing with the change you're good here too.
Shape Change: Again all items morph with the caster and become inert. Lower duration to 1 min/level and make changing shape a standard action and this spell is mostly fixed. A few outlying issues surrounding spell like abilities may still be a problem, but this is still much better than it was before and fixes most of the problems.
Well From a druids perspective i can say initially i'm skeptical about the beast shape but I'll give it a run through to see how things go.
This will mean a major downgrade for my low strenght low con Druid. But the playtest will be the key to seeing if i'll wildshape again :)
Initial thoughts
I like that the new system will streamline play. Currently I have ten or more Wildshapes built on a seperate sheet. So the idea of being able to more quickly change into an animal is a good step.
There is a question I would put on the table about the wording of the Beast Shape spells. Currenlty a Medium creature gets stat enhancments and non land based speed adjustments only. While Beast SHape 2 allows for Pounce and other special attacks. Does this imply that if i have access to Beast shape 2 that my Medium shapes still do not have special attacks/abilities?
One of my favorite forms the Cheetah is a medium creature and has some wild land based speed and Sprint ability.
I'm a little surprised no Con modifier at all is given. My Animal companion is a much better tiger than i could ever be :) So if some Orc chops down my 60hp level 9 druid in tiger form. He would say that was the sickest tiger he's ever seen hehe.
But on a final note, if i could remake my Druid i would definately focus on Strenght and Con in order to take full advantage of the bonus's given through wildshapeing. This allows for two types of druids, the Wildshaper and the Caster. I'm interested to see how that would play out.
I'll let you guys know how the Playtest this weekend goes.
Comes down to this. Jason is lead designer and we are not. Personally, I am thankful for fairly unprecedented level of input we are being given the chance to throw out there. Has he made calls in design I deeply disgaree with? Sure. Every game designer has but I still buy their games. And for the most part I agree with changes Jason has made to the system.
I am very happy with the breaking of polymorph into several seperate "spell trees". It fits that style of magic more than an all or nothing approach. The point of the spell being overpowered and difficult to adjuticate in previous edtions is a fair call and is part of why I am glad to see it go the way it has. Played too many games where a wizard with polymporph left the rest of the party thinking "Why am I even here if he is just going to polymorph and stomp all over the enemies?".
So keep up the good work, Jason.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
Senseless nitpick:Hey there Everybody,
While I can certainly understand a number of the points made in this thread, I have to disagree with a couple. 3.5 Polymorph is a difficult to adjudicate and easily abused spell. There is a reason it has been modified no less than three times since 2000.
- Tome and Blood
- 3e Polymorph Errata
- 3.5 PHB
- 3.5 Polymorph Errata
- PHB2 Polymorph Subschool Rules
I count five revisions to the rules. For a total of six incarnations of Polymorph for 3rd edition. And they were all broken. Extremely broken. And they were all broken because of exactly the same thing:
After you applied the senselessly complex rubric of what your character kept and what your character lost and what your character gained and what your character did not gain, there was always a killer app somewhere in the piles of monster listings that made that function hit TILT. As long as we are comparing monster entries to the spell effects in any way, there will be a way to break the spell. And more importantly, the spell will continue to be a pain in the ass to use.
So, while I am not 100% satisfied with the new system, I am much more satisfied with it than the old system. Hence, I do not believe we will be going back to the old system. Some of you might feel this is "closed minded" and that is your perogative. It is my perogative to make the changes that I believe are in the system's best interest. That said, I am, as always, interested in your comments and feedback to help me fine tune this massive rules system.
Sure. The only problem is that it doesn't go far enough. Once you've made the concession to mostly ignore the monster entries, which mostly stops the abuse, it should be obvious that going the extra mile and completely ignoring the Monster entries is the way to go.
The PHB2 Polymorph Subschool rules were the most confusing and broken version of Polymorph yet (hint: you explicitly got to assume the "spellcasting" abilities of creatures like Abeil Queens and Ehergaunts). Basing anything on those rules is a terrible plan. Don't go there. Go back to the AD&D Polymorph rules. The ones where you didn't even have to look at the Monster Manual (and nominally weren't allowed to anyway, which I think might be going a bit far). Those ones were fast and simple to adjudicate, and were much less game breaking and game defining than the 3e rules on the subject have ever been.
- Listed Bonuses in the spell.
- No reference to monster abilities in the monster listings whatsoever.
I should not be turning into a black scale lizardman or deep halfling to get better bonuses. I should just turn into whatever form is appropriate to the story and skip the entire sequence where I check through all six monster manuals altogether.
-Frank
I think that to get rid of potential misuses of the spell(s), one has to codify them even more and limit the forms that people are able to assume.
To ensure that noone can come up with obscure animals and their weird abilities, and to streamline tournament play also, I suggest something like this (yes, I know it's reminiscent of WoW):
3 overall forms, each with their subcategories:
Combat
Movement
Scout
Combat:
- Land
-- Bear
-- Feline
- Flight
-- Eagle
- Aquatic
-- Shark
Movement:
- Land
-- Feline
- Flight
-- Eagle
- Aquatic
-- Shark/seal
Scout:
- Land
-- Feline (house cat)/Rodent
- Flight
-- Bird (smaller)
- Aquatic
-- Fish/Amphibian
The various creatures would then be fixed (appearance could be altered, i.e. it doesn't matter if you look like a tiger or lion in combat form, but stats and abilities stay the same), with ordinary creature stats (instead of stat bonuses - you ARE changing into another form, not "enhancing" your own physical form).
As one progresses in level and gain access to larger and smaller animals you simply get access to e.g. dire bear form instead of bear form (combat form) or housefly instead of bird (scout form).
Now, I know a lot of people will feel that this cramps their flavour style, but it's pretty much, IMO, the only way to streamline the rules and make sure you don't get all these weird combos and obscure monsters/animals with broken abilities.
Also, the animals above are just examples of which "main" animal could be in each category. The difference in e.g. bear and feline combat forms could be Improved Grab (bear) vs. Pounce (felines) etc.
EDIT: Regarding stats - one would, of course, still be able to benefit from buff spells like Bull's Strength etc.
Go back to the AD&D Polymorph rules. The ones where you didn't even have to look at the Monster Manual (and nominally weren't allowed to anyway, which I think might be going a bit far).
Huh? You seriously want to allow Joe Mage to buy a horse and then permanently Polymorph Other it into a hippogriff? Or Polymorph Other your henchman into a silver dragon? (You wouldn't use Polymorph Other on yourself, of course, because of the possibility of sudden death.) Not to mention Polymorph Any Object where you can turn a turnip into a purple worm.
Going back to AD&D polymorph -- that's deeply, deeply weird.
I'd like to throw in as many votes as I can towards Frank's suggestion for polymorph. Some people scour the Monster Manual for the perfect combo, others only use it to turn into the two or three humanoids we've run into and nothing else. That alone creates an imbalance, and occasionally the scourer is given the stink-eye for actually checking the book for a good form (doesn't even need to actually scour).
It's already almost there, a list of bonuses you think would be balanced for that spell level. Just go that extra step and say you can look like all sorts of things and pick from the list.
Go back to the AD&D Polymorph rules. The ones where you didn't even have to look at the Monster Manual (and nominally weren't allowed to anyway, which I think might be going a bit far). Those ones were fast and simple to adjudicate, and were much less game breaking and game defining than the 3e rules on the subject have ever been.
* Listed Bonuses in the spell.
* No reference to monster abilities in the monster listings whatsoever.I should not be turning into a black scale lizardman or deep halfling to get better bonuses. I should just turn into whatever form is appropriate to the story and skip the entire sequence where I check through all six monster manuals altogether.
Just to be clear, here's what the AD&D Polymorph Self spell did:
"When this spell is cast, the magic-user is able to assume the form of any creature -- from as small as a wren to as large as a hippopotamus -- and its form of locomotion as well. The spell does not give the other abilities (attack, magic, etc.), nor does it run the risk of changing personality and mentality. No 'system shock' check is required. Thus, a magic-user changed to an owl could fly, but his or her vision would be human; a change to a black pudding would enable movement under doors or along halls and ceilings, but not the pudding's offensive or defensive capabilities. Naturally, the strength of the new form must be sufficient to allow normal movement."
So it was a buff that gave you the movement and strength of some creature. Frank can explain to us how this would prevent us from having to refer to the Monster Manual.
Now AD&D Polymorph Other gave you "all the physical and mental capabilities" of the form assumed (which again requires looking in the Monster Manual as far as I know).
So it was a buff that gave you the movement and strength of some creature. Frank can explain to us how this would prevent us from having to refer to the Monster Manual.
Monster Entries in AD&D didn't even have strength scores. Checking the monster entry would not have been helpful in any way. The statement simply means that you don't collapse under your own weight - in short that you got the size modifiers for carrying capacity (if for some reason that came up).
Also it didn't give you the speed of the monster, just the movement type. And it didn't give you any of the abilities at all.
So you could turn into a shark and "swim" but you still had human speed. You still had the same physical attributes. In short, there was no need to look at the shark monster manual entry at all. And that is what we should go back to - a rule where I can look like whatever I want and not feel constrained to cherry pick min/max forms.
-Frank
As someone who generally disagrees with Frank (even if I don't post this fact), I should say that I am fully behind this suggestion. In fact, when I heard that Polymorph had been reworked in A2, I kind of assumed that this was the direction it had gone.
It allows both the flavor of the original spell while being simple to adjudicate, balance, and calculate.
Yay.
O
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Sure. The only problem is that it doesn't go far enough. Once you've made the concession to mostly ignore the monster entries, which mostly stops the abuse, it should be obvious that going the extra mile and completely ignoring the Monster entries is the way to go
I don't think ignoring the books is the way to go. I have issues with the current form, but going to the "ignore monster entries entirely" isn't the way to fix them.
Monster Entries in AD&D didn't even have strength scores. Checking the monster entry would not have been helpful in any way. The statement simply means that you don't collapse under your own weight - in short that you got the size modifiers for carrying capacity (if for some reason that came up).Also it didn't give you the speed of the monster, just the movement type. And it didn't give you any of the abilities at all.
So you could turn into a shark and "swim" but you still had human speed. You still had the same physical attributes. In short, there was no need to look at the shark monster manual entry at all. And that is what we should go back to - a rule where I can look like whatever I want and not feel constrained to cherry pick min/max forms.
I don't agree with some of your interpretation of AD&D's Polymorph Self (e.g. that you can know that a black pudding can climb walls and crawl under doors without looking in the Monster Manual, or that a M-U in the shape of an umber hulk can tunnel through stone at walking/running speed), but it doesn't matter.
It sounds like you're saying you want something like Beast Shape I but even more limited (a buff gives you fly 30' or climb 30' or swim 30' and maybe a size change and that's it). That's fine. But I think the more general idea of Polymorph is like K said earlier:
All I want out of shapeshifting is:
1. I can fight as a monster. I don't even want to be as good as a fighter....I just want to contribute.
2. I'd like to use it as a utility spell for movement.
3. I want to occasionally use things like dragonfire.
AD&D Polymorph Self manages number 2, but not 1 & 3. The Pathfinder Polymorph series of spells does 2 and 3, but might not be very effective at 1 (I don't know without playtesting it).
I don't agree with some of your interpretation of AD&D's Polymorph Self (e.g. that you can know that a black pudding can climb walls and crawl under doors without looking in the Monster Manual
But in the AD&D monster manual, it didn't tell you that a Black Pudding could go under doors. You were supposed to work that out by using your imagination. The monster entry basically just gave it some hit dice (which you didn't get), some special powers (which you didn't get), an Intelligence score (which you didn't get), an organization type (which you didn't get), and a movement rate (which you didn't get).
The fact that some creatures could flow under doors or cling to ceilings or whatever wasn't part of their monster entries. There weren't usually any rules for that. If you were lucky you could figure that out from the picture (not all monsters had pictures) or the flavor text.
So yeah. The AD&D Polymorph Self spell did not reference the Monster Manual at all. You picked any form you wanted within a size range, and then you could do anything that you could convince your DM that you could do with your new shape. That was it. There was no comparisons of he spell and the monster entries. Totally magical teaparty and totally non-numeric.
Now for today's youth, I would suggest codifying it a little more. Possibly give people a choice of one special attack off a list (flaming breath, poison sting/bite, and rending claws are all popular). Possibly give people the opportunity to enhance one or more of their physical stats. But putting in codes that modify monster entries was the worst mistake ever, and it has ruined every single incarnation of polymorph since 2000.
-Frank
The things I've done with Polymorphing:
-I've changed into various flying, climbing, and swimming monsters. I prided myself on never picking the same one twice.
-I made an item to extend the duration of a single Dragon form by hours. I really liked having two forms.
-I turned into a Treant to move a boat off a reef.
-Disguises.
Things I didn't do with Polymorph:
-Fight. While I liked the natty armor, I never really clawed anything.
-Use a range of Ex abilities. Seriously. When you are a spellcaster, tossing down weak acid streams is chump change (though I was tempted to possess people as a Hellwasp Swarm).
-Superbuff. Tossing down a pile of buffs is a lot of paperwork. The fact that Pathfinder polymorphing makes that paperwork easier is actually bad.
---------------------------
Another note:
I do like how Pathfinder shapechanging lets people turn unto Giants. Cutting the HD cap was a brilliant idea.
Now I just need them to give me a smaller number of spells so that I can turn into a reasonable variety of things (like manticores). I'll really miss turning into a dragon of a size I respect(Huge is elephant-sized, not house-sized).
So yeah. The AD&D Polymorph Self spell did not reference the Monster Manual at all. You picked any form you wanted within a size range, and then you could do anything that you could convince your DM that you could do with your new shape. That was it. There was no comparisons of he spell and the monster entries. Totally magical teaparty and totally non-numeric.Now for today's youth, I would suggest codifying it a little more. Possibly give people a choice of one special attack off a list (flaming breath, poison sting/bite, and rending claws are all popular). Possibly give people the opportunity to enhance one or more of their physical stats. But putting in codes that modify monster entries was the worst mistake ever, and it has ruined every single incarnation of polymorph since 2000.
It's interesting that you leave out Polymorph Other and Shapechange, two shapeshifting spells from AD&D that did require you to reference the Monster Manual. What should Shapechange do, in your opinion?
Okay, if we want to fight in polymorphed form, we need to deicde how effective we want this to be. I'd say a level 10 wizard ought to be able to go 50/50 against CR 8 monsters in monster form: that is, he should fight as well as his martial cohort.
The obvious way to do this would be for him to literally become a CR 8 monster, playing the state straight out of the book, with active buffs *and* items going away. Possibly CR 7, to reflect the advantage he gets from picking a form after seeing the enemy.
If total character replacement is off the table, then we need to do actual playtest characters. I Present:
Human Transmuter 10 (28 point buy)
Str 10 Dex 14 (17) CON 14 (18) Int 18 (22) Wis 12 Cha 8
HP 90 AC 19
Feats: Toughness, Magic Stuff
Possessions: Belt of health +4, Headband of Intellect +4, Ring of Protection +3
Active Spells: Mage Armor
With Beast Shape 3 (Huge Animal)
STR 16 DEX 11 AC 22
Natural Weapons +6 , +4 to damage.
He's got probbably a claw/claw bite going, with possibly pounce, improved grab, or some poison or webs.
The thing that jumps out at me is that his to hit and AC are mad low. This Wizard has a solid buffer of hit points, but is likely to get shredded extremely quickly. He also has extreme difficulty hitting level-appropriate enemies. Either or both of these can be partially corrected by layering buffs on. If he has displacement and stoneskin he has a lot mroe staying power. But he's going to have extreme difficulty getting his +to hit high enough for his attacks to matter.
After a review of 2nd Edition rules, 3.x, Alpha 2 and this board, I am 100% behind Frank on this one.
I gotta agree to. The intent of polymorph really seems to be that you can shift your form into something else, but not really become something else, other than superficially. Getting a set group of abilities based on what you change into makes sense, and if you look like something no one has ever seen before or if you look like, say, a manticore, it shouldn't matter, because according to the spell, you picked a fly speed off of a list, and that is what matters.
There really isn't a reason to look at the MM because you aren't becoming a given monster, you are shifting your body in a way that may or may not resemble an existing creature, that might facilitate a general form of movement or attack, but has nothing to do with that monster.
Okay, if we want to fight in polymorphed form, we need to deicde how effective we want this to be. I'd say a level 10 wizard ought to be able to go 50/50 against CR 8 monsters in monster form: that is, he should fight as well as his martial cohort.
The obvious way to do this would be for him to literally become a CR 8 monster, playing the state straight out of the book, with active buffs *and* items going away. Possibly CR 7, to reflect the advantage he gets from picking a form after seeing the enemy.
If total character replacement is off the table, then we need to do actual playtest characters. I Present:
Human Transmuter 10 (28 point buy)
Str 10 Dex 14 (17) CON 14 (18) Int 18 (22) Wis 12 Cha 8
HP 90 AC 19
Feats: Toughness, Magic Stuff
Possessions: Belt of health +4, Headband of Intellect +4, Ring of Protection +3
Active Spells: Mage ArmorWith Beast Shape 3 (Huge Animal)
STR 16 DEX 11 AC 22
Natural Weapons +6 , +4 to damage.
He's got probbably a claw/claw bite going, with possibly pounce, improved grab, or some poison or webs.The thing that jumps out at me is that his to hit and AC are mad low. This Wizard has a solid buffer of hit points, but is likely to get shredded extremely quickly. He also has extreme difficulty hitting level-appropriate enemies. Either or both of these can be partially corrected by layering buffs on. If he has displacement and stoneskin he has a lot mroe staying power. But he's going to have extreme difficulty getting his +to hit high enough for his attacks to matter.
And this is a wizard (who get full use of this spell, druids are prohibited from changing into magical beasts).
And look at the stats! Huge animal with a Str of 16. Are you kidding. And even with a base Str of 16 this would only become a 22. A dire bear is "only" large and has a Str of 31! And a natural armor of +7 and a Dex of 13!It breaks my suspension of believe if I change into a huge creature with worse stats!
|
As fun as the old polymorph is, it's a truly broken system. I've been banned from playing a Master of Many Forms in every game group I've ever played in, and people get nervous just hearing me mention wild shape.
There are just too many imbalanced forms in the string of monster manuals to select from.
I like the idea of the new polymorph tree spells. They might need a little more versatility, but I think this is the right way to go if you want to avoid gross exploitation of an unclear rule.
A decentish spell for size changing is giant size. It's not open content, but the size modifiers it applies certainly are.
-Frank
|
Or, do the flipping once, out of combat?
But why keep the book flipping aspect at all? Why not just let people look like whatever they want within the size limits?
The problem with this is that when you rely on any sort of mechanic like this then your characters power and flexibility increases with the number of books the player owns. Your idea of making the character use skill points and tracking the forms is great but you can still have 2 players using the same spell with vastly different results and effectiveness.
Personally I'm with Trollman on this one, give a set list of abilities gained with each spell (or a menu where the player picks from a number of options). The form that the player takes is up to him, however the benefits of the spell are from a fixed list.
The Sorcerer
I also agree with someone's comment above that by splitting the spell into multiple different spells the sorcerer gets short changed here. The wizard can learn 12 different shape changing spells and pick the appropriate one for the day. A sorcerer who used to have 1 or 2 polymorph spells now has to use a bunch of his spells known to pick up the same flexibility.
-- Dennis
The Sorcerer
I also agree with someone's comment above that by splitting the spell into multiple different spells the sorcerer gets short changed here. The wizard can learn 12 different shape changing spells and pick the appropriate one for the day. A sorcerer who used to have 1 or 2 polymorph spells now has to use a bunch of his spells known to pick up the same flexibility.
Just pointing out again -- there are two shape changing spells that give multiple shapes like you suggest: Polymorph Other I & II. So it's not quite as bad as you might think.