Venture-Agent, Australia—NSW—Bondi Junction
|
I have seen a number of posts about how awesome the Monstrous Physique line of spells are and how they work - this isn't a post about how Polymorph works or the like, as I understand the mechanics of the rules.
I also understand the list of allowable monstrous humanoids allowed or more importantly the legal sources they can come from.
No my problem within PFS is this:
A lot of posts suggest taking monsters like the Calikang or the Chardra or even the Gargoyle but none of them address the real limitation of this spell - the material component.
From the spell description:
Components V, S, M (a piece of the creature whose form you plan to assume)
How is a Level 7 ish caster get his hands on part of a CR 12 monster in the case of a Calikang (apart of course from defeating one) as an example?
A 5th level caster encountering a gargoyle is within tier, but they still need to have played an adventure when they encounter and defeat one.
Is there some kind of handwave within PFS that removes this requirement?
Otherwise you can only use Monstrous Physique on forms of creatures you have encountered during sessions and more so you need to keep a record of said monsters and the adventure you encountered it in.
Thoughts and Clarifications anyone?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a spell doesn't have a cost listed by the material component, or that material component doesn't have a cost listed somewhere in a published paizo book, then the material component is included in a spell component pouch. So for PFS, anyway, you can turn into anything that is legal using Monstrous Physique as long as you have your class's equivalent of a spell component pouch.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.
To cast a spell with a material (M), focus (F), or divine focus (DF) component, you have to have the proper materials, as described by the spell. Unless these components are elaborate, preparing them is a free action. For material components and focuses whose costs are not listed in the spell description, you can assume that you have them if you have your spell component pouch.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Yes, that is a little strange isn't it? Then again, you're not actually getting a whole lot of power out of it, since Monstrous Physique can't duplicate most of the anunnaki's abilities.
You'd get...
* speed 50
* fly speed 60 (good)
* 1d8 bite attack
* 4x 1d6 wing attack (wings are always secondary weapons)
* darkvision 60
* +4 Str, -2 Dex, +4 natural AC
That's really not amazing.
|
|
If it were an issue, the mechanism PFS has for preventing it is to not make the creature a legal choice for polymorph effects. A home GM (or campaign mode) can make a judgement call on whether or not the material should have a cost and house rule that it does. But for PFS, that's a little beyond what a table GM should probably be doing.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For mon. Physique 2 you want the Tikbalang. A monstrous humanoid with pounce, so your fighter can run in and full attack with their weapon and then bite and hoof people as a cherry on top.
My brown furred transmuter likes to throw that spell on the party barbarian resulting in a form refered to as PRINCESS TWILIGHT CARNAGE
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For mon. Physique 2 you want the Tikbalang. A monstrous humanoid with pounce, so your fighter can run in and full attack with their weapon and then bite and hoof people as a cherry on top.
My brown furred transmuter likes to throw that spell on the party barbarian resulting in a form refered to as PRINCESS TWILIGHT CARNAGE
You are making it awfully hard to complain about the level of cheese with that name.
|
For mon. Physique 2 you want the Tikbalang. A monstrous humanoid with pounce, so your fighter can run in and full attack with their weapon and then bite and hoof people as a cherry on top.
Can he, though?
A tikbalang has two hoove attacks (same as a horse) and no slams or claws. Together with the illustration, I’d say those forelimbs aren’t capable of holding weapons.
The only rules I can find for this are in the transmutation (polymorph) description in the CRB.
While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed.
|
|
Merging the features of a horse and human, this monstrosity has an equine snout, sharp fangs, and long forelimbs with clawed fingers.
So it has actual fingers.
Monstrous humanoids are similar to humanoids, but with monstrous or animalistic features. They often have magical abilities as well.
Something without manipulative limbs would be unlikely to be catagorized as a monstrous humanoid.
When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body.
Monstrous humanoid on the other hand, lets you keep your gear.
it's space and reach is 10 feet, so it's tall, standing upright (as opposed to a horse which has space 10 reach 5 and is on all fours)
|
|
I'm going to disagree with you. But before I get into why, I will stipulate that I don't believe my position is ironclad either. I know how I would rule, but there is enough uncertainty to leave it in the realm of "GM interpretation." Barring a clarification/FAQ, I would not blame any GM for using either interpretation.
It doesn't say one way or the other in the monstrous physique spell description. The core rulebook lists the types you quoted above. However it also goes on to say in the same paragraph:When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body.
Monstrous humanoid on the other hand, lets you keep your gear.
Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion).
Bearing in mind that the monstrous physique spell did not exist when the CRB was published, that puts it in the realm of GM discretion.
Merging the features of a horse and human, this monstrosity has an equine snout, sharp fangs, and long forelimbs with clawed fingers.
So it has actual fingers.
But it has two hoof attacks. I went through quite a few Bestiary entries, and every one I found which had hoofs had one hoof attack per pair of limbs. Which would indicate that the tikbalang has hoofs on all limbs.
Something without manipulative limbs would be unlikely to be catagorized as a monstrous humanoid.
it's space and reach is 10 feet, so it's tall, standing upright (as opposed to a horse which has space 10 reach 5 and is on all fours)
These are very good arguments, and a reasonable way for a GM to interpret that the tikbalang can use weapons.
The tikbalang is the only monstrous humanoid I could find that does not have at least one of slam, claw, or weapons in its Offense entry. By my interpretation that - combined with the two hoof attacks - means it doesn't have manipulative limbs.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Related food for thought:
The skinwalker hoof attacks come in pairs despite only having 2 feet and presumably having to stand on them.
The eidolon hooves evolution only requires a single pair of legs and generates 2 attacks.
I see no requirement or precedent of 4 "legs" to get hoof attacks.
Seems to strongly imply manipulative limbs
Artwork for those curious Paizo Tikbalang from Bestiary 4 (NSFW)
Also monstrous humanoids come with simple weapon proficiency.
To me all the evidence points to the Tikbalang being able to wield weapons.
Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion).
Means ask your GM though, I'm just some yahoo.
|
|
Its absolutely does not have hooves on all hands. If that's the basis of your argument that isn't dm's discretion that's making an error. It's both specifically called out as having fingers and the the picture in the bestiary clearly shows it having hands.
Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion).
Bearing in mind that the monstrous physique spell did not exist when the CRB was published, that puts it in the realm of GM discretion.
That isn't what that sentence refers to
While in such a form, you cannot cast any spells that require material components (unless you have the Eschew Materials or Natural Spell feat), and can only cast spells with somatic or verbal components if the form you choose has the capability to make such movements or speak, such as a dragon. Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion). If your new form does not cause your equipment to meld into your form, the equipment resizes to match your new size.
"this restriction" is clearly the preceding sentence about spellcasting. Equipment melding into your new form isn't a restriction and it would be really weird if "this restriction" didn't apply to the previous sentence (which actually is a restriction)
The spell might be new but the forms are not. Animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin all meld your gear to your body. Monstrous humanoid does not cause your equipment to meld into your form , so the equipment resizes to match your new size.
|
|
The Deathsnatcher has eclipsed the Tikbalang anyway. 4 arms w/claws, a bite, a sting, pounce, 50' fly speed, etc., etc. It is only medium, though, so Tikbalang is better if you want to be large... But that also means you can start turning into a Deathsnatcher (minus pounce) with Monstrous Physique I.
I've never tried to pull that one out at a table. I get enough funny looks turning into a Charda or Popobala.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Deathsnatcher has eclipsed the Tikbalang anyway. 4 arms w/claws, a bite, a sting, pounce, 50' fly speed, etc., etc. It is only medium, though, so Tikbalang is better if you want to be large... But that also means you can start turning into a Deathsnatcher (minus pounce) with Monstrous Physique I.
I've never tried to pull that one out at a table. I get enough funny looks turning into a Charda or Popobala.
Luckily, the Deathsnatcher is an illegal target to polymorph in according to the Additional Resources (PFS hard-ruling only)
EDIT: Might be handy if I also quote the text:
creatures in this book—except the blight (any), deathsnatcher, Euryale, fen mauler, green man, mezlan, rawhead, and vespergaunt—are legal for polymorph effects (including a druid's wild shape ability) within the boundaries of each spell or ability's parameters.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, that’s good. They system works! Like I said, I’ve never tried to use it at a table. My monstrous physique character is in seeker levels now, and I haven’t played him in a while. He also likes to stay small, since he’s dex based. I’d just seen it tossed around on the advice forum.
Natural attacks and land speed are the main things that have to be watched for with polymorph spells -- everything else is explicitly limited by the spell used. (That is why the Fey Form spells set a limit on land speed -- otherwise, everyone would go for the Quickling form. Prior polymorph spells set no such limits.)
For PFS, it is a relatively simple matter to identify such problematic creatures and ban them for polymorphing.