Alter Self and the rest of the polymorph line of spells [Archive]

Spuddles

2014-02-14, 01:20 PM

You are a level 3 humanoid wizard.

Alter self gets you +6 nat armor (trog), swim speed (locathah, aquatic elf, sahuagin), fly speed (raptoran, flying elf), climb speed (jungle goblin).

There are other forms to get you stuff. But a single slot that gets you more AC than a fighter of your level, or fly, or swim, or climb is pretty damn useful. And you can still cast spells.

If you go dragonwrought kobold as race & feat, white dragon wyrmling gets you fly, climb, burrow, swim and you retain ability to cast spells.

Polymorph is best to put on a monk or fighter. Hydra + monk = 7 natural attacks + flurry of blows. As a standard action. Firbolg on a fighter gets humanoid shape with 32 str and large size. War Troll is similar, but with dazing blow- a str based special attack that forces fort save vs. daze.

Shapechange gets you free wishes (zodar), the eyebeams of a beholder (free action at will dominate and disintegrate are pretty cool), and arguably the spellcasting of black ethergaunts, solars, or chronotryns. Which all have amazing Su, anyway, like a chronotryns double actions.

nedz

2014-02-14, 01:22 PM

Basically with one spell you now have 6 monster manuals worth of options. Some of these options are very powerful, others are only useful in certain situations but happen to be exactly what you need at the time when these situations crop up.

Max Caysey

2014-02-14, 02:35 PM

lets say a level 20 wiz... what monster is going to be better that his og her natural form, spellcasting abilities and magic items???

Segev

2014-02-14, 02:57 PM

lets say a level 20 wiz... what monster is going to be better that his og her natural form, spellcasting abilities and magic items???

Well, the aforementioned Beholder has all of his spellcasting abilities and magic items, and gets those eye rays as free actions on top of them.

The Zodar gets him 1 free wish, rather than casting Wish himself, which costs 5000 gp.

The simple Troglodyte from casting an Alter Self is still +6 NAC over his natural form, without having to spend gp on an amulet for it. (Admittedly, a 20th level wizard is RARELY worried about his AC anymore.)

The Choker remains one of the most cheese-tastically broken things to assume the form of, since it has 3.0 Haste as an (Ex) (or is it an (Su)?) and that transfers with Shapechange.

Chronos

2014-02-14, 03:09 PM

You seem to be under the impression that you lose your spellcasting and items. You don't.

Max Caysey

2014-02-14, 03:53 PM

You seem to be under the impression that you lose your spellcasting and items. You don't.

A couple of things:

Taken from alter self

If the new form is capable of speech, you can communicate normally. You retain any spellcasting ability you had in your original form, but the new form must be able to speak intelligibly (that is, speak a language) to use verbal components and must have limbs capable of fine manipulation to use somatic or material components..

and

When the change occurs, your equipment, if any, either remains worn or held by the new form (if it is capable of wearing or holding the item), or melds into the new form and becomes nonfunctional.

Brookshw

2014-02-14, 03:56 PM

lets say a level 20 wiz... what monster is going to be better that his og her natural form, spellcasting abilities and magic items???

Solars are rather nice.

graeylin

2014-02-14, 05:27 PM

KorbeltheReader

2014-02-14, 05:33 PM

Well, you can use polymorph any object to turn your snake familiar into a gold dragon. For a week.

You can use it to turn your raptoran wizard into a gold dragon. Permanently.

No worries though, it specifically says you can't turn rock into diamonds. Balance achieved!

TuggyNE

2014-02-14, 08:11 PM

bekeleven

2014-02-14, 11:06 PM

lets say a level 20 wiz... what monster is going to be better that his og her natural form, spellcasting abilities and magic items???

http://i.imgur.com/WNtPjyU.jpg

Brookshw

2014-02-14, 11:20 PM

yeah, that choker-cheese is nice. Two standard actions per round? Two times the spells each round.

I tended to use one for summons, and the other for... whatever was needed. And by that level, all my summons had magic/Su/EX abilities, so by round three, I had the SRD, Every monster manual, and the spell compendium opened, and cherry picking.

Hmmmm,....what are those dual bird brained things again, iirc mm2, chronotyn? I believe they top the action economy cheese once you're high enough. Also iirc the there's mention of them using time stop though they don't actually have the ability. Been a while since I checked though,

Rubik

2014-02-14, 11:24 PM

Polymorph is best to put on a monk or fighter. Hydra + monk = 7 natural attacks + flurry of blows.Hydras are Huge sized, and you can only turn something into a Hydra if it's already Large sized+ (up to Gargantuan).

Silva Stormrage

2014-02-14, 11:26 PM

A couple of things:

Taken from alter self

and

Pretty much all forms mentioned can use somatic components. Even Beholders can do so (See Beholder Mage PRC).

For the magic item part, you can drop items shift and pick them up if its out of combat. In combat you often can just transmute the fighter into the super strong form. Often that will be stronger than whatever items he has on him.

Urpriest

2014-02-14, 11:52 PM

A couple of things:

Taken from alter self

and

Yes, and almost all the forms listed are capable of using items and speech. I think the only one in this thread that doesn't apply is the Hydra. So what was confusing you?

TuggyNE

2014-02-15, 12:18 AM

Yes, and almost all the forms listed are capable of using items and speech. I think the only one in this thread that doesn't apply is the Hydra. So what was confusing you?

If I had to guess, I would say the instinctive "but that would be ridiculously broken, so that can't possibly be right!" response is overriding "wait… that really is ridiculously broken, isn't it?" Still happens to me once in a while.

Drachasor

2014-02-15, 12:37 AM

While PF does weaken polymorph spells and also make them really wonky in some places. PAO in PF is very odd. If you turn a rock into a rock, it becomes sentient as well as gaining strength, dexterity, and constitution scores:

If the target of the spell does not have physical ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution), this spell grants a base score of 10 to each missing ability score. If the target of the spell does not have mental ability scores (Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma), this spell grants a score of 5 to such scores. Damage taken by the new form can result in the injury or death of the polymorphed creature. In general, damage occurs when the new form is changed through physical force. A non-magical object cannot be made into a magic item with this spell. Magic items aren't affected by this spell.

Strange, eh?

bekeleven

2014-02-15, 01:44 AM

Strange, eh?

Unless I missed my control-F, nothing in the Polymorph subschool, Beast Shape, (Greater) Polymorph, and PAO mentions incorporeality. This makes PAO the quickest way to get strength as a ghost.

Also the quickest way to get Con as an undead. Is immune to (most) fort saves a consequence of the undead type, or a consequence of lack of con specifically?

Drachasor

2014-02-15, 01:51 AM

Unless I missed my control-F, nothing in the Polymorph subschool, Beast Shape, (Greater) Polymorph, and PAO mentions incorporeality. This makes PAO the quickest way to get strength as a ghost.

Also the quickest way to get Con as an undead. Is immune to (most) fort saves a consequence of the undead type, or a consequence of lack of con specifically?

Who knows? PF leads such questions up to the DM. Is not being able to be healed something that goes away if an undead casts Alter Self? Again, the game doesn't say, but just indicates MAYBE.

Greater Polymorph doesn't let you become incorporeal since that's a special ability -- on the other hand, you can become something that's incorporeal, you just aren't -- which is weird. On the other hand, PAO in PF is clearly not limited to Greater Polymorph and other explicit spells it mentions. You can turn things into rocks after all. So can you become a Shadow or Ghost? Maybe. Can you turn a Ghost into a Ghost which now has strength and con? Maybe.

GP doesn't let you become undead either, since the Undead Anatomy line of spells was added in a later book and why make Polymorph Self and GP like Shadow Conjuration and duplicate lower level polymorph spells to avoid that problem? Which isn't to say the polymorph stuff isn't crazy powerful. In some ways Polymorph is more powerful than before, since you can take a character with high physical stats and make them even higher (in some cases higher than they'd be if they just adopted the new forms normal stats). On the other hand, it does prevent stat dumping.

They really didn't think through the polymorph changes very well. PAO is the worst since they just slapped on a word change or two and didn't bother changing any other text. But in general there are a lot of weird questions left since they don't change your type and the spells avoid talking about type. Yet, some natural abilities you do get, but not all of them, and the distinction is unclear.

While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. 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. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.

It's even a bit unclear if you Alter Self from something that can fly with wings to something that can fly with wings...can you still fly? Alter Self doesn't grant it, but it indicates that maybe you get it since you already had it. Or did they just mean what you explicitly gain? It's unclear.

You do explicitly gain all natural attacks (so hydras are still great for lots of attacks). It's just what you lose that is unclear.

But yeah, PAO is extra weirdness.

JDL

2014-02-15, 02:44 AM

Also don't forget the benefits of having an Outsider character when casting Alter Self and Polymorph.

An Aasimar or Tiefling Wizard has a broad array of options available to them from the normally prohibited list of Outsiders in the Monster Manual.

Example:

Level 7 Wizard, Tiefling (Level 8 Character)

Cast Polymorph, turn into Avoral (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/avoral.htm).

AC: 24 base (+6 Dex, +8 Natural)

Add Mage Armor and you're at 28 AC, equal to a Fighter in +2 Full Plate with a +2 Tower Shield. Add a Shield spell? 32 AC. Protection from X? 34 AC. A CR 9 Frost Giant would need to roll an 16 or above just to hit you on its first attack roll.

Ranged Touch Attack: +9 (+3 BAB, +6 Dex)

With this sort of bonus to ranged touch attack ray spells you're pretty much guaranteed to hit anything you want. This doesn't even count bonuses from things like Heroism.

Movement: 90 ft. fly speed (good)

Note that unlike the Fly spell, this form's flying ability means you can hover in place without needing a minimum forward speed to avoid crashing into the ground. You can safely cast the spell, fly up above your enemies and rain death down on them from high.

A form like this will serve you a long time, well into the mid to high levels. And that's just one of many options available. The list only gets bigger as you get more caster levels.

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 03:51 AM

Yes, and almost all the forms listed are capable of using items and speech. I think the only one in this thread that doesn't apply is the Hydra. So what was confusing you?

Basically what Im saying s that your items will only work if your shape allows it. Having humanoid shaped items your only going to be able to wear them in a humaoid shape. Further mundane items will not refit to your new size if that changes so spell component pouch is gone unless your size is close to medium and humanoid in shape.

Verbal ans somatic components are gone unless your chosen form can speak and have finger-like limbs for both somatic and material component. Wich is a lot of monsters...

So what I dont understand is the hype. My level 20 wiz would be better of any day to gate in some HD 40 creature or than to actually change into something where a) might loose the bonuses from magic items, and b) looses his spellcasting abilities.

And as I see it, the higher level you become the worse the polymorph spell line becomes... A level 30 wiz could only become a HD 25, so all the great wyrms are gone... what HD 25 creature wich allows for items and spellcasting is more powerful than a level 30 wizard in natural form?

Drachasor

2014-02-15, 03:54 AM

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 10:12 AM

You do use summons.

You also Polymorph yourself into something that is better, stronger, faster, and still humanoid. There are plenty of good choices. The existence of bad choices doesn't change this.

Most games don't go to level 20, let alone ABOVE level 20. If you are above level 20 you have a lot of even more powerful options, and still have plenty of forms that are better than human.

There's no contradiction.

COuld you give me an example of something wich would be better that normal human form at level 20 and level 30?

My stats are the following:

str 12
dex 21
con 24
int 43
wis 23
cha 9

Chronos

2014-02-15, 10:21 AM

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 10:40 AM

Anything humanoid-shaped will be better than human, at any level where it's available. Most angels, demons, and devils, titans, many giants... Heck, at any level 3 or up, you've got troglodytes, and those are already better than human.

BUt only if they have better physical scores than the physical scores of my wizard... right? And more HD? I mean a level 30 wiz would loose a lot of hit points if he were to assume a HD 25 form

Silva Stormrage

2014-02-15, 11:25 AM

BUt only if they have better physical scores than the physical scores of my wizard... right? And more HD? I mean a level 30 wiz would loose a lot of hit points if he were to assume a HD 25 form

Why would you particularly care about your own physical scores? I assume you don't have a flat 21, 24 dex and con modifier respectively. Those are probably enhanced with magic items.

To give an exam of a better form. Shapechange into a Chrotowryn as mentioned above. It has a humanoid enough shape to cast spells and wear the standard items. It gets double actions each round gets a bonus on knowledge checks, gets flight + natural armor (22 NA) and stats are str 26, dex 21, con 21. So probably going to be higher than your wizard's. It is superior in literally every way that matters.

And also you can't lose HP from polymorph line. Your HP remains the same even if your con changes.

lunar2

2014-02-15, 11:57 AM

BUt only if they have better physical scores than the physical scores of my wizard... right? And more HD? I mean a level 30 wiz would loose a lot of hit points if he were to assume a HD 25 form

you don't gain the creature's HD. you keep your own. the only thing that changes is your con modifier.

also, magic items except armor and weapons resize to fit the wearer. and with the exception of gloves and boots, most creatures can wear any magic item. obviously, you need hands for gloves and feet for boots.

you also don't need a hand to cast spells. you need a limb capable of fine manipulation. tentacles work, for example. so do a dragon's claws. even a beholder's eyestalks count. and all sentient creatures have the physical ability to speak unless stated otherwise.

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 12:41 PM

you don't gain the creature's HD. you keep your own. the only thing that changes is your con modifier.

also, magic items except armor and weapons resize to fit the wearer. and with the exception of gloves and boots, most creatures can wear any magic item. obviously, you need hands for gloves and feet for boots.

you also don't need a hand to cast spells. you need a limb capable of fine manipulation. tentacles work, for example. so do a dragon's claws. even a beholder's eyestalks count. and all sentient creatures have the physical ability to speak unless stated otherwise.

From what I could gather from a post about bear warriors and their shapechange, items for a humanoid only fit humanoid, and so do not go from human to horse or giraffe or snake... It would have to fit the general shape of the creature. And though magic items does refit it self, mundane does not, and a spell component pouch would meld into the new form and become useless if that form was not humanoid and close to the same size as the original spell component pouch was for.

The mage at hand has 12, 15, 18 in his pysical stats, but lets assume he has 24 in all physical stats unbuffed/un itemed. The change that occurs from shapechange would then be changing my stats in a negative direction and thus be un-preferable... right? So even though the Wizard migh not loose hp from the loss of HD from 30 to 25, he sould still loose HP if the con was lower.

Dimcair

2014-02-15, 12:55 PM

How could we NOT abuse Alter Self and Polymorph then? Anybody has a RAI wording? I refrained from casting them so far since it just overshadows everybody....

Urpriest

2014-02-15, 02:05 PM

Basically what Im saying s that your items will only work if your shape allows it. Having humanoid shaped items your only going to be able to wear them in a humaoid shape. Further mundane items will not refit to your new size if that changes so spell component pouch is gone unless your size is close to medium and humanoid in shape.

Your spell component pouch is attached to your belt. Your belt is magical, so it resizes. Humanoid or nonhumanoid is irrelevant, the relevant question is whether the creature can wear the item in question, since items resize. For example, Draconomicon says Dragons use basically the same items as humans.

Verbal ans somatic components are gone unless your chosen form can speak and have finger-like limbs for both somatic and material component. Wich is a lot of monsters...

But neither Dragons, nor most outsiders, nor trolls...basically everything people have been talking about in this thread works fine for this.

So what I dont understand is the hype. My level 20 wiz would be better of any day to gate in some HD 40 creature or than to actually change into something where a) might loose the bonuses from magic items, and b) looses his spellcasting abilities.

Shapechange is free. Gate is expensive. They're both powerful, but one is an everyday spell, the other is an investment.

And as I see it, the higher level you become the worse the polymorph spell line becomes... A level 30 wiz could only become a HD 25, so all the great wyrms are gone... what HD 25 creature wich allows for items and spellcasting is more powerful than a level 30 wizard in natural form?
A level 30 Wiz would have crappy physical ability scores because they would have spent all their point-buy and level-up points on the mental scores, because they knew they could just polymorph into something. Arguably even inherent bonuses carry over.

From what I could gather from a post about bear warriors and their shapechange, items for a humanoid only fit humanoid, and so do not go from human to horse or giraffe or snake... It would have to fit the general shape of the creature. And though magic items does refit it self, mundane does not, and a spell component pouch would meld into the new form and become useless if that form was not humanoid and close to the same size as the original spell component pouch was for.

That's just because the rules aren't specific about what sort of items animals can use, so that's ambiguous. There are explicit lists for Dragons and Beholders (and some other Aberrations), and most of the powerful stuff is humanoid.

The mage at hand has 12, 15, 18 in his pysical stats, but lets assume he has 24 in all physical stats unbuffed/un itemed. The change that occurs from shapechange would then be changing my stats in a negative direction and thus be un-preferable... right? So even though the Wizard migh not loose hp from the loss of HD from 30 to 25, he sould still loose HP if the con was lower.
Let's say the mage in question does in fact have 12, 15, 18 in physical stats before all buffs (including inherent bonuses). This is probably false because of the limitations of point buy, but let's assume it. Solars are straight-up better, and are completely humanoid in shape.

Finally: free Wishes. Is that of no interest to you?

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 02:28 PM

Your spell component pouch is attached to your belt. Your belt is magical, so it resizes. Humanoid or nonhumanoid is irrelevant, the relevant question is whether the creature can wear the item in question, since items resize. For example, Draconomicon says Dragons use basically the same items as humans.

This is not true. You mundane pouch does nowhere say that it takes the enchant of what ever it touches. So unless you specifically have an enchanted spell component pouch it will not refit.

What enchent do your gloves get from being attaced to your braces, which are attached to your armor?

Let's say the mage in question does in fact have 12, 15, 18 in physical stats before all buffs (including inherent bonuses). This is probably false because of the limitations of point buy, but let's assume it. Solars are straight-up better, and are completely humanoid in shape.

Not everyone uses the point buy system!

Finally: free Wishes. Is that of no interest to you?

Well yes and no. Its powerful, but not powerful to the point of brokenness when I with enough gold can do the same thing.

lunar2

2014-02-15, 03:29 PM

From what I could gather from a post about bear warriors and their shapechange, items for a humanoid only fit humanoid, and so do not go from human to horse or giraffe or snake... It would have to fit the general shape of the creature. And though magic items does refit it self, mundane does not, and a spell component pouch would meld into the new form and become useless if that form was not humanoid and close to the same size as the original spell component pouch was for.

The mage at hand has 12, 15, 18 in his pysical stats, but lets assume he has 24 in all physical stats unbuffed/un itemed. The change that occurs from shapechange would then be changing my stats in a negative direction and thus be un-preferable... right? So even though the Wizard migh not loose hp from the loss of HD from 30 to 25, he sould still loose HP if the con was lower.

there is no rule that items vary based on the creature type. shape is what matters. a bear, for example, can wear a belt, because it has an area on it's body that resembles a waist. it can wear a helmet, because it has a head. it can wear an amulet, because it has a neck. it has eyes, so it can wear goggles. it has claws, so it can wear rings. it can't wield weapons, except mouthpick weapons, because it has no hands. it can't wear armor, but can wear barding. this is funny, but it can actually wear boots, because it has feet (only hoofed creatures can't wear boots).

spell component pouches are all the same. they do not come in different sizes or shapes for different creatures. any creature capable of fine manipulation can use a spell component pouch, regardless of size.

as for ability scores. you're a wizard. unless you are using polymorph to get into melee (which you shouldn't, you have minions party members for that), you don't actually care about ability scores. you care about movement modes, special abilities, action economy, etc. also, str 12 and con 18 are not at all hard to beat (forget 24s. if you have an unbuffed anything PC that does not have LA with all 24s, you are not playing DnD as written. it's flat out impossible.) any true giant beats both, for example. iirc sand giants (MM3) beat your dex, too. actually read the monster manuals, and you will find dozens of monsters in each that blow your ability scores out of the water, many of them with good special attacks on top of that.

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 03:40 PM

spell component pouches are all the same. they do not come in different sizes or shapes for different creatures. any creature capable of fine manipulation can use a spell component pouch, regardless of size.

Well only of that spell component pouch is magical. A mundane spell component pouch would not change size and therefor be unusuable for someone who changed to huge... or tiny or somewhing like a snake...

Urpriest

2014-02-15, 03:51 PM

This is not true. You mundane pouch does nowhere say that it takes the enchant of what ever it touches. So unless you specifically have an enchanted spell component pouch it will not refit.

What enchent do your gloves get from being attaced to your braces, which are attached to your armor?

You misunderstand. The belt changes size, the spell component pouch doesn't, but it also doesn't merge because it's not worn by you, it's attached to your belt.

Well yes and no. Its powerful, but not powerful to the point of brokenness when I with enough gold can do the same thing.

Gold puts a limit on how many Wishes, how frequent, etc. Shapechange gets you a free Wish every round, forever.

Similarly, it's nice to be an Elemental Weird rather than Gate-ing one, since you have to ask the Gated one questions while you gain the benefit of the Shapechanged one's free action divinations more immediately and as such can actually benefit from the fact that you can take an arbitrary number of free actions per round.

Have you read Team Solars (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188138)? Shapechange can get you access to abilities on your own, superior, chassis, rather than on a called creature, which is handy when you want to do things like share your own buffs by turning into a symbiote.

lunar2

2014-02-15, 04:22 PM

Well only of that spell component pouch is magical. A mundane spell component pouch would not change size and therefor be unusuable for someone who changed to huge... or tiny or somewhing like a snake...

no. it doesn't matter whether the spell component pouch is magical or not. spell component pouches don't come in different sizes. a colossal creature uses the same spell component pouch as a fine creature.

now yeah, a snake with no hands would lose the pouch, because they can't use it without limbs capable of fine manipulation, and a snake's mouth is only capable of rough manipulation. but it will be very rare that you polymorph into a creature without limbs, because that interferes with your somatic components. and all the best polymorph forms have limbs, anyway.

Spuddles

2014-02-15, 05:19 PM

Alter Self does not affect your ability scores. There is also an argument that shapechanging into a creature with spellcasting gets you spellcasting. Older monster manuals this is unclear; in later ones innate spellcasting (such as MMV hobgoblin war wizards) is put in the special abilities table of the monster's entry.

This means you can shapechange into a Black Ethergaunt or Chronotryn every round and as a free action, double your cleric spells. Or grab sorc spells, or cleric, or druid.

The world is yours.

Hmmmm,....what are those dual bird brained things again, iirc mm2, chronotyn? I believe they top the action economy cheese once you're high enough. Also iirc the there's mention of them using time stop though they don't actually have the ability. Been a while since I checked though,

They come with like 17 levels of wizard casting.

Also don't forget the benefits of having an Outsider character when casting Alter Self and Polymorph.

An Aasimar or Tiefling Wizard has a broad array of options available to them from the normally prohibited list of Outsiders in the Monster Manual.

Example:

Level 7 Wizard, Tiefling (Level 8 Character)

Cast Polymorph, turn into Avoral (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/avoral.htm).

AC: 24 base (+6 Dex, +8 Natural)

Add Mage Armor and you're at 28 AC, equal to a Fighter in +2 Full Plate with a +2 Tower Shield. Add a Shield spell? 32 AC. Protection from X? 34 AC. A CR 9 Frost Giant would need to roll an 16 or above just to hit you on its first attack roll.

Ranged Touch Attack: +9 (+3 BAB, +6 Dex)

With this sort of bonus to ranged touch attack ray spells you're pretty much guaranteed to hit anything you want. This doesn't even count bonuses from things like Heroism.

Movement: 90 ft. fly speed (good)

Note that unlike the Fly spell, this form's flying ability means you can hover in place without needing a minimum forward speed to avoid crashing into the ground. You can safely cast the spell, fly up above your enemies and rain death down on them from high.

A form like this will serve you a long time, well into the mid to high levels. And that's just one of many options available. The list only gets bigger as you get more caster levels.

Dwarf Ancestor has 20 NA.

Basically what Im saying s that your items will only work if your shape allows it. Having humanoid shaped items your only going to be able to wear them in a humaoid shape. Further mundane items will not refit to your new size if that changes so spell component pouch is gone unless your size is close to medium and humanoid in shape.

Verbal ans somatic components are gone unless your chosen form can speak and have finger-like limbs for both somatic and material component. Wich is a lot of monsters...

So what I dont understand is the hype. My level 20 wiz would be better of any day to gate in some HD 40 creature or than to actually change into something where a) might loose the bonuses from magic items, and b) looses his spellcasting abilities.

And as I see it, the higher level you become the worse the polymorph spell line becomes... A level 30 wiz could only become a HD 25, so all the great wyrms are gone... what HD 25 creature wich allows for items and spellcasting is more powerful than a level 30 wizard in natural form?

If your wizard cannot figure out how to take off and put items back on, or use keep his stuff in a bag of holding, he should have his wizarding license revoked.

Deophaun

2014-02-15, 05:42 PM

From what I could gather from a post about bear warriors and their shapechange, items for a humanoid only fit humanoid, and so do not go from human to horse or giraffe or snake... It would have to fit the general shape of the creature.
"General" is a broad category. The basic notion is that the form must have appropriate slots for the item. Your bear is going to have arms, shoulders, torso, body, head, neck, and face at least. Magic items that fit those will work. It may have hands and feet at DM discretion. Dragon forms explicitly have slots for all items, although items for their hand and feet slots are better adapted to their form while still being usable for humanoids, and I'd assume anything a dragon can wear a bear could.

Snakes, meanwhile, are missing a lot. Torso and neck are likely merged, possible head and face. There are no shoulders, arms, hands, feet, or fingers.

Story

2014-02-15, 06:51 PM

And as I see it, the higher level you become the worse the polymorph spell line becomes... A level 30 wiz could only become a HD 25, so all the great wyrms are gone... what HD 25 creature wich allows for items and spellcasting is more powerful than a level 30 wizard in natural form?

Epic level wizards are already infinitely powerful so it's not a meaningful discussion.

How could we NOT abuse Alter Self and Polymorph then? Anybody has a RAI wording? I refrained from casting them so far since it just overshadows everybody....

Just don't abuse it. The thing about having more power means that you simply have more options as to which power level you play at. You could also try casting it on teammates if you think they won't mind.

Not everyone uses the point buy system!

A Wizard is unlikely to have 24 strength without bonuses no matter what system is being used.

TuggyNE

2014-02-15, 08:16 PM

The mage at hand has 12, 15, 18 in his pysical stats, but lets assume he has 24 in all physical stats unbuffed/un itemed. The change that occurs from shapechange would then be changing my stats in a negative direction and thus be un-preferable... right?

Yes, there exists an edge case such that polymorphing is not as useful as normal. This is, however, an extreme edge case, and is not particularly useful for evaluating the spells in practice, any more than it's useful to consider feats for a Fighter based on a hypothetical character that has 12 Wis, 8 Str, and 10 Dex: sure, it could happen, but it won't.

And, of course, there are still various monstrous abilities like natural armor and special abilities that cannot be gained efficiently any other way. I don't care if you have a Wizard with 30 Str/Dex/Con unbuffed, Su wish 1/round or double actions is still a massive improvement.

So even though the Wizard migh not loose hp from the loss of HD from 30 to 25, he sould still loose HP if the con was lower.

No, there is no chance of HP loss. Fort save reduction, yes, but you explicitly retain exactly the same HP, period, end of story.

Max Caysey

2014-02-15, 08:44 PM

no. it doesn't matter whether the spell component pouch is magical or not. spell component pouches don't come in different sizes. a colossal creature uses the same spell component pouch as a fine creature.

How should this be possible? A fine spell component pouch would be like 1mm i diameter and a colossal would not be able to manipulate so small things. This might be nowhere i the rules, but its allows to put 2 and 2 togerther for one self. Just like a fine creature would not be able to maipulate items that are 10 to 100 times his size like some gems... And basically would loose spellcasting abilities just on that note.

But what about your armor/rope... that would not refit itself to lets say a raven /bear/ dragon... would it?

TuggyNE

2014-02-15, 09:12 PM

lunar2

2014-02-15, 10:01 PM

How should this be possible? A fine spell component pouch would be like 1mm i diameter and a colossal would not be able to manipulate so small things. This might be nowhere i the rules, but its allows to put 2 and 2 togerther for one self. Just like a fine creature would not be able to maipulate items that are 10 to 100 times his size like some gems... And basically would loose spellcasting abilities just on that note.

But what about your armor/rope... that would not refit itself to lets say a raven /bear/ dragon... would it?

there are no costs, weights, or other statistics for any spell pouch besides the one in the PHB. it is literally the only spell component pouch in existence. all spellcasting creatures, regardless of size, use that same spell component pouch. you can houserule it differently, sure. but that is a houserule, which has no place in evaluating the effectiveness of a spell in general play. it is also a pointless houserule, since spell component pouches follow no form of logic to begin with. they hold an infinite amount of items bigger than themselves, and you're worried about whether a giant can use the same spell component pouch as a halfling. honestly, which seems like the bigger logic break?

what stupid wizard is wearing armor to begin with? there are maybe 3 armors that don't offer ASF, and wizards are better served by robes, which take the same slot as armor, anyway. and robes, being wondrous items, resize to fit the wearer, and by taking the armor slot, they fit nearly any creature, since all creatures have an armor slot, whether they wear normal armor or barding. yes, even snakes can wear barding. if a wizard wants an armor bonus to armor class, they cast (greater) mage armor, which will last an entire adventuring day, doesn't take up a body slot, and is ghost touch for free.

as for rope. aren't you storing your rope in your bag of holding/ handy haversack/ portable hole? you know, the wondrous items usable by anyone with anything even remotely resembling hands. and why do you care about rope, anyway? anything you can do with a rope, you can do just as effectively, if not more effectively, with a spell, except spells have less chance of failure, and are quicker to set up.

graeylin

2014-02-15, 10:11 PM

My dad used to say "Never wrestle with a pig. You just get muddy, and the pig enjoys it."

Rubik

2014-02-15, 10:15 PM

My dad used to say "Never wrestle with a pig. You just get muddy, and the pig enjoys it.""That ain't wrasslin', boy!"

Story

2014-02-15, 11:41 PM

what stupid wizard is wearing armor to begin with? there are maybe 3 armors that don't offer ASF, and wizards are better served by robes, which take the same slot as armor, anyway.

I'm rather partial to my +1 Soulfire Githcraft Gnome Twist-cloth with +1 Eager armor spikes. :smallbiggrin:

Spuddles

2014-02-15, 11:58 PM

I'm rather partial to my +1 Soulfire Githcraft Gnome Twist-cloth with +1 Eager armor spikes. :smallbiggrin:

Pfff, wizards these days have no sense of style. Ya'll look like a bunch of spacepunk hobos.

lunar2

2014-02-16, 12:24 AM

I'm rather partial to my +1 Soulfire Githcraft Gnome Twist-cloth with +1 Eager armor spikes. :smallbiggrin:

ok. but i'd guess you are only polymorphing into medium creatures with humanoid shape, then. of course, trumpet archon isn't bad, with good ability scores and a fly speed. iirc, it had a decent natural armor, as well. also, is there any way to get its (Su) greater teleport off a polymorph? because if there is, that is cheesy. iirc, the archons' GT doesn't have the 50 lbs of objects limit that demons and devils GT has. at least, i specifically remember a hound archon party member rescuing me from a force cage, once.

Drachasor

2014-02-16, 05:08 AM

Let's also remember that you change your Type with Shapechange and the like. So you can become immune to a ton of spells just because of that.

This, the immunities of particular forms, and so forth means that Shapechange lets you adapt your form to whatever is appropriate to the current encounter if needed. To say nothing of other boosts like flight and movement modes. This can take the place of a ton of magical items and other buffs or merely act as a backup to those other items and spells.

And some forms have decent attacks that can help you save resources.

It can also be used to deal out physical damage if needed, since you don't have to worry about iterative attacks, you get a good strength score, and there are a lot of forms that can do tons of damage.

And that's without looking for poorly written powers that exploit the system.

Story

2014-02-16, 09:53 AM

Polymorph also changes your type. One fun tactic is polymorphing into a Treant and then alter-selfing back into your normal form to get an early form of immunity to mind affecting (and free fortification too). The main downside is that your dexterity is abysmal.

ok. but i'd guess you are only polymorphing into medium creatures with humanoid shape, then. of course, trumpet archon isn't bad, with good ability scores and a fly speed. iirc, it had a decent natural armor, as well. also, is there any way to get its (Su) greater teleport off a polymorph? because if there is, that is cheesy. iirc, the archons' GT doesn't have the 50 lbs of objects limit that demons and devils GT has. at least, i specifically remember a hound archon party member rescuing me from a force cage, once.

I went with Gloura for the high dex and fly speed. Trumpet Archon require you to be an outsider.

Fenris-Wolf

2014-02-16, 10:58 AM

If you are really that concerned about spell components and won't except the arguments have given you so far, there is always the Eschew Materials and Ignore Material Components feats.

lunar2

2014-02-16, 11:01 AM

Deophaun

2014-02-16, 11:09 AM

Rubik

2014-02-16, 11:13 AM

If polymorph changes your type, then how are you alter-selfing back into your normal form? You'd be limited to 5 HD plants.Perhaps he meant Disguise Self?

ZamielVanWeber

2014-02-16, 11:17 AM

If polymorph changes your type, then how are you alter-selfing back into your normal form? You'd be limited to 5 HD plants.

Alter Self specifies your normal form. The treant is not your normal form, so alter self won't see it. Disguise Self won't work because a treant is too big to make look humanoid.

Spuddles

2014-02-16, 11:32 AM

How does normal form work? Is that like original form with PaO?

Story

2014-02-16, 12:24 PM

I don't think it's defined in the rules anywhere. I interpret it as your form before applying magic.

Max Caysey

2014-02-16, 07:57 PM

Just to get something strait... Armor made for human will reshape it self to fit, if i polymorph into a horse? What about oozes is this the same thing?

Urpriest

2014-02-16, 08:18 PM

Just to get something strait... Armor made for human will reshape it self to fit, if i polymorph into a horse? What about oozes is this the same thing?

No, Armor, Weapons, and Mundane Items don't change to fit. Everything else does.

lunar2

2014-02-16, 08:25 PM

Just to get something strait... Armor made for human will reshape it self to fit, if i polymorph into a horse? What about oozes is this the same thing?

no. armor will not reshape. neither will weapons. all other worn magic items will, though, even if they take the armor or weapon slot (as long as they are not actual armor or weapons). so a robe, which takes the armor slot, will reshape to fit nearly any creature, since AFAIK all creatures have an armor slot, even if they normally wear barding. this is because robes aren't actually armor, they are wondrous items.

similarly, even though a standard wand is about a foot long piece of wood, if a fine creature grabs it it will shrink to be used normally by the fine creature, even though it is wielded in the "weapon slot", since it is not an actual weapon. on the other hand, a rod that actually functions as a light mace will not resize, since it is a weapon in its own right. although unlike regular weapons, all randomly generated wands are medium sized by default, since they aren't generated from the weapon table.

Invader

2014-02-16, 09:39 PM

Max Caysey

2014-02-17, 08:03 PM

I didn't make it through both pages so this might have been brought up but let go of the idea of Polymorphing your 20 lvl wizard into something else and focus on Polymorphing your fighter or rogue into something else and that makes all the difference in the word.

That does sound like a good idea!

Segev

2014-02-17, 09:17 PM

Story

2014-02-17, 10:02 PM

And at lower levels, you use Draconic Polymorph instead.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-17, 11:18 PM

Rubik

2014-02-17, 11:22 PM

Don't these spells require the character to be familiar with whatever they're trying to change into?Not in the slightest, actually. The spells are, basically, "pick form at will, ravage and destroy."

I know I'm guilty of skipping past this part, but...if my character has never encountered or read about or been told about any of these exotic and powerful creatures... How are these spells actually super powerful?

Remember, the DM is the one who determines what a character actually encounters, not the player.RAW, you've got info on any creature with an appropriate Knowledge check. That's the closest anyone gets to anything resembling "familiarity," since the term isn't explained (and it's not even mentioned in the Polymorph line -- that's the druid's wild shape).

ryu

2014-02-17, 11:54 PM

Don't these spells require the character to be familiar with whatever they're trying to change into?

I know I'm guilty of skipping past this part, but...if my character has never encountered or read about or been told about any of these exotic and powerful creatures... How are these spells actually super powerful?

Remember, the DM is the one who determines what a character actually encounters, not the player.

As previously noted knowledge checks are a thing. Assuming you require encounters anyway for some pedantic reason? I'm a wizard. We corner the market on magical transportation and magical knowledge gathering. Try and stop me from finding what I want manually.

Deophaun

2014-02-18, 12:20 AM

similarly, even though a standard wand is about a foot long piece of wood, if a fine creature grabs it it will shrink to be used normally by the fine creature, even though it is wielded in the "weapon slot", since it is not an actual weapon. on the other hand, a rod that actually functions as a light mace will not resize, since it is a weapon in its own right. although unlike regular weapons, all randomly generated wands are medium sized by default, since they aren't generated from the weapon table.
Is there a source for this? Magical clothing a jewelery are called out as resizing, but nothing else I know of is. Because it would be nice if my small/tiny characters didn't have to deal with 5lb metamagic rods.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 12:30 AM

Not in the slightest, actually. The spells are, basically, "pick form at will, ravage and destroy."

RAW, you've got info on any creature with an appropriate Knowledge check. That's the closest anyone gets to anything resembling "familiarity," since the term isn't explained (and it's not even mentioned in the Polymorph line -- that's the druid's wild shape).

That was a rhetorical question. Shapechange specifically limits the caster to assuming the form of "any creature you're familiar with".

I can't think of a way to become something you don't even know exists, so really that caveat might as well exist for alter self and polymorph spells.

Where in the players handbook does it say knowledge checks can be used to know a creature exists? I only see an option to attempt a knowledge check to identify monsters, which isn't the same thing.

Rubik

2014-02-18, 12:41 AM

That was a rhetorical question. Shapechange specifically limits the caster to assuming the form of "any creature you're familiar with".

I can't think of a way to become something you don't even know exists, so really that caveat might as well exist for alter self and polymorph spells. Alter Self, Polymorph, and Polymorph Any Object all three do not have anything regarding familiarity.

So if you need familiarity to use Shapechange, why not just Polymorph into as many creatures as you can to become familiar with said creatures? How more familiar can you be with something than to be that something?

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 12:55 AM

Alter Self, Polymorph, and Polymorph Any Object all three do not have anything regarding familiarity.

So if you need familiarity to use Shapechange, why not just Polymorph into as many creatures as you can to become familiar with said creatures? How more familiar can you be with something than to be that something?

I mentioned that it doesn't make any sense that one could polymorph into something they've never even heard of. I mean we the players know what some of these things are, but we aren't the characters.

ryu

2014-02-18, 01:00 AM

I mentioned that it doesn't make any sense that one could polymorph into something they've never even heard of. I mean we the players know what some of these things are, but we aren't the characters.

Go to a freaking library, teleport repeatedly to various habitats throughout the world. Murder the things you want. The undeniable fact of the matter is that if it exists and has stats the players can and probably will find and kill it. You cannot prevent this behavior short of directly making the thing not exist in your world. Even then that just delays the inevitable until the wizard simply gets to design his own species at high levels with magical experimentation shenanigans.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 01:18 AM

Go to a freaking library, teleport repeatedly to various habitats throughout the world. Murder the things you want. The undeniable fact of the matter is that if it exists and has stats the players can and probably will find and kill it. You cannot prevent this behavior short of directly making the thing not exist in your world. Even then that just delays the inevitable until the wizard simply gets to design his own species at high levels with magical experimentation shenanigans.

What is it that makes you think there are libraries around the corner in d&d, let alone that they contain any of the information you're looking for?

ryu

2014-02-18, 01:22 AM

What is it that makes you think there are libraries around the corner in d&d, let alone that they contain any of the information you're looking for?

Do they exist as at all in the planes? If so I've all that's necessary to find ANY of them by level 9. And yes I know books and therefor their repositories exist to enable all forms of scrying. By RAW we collectively START with the damn things.

lunar2

2014-02-18, 01:40 AM

Is there a source for this? Magical clothing a jewelery are called out as resizing, but nothing else I know of is. Because it would be nice if my small/tiny characters didn't have to deal with 5lb metamagic rods.

funny. i thought it explicitly applied to all items but armor and weapons. but i guess not.

When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items.

There may be rare exceptions, especially with racial specific items.

still, the second to last sentence at least supports my interpretations. size should not keep characters from using magic items. now, some magic items have specific weights, like bags of holding, so those are an issue. but a rod or wand shouldn't be.

ryu

2014-02-18, 01:50 AM

funny. i thought it explicitly applied to all items but armor and weapons. but i guess not.

still, the second to last sentence at least supports my interpretations. size should not keep characters from using magic items. now, some magic items have specific weights, like bags of holding, so those are an issue. but a rod or wand shouldn't be.

At no point does size changing have to be inconsistent with specific weights. Who's to say density isn't also changing in the process?

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 01:52 AM

Do they exist as at all in the planes? If so I've all that's necessary to find ANY of them by level 9. And yes I know books and therefor their repositories exist to enable all forms of scrying. By RAW we collectively START with the damn things.

What makes you think the possible existence on an infinite space makes it remotely probable it will be available to any given PC wizard? This sounds like wishful thinking.

Deophaun

2014-02-18, 01:59 AM

What makes you think the possible existence on an infinite space makes it remotely probable it will be available to any given PC wizard? This sounds like wishful thinking.
A library-worth of books on a give subject costs 1000 gp (SBG). Peanuts when you're capable of casting polymorph.

Gemini476

2014-02-18, 02:08 AM

What makes you think the possible existence on an infinite space makes it remotely probable it will be available to any given PC wizard? This sounds like wishful thinking.

(Greater) Teleport, Gate, Plane Shift, etc. all make finding the specific thing you are looking for easy.

You can use Divination spells to check whether or not they exist, as well, so you don't waste your time. Extended Scrying and the like saves you the trouble of even traveling to the creature.

Remember, if the DM rules that X type of enemy does not exist (and the Wizard cannot polymorph into it because of that), that means that the party no longer needs to worry about ever encountering that enemy (who presumably was dangerous, because why else the Polymorph?)

ryu

2014-02-18, 02:31 AM

What makes you think the possible existence on an infinite space makes it remotely probable it will be available to any given PC wizard? This sounds like wishful thinking.

Have you read the spell list at all? We have spells that allow travel to literally any plane. We also have spells to go literally anywhere desired on that chosen plane immediately. Going to the highest extreme gate does both at once as does wish's transport travelers explicitly safe use. We also have divination to find relevant planes and locations. These are all powers that are explicitly given to exist in the form of spells. You know what's wishful thinking? Thinking it's even remotely possible to oppose a competent wizard (which can just get free wish as a class feature under spells) on any level short of an equally optimized tier one or direct DM fiat changing the basic rules of reality.

Talakeal

2014-02-18, 02:35 AM

I don't think it's defined in the rules anywhere. I interpret it as your form before applying magic.

While it is ambiguously worded, I think it far more likely that they simply mean your form before the alter self spell that is being cast takes effect.

ryu

2014-02-18, 02:37 AM

While it is ambiguously worded, I think it far more likely that they simply mean your form before the alter self spell that is being cast takes effect.

Now see this is why you must be VERY specific when writing in rules for sweeping effects like the polymorph line rather than ambiguous. People can have entirely fair disagreements about what your spell even MEANS without any vested interest in it one way or the other.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 02:43 AM

A library-worth of books on a give subject costs 1000 gp (SBG). Peanuts when you're capable of casting polymorph.

That is how much it costs to build a library, and stock it. Again, what guarantee does it carry that any information on monsters your character has never even heard of will be present? I see no such assurance.

Melcar

2014-02-18, 02:47 AM

That was a rhetorical question. Shapechange specifically limits the caster to assuming the form of "any creature you're familiar with".

I can't think of a way to become something you don't even know exists, so really that caveat might as well exist for alter self and polymorph spells.

Where in the players handbook does it say knowledge checks can be used to know a creature exists? I only see an option to attempt a knowledge check to identify monsters, which isn't the same thing.

I agree strongly on this. If you don’t know it exists you of cause can’t say you want to become it. Because how would you formulate this. Such a thing might not exist in game mechanics though.

ryu

2014-02-18, 02:57 AM

That is how much it costs to build a library, and stock it. Again, what guarantee does it carry that any information on monsters your character has never even heard of will be present? I see no such assurance.

Books exist. There is literally an infinite reality space made up of countless infinite spaces smaller than the whole of this reality, but still infinite in themselves. There are also literally spells to access any of those smaller infinite spaces called planes, and spells to go anywhere on those planes with no chance of failure. There are scrying spells which literally cross over planes, and garner info from any number of deities to immediately find the desired destination. To walk on the side of limits here is to say all of infinite existence never saw fit to place a large number of books in one location. This is literally a more extreme shattering of anything resembling suspension of disbelief I have ever seen on this forum, and I've seen the idea that monks beat wizards so ubiquitously that it actually has a culturally given nickname in this community. As is clearly evidenced that's saying something.

Melcar

2014-02-18, 02:57 AM

(Greater) Teleport, Gate, Plane Shift, etc. all make finding the specific thing you are looking for easy.

You can use Divination spells to check whether or not they exist, as well, so you don't waste your time. Extended Scrying and the like saves you the trouble of even traveling to the creature.

Well this is only partly true... If you dont know about something, you cant ask about it, and so would not be able to scry on something you dont know exists at all. Just like that the ones who only use MM1 those wizards would never ask to become Prismatic dragon, because of the fact that the player does not know its there at all. Its the same thing ingame. You cant have a feat you dont know is there.

Deophaun

2014-02-18, 02:58 AM

That is how much it costs to build a library, and stock it.
No, actually. That's just the cost of books.

Again, what guarantee does it carry that any information on monsters your character has never even heard of will be present? I see no such assurance.
Well the assurance is already baked into the knowledge checks. Even if you interpret "identification" as a form of comparative biology and not precise knowledge of the specific creature, such a usage coupled with divination magic makes uncovering the existence of creatures theorized in that way just makes the whole endeavor a pointless hurdle.

ryu

2014-02-18, 03:05 AM

Well this is only partly true... If you dont know about something, you cant ask about it, and so would be able to scry on something you dont know exists at all. Just like that the ones who only use MM1 those wizards would never ask to become Prismatic dragon, because of the fact that the player does not know its there at all. Its the same thing ingame. You cant have a feat you dont know is there.

Actually you can. Very easily actually. Travel the countryside paying special attention to areas of extreme climate or that are relatively remote. Justification? Anything naturally capable of surviving in those areas is probably worth polymorphing into. Then you write books cataloging them and selling them off to people who don't want to do all the searching themselves. This continues until libraries exist as a logical extension of capitalism. All of this because sentient critters have this odd habit of exploring and writing what they found down that's only exacerbated by pound upon pound of magic to adapt to any area and the ability to go literally anywhere.

Rubik

2014-02-18, 03:14 AM

ryu

2014-02-18, 03:29 AM

Basically, if you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.

And this get's even more poignant when you realize that the wizard CAN in-fact invent the universe. He just has to start applying his thirty-forty odd int to the laws of magic which fundamentally reshape reality on a basic level.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 03:52 AM

No, actually. That's just the cost of books.

Well the assurance is already baked into the knowledge checks. Even if you interpret "identification" as a form of comparative biology and not precise knowledge of the specific creature, such a usage coupled with divination magic makes uncovering the existence of creatures theorized in that way just makes the whole endeavor a pointless hurdle.

What is this divination that tells you the answer to the question you don't even know yet?

Knowledge checks are to see if you can identify a creature when confronted, no guarantee there or you wouldn't even have to make checks to identify it.

The sidebar on player knowledge vs character knowledge indicates characters don't just know everything, and I can't find any information that supports the position that they can.

Deophaun

2014-02-18, 04:01 AM

What is this divination that tells you the answer to the question you don't even know yet?
You know the question because you have knowledge.

Knowledge checks are to see if you can identify a creature when confronted, no guarantee there or you wouldn't even have to make checks to identify it.
If you are not threatened, or distracted, you can take 10. If the player is smart, there is a guarantee that their character can have knowledge about any creature with HD equal to their skill modifier, whether that be specific knowledge of the creature, or mere theorizing based on comparative biology. Exceed this by 5, and you start knowing aspects of the creature. So, eventually, if your knowledge (dungeoneering) is high enough, you will know that aberrations exist that can take two standard actions, even if we rule that you don't necessarily know about the choker.

ryu

2014-02-18, 04:02 AM

What is this divination that tells you the answer to the question you don't even know yet?

Knowledge checks are to see if you can identify a creature when confronted, no guarantee there or you wouldn't even have to make checks to identify it.

The sidebar on player knowledge vs character knowledge indicates characters don't just know everything, and I can't find any information that supports the position that they can.

Wrong. The base entry doesn't ever use the phrase confronted in conjunction with the identify use. You can identify what any given species is at any time for any reason. It is never specified that the creature must actually be in any proximity to you.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 04:12 AM

Wrong. The base entry doesn't ever use the phrase confronted in conjunction with the identify use. You can identify what any given species is at any time for any reason. It is never specified that the creature must actually be in any proximity to you.

Not without the appropriate knowledge skill, it's 10 + HD, which exceeds an untrained check. Identification requires something to identify, that in turn means confrontation. With nothing to go on a thing can not be identified.

Also, making the DC merely indicates knowledge of a creatures existence, the skill entry clearly indicates that is not complete knowledge. Each 5 points above the DC indicates another bit of knowledge, so there is still a high probability a character would not be privy to knowing what the perfect forms are.

Deophaun

2014-02-18, 04:15 AM

Identification requires something to identify, that in turn means confrontation.
Identify dragons that can breath fire.

Identification doesn't mean confrontation.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 04:20 AM

Identify dragons that can breath fire.

Identification doesn't mean confrontation.

Identification means being able to explain what a thing is. That requires being presented with said thing visually or hearing about it from a third party.

Neither of those things happens in a vacuum.

ryu

2014-02-18, 04:22 AM

Not without the appropriate knowledge skill, it's 10 + HD, which exceeds an untrained check. Identification requires something to identify, that in turn means confrontation. With nothing to go on a thing can not be identified.

Also, making the DC merely indicates knowledge of a creatures existence, the skill entry clearly indicates that is not complete knowledge. Each 5 points above the DC indicates another bit of knowledge, so there is still a high probability a character would not be privy to knowing what the perfect forms are.

Do you really want to start talking about all the easy ways of getting a skill check equal to x where x is some ridiculously huge number? Further knowledge of existence is all that's relevant. Once you have names of species you can undeniably use divination to research them. Oh and then you start writing books as previously mentioned for easy profit and the peace of mind that nobody in the world has to deal with this circle-jerking ever again.

Edit: Except in D&D they do in-fact happen in a vacuum. Live by the RAW, die by the RAW.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 04:44 AM

Do you really want to start talking about all the easy ways of getting a skill check equal to x where x is some ridiculously huge number? Further knowledge of existence is all that's relevant. Once you have names of species you can undeniably use divination to research them. Oh and then you start writing books as previously mentioned for easy profit and the peace of mind that nobody in the world has to deal with this circle-jerking ever again.

Edit: Except in D&D they do in-fact happen in a vacuum. Live by the RAW, die by the RAW.

No, because getting a knowledge check to a specific number is using player knowledge to meta game.

The DM determines what a character knows based on the level of success of the check, not the player. There are no retries so your assertion that knowledge of the species is all that is required is incorrect.

Zetapup

2014-02-18, 05:00 AM

So a high level wizard with sky high intelligence and full ranks in various knowledge skills can't identify even the slightest bit about creatures without seeing them directly? That makes sense :smalltongue:

In all seriousness, if I were a wizard looking for forms to polymorph into and for some reason I couldn't use knowledge to know about them, I'd locate the nearest metropolis. That should be pretty easy to do, given how metropolis' tend to be big/renowned. From there, I'd look for an expert in exotic monsters. That'd be a little more challenging, but still very doable with the amount of information gathering spells a wizard has access to. I locate the expert, pay them to teach me about various monsters/whatnot and we both go on our merry way.

Rubik

2014-02-18, 05:10 AM

In all seriousness, if I were a wizard looking for forms to polymorph into and for some reason I couldn't use knowledge to know about them, I'd locate the nearest metropolis. That should be pretty easy to do, given how metropolis' tend to be big/renowned. From there, I'd look for an expert in exotic monsters. That'd be a little more challenging, but still very doable with the amount of information gathering spells a wizard has access to. I locate the expert, pay them to teach me about various monsters/whatnot and we both go on our merry way.I'd keep him on retainer for acquiring info on new creatures he discovers, such as the crumple horned snorkack. Of course, paying him to wrestle dire crocodiles on the Scry Broadcasting Channel (SBC) would work, too. You've gotta advertise your potions sale somehow.

Zetapup

2014-02-18, 05:15 AM

I'd keep him on retainer for acquiring info on new creatures he discovers, such as the crumple horned snorkack. Of course, paying him to wrestle dire crocodiles on the Scry Broadcasting Channel (SBC) would work, too. You've gotta advertise your potions sale somehow.

"Crikey, look at the size of this dragon! Must be at least an adult! A real beaut too"

I would definitely watch a show where Steve Irwin educates people about magical beasts and how they're misunderstood

Melcar

2014-02-18, 05:55 AM

Actually you can. Very easily actually. Travel the countryside paying special attention to areas of extreme climate or that are relatively remote. Justification? Anything naturally capable of surviving in those areas is probably worth polymorphing into. Then you write books cataloging them and selling them off to people who don't want to do all the searching themselves. This continues until libraries exist as a logical extension of capitalism. All of this because sentient critters have this odd habit of exploring and writing what they found down that's only exacerbated by pound upon pound of magic to adapt to any area and the ability to go literally anywhere.

Yes... now you can read about them or discover them for you self. But this was not what you word for word wrote before. I have learned at this place interpret litteraly what people write here. You said last that you could scry to check if something excisted. You can scan different invironments but in no way can you say to your DM: " I want to scry to check whether a prismatic dragon excists." If it didnt exist you could not ask that question. And since you have asked that question that means your character knows it exists.

You could have asked: " Does divine extraplanar dragons exists... and maybe then find a prismatic dragon, but you cant ask about a prismatic dragon, specifically if you dont know that something is called a prismatic dragon. And if you do indeed ask that particular question that automatic means that at sometime there was indeed something like that. Where else would your character gain that name from.

JDL

2014-02-18, 06:39 AM

Step 1: Cast Wish.

Step 2: Wish for a book costing up to 25,000 gp that lists every type of creature that exists or has ever existed.

Step 3: Read book.

Step 4. Profit.

Drachasor

2014-02-18, 06:39 AM

Yes... now you can read about them or discover them for you self. But this was not what you word for word wrote before. I have learned at this place interpret litteraly what people write here. You said last that you could scry to check if something excisted. You can scan different invironments but in no way can you say to your DM: " I want to scry to check whether a prismatic dragon excists." If it didnt exist you could not ask that question. And since you have asked that question that means your character knows it exists.

You could have asked: " Does divine extraplanar dragons exists... and maybe then find a prismatic dragon, but you cant ask about a prismatic dragon, specifically if you dont know that something is called a prismatic dragon. And if you do indeed ask that particular question that automatic means that at sometime there was indeed something like that. Where else would your character gain that name from.

The player may ask if their character knows something. If the DM says that such things exist and it is possible the character can know about it, then they make a check. If a successful check is somehow not enough for polymorphing, then the character still has a starting place on where to look for said creature.

Unless you are saying that the ID a monster check is somehow possible without knowing that said monster exist/is a thing. I suppose you use similar reasoning to conclude that libraries don't have bestiaries, descriptions of creatures on other planes, or the like? Or are people just incredibly stupid with short term memory problems? Characters just know information about monsters when they see them and that disappears if the monster isn't there, right? I mean, if you haven't seen and fought a wolf, then you just can't answer any questions about whether such a beast even EXISTS, yes?

But if you're being that ridiculous about RAW then you just do a standard sort through all information using Contact Other Plane or the like. Asking if there are creatures with certain properties, narrowing it down to a list, asking for the name of them one at a time alphabetically, determining further features, etc, etc. Have fun wasting everyone's time with THAT. There's an extra time waster built in too, since you need to develop a solid statistical sample since you'll get some bad answers. Yay!

Though this does bring up the oddity that knowing stuff about an obscure 1 HD monster is somehow much easier than knowing the basics about a Ancient Red Dragon or Unicorn. That's pretty weird.

TuggyNE

2014-02-18, 06:55 AM

Though this does bring up the oddity that knowing stuff about an obscure 1 HD monster is somehow much easier than knowing the basics about a Ancient Red Dragon or Unicorn. That's pretty weird.

We've had that discussion before. :smalltongue:

ahenobarbi

2014-02-18, 07:52 AM

Not without the appropriate knowledge skill, it's 10 + HD, which exceeds an untrained check. Identification requires something to identify, that in turn means confrontation. With nothing to go on a thing can not be identified.

So like... wizard has no idea when you ask him "hey, what's a goblin" (because no confrontation) but the instant he actually meets one he learns all about the species?

Story

2014-02-18, 08:04 AM

There are no retries so your assertion that knowledge of the species is all that is required is incorrect.

Technically, there are ways to retry a knowledge check. Plus, I believe you can retry it for free if you gain another skill point.

ryu

2014-02-18, 08:49 AM

No, because getting a knowledge check to a specific number is using player knowledge to meta game.

The DM determines what a character knows based on the level of success of the check, not the player. There are no retries so your assertion that knowledge of the species is all that is required is incorrect.

It's no specific number. It's simply silly high because int based skill on a class where pumping int is the most important thing. Also int is skill points. Also also every knowledge is a class skill. Also also also we have buffs for skills which explicitly let you retry failed checks. Considering hitting the low fifties is easy to the point of being expected? Any wizard should have all they need.

Segev

2014-02-18, 09:51 AM

Yeah, sorry, if you want to claim that a moderately intelligent Sorcerer with the Polymorph line of spells can't fathom the notion of going and researching the most exotic and powerful monsters he can find (let alone what a wizard, whose bread and butter is research and study, could do), I'm not sure where you're coming from.

Do you not buy and read monster manuals to find monsters for various purposes?

Sure, books might be rarer. But the concept of, "Hey, I can turn into anything I can think of; I will go and find out what others have discovered exists to get more ideas!" is not really all that far-fetched.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 12:50 PM

So like... wizard has no idea when you ask him "hey, what's a goblin" (because no confrontation) but the instant he actually meets one he learns all about the species?

Not at all. Common knowledge is well within the purview of an untrained check. What is common knowledge however is entirely within the control of the DM.

I mentioned that a valid source of knowledge is hearing about said creature (ie old man describes the terrible monster of bran bog, and our heroes deduce its nature)

Lastly, scry as a means of gathering information without a target isn't possible.

Segev you're describing player knowledge. Even if we assume I have read every monster ever created by WotC, my character has not.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 12:57 PM

Technically, there are ways to retry a knowledge check. Plus, I believe you can retry it for free if you gain another skill point.

I think it ought to be allowed anytime your knowledge skill increases, or anytime you can do research on the topic. But I don't see that in the PHB, is it in the rules compendium?

bekeleven

2014-02-18, 01:00 PM

Not at all. Common knowledge is well within the purview of an untrained check. What is common knowledge however is entirely within the control of the DM.Actually, common knowledge is defined as DC 10 or lower (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/knowledge.htm), which leads to a ton of issues:

No creature in the Monster Manual can be identified, including your own species, farm animals, dogs, etc. unless you are trained. Although, since everything rounds down, you can identify creatures with fractional HD like cats or bats.
The only other things that can be (arguably) identified are humans (which have no MM entry and ambiguous HD rules).
You can also identify creatures without HD. This includes intelligent objects and perhaps nothing else. So yes, you can't tell what a dog is, but the empathic cudgel is A-OK.

This is in addition to issues like dragons becoming harder to identify when they grow, or adventurers' races becoming less clear as they level.

Drachasor

2014-02-18, 01:02 PM

Segev you're describing player knowledge. Even if we assume I have read every monster ever created by WotC, my character has not.

No, he was making an analogy. If you as a player in a GAME bother looking up monsters for a class ability, then there's even more reason that the character would want to use a library or other resources to do the same thing. That includes using spells (and while Scrying might not work without a specific target, Contact Other Plane and other spells certainly can work and even provide you with a target).

This is in addition to issues like dragons becoming harder to identify when they grow, or adventurers' races becoming less clear as they level.

Maybe that's how the game should actually work though.

Talya

2014-02-18, 01:05 PM

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 01:11 PM

Actually, common knowledge is defined as DC 10 or lower (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/knowledge.htm), which leads to a ton of issues:

No creature in the Monster Manual can be identified, including your own species, farm animals, dogs, etc. unless you are trained. Although, since everything rounds down, you can identify creatures with fractional HD like cats or bats.
The only other things that can be (arguably) identified are humans (which have no MM entry and ambiguous HD rules).
You can also identify creatures without HD. This includes intelligent objects and perhaps nothing else. So yes, you can't tell what a dog is, but the empathic cudgel is A-OK.

This is in addition to issues like dragons becoming harder to identify when they grow, or adventurers' races becoming less clear as they level.

I don't see that as a problem. How many people have more than common knowledge about a cat or dog?

Further, knowledge checks, and skill checks in general, are never required for everyday easy tasks. If there were no cats in your campaign world, then identifying one would indeed require special training. If however, you just saw a cat, you know what they are, no check is required.

@drachasor, if your character wants to look for naturalistic texts, that's all well and good, but... I don't see any guarantees a character will find any useful information. If you want to research magical beasts (having never encountered one) the character is more likely to encounter myth and fanciful conjecture rather than fact. I wouldn't call that familiarity by a long shot.

Drachasor

2014-02-18, 01:11 PM

Alter Self does not break the game. Is it incredibly versatile? Yes. Does it do too much for a level 2 spell? Probably, yes. It does not break the game, however.

If I have one complaint about Pathfinder, it's how they castrated the entire polymorph line of spells. Instead of changing what was broken, they just nerfed it into uselessness. Meanwhile, they left the real game-breaking stuff pretty much alone. (Not that I ever really had a problem with 3rd edition spellcasting anyway...)

Yes, PF has a bad habit of taking fun things and making them not-fun for "balance." Rather than trying to find a way to preserve the fun part, which is the most important bit.

With Polymorph it is also unclear exactly what type-related stuff you lose. Which is another PF problem, they tend to make new rules that are a bit vague.

I don't see that as a problem. How many people have more than common knowledge about a cat or dog?

Further, knowledge checks, and skill checks in general, are never required for everyday easy tasks. If there were no cats in your campaign world, then identifying one would indeed require special training. If however, you just saw a cat, you know what they are, no check is required.

I think most people know more than one bit of useful information about many animals, including ones they've never seen. Especially famous animals.

On the other hand, a DC 10 or 11 check to ID an animal not native to your planet does NOT make sense. Nor does a DC 10 or 11 check to ID an extremely obscure animal.

@drachasor, if your character wants to look for naturalistic texts, that's all well and good, but... I don't see any guarantees a character will find any useful information. If you want to research magical beasts (having never encountered one) the character is more likely to encounter myth and fanciful conjecture rather than fact. I wouldn't call that familiarity by a long shot.

What kind of incompetent people live in your campaign worlds where texts on magical beasts and other common enough creatures aren't remotely accurate? Outside of texts based just on hearsay, that doesn't really make any sense. Especially when you were advising talking to people -- so some old man that encountered it once is a more valid source of information than a retired adventurer or someone that studied creatures and wrote a book? What?

Andezzar

2014-02-18, 01:16 PM

I don't see that as a problem. How many people have more than common knowledge about a cat or dog?The problem is that people without at least one rank in knowledge nature can identify that furry creature as a cat (DC 10.5 rounded to 10) but cannot identify that other furry creature as a dog (DC 11) or horse (DC 13) or donkey (DC 12) or most other commonly domesticated animals.

Further, knowledge checks, and skill checks in general, are never required for everyday easy tasks. If there were no cats in your campaign world, then identifying one would indeed require special training. If however, you just saw a cat, you know what they are, no check is required.Where do you get that? Common knowledge may be common but it is not automatic.

lunar2

2014-02-18, 01:17 PM

I don't see that as a problem. How many people have more than common knowledge about a cat or dog?

Further, knowledge checks, and skill checks in general, are never required for everyday easy tasks. If there were no cats in your campaign world, then identifying one would indeed require special training. If however, you just saw a cat, you know what they are, no check is required.

no, by raw, you can't identify a dog at all without at least one rank in knowledge nature. that is a task with a preset DC, and any waiving of that check is a houserule, not RAW. and a cat also has a DC, although most people can take 10 on it (funny that orcs and half orcs actually have to roll to know what a cat is).

Drachasor

2014-02-18, 01:21 PM

no, by raw, you can't identify a dog at all without at least one rank in knowledge nature. that is a task with a preset DC, and any waiving of that check is a houserule, not RAW. and a cat also has a DC, although most people can take 10 on it (funny that orcs and half orcs actually have to roll to know what a cat is).

To be precise, you couldn't tell the difference between dog and wolf. Possibly not between a dog and a jaguar.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 01:23 PM

The problem is that people without at least one rank in knowledge nature can identify that furry creature as a cat (DC 10.5 rounded to 10) but cannot identify that other furry creature as a dog (DC 11) or horse (DC 13) or donkey (DC 12) or most other commonly domesticated animals.

Where do you get that? Common knowledge may be common but it is not automatic.

Yeah and you don't need to make a knowledge check on anything you've actually seen (the wording of the DC is that it is only in general)

I get the pass on easy tasks from that chapter in the PHB.

"Performing routine tasks in normal situations is generally so easy that no check is required."

"You're always welcome to assume that your character is familiar with - even good at, as far as everyday tasks go - many skills beyond those for which you actually gain ranks."

That looks like a solid pass on knowing things your character is familiar with because they've seen it first hand.

Rubik

2014-02-18, 01:29 PM

To be precise, you couldn't tell the difference between dog and wolf. Possibly not between a dog and a jaguar.Or between a dog and a dragon.

lunar2

2014-02-18, 01:35 PM

Yeah and you don't need to make a knowledge check on anything you've actually seen (the wording of the DC is that it is only in general)

I get the pass on easy tasks from that chapter in the PHB.

"Performing routine tasks in normal situations is generally so easy that no check is required."

"You're always welcome to assume that your character is familiar with - even good at, as far as everyday tasks go - many skills beyond those for which you actually gain ranks."

That looks like a solid pass on knowing things your character is familiar with because they've seen it first hand.

but anything with a set DC that you can't even attempt to hit without a rank in the skill is obviously not one of those routine tasks in normal situations. and you do still need to identify creatures you see. unless someone with a rank in knowledge tells you it's a dog, or you roll the knowledge yourself at some point, you don't know it's a dog. at some point you had to identify it as a dog, which you can't do on your own without a rank in knowledge nature.

Andezzar

2014-02-18, 01:42 PM

"Performing routine tasks in normal situations is generally so easy that no check is required."Generally this is true but identifying a creature is an explicit exception which is DC 10+HD of the creature.

"You're always welcome to assume that your character is familiar with - even good at, as far as everyday tasks go - many skills beyond those for which you actually gain ranks."This does not apply at all. Identifying creatures is the purview of various knowledge skills, so not part of "beyond those for which you actually gain ranks.

Urpriest

2014-02-18, 02:01 PM

Regardless, you're forgetting that the rules inform you of how the world works, especially when it comes to magic. Not knowing how polymorphing works from real-world experience, you have to look at how the rules say it works, then find a description that fits that behavior. Coming at it with preconceptions is silly.

The rules say that you don't need familiarity for Polymorph. Note that you don't need familiarity for the Summon Monster line either. This suggests that any fluff for either spell must give the caster the information sought, rather than demanding it from them.

It's not hard to come up with fluff that works for this, you've probably already thought of it and then dismissed it because it didn't fit your preconceptions. For example, these spells could work via the caster asking for a form or summoned minion with particular properties, the spell then finds such a creature if one exists, or suggests something lesser if one doesn't. This would synch up well with the general sense in D&D that creatures represent something akin to Platonic forms, which explains why most spells can't give you access to templated creatures. A Wizard could attempt to polymorph into something with a bunch of tentacles, and the spell would select a Grell as the preferred form even if the Wizard had never heard of a Grell, simply because it is the closest Platonic form with lots of tentacles.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 02:50 PM

Generally this is true but identifying a creature is an explicit exception which is DC 10+HD of the creature.

This does not apply at all. Identifying creatures is the purview of various knowledge skills, so not part of "beyond those for which you actually gain ranks.

It says that dc is generally the case. That makes it an exception to the exception.

Regardless, you're forgetting that the rules inform you of how the world works, especially when it comes to magic. Not knowing how polymorphing works from real-world experience, you have to look at how the rules say it works, then find a description that fits that behavior. Coming at it with preconceptions is silly.

The rules say that you don't need familiarity for Polymorph. Note that you don't need familiarity for the Summon Monster line either. This suggests that any fluff for either spell must give the caster the information sought, rather than demanding it from them.

It's not hard to come up with fluff that works for this, you've probably already thought of it and then dismissed it because it didn't fit your preconceptions. For example, these spells could work via the caster asking for a form or summoned minion with particular properties, the spell then finds such a creature if one exists, or suggests something lesser if one doesn't. This would synch up well with the general sense in D&D that creatures represent something akin to Platonic forms, which explains why most spells can't give you access to templated creatures. A Wizard could attempt to polymorph into something with a bunch of tentacles, and the spell would select a Grell as the preferred form even if the Wizard had never heard of a Grell, simply because it is the closest Platonic form with lots of tentacles.

I agree that we should follow the rules. But the spell rules say nothing about how to know if a character knows a creature exists. Absent those rules a character would know of the creatures they have encountered in person or studied in detail. Encounters are the purview of the DM and so is revelation of what they learn via study.

Urpriest

2014-02-18, 02:59 PM

I agree that we should follow the rules. But the spell rules say nothing about how to know if a character knows a creature exists. Absent those rules a character would know of the creatures they have encountered in person or studied in detail. Encounters are the purview of the DM and so is revelation of what they learn via study.

See, my post began by repeating the point that this is irrelevant for Polymorph, Alter Self, and the Summon spells. The rules clearly show which abilities require the character to know if the creature exists, because those abilities (Wild Shape, for example) explicitly give that requirement.

Basically, you are assuming that the spells require you to know that the creature exists, because you're presupposing how the spells work. But you don't know how the spells work, and nothing in the spells say you need to know the creature exists.

zionpopsickle

2014-02-18, 04:37 PM

Vogonjeltz, by your reasoning players in a D&D game cannot have any agency because the only knowledge and therefore the only information possible for them to use to make choices is entirely at the purview of the DM. You are imposing the omniscience problem in that if someone is the arbiter of all knowledge then any other being in the system inherently lacks free will because they cannot do anything outside the knowledge of this omniscient presence.

Frankly, in your zealousness to slay the dragon of the polymorph line you have destroyed D&D as a cooperative storytelling game and made it into railroad tycoon DM edition.

ddude987

2014-02-18, 06:18 PM

Or between a dog and a dragon.

But wouldn't the DC to get a dog be 10? And with no ranks, you can still get a 10 as your maximum on a knowledge check RAW. You can see a dragon, and although you fail to identify it with a 10, you do not identify it as a dog with your 10 and therefore can tell the difference between a dog and a dragon.

Rubik

2014-02-18, 06:24 PM

But wouldn't the DC to get a dog be 10? And with no ranks, you can still get a 10 as your maximum on a knowledge check RAW. You can see a dragon, and although you fail to identify it with a 10, you do not identify it as a dog with your 10 and therefore can tell the difference between a dog and a dragon.Dogs are 1 HD animals, meaning that the DC to identify one is 11. So no, you can't tell the difference between the two unless you have the requisite Knowledge ranks.

ddude987

2014-02-18, 06:25 PM

Dogs are 1 HD animals, meaning that the DC to identify one is 11. So no, you can't tell the difference between the two unless you have the requisite Knowledge ranks.

for some reason I thought it was 10 + CR. Oops.

Silva Stormrage

2014-02-18, 07:04 PM

for some reason I thought it was 10 + CR. Oops.

Thats for pathfinder I believe.

TuggyNE

2014-02-18, 08:57 PM

Thats for pathfinder I believe.

And MMIV/MMV too I think. It usually works a little better practically than 10 + HD, but at the cost of making any sort of actual logical sense; it also does not solve all the problems, just makes them slightly less bad. (A great wyrm red is still harder to identify as a dragon at all than a young red is to identify as a [fire] dragon that casts spells and has a breath weapon.)

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-18, 11:34 PM

See, my post began by repeating the point that this is irrelevant for Polymorph, Alter Self, and the Summon spells. The rules clearly show which abilities require the character to know if the creature exists, because those abilities (Wild Shape, for example) explicitly give that requirement.

Basically, you are assuming that the spells require you to know that the creature exists, because you're presupposing how the spells work. But you don't know how the spells work, and nothing in the spells say you need to know the creature exists.

Actually I am just saying it makes no sense to claim one can transform themselves (deliberately) into a specific creature if they don't even know about said creature.

Vogonjeltz, by your reasoning players in a D&D game cannot have any agency because the only knowledge and therefore the only information possible for them to use to make choices is entirely at the purview of the DM. You are imposing the omniscience problem in that if someone is the arbiter of all knowledge then any other being in the system inherently lacks free will because they cannot do anything outside the knowledge of this omniscient presence.

Frankly, in your zealousness to slay the dragon of the polymorph line you have destroyed D&D as a cooperative storytelling game and made it into railroad tycoon DM edition.

Where did you get the idea that there is such a thing as agency in D&D?

The DM is by the rules exactly that arbiter. It's not a question of what choices a player has, but how they react. Those reactions are always bounded by the circumstances that each DM presents.

Deophaun

2014-02-18, 11:47 PM

And MMIV/MMV too I think. It usually works a little better practically than 10 + HD, but at the cost of making any sort of actual logical sense; it also does not solve all the problems, just makes them slightly less bad. (A great wyrm red is still harder to identify as a dragon at all than a young red is to identify as a [fire] dragon that casts spells and has a breath weapon.)
I think the only way you could eliminate such oddness is to give each monster its own Knowledge DC, instead of trying to cram everything into the 10+HD/CR/Whatever formula

zionpopsickle

2014-02-19, 12:47 AM

Where did you get the idea that there is such a thing as agency in D&D?

The DM is by the rules exactly that arbiter. It's not a question of what choices a player has, but how they react. Those reactions are always bounded by the circumstances that each DM presents.

Wow, just wow... this has to be one of the most misinformed opinions I have heard about D&D in a long time.

Player agency is at the core of good DMing. The players have to be allowed to make choices from internal decision making processes that the DM is not in control of otherwise there is literally no point in playing. If the players are not allowed to actually influence the game because the DM decides everything you aren't playing D&D, you are listening to the DM tell a story.

Frankly, I get the idea that you don't actually know what agency means nor are you familiar enough with epistomology to understand how your ideas are flawed. Most people are pretty poor with epistomology because it is an exceedingly niche subject so its not like you are alone. But the fact that you so blatantly state what you did just astounds me.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 01:49 AM

Wow, just wow... this has to be one of the most misinformed opinions I have heard about D&D in a long time.

Player agency is at the core of good DMing. The players have to be allowed to make choices from internal decision making processes that the DM is not in control of otherwise there is literally no point in playing. If the players are not allowed to actually influence the game because the DM decides everything you aren't playing D&D, you are listening to the DM tell a story.

Frankly, I get the idea that you don't actually know what agency means nor are you familiar enough with epistomology to understand how your ideas are flawed. Most people are pretty poor with epistomology because it is an exceedingly niche subject so its not like you are alone. But the fact that you so blatantly state what you did just astounds me.

My point was that agency is an illusion. (Which had been proven empirically, for more see: Libet et al)

This wasn't an opinion on DMing style, it was a comment on things that are required within the rule set. If you were interested in trying to convince me (instead of wrongfully castigating me) perhaps it would be best to apply reason instead of base emotion attacks.

Kalaska'Agathas

2014-02-19, 02:16 AM

Actually I am just saying it makes no sense to claim one can transform themselves (deliberately) into a specific creature if they don't even know about said creature.

It may not make sense, but that's RAW for you. Some polymorph-esque abilities require familiarity, and in such cases it is not possible to deliberately transform into a creature unknown to the caster. However, not all such abilities require familiarity, and therefore the caster is able to transform without knowing anything about the creature, up to and including whether or not it exists. It may be that there is an arcane, knowable mechanism by which casters are able to do this seemingly impossible feat - it may be an ineffable mystery of the art of magic. In any case, how it is explained is a fluff question; by RAW, it is an capacity shared by those with access to the ability in question.

It is, as they say, magic. Magic which is not bound by the normal terms of causality or sense, good or otherwise.

My point was that agency is an illusion. (Which had been proven empirically, for more see: Libet et al)

There is considerable contention with regard to the neuroscience of free will, both within the scientific community and philosophy. To claim it is proven (empirically or otherwise) is bad science.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 02:23 AM

It may not make sense, but that's RAW for you. Some polymorph-esque abilities require familiarity, and in such cases it is not possible to deliberately transform into a creature unknown to the caster. However, not all such abilities require familiarity, and therefore the caster is able to transform without knowing anything about the creature, up to and including whether or not it exists. It may be that there is an arcane, knowable mechanism by which casters are able to do this seemingly impossible feat - it may be an ineffable mystery of the art of magic. In any case, how it is explained is a fluff question; by RAW, it is an capacity shared by those with access to the ability in question.

It is, as they say, magic. Magic which is not bound by the normal terms of causality or sense, good or otherwise.

There is considerable contention with regard to the neuroscience of free will, both within the scientific community and philosophy. To claim it is proven (empirically or otherwise) is bad science.

To the first point, how does one become something they don't know they can become? Sounds like the only way is meta knowledge.

Second point, contention backed up by what? Personal revulsion for the concept of not being in control is not evidence.

Drachasor

2014-02-19, 02:25 AM

My point was that agency is an illusion. (Which had been proven empirically, for more see: Libet et al)

Eh, are you saying coercion doesn't exist either?

Andezzar

2014-02-19, 02:27 AM

To the first point, how does one become something they don't know they can become? Sounds like the only way is meta knowledge. It's magic. Other spells do the same thing. The purpose of some spells is even to give the caster knowledge he does not possess. So where is the problem?

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 02:29 AM

Eh, are you saying coercion doesn't exist either?

No, I am saying that the player has no real control over the universe or the set of circumstances they are presented with.

In a greater sense they also don't have control over their initial reactions to the circumstances they do encounter.

This effects what the character knows within any given game.

@andezzar this spell doesn't say it grants knowledge. So presumably the Mage is only going to be using it to turn into something they know exists. If the character has never seen a cat, he can't become a cat.

Rubik

2014-02-19, 02:29 AM

It's magic. Other spells do the same thing. The purpose of some spells is even to give the caster knowledge he does not possess. So where is the problem?It's a transmutation spell. It's probably transmuting the caster's brainwaves along with everything else.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 02:33 AM

It's a transmutation spell. It's probably transmuting the caster's brainwaves along with everything else.

Don't they explicitly retain their own mind?

Rubik

2014-02-19, 02:35 AM

Don't they explicitly retain their own mind?Yes, but that doesn't mean the spell doesn't give them information -- ergo, changing a brainwave or two.

bekeleven

2014-02-19, 02:36 AM

To the first point, how does one become something they don't know they can become? Sounds like the only way is meta knowledge.Did you quote ur priest without reading him?

Drachasor

2014-02-19, 02:45 AM

No, I am saying that the player has no real control over the universe or the set of circumstances they are presented with.

In a greater sense they also don't have control over their initial reactions to the circumstances they do encounter.

This effects what the character knows within any given game.

If there's no player agency, then how can there be coersion in your mind?

The player certainly has a measure of control over the fantasy universe -- namely through their character. The rules are meant to provide a structure through which that control can be understood and exercised. The DM has the option of making up inconsistent rules that don't mesh with the existing ones in order to stop the player from doing things -- but that's pretty coersive. It also leads to a less than satisfying game if the DM goes around breaking immersion like that. Sure, the DM can do it via Rule 0, but the players can then leave via Rule -1.

It's incredibly absurd to propose a character can ID creatures when he sees them, but can't know anything about them when they aren't in view. Any DM that runs the game like that is being stupid.

Regarding initial reactions, it is unclear whether you are talking about the player having control over himself or over his character.

Andezzar

2014-02-19, 02:52 AM

@andezzar this spell doesn't say it grants knowledge. So presumably the Mage is only going to be using it to turn into something they know exists. If the character has never seen a cat, he can't become a cat.I get, what you are trying to say, but that contradicts the rules. The spells have explicit restrictions into what kind of creature the the target can be turned into. Knowledge of such a creature is not among them. Adding additional restrictions is a houserule.

As to how that works, I'll say it again It's Magic. (http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/700674603_mAVrc-L.jpg) We don't know why magic works, the rules just tell us how it does. Since the rules say (in respect to shapechange) that the caster can "assume the form of any single nonunique creature (of any type) from Fine to Colossal size" it is just that: any such creature, not any such creature the character is familiar with.
Alter Self and Polymorph don't require knowledge either, so they to allow any applicable creature regardless of character knowledge.

Talakeal

2014-02-19, 03:07 AM

It may not make sense, but that's RAW for you. Some polymorph-esque abilities require familiarity, and in such cases it is not possible to deliberately transform into a creature unknown to the caster. However, not all such abilities require familiarity, and therefore the caster is able to transform without knowing anything about the creature, up to and including whether or not it exists. It may be that there is an arcane, knowable mechanism by which casters are able to do this seemingly impossible feat - it may be an ineffable mystery of the art of magic. In any case, how it is explained is a fluff question; by RAW, it is an capacity shared by those with access to the ability in question.

It is, as they say, magic. Magic which is not bound by the normal terms of causality or sense, good or otherwise.

There is considerable contention with regard to the neuroscience of free will, both within the scientific community and philosophy. To claim it is proven (empirically or otherwise) is bad science.

It is still acting on ooc knowledge though. Reading the adventure notes and then finding every secret door is still raw legal, as is shooting an aoe spell at a hidden creature your character doesn't know is there or reading a chemistry book and then mixing chemicals to make gunpowder.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 03:18 AM

Yes, but that doesn't mean the spell doesn't give them information -- ergo, changing a brainwave or two.

I suppose I don't differentiate between brain waves and the mind because the game makes no distinction there (that I'm aware of).

Did you quote ur priest without reading him?

His reasoning didn't hold water. He said the spell doesn't have explicit restrictions on becoming something the caster has never even imagined and so therefore they can.

I say that doesn't resolve the underlying question, it's just hand waving.

If there's no player agency, then how can there be coersion in your mind?

The player certainly has a measure of control over the fantasy universe -- namely through their character. The rules are meant to provide a structure through which that control can be understood and exercised. The DM has the option of making up inconsistent rules that don't mesh with the existing ones in order to stop the player from doing things -- but that's pretty coersive. It also leads to a less than satisfying game if the DM goes around breaking immersion like that. Sure, the DM can do it via Rule 0, but the players can then leave via Rule -1.

It's incredibly absurd to propose a character can ID creatures when he sees them, but can't know anything about them when they aren't in view. Any DM that runs the game like that is being stupid.

Regarding initial reactions, it is unclear whether you are talking about the player having control over himself or over his character.

Coercion only requires the feeling of duress, that a player may have no actual choice has no bearing on their ability to feel. As a corollary, people feel real emotion regarding the plight of fictional characters (horror movies provide an obvious example here).

My point about the DM ultimately controlling access to information is, when your character goes to town it is the DM who has structured what is there and what can be found there. No amount of searching will get information on the abilities of say, mummies, if nobody in town has experience with them.

Is it rail roading for the DM to have the players encounter undead, but no constructs too?

If the player never encounters a dragon, and has never read about them, how do they justify making the check?

I get, what you are trying to say, but that contradicts the rules. The spells have explicit restrictions into what kind of creature the the target can be turned into. Knowledge of such a creature is not among them. Adding additional restrictions is a houserule.

As to how that works, I'll say it again It's Magic. (http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/700674603_mAVrc-L.jpg) We don't know why magic works, the rules just tell us how it does. Since the rules say (in respect to shapechange) that the caster can "assume the form of any single nonunique creature (of any type) from Fine to Colossal size" it is just that: any such creature, not any such creature the character is familiar with.
Alter Self and Polymorph don't require knowledge either, so they to allow any applicable creature regardless of character knowledge.

The spells implicit restriction is the ability of the caster to choose a form. If the player has never heard of a choker it's impossible for them to choose that form. Why is the character not knowing about the chokers existence any different?

Also we do know why magic in D&D works, it's described in the PHB as the language of the universe.

bekeleven

2014-02-19, 03:25 AM

His reasoning didn't hold water. He said the spell doesn't have explicit restrictions on becoming something the caster has never even imagined and so therefore they can.

I say that doesn't resolve the underlying question, it's just hand waving.

For example, these spells could work via the caster asking for a form or summoned minion with particular properties, the spell then finds such a creature if one exists, or suggests something lesser if one doesn't. This would synch up well with the general sense in D&D that creatures represent something akin to Platonic forms, which explains why most spells can't give you access to templated creatures. A Wizard could attempt to polymorph into something with a bunch of tentacles, and the spell would select a Grell as the preferred form even if the Wizard had never heard of a Grell, simply because it is the closest Platonic form with lots of tentacles.

Also we do know why magic in D&D works, it's described in the PHB as the language of the universe.

At least you're consistent with what constitutes an explanation and what's just hand-waving.

Kalaska'Agathas

2014-02-19, 03:30 AM

To the first point, how does one become something they don't know they can become? Sounds like the only way is meta knowledge.

Metaknowledge is one possibility. Magic is another. And since it is an application of magic which we are discussing, I propose the latter solution is more probable. It doesn't have to make sense under the normal regime of sensibility, because we are explicitly dealing with a system which exists to "make the laws of [reality] shut up and sit down."

Second point, contention backed up by what? Personal revulsion for the concept of not being in control is not evidence.

My personal feelings on the matter are irrelevant. The contention in the Scientific and Philosophic communities exists on several grounds - ranging from the more philosophical - disagreements with regards to first principles, for example - to issues with experimental design, issues of data analysis (the data being portrayed as saying something it does not, according to one side or the other), etc. While Libet's work was groundbreaking, consensus has not been reached on the validity of his claims (and any 'proofs' produced by his work (again, issues of fundamental disagreement (or lack of agreement) on first principles)). It's not like Boyle's Law, or General Relativity, or the Higgs Mechanism. There is still disagreement within the literature, between the various members of the fields in question - the Answer (if there is one) has not been found. To claim otherwise is unsound.

It is still acting on ooc knowledge though. Reading the adventure notes and then finding every secret door is still raw legal, as is shooting an aoe spell at a hidden creature your character doesn't know is there or reading a chemistry book and then mixing chemicals to make gunpowder.

This is not analogous. Reading the adventure notes to find every secret door is an OOC action, and therefore not under the purview of the rules (except maybe in the broader "Rules of the Game, or, How Not To Be A Jerk and Have Fun With Dice" sense). The ability gives the character the specific ability to become a different creature with certain restrictions. Since whether or not the character knows of the creature is not (in the applicable cases) one of these restrictions, the character is able to become a different creature (of the player's choosing) without knowing anything about the creature, up to and including whether or not it exists.

Maybe that's where the Owlbear comes from. It blinked into existence one morning, when an enterprising young apprentice was practicing transmutation by blindly casting Polymorph.

Edit:

His reasoning didn't hold water. He said the spell doesn't have explicit restrictions on becoming something the caster has never even imagined and so therefore they can.

I say that doesn't resolve the underlying question, it's just hand waving.

The spell says a character may perform action x under restrictions a, b, and c. You continue to insist that they must also act under restriction d. This is not RAW. What about this is unclear, or hand waving?

Drachasor

2014-02-19, 03:41 AM

Coercion only requires the feeling of duress, that a player may have no actual choice has no bearing on their ability to feel. As a corollary, people feel real emotion regarding the plight of fictional characters (horror movies provide an obvious example here).

That's NOT what coercion means. It's using power or force to gain compliance. It's not the "feeling of duress." How you feel about it has nothing to do with it.

My point about the DM ultimately controlling access to information is, when your character goes to town it is the DM who has structured what is there and what can be found there. No amount of searching will get information on the abilities of say, mummies, if nobody in town has experience with them.

Is it rail roading for the DM to have the players encounter undead, but no constructs too?

If the player never encounters a dragon, and has never read about them, how do they justify making the check?

Because he has the KNOWLEDGE skill, it is implied he has studied such things. If they exist in the world, then the knowledge skill gives him a chance to know about it. That's how the skill works unless you use an outright bizarre interpretation of the rules that makes no sense just to enforce limitations on player behaviour.

Is it railroading for a DM to decide the player doesn't know about something that exists despite the rules indicating they should know? Yes, it is.

Just because the DM can abuse his authority doesn't make it ok or sensible.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 03:49 AM

Metaknowledge is one possibility. Magic is another. And since it is an application of magic which we are discussing, I propose the latter solution is more probable. It doesn't have to make sense under the normal regime of sensibility, because we are explicitly dealing with a system which exists to "make the laws of [reality] shut up and sit down."

How pray tell is magic circumventing the requirement? Absent player knowledge there is neither a reason to polymorph into creature N, nor an understanding of the creatures capabilities.

My personal feelings on the matter are irrelevant. The contention in the Scientific and Philosophic communities exists on several grounds - ranging from the more philosophical - disagreements with regards to first principles, for example - to issues with experimental design, issues of data analysis (the data being portrayed as saying something it does not, according to one side or the other), etc. While Libet's work was groundbreaking, consensus has not been reached on the validity of his claims (and any 'proofs' produced by his work (again, issues of fundamental disagreement (or lack of agreement) on first principles)). It's not like Boyle's Law, or General Relativity, or the Higgs Mechanism. There is still disagreement within the literature, between the various members of the fields in question - the Answer (if there is one) has not been found. To claim otherwise is unsound.

That was referencing the claim to this being a disputed topic, not your personal feelings. There's no real dispute, merely a claim that the established neuroscience has not completely ruled out the possibility of certain concepts of free will. The problem with this, is the latter view doesn't have actual evidence to back it up.

This is not analogous. Reading the adventure notes to find every secret door is an OOC action, and therefore not under the purview of the rules (except maybe in the broader "Rules of the Game, or, How Not To Be A Jerk and Have Fun With Dice" sense). The ability gives the character the specific ability to become a different creature with certain restrictions. Since whether or not the character knows of the creature is not (in the applicable cases) one of these restrictions, the character is able to become a different creature (of the player's choosing) without knowing anything about the creature, up to and including whether or not it exists.

Maybe that's where the Owlbear comes from. It blinked into existence one morning, when an enterprising young apprentice was practicing transmutation by blindly casting Polymorph.

Edit:

The spell says a character may perform action x under restrictions a, b, and c. You continue to insist that they must also act under restriction d. This is not RAW. What about this is unclear, or hand waving?

I'm only insisting that there is no possibility of a player casting polymorph and choosing to become a creature they have no conception of. By that token, if the player picks a creature their character necessarily has no conception of, it is meta gaming.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 03:54 AM

That's NOT what coercion means. It's using power or force to gain compliance. It's not the "feeling of duress." How you feel about it has nothing to do with it.

Because he has the KNOWLEDGE skill, it is implied he has studied such things. If they exist in the world, then the knowledge skill gives him a chance to know about it. That's how the skill works unless you use an outright bizarre interpretation of the rules that makes no sense just to enforce limitations on player behaviour.

Is it railroading for a DM to decide the player doesn't know about something that exists despite the rules indicating they should know? Yes, it is.

Just because the DM can abuse his authority doesn't make it ok or sensible.

Compliance with coercion requires the subject to actual be under duress. If you aren't feeling any duress, you aren't being coerced. These things go hand in hand.

The rules don't indicate anything about what a player should know, that is entirely DM discretion, as the DM controls the DCs of every skill check.

Suggested skill checks are not absolutes.

Drachasor

2014-02-19, 04:06 AM

Compliance with coercion requires the subject to actual be under duress. If you aren't feeling any duress, you aren't being coerced. These things go hand in hand.

False equivalency. Being aware of the coercion is not necessary. It can be a subtle, or simple ignorance could conceal it. For instance, a player that doesn't really know the rules might not notice the DM pulling strings to force things to go in a particular direction and undermine player choices. That doesn't make what the DM is doing less coercive.

The rules don't indicate anything about what a player should know, that is entirely DM discretion, as the DM controls the DCs of every skill check.

Suggested skill checks are not absolutes.

The rules specify the difficulty. They aren't suggestions. Changing them is houseruling.

Andezzar

2014-02-19, 04:47 AM

How pray tell is magic circumventing the requirement? Absent player knowledge there is neither a reason to polymorph into creature N, nor an understanding of the creatures capabilities.By giving the caster a list of applicable forms. This list would of course only be limited by the restrictions mentioned in the respective spells, not by character knowledge. Now you will probably say that the spell's description does not mention such a list, but you cannot satisfy the conditions of the spell unless this list exists.
This list could even be included in the spell book entry. After all those spells require 2, 4 and 9 pages in a spell book. You can write down quite a few names of creatures on those pages.

I'm only insisting that there is no possibility of a player casting polymorph and choosing to become a creature they have no conception of. By that token, if the player picks a creature their character necessarily has no conception of, it is meta gaming.But how can the DM decide which creatures the caster cannot have knowledge of, besides arbitrarily deciding it? Guess what, that's what knowledge checks are for. A wizard with maxed out knowledge skills and/or other abilities that boost such checks should not be unable to have knowledge of any conceivable creature.

Melcar

2014-02-19, 04:52 AM

What kind of incompetent people live in your campaign worlds where texts on magical beasts and other common enough creatures aren't remotely accurate? Outside of texts based just on hearsay, that doesn't really make any sense. Especially when you were advising talking to people -- so some old man that encountered it once is a more valid source of information than a retired adventurer or someone that studied creatures and wrote a book? What?

Well think about how wrong medicine was during the dark ages. Or astrology for that matter. The same could very well be true for a fantasy middle age setting. They might believe a lot of odd or stupid things about creatures. Who says that anyone have actually conducted "true" scientific research of these extraplannar creatures, which must be called extreme rare/exotic at best. I would say that even sages of that particular subject would not automatically know the entire MM series or fiend folio. And those who have, there is no security that these "correct text books will reach all corners of the world.

So when researching exotic, powerful extraplannar creatures I would say that it would indeed be a touch subject which should be read with critical eyes. And I would also say that only the most well stocked, specialized libraries would have comprehencive knowledge of exotic/extraplannar creature.

Max Caysey

2014-02-19, 05:11 AM

It may not make sense, but that's RAW for you. Some polymorph-esque abilities require familiarity, and in such cases it is not possible to deliberately transform into a creature unknown to the caster. However, not all such abilities require familiarity, and therefore the caster is able to transform without knowing anything about the creature, up to and including whether or not it exists. It may be that there is an arcane, knowable mechanism by which casters are able to do this seemingly impossible feat - it may be an ineffable mystery of the art of magic. In any case, how it is explained is a fluff question; by RAW, it is an capacity shared by those with access to the ability in question.

If we assume that, then a player should say to his DM: "I want to become something strong or fast or with flight.

I simply cant see how one can say I want to become a Chronotyryn if the character does not know about it. (Just like the player will never ask this if he does not know about it.)

Drachasor

2014-02-19, 05:22 AM

Well think about how wrong medicine was during the dark ages. Or astrology for that matter. The same could very well be true for a fantasy middle age setting. They might believe a lot of odd or stupid things about creatures. Who says that anyone have actually conducted "true" scientific research of these extraplannar creatures, which must be called extreme rare/exotic at best. I would say that even sages of that particular subject would not automatically know the entire MM series or fiend folio. And those who have, there is no security that these "correct text books will reach all corners of the world.

So when researching exotic, powerful extraplannar creatures I would say that it would indeed be a touch subject which should be read with critical eyes. And I would also say that only the most well stocked, specialized libraries would have comprehencive knowledge of exotic/extraplannar creature.

Except that's not how books work in the game nor skills.

Andezzar

2014-02-19, 05:35 AM

I simply cant see how one can say I want to become a Chronotyryn if the character does not know about it. (Just like the player will never ask this if he does not know about it.)A Chronothyryn is a Magical Beast with 17 HD. So a Knowledge Arcana check DC 27 will identify it. A knowledge check is to determine whether you remember stuff you have learned previously.

Unless the DM arbitrarily decides that certain information cannot be learned, or he uses the weird notion that no one can recall any information about a creature unless he sees a specimen, anyone succeeding at that check would know what a chronothryn is and thus could select one as new form for shapechange.

Melcar

2014-02-19, 10:09 AM

A Chronothyryn is a Magical Beast with 17 HD. So a Knowledge Arcana check DC 27 will identify it. A knowledge check is to determine whether you remember stuff you have learned previously.

Unless the DM arbitrarily decides that certain information cannot be learned, or he uses the weird notion that no one can recall any information about a creature unless he sees a specimen, anyone succeeding at that check would know what a chronothryn is and thus could select one as new form for shapechange.

Only if that creature existed. You might not know that i does. And so just cant say I roll a knowledge check to se if it exists (if it doesnt). You can roll to see if you remember any creatures with the ability to move/act twise as fast as any other creature you have incountered.

What I mean is. Your roll does not determain whether or not the DM is allowing the material in the game nor whether or not it acually ingame. Therefor its simply too powerful to let a knowledge check automatically gain information about all living and unliving matter in the intire cosmos just by passing a skill check. That is why I keep saying that ingame you somehow have to have found the information.

Just like a player will never ask to polymorph into one if they dont know it exists. The same thing applies to ingame knowledge.

Lets say you are a level 200 commoner, who have never left his home village. He takes skillfocus knowledge. And rolls a natural 20 Doe to the fact that hes roll surpasses all creatures HD in terms of DC for knowing about them or not he know know the intire body of creatures from all planes, words and time.

He then picks up one level of wizard gets lucky with a scroll and becomes a xonomorph from some distand world.

How lame is that?

Andezzar

2014-02-19, 10:35 AM

Lets say you are a level 200 commoner, who have never left his home village. He takes skillfocus knowledge. And rolls a natural 20 Doe to the fact that hes roll surpasses all creatures HD in terms of DC for knowing about them or not he know know the intire body of creatures from all planes, words and time.

He then picks up one level of wizard gets lucky with a scroll and becomes a xonomorph from some distand world.

How lame is that?You forget that to level up and raise skills the characters actually train or do other stuff that merits an increase in abilities. The game just glosses over that aspect because it is not fun. So the level 200 commoner with maxed out knowledges would have done quite a lot of research. Thus he must have learned at some point if such a creature exists because if his skill check routinely beats the DC for any creature (I'm not aware of any creature anywhere near 200 HD) he has actually learned about all of them at some point.

Duke of Urrel

2014-02-19, 10:47 AM

"You can become just about anything you are familiar with." That sentence from the description of the Shapechange spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shapechange.htm) has universal agreement here, I think.

And it is almost universally agreed that this familiarity is conferred by Knowledge skill of some kind. However, it is not universally agreed that the rules of Knowledge skill produce an accurate measure of a PC's familiarity in all cases. I agree with TuggyNE that there are some discrepancies here. I would also argue that the DM should have the power to impose some house rules to iron out these discrepancies.

I justify this argument with two premises: (1) familiarity with any creature depends on how common or uncommon that creature is in the fantasy world you inhabit, and (2) the DM alone determines how common or how rare any creature is in the fantasy world you inhabit. Therefore, the DM can and should house-rule Knowledge skill.

To me, this means, firstly, that the general rule, namely that the Knowledge DC to determine familiarity with a creature is 10 plus Hit-Dice, can and should have exceptions. These exceptions should go both ways. There are some creatures that are so well known that no Knowledge skill should be required to be familiar with them. This is true of most creatures of the Animal type, for example, and it may be true of a few creatures of all other types that are either so common (as some species of giants may be, for example) or so legendary (as some species of dragons may be, for example) that the DM believes they ought to be generally well known, and therefore familiar even to those PCs with no Knowledge skill at all. On the other hand, many other creatures, even including a few of the Animal or Humanoid type, may be so rare that the Knowledge DC given by the RAW should be regarded as much too low.

Secondly, as DM, I myself impose the house rule that you can never take 10 on a Knowledge check of any kind. I justify this with the argument that even if you are a sage or an expert, there are always gaps in your knowledge, and even knowledge of lowly things cannot always be so complete as to be free of gaps. Think of entomologists, for example. Their knowledge consists exclusively of small creatures, none of which has more than a few Hit-Dice in D&D terms. But can we honestly claim that with very few ranks of Knowledge of Nature skill, we ought to have knowledge of every one of the literally millions of insect species? No, say I. For this reason (among others), I forbid taking 10 on Knowledge checks.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 10:53 AM

Except that's not how books work in the game nor skills.

Is there a game text to cite re books? As far as I'm aware this is up to the individual preference of DMs and thus books don't necessarily exist with the information a player might want.

A Chronothyryn is a Magical Beast with 17 HD. So a Knowledge Arcana check DC 27 will identify it. A knowledge check is to determine whether you remember stuff you have learned previously.

Unless the DM arbitrarily decides that certain information cannot be learned, or he uses the weird notion that no one can recall any information about a creature unless he sees a specimen, anyone succeeding at that check would know what a chronothryn is and thus could select one as new form for shapechange.

I don't think we are saying the same things. I'm not saying they can't recall information about a creature without seeing, I'm saying absent actual experience with this animal, either in person or via some other method of learning about it, it is functionally impossible to know anything.

Example: in a world where there are no orcs, a character can not make a knowledge check to know something about the first Orc because there is no prior knowledge.

Vs

In a world with orcs, where it is common knowledge they exist, and there's an Orc tribe down the road, a knowledge check would help you recognize if that hairy dude was an Orc or a Goblin, and assuming you passed by a high number you might know about their light sensitivity, extra strength etc...

By giving the caster a list of applicable forms. This list would of course only be limited by the restrictions mentioned in the respective spells, not by character knowledge. Now you will probably say that the spell's description does not mention such a list, but you cannot satisfy the conditions of the spell unless this list exists.
This list could even be included in the spell book entry. After all those spells require 2, 4 and 9 pages in a spell book. You can write down quite a few names of creatures on those pages.

But how can the DM decide which creatures the caster cannot have knowledge of, besides arbitrarily deciding it? Guess what, that's what knowledge checks are for. A wizard with maxed out knowledge skills and/or other abilities that boost such checks should not be unable to have knowledge of any conceivable creature.

I don't think there needs to be a list, just a guy check. If this character has never had the opportunity to encounter whatever high powered creature the player wants to use, he can't do it. Again, the knowledge check DC isn't static, it's a guideline, not a rule.

False equivalency. Being aware of the coercion is not necessary. It can be a subtle, or simple ignorance could conceal it. For instance, a player that doesn't really know the rules might not notice the DM pulling strings to force things to go in a particular direction and undermine player choices. That doesn't make what the DM is doing less coercive.

Actually it is necessary. Coercion is persuading someone to do something because of threats or force. If you're not impacted by those (under duress) then it's not coercion, by definition. You're mistaking manipulation for coercion, but they're not the same thing.

The rules specify the difficulty. They aren't suggestions. Changing them is houseruling.

Allow me to quote the PHB in reinforcing the fact they are only suggestions:

"In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters..."

Note the opening phrase clearly states this is not universally applicable.

"In general, the DC of such a check equals..."

Again, the opening phrase indicates this is NOT a hard and fast rule.

Andezzar

2014-02-19, 11:35 AM

I don't think we are saying the same things. I'm not saying they can't recall information about a creature without seeing, I'm saying absent actual experience with this animal, either in person or via some other method of learning about it, it is functionally impossible to know anything.

Example: in a world where there are no orcs, a character can not make a knowledge check to know something about the first Orc because there is no prior knowledge. If this is a world without orcs the character cannot encounter the first orc, because then the world would cease to be a world without orcs. Unless the orc came into being at that moment, someone could have previously experienced an orc and the character could have acquired knowledge of what an orc is. Either by hearing from that person or by reading someone's account of that encounter.

I don't think there needs to be a list, just a guy check. If this character has never had the opportunity to encounter whatever high powered creature the player wants to use, he can't do it. Again, the knowledge check DC isn't static, it's a guideline, not a rule. The rules do not require first hand knowledge just familiarity. Someone who has read everything there is about orcs would have a chance to know what an orc is even though he as never before encountered an orc. Whether he actually does is determined by the knowledge check.

Allow me to quote the PHB in reinforcing the fact they are only suggestions:

"In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters..."

Note the opening phrase clearly states this is not universally applicable.

"In general, the DC of such a check equals..."

Again, the opening phrase indicates this is NOT a hard and fast rule.But how does the DM decide if this does not work?

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 12:28 PM

If this is a world without orcs the character cannot encounter the first orc, because then the world would cease to be a world without orcs. Unless the orc came into being at that moment, someone could have previously experienced an orc and the character could have acquired knowledge of what an orc is. Either by hearing from that person or by reading someone's account of that encounter.

The rules do not require first hand knowledge just familiarity. Someone who has read everything there is about orcs would have a chance to know what an orc is even though he as never before encountered an orc. Whether he actually does is determined by the knowledge check.

But how does the DM decide if this does not work?

First part: yes, I'm positing a first contact case. Upon creation of a new creature players do not retroactively gain knowledge of it.

Shape change requires familiarity, and imaginary creatures aren't an option, so by necessity polymorph (whether it says so or not) will require the player to select an existing and known creature.

The DM uses their judgement, the same way they do everything (the DMG even says so)

lunar2

2014-02-19, 01:30 PM

Is there a game text to cite re books? As far as I'm aware this is up to the individual preference of DMs and thus books don't necessarily exist with the information a player might want.

I don't think we are saying the same things. I'm not saying they can't recall information about a creature without seeing, I'm saying absent actual experience with this animal, either in person or via some other method of learning about it, it is functionally impossible to know anything.

Example: in a world where there are no orcs, a character can not make a knowledge check to know something about the first Orc because there is no prior knowledge.

Vs

In a world with orcs, where it is common knowledge they exist, and there's an Orc tribe down the road, a knowledge check would help you recognize if that hairy dude was an Orc or a Goblin, and assuming you passed by a high number you might know about their light sensitivity, extra strength etc...

I don't think there needs to be a list, just a guy check. If this character has never had the opportunity to encounter whatever high powered creature the player wants to use, he can't do it. Again, the knowledge check DC isn't static, it's a guideline, not a rule.

Allow me to quote the PHB in reinforcing the fact they are only suggestions:

"In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters..."

Note the opening phrase clearly states this is not universally applicable.

"In general, the DC of such a check equals..."

Again, the opening phrase indicates this is NOT a hard and fast rule.

you are missing a crucial point. ranks in knowledge represent dedicated study of a body of lore. it's not "you get to make a check after you've done the in game research", it's "the knowledge check itself represents the research you have already done off screen". you don't need in game experience with a monster to make a knowledge check, because the check isn't representing your experience, but your research. making a successful knowledge check means that at some point off screen, you found a source of lore on that particular monster, be it a book, an experienced adventurer, casting a divination spell, whatever. so yes, if the creature exists, you can make a knowledge check to see if your character knows about it at any time. that is the point of the knowledge check, to tell the player what the character already knows. so unless there is a special situation where a character couldn't possibly know about a creature, such as your example of orcs just now starting to exist, the character gets a knowledge check to see if they know or not.

Deophaun

2014-02-19, 01:51 PM

First part: yes, I'm positing a first contact case. Upon creation of a new creature players do not retroactively gain knowledge of it.
Even "first contact" does not preclude prior knowledge. Knowledge can easily diffuse across planes, and even, due to divination, through time.

Shape change requires familiarity, and imaginary creatures aren't an option, so by necessity polymorph (whether it says so or not) will require the player to select an existing and known creature.
Except polymorph isn't based on shapechange; it's the other way around. So by necessity, nothing.

The DM uses their judgement, the same way they do everything (the DMG even says so)
The problem is the way you're applying "judgement" is basically making Knowledge skills subject to capriciousness and encouraging metagaming. Sure, the DM has the ability to do it, but a wise DM will avoid that at all cost.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 02:34 PM

Even "first contact" does not preclude prior knowledge. Knowledge can easily diffuse across planes, and even, due to divination, through time.

Except polymorph isn't based on shapechange; it's the other way around. So by necessity, nothing.

The problem is the way you're applying "judgement" is basically making Knowledge skills subject to capriciousness and encouraging metagaming. Sure, the DM has the ability to do it, but a wise DM will avoid that at all cost.

By necessity of logic. If the character doesn't know the creature exists, they don't know to use it. It follows that knowledge of the creature is necessary.

And first contact absolutely precludes pre knowledge.

So the alternative to the DM doing their game defined job is what exactly? Player fiat?

Deophaun

2014-02-19, 02:52 PM

By necessity of logic.Then we can just cross out Chapter 10 of the PHB, because logic necessitates that magic does not exist.

And first contact absolutely precludes pre knowledge.
Um, no. Not at all, unless you're going to say the Silk Road is a historical myth.

So the alternative to the DM doing their game defined job is what exactly? Player fiat?Hello, I'm over here. I'd appreciate it if you speak to me instead of a straw man.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 02:54 PM

Then we can just cross out Chapter 10 of the PHB, because logic necessitates that magic does not exist.

Um, no. Not at all, unless you're going to say the Silk Road is a historical myth.
Hello, I'm over here. I'd appreciate it if you speak to me instead of a straw man.

No it doesn't. Internal consistency allows for magic, it doesn't allow for knowledge prior to the existence of knowledge.

That isn't a straw man, you rejected the defined role of the DM.

Deophaun

2014-02-19, 03:14 PM

No it doesn't. Internal consistency allows for magic, it doesn't allow for knowledge prior to the existence of knowledge.
You seem confused by the concept of magic.

That isn't a straw man, you rejected the defined role of the DM.
I did no such thing. You can either respond to what I wrote, or not. However, I will not continue any discussion where the other side takes it upon itself to determine my arguments.

Kalaska'Agathas

2014-02-19, 03:27 PM

How pray tell is magic circumventing the requirement? Absent player knowledge there is neither a reason to polymorph into creature N, nor an understanding of the creatures capabilities.

There is no such requirement. The magic explicitly allows the character to change into any creature allowed by the restrictions written into the spell. Since foreknowledge of the creature is not one of them, it is not a requirement. As to how magic circumvents the normal order of things (the "logic" and "requirement" you keep referring to) - it's magic! It can do the impossible! That's the whole point. But since it's a fictional system which is notoriously vague on the details, I cannot explain to you the underlying mechanisms by which it works. But I am under no obligation to do so. It works the way it says it works, even if that would mean doing something which is normally impossible. If this were a real system, it would be beneficial to attempt, likely through the scientific method, to better understand the mechanics of magic, like we are doing for physics, chemistry, biology, and the other sciences. But it's not a real system. We cannot apply those techniques, because we already understand how it works, on a fundamental level. The rules of the game give your character the ability to do the things it says they can do, under the restrictions it gives.

That was referencing the claim to this being a disputed topic, not your personal feelings. There's no real dispute, merely a claim that the established neuroscience has not completely ruled out the possibility of certain concepts of free will. The problem with this, is the latter view doesn't have actual evidence to back it up.

That papers criticizing and disputing the neuroscience involved continue to be published in the literature, passing peer review, is evidence to the contrary. Consensus has not been reached regarding the significance of Libet et al.'s data - whether or not it shows what they claim it shows. And that is without getting into the philosophic issues which underly the science. So, no, there is real dispute, the neuroscience you site has not adequately established that its data signifies what it claims to, and the "latter view" has 'actual evidence' to back itself up.

I'm only insisting that there is no possibility of a player casting polymorph and choosing to become a creature they have no conception of. By that token, if the player picks a creature their character necessarily has no conception of, it is meta gaming.

Again, 'having a conception of the creature you wish to become' is not a requirement in all cases. That familiarity is specified in some cases, but not in others, demonstrates that it is not a requirement in all cases. And a certain level of meta-gaming is necessary to playing the game - it is not necessary for your character to know what feats are, what feats they are building towards, etc., but it is necessary for the player to be familiar with them, in order to play the game. This is just another such case.

If we assume that, then a player should say to his DM: "I want to become something strong or fast or with flight.

I simply cant see how one can say I want to become a Chronotyryn if the character does not know about it. (Just like the player will never ask this if he does not know about it.)

Again, it's magic. It does things that would normally be impossible - including violating normal-regime real-world logic.

Shape change requires familiarity, and imaginary creatures aren't an option, so by necessity polymorph (whether it says so or not) will require the player to select an existing and known creature.

Again, to require knowledge or familiarity is only a requirement in some cases (those where it says so). To play otherwise is a house-rule. It may even be a good one. It may be necessary to your sense of verisimilitude. But it is not RAW.

By necessity of logic. If the character doesn't know the creature exists, they don't know to use it. It follows that knowledge of the creature is necessary.

Real-world normal-regime logic is not the logic you need to be using, in this case. You need to adapt your logic to the fact that these abilities exist, and do what they say they do.

Story

2014-02-19, 05:26 PM

By necessity of logic. If the character doesn't know the creature exists, they don't know to use it. It follows that knowledge of the creature is necessary.

And first contact absolutely precludes pre knowledge.

So the alternative to the DM doing their game defined job is what exactly? Player fiat?

Actually, you can research things you don't know about. For example, say I want to find the spider with the strongest spidersilk. I've never heard of Darwin's Bark Spider, but after doing research, I find out about it anyway.

If you could only learn things you already knew, it'd be impossible to ever learn anything.

Melcar

2014-02-19, 08:12 PM

Even "first contact" does not preclude prior knowledge. Knowledge can easily diffuse across planes, and even, due to divination, through time.

Except polymorph isn't based on shapechange; it's the other way around. So by necessity, nothing.

The problem is the way you're applying "judgement" is basically making Knowledge skills subject to capriciousness and encouraging metagaming. Sure, the DM has the ability to do it, but a wise DM will avoid that at all cost.

Are you saying that a character can become any creature whether or not he knows about them? How would he, without knowledge of an orc, become one?

And secondly... It sounded dangerously like your saying that DM's have no control over the rules?? Im sure I miss read something... right?

ZamielVanWeber

2014-02-19, 08:16 PM

Melcar

2014-02-19, 08:18 PM

Actually, you can research things you don't know about. For example, say I want to find the spider with the strongest spidersilk. I've never heard of Darwin's Bark Spider, but after doing research, I find out about it anyway.

If you could only learn things you already knew, it'd be impossible to ever learn anything.

Thanks you... some of my preavious post have been about this. You can not say: I want to learn about Darwin's Bark Spider if I didnt already know that specific name. How could you, but I would indeed be able to ask I want to reasearch the strongest spider silk.

Max Caysey

2014-02-19, 08:20 PM

What he is saying is that the rules are clear: the character need not know anything about the monster they intend to transform into. DMs are free to house rule otherwise, but that would still be a house rule.

But he need to know it.

The low level sorcerer with no knowledge skill who have never left his house cant just transform into something the character have never read/heard/see/felt/saw a program on National Geografic about.

If you have never had any contact with any creature but live in an isolated demi plane, somehow manage to practice magic and get the polymorph ability. I would 100% of the time say no to any attemt of trasmutation. Because nowhere in hell would that sorcerer be able to formulize/conceptualize another creature. And so would not be able to polymorp. When he at some point got knowledge of an orc and only an orc he could then change into an orc. Nothing more.

Rubik

2014-02-19, 08:25 PM

But he need to know it.Only for Shapechange and wild shape.

Kalaska'Agathas

2014-02-19, 08:25 PM

Are you saying that a character can become any creature whether or not he knows about them?

For those spells which place no restriction of familiarity on becoming a creature, yes.

How would he, without knowledge of an orc, become one?

Magic.

Max Caysey

2014-02-19, 08:30 PM

For those spells which place no restriction of familiarity on becoming a creature, yes.

Magic.

Hopefully no DM would allow so blatenly abuse of meta-knowledge. Where is the fun in that? I would not, and persnally dont think this was the RAI when this spell was designed. Thats why I so seldomly go 100% RAW of the time, because of IMO mistakes from the game designers.

ryu

2014-02-19, 08:43 PM

Hopefully no DM would allow so blatenly abuse of meta-knowledge. Where is the fun in that? I would not, and persnally dont think this was the RAI when this spell was designed. Thats why I so seldomly go 100% RAW of the time, because of IMO mistakes from the game designers.

Right because going on a twenty session circle-jerk to get all the forms you want is fun, and not a waste of the limited playtime of all involved in the slightest. Further if the designer goes out of their way to include the specific clause you think is necessary on some magical effects, but specifically leaves it out of others it's clearly RAI that said clause wasn't meant to go on the exempted effects. Considering they had the knowledge to know that that clause had to be stated in the spells mechanics and didn't errata the rest of the polymorph line over the entire run of 3.5? Clearly RAI.

lunar2

2014-02-19, 09:24 PM

Thanks you... some of my preavious post have been about this. You can not say: I want to learn about Darwin's Bark Spider if I didnt already know that specific name. How could you, but I would indeed be able to ask I want to reasearch the strongest spider silk.

the character can't say "i want to learn about darwin's bark spider" if the character doesn't know.

the player can't say "i want to learn about darwin's bark spider" if the player doesn't know.

the player can say "i want my character to learn about darwin's bark spider" if the character doesn't know, as long as the player knows. at which point the DM is obliged to say either do some research, or acknowledge that darwin's bark spider doesn't exist. the DM can't just say "no, you can't research that" if the creature exists.

Deophaun

2014-02-19, 09:31 PM

Are you saying that a character can become any creature whether or not he knows about them? How would he, without knowledge of an orc, become one?
By RAW, the answers are "yes" and "magic," respectively.

And secondly... It sounded dangerously like your saying that DM's have no control over the rules?? Im sure I miss read something... right?
DMs have control over the rules, but it's hardly absolute and players are known to revolt (just read the forum). A good DM puts his rule changes up front. In my experience, the whole "you must encounter a creature to know it/change into it" runs counter to that, as the players have no way of knowing how useful such powers are. It's better off if DMs just outright ban polymorph/wild-shape to avoid unnecessary conflict this policy creates.

Secondly, as DM, I myself impose the house rule that you can never take 10 on a Knowledge check of any kind.
I missed this. This is probably one of the most pointless houserules I've ever read. Let's look at this.

At level 1, a wizard will probably have 18 Int and 4 ranks in any knowledge subject he's interested in. On a 1, he gets a 9. If he finds an expert to Aid Another, that's an 11. So already, at level 1, he can automatically know all 1 HD creatures. This will continue for his entire career, until he gets his +2 Headband of Intellect and hits level 8, whereupon he doesn't need to bother with an expert to know every single creature that matches his (unmodified) caster level on a natural 1. Add in a basic library, and that can give him an additional +2 circumstance bonus, even up to a +6. Add a Tome of Worldly memory (at a whopping 1500 gp) or take the Collector of Stories skill trick for a +5 competence bonus. Druids aren't even meaningfully worse off here, considering they get a +4 bonus to Knowledge (nature) checks right out of the gate, and an additional +2 synergy from Survival. So past level 1, they have no need for someone to Aid Another (and if you say it makes no sense to Aid Another on a knowledge check, I'll suspect you have never gone to school before), and they don't get Wild Shape until level 4.

So congratulations! It's a house rule that has no impact on the very part of the game it's designed to impact.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-19, 11:09 PM

Actually, you can research things you don't know about. For example, say I want to find the spider with the strongest spidersilk. I've never heard of Darwin's Bark Spider, but after doing research, I find out about it anyway.

If you could only learn things you already knew, it'd be impossible to ever learn anything.

I don't think we're in disagreement that one can research for something based on criteria, but they neither know that the object of their search actually exists nor do they search by name for it.

You searched for a spider with a high strength of silk (note, there is no conclusive proof what you found is universally true), you didn't search for the Darwin bark spider.

Duke of Urrel

2014-02-19, 11:33 PM

So congratulations! It's a house rule that has no impact on the very part of the game it's designed to impact.

My house rule would have a very significant impact, as what you wrote plainly indicates. It would permit you to make the entire insect order accessible to the Shapechange spell only by investing some more in Knowledge of Nature skill or by relying some more on other creatures or magic items to help you. That is exactly what I intended.

I am unwilling to weaken Knowledge skill any further than I have already done, because after all, Knowledge has many other purposes besides merely limiting what the Shapechange spell can do. If we want to limit this spell, or more broadly the entire Polymorph subschool, I agree with you that serious house rules are the only way to go.

For example, suppose we make the house rule that spells of the Polymorph subschool permit you, as a Humanoid, to take the form of any Animal or Humanoid species that is familiar to you, but no other form, unless you have sufficient Spellcraft or Knowledge skill. You can assume the form of one non-Animal, non-Humanoid species for every rank you have in Spellcraft or an appropriate Knowledge skill. For example, if you have 10 ranks of Spellcraft and 5 ranks of Knowledge of Arcana, you can assume the form of any familiar Animal or Humanoid, in addition to 15 other species of creatures, five of which must belong to the Construct, Dragon, or Magical Beast type. Of course, restrictions in a particular Polymorph spell's description itself may further limit the forms that you can take; my rule applies only to the Polymorph subschool in general. This is a mild restriction, I think, but one that makes the upper-level spells of the Polymorph subschool a little less godly in their power. It's not a rule that I have ever applied in actual game play before, but I'm offering it here for everyone's consideration.

Since I'm on the topic, it will surprise no one to discover that when I'm the DM and you cast first the Polymorph spell and then the Alter Self spell upon yourself, I consider your "normal" creature type to be the one that the Polymorph spell bestows, not your original creature type. For example, if you use the Polymorph spell to change yourself from human to hill giant and then cast the Alter Self spell, I allow you only to take the form of a different giant, not that of a halfling who inexplicably has a Strength score of 25. Basically, for as long as the Polymorph spell remains in effect, your assumed creature type remains for you the "new normal" – just as your assumed physical ability scores do.

"The RAW are only a subset of the DM's rules." I think the best DMs are likely to admit to this. The worst ones make arbitrary, spontaneous, ad-hoc exceptions to the RAW without explaining them or even informing you of them in advance.

Story

2014-02-19, 11:44 PM

I don't think we're in disagreement that one can research for something based on criteria, but they neither know that the object of their search actually exists nor do they search by name for it.

You searched for a spider with a high strength of silk (note, there is no conclusive proof what you found is universally true), you didn't search for the Darwin bark spider.

But given the right criteria you can find anything. Search for a medium humanoid with high dexterity and you'll find the Gloura. Look for something that saps the enemies intellect and you'll find the Phthisic. Look for creatures that can do things faster than normal and you'll find the Choker, Thoon Elder Brain, Chronotyrm, etc.

Generally, you want to find creatures with the most extreme or unusual abilities, so even a general search will find them. I think the one thing you could argue is that it's difficult to tell whether something is an Ex ability or what the target's HD is. A wizard would need to actually try turning into the creature to test that, and if for some weird reason there's no organized Wizard organizations, such information might be hard to come by.

On the other hand, if there are organized Wizard research institutions, which is the default assumption (See Arcane Order, Paragnostic Assembly, etc.), then stuff like the best Polymorph forms should be common knowledge for completely IC reasons.

ZamielVanWeber

2014-02-20, 12:18 AM

But he need to know it.

Again, no he does not. Does this make sense? Not entirely. Is it the way the rules work? Yes. Are you free to house rule it? Yes. But it would still be a house rule.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-20, 12:24 AM

But given the right criteria you can find anything. Search for a medium humanoid with high dexterity and you'll find the Gloura. Look for something that saps the enemies intellect and you'll find the Phthisic. Look for creatures that can do things faster than normal and you'll find the Choker, Thoon Elder Brain, Chronotyrm, etc.

Generally, you want to find creatures with the most extreme or unusual abilities, so even a general search will find them. I think the one thing you could argue is that it's difficult to tell whether something is an Ex ability or what the target's HD is. A wizard would need to actually try turning into the creature to test that, and if for some weird reason there's no organized Wizard organizations, such information might be hard to come by.

On the other hand, if there are organized Wizard research institutions, which is the default assumption (See Arcane Order, Paragnostic Assembly, etc.), then stuff like the best Polymorph forms should be common knowledge for completely IC reasons.

Or you'll find anything that is quick, there's no guarantee one won't simply find several well known examples instead of the player desired outcome.

For unusual abilities, if the character is unaware of the existence of said abilities how to know to look for then? Ie if one has no understanding of the sarrukh, one can not even know what question to ask.

ryu

2014-02-20, 12:37 AM

Or you'll find anything that is quick, there's no guarantee one won't simply find several well known examples instead of the player desired outcome.

For unusual abilities, if the character is unaware of the existence of said abilities how to know to look for then? Ie if one has no understanding of the sarrukh, one can not even know what question to ask.

Okay second point is straight up wrong. Randomly think of an ability that you think would be beneficial to have. Research on the criteria of thing that has that ability. Done. You don't even need names. You can literally just list off stuff like: Flight, more actions, has Spell Like Ability X, and so on. Proof of concept? Show of hands people: Has anyone here never searched any form of media by genre, length, general reception in the form of review score, artist, or perhaps company? Find me someone past the age of ten who can answer that question honestly yes and I'll be flabbergasted.

georgie_leech

2014-02-20, 12:39 AM

Or you'll find anything that is quick, there's no guarantee one won't simply find several well known examples instead of the player desired outcome.

For unusual abilities, if the character is unaware of the existence of said abilities how to know to look for then? Ie if one has no understanding of the sarrukh, one can not even know what question to ask.

"I've heard many tales about creatures with strange abilities that aren't found in most other examples of the species. I should look into this, because it's interesting/this could be something I could seek out to increase my own power."

"Interesting, the legends and lore indicate a particular kind of creature able to grant abilities to other scaly kind creatures. These creatures are known as the Sarrukh. This seems promising, I should focus my research on these."

Seriously, people can use bits of existing knowledge as guideposts for further research. Libet did not suddenly wake up one day with his theories ready-made, nor were they programmed from birth. He asked questions, sought answers, contextualised what he knew with this new knowledge, and asked more questions. That's how science works.

Incidentally, people can go beyond the obvious, simple answer to a question. If people always stopped at the obvious one, none of the D&D optimisation on this board would exist.

Deophaun

2014-02-20, 01:00 AM

My house rule would have a very significant impact, as what you wrote plainly indicates. It would permit you to make the entire insect order accessible to the Shapechange spell only by investing some more in Knowledge of Nature skill or by relying some more on other creatures or magic items to help you. That is exactly what I intended.
I'm sorry, but the fact that your intent was for it to be pointless is not a saving grace. Wizards get a lot of skill points and precious few places to put them, so you aren't exactly taxing them here. Personally, I'd rather work on giving them reasons to take Know (architecture and engineering) or Know (geography) instead of yet another reason to take Know (arcana). And Druids, well, I've never known one that didn't max Know (nature), but maybe your groups are different.

About the best you can say is that it might make life difficult on non Tier-1s that try to use polymorph-style magic, like a Wild Shape Ranger or a Sorcerer, but that's not really a positive, is it?

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-20, 01:39 AM

Okay second point is straight up wrong. Randomly think of an ability that you think would be beneficial to have. Research on the criteria of thing that has that ability. Done. You don't even need names. You can literally just list off stuff like: Flight, more actions, has Spell Like Ability X, and so on. Proof of concept? Show of hands people: Has anyone here never searched any form of media by genre, length, general reception in the form of review score, artist, or perhaps company? Find me someone past the age of ten who can answer that question honestly yes and I'll be flabbergasted.

That ability is unique, without prior experience there is no way to know it exists.

ryu

2014-02-20, 01:43 AM

That ability is unique, without prior experience there is no way to know it exists.

No. No ability save perhaps the pun-puning is truly unique in this game in anything but name. Everything has functional analogues right down to various forms of free wishes.

georgie_leech

2014-02-20, 01:52 AM

That ability is unique, without prior experience there is no way to know it exists.

I didn't know this smiley face spider (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/05/09/article-1179781-04DF411B000005DC-651_634x778.jpg) existed either, but I wondered whether something had that quality (i.e. a spider with a smiley face design somewhere on it) and so looked it up. The internet makes it easy, but I could have also looked up various spiders in an encyclopedia, gone to a museum with an arthropology/arachnology exhibit, asked a professor of either of the above, heard about Hawaiian animals with odd coloration patterns and stumbled upon it while researching some other creature like various Hawaiian moths instead, or even looked for copies of the research papers first identifying this particular species. In the world of D&D, where you can literally contact the upper planes and ask "Is there a creature that can do X?" it's easier still.

The entire point of a knowledge check is to determine what a character knows about a given subject. It doesn't generally represent a character going out and doing research. My finding of that spider was not represented by a Knowledge check; my remembering the existence of this species of crab with shell patterns that vaguely resemble a Japanese kabuki mask (http://arthropoda.southernfriedscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/H-japonica.jpg) would be.

Duke of Urrel

2014-02-20, 02:11 AM

Although it is generally true that the rules of the Shapechange spell don't apply to lower-level spells of the Polymorph subschool, I think Max Caysey and Vogonjeltz have a point when they say that the "familiarity clause" in particular should apply.

It has already been argued that PCs do not necessarily know everything that players know. This doesn't mean that PCs are as dumb as sticks until they start acquiring Knowledge skill, but it does mean that it's up to the DM to determine what common knowledge entails – that is, what both PCs and NPCs can know without any Knowledge skill at all. And it is also up to the DM to determine whether the usual Knowledge DC by RAW – that is, 10 plus Hit-Dice level – or perhaps a lower or higher DC should apply, according to the scarcity, ubiquity, obscurity, or notoriety of a particular species (which it is well within the DM's power as world-builder to determine).

Whenever a spell's effect depends on a choice that a PC makes, we can and should apply the general rule that the PC can only choose something that the PC knows is available to choose. What the player knows is generally not what counts here – not for any spell. Rather, what counts is what the PC knows. So the rules that the DM makes generally, in regard to common knowledge and Knowledge skill, should matter not only for the Shapechange spell, but for all spells of the Polymorph subschool. Indeed, it should matter for all spells in all schools, with the obvious exception of spells whose purpose is explicitly to reveal to PCs what they do not know.

As I interpret the "familiarity clause," its purpose is not to distinguish the Shapechange spell from the other spells in the Polymorph subschool, but to impose a limit upon available target forms that would otherwise be virtually unlimited. The other spells of the Polymorph subschool should not be assumed to empower PCs to know everything that their players know, because this is nowhere stated explicitly and not a general rule of the game.

Drachasor

2014-02-20, 03:22 AM

Hurnn

2014-02-20, 03:22 AM

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-20, 10:21 AM

No. No ability save perhaps the pun-puning is truly unique in this game in anything but name. Everything has functional analogues right down to various forms of free wishes.

So, what is analogous to the sarrukh ability?

Also, searching media on the interwebs is entirely different than browsing through random books hoping to find mention of something that vaguely resembles the outcome.

lunar2

2014-02-20, 10:35 AM

But you definitely can't ID something if you don't already know about it.

identifying a creature is just confirming what your character knows and does not know. when you want to identify a creature, what you are doing is determining what your character already knows. so yes, you can roll a knowledge check to ID any creature that you could have even theoretically learned about in any way in the past, including before the start of the game and any time your character was ever off screen. that's what the knowledge check represents: what your character knows through off screen research.

so yes, if the player knows about a choker, he can ask the DM, "does my character know about chokers". the DM is then obliged to say either "roll knowledge: dungeoneering", or "there was no possible way to research that creature" either because it does not exist in that setting, or because it was somehow protected from all forms of research available to the PC, including divination spells. the latter, of course, should not come up more than once per campaign, because a DM who keeps falling back on that is just being a jerk. one species being protected from all forms of magical and mundane research is unlikely, but feasible. 2, 3, or a dozen? that's the DM trying to screw the player.

ryu

2014-02-20, 10:52 AM

So, what is analogous to the sarrukh ability?

Also, searching media on the interwebs is entirely different than browsing through random books hoping to find mention of something that vaguely resembles the outcome.

Did you not read the part of that sentence where I literally said save perhaps the pun-puning? You do know what pun-pun is and what save means in that context right?

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-20, 01:32 PM

Did you not read the part of that sentence where I literally said save perhaps the pun-puning? You do know what pun-pun is and what save means in that context right?

Yes and that has nothing to do with my question.

What ability is there that is analogous to the sarrukhs? I can't think of one, so my thought is that you were wrong in your claim.

Andezzar

2014-02-20, 01:40 PM

He said everything has an analogue except Pun-Pun. Pun-Pun requires the Sarrukh's Manipulate Form Ability.

Drachasor

2014-02-20, 02:24 PM

identifying a creature is just confirming what your character knows and does not know. when you want to identify a creature, what you are doing is determining what your character already knows. so yes, you can roll a knowledge check to ID any creature that you could have even theoretically learned about in any way in the past, including before the start of the game and any time your character was ever off screen. that's what the knowledge check represents: what your character knows through off screen research.

so yes, if the player knows about a choker, he can ask the DM, "does my character know about chokers". the DM is then obliged to say either "roll knowledge: dungeoneering", or "there was no possible way to research that creature" either because it does not exist in that setting, or because it was somehow protected from all forms of research available to the PC, including divination spells. the latter, of course, should not come up more than once per campaign, because a DM who keeps falling back on that is just being a jerk. one species being protected from all forms of magical and mundane research is unlikely, but feasible. 2, 3, or a dozen? that's the DM trying to screw the player.

I do not believe we disagree on this in any way, shape, or form.

So, what is analogous to the sarrukh ability?

Also, searching media on the interwebs is entirely different than browsing through random books hoping to find mention of something that vaguely resembles the outcome.

Sure. There are plenty. Awaken, Imbue with Spell Ability, Wish, Polymorph Any Object to name a few. There are tons of things that make permanent changes in the target, and many of them let you tailor it in some way.

The idea of magically altering other creatures is probably one of the least novel of abilities.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-20, 02:46 PM

Sure. There are plenty. Awaken, Imbue with Spell Ability, Wish, Polymorph Any Object to name a few. There are tons of things that make permanent changes in the target, and many of them let you tailor it in some way.

The idea of magically altering other creatures is probably one of the least novel of abilities.

I would not characterize the mutation of the sarrukhs ability as anything like what you listed. On this we are in disagreement.

Vaz

2014-02-20, 02:51 PM

I like to self restrict myself to forms I'm concurrent with; either one that the campaign and my background states I have spent a decent amount of time observing; (say I'm a Human having spent lots of time around Dwarves, then Dwarves I can morph into. But an Elf, a race that I've not even encountered, then they're not available to, unless I'd have learned about them in some other way; such as the ability to make a relevant DC Knowledge Check (DC10+HD, so DC11 knowledge check, to make things simple).

To get more esoteric forms (such as say a Chronotyryn for Shapechange etc), then making a relevant knowledge check requires significant investment; in this instance, a DC27 Knowledge (Arcana) check, while one for Aberrations requires Dungeoneering etc.

There would otherwise be opportunities available to learn about threats in the campaign, although much more defined; for example, learning about the above Elves, if they've encountered only Sun Elves, then they wouldn't be able to learn about say Wild Elves.

ryu

2014-02-20, 02:52 PM

I am also in disagreement with him on that one. This would be why I singled out that particular ability as probably unique. Well unless of course you count the kobold who attained a copy of said ability and made better versions of it as analogues. Keep in mind the only difference between that ability and the list given is simple magnitude of completely safe to use effects.

Drachasor

2014-02-20, 03:18 PM

I would not characterize the mutation of the sarrukhs ability as anything like what you listed. On this we are in disagreement.

If you had a taxonomy of special abilities, then altering the natural abilities of other creatures would at least fall under the same broad grouping. Much like hardness, displacement, damage reduction, resistance, SR, regeneration, and so forth might fall under a similar classification of resisting or avoiding damage.

But if you tell me that there are no similarities between giving a creature the ability to cast spells that you possess, and giving them the power another creature posseses, then I'm going to have to absolutely disagree with you. Are they the same? No. Might you see all these things listed in a book (or just part of a book) under "Various Ways to Permanently Alter Creatures" or the like? Yes.

Or are we assuming that people in D&D settings for some reason never group a bunch of interesting and semi-related facts together into lists? And collected works and references of people who actually looked into manipulating the form and abilities of creatures don't exist either? Because that sounds like BS to me.

Kalaska'Agathas

2014-02-20, 05:36 PM

So, what is analogous to the sarrukh ability?

Also, searching media on the interwebs is entirely different than browsing through random books hoping to find mention of something that vaguely resembles the outcome.

Why would you browse through random books when you're doing research? Have you exhausted your other means (searching by subject, keyword, with the assistance of a librarian/archivist (or an Archivist who's learned a great many divinations)? Seriously, you can do focused research without the internet - people have been doing that for considerably longer than we've been googling.

Of course, that isn't to say you won't pick up random factlets while doing research, reading for fun (or other purposes), or simply living in the world.

As far as what is analogous to the Sarrukh's Manipulate Form ability, I concur with Drachasor:

Sure. There are plenty. Awaken, Imbue with Spell Ability, Wish, Polymorph Any Object to name a few. There are tons of things that make permanent changes in the target, and many of them let you tailor it in some way.

The idea of magically altering other creatures is probably one of the least novel of abilities.

While you may feel that none of those are exact analogues (and you'd be right), they are similar enough that they'd belong to the same Order, if not Class, to borrow Biology's Taxonomic Rank system. That would merit their inclusion in sources discussing such magic and abilities, don't you think?

zionpopsickle

2014-02-20, 05:52 PM

I would also like to point out that various ideas of Transcendental Knowledge are well within the general metaphysical ideas present in D&D. In fact, I would argue that to attempt to apply modern philosophical thought to D&D is fundamentally flawed since D&D is built upon the novel idea of a platonic universe with a number of other outdated classical philosophies held as true.

Simply put, it isn't illogical within the metaphysical systems of D&D to gain knowledge of things you have no experience with because knowledge functions in a fundamentally different way in D&D than in real life.

Story

2014-02-20, 05:54 PM

Why would you browse through random books when you're doing research?

Why not? Thanks to Scholar's Touch, Wizards have the ability to read books in seconds just by touching them. Reading every library you come across should be standard practice.

ryu

2014-02-20, 06:00 PM

Why not? Thanks to Scholar's Touch, Wizards have the ability to read books in seconds just by touching them. Reading every library you come across should be standard practice.

When you don't have a particular thing in mind yes. If you do have a particular thing to look for it's more efficient to narrow your search.

Kalaska'Agathas

2014-02-20, 07:24 PM

Why not? Thanks to Scholar's Touch, Wizards have the ability to read books in seconds just by touching them. Reading every library you come across should be standard practice.

This is precisely why Wizards (and other casters with access to Scholar's Touch) are so likely to have knowledge of obscure and arcane things. Well, that and the existence of the Divination school.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-20, 11:28 PM

This is precisely why Wizards (and other casters with access to Scholar's Touch) are so likely to have knowledge of obscure and arcane things. Well, that and the existence of the Divination school.

First, scholars touch only provides as much knowledge as one retains from reading a book, it says that in the spell. In the case of anything technical knowledge retention from a single read through is generally awful. Sure, it might point the user in the right direction for closer study but its worthless for long term memory.

Second, divination may provide secondary knowledge, assuming they even work, but they also have requirements such as having some idea what the caster is trying to figure out. And that isn't helpful if the caster just has some vague idea of wanting a special ability.

Deophaun

2014-02-20, 11:42 PM

First, scholars touch only provides as much knowledge as one retains from reading a book, it says that in the spell. In the case of anything technical knowledge retention from a single read through is generally awful. Sure, it might point the user in the right direction for closer study but its worthless for long term memory.
Have to disagree. If you're reading multiple books in the same field, you will begin to recall very specific details. Of course, my experience could be a modern artifact of the common practice of academic citation, but it seems strange to me that someone could read twenty or thirty books on a subject and yet have none of it sink into long term memory.

And that isn't helpful if the caster just has some vague idea of wanting a special ability.
Sure it is. "I want to a form that will let me cast multiple spells in a round" is a great place to start that will net you several great forms, even if you don't know exactly the type of abilities the resulting creatures will have.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-21, 12:02 AM

Have to disagree. If you're reading multiple books in the same field, you will begin to recall very specific details. Of course, my experience could be a modern artifact of the common practice of academic citation, but it seems strange to me that someone could read twenty or thirty books on a subject and yet have none of it sink into long term memory.

Sure it is. "I want to a form that will let me cast multiple spells in a round" is a great place to start that will net you several great forms, even if you don't know exactly the type of abilities the resulting creatures will have.

Maybe in reality, but as has so often been pointed out, the spell doesn't say what you just said. If it were the case, I'd expect a knowledge bonus, depending on the book topic.

Can you uncover a divination spell that actually does that, just as you wanted? I only see some cleric 20 questions ones and scry requires a connection to the target, so that really is no help at all.

Deophaun

2014-02-21, 12:09 AM

Can you uncover a divination spell that actually does that, just as you wanted? I only see some cleric 20 questions ones and scry requires a connection to the target, so that really is no help at all.
Spiritual advisor is a level 4 cleric spell that lets you pose that question (well, "What forms can someone polymorph into to cast multiple spells at once?") to an aspect of your deity. No 20 questions needed.

lunar2

2014-02-21, 01:24 AM

First, scholars touch only provides as much knowledge as one retains from reading a book, it says that in the spell. In the case of anything technical knowledge retention from a single read through is generally awful. Sure, it might point the user in the right direction for closer study but its worthless for long term memory.

Second, divination may provide secondary knowledge, assuming they even work, but they also have requirements such as having some idea what the caster is trying to figure out. And that isn't helpful if the caster just has some vague idea of wanting a special ability.

you are forgetting that the guy casting scholar's touch is most likely at least genius level, and possibly of super human intelligence. they are going to remember a lot more than you or i do from a single reading. and what they do remember is going to be enough for them to pinpoint where to look if they have to go back and read again.

TuggyNE

2014-02-21, 05:58 AM

First, scholars touch only provides as much knowledge as one retains from reading a book, it says that in the spell. In the case of anything technical knowledge retention from a single read through is generally awful. Sure, it might point the user in the right direction for closer study but its worthless for long term memory.

Speak for yourself*; I have found that one or two readings through a textbook (chemistry, computer science, economics) is enough to ace college-level tests weeks later, and a pretty substantial fraction is retained to a decent level of detail more or less indefinitely. And I do not have 18 Int, never mind 20+, so I would expect a PC Wizard to be still more competent at this.

*Edit: This was not intended to be rude but I'm not sure how to rephrase. Bah. :smallsigh:

Drachasor

2014-02-21, 06:41 AM

Speak for yourself*; I have found that one or two readings through a textbook (chemistry, computer science, economics) is enough to ace college-level tests weeks later, and a pretty substantial fraction is retained to a decent level of detail more or less indefinitely. And I do not have 18 Int, never mind 20+, so I would expect a PC Wizard to be still more competent at this.

*Edit: This was not intended to be rude but I'm not sure how to rephrase. Bah. :smallsigh:

Well, he does have a point with highly technical stuff. And with tests it also depends on what sort of resources you are allowed beforehand.

For instance, I don't think you are going to ace a Quantum Physics or Themodynamics test after just reading the text twice. Same with a lot of stuff that involves high level math. You're going to have to put in the work practicing and getting skills down.

The same would be true of Computer Science and programming.

This assumes you are actually going over novel material and that the test actually stresses how much information you have learned as well as how well you can apply it.

Of course, classes aren't always good at testing your ability to retain knowledge. That takes a lot of practice, but you can fake it for tests fairly well. Of course, in the case of looking for info in some books, you don't need to memorize the book. A quick read will definitely make you notice info you are specifically looking for.

Though, beyond that, in a world where Wizards are the rough equivalent of scientists, it is hard to imagine there aren't "Polymorphing For Beginner" books. If we want to be a bit realistic anyhow.

TuggyNE

2014-02-21, 07:04 AM

For instance, I don't think you are going to ace a Quantum Physics or Themodynamics test after just reading the text twice. Same with a lot of stuff that involves high level math.

I suppose we'd have to see, wouldn't we?

The same would be true of Computer Science and programming.

CS was one of the subjects I mentioned.

Though, beyond that, in a world where Wizards are the rough equivalent of scientists, it is hard to imagine there aren't "Polymorphing For Beginner" books. If we want to be a bit realistic anyhow.

Teach Yourself To Alter Yourself In Just 30 Days! and so forth, yes.

More seriously, there's really two different things to learn from books. One is the basic framework and structure, the appropriate mental model to have. This I have seldom if ever had trouble retaining. The second is the reference details of exactly how this API works or what that ion does in solution; I consider that a matter chiefly for reference manuals, although I still do remember some of that. So a practical caster should have a reference manual detailing whichever forms they chose to keep around; such a book is not free, but it would certainly be vastly cheaper than an actual spellbook, and no harder to preserve.

So sure, if you want to say that a caster must have at least a 10gp tool for Knowledge checks to polymorph, and a 100gp MW tool for the +2, go for it. Just don't think it'll actually change anything except a line on the character sheet.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-22, 12:08 PM

Spiritual advisor is a level 4 cleric spell that lets you pose that question (well, "What forms can someone polymorph into to cast multiple spells at once?") to an aspect of your deity. No 20 questions needed.

Aren't we talking about wizards not clerics?

you are forgetting that the guy casting scholar's touch is most likely at least genius level, and possibly of super human intelligence. they are going to remember a lot more than you or i do from a single reading. and what they do remember is going to be enough for them to pinpoint where to look if they have to go back and read again.

The spell doesn't indicate that intelligence makes a difference.

Speak for yourself*; I have found that one or two readings through a textbook (chemistry, computer science, economics) is enough to ace college-level tests weeks later, and a pretty substantial fraction is retained to a decent level of detail more or less indefinitely. And I do not have 18 Int, never mind 20+, so I would expect a PC Wizard to be still more competent at this.

*Edit: This was not intended to be rude but I'm not sure how to rephrase. Bah. :smallsigh:

No offense taken, I just don't buy the perfect retention from a single read through without going back to retread passages.

Well, he does have a point with highly technical stuff. And with tests it also depends on what sort of resources you are allowed beforehand.

For instance, I don't think you are going to ace a Quantum Physics or Themodynamics test after just reading the text twice. Same with a lot of stuff that involves high level math. You're going to have to put in the work practicing and getting skills down.

The same would be true of Computer Science and programming.

This assumes you are actually going over novel material and that the test actually stresses how much information you have learned as well as how well you can apply it.

Of course, classes aren't always good at testing your ability to retain knowledge. That takes a lot of practice, but you can fake it for tests fairly well. Of course, in the case of looking for info in some books, you don't need to memorize the book. A quick read will definitely make you notice info you are specifically looking for.

Though, beyond that, in a world where Wizards are the rough equivalent of scientists, it is hard to imagine there aren't "Polymorphing For Beginner" books. If we want to be a bit realistic anyhow.

That would make sense (the polymorphic for beginners), I'd definitely consider creating something like that for a game, in its absence.

Drachasor

2014-02-22, 12:21 PM

I suppose we'd have to see, wouldn't we?

...

CS was one of the subjects I mentioned.

I know you mentioned it. If you are saying that you got a CS or Chemistry major where you did zero work, only read the book for the class twice, aced all the tests, and had no prior experience, and aren't particularly intelligent, then I do not believe you.

You simply can't learn the material in such courses very well without practice. You certainly can't remotely master it. Entry level courses I could see, since those are pretty basic. This is especially true if they aren't designed very well, so they don't push the students. Past that you do have to put in the work even if you are quite intelligent. The skills you pick up build upon older skills, and this becomes more and more pronounced as you delve into a particular subject in the sciences.

lunar2

2014-02-22, 12:55 PM

The spell doesn't indicate that intelligence makes a difference.

it says you remember what you normally would for completely reading the book once. characters with higher intelligence are going to remember more than characters with lower intelligence.

a cleric or bard may remember a vague outline of the book, along with a few standout passages, sure. a wizard, on the other hand, is going to have a working knowledge of most of the concepts covered in the book, as well as a pretty good idea of where to look for any individual passage.

for example, i'm fairly above average intellect, but nowhere near genius. however, i can still remember the basic plot of books i read 10 years ago. i've read the bible through once, and haven't touched it in years, but can still not only remember roughly what it says on any particular subject, but can identify which section of the bible covers that subject (not down to individual book level, but for example the gospels or the epistles).

Deophaun

2014-02-22, 12:59 PM

Aren't we talking about wizards not clerics?
Is there some kind of enmity between wizards and clerics that would cause them to never seek out eachother's services?

Besides, I want you to note that this is a fourth level spell that will straight up give you information that would otherwise be gotten through a knowledge check, while higher level divination spells don't pretend to bother with this. Why is that? Likely because the game designers thought there was no need to waste a 9th-level slot on something that, by their rules, was done by a trivial skill check. So you're really asking for something to exist in game that is outside their conceptual design space.

Talya

2014-02-22, 05:23 PM

it says you remember what you normally would for completely reading the book once. characters with higher intelligence are going to remember more than characters with lower intelligence.

Indeed. Think of someone like Stephen Hawking (rating around 20+ intelligence in D&D) - the guy does complex equations in his head. He reads something highly technical once, and can repeat it near word-for-word.

Vogonjeltz

2014-02-22, 05:43 PM

it says you remember what you normally would for completely reading the book once. characters with higher intelligence are going to remember more than characters with lower intelligence.

a cleric or bard may remember a vague outline of the book, along with a few standout passages, sure. a wizard, on the other hand, is going to have a working knowledge of most of the concepts covered in the book, as well as a pretty good idea of where to look for any individual passage.

for example, i'm fairly above average intellect, but nowhere near genius. however, i can still remember the basic plot of books i read 10 years ago. i've read the bible through once, and haven't touched it in years, but can still not only remember roughly what it says on any particular subject, but can identify which section of the bible covers that subject (not down to individual book level, but for example the gospels or the epistles).

There is no basis in game for this.

Is there some kind of enmity between wizards and clerics that would cause them to never seek out eachother's services?

Besides, I want you to note that this is a fourth level spell that will straight up give you information that would otherwise be gotten through a knowledge check, while higher level divination spells don't pretend to bother with this. Why is that? Likely because the game designers thought there was no need to waste a 9th-level slot on something that, by their rules, was done by a trivial skill check. So you're really asking for something to exist in game that is outside their conceptual design space.

That didn't address my question. We aren't talking about clerics, so the wizard has no innate rationale for knowing this information via divination (as was clsimed)

lunar2

2014-02-22, 07:13 PM

There is no basis in game for this.

Intelligence (Int)

Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons. This ability is important for wizards because it affects how many spells they can cast, how hard their spells are to resist, and how powerful their spells can be. It’s also important for any character who wants to have a wide assortment of skills.

You apply your character’s Intelligence modifier to:

The number of languages your character knows at the start of the game.

The number of skill points gained each level. (But your character always gets at least 1 skill point per level.)

Appraise, Craft, Decipher Script, Disable Device, Forgery, Knowledge, Search, and Spellcraft checks. These are the skills that have Intelligence as their key ability.

A wizard gains bonus spells based on her Intelligence score. The minimum Intelligence score needed to cast a wizard spell is 10 + the spell’s level.

An animal has an Intelligence score of 1 or 2. A creature of humanlike intelligence has a score of at least 3.

A character does not retroactively get additional skill points for previous levels if she increases her intelligence.

Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks.

Mindless creatures do not gain feats or skills, although they may have bonus feats or racial skill bonuses.

relevant text bolded. intelligence is the ability that determines how well you learn and remember information. therefore, anyone with higher intelligence is going to have a better memory than someone with a lower intelligence.

TuggyNE

2014-02-22, 07:50 PM

I know you mentioned it. If you are saying that you got a CS or Chemistry major where you did zero work, only read the book for the class twice, aced all the tests, and had no prior experience, and aren't particularly intelligent, then I do not believe you.

I didn't say I wasn't particularly intelligent, merely that I do not, as far as I know, have the equivalent of 18 Int, never mind 20. (Personally I think it's around 15 or 16, but who knows?)

And, by analogy, knowing that there's a high-HD monster with the ability to act at twice the speed with a name starting with Chrono-something-something is not nearly as difficult as remembering off the top of your head exactly how to implement a particular Traveling Salesman solver.

For clarity's sake, though, it's probably a little excessive to suppose that wizards would really just cast scholar's touch and move on to the next subject; however, it's not unreasonable at all to suppose that they would use it and potentially other divinations heavily during their studies; coupled with their high starting Int and a formal tradition involving a fair number of high-level casters for some centuries back, it is, on the whole, entirely sensible to suppose that almost any monster with any sort of useful ability would be known to almost any wizard with a desire to change forms.