Polymorph clarification

[Soranar]

I always interpreted polymorph's rule to have alter self's size limitation (only 1 step away from your original size)

But I keep reading threads assuming that's not the case

Is there an official ruling on this anywhere?

[Segev]

This question, and similar ones about inheritance from alter self, tends to spawn multi-page arguments, actually. So, no, it's pretty unclear.

Personally, I tend to fall on the side that interprets polymorph listing a minimum and maximum size, where alter self does not, as overwriting alter self's "within one size category" limitation.

Other people argue that these are extra limits, not overwriting limits, so both remain in effect.

Which side you fall on depends on whether you think that polymorph's size limitations count as something that falls under "except as noted here" that qualifies as a change to alter self. Even then, whether it's an "additional limit" or a "replacement limit" is a somewhat open question.

I go with the one I go with because it seems silly to me for the higher-level spell to increase the restrictions on what it can do, rather than loosen them.

[Venger]

I was ready to come in and say beyond shrinking smaller than fine there aren't any restrictions, but you're right, by strict RAW, since it's keyed off alter self, you're stuck going one bigger than your normal size as your upper bound.

that said, I've never heard of anyone actually having it work this way, and while I know it's anathema to say RAI, I think it's fair to say that's an oversight given how often polymorphing into otherwise illegal examples is mentioned.

that's a good find.

[Keral]

I was just debating this thing with my group the other week.

By strict RAW I'd say that yes, you are restricted within 1 size of your normal form. However, as Segev already said, it's a bit silly to actually enforce it that way. Plus, by reading up on the articles on the Wizard site, I'd say the writers didn't want it to work that way.