Is Living Wish a valid Shapechange form? (On-Slam/Engulf spell effect activation Su)

[IraWolf]

During a fairly lengthy discussion in a 3.5e Discord server, me and a few other people slowly came to the realization that, as far as we're aware, there might be a better way than even Zodar to get infinite Wishes from Shapechange, using the Living Spell template.

By the text of the Living Spell template, "The template can be applied to any spell that creates an area or effect (not targeted spells), but not a spell whose effect is already a creature (such as a summon monster spell)."

If we take a look at the Wish text, it says "A wish can produce any one of the following effects."

The key word there being "effects." Wish certainly isn't a targeted spell, and therefore would be a valid selection for the template. We found exactly one prior forum post from ages ago that had a whopping 22 replies, and the main argument (from someone who admitted to not actually double-checking the Template) was that "Wish isn't an area spell, so it doesn't apply," completely ignoring the "effects" line.

What's more the effect of the spell applies (as a Su ability) on any creature hit with the Engulf of the Living Spell (which, as an Ooze, is a valid form to turn into via Shapechange). So we realized that one of the best ways to mass farm Wishes on a scale hitherto undreamt of was to Mass Dominate a bunch of people, and then Engulf them (since Wish is above CL 13, it's a Huge creature, so you can get more than one) to grant Wishes each turn.

Since I'm a not-new but not veteran DM, I wanted some opinions from the Playground on my/our interpretations of this. Thank you. :D

[weckar]

The only issue I could see is that you'd have to prove that a Living Wish EXISTS in the world you are playing. As it has to be a non-unique creature, and your character needs to be familiar with it.
The Living spell MUST also affect creatures, and the template is very unclear on how spell parameters are set (whether they are at the whim of the living spell, or not).

[Crake]

Pretty sure shapechange inherits the "cannot transform into a creature with a template" limit of alter self. Even if it doesn't, I would certainly argue that a "living wish" would be considered a unique creature.

[False God]

Shapechange doesn't cover templated creatures (which is kinda silly really, since it means you can't turn into Vampires, Lycanthropes and all variety of mundane half-creatures) because it "functions like Polymorph" and Polymorph "functions like Alter Self" and Alter Self says no templates.

So yeah. No templates.

[frogglesmash]

Shapechange doesn't cover templated creatures (which is kinda silly really, since it means you can't turn into Vampires, Lycanthropes and all variety of mundane half-creatures) because it "functions like Polymorph" and Polymorph "functions like Alter Self" and Alter Self says no templates.

So yeah. No templates.

Living spells are kind of a weird case. Alter Self specifically says that "you cannot take the form of any creature with a template," but the living spell template isn't applied to a creature, it's applied to a spell, so technically it's a spell with a template, not a creature with a template. Of course you could argue that the when the template turns a spell into a creature, it becomes a creature with a template, but as far as I can tell, there's no clear indication of which interpretation is correct.

[unseenmage]

Amusingly, the Wish spell is so broken overpowered that it's still faster/cheaper to use epic spellcasting to Origin of Speceis up a Wish Living Spell race than to duplicate the wish spell as an epic spell.

[Psyren]

Living spells are kind of a weird case. Alert Self specifically says that "you cannot take the form of any creature with a template," but the living spell template isn't applied to a creature, it's applied to a spell, so technically it's a spell with a template, not a creature with a template. Of course you could argue that the when the template turns a spell into a creature, it becomes a creature with a template, but as far as I can tell, there's no clear indication of which interpretation is correct.

I'd definitely go with the latter, as the end result is in fact "a creature with a template," even if it didn't start out that way.