[3.5]Polymorph and hit points

[Almostdead]

Simple question: Do you gain hit points due to an increase in constitution caused by Polymorph effect?:smallbiggrin:

Yeah, I'm talking about 3.5. Thx!

[Covenant12]

No, you don't gain or lose hps due to Con change by Polymorph. This is inherited from alter self's wording, and nothing in polymorph overwrites it.

Polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorph.htm)

Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm)

Wait, that's 3.5. I believe 3.0 it did change, that would take time to sort through.

[Cruiser1]

Simple question: Do you gain hit points due to an increase in constitution caused by Polymorph effect?:smallbiggrin: Yeah, I'm talking about 3.5. Thx!
Unknown, because the rules aren't clear. :smalltongue: As with many ambiguous wordings, ultimately it comes down to "ask your DM". There's arguments to be made for both, and this has been debated before: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?571400-draconic-polymorph-and-hit-points

As with many areas of D&D, people sometimes have strong opinions one way or the other, which are often influenced by desired effect on play. For example, CON should affect Polymorph so cool build will still work, or CON should NOT affect Polymorph because that spell is already overpowered.

Me, I prefer CON to affect Polymorph for the simple reason that it makes the game easier to run (and easier to implement online). If CON doesn't affect Polymorph then it becomes harder to calculate hp, because then you (or the software program running) has to keep track of which sources of CON increase are allowed to affect hp in the standard manner and which aren't (instead of a simple gain 1 hp/HD for each point of CON bonus).

[Kelb_Panthera]

Depends.

If you're using PHB2 and the polymorph subschool rules addition, then no. Per the subschool, your HP don't change unless the spell says otherwise and polymoprh doesn't say anything to that effect.

If you're -not- using that update, then any change to your con comes with a commensurate change to your HP unless otherwise noted and, again, polymorph says nothing about HP except that you have some HP damage healed.


This does, indeed, amount to "ask your GM" but that's because sources and rules additions are up to him, not us.

[Almostdead]

What about this article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040525a) ?
This is the only source that says Polymorph changes HP I guess.

[Kelb_Panthera]

What about this article (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040525a) ?
This is the only source that says Polymorph changes HP I guess.

Written in 2004. PHB2 came out in 2006. It was accurate at that time but isn't any longer.

Here's the first of the series that came out with PHB2: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060502a

[Almostdead]

Written in 2004. PHB2 came out in 2006. It was accurate at that time but isn't any longer.

Here's the first of the series that came out with PHB2: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060502a

This “Polymorphing Revisited” says nothing about polymorph actually...only elaborates Alternate Form.:smallsigh:

[Bronk]

Simple question: Do you gain hit points due to an increase in constitution caused by Polymorph effect?:smallbiggrin:

Yeah, I'm talking about 3.5. Thx!

I agree with all that, but don't forget that you at least get to adjust your Fort save!

[Almostdead]

Written in 2004. PHB2 came out in 2006. It was accurate at that time but isn't any longer.

Here's the first of the series that came out with PHB2: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060502a

PHB II says, "However, note that the spells’ existing rules texttakes priority over that of the subschool."

And the DMG errata says "Polymorph:They retain their original class and level, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, hit points, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, and alignment."

So we have The Rule of the Game(Polymorph) and DMG errata here. Do you think they contradict to each other?

[Kelb_Panthera]

PHB II says, "However, note that the spells’ existing rules texttakes priority over that of the subschool."

And the DMG errata says "Polymorph:They retain their original class and level, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, hit points, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, and alignment."

So we have The Rule of the Game(Polymorph) and DMG errata here. Do you think they contradict to each other?

Again, the old rules of the game article is outdated and only a clarification, not RAW.

This actually makes the whole thing a done deal. PHB2 or no, your HPs stay the same.

Oddly, the spell description and the PHB errata make no mention of this supposed clarification that the DMG errata is supposed to be making. No matter, with the same idea in place two years apart in two different RAW sources, the designer intent is reasonably clear even if the RAW itself isn't.

Always felt it was a dumb rule, personally, but it is what it is.

[Aotrs Commander]

Again, the old rules of the game article is outdated and only a clarification, not RAW.

This actually makes the whole thing a done deal. PHB2 or no, your HPs stay the same.

Oddly, the spell description and the PHB errata make no mention of this supposed clarification that the DMG errata is supposed to be making. No matter, with the same idea in place two years apart in two different RAW sources, the designer intent is reasonably clear even if the RAW itself isn't.

Always felt it was a dumb rule, personally, but it is what it is.

Making you retain your hit points was necessary for game-balance sanity (that's why they errata'd it in and later made an attempt to tune in back further with stuff like Trollshape and such in the SpC as replacements). Druids being able to literally dump EVERY physical stat because Wild Shape, for one, was horribly broken.

(As I recall, even the TO folk on WotC's boards breathed something of a sigh of relief when it got nerfed.)

I play in a mid-high optimisation environment, and I am still very cautious about allowing too much leeway with the 3.5 wild shape and polymorph and the like. I can fully understand why Paizo nerfed it all to the ground (even if I don't necessarily agree 100%); wild shape/polymorph can get out of control all too easily, even WITH maintaining the hit points.

[Almostdead]

Making you retain your hit points was necessary for game-balance sanity (that's why they errata'd it in and later made an attempt to tune in back further with stuff like Trollshape and such in the SpC as replacements). Druids being able to literally dump EVERY physical stat because Wild Shape, for one, was horribly broken.

(As I recall, even the TO folk on WotC's boards breathed something of a sigh of relief when it got nerfed.)

I play in a mid-high optimisation environment, and I am still very cautious about allowing too much leeway with the 3.5 wild shape and polymorph and the like. I can fully understand why Paizo nerfed it all to the ground (even if I don't necessarily agree 100%); wild shape/polymorph can get out of control all too easily, even WITH maintaining the hit points.

Yeah, I agree with you. But my friend kept saying The Rule of the Game(Polymorph) (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040525a) was written by Skip William so it should override other sources like DMG errata. Is it a reasonable argument?:smallmad:

[Kelb_Panthera]

Yeah, I agree with you. But my friend kept saying The Rule of the Game(Polymorph) (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040525a) was written by Skip William so it should override other sources like DMG errata. Is it a reasonable argument?:smallmad:

It's not supported by any of the game rules, any statement made by WotC, or the community at large (and for good reason.) So I'd say, no, it's not a reasonable argument. I'd say it's a presentation of an appeal to authority. Maybe a bit of munchkinry too.

It's not a rule I like. The inconsistency with other con changing effects grates. I don't include it in games I GM but it is the official rule so unless a GM explicitly overrules it, I presume it's in play and I certainly wouldn't argue that it isn't actually the rule because of that distaste.

[ShurikVch]

Chicken (1 hp) PAOed into a Roc (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/roc.htm) would still have 1 hp.
Diminutive-sized dagger - or a single drop of acid - can disable it instantly.
I want to see how DM would explain: how, exactly, damage which isn't enough to knock out a cat somehow killing Gargantuan creature... :smallamused:

[Aotrs Commander]

Chicken (1 hp) PAOed into a Roc (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/roc.htm) would still have 1 hp.
Diminutive-sized dagger - or a single drop of acid - can disable it instantly.
I want to see how DM would explain: how, exactly, damage which isn't enough to knock out a cat somehow killing Gargantuan creature... :smallamused:

Because it ISN'T a gargantuan creature, it's still a chicken; just one that is in the shape of one, all stretched out by magic. (Or, in the revese, all compacted down into a chicken form.)

Remember, when it dies - or the spell is dispelled (or in other circumstances, the spell duration expires)- it turns back into a chicken.




But stray to far down that route and you end up in an arguement about what hit points represnt and blah blah blah... But the primary reason for it is "so the druid and the wizard can't abuse the highly absuably mechanic as much as thet were previously able to do."

[Covenant12]

Though I responded first and cited the rules as I know them, doesn't mean I'm implying they are logical. Con not changing hps is just confusing and a nuisance.

But Wild Shape, PaO, and Shapechange are already stupid powerful. Allowing the caster to dump Con completely and Wizard20 builds to melee tank isn't something I encourage.

[ShurikVch]

Because it ISN'T a gargantuan creature, it's still a chicken; just one that is in the shape of one, all stretched out by magic. (Or, in the revese, all compacted down into a chicken form.)

Remember, when it dies - or the spell is dispelled (or in other circumstances, the spell duration expires)- it turns back into a chicken.Remember: Roc-Chicken wouldn't die at 0 hp, but at -10
By the logic, Diminutive dagger (even if embedded near a carotid artery - blade, guard, and handle), or a single drop of acid (even if dropped directly to eyeball), shouldn't cause fatal wound to a Gargantuan creature
Heck, a punch from a venerable halfling commoner should knock it out (nonlethal negative hp)
My point is: hamfisted attempts of "balancing" something which can't (and shouldn't) be balanced leading to deteriorating of verisimilitude



Allowing the caster to dump Con completely and Wizard20 builds to melee tank isn't something I encourage.What's you mean? :smallconfused:
32 Point buy allow to have 18 in primary casting stat, 14 - in Dex and Con, and 10 in everything else
28 pb - mostly the same, except either 12 Dex/Con, or 10 Dex/14 Con (14 Dex/10 Con is possible too, but less popular)

Also, if Wizard20 wants to play melee tank, and group is OK with it, then why would you discourage it?
And if group isn't OK with it, then just talk with a player out of game
(Also, 3.X lacks tanking mechanics - melee or not)

[Crake]

polymorph says nothing about HP except that you have some HP damage healed.

Uhh...


Polymorph
This spell functions like alter self, except [...]


Alter Self
Your class and level, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses all remain the same.

Feel like that's pretty conclusive?

[Aotrs Commander]

Remember: Roc-Chicken wouldn't die at 0 hp, but at -10
By the logic, Diminutive dagger (even if embedded near a carotid artery - blade, guard, and handle), or a single drop of acid (even if dropped directly to eyeball), shouldn't cause fatal wound to a Gargantuan creature
Heck, a punch from a venerable halfling commoner should knock it out (nonlethal negative hp)
My point is: hamfisted attempts of "balancing" something which can't (and shouldn't) be balanced leading to deteriorating of verisimilitude

Okay, look at it this way. It's a Roc, but it's only got 1 hit point left.



(Actually, 3.5 doesn't have proper chicken stats, so I assume you're basing that of the raven stats. Hilariously, Pathfinder DOES have chicken stats, and they give them a full HD and Con bonus, so they have 5 hit points, which more than a basic house cat. Well, what do you expect, it IS a fricking dinosaur, after all...)



Hell, a chicken-turned Roc ONLY has 8 hit points even IF you gave it the Con bonus, which is still dead by any character with a dagger at any level where anyone can actually CAST that spell. (Oh, and it can't fly. Because it's a chicken, so it cannot understand. You'd have to try and teach it, and I'm fairly sure that would be extremely difficult, becasue chickens and pretty stupid...) Three club hits from a common will still knock out a creature that is preportedly big enough to carry off an elephant; AC 17 is difficult, but not out of their reach especially because, it's still a chicken, and it's going to react like a chicken and run away from danger while they pelt it with sticks and stones.

(But let us also remember, the commoner is in danger from the average cat in D&D...)



But we digress; ultimately, the issue at hand is NOT how many hit points a chicken turned into a roc has (which is not as common an occurance, as, say, a druid using wild shape), it is not letting said druid dump his Con for free stat points because after level 5, he's going to be an animal all the time where it matters and not giving the wizard the ability to hand out free LA when he permenantly polymorphs himself or someone else into a humanoid something which nice big stats (hag for example) or something equally abusable.

[Remuko]

O(Oh, and it can't fly. Because it's a chicken, so it cannot understand. You'd have to try and teach it, and I'm fairly sure that would be extremely difficult, becasue chickens and pretty stupid...)

What? Chickens can fly. Modern chickens IRL have their wings clipped and are fed to have more meat, but afaik, chickens can definitely fly by default without human intervention. (its possible I'm wrong on this but I feel confident I'm not)

[Jack_Simth]

What? Chickens can fly. Modern chickens IRL have their wings clipped and are fed to have more meat, but afaik, chickens can definitely fly by default without human intervention. (its possible I'm wrong on this but I feel confident I'm not)

They're not good at flying (OK, they're better than unequipped humans...), but they can, yes. See Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken#General_biology_and_habitat):
Domestic chickens are not capable of long distance flight, although lighter birds are generally capable of flying for short distances, such as over fences or into trees (where they would naturally roost). Chickens may occasionally fly briefly to explore their surroundings, but generally do so only to flee perceived danger.So yes, the chicken turned into a Roc would fly away. Just not very far.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Uhh...





Feel like that's pretty conclusive?

The sentence right before it says you keep your own ability scores. Why would your HP change if your con doesn't? Because the creature you're changing into has a HP value associated with it, typically, and you don't get -that- value because neither your HD nor your con change.

Since polymorph -does- change your con, whether your HPs change as a result becomes a question and the spell itself doesn't answer that. There's an ambiguity in whether the mention of HPs in alter self is explanatory or prescriptive so a clarification should've been included.

So, no, that's not conclusive.

[Crake]

The sentence right before it says you keep your own ability scores. Why would your HP change if your con doesn't? Because the creature you're changing into has a HP value associated with it, typically, and you don't get -that- value because neither your HD nor your con change.

Since polymorph -does- change your con, whether your HPs change as a result becomes a question and the spell itself doesn't answer that. There's an ambiguity in whether the mention of HPs in alter self is explanatory or prescriptive so a clarification should've been included.

So, no, that's not conclusive.

The fact that Alterself says that, but polymorph doesn't state the flip side, something along the lines of "with an altered constitution score comes a commesurate change in hit points", means that the alter self line takes precedence.

Whether that is the intention or not is a different discussion, as written, it is entirely conclusive.