What are the reasons for Minor Change Shape NOT working with Assume Su Ability?

[wefoij123]

To me the rules are open and shut but it seems there is quite a lot of people who think otherwise. But instead of trying to convince anyone of anything, I'm just gonna gather the arguments of the other side and make the decision myself. I think that way I can remain civil and objective.

I received permission to create this thread from a moderator.

Basic Facts:

ASSUME SUPERNATURAL ABILITY
[GENERAL]
You learn to use a supernatural ability of an assumed form.

Prerequisite: Wis 13, ability to assume a new form magically.

Benefit: You learn to use a single supernatural ability of another kind of creature while assuming its form through a polymorph self spell or a similar effect. The saving throw DC against this ability is based on your ability scores, not those of a standard creature of the kind whose form you’ve assumed. For a breath weapon, the saving throw DC is 10 + your Constitution modifier + 1/2 your Hit Dice (rounded down). For all other supernatural abilities, the saving throw (if any) DC is 10 + your Charisma modifier + 1/2 your Hit Dice (rounded down). If a creature, such as an undead, has no Constitution score, use its Charisma modifier or its Constitution modifier (+0 for a nonability), whichever is higher, to determine the save DC. Using this alien ability is disorienting. You take a –2 penalty on all attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. Additionally, in a stressful or demanding situation (such as combat), you must succeed on a Will save (DC 19) or be unable to use the ability.

Normal: Without this feat, you cannot use the supernatural abilities of a creature whose form you assume.

Special: You can take this feat multiple times. You cannot apply it more than once to the same special ability in order to improve the Will save DC. Each time you take this feat, it applies to a different special ability

RACIAL EMULATION
[RACIAL]
You can emulate a humanoid more closely with your minor change shape ability.

Prerequisite: Changeling.

Benefit: When you use your minor change shape ability to assume the form of a humanoid creature, you can also emulate any of that humanoid’s subtypes. Though you do not gain any of the humanoid’s traits, you are considered to be a member of that race for all other purposes (allowing you to use magic items or spells keyed to race, for example). You can also ignore the normal penalty on Disguise checks when disguising yourself as a different race (see the Disguise skill description, page 72 of the Player’s Handbook). You can only emulate one race at a time, and you always retain the shapechanger subtype.

Interpretation 1: In the quote

You learn to use a single supernatural ability of another kind of creature while assuming its form through a polymorph self spell or a similar effect.
polymorph self is an effect that lets you magically assume the form of another creature, and a "similar effect" is something that lets you magically assume the form of another creature.

This is my vote simply because of Occam's Razor, which is that the simplest explanation is the right one.
This interpretation has 0 conflict with anything.
This interpretation does not require anything other than what is listed in its prerequisite to use.
This interpretation requires the least amount of lawyering.
This interpretation doesn't require you to make up a ton of stuff that's not found anywhere in the rules.
And this interpretation is consistent with the rest of both 3.0 and 3.5, including Player's Handbook, Rules Compendium, and even Psionics.


Metamorphic Transfer [Psionic]

You can gain a supernatural ability of a metamorphed form.
Prerequisite

Wis 13, manifester level 5th.
Benefit

Each time you change your form, such as through the metamorphosis power, you gain one of the new form’s supernatural abilities, if it has any.

You gain only three uses of the metamorphic ability per day, even if the creature into which you metamorph has a higher limit on uses (you are still subject to other restrictions on the use of the ability.) The save DC to resist a supernatural ability gained through Metamorphic Transfer (if it is an attack) is 10 + your Cha modifier + ½ your Hit Dice. No matter how many times you manifest the metamorphosis power on a given day, you can gain only a total of three supernatural ability transfers per day.
Normal

You cannot use the supernatural abilities of creatures whose form you assume.
Special

You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time, you can gain one additional supernatural ability.

This is a virtually identical feat that works 100% with Minor Change Shape and only requires the user to assume the form of another creature.


Interpretation 2: In the quote

You learn to use a single supernatural ability of another kind of creature while assuming its form through a polymorph self spell or a similar effect.
"similar effect" is something that is specifically similar to "Polymorph Self".

Question 1: Why is this interpretation more correct than interpretation 1?


POLYMORPH
Lidda thought that the captain of the guard was acting a little strangely, but she put it down to stress. When she turned away, however, she heard a strange squishing sound behind her. She spun around to see that the man had turned into a 10-foot-tall blueskinned monster, complete with a greatsword—an ogre mage.

Magic can cause creatures and characters to change their shapes—sometimes against their will, but usually to gain an advantage. Polymorphed creatures retain their own minds but have new physical forms.

The polymorph spell (see page 263 of the Player ’s Handbook) defines the general polymorph effect.

Creatures that polymorph themselves with an ability (not a spell) do not suffer disorientation (as described in polymorph).

Since creatures do not change types, a slaying or bane weapon designed to kill or harm creatures of a specific type affects those creatures even if they are polymorphed. Likewise, a creature polymorphed into the form of a creature of a different type is not subject to slaying and bane effects directed at that type of creature. A ranger’s favored enemy bonus is based on knowing what the foe is, so if a creature that is a ranger’s favored enemy polymorphs into another form, the ranger is denied his bonus.

A dwarf ’s bonus for fighting giants is based on shape and size, so he does not gain a bonus against a giant polymorphed into something else, but does gain the bonus against any creature polymorphed into a giant.

This quote is saying that any magic that causes creatures and characters to change their shape is a "polymorph effect"
This quote is saying abilities (not spells) that causes creatures and characters to change their shape is a "polymorph effect"
This quote is saying that form changing abilities that do not change types are "polymorph effects".

It is very important to note that Polymorph DOES change the creatures' type.
It is very important to note that Polymorph does NOT disorient its target despite being a spell.

So even the Polymorph Spell doesn't 100% obey this definition of what a "polymorph effect" is.

Question 2: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape is not a "polymorph effect" when it's a magical ability that changes your shape, does not change your type, and does not disorient you?
Question 3: What is the justification that Change Shape is not a "polymorph effect"? when it's a magical ability that changes your shape, does not change your type, and does not disorient you?
Question 4: What is the justification that Alternate Form is not a "polymorph effect"? when it's a magical ability that changes your shape, does not change your type, and does not disorient you?


Changing Forms
Some special abilities allow a creature to change its form or appearance. When a creature is using any ability described in this entry, a true seeing spell or ability reveals its natural form (the form it would always be in if it couldn’t change forms at all). A creature using one of these abilities reverts to its natural form when killed, but separated body parts retain their shape. A creature can’t use one of these abilities to take the form of a creature with a template.
...
ALTERNATE FORM
...
CHANGE SHAPE
...
REVISED SPELLS
A number of spells allow or force a creature to change shape, such as alter self, animal shapes, baleful polymorph, polymorph, and shapechange. Spell-like abilities can resemble these spells as well. The spell descriptions delineate how these spells work, but a few have changed significantly since the publication of the Player’s Handbook and are presented here. For more information on the polymorph subschool, see page 122.
...
DRUIDS
Druids have a couple class features that are significantly altered from the Player’s Handbook.

A Thousand Faces
At 13th level, a druid gains the supernatural ability to change her appearance at will, as if using the disguise self spell, but only while in her natural form. This change affects the druid’s body but not her possessions. It isn’t an illusory effect, but a minor physical alteration of the druid’s appearance, within the limits described for the spell

Rules Compendium does not say the polymorph subschool is a separate effect to changing forms to the point that Alternate Form, Change Shape, and A Thousand Faces are not "similar effects". Rules Compendium in fact directly and explicitly says the polymorph subschool is nothing but revised spells that change your form. So...

Question 5: What is the justification that the polymorph subschool is a separate effect to changing forms to the point that Alternate Form, Change Shape, and A Thousand Masks are not considered as "similar effects" to polymorph self when Rules Compendium just says the polymorph subschool is nothing but revised spells that change your form?

This is Minor Change Shape

Minor Change Shape (Su): Changelings have the supernatural ability to alter their appearance as though using a disguise self spell that affects their bodies but not their possessions. This is not an illusory effect but a minor physical alteration of a changeling’s facial features, skin color and texture, and size, within the limits described for the spell. A changeling can use this ability at will, and the alteration lasts until she changes shape again. A changeling reverts to her natural form when killed. A true seeing spell reveals her natural form. Using this ability is a full-round action.

Notice how it's identical to A Thousand Faces? And notice how Minor Change Shape is explicitly said to change your form?

Lets switch gears and switch to 3.0.
3.5 Minor Change Shape is equal to 3.5 A Thousand Faces.
3.5 A Thousand Faces is the updated version of 3.0 A Thousand Faces.

A Thousand Faces: At 13th level, a druid gains the supernatural ability to change his or her appearance at will, as if using the spell alter self.
3.0 A Thousand Faces = 3.0 Alter Self.
Therefore 3.5 Minor Change Shape reverted to 3.0 would be 3.0 Alter Self.


The character can alter the character's appearance and form-including clothing and equipment-to appear taller or shorter, thin, fat, or in between. The assumed form must be corporeal. The character's body can undergo a limited physical transmutation, including adding or subtracting one or two limbs, and the character's weight can be changed up to one-half. If the form selected has wings, The character can fly at a speed of 30 feet with poor maneuverability. If the form has gills, the character can breathe underwater.

The character's attack rolls, natural armor bonus, and saves do not change. The spell does not confer special abilities, attack forms, defenses, ability scores, or mannerisms of the chosen form. Once the new form is chosen, it remains for the duration of the spell. If the character is slain, the character automatically returns to the character's normal form.

If the character uses this spell to create a disguise, the character gets a +10 bonus on the character's Disguise check.

The predecessor of Minor Change Shape is explicitly said to let you assume forms of other creatures. So...

Question 6: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape does not let you assume the form of creatures, and that the language in Racial Emulation is a mistake when even its 3.0 counterpart directly says it lets you assume the form of creatures?


Alternate Form: Shauganttha can assume the form of a Tiny to Large viper (see the Snake entry in the Monster Manual). This ability is similar to a shapechange spell cast by a 19thlevel sorcerer but allows only viper forms. He uses the viper’s poison since he has no poison attack of his own.

Alternate Form (Su): At 2nd level a barghest can assume the form of a goblin or an unusually large wolf as a standard action. This is similar to using the polymorph self spell but allows only these two forms.

Alternate Form (Su): A rakshasa can assume any humanoid form, or revert to its own form, as a standard action. This ability is similar to the alter self spell cast by an 18th-level sorcerer. A rakshasa can use this ability the indicated number of times per day at the indicated duration. Eventually the rakshasa can remain in an alternate form indefinitely

Notice that these quotes are from the same book that introduced Assume Supernatural Ability.

Question 7: How is the above quotes not saying that Alter Self, Minor Change Shape, A Thousand Faces, Shapechange, and Polymorph Self are "similar effects"?

Also, if you look at the MMI errata, a lot of polymorph (self only) was replaced by Change Shape.

Question 8: What is the justification that Change Shape doesn't work with Assume Supernatural Ability?
Question 9: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape is not a similar but weaker effect to Change Shape?

There's also the fact that all these form changing spells override each other. So...
Question 10: What is the justification that spells that override each other to provide the same but weaker/stronger effects are not similar effects?

To conclude
Question 11: Even under this interpretation, why wouldn't Minor Change Shape work with Assume Supernatural Ability?



From my perspective this is not even a debate. The rules are 100% onesided.
Polymorph is never said to be a separate effect to changing forms.
Polymorph Subschool is not a separate effect to changing forms
All polymorph and form changing effects have never been categorized separately to each other for any reason.
In 3.0, the 3.0 equivalent of Minor Change Shape is explicitly said to be similar to Polymorph Self in the same book that introduced assume supernatural ability.

There is not 1 rule quote I could find that separates polymorph self from alternate form, change shape, etc.

So...
Question 12: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape does not work with Assume Supernatural Ability?

Because I cannot see the foundation the people who say it doesn't work are standing on. There is simply nothing in the rules that suggest that Minor Change Shape doesn't work with Assume Supernatural Ability.

Question 13: Did I miss something?

[InvisibleBison]

The rules do what they say they do, and they don't do anything else. Minor Change Shape doesn't say that it lets you assume the form of another creature, so it doesn't let you assume the form of another creature. The person who wrote Racial Emulation misunderstood or misremembered how Minor Chane Shape works, and so by strict RAW Racial Emulation can never be used.


Question 6: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape does not let you assume the form of creatures, and that the language in Racial Emulation is a mistake when even its 3.0 counterpart directly says it lets you assume the form of creatures?

The fact that rules worked a certain way in 3.0 doesn't mean anything about how the revised version of those rules work in 3.5, because the whole point of revising the rules was to change how they work.

[wefoij123]

The rules do what they say they do, and they don't do anything else. Minor Change Shape doesn't say that it lets you assume the form of another creature, so it doesn't let you assume the form of another creature. The person who wrote Racial Emulation misunderstood or misremembered how Minor Chane Shape works, and so by strict RAW Racial Emulation can never be used.



The fact that rules worked a certain way in 3.0 doesn't mean anything about how the revised version of those rules work in 3.5, because the whole point of revising the rules was to change how they work.

By strict RAW it says it changes your form.


A changeling reverts to her natural form when killed. A true seeing spell reveals her natural form.


A shapechanger has the supernatural ability to assume one or more alternate forms. Many magical effects allow some kind of shape shifting, and not every creature that can change shape has the shapechanger subtype.


A creature of the shapechanger subtype can revert to its natural form as a standard action.


Changing Forms
...
A Thousand Faces
At 13th level, a druid gains the supernatural ability to change her appearance at will, as if using the disguise self spell, but only while in her natural form. This change affects the druid’s body but not her possessions. It isn’t an illusory effect, but a minor physical alteration of the druid’s appearance, within the limits described for the spell.

So just to be clear, not trying to debate here since that never ended well for me,
You are saying an explicitly form changing effect that
1. overrides and gets overridden by other form changing effects
2. can take on the form of other races to the point a feat lets you be treated like the form of the race you take on when you do
does not let you "assume" the form of other creatures and that's why Racial Emulation is 100% wrong about everything and must be stricken? Even though it creates no conflict?

Ok then. If so then this is where we agree to disagree.

[Doctor Despair]

To me the rules are open and shut

They always are until they aren't.


But instead of trying to convince anyone of anything, I'm just gonna gather the arguments of the other side and make the decision myself. I think that way I can remain civil and objective.

I'm not sure what the purpose of this thread then. Is a thread necessary for you to do this? You're the DM, and you've resolved (correctly) to make the decision that's right for your table. Why involve the forum?

With that said: that you are responding to posters suggests that you are not, in fact, just here to fact-find, and in fact are here to engage in trying to convince people. There's nothing inherently wrong in that, although I think it's odd you seem to want to avoid stating that as your mission.



I received permission to create this thread from a moderator.

Good, I suppose? I'm curious why you asked them to start a new thread instead of asking to unlock the old one, but that's entirely tangential to the topic of the thread, so my curiosity will have to go unsated.




Basic Facts:


- quotes-



Interpretation 1: In the quote

polymorph self is an effect that lets you magically assume the form of another creature, and a "similar effect" is something that lets you magically assume the form of another creature.

This is my vote simply because of Occam's Razor, which is that the simplest explanation is the right one.
This interpretation has 0 conflict with anything.
This interpretation does not require anything other than what is listed in its prerequisite to use.
This interpretation requires the least amount of lawyering.
This interpretation doesn't require you to make up a ton of stuff that's not found anywhere in the rules.
And this interpretation is consistent with the rest of both 3.0 and 3.5, including Player's Handbook, Rules Compendium, and even Psionics.

Actually, Occam's razor states that, among competing hypotheses about the same prediction, one should select the solution with the fewest assumptions. You assume that ASA defines a similar effect as any shape-changing magic. Others assume that ASA defines a similar effect as something more specific than that. They are both making an equal amount of assumptions.

Neither interpretation conflicts with anything. Reading ASA to require something explicitly called out as similar to polymorph (i.e. Spiderform, Spider Shapes, Shapechange, Polymorph Any Object, Polymorph Other, Feathers, Warp Truename, Fiendform, Draconic Polymorph, 3.0 Alternate Form (and therefore Wildshape), etc) doesn't break anything in the game; there's no dysfunction invited whatsoever.

You are correct that even if ASA doesn't work with MCS, it shouldn't prevent someone from selecting it. That isn't dysfunctional by itself; a level 1 human wizard can take Chain Spell, for example, despite having no means to actually use it yet.

All interpretations require lawyering when there is disagreement; while I disagree that it requires the least, I also object to its value as a metric.

Neither interpretation requires you to make up a ton of stuff that's not found anywhere in the rules. I would suggest that you reconsider your stance here. A number of people in the previous thread spent a lot of time and effort trying to explain their objections to you. Many of them were rooted in rules citations and references; many were predicated on interpreting the textual examples you had provided differently than you interpreted them. To suggest that those that disagree with you are just making things up is a little disingenuous, and won't make this thread conducive to the discussion you seem to be seeking.

I agree; it is consistent. So are the other ones.



This is a virtually identical feat that works 100% with Minor Change Shape and only requires the user to assume the form of another creature.

This is a good argument to use to convince a DM to allow it based on its power level. However, consider that Metamorphic Transfer is online by level 5 at the earliest, and requires some combination of specific class levels or feats to achieve. It also allows you to use the ability three times per day instead of at will. It's objectively a weaker feat than ASA; that might have been intentional, or it might not have. Regardless -- it is a good example of how they could have written ASA if they wanted to use polymorph other as an example instead of a use-criteria.


Each time you change your form, such as through the metamorphosis power,

VS


You learn to use a single supernatural ability of another kind of creature while assuming its form through a polymorph self spell or a similar effect

MT just requires that you change your form, and gives metamorphosis as an example of how to do that.

ASA requires you to assume a creature's form using a polymorph self spell or similar effect.

There will never be a 100% RAW answer about what "similar effect" means because it isn't in the glossary. There are effects (listed above) that specifically say they work as polymorph, but different in X way. Those are explicitly similar to polymorph, as defined by the writers, and would unambiguously work. Anything lacking that language could work if the DM cares to allow it to work, but it also would not be against the RAW for a DM to not allow it to work.

With that said -- I have my own opinions about what a reasonable DM should probably allow. Alternate form, for example, was explicitly as polymorph in 3.0 when the feat was released. It should probably be included in acceptable effects for a 3.5 update. That would mean that wild shape would also be acceptable.

Some creatures were updated to no longer have alternate form (which was acceptable), and now have change shape. Should that be acceptable? I'm not nearly as convinced that a reasonable DM would necessarily rule that way. Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that alternate form had not been updated, and was still as polymorph. The succubus was updated to not have alternate form. Why would it still qualify for things that alternate form qualified it for? If they updated it to no longer have a fly speed, but instead have a glide, should it still qualify for things that require fly? Certainly not, right?

However, my opinion isn't the end-all-be-all of RAW -- at the end of the day, the only RAW answer is "things that explicitly have text saying they are similar to polymorph." That's it.




Interpretation 2: In the quote

"similar effect" is something that is specifically similar to "Polymorph Self".

Question 1: Why is this interpretation more correct than interpretation 1?


interesting quote

This quote is saying that any magic that causes creatures and characters to change their shape is a "polymorph effect"

This quote is saying abilities (not spells) that causes creatures and characters to change their shape is a "polymorph effect"
This quote is saying that form changing abilities that do not change types are "polymorph effects".

It is very important to note that Polymorph DOES change the creatures' type.
It is very important to note that Polymorph does NOT disorient its target despite being a spell.

So even the Polymorph Spell doesn't 100% obey this definition of what a "polymorph effect" is.

You are right -- there is disagreement here. However, notice the text actually explicitly defers to polymorph in the PHb to define the general term "polymorph effect." This falls in line with the primary source rule as I understand it too, as the PHb would be primary on how polymorph works (since it's where polymorph is), so that's a neat bit of symmetry there. When we look to the PHb to see the definition, we see a number of other useful details beyond just changing shape magically and not changing type (especially since the latter is just untrue).



Question 2: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape is not a "polymorph effect" when it's a magical ability that changes your shape, does not change your type, and does not disorient you?
Question 3: What is the justification that Change Shape is not a "polymorph effect"? when it's a magical ability that changes your shape, does not change your type, and does not disorient you?
Question 4: What is the justification that Alternate Form is not a "polymorph effect"? when it's a magical ability that changes your shape, does not change your type, and does not disorient you?


The criteria to be a polymorph effect aren't set by the DMG quote. They're set by the PHb, or the individual ability description. Additionally, not changing type makes them LESS likely to be polymorph effects, not more likely. Minor Change Shape lacks language calling it out as similar to polymorph. Change Shape likewise lacks that language. Alternate Form DID have language calling it out as similar in 3.0, but lacks that language in 3.5. Whether a DM considers any of these effects as similar is ultimately up to them, but there is no RAW instructing them to do it, or requiring them to houserule to avoid doing it.



Rules Compendium does not say the polymorph subschool is a separate effect to changing forms

Point of order: the RC doesn't HAVE to say that the polymorph subschool is a separate effect to changing forms. Things have the subschool or they don't. I don't personally think having the subschool is sufficient to qualify as "similar to polymorph" for the purposes of the feat for the purposes of pure RAW (and would rather claim it requires a line of text calling it out as similar in the spell or ability), but a lack of a negative statement doesn't prove a positive statement. The RC doesn't have to say they're different in order to avoid implicitly saying they're the same.



to the point that Alternate Form, Change Shape, and A Thousand Faces are not "similar effects".

I'm not sure what claim you're making here; I don't think you've fully phrased the thought in your head. What you've said here is that the RC proved that these are not similar effects, which is NOT what I think you intended to claim. Either way, however, I do agree: nothing in the quote you provided suggests that those effects are similar to polymorph. In fact, the passages you notably omitted from Alternate Forma nd Change Shape describe how they are different than polymorph.



Rules Compendium in fact directly and explicitly says the polymorph subschool is nothing but revised spells that change your form.

The RC, in that quote, said that a number of spells allow or force a creature to change shape, and that SLAs can resemble them. Their descriptions describe how they work, and some have changed from how the PHb listed them. See 122 for info on the polymorph subschool. It doesn't quite say that the polymorph subschool are just revised spells that change your form; it says that some spells from the polymorph subschool that allow you to change your form have been revised. They seem similar, but as it seems you're about to try to draw some sort of conclusion from this, it's important not to claim that a text explicitly says something when you mean to say it's implicitly saying something. The latter is opinion; the former is RAW.


So...

Question 5: What is the justification that the polymorph subschool is a separate effect to changing forms to the point that Alternate Form, Change Shape, and A Thousand Masks are not considered as "similar effects" to polymorph self when Rules Compendium just says the polymorph subschool is nothing but revised spells that change your form?

The RC didn't say that, and having the polymorph subschool is neither necessary nor sufficient to be considered "similar to polymorph" by RAW. In fact, I would argue Animal Shapes and Baleful Polymorph wouldn't necessarily be "similar to polymorph" either by a strict RAW reading. Of course, if you allow Alternate Form to work with ASA by inheriting its similarity from 3.0, then you would have to allow Animal Shapes. A DM could also rule that having the subschool makes it similar by itself -- a valid ruling, as "similar" is vague enough to allow it, but not one required by RAW.



This is Minor Change Shape


Notice how it's identical to A Thousand Faces? And notice how Minor Change Shape is explicitly said to change your form?

I've actually always been on board with you here. MCS does change your form -- the reading that Racial Emulation does nothing has always seemed silly to me. Why invite dysfunction?



Lets switch gears and switch to 3.0.
3.5 Minor Change Shape is equal to 3.5 A Thousand Faces.
3.5 A Thousand Faces is the updated version of 3.0 A Thousand Faces.

3.0 A Thousand Faces = 3.0 Alter Self.
Therefore 3.5 Minor Change Shape reverted to 3.0 would be 3.0 Alter Self.

This is bald-faced speculation on your part. Yes, 3.0 Faces used to be as alter self. It was updated NOT to be as alter self. 3.5 Faces doesn't qualify as changing your form. Ironically, the section "Changing forms" begins by saying:


"Some special abilities allow a creature to change its form or appearance."

Sure enough, 3.5 Druid's TFaces reads:


A THOUSAND FACES
At 13th level, a druid gains the supernatural ability to change her appearance at will, as if using the disguise self spell, but only while in her natural form.

So 3.5 Druid definitely doesn't work with ASA, while 3.0 Druid did. The writers changed it specifically so that it wouldn't work with ASA. It is worded very similar to MCS. Therefore, the writers didn't want ASA to work with MCS. See how guessing at authorial intent can go both ways? We can never know exactly what the writers intended. Even an FAQ answered by the actual author could be them retconning their idea now that they've had some time to regret their earlier decisions. We have the RAW to rely on. We can't know that the authors would have given Changelings an ability like alter self in 3.0; even if they had, maybe they would have been updated to 3.5 to specifically not work with ASA. This line of questioning isn't helpful to determine what the rules of the game actually are though.



The predecessor of Minor Change Shape is explicitly said to let you assume forms of other creatures. So...

Question 6: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape does not let you assume the form of creatures, and that the language in Racial Emulation is a mistake when even its 3.0 counterpart directly says it lets you assume the form of creatures?

Again, I've always been with you on this one, so I'm not going to argue too fiercely here. Alter Self isn't the 3.0 counterpart of MCS though -- Disguise Self is. You made a faulty conclusion to get to question 6.

Their argument, however, as Bison put it, is based on how MCS doesn't actually say that it lets you change form. It says you revert to your natural form upon death, and that true seeing reveals your natural form, but doesn't say the ability changes you out of your natural form. Additionally, even if the challengers accept that MCS changes your form, it doesn't say it allows you to assume the form of another creature (which might be considered different somehow). Racial Emulation would therefore be dysfunctionally nonfunctional, but it's an internally consistent position to hold.

To reiterate: I don't hold that opinion. However, it is logically sound. A reasonable DM wouldn't use that ruling, nor would I, but the RAW doesn't preclude a DM from ruling that way.




Notice that these quotes are from the same book that introduced Assume Supernatural Ability.

Even in 3.5, polymorph is explicitly like alter self; that would probably also have been a good reference to include. Shapechange is as polymorph, so it is also as alter self.

In 3.0, alternate form was as polymorph, so it's unsurprising that it would be conflated with alter self and shapechange.



Question 7: How is the above quotes not saying that Alter Self, Minor Change Shape, A Thousand Faces, Shapechange, and Polymorph Self are "similar effects"?

Alter self, shapechange, and polymorph are.

A Thousand Faces is as disguise self, not polymorph.

MCS is as disguise self, not polymorph.



Also, if you look at the MMI errata, a lot of polymorph (self only) was replaced by Change Shape.

I would argue that any creature that was erratad to have Change Shape instead (like the succubus) no longer qualifies for ASA, too. I address that above though, so I won't repeat myself here.

Even if it did work, however, MCS isn't as Change Shape; it's as disguise self. It was a very strange design decision, but it's the decision they made by RAW.



Question 8: What is the justification that Change Shape doesn't work with Assume Supernatural Ability?

I address that above, but in summation: nothing says it does. There's no RAW text that says Change Shape is like polymorph.



Question 9: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape is not a similar but weaker effect to Change Shape?

Again, I just addressed that, but: there's no text staying that the ability is related to Change Shape at all.



There's also the fact that all these form changing spells override each other. So...
Question 10: What is the justification that spells that override each other to provide the same but weaker/stronger effects are not similar effects?

I see the argument you're trying to make here, but you're actually making it incorrectly. You are currently trying to reference RC page 137 to claim that the fact that they override each other means they're the same effect. However, the text doesn't actually require that they be the same effect for this to happen


Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths:
In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in
the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths,
only the best one applies.

Same Effect with Differing Durations: When the
same effect is cast more than once on the same target, the
durations of the effects don’t stack. Each effect’s duration
elapses normally.

Same Effect with Differing Results: The same spell
can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same
recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series
trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually
removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant
while the fi nal spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one
spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still
active, but one has rendered the other useless.

If one effect overrides another, it means that either the dominant effect is stronger, or that the dominant effect made the other effect irrelevant. If they did all override each other, it could very well be that they were different effects that just happened to make the previous one irrelevant. With that said: they don't all override each other.

A Thousand Faces can't be applied because you aren't in your natural form. Even if it could, it wouldn't change your form; it is as disguise self. It would apply on top of the polymorph, and both effects would remain active.

Minor Change Shape could be applied while you were in the new form -- and, because MCS changes your form without changing any other statistics, both effects would remain active. You would effectively have both a disguise self and polymorph effect on your person at the same time. If you activated it before using polymorph, the polymorph would be a different effect rendering the MCS irrelevant. If you activated it after using the polymorph, both would apply.


To conclude
Question 11: Even under this interpretation, why wouldn't Minor Change Shape work with Assume Supernatural Ability?

It isn't similar to polymorph.





From my perspective this is not even a debate. The rules are 100% onesided.

...

There is not 1 rule quote I could find that separates polymorph self from alternate form, change shape, etc.

You don't need a rules quote saying they're different. You need a rules quote saying they're similar. You're going about this backwards. You need to prove a positive, not disprove a negative. Things aren't similar until proven otherwise. There are specific spells and abilities that are explicitly similar to polymorph. MCS is not among them.



So...
Question 12: What is the justification that Minor Change Shape does not work with Assume Supernatural Ability?

It isn't similar to polymorph.



Because I cannot see the foundation the people who say it doesn't work are standing on.

I hope my post is helpful.



There is simply nothing in the rules that suggest that Minor Change Shape doesn't work with Assume Supernatural Ability.

There doesn't need to be. There needs to be a statement that it is similar to polymorph. There isn't one. Also acceptable would be a statement that it is similar to alter self. There isn't one. Also acceptable would be a statement that it is similar to one of the other effects similar to alter self or polymorph. There isn't one.

MCS is similar to disguise self. Disguise self is not similar to either alter self or polymorph.

[redking]

One could easily ask what your justification is for taking a whole bunch of paragraphs out of context and claiming it is relevant to your assertions.

A Thousand Faces = disguise self. Nowhere does it say that this is a polymorph effect. Minor Shape Change = disguise self. This is explicitly stated.

All the effects similar to polymorph are of the transmutation school. Disguise self is the illusion school. Bringing up a nerf of A Thousand Faces from 3.0, stating that it used to be alter self is irrelevant since it got changed to disguise self in 3.5.

The debate was over the second that you conceded that Minor Shape Change = disguise self. Disguise self isn't eligible for Assume Supernatural Ability.

[Gruftzwerg]

I'll try to give an overview what has happened here. You can try to draw you own picture based on this.

1. Assume Supernatural Ability is 3.0 stuff and needs to be updated by the DM with the rules given. The term "polymorph self like spells/effects" was a common phrase for those things that are related to it. But only for those that are really "related" to it and not those that are just similar. "Polymorph Self like" is not an example but a specified key term for those things that are called out as such. It's like the term "mind-affecting", which doesn't include anything that affect minds, but sole those things that are explicitly called out as such.

2. Polymorph Self 3.0 > Polymorph 3.5
Note that Wild Shape used to be to "work like Polymorph" in 3.0. Later in 3.5 (after the release) it got changed to not to be based on the Polymorph rules anymore. For a full conversion of the original ASA it would thus need to also work with Wild Shape. But your DMs opinion may differ here. He might argue, that this was one of the intended changes that Wild Shape ain't Polymorph related anymore. Thus remaining a gray area where the DM has the last word.

3. Later (! about a few years..), the Polymorph rules got updated (IIRC it was even twice?). The Polymorph subschool was added to make it even more complicated. Now the term "polymorph-like" was also referring to the polymorph subschool rules.

4. Note that while Polymorph is based on Alter Self, the subschool is targeting Polymorph (and anything with at least similar power or more) and not Alter Self (which is not at the level of transformation like Polymorph).

5. Minor Change Shape is based on Disguise Self an Illusion effect. While the ability claims not to be a mere illusion (we could assume/argue it to be a transmutation effect), it's still only references Disguise Self and not Polymorph. MCS doesn't qualify since it lacks the language to count as Polymorph effect.

[Doctor Despair]

4. Note that while Polymorph is based on Alter Self, the subschool is targeting Polymorph (and anything with at least similar power or more) and not Alter Self (which is not at the level of transformation like Polymorph).


I see the merit to your point here, but I'm not sure I agree. I'd argue that the intention may be that it requires polymorph-level strength, but it did use "similar to" in the feat. Polymorph self as as alter self, but different in a few ways. It's explicitly similar to alter self.

In terms of RAI, a common comparison might be found in geometry: all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. Polymorph (square) might fall into the same category as alter self (rectangle), but that doesn't make the rectangle a square.

However, in terms of RAW, I'd be hard-pressed to be sympathetic to a sentence like: polymorph is similar to alter self, but alter self isn't similar to polymorph. The word "similar" just wasn't the correct word to use to get that concept across, I feel, and in using it, they would allow alter self (and spells/abilities keyed off of alter self) to work with Assume Supernatural Ability.

[Gruftzwerg]

I see the merit to your point here, but I'm not sure I agree. I'd argue that the intention may be that it requires polymorph-level strength, but it did use "similar to" in the feat. Polymorph self as as alter self, but different in a few ways. It's explicitly similar to alter self.

In terms of RAI, a common comparison might be found in geometry: all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. Polymorph (square) might fall into the same category as alter self (rectangle), but that doesn't make the rectangle a square.

However, in terms of RAW, I'd be hard-pressed to be sympathetic to a sentence like: polymorph is similar to alter self, but alter self isn't similar to polymorph. The word "similar" just wasn't the correct word to use to get that concept across, I feel, and in using it, they would allow alter self (and spells/abilities keyed off of alter self) to work with Assume Supernatural Ability.

Imho there is a logical difference in the terms "like this" and "like these".
One is referring to an explicit example (for reasons), the other is referring to a lose type/group of examples (more open-ended).

You want to read it as "like these" but that is not RAW.
ASA is referring to an explicit category and not a lose category imho. It's talking about an explicit category and not giving a random example here. "Polymorph(-Self)-like" is a well established key term in the rules imho.

Dunno, if this is comprehensible. It's complicated to explain and I'm struggling a bit here.

[wefoij123]

5. Minor Change Shape is based on Disguise Self an Illusion effect. While the ability claims not to be a mere illusion (we could assume/argue it to be a transmutation effect), it's still only references Disguise Self and not Polymorph. MCS doesn't qualify since it lacks the language to count as Polymorph effect.

It's said to let you assume the form of creatures.
It's the physical form of disguise self

Form-altering magic3
...
3 Magic that alters your form, such as alter self, disguise self, polymorph, and shapechange. See specifi c spell descriptions

disguise self, alter self, polymorph, and shapechange are all labelled form altering magic.

A thousand faces is grouped together with the polymorph subschool, alternate form, and change shape under the section "changing forms".

And your opinion is that this lacks the language?

{Scrubbed}


One could easily ask what your justification is for taking a whole bunch of paragraphs out of context and claiming it is relevant to your assertions.

A Thousand Faces = disguise self. Nowhere does it say that this is a polymorph effect. Minor Shape Change = disguise self. This is explicitly stated.

All the effects similar to polymorph are of the transmutation school. Disguise self is the illusion school. Bringing up a nerf of A Thousand Faces from 3.0, stating that it used to be alter self is irrelevant since it got changed to disguise self in 3.5.

The debate was over the second that you conceded that Minor Shape Change = disguise self. Disguise self isn't eligible for Assume Supernatural Ability.

Same as above. Not addressing every single instance the rules grouped A Thousand Mask, Disguise Self, and their 3.0 counterparts being categorized together with Polymorph and just saying you're right.

Ok, seems like that's your entire opinion. I guess we're done here.




Neither interpretation conflicts with anything.
...
Neither interpretation requires you to make up a ton of stuff
Interpretation 2 does. It requires you to address every single polymorph related rule in all of the books and find a way to say form changing effects and polymorph effects are not the same and somehow exclude minor change shape. Interpretation 1 does not, because the rules actually don't differentiate between any form changing effect.

Rather than snippet everything I'm just gonna respond to the rest of your post without quoting you.

----

The DMG gets to decide what a "polymorph effect" is because it's the one coining the term, not PHB. PHB does not have a "polymorph effect".
A similar issue: DMG's "charm" effect entry says you get a 2nd will save like Dominate Person, but PHB's Charm Person does not say you can. The correct interpretation? DMG sets what a "charm" effect is and whatever the DMG says that isn't in charm person applies to charm person as well. DMG decides what a "polymorph effect" is.

Actually Rules Compendium gets to decide it, but we're addressing this DMG quote.

DMG says polymorph spell is the general polymorph effect, which means not general polymorph effects exist.
DMG says abilities (not spells) are polymorph effects too.

Change Shape, Alternate Form, and Minor Change Shape fulfill all the requirements in the DMG's definition of a polymorph effect. Change your shape (it's in the ability's name), don't change your type, and does not disorient when used.

Just to be clear right here, you are saying the reason the DMG's definition of a polymorph effect must be discarded is because only PHB gets to say what a polymorph effect is? Is that your entire reasoning?

----

Just to be clear here, you are saying under the Changing Forms section, and under the section Revised Spell section, the polymorph subschool is not a changing forms effect and is its entirely separate entity and is therefore not similar to all the other abilities located under "changing forms"?

----


So 3.5 Druid definitely doesn't work with ASA, while 3.0 Druid did. The writers changed it specifically so that it wouldn't work with ASA. It is worded very similar to MCS. Therefore, the writers didn't want ASA to work with MCS. See how guessing at authorial intent can go both ways? We can never know exactly what the writers intended. Even an FAQ answered by the actual author could be them retconning their idea now that they've had some time to regret their earlier decisions. We have the RAW to rely on. We can't know that the authors would have given Changelings an ability like alter self in 3.0; even if they had, maybe they would have been updated to 3.5 to specifically not work with ASA. This line of questioning isn't helpful to determine what the rules of the game actually are though.

{Scrubbed} Shape, Appearance, and Form are synonyms in this game. These 3 words have been used interchangeably way too much, within the same ability descriptions in fact. Multiple times too. Change Shape for example is an ability that changes your shape (it's in its name), and what it does is let you assume the appearance of another creature, and then it goes on to say the creature whose "form" you assumed.

Disguise Self has been explicitly called out as form-altering magic in both Rules Compendium and Player's Handbook. And that spell is 100% appearance.

Here's 3.5 Disguise Self

The spell does not provide the abilities or mannerisms of the chosen form

{Scrubbed}


Ok, I think I got the gist of why everyone does not agree with me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's
1. MCS is similar to disguise self and therefore not similar to polymorph self. And somehow ignore/dismiss every single instance in all the books both 3.0 and 3.5 including PHB, Rules Compendium, and Savage Species says they are. A Thousand Faces at least.
2. MCS is appearance, and appearance is not form or shape. Even though its both in the name and description. Minor Change Shape. Chosen Form. Natural Form. Alter their Appearance.

{Scrubbed}

Ok, lets agree to disagree here. No need for any of us to try and convince each other. I made this thread to see if anyone can provide something convincing, and all i got is appearance =/= form, and disguise self =/= form change without providing any rule quotes of their own {Scrubbed} so... yeah. Thoroughly unconvincing.

[Gruftzwerg]

It's said to let you assume the form of creatures.
It's the physical form of disguise self


disguise self, alter self, polymorph, and shapechange are all labelled form altering magic.

A thousand faces is grouped together with the polymorph subschool, alternate form, and change shape under the section "changing forms".

And your opinion is that this lacks the language?

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}



Note the difference between the requirements of ASA and the use ("Benefit:") of it.

Requirement: "... ability to assume a new form magically"

Benefit: "...use a single supernatural ability of another kind of creature while assuming its form through a polymorph self spell or a similar effect. ..."

While you are free to argue that the intention (RAI) was the same (and for no reason prefer the "requirement version" as "intended" instead of assuming that the "Benefit: version" is intended), you may not argue that this is RAW.

RAW differentiates between qualifying for a feat and using it. Just because you qualify for a feat doesn't automatically mean that you can use it too. There are multiple reasons why this can be. A simple example is DMM who relies on Turn Undead charges to fuel. Using a feat may imply further restrictions under which it can be used. While this is not elegant editing, it's not wrong either.

Thus, you can legally qualify with Minor Change Shape for ASA, but you couldn't use it. While this may seem totally useless, you can still abuse it as early entry for ASA (if you need the higher lvl feat-slots for more demanding feats). You could still get a Polymoph effect later to use ASA.
Not totally useless but very limited in its use (using MCS as entry for ASA).

As said, RAI you are free to assume that either one (requirements or benefits section) has the right intention (while I still don't see how you would decide which one is the right intention here?).
RAW has a more strict, but clear answer.

So my conclusion is:
If you don't like the result RAW gives, you have to make houserules here (nothing wrong with that, as said. It's the norm to make such things according to your tables needs). Because we seem to lack any hint what RAI might have been here.

[Doctor Despair]

disguise self, alter self, polymorph, and shapechange are all labelled form altering magic.

You weren't responding to me, but this is incorrect. They are not all form changing magic. Disguise self and thousand faces explicitly alter your form, but aren't explicitly changing you into a new one. Altering your form =/= changing your form into a new one, or assuming the form of another creature.


A thousand faces is grouped together with the polymorph subschool, alternate form, and change shape under the section "changing forms".

Again, your quote from above doesn't say what you're saying it does. The section is labeled Changing Forms, yes, and everything in there is related to changing forms -- but they are not all examples of how to change your form. The section itself says:


"Some special abilities allow a creature to change its form or appearance.

Changing your appearance =/= changing your form. It is necessary, but not sufficient to change your appearance to qualify as changing your form. Additionally, thousand faces may have been included as an example of something that was form-changing (3.0 druid) but now is not form-changing (3.5 druid).



And your opinion is that this lacks the language?

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

{Scrubbed}



Same as above. Not addressing every single instance the rules grouped A Thousand Mask, Disguise Self, and their 3.0 counterparts being categorized together with Polymorph and just saying you're right.

Being grouped together is neither necessary nor sufficient to prove that disguise self is similar to polymorph by a RAW perspective. I've addressed specific places they were grouped together thusfar, but if you have additional examples, we can discuss those too.



Ok, seems like that's your entire opinion. I guess we're done here.

{Scrubbed}






Interpretation 2 does. It requires you to address every single polymorph related rule in all of the books and find a way to say form changing effects and polymorph effects are not the same and somehow exclude minor change shape. Interpretation 1 does not, because the rules actually don't differentiate between any form changing effect.

You have not provided any rules citations that say that MCS is similar to polymorph. You have not provided any rules citations that say disguise self is similar to polymorph. There is a strict bar you need to overcome here -- the rules need to say they are similar. If the rules don't say they are similar, then it is up to the DM to rule on whether or not they are. If you as the DM personally think they are similar, as I've said repeatedly, you are entitled to do so without house rules -- the RAW allows it. However, you aren't asking "does the RAW allow me to rule this way." You are claiming that this is the only RAW way to rule it. That is a higher bar to clear.



Rather than snippet everything I'm just gonna respond to the rest of your post without quoting you.

----

The DMG gets to decide what a "polymorph effect" is because it's the one coining the term, not PHB. PHB does not have a "polymorph effect".
A similar issue: DMG's "charm" effect entry says you get a 2nd will save like Dominate Person, but PHB's Charm Person does not say you can. The correct interpretation? DMG sets what a "charm" effect is and whatever the DMG says that isn't in charm person applies to charm person as well. DMG decides what a "polymorph effect" is.

Actually Rules Compendium gets to decide it, but we're addressing this DMG quote.

DMG says polymorph spell is the general polymorph effect, which means not general polymorph effects exist.
DMG says abilities (not spells) are polymorph effects too.

Per your quote, the DMG says:


The polymorph spell (see page 263 of the Player ’s Handbook) defines the general polymorph effect.

The DMG defers the definition to the PHb. The rest of the section is describing how polymorph works, not defining what a polymorph effect is.

However, for the sake of discussion, let's assume they were defining what a polymorph effect is. In that instance, both the DMG and PHb would be offering criteria for what qualifies as a polymorph effect. The result? Both sets of criteria would need to be met. Where they disagree, the primary source rule would take over.



When you find a disagreement between two... rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

They disagree in two places.

In 3.5, polymorph no longer disorients you, so the disorientation is technically a disagreement, but fortunately for spellcasters, PHb is primary on spells, so it wins out.

Likewise, they disagree on whether or not polymorph effects change your type. Again -- the PHb wins out, because it is primary on how spells work.

Even if the DMG were treated as criteria to be a polymorph effect, it therefore wouldn't be adding anything -- that's why it tells you to look the the PHb to see what a polymorph effect is.



Change Shape, Alternate Form, and Minor Change Shape fulfill all the requirements in the DMG's definition of a polymorph effect. Change your shape (it's in the ability's name), don't change your type, and does not disorient when used.

The DMG doesn't define a polymorph effect. Its definition is "look at the PHb." Polymorph effects do change your type, among a number of other things.



Just to be clear right here, you are saying the reason the DMG's definition of a polymorph effect must be discarded is because only PHB gets to say what a polymorph effect is? Is that your entire reasoning?

No. I'm saying the DMG doesn't define what a polymorph effect is at all. It tells you to look at the PHb for the definition. Even if it did offer a definition, where it disagrees with the PHb, those parts of the DMG definition would need to be discarded, yes. That is how the primary source rules works.



----

Just to be clear here, you are saying under the Changing Forms section, and under the section Revised Spell section, the polymorph subschool is not a changing forms effect and is its entirely separate entity and is therefore not similar to all the other abilities located under "changing forms"?

----

I never said anything similar to that. Please take care to paraphrase me correctly if you're going to paraphrase me.

"Changing Forms" is the title of the section, but it has an introduction that explains what the section is about. Similarly, you shouldn't read the title of a spell and say "that's what the spell does" without reading the description of the spell.

The section is about things that change your form or your appearance. Everything within is similar in that they all involve changing your form or appearance. However, you could also argue that everything in the book is similar in that it appears in the Rules Compendium. The degree to which something needs to be similar for ASA is up to the DM. Appearing on the same page, in the same section, or in the same sentence as something may be sufficient for some DMs. By strictest RAW, the only thing a DM has to accept by RAW is an ability that is explicitly said to be "similar" to polymorph, "as polymorph," or "like polymorph," or something similar to those phrasings.

What I said about the revised spells section is that your use of it as a definition for the polymorph effect was inappropriate.

The section says that some spells that allow or force creatures to change shape have changed from how the PHb originally listed them. See page 122 for info on the polymorph subschool.

It doesn't say that all spells of the polymorph subschool involve allowing or forcing a creature to change shape.

It doesn't say that any spell that allows or forces a creature to change shape is in the polymorph subschool.

If we look to page 122 as designated, however, we can see (at the top of 123) that it actually does define the subschool.


Polymorph Subschool and Preexisting Spells: Any spell based on either alter self or polymorph should be considered to have the polymorph subschool. However, a spell’s existing rules text takes priority over that of the subschool.

So to be in the polymorph subschool, a spell or ability needs to either say it's in the subschool, or have a preexisting basis on alter self or polymorph.



{Scrubbed} Shape, Appearance, and Form are synonyms in this game. These 3 words have been used interchangeably way too much, within the same ability descriptions in fact. Multiple times too. Change Shape for example is an ability that changes your shape (it's in its name), and what it does is let you assume the appearance of another creature, and then it goes on to say the creature whose "form" you assumed.

Disguise Self has been explicitly called out as form-altering magic in both Rules Compendium and Player's Handbook. And that spell is 100% appearance.

Here's 3.5 Disguise Self

{Scrubbed}



It doesn't say you change your form. It suggests that you choose a form, but choosing a form =/= changing your form. I would, as a DM, consider it altering your form, as we discussed previously, but not changing your form to another form. There are no rules citations that designate Disguise Self a similar to polymorph, or as form-changing magic.



Ok, I think I got the gist of why everyone does not agree with me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's
1. MCS is similar to disguise self and therefore not similar to polymorph self. And somehow ignore/dismiss every single instance in all the books both 3.0 and 3.5 including PHB, Rules Compendium, and Savage Species says they are. A Thousand Faces at least.


No one is ignoring those instances. {Scrubbed} A Thousand Faces was similar to polymorph self when it was based on alter self. Now it is based on disguise self, so it is not, because there are no rules citations that say disguise self is similar to polymorph. Disguise self is form-altering magic that changes your appearance, not your form.



2. MCS is appearance, and appearance is not form or shape. Even though its both in the name and description. Minor Change Shape. Chosen Form. Natural Form. Alter their Appearance.

Again, I've always been with you that MCS changes your form, but this is an internally consistent reading for others to hold that just makes the "revert to natural form" line nonsensical and makes Racial Emulation dysfunctional. I wouldn't use it personally. However, just because I believe MCS changes your form does not mean that I believe changing your appearance = changing your form. I believe MCS changes your form because Racial Emulation says it does, and as you cited, the ability itself seems to assume you are not in your natural form when you use it. It is necessary, but not sufficient to change your appearance when you change your form. Changing your form means your appearance has changed; changing your appearance does not mean your form has changed.



{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

I don't think the other posters came here unprepared to change their mind. However, you have failed to provide rules citation or reasoning sufficient to change their mind. There is a difference. If you want to argue that this is the One True RAW, then you need to demonstrate that.

You have demonstrated that it is a valid DM reading for ASA to work with MCS. I never disputed that; many others did not dispute that.

You have not demonstrated that it is an invalid DM reading for ASA not to work with MCS. That is a much higher bar to clear; you haven't cleared it. It isn't a misconception to disagree with you on this front, and it isn't necessary to insult the other forum posters' efforts by claiming such. After all, you specifically solicited their posts to explain why someone would disagree with the combo working.



Ok, lets agree to disagree here. No need for any of us to try and convince each other. I made this thread to see if anyone can provide something convincing, and all i got is appearance =/= form, and disguise self =/= form change without providing any rule quotes of their own{Scrub the post, scrub the quote} so... yeah. Thoroughly unconvincing.

I don't think anyone's goal here was to convince you to rule differently in your game. If you felt that was my goal, I'm sorry I came across that way. It was never my intention to do so. People here didn't ignore your rules quotes though; your quotes just don't prove what you think they do.

[Troacctid]

"A school of magic is a group of related spells that work in similar ways." RC 120. The only general rule I know of that defines a way for spells to be similar. Let's check minor change shape against this criterion.

What school is MCS? It's not a spell, so it doesn't have one, but it is based on disguise self, which belongs to the illusion school and the glamer subschool.

What school is polymorph? According to the spell description, it belongs to the transmutation school. It later received errata adding the polymorph subschool as well.

So, seemingly the only general similarity test in the game, and MCS fails it. I await your citation of another rule that can explicitly test for similarity. (Explicitly, not implicitly; if you respond with a section that simply lists two effects under the same header without using the word "similar," I will gladly respond with another section that lists two effects under the same header, and I will expect you to either recant your list or accept that the items in my list are similar to polymorph.)

[redking]

Handful of spells similar to polymorph, of the polymorph subschool. A handful, but all the rest also have the same traits.


Trollshape

Your muscles ripple, and you hear bones crackling underneath your now mottled green skin as your form reshapes to that of a horrid troll.
You take on the form and abilities of a troll (MM 247).
You gain 30 temporary hit points, which disappear at the end of the spell's duration.
See the description of the new polymorph subschool on page 95 formore details.



Spider Form, Lesser

You take on the form and abilities of a Medium fiendish monstrous spider (MM 289).
You are treated as having the spider's Hit Dice (2) for the purpose of adjudicating the special abilities gained from the fiendish template.
You gain 5 temporary hit points, which disappear at the end of the spell's duration.
See page 59 for details of the polymorph subschool.


Dreaded Form of the Eye Tyrant

You take the form of a beholder (MM 26).
You gain 30 temporary hit points, which disappear at the end of the spell's duration.
You can use only one eye ray each round, and each of your ten eye rays can be used only once during the spell's duration.
For example, once you use your disintegrate eye ray, you can't use that eye ray again during this casting of the spell.
See the Polymorph Subschool sidebar on page 91 for more details.


Dragonshape

You take on the form and abilities of a mature adult red dragon (see below for your new statistics).
You gain 150 temporary hit points, which disappear at the end of the spell's duration.
You do not gain the normal spellcasting ability of your new form.
See the description of the new polymorph subschool on page 95 for more details.

I could go on with spell after spell. All effects similar to polymorph confer at least some abilities. Disguise self confer none at all. Take stuff out of context all you like. Everyone knows what is similar to polymorph and what is not.

[wefoij123]

There are no rules citations that designate Disguise Self a similar to polymorph, or as form-changing magic.


Special: Magic that alters your form, such as alter self, disguise self, polymorph, or shapechange, grants you a +10 bonus on Disguise checks (see the individual spell descriptions in Chapter 11: Spells). You must succeed on a Disguise check with a +10 bonus to duplicate the appearance of a specific individual using the veil spell. Divination magic that allows people to see through illusions (such as true seeing) does not penetrate a mundane disguise, but it can negate the magical component of a magically enhanced one.

Ok I think i got your opinion.

So the difference between my opinion and your opinion is that I don't outright say multiple rule quotes in PHB and Rules Compendium is wrong where as you do.

Alright, agree to disagree.

I'd like to point out the fact that the interpretation that excludes minor change shape requires defying unambiguous established rules in two books that consider themselves the authority of the rules/disguise self. Which makes this a direct conflict. Which is why Occam's Razor says interpretation 1 which doesn't require you to defy any established unambiguous rules is the correct one.


I don't think anyone's goal here was to convince you to rule differently in your game. If you felt that was my goal, I'm sorry I came across that way. It was never my intention to do so. People here didn't ignore your rules quotes though; your quotes just don't prove what you think they do.

I think there's a misunderstanding here. I hate it when I get the rules wrong. I recently learned that polymorph does in fact let you enter PrCs with race requirements. For the longest time I have ruled no. I hate this so much. So this is just to ensure I don't get this subject matter wrong.

But in accordance to some advice I received, I'm just gonna gather arguments and decide for myself rather than try to convince anyone here that I'm right.



"A school of magic is a group of related spells that work in similar ways." RC 120. The only general rule I know of that defines a way for spells to be similar. Let's check minor change shape against this criterion.

What school is MCS? It's not a spell, so it doesn't have one, but it is based on disguise self, which belongs to the illusion school and the glamer subschool.

What school is polymorph? According to the spell description, it belongs to the transmutation school. It later received errata adding the polymorph subschool as well.

So, seemingly the only general similarity test in the game, and MCS fails it. I await your citation of another rule that can explicitly test for similarity. (Explicitly, not implicitly; if you respond with a section that simply lists two effects under the same header without using the word "similar," I will gladly respond with another section that lists two effects under the same header, and I will expect you to either recant your list or accept that the items in my list are similar to polymorph.)

Test of similiarity? You're saying because the rules said somethings are similar, other things can't be similar too?

So...

A caster can’t sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect spells or area spells, or against similar abilities.
according to you, the caster would know all the creatures that failed a save from an area effect Su or Ex ability. Because having no schools, they cannot be "similar abilities" to area spells


Immunity to sleep spells and similar magical effects, and a +2 racial bonus on saving throw against enchantment spells or effects.
according to you Half-Elves are not immune to Su and Ex abilities that make a creature fall asleep. Because "similar magic effects" is spells only on the account of Su and Ex abilities not having spell schools.

Rather than list every single instance in the books that address both spells and Su abilities together (there is a hell of a lot), I'm just gonna agree to disagree here. There is not a chance in hell I'd accept the logic that "these things have been called explicitly similar, therefore nothing else can be similar to them."

In addition to the fact that in 3.0 the two have been explicitly called similar. But I guess your argument for that is 3.5 update destroyed this interaction because the way you'd update the feat to 3.5 would be in a way that destroyed the interaction.

edit: Arguments so far are (correct me if I missed any)
1. Racial Emulation is wrong.
2. All the rule quotes relating to disguise self is wrong.
3. Form, Appearance, and Shape are not synonyms.
4. 3.0 must be ignored.
5. If the rules says two things are similar, all other things cannot be similar to them by RAW because by saying two things are similar, the rules created a "test of similarity" that all other potentially "similar" things must pass.
6. DMG is wrong, because when it said polymorph spell describes the general polymorph effect, it invokes the primary source rule which nullifies the rest of the entry in DMG.

[Troacctid]

In addition to the fact that in 3.0 the two have been explicitly called similar. But I guess your argument for that is 3.5 update destroyed this interaction because the way you'd update the feat to 3.5 would be in a way that destroyed the interaction.
Changelings did not exist in 3.0; how is the text supposed to explicitly call them out?


edit: Arguments so far are (correct me if I missed any)
1. Racial Emulation is wrong.
2. All the rule quotes relating to disguise self is wrong.
3. Form, Appearance, and Shape are not synonyms.
4. Disguise Self is not similar to polymorph therefore a thousand faces is not similar.
5. 3.0 must be ignored.
5. If the rules says two things are similar, all other things cannot be similar to them by RAW.
You missed some.

[holbita]

Okay...

So let me get this right... this whole argument is based on the idea an ability that allows you to change form/disguise yourself is an ability similar to polymorph? I'm afraid we are missing a very important point:

Polymorph does MUCH more than just assume the form, it gives you plenty of other stuff, why would we consider assuming a form in such a puny way like using "minor change shape" would be the same thing as polymorph, they are clearly not similar effects. I mean polymorph heals you, replaces stats, gives you extraordinary abilities, changes type and subtype, etc.

The changeling on the other side does the equivalent of putting on makeup... how are those two similar effects on your eyes?

The purpose of the feat is clear, to take polymorph to the next level... the next level for a changeling would be to... gain natural weapons? movement speeds? clearly not a supernatural ability.

Minor shape chage is not a similar effect to polymorph, the same way that levitate is not a similar effect to fly.

Do not get stuck at "assuming a form" and forget about "through polymorph or a similar effect", just the ability to assume a form is not enough.

Hope this helped!

[Buufreak]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

{Scrubbed}

[redking]

{Scrubbed} If something is "similar to polymorph", then it has similar functions to polymorph. Appearance is an aspect of polymorph, but not the only or even most important aspect of it.

[Crake]

{Scrubbed}

[redking]

{Scrubbed}

[wefoij123]

"A school of magic is a group of related spells that work in similar ways." RC 120. The only general rule I know of that defines a way for spells to be similar. Let's check minor change shape against this criterion.

I thought about this even more. "similar ways" is not "similar effect". Bull's Strength and Polymorph are not "similar effects". They work in "similar ways" because they modify the body. And you saying the same subschool are "similar effects" is not RAW either, that's just you. And as I pointed out, your logic is severely flawed, and your interpretation prevents any effect that works on spells from working on Su abilities too so yeah, agree to disagree.


{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

1. I'm not trying to convince Forumites. Not anymore. Not ever again in fact. I'm just gathering arguments. Seeing how so many forumites are so sure that this doesn't work, I wanted to see the exact precise reasonings for it because the past topics didn't directly address it, and I lost my temper and got those threads locked.
2. I consider myself a reasonable DM and I allow it. And I know two DMs personally that do allow it. But they're not as focused on the rules as I am so their allowance doesn't mean anything. Can't really have a rule discussion with them either because they don't care that much about sticking to the rules.
3. It's not equivalent of turning on godmode. Not even close. My players tried to "abuse" it in a one shot I made to test it out and it failed miserably. Just like Planar Binding is fine as long as you ban the free wish monsters, ASA is fine as long as you ban the free wish form. The DC19 Will save required by the feat kills every combat application of the feat, and noncombat Su abilities just aren't that good. If turning into a Bodak to spam its at-will instant kill effect fails to kill even a 1hd goblin reliably, then that is pathetic. And you're saying something this pathetic is "god mode"
4. There's nothing forcing you to participate in this thread. If you find it annoying then go ahead and ignore it. Why do you have to feel the need to post in a thread you find annoying?

I get that you absolutely loathe this combo to the point you refuse to even give it a try before passing judgement. But you really shouldn't judge a book by its cover, should probably play test it before saying it's a god mode, and claim no reasonable DM would allow it when reasonable DMs do allow it because it doesn't really do anything. I have a munchkin player in my group and he ditched this combo after the 1 one shot we did to test it out. That's how weak this combo is and I doubt that you're more skilled than he is.

Even choker for that extra standard action. You're paying the cost of a feat and a race choice to have a 25% chance of doubling your standard actions before level 7 or before 11,200gp.

Having a small chance to do something you can do later slightly earlier by paying a race and feat cost is indeed God mode /s.


{Scrub the post, scrub the quote} If something is "similar to polymorph", then it has similar functions to polymorph. Appearance is an aspect of polymorph, but not the only or even most important aspect of it.

I have provided multiple rule quotes that define what a polymorph effect is and how minor change shape is directly included or satisfies the definition.

You on the other hand, is listing random spells and declaring thats the definition of a "similar effect" of polymorph self and that's why they trump the definition in DMG and Rules Compendium. If you don't see just how unconvincing your reasoning is I guess this is our last exchange.

[truemane]

Metamagic Mod: thread closed.