deleted

[wefoij123]

Don't need this answered anymore so deleted.

[Kalkra]

I believe that Polymorph removes the base creature's extraordinary special qualities, but doesn't grant those of the new form.

[Duke of Urrel]

I think it's a good idea for humans to lose their extraordinary qualities when they polymorph into something else. It's a good idea because it balances the various Humanoid species. Demi-humans (if you'll pardon my use of this term) shouldn't be the only ones who lose something when they're polymorphed; humans should lose something, too.

However, I don't consider the answers given in the D&D Frequently Asked Questions to have the same authority as the rules in the rulebooks. I think many other commenters in this forum agree with this. It is said that whereas the questions asked in the D&D FAQ are canonical, the answers are not.

So I myself have some house rules for what happens when humans polymorph themselves into other creatures using Polymorph spells based upon the Alter Self spell. You're welcome to use them or to ignore them as you wish.

LOSING THE HUMAN BONUS FEAT: I don't consider any one of a human's feats to be more "human" than the others. I also don't like the idea that a polymorphed human should lose not only the first or second feat they ever gained, but also the use of every other feat for which the lost feat was a prerequisite. Instead, I require a polymorphed human to lose only the most recently added feat.

LOSING HUMAN BONUS SKILL POINTS: Likewise, I don't consider any one of a human's skills to be more "human" than the others. So here's what I propose to do if you are a human and you cast the Alter Self spell (or any other Polymorph spell based on the Alter Self spell) on yourself. Add three to your character level; the sum represents the number of human bonus skill points you have. Divide this sum by the number of skills you have. Drop any fraction from this number and convert it to a negative number. The result is the penalty that you must add to every skill check for as long as you are polymorphed, to reflect the fact that you are have lost your human bonus skill points.

I believe that Polymorph removes the base creature's extraordinary special qualities, but doesn't grant those of the new form.

You're right about this. Polymorph spells based on the Alter Self spell cause you to lose the extraordinary special qualities of your natural form, but they don't grant you the extraordinary special qualities of your new form. Only the Shapechange spell does this.

[Biggus]

Is this from the FAQ? If so, it's not technically a rule as such; opinions differ on how official it should be considered.

I've never known anyone to use this rule, but it does make sense now I see it explained.

As far as I know, any feat that the PC took at first level can be considered their bonus feat, but personally I'd certainly make them pick one and stick to it, rather than choosing which they feel like losing on any given occasion.

[RandomPeasant]

You did it! You found a way to abuse form-changing magic!

More seriously, the answer to anything but the most basic questions about form changing magic is "I don't know, and you're not going to figure out a RAW answer fast enough to stop your DM from houseruling something". The spells involve a multi-level inheritance tree (with some really gnarly inheritance questions), several sources of dubious applicability, and various errata or maybe-rules web stuff. They do what you can convince your DM is plausibly related to the text.

[Crake]

I feel like it makes no sense that a human would lose skillpoints and feats whenever they polymorph. These are learned abilities, what's supposed to happen when you transform, what you suddenly forget to do the things you knew how to do before? Balance be damned, it just makes no sense. I prefer the rules to be grounded in verisimilitude, and not balance.

Also, what happens when you return to being a human? Do you get your feat back? Does this mean now you get to re-pick it as whatever you want? After all, you forgot the ability, now you can pick something new to learn in a flash. There's nothing saying when you lose a feat for all the various circumstances that you have to pick the same feat when you get it back. Notably, losing a feat due to level loss, and then regaining the level doesn't require anything of the sort.

[Max Caysey]

I've been ruling no for the longest time now. Because nowhere in the rules does it explicitly label the human bonus feat as a racial bonus feat.

But here it is... creator of the game explicitly saying that it is a racial bonus feat and it is gained/lost because of polymorph... you can't get any more open and shut than that...

So the next question was, can the player choose the human bonus feat? The bonus feat is "any", so I think the answer is yes, but it has to be a 1st level feat and only a 1st level feat.

Unless I'm wrong. Am I wrong?

Does the feat originate from the human having a human body or having a human brain? If it is the body the feat derives from (which seems weird) then yes loose it while not being in human body. If the feat derives from the mind of humans being creative intelligent and adaptive then no, you should not loose the feat!

[Arkhios]

Frankly, and this is just my opinion, losing a racial bonus feat while merely polymorphed doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

But, alas, Dungeons and Dragons (arguably all editions) do not comprehend common sense, or even logic, so this is basically just shouting into the wind.

[sleepyphoenixx]

The human extra feat isn't a bonus feat in a rules sense, it's the extraordinary special quality to pick an extra feat.
The distinction is important because Polymorph doesn't grant extraordinary special qualities so you don't get to pick an extra feat when polymorphing into a human.

The subject gains the Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution scores of the new form but retains its own Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. It also gains all extraordinary special attacks possessed by the form but does not gain the extraordinary special qualities possessed by the new form or any supernatural or spell-like abilities.

Seems pretty clear to me at least.

As for why people don't take the FAQ seriously it's because it frequently contradicts RAW or even itself. Like it does in this case.
It's basically someone going "this is how i'd rule it", most of the time going by vague recollection without bothering to look up the actual RAW first.

Frankly, and this is just my opinion, losing a racial bonus feat while merely polymorphed doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

But, alas, Dungeons and Dragons (arguably all editions) do not comprehend common sense, or even logic, so this is basically just shouting into the wind.

If the bonus feat is dependant on your form instead of training it makes sense that'd you'd lose it if you change form.
What doesn't make sense is that things like weapon proficiency count as racial abilities. They're clearly learned instead of inborn, no matter how "traditional" it is for the race to shoot bows or whatever.

[Duke of Urrel]

Also, what happens when you return to being a human? Do you get your feat back?

Yes, you get your feat back. Why not?

Does this mean now you get to re-pick it as whatever you want? After all, you forgot the ability, now you can pick something new to learn in a flash.

It's more like forgetting how to use the feat and then remembering how to use it again.

I get this notion from earlier versions of the Polymorph spell – version 3.0 or perhaps even the old AD&D. The notion was that polymorphing was "disorienting." So it makes sense to me that while you're polymorphed as a human, you're disoriented enough that your skill checks may suffer and you can't use one of your feats. But when you turn back into a human, the disorientation passes and you return to normal.

I will say that you can make a good and strong argument that both feats and skills are "based on class levels" and therefore should not be affected by polymorphing at all. It is only out of respect for the FAQs (as well as criticism) that I have proposed my own house rules for the human bonus feat and human skill points.

Nope. Polymorph gives you racial bonus feats. Even the FAQ agrees.

You're right. The description of the Alter Self spell does carve out some exceptions to the general rule that it doesn't bestow the "extraordinary qualities" of the new form, and this is one of them. (I shouldn't make hasty edits late at night...)

I think I was confused by another one of my house rules, which is that if a racial skill bonus depends upon an extraordinary special quality that a Polymorph spell doesn't bestow, you shouldn't gain that racial skill bonus. For example, if you turn into an owl using any Polymorph spell less powerful than the Shapechange spell, you don't gain Low-Light Vision; therefore, it doesn't make any sense that you should gain the owl's racial skill bonus of +8 to Spot checks in dim light. In contrast, when you turn into a merman or merwoman, you should gain the racial Swim check bonus that the merfolk have, because this bonus obviously comes with the fish tail (not to mention the swim speed) that you also gain.

But even if I cling to my house rule, you're still right; when you turn into a human, even using the Alter Self spell, you should acquire the human bonus feat and human skill points. There is no extraordinary special quality that these human traits depend on; you should just acquire them.

The method for acquiring human bonus skill points should be the reverse of the method for losing them. The number of human bonus skill points to be acquired by a non-human should be your character level plus three. Divide this number by the number of skills in which you've already added skill points. Drop any fraction. The result is the bonus that you now add to all your skill checks as long as you're polymorphed into a human.

And the human bonus feat that you gain when you're polymorphed into a human can be any feat you choose that you otherwise qualify for.

[InvisibleBison]

I find this a very puzzling stance to take. FAQ is a clarification of the rules by the designer of the entire system. How can it be not official?

And I find this a very puzzling stance to take. Why does it matter if the FAQ is official or not? There are plenty of unambiguously official rules that are also unambiguously bad, and will be ignored or houseruled away in any game where they come up. In that light, it doesn't matter whether or not the FAQ's rulings are official; it matters whether or not they are good.

[Crichton]

And I find this a very puzzling stance to take. Why does it matter if the FAQ is official or not? There are plenty of unambiguously official rules that are also unambiguously bad, and will be ignored or houseruled away in any game where they come up. In that light, it doesn't matter whether or not the FAQ's rulings are official; it matters whether or not they are good.

At the risk of derailing the main discussion -

At a particular table, in a particular game, everything you said here is entirely true and is what matters at that table. But when we, the community, come together from all tables and all games to a place like this to discuss the game, and ask questions about the rules, it's very important that we know and can agree on what the rules actually ARE, and how they work, BEFORE we start discussing how to fix problems with them and suggest houserule changes in them for our particular games and tables. Especially in a game system with like 90 different rulebook expansions and the associated explosion of potential interactions and unforeseen consequences of combining things. THAT'S why it matters what sources are official, and it's why we sometimes delve into ridiculous discussions about seemingly irrelevant minutiae in the rules and argue about what the rules-as-written say on a given topic. We want and need to know if a specific build or an interaction between multiple rules from multiple books is legal/allowed in the overall system when it sometimes seems questionable or we wonder if we missed some other rule in some other book that clarifies the topic or makes the interaction not legal, etc

TL;DR - We have to establish the common foundation before we start the discussion of the rules and how to implement them at our tables.

[bekeleven]

I think there's an argument that polymorphing into a human at first level grants a bonus feat (Frankly, I wouldn't buy it, but it's at least a discussion.) But since the human Ex Sq is the ability to select a feat at first level, I think by the time you're casting polymorph you're well and truly out of range for it.

[Darg]

Why are we arguing here? Alter self explains this already:

You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include natural size, mundane movement capabilities (such as burrowing, climbing, walking, swimming, and flight with wings, to a maximum speed of 120 feet for flying or 60 feet for nonflying movement), natural armor bonus, natural weapons (such as claws, bite, and so on), racial skill bonuses, racial bonus feats, and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth). A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks (or more advantageous two-weapon attacks) than normal.

Polymorph takes away your racial feats and skill bonuses and gives you the new race's bonus feats and skill bonuses.

If we take the text of the human bonus feat at face value then trying to exploit the human racial feat would be too much work for most people to bother trying. You only get the bonus feat at level 1. I personally also don't think that polymorphing into a human grants the bonus skill points either for the same reason and for the fact that skill points are only spent on level up.

Anyways, we like to rule that polymorphing into human doesn't grant the feat unless at level 1, if the feat is lost the player can choose what feat to lose, they do not get to choose a new feat when the bonus feat returns, and they do not get the skill points. Simple, easy, no one tries to exploit it, the human doesn't get screwed, and the nonhuman players don't get jealous.

[Gruftzwerg]

Play Advice:
If these kind of situations should come up at your table, try to agree on something and stick to that. Because both options can be used for optimization purposes. You should just be consistent in your ruling so that players know what to expect the next time when someone brings it up again.




RAW:

1. As others have already said, when you poly into a human form, your target form is a 1st lvl commoner.

2. Due to the lack of the statblock of an average 1st lvl human commoner, we are free to select the additional skill point and the bonus feat. Note that the PC and DM should agree on the "regular" skill choices of an average human when this comes up the first time, and those should be fix for further polymorph uses. These regular skill choices block the use of "bonus skill points". The bonus feats and skill points are adjustable on each polymorph use, but they can't be spent on the regular skill choices due to the max skill rank rules.

3. On the contrary, a human polymorphing into something else looses his bonus feat and his bonus skills. Any human PC should therefore note his bonus feat and how he did spend his extra skill ranks. This should be done at least when the situation comes up the first time for the character to preserve the consistency for the future. Extra skill ranks can be easily tracked by either assigning them all into one skill (max a single skill as human bonus skill), or divide it evenly on your skills while lvling up (so each skill will lose roughly the same amount of skillpoints the higher your lvl gets).

[Crake]

I think it makes as much sense as gaining and losing weapon proficiencies due to race. You mention "balance" but this has nothing to do with balance. It's mechanics.

I mean, I'm equally of the opinion that elves wouldn't forget how to use a longsword when they polymorph, nor would a non-elf suddenly learn how to use a longsword due to polymorphing into one. The reason for this is simple, the elves' proficiency comes from a cultural training they have through their upbringing. This is something that makes no sense to gain or lose from polymorph. Just the same, the human's bonus feat comes from the fact that humans learn quickly. It makes no sense for something you learned to be randomly forgotten simply because you polymorphed. The whole point of polymorph is specifically that you don't affect the mind with the transformation.

As to why I mentioned balance, it's because someone else did, that it was a balancing factor because other races lost physical qualities like low-light vision and whatnot.

On a side note, can someone actually point to where it says the human bonus feat is an extraordinary special quality? Because I've never seen anything of the sort. Both the bonus feat and the bonus skill points are listed under human racial traits in the player's handbook, but are not mentioned anywhere to be Ex, and unlike the other races, humans have no monster manual entry that can clarify this.

[Darg]

I'm a fan of the primary source rule myself.

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.

Racial traits for playable races aren't classified as extraordinary abilities in the PHB and if there is a conflict between the PHB and the MM the PHB is assumed the primary source. As that is the case, you don't lose your racial traits, nor would you gain the racial traits of the race you transform into other than what the spells specifically tell you what you gain. I was out voted several times for this.

Basically, playable race racial traits would be considered natural abilities instead of extraordinary as anything not classified is considered natural.

Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

That said, my design sensibilities would have been to separately classify individual traits instead of lumping them together.

[InvisibleBison]

Personally, I think when the rules are silent, FAQ is the authority. [...] Because the developer interpreted it for us.

Why should I privilege the developer's interpretation of the rules over my own?

[Arkhios]

Why should I privilege the developer's interpretation of the rules over my own?

Because if there are no consensus between involved players' and DM's (or in this case, forumites') interpretation, the developer's interpretation should take precedence. Developers made the game and they have the better idea of the Rules As Intended than any of us. It's simply that if you didn't make the rules, you really can't know what the RAI is for a 100% certainty.

[Darg]

Because if there are no consensus between involved players' and DM's (or in this case, forumites') interpretation, the developer's interpretation should take precedence. Developers made the game and they have the better idea of the Rules As Intended than any of us. It's simply that if you didn't make the rules, you really can't know what the RAI is for a 100% certainty.

The game wasn't single handedly created either. Take the hideous blow invocation for example. The designer had intended for it to be a straight up standard action without casting as an SLA. The FAQ on the other hand contradicts this intent. Sure, we don't know the intent behind things unless they tell us, but it's obvious that people are swapping things around or just aren't as intimate enough to know the other designer's intent. In my opinion the FAQ should be the last line of attempted mediation and even then you have to take it with a grain of salt because it does contradict the rules at times.

[Gruftzwerg]

I'm a fan of the primary source rule myself.



Racial traits for playable races aren't classified as extraordinary abilities in the PHB and if there is a conflict between the PHB and the MM the PHB is assumed the primary source. As that is the case, you don't lose your racial traits, nor would you gain the racial traits of the race you transform into other than what the spells specifically tell you what you gain. I was out voted several times for this.

Basically, playable race racial traits would be considered natural abilities instead of extraordinary as anything not classified is considered natural.



That said, my design sensibilities would have been to separately classify individual traits instead of lumping them together.

You are not the sole fan of the Primary Source Rule (PSR). It's just that somehow you ended up with an interpretation of the rules that can cause "gray areas" with dysfunctions (just my humble opinion, no offense here).

_______________


It boils down, how the definitions of Special Abilities is to be interpreted by the rules.
Imho there is sole one interpretation that gives us 4 distinct categories for ALL abilities and not sole those abilities that are obviously visually marked with "(XX)".



1. The PSR says that there is topic supremacy and gives some nonexclusive examples. It doesn't limit nor define what can be a topic. Thus we have to take the full extend of the general english definition of "topic". As such anything that creates a distinct situation (specific) is his own topic. As soon as you have 2 or more (!) rules interacting, you can always take 2 and compare their status to each other. When dealing with multiple rules at the same time, you get a rule hierarchy. One direction is more "general" while the other direction is more "specific": e.g.
Attack Rules > Full Attack Rules > TWF rules > TWF feat > Power Attack ...
(this is an example how the interacting rules might look like)

2. The hierarchy for Special Abilities is by RAW a bit annoying due to the PSR:

The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, ...

This gives the general definition of Special Abilities in the PHB topic supremacy. But at the time...

The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

So, while for the general topic "Special Abilities" you should consult the PHB, for the 3 more specific subcategories (excluding Natural Abilities!) you should be looking into the MM version.

3. Since we found out that the PHB has topic supremacy, we should look at the PHB version (p.180). This is very important, because the SRD version changed up the order and this can creates misinterpretations imho. Now lets have a look at the PHB version:
***Added some numbers (x) (/x) at the start and end of the important parts for a better visualization***

Special Abilities

(1) Medusas, dryads, harpies, and other magical creatures can create magical effects without being spellcasters. Characters using magic wands, rods, and other enchanted items, as well as certain class features, can also create magical effects. These effects come in two types: spell-like and supernatural(/1). (2) Additionally, members of certain classes and certain creatures can use special abilities that aren’t magical. These abilities are called extraordinary or natural (/2).

Spell-Like Abilities: A dryad’s charm person effect and the greater teleport ability of many devils are spell-like abilities Usually, (3) a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name (/3). (4) A few spell-like abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are described (/4).
(5) A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability’s use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component. A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted
otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.
Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and to being dispelled by dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated, such as an antimagic field. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled.
Some creatures are actually sorcerers of a sort. They cast arcane spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. In fact, an individual creature (such as some dragons) could have some spell-like abilities and also cast other spells as a sorcerer. (/5)

Supernatural Abilities: (6) A dragon’s fiery breath, a medusa’s pet-rifying gaze, a spectre’s energy drain, and a cleric’s use of positive or negative energy to turn or rebuke undead are supernatural abilities.
These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance, counterspells, or to being dispelled by dispel magic, and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field).(/6)

Extraordinary Abilities: (7) A rogue’s evasion ability and a troll’s ability to regenerate are extraordinary abilities. These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic field. Indeed, extraordinary abilities do not qualify as magical, though they may break the laws of physics.(/7)

Natural Abilities: (8) This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly (/8). (9) Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.(/9)

(1) Within the general rules for Special Abilities we first divide the magical abilities into the 2 categories SLA & SU.

(2) Nonmagical abilities fall either into EX or NA

(3) In general, SLA refer to an existing spell and produce the same effect.

(4) SLA without an actual existing spell may exist but are called out.

(5) Explains how SLA work in general and some edge chases.

(6) Explains how SU work.

(7) Explains how EX work and notes again that they are always non-magical.

(8) Explains that NA thrive from your physical nature (your normal base race without any kind of character resources like feats, class lvl, templates and such).

(9) The sentence is further explaining (8) and doesn't refer to anything outside of the Natural Abilities paragraph (this is where most confusion thrives from imho..). "Those" is referring to "abilities a creature has because of its physical nature".
Try to read it like:
"Those abilities a creature has because of its physical nature that are not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like are Natural Abilities."
The sentence does not give you permission on a global level to treat any ability that is not designated as NA. Only those abilities that thrive from your physical nature. It's (the sentence) is not a global rule for Special Abilities. If it would have been intended that way, it wouldn't be standing in the specific NA rules but in the general Special Ability rules at the start of the section/quote.


5.
So, we have 4 distinct categories:

NA: (nonspecial) abilities (for its race) a creature has because of its physical nature that are not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like are Natural Abilities

EX: Special Abilities that are non magical

SLA: abilities that refer to a spell or are explicitly called out as SLA

SU: magical abilities that don't refer to a spell (and aren't called out as SLA).


6. Book of Exalted Deeds also has this interesting line that further proves my interpretation:

Exalted Feats
...
These feats are thus supernatural in nature (rather than being extraordinary abilities, as most feats are).

Most feats are (EX) because you don't get (most of) em due to your physical nature and most of em are non magical. Imho this sounds right to me by statistical evidence.

This sentence further proves that abilities don't always need to have a friendly reminder in form of "(XX)".
The general rules for Special Abilities (1) & (2) are always in effect and have to be applied by the DM. No reminders needed for that.

7. Conclusion:
Since the Human Bonus feat is a mental ability (disqualifies as NA since it is not physical) that is non-magical (disqualifies as SLA & SU), it can sole be an EX ability.

[Arkhios]

The game wasn't single handedly created either. Take the hideous blow invocation for example. The designer had intended for it to be a straight up standard action without casting as an SLA. The FAQ on the other hand contradicts this intent. Sure, we don't know the intent behind things unless they tell us, but it's obvious that people are swapping things around or just aren't as intimate enough to know the other designer's intent. In my opinion the FAQ should be the last line of attempted mediation and even then you have to take it with a grain of salt because it does contradict the rules at times.

This is bordering semantics.

Maybe I didn't say it clearly enough, or maybe there's a minor deficiency in knowing how to read between the lines, but Designer(s) and/or Developer(s), whether they were just one or many, still know better than we players do. Therefore, they are (or should be) the higher authority when the rules or FAQ are silent.

[InvisibleBison]

Because if there are no consensus between involved players' and DM's (or in this case, forumites') interpretation, the developer's interpretation should take precedence. Developers made the game and they have the better idea of the Rules As Intended than any of us. It's simply that if you didn't make the rules, you really can't know what the RAI is for a 100% certainty.

Okay, but why should I care how the developers intended the rules to work? If I'm playing in an actual game, it's my group's interpretation of the rules that matters; if I'm participating in an online discussion, it's the forum's consensus interpretation that matters. In either case, saying that we have to defer to the developers because they made the game seems like an appeal to authority. After all, in many cases it's pretty clear that the developers didn't really know what they were doing or how their game worked.

[Arkhios]

Okay, but why should I care how the developers intended the rules to work? If I'm playing in an actual game, it's my group's interpretation of the rules that matters; if I'm participating in an online discussion, it's the forum's consensus interpretation that matters. In either case, saying that we have to defer to the developers because they made the game seems like an appeal to authority. After all, in many cases it's pretty clear that the developers didn't really know what they were doing or how their game worked.

All I'm saying that if your group of choice (whether it's us the forum, or your table group) doesn't see eye to eye and can't agree on a ruling, as an outside opinion, the people who were part of the design, development, and production of the game in question simply have the best idea of how they intended the rules they have created to work.

If you think that this has absolutely no value whatsoever, why are you even using those rules instead of making your own?

[Darg]

You are not the sole fan of the Primary Source Rule (PSR). It's just that somehow you ended up with an interpretation of the rules that can cause "gray areas" with dysfunctions (just my humble opinion, no offense here).

I understand that. It just works in usable manner in this scenario. As I mentioned, I really just think racial traits should have been classified individually. It's just extremely silly to lose something "trained" just because you are racially different. An example is that baby elves come pre-loaded with combat training with multiple different weapon types. Logically and by lore it shouldn't be so.

This is bordering semantics.

Maybe I didn't say it clearly enough, or maybe there's a minor deficiency in knowing how to read between the lines, but Designer(s) and/or Developer(s), whether they were just one or many, still know better than we players do. Therefore, they are (or should be) the higher authority when the rules or FAQ are silent.

I just don't see much need in the use of the FAQ. The rules text is generally straightforward in creating a coherent experience that works quite well. The hideous blow interaction just seemed so common sense that I never even knew people were actually having players provoke AoOs to use the ability until I started looking at things online a few years ago.

Anyways, it's just a difference in perspective and likely a more isolated experience that lead to my perspective.

[Gruftzwerg]

I understand that. It just works in usable manner in this scenario. As I mentioned, I really just think racial traits should have been classified individually. It's just extremely silly to lose something "trained" just because you are racially different. An example is that baby elves come pre-loaded with combat training with multiple different weapon types. Logically and by lore it shouldn't be so.

Wait wait wait...^^


edit: Sry, mixed up the shapechange tread with this poly thread: The reply was meant for Shapechange. With Shapechange you can keep your Human Bonus Feat:

You gain all extraordinary and supernatural abilities (both attacks and qualities) of the assumed form, but you lose your own supernatural abilities.

Conclusion: Shapechange lets you keep you Human Bonus Feat since it is EX.

Sadly Polymorph does not do that.

[Darg]

Wait wait wait...^^

Seems we have been slightly on the wrong road here:


I always keep forgetting how cheesy and totally OP Shapechange is and why I barely play it (and sole use it for TO abuse)..

While you gain EX and SU, you have to sole give up SU.

And the cheese is, that with multiple Shapechange casts you can now stack EX abilities from multiple forms. Note that multiple casts just overlap.


Conclusion: Humans don't loose their Bonus Feat since it is EX.

(will edit my post above to prevent further misinformation; I really annoys me that I keep forgetting this, while I'm trying to get it right since a while..^^)

It's in the spell Alter Self

You keep all extraordinary special attacks and qualities derived from class levels, but you lose any from your normal form that are not derived from class levels.

The alter self>polymorph>shapechange description chain can be a little confusing.

[Gruftzwerg]

It's in the spell Alter Self



The alter self>polymorph>shapechange description chain can be a little confusing.

sry, just woke up and mixed this poly thread with shapechange..^^

Shapechange is more specific and thus you keep you EX. It says which Special Abilities you get and which you are giving up.

Sadly this does not work for Poly.

[Darg]

Shapechange doesn't allow you to keep any Ex abilities that are not from class levels.

[Gruftzwerg]

Shapechange doesn't allow you to keep any Ex abilities that are not from class levels.

Imho, "casting Shapechange" is a ability that comes from your class, thus you keep the EX abilities. That's why I said with multiple Shapechange casts.
You are loosing the EX stuff of your normal form with each cast, but the stuff from the previous cast is still as buff on your character sheet for the remaining duration.

Have a look here at the example in the PHB (p171)

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. For example, if a wizard is using a shapechange spell to take the shape of an eagle, a polymorph spell could change her into a goldfish. The shapechange spell is not negated, however, and since the polymorph spell has no effect on the recipient’s special abilities, the wizard could use the shapechange effect to take any form the spell allows whenever she desires. If a
creature using a shapechange effect becomes petrified by a flesh to stone spell, however, it turns into a mindless, inert statue, and the shapechange effect cannot help it escape.

Imho, if Shapechange's special ability to switch forms is preserved, any non bodypart-dependant abilities like the (EX) Human Bonus Feat from a previous instance (of Shapechange) should also be preserved. Cheesy but RAW imho.