Why doesn't ASA work with Wild Shape, Alternate Form, and Change Shape?

[alexstrasa81]

To those who want to report this thread, I got permission from a moderator to make this thread.

Seems like a lot of people here think Assume Supernatural Ability doesn't work with Wild Shape, Alternate Form, Change Shape, and Minor Change Shape. {scrubbed} so I'm making this thread to get one last round of opinions from the other side to see if my table missed something or I misrepresented an argument or something. I only have two questions.

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.

Here's my first question: What is your reason that the "effect" referred to in the above quote is anything other than "assuming a new form magically"? As in, why do you think the above quote is demanding an effect that modifies your ability scores and natural armor?

In Rules Compendium
Section: Changing Forms (includes Alternate Form, and Change Shape)
Sub Section within Changing Forms: Revised Spells (includes Polymorph)
Sub Section within Changing Forms: Druid (includes Wild Shape and Minor Change Shape)

Here's my second question: What is your reason that the stuff listed under Changing Forms:Revised Spells is a completely different effect (aka not similar effect) than all the stuff listed under Changing Forms and Changing Forms:Druid?

Is your answer because it doesn't modify ability scores or natural armor?
Is your answer because it's not a spell but an ability?

edit: Actually one more question. I've seen people say they're similar but not similar enough. So my third question is, where does it say "degree of similiarity" matters? Any ability that lets you assume the form of another creature magically is similar to polymorph self since not only do they both do the same thing, but they also make each other irrelevant. So where does it say this is not "similar enough"? Where does it say it needs a higher degree of similarity? What is your reason that there is a degree of similarity in the rules?

[Gruftzwerg]

To those who want to report this thread, I got permission from a moderator to make this thread.

Seems like a lot of people here think Assume Supernatural Ability doesn't work with Wild Shape, Alternate Form, Change Shape, and Minor Change Shape. {scrubbed} so I'm making this thread to get one last round of opinions from the other side to see if my table missed something or I misrepresented an argument or something. I only have two questions.

Yeah our forum is popular for taking rule lawyering a bit to far sometimes^^
But remind you that these are often no play advices. It's just to find out what RAW says and what maybe was the intentions of the authors (RAI).

I for myself like rule discussions, since that is the way to learn the rules and also to see the real shortcomings of the rules. This way everyone can decide what is best for their table.

Here's my first question: What is your reason that the "effect" referred to in the above quote is anything other than "assuming a new form magically"? As in, why do you think the above quote is demanding an effect that modifies your ability scores and natural armor?

1. Sentence Structure

The rule ain't counting a variety of example, but presents a specific type of example.

To give you a real life example of what I mean.

The rule doesn't say:
"You need a sport car like a "Ferrari F1 car", a "Ford Rally car",...or something alike"

It say more something like:
"You need a sport car that is like a "Ferrari Formula 1 car" or something similar"

The first example includes all sport cars types, while the latter example narrows the options down to a specific type of sport cars. I hope I could make the difference here clear.

ASA makes also use of a specific example that narrows the options down. That specific example is "a polymorph self spell or a similar effect" (see below).

In Rules Compendium
Section: Changing Forms (includes Alternate Form, and Change Shape)
Sub Section within Changing Forms: Revised Spells (includes Polymorph)
Sub Section within Changing Forms: Druid (includes Wild Shape and Minor Change Shape)

Here's my second question: What is your reason that the stuff listed under Changing Forms:Revised Spells is a completely different effect (aka not similar effect) than all the stuff listed under Changing Forms and Changing Forms:Druid?

Is your answer because it doesn't modify ability scores or natural armor?
Is your answer because it's not a spell but an ability?

edit: Actually one more question. I've seen people say they're similar but not similar enough. So my third question is, where does it say "degree of similiarity" matters? Any ability that lets you assume the form of another creature magically is similar to polymorph self since not only do they both do the same thing, but they also make each other irrelevant. So where does it say this is not "similar enough"? Where does it say it needs a higher degree of similarity? What is your reason that there is a degree of similarity in the rules?

2. The Polymorph-Self example
As explained in (1.), ASA gives the specific example of the Polymorph-Self. So lets dissect this "3.0" term before we move on.
"Polymorph Self" and "Polymorph Other" got both combined into sole "Polymorph" in 3.5.

Form changing effects often refer to a general ability it is based of, like the Alter Self, Polymorph to Shapechange line where each is based of the former and expands the things you get by the rules.
Referring to something "like Polymorph" referrers to the ruleset of stat changes. So asking for something like Polymorph also asks for those "stat changes by the rules you get".

What we have here is a requirement for the form changing ability in the amount of changes as defined by the Polymorhp spell rules. It's not sole a request for any form changing ability. Thus, your ability needs to refer to Polymorph or at least to the Polymorph subschool (see below)



3. Polymorph and the Polymorph subschool
The from changing abilities did see a lot of changes over the lifetime of 3.5. One of those was the addition of the Polymorph subschool. Originally this was intended as replacement for the strong Polymorph and Shapechange spells (and to some degree even Wild Shape), but WotC didn't wanted to force the changes and ended up just adding the new stuff, leaving the DM the option to "ban" the older stuff if they want (what almost never happens btw..^^).
This leaves the Polymorph subschool in a difficult state in regards to ASA. While it was originally intended as replacement for Polymorph, it officially isn't by RAW. Nor does it refer to the Polymorph spells ruleset. The subschool creates its own rule set which has fundamental differences compared to Polymorph.
Thus a strict RAW reading would exclude Polymorph Subschool effects, while RAI would suggest to include them. But since Polymorph Subschool effects are already a 100% statexchange, there ain't much to get from ASA, so it's kinda irrelevant here in the end..^^


4. Wild Shape and Polymorph

At the time ASA was released, Wild Shape was referring to the Polymorph rules.
At the start of 3.5 Wild Shape was still referring to Polymorph.
Later Wild Shape got changed to be based of Alternate Form now.

And here starts the problem. Originally Wild Shape was intended to work with ASA.
Since ASA needs to be updated by the DM, there is an argument that it should include Wild Shape now.
But at the same time the DM might argue that the Wild Shape changes to Alternate Form intended to "change" things and that this now excludes Wild Shape from ASA.
Thus, this (wild shape) remains in the DM's decision how he updates ASA into 3.5

_____________________

I hope that I could clear your thoughts here (or create more confusion^^). If you feel that I missed to address something, or something feels unclear, just let me know.

[alexstrasa81]

snip

Rather than address what you said. I'm just gonna ask you a question.
A grimalkin has 7 wizard levels.
He uses alternate form to turn into a human.
He then uses polymorph to turn into an elf.
He then uses alternate form to turn into a dwarf.
He then uses polymorph to turn into a human.
He then uses alternate form to turn into an elf.
He then uses polymorph to turn into a dwarf.

You see how both alternate form and polymorph transforms you into humans, elves, and dwarves right?
Do these two abilities let you do same things? No right? Because Alternate form doesn't bestow subtype while Polymorph does.
So if they're not the same, then... are they similar? Does Alternate Form let you do something similar to polymorph just not as strong? y/n

[Crake]

Fact is, ASA is a 3.0 feat that existed at a time when the polymorph rules were vastly different. Ask 10 people youll get 10 different opinions and reasonings on why it should or should not work.

Only person who’s decision matters is your DM’s, and their decision shouldnt be based on anything other than how they think it would affect the health of their table.

There is no one-ruling-to-rule-them-all here.

Personally, I would allow any shapechange effect that gave you the Ex special attacks to count for ASA. If it cant even give you the Ex special attacks, why would it be able to give you an Su one.

[JNAProductions]

Were Changelings in 3.0?
Or are they exclusive to 3.5?

[RedWarlock]

Were Changelings in 3.0?
Or are they exclusive to 3.5?

3.5, originated in Eberron which was purely 3.5.

[Gruftzwerg]

Rather than address what you said. I'm just gonna ask you a question.
A grimalkin has 7 wizard levels.
He uses alternate form to turn into a human.
He then uses polymorph to turn into an elf.
He then uses alternate form to turn into a dwarf.
He then uses polymorph to turn into a human.
He then uses alternate form to turn into an elf.
He then uses polymorph to turn into a dwarf.

You see how both alternate form and polymorph transforms you into humans, elves, and dwarves right?
Do these two abilities let you do same things? No right? Because Alternate form doesn't bestow subtype while Polymorph does.
So if they're not the same, then... are they similar? Does Alternate Form let you do something similar to polymorph just not as strong? y/n

They sole appear to be similar from a non-rule and sole common sense perspective if you ignore the entire 3.5 rules.

But we have the 3.5 rules, thus I have to read em trough the lens of rules.

The requirement for ASA to work is not "any form changing ability" you might have.

It requires you to "assume its form through a polymorph self spell or a similar effect".

And as already explained, this in not an "inclusive example" given here but an "exclusive example". We are looking exclusively for form changing abilities that is either Polymorph itself or at least a spell based on Polymorph (e.g Draconic Polymorph; Shapechange;..).

"Polymorph-like" is an established term that is used to refer to polymorph's rule set for form changing. It is mechanically referring to the things the Polymorph rules allow you to get.

Your response didn't address my argument at all. Would be nice if you would address the arguments presented if you wanna discuss this topic.

Fact is, ASA is a 3.0 feat that existed at a time when the polymorph rules were vastly different. Ask 10 people youll get 10 different opinions and reasonings on why it should or should not work.

Only person who’s decision matters is your DM’s, and their decision shouldnt be based on anything other than how they think it would affect the health of their table.

There is no one-ruling-to-rule-them-all here.

Personally, I would allow any shapechange effect that gave you the Ex special attacks to count for ASA. If it cant even give you the Ex special attacks, why would it be able to give you an Su one.

First regarding Polymorph and EX special attacks:

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.

Getting EX Attacks is part of the requirements for ASA to work here. This is one of the reasons why Alter Self, MCS and "other abilities lesser than Polymorph" don't work.

I agree that regarding ASA each DM has his/her own view on that. And even by RAW there ain't even a clear answer anymore, since we don't know if Wild Shape is supposed to "still work", or if this was one of the "intended changes" that did come along the Wild Shape changes (to now work of Alternate Form).

[Crake]

I agree that regarding ASA each DM has his/her own view on that. And even by RAW there ain't even a clear answer anymore, since we don't know if Wild Shape is supposed to "still work", or if this was one of the "intended changes" that did come along the Wild Shape changes (to now work of Alternate Form).

Yeah, thats the biggest issue with a feat that is from such a legacy state of the game. Polymorphing has been through i believe no less than three iterations since the start of 3.0, and this feat was released during its first iteration, so its no surprise that it is so dysfunctional and difficult to come to a consensus on how it should work.

The best you can do is decide on a ruling for your table and move on. If you want it to work on changeling MCS, then do what you want, the issue arises when you try to push your opinion as indisputable fact.

[Darg]

The only real contention with ASA that I've seen is the interaction with MCS. With that it's because of the lack of a keyword and the disguise self part. It doesn't say you are taking on the form of anything. "Form" being the operative word that is used to say you are becoming something else.

The description of A Thousand Faces implies that even though the druid's appearance changes, they retain their natural (normal) form. So even here you aren't assuming a different form.

In my opinion, if it doesn't tell you that you are changing forms, you aren't.

I can also see the confusion MCS causes BECAUSE it uses "form" in the broader understanding of the word rather than the contextual use of the word as part of the rules.

[alexstrasa81]

They sole appear to be similar from a non-rule and sole common sense perspective if you ignore the entire 3.5 rules.

Just provide precedent that the word "similar" or "similar effect" is an actually defined in-game mechanical term that does what you say it does and I'll admit I'm wrong.

If not then similar is not a in-game mechanical term and we use english or as you say, common sense perspective. In which case it works.

EDIT: See next post. I give you an example in Savage Species that directly says in rule text that MCS and Polymorph Self are similar.

The only real contention with ASA that I've seen is the interaction with MCS. With that it's because of the lack of a keyword and the disguise self part. It doesn't say you are taking on the form of anything. "Form" being the operative word that is used to say you are becoming something else.

The description of A Thousand Faces implies that even though the druid's appearance changes, they retain their natural (normal) form. So even here you aren't assuming a different form.

In my opinion, if it doesn't tell you that you are changing forms, you aren't.

I can also see the confusion MCS causes BECAUSE it uses "form" in the broader understanding of the word rather than the contextual use of the word as part of the rules.

People I've seen who argued ASA not working with MCS also argued WS, AF, and CS not working either because if WS, AF, and CS work, it also works with MCS so to not admit that they argued they don't work with WS, AF, and CS. Saying things like it only works with spells and not abilities. Or that it must have the polymorph subschool and since abilities don't have subschools they don't work or the like.

Since you do think it works with WS, AF, and CS, I'll share with you the arguments that lead to it also working with MCS.
CS and MCS are definitely similar effects. MCS is literally just a lesser weaker effect of CS just like Minor Creation and Teleport are lesser weaker but the same effect of Major Creation and Greater Teleport.

From the racial emulation feat (from Races of Eberron, aka Primary Source for changelings)
"When you use your minor change shape ability to assume the form of a humanoid creature"

So if we put all this together.
MCS is under the Changing Forms section of rules compendium.
MCS talks about reverting to your natural form upon death just like polymorph. Which means your altered form is not your natural form but some other form.
We have the book that is the primary authority on changelings saying MCS lets you assume the form of other creatures.
MCS is just a lesser effect of CS.

Therefore ASA works with MCS.
And the sole counterargument is that only spells are "polymorph effects" therefore WS, AF, CS, and MCS don't work with ASA because they're not spells even though in 3.0 they worked with abilities.



I've seen some people talk about 3.0 rules and needs to be updated to 3.5? Well Alter Self 3.0 is Minor Change Shape and Savage Species have said Alter Self is similar to Alternate Form and said Alternate Form is similar to Shapechange and Polymorph Self.

So logically if you "update", then the 3.5's equivalent of 3.0's alter self (aka MCS) must also be similar to alternate form which is similar to Shapechange and Polymorph self.

[alexstrasa81]

snip

I'm curious as to your opinion on this
Savage Species p.162
"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"

Savage Species p.159
"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."

This is the 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."



As you can see 3.0 Alter Self is pretty much identical to Minor Change Shape except for the clothing change.

So you have here, direct rule text in the same book as Assume Supernatural Ability, explicitly saying a practical clone of Minor Change Shape is similar to Polymorph Self and Alternate Form.

What is your basis for saying if the word "similar" is in fact an in-game mechanical term, why is this above not saying MCS is similar to Polymorph Self?

[Crake]

I'm curious as to your opinion on this
Savage Species p.162
"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"

Savage Species p.159
"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."

This is the 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."



As you can see 3.0 Alter Self is pretty much identical to Minor Change Shape except for the clothing change.

So you have here, direct rule text in the same book as Assume Supernatural Ability, explicitly saying a practical clone of Minor Change Shape is similar to Polymorph Self and Alternate Form.

What is your basis for saying if the word "similar" is in fact an in-game mechanical term, why is this above not saying MCS is similar to Polymorph Self?

Alternate form was not a standardized, codified ability in 3.0. As you can see, two of the same ability functioned differently. Just because they had the same name, doesnt mean they had to both either qualify or not. In this case, the rakshasa’s ability would not work, wheras the bhargest’s would.

[Segev]

It really comes down to a DM's call as to what is "a similar effect." Yes, 3e is much more rules-specific in a lot of ways than 5e, but ultimately, the DM has to make rulings on things. Is Assume Supernatural Ability causing anything to break at your table if you allow it on certain features? If not, your DM should rule however he feels is most thematic. If so, he should rule to preserve game balance and fun, regardless of the RAW.

[alexstrasa81]

It really comes down to a DM's call as to what is "a similar effect." Yes, 3e is much more rules-specific in a lot of ways than 5e, but ultimately, the DM has to make rulings on things. Is Assume Supernatural Ability causing anything to break at your table if you allow it on certain features? If not, your DM should rule however he feels is most thematic. If so, he should rule to preserve game balance and fun, regardless of the RAW.

DM's call is only if there is a gray area. I don't think this is a gray area at all.

Direct rule text from all primary sources (Races of Eberron, Savage Species, Rules Compendium) say the same thing. MCS changes your form, you can assume the form of other creatures, and they're similar to polymorph self and alternate form.

What more do you need? Honestly. This is dead to rights.

Why do you think it's a gray area?



Also, this is the second time I've seen on this forum someone enter a rule discussion and talk about DMs disregarding the rules. Nobody here is at my table. Nobody here is my DM. I'm just trying to see if I'm right on the rules here. Or rather if my table is right on the rules here. My table thinks it works.

But that doesn't matter. This isn't about me trying to get this trick into my table. This is me wanting to play a legal character. I don't want to sneak an illegal character past my DM and do something I can't do. I don't want to play a mistake or a misunderstanding. I want to play the game. So I'm engaging in a discussion about the rules.

Whether a DM feels thematic about this particular trick or thinks this trick is balanced or fun is irrelevant. How is this relevant to the discussion? How is a DM feeling thematic have anything to do with whether MCS works with ASA or not? Why are you bringing this up? What does DMs house ruling have anything to do with the discussion at hand?

[Darg]

Are you unable to talk with your DM? It's the easiest way to simply get a ruling for your table. As you can obviously see there are going to be wildly varying opinions on the matter depending on who you ask.

[alexstrasa81]

Are you unable to talk with your DM? It's the easiest way to simply get a ruling for your table. As you can obviously see there are going to be wildly varying opinions on the matter depending on who you ask.

For the last time I am double checking my DM's ruling because he gets things wrong all the time and I don't want to play an illegal character.

Why is this such an alien impossible to understand concept for everyone here?

I'm just gonna wait for the few people not on my ignore list to give their final thoughts. And once either they change my mind or they change their mind or we reach an impasse I'm gone from this site.

There's an overwhelmingly large number of rule quotes that says it works. There's literally 0 rule quotes that says it doesn't. And it's a "gray area" or "DM's Call". Yeah right. But just in case I missed something I'm gonna wait around and then ask this same question over another site and then close the matter.

[truemane]

Metamagic Mod: closed for review