A Pun-Pun build is starting to look plausible

[ftafp]

If you cut the hand of the True Polymorphed person in a duel, does it go back to being an human hand?

The spell doesn't say it does and it wouldn't really defy logic if it didn't. I mean if I painted a cucumber blue and then cut a piece off would the piece stop being blue?

Frankly, what's more concerning is the fact that you seem to be trying to recreate the events of a Doctor Who episode

[Unoriginal]

The spell doesn't say it does and it wouldn't really defy logic if it didn't. I mean if I painted a cucumber blue and then cut a piece off would the piece stop being blue?

If you cut the True Polymorphed's head off, it does turn back, though. As does the rest of their body.

The DM just needs to rule out if they consider an amputated body part to count a dead/at 0 HPs or not.

[ftafp]

If you cut the True Polymorphed's head off, it does turn back, though. As does the rest of their body.

The DM just needs to rule out if they consider an amputated body part to count a dead/at 0 HPs or not.

The DM also has to decide if "the target" refers to the creature or each individual atom that makes up the creature. Also, bear in mind that the spell doesn't end when the target dies if the true polymorph becomes permanent

[qube]

The spell doesn't say it does and it wouldn't really defy logic if it didn't. I mean if I painted a cucumber blue and then cut

does your cucumber stop being blue when you kill it? - as per polymorph?
Your analogy doesn't work.

If I die i stop having a Heartbeat.
If I cut of flesh, that part immediately stops having one.

... Fyi what you are trying to do is invent & justify your own rulings. You can't do that: tot are not the DM.

Find us the RAW that deals with cutting of limbs - Because theorycrafting doesn't care about your personal interpretation of the tules. That's RAI, not RAW

[Dr.Samurai]

So if I'm reading this correctly, you're basically saying the spell allows you to:

"... use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form..."

And one of those rules is:

"You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source..."

And "other source" would include Shapechange itself. So in essence it reads "use your action to assume a different form and retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or shapechange..."

Even apart from the combination in the OP, isn't this a reasonable interpretation of the Shapechange spell? I don't know that it's all that strong since you're probably not going to eat up actions in combat trying to buff up into some incredible monster. Not sure what you can do with prep time that would be ridiculously powerful and within the restrictions. I mean... you still have one action a turn I suppose.

But still, how do we determine that "Shapechange" is not an "other source"?

And as formerly Khan the Destroyer at the WotC forums and the creator of Pun Pun, I am disappointed by all the poo-pooing in this thread at theory-crafting. Let people have their fun!

Keep it up OP!

[qube]

So if I'm reading this correctly, you're basically saying the spell allows you to:

"... use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form..."

And one of those rules is:

"You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source..."

And "other source" would include Shapechange itself. So in essence it reads "use your action to assume a different form and retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or shapechange..."

Except, you're not reading that correctly, are you? You litterly cut the middle of the sentence to do that. This is the sentence.

During this spell's Duration, you can use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form, with one exception - if your new form has more hit pints than your current one, your Hit Points remain at their current value.

Even if you get this ability ... once the spell ends - you can't do anything anyone. It doesn't matter that the spell is not cast on you - that's not what the rules say. After 1 hour, you maybe wouldn't lose

During this spell's Duration, you can use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form, with one exception - if your new form has more hit pints than your current one, your Hit Points remain at their current value.

But those first 4 words make you unable to use the rest of the rest of the sentence. The spell ended. The duration is over. By RAW the second part of the sentence no longer applies.

[Frogreaver]

So if I'm reading this correctly, you're basically saying the spell allows you to:

"... use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form..."

And one of those rules is:

"You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source..."

And "other source" would include Shapechange itself. So in essence it reads "use your action to assume a different form and retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or shapechange..."

Even apart from the combination in the OP, isn't this a reasonable interpretation of the Shapechange spell? I don't know that it's all that strong since you're probably not going to eat up actions in combat trying to buff up into some incredible monster. Not sure what you can do with prep time that would be ridiculously powerful and within the restrictions. I mean... you still have one action a turn I suppose.

But still, how do we determine that "Shapechange" is not an "other source"?

And as formerly Khan the Destroyer at the WotC forums and the creator of Pun Pun, I am disappointed by all the poo-pooing in this thread at theory-crafting. Let people have their fun!

Keep it up OP!

I've no problem with theory crafting. I do have a problem with making up RAW to theory craft from. I also have a problem when a rule is vague to simply assume the most liberal interpretation possible of it. That's not theory crafting. It's more like putting poo poo in the oven and calling it baking.

[Dr.Samurai]

Except, you're not reading that correctly, are you? You litterly cut the middle of the sentence to do that.

Eh, no. As I said...

Even apart from the combination in the OP, isn't this a reasonable interpretation of the Shapechange spell? I don't know that it's all that strong since you're probably not going to eat up actions in combat trying to buff up into some incredible monster. Not sure what you can do with prep time that would be ridiculously powerful and within the restrictions. I mean... you still have one action a turn I suppose.

But still, how do we determine that "Shapechange" is not an "other source"?

So it sounds like you have no issue with "other source" including "Shapechange" correct? So if within the duration of the spell, you can continue using your action to gain and retain various features?

Because that is what I was speaking to.

Whether Clone will keep those features after the spell ends is a different question that I think you're speaking to if I understand you correctly.

[J.C.]

What about True Polymorph? If I'm permanently True Polymorphed into an Ogre, and someone takes a handful of Ogre flesh and Clones it, does it produce a human clone or an Ogre clone? I'm guessing you'd say "human" because you said only "irreversible" physical changes count, but would like confirmation that I'm understanding you correctly.

Human.

True Polymorph is a magical reversible conditional alteration to your "normal form" that does not permanently change what your "normal" form is. When True Polymorph is dispelled you revert to your "normal form", ie your intrinsic physical form. True Polymorph would have to change what your "normal" irreducible form is for True Polymorph to duplicate via Clone.

Very few spells alter your base physical form. Reincarnate is one such spell.

If you Clone someone who is True Polymorphed you clone their "normal" form, not their magically polymorphed form. If you Clone someone who was Reincarnated you clone their form post-Reincarnation as Reincarnation does indeed change your "normal form".

Something like Aid or Bless wouldn't be copied since they don't physically alter you, but something like Alter Self would because it transforms your physical form rather than your game statistics.

Shapechange, Aid, Bless, Alter Self . . . None of these change your 'base normal' form. Rather they apply a layer of transformation on top of your "base normal". When the spell expires or is dispelled you revert to "base normal". If the magical transformations were a transformation of the underlying 'base normal' form there would be no reverting back to normal, the magically altered self would be the new base normal. However, that is not the case. Magic is almost always a transformation layer on top of the "base normal" and not a new "base normal".

Reincarnate changes "base normal". True Polymorph does not.

[JoeJ]

So it sounds like you have no issue with "other source" including "Shapechange" correct? So if within the duration of the spell, you can continue using your action to gain and retain various features?

That's not a reasonable reading of the text. To do what you want it would need to say, "including features from other forms assumed with this spell." This isn't computer programming, it's English.

[ftafp]

Except, you're not reading that correctly, are you? You litterly cut the middle of the sentence to do that. This is the sentence.

During this spell's Duration, you can use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form, with one exception - if your new form has more hit pints than your current one, your Hit Points remain at their current value.

Even if you get this ability ... once the spell ends - you can't do anything anyone. It doesn't matter that the spell is not cast on you - that's not what the rules say. After 1 hour, you maybe wouldn't lose

During this spell's Duration, you can use your action to assume a different form following the same restrictions and rules for the original form, with one exception - if your new form has more hit pints than your current one, your Hit Points remain at their current value.

But those first 4 words make you unable to use the rest of the rest of the sentence. The spell ended. The duration is over. By RAW the second part of the sentence no longer applies.

That only prevents you from changing once the spell is over. However, I dont think that matters as...

Human.

True Polymorph is a magical reversible conditional alteration to your "normal form" that does not permanently change what your "normal" form is. When True Polymorph is dispelled you revert to your "normal form", ie your intrinsic physical form. True Polymorph would have to change what your "normal" irreducible form is for True Polymorph to duplicate via Clone.

Very few spells alter your base physical form. Reincarnate is one such spell.

If you Clone someone who is True Polymorphed you clone their "normal" form. If you Clone someone who was Reincarnated you clone their form post-Reincarnation.

having re-read the spell for the millionth time I have come to the conclusion that this interpretation is correct based on the wording of the spell

The clone is physically identical to the original and has the same personality, memories, and abilities, but none of the original's equipment.

had it said "target" it would have referred to the current form. Original means the original creature. Interestingly, this would mean it would reverse the effects of reincarnate if interpreted literally

That's not a reasonable reading of the text. To do what you want it would need to say, "including features from other forms assumed with this spell." This isn't computer programming, it's English.

It can mean that in english too. we're playing a game of exact words. You can't use basic logic when being literal is the objective

[JoeJ]

It can mean that in english too. we're playing a game of exact words. You can't use basic logic when being literal is the objective

Being literal is NOT the objective. Being understood is. Completely literal writing makes things harder, not easier for most people to parse and it's not the writing style the devs used.

[qube]

having re-read the spell for the millionth time I have come to the conclusion that this interpretation is correct based on the wording of the spell

The clone is physically identical to the original and has the same personality, memories, and abilities, but none of the original's equipment.

had it said "target" it would have referred to the current form. Original means the original creature. Interestingly, this would mean it would reverse the effects of reincarnate if interpreted literally

Interesting it also prevents from worse shenanigans:

• true polymorph: transform random toad into a object: namely the finger of a custom humanoid race (lets say, one a race with all stats +9010; but a -10 on charisma saving throws)
  <most of the limitations are in the creature to creature section>
• use that finger to clone said human
• use magic jar your to force your way in in (magic jar has a charisma saving throw ... which *conincidently* it just can't make.)
  (as 1 isn't an automatic fail, you can't just use portrent to force it to fumble a +4500 save)

[Yucca]

In the interest of being super lawyerly - the Shapechange spell does not say that you gain the special abilities of the form you assume. It specifically calls out "game statistics", "skill and saving throw proficiencies" and "hit dice".

In general usage "game statistics" refers to the creature's ability scores. If someone asks "what's your strength stat?" few people would respond with "I can make 2 strength based attack rolls at +2 to hit with 1d8+4 damage".

You could argue that "game statistics" refers to the full "Stat Block" of the creature. I think a reasonable DM would rule this way. But in the absence of a DM ruling, Shapechange does not give access to the special abilities of the creature you've changed into, by RAW. Since we've specifically ruled out DM intervention in creating this scenario, this prevents the Shapechange spell from accumulating abilities.

I also think a reasonable DM would rule the the Shapechange spell itself doesn't count as an "other source" for the purposes of the Shapechange spell.

[Valmark]

In the interest of being super lawyerly - the Shapechange spell does not say that you gain the special abilities of the form you assume. It specifically calls out "game statistics", "skill and saving throw proficiencies" and "hit dice".

In general usage "game statistics" refers to the creature's ability scores. If someone asks "what's your strength stat?" few people would respond with "I can make 2 strength based attack rolls at +2 to hit with 1d8+4 damage".

You could argue that "game statistics" refers to the full "Stat Block" of the creature. I think a reasonable DM would rule this way. But in the absence of a DM ruling, Shapechange does not give access to the special abilities of the creature you've changed into, by RAW. Since we've specifically ruled out DM intervention in creating this scenario, this prevents the Shapechange spell from accumulating abilities.

This isn't true- the monster manual includes in statistics everything mechanical about the monster, and considers 'Stat Block' as being just another name for them.

[Yucca]

This isn't true- the monster manual includes in statistics everything mechanical about the monster, and considers 'Stat Block' as being just another name for them.

I could have sworn I remembered the Monster Manual referring to a creatures "statistics and abilities" which would indicate that the two are sperate. But A quick check proves that no such reference exists.

I stand corrected.

[LtPowers]

The problem with theorycrafting in 5e is that the rules were intentionally not written to be iron-clad or interpreted in a vacuum. They were written with the assumption of a thinking DM with common sense. Thus, theorycrafting crazy stuff that exploits "loopholes" is effectively trivial. And firming up the wording to close those loopholes would be contrary to the game's design intent.

I'm a computer programmer. I love looking for bugs in designed systems. I do it instinctually. But in my opinion, 5e does not support that kind of analysis.

And moreover, to the extent that attempts to find exploitable loopholes in the 5e rules result in attempts to close those loopholes, they only serve to pull 5e farther away from its design intent, and thus are inherently detrimental. Very few "bug fixes" implemented in 5e errata have been improvements.


Powers &8^]

[MaxWilson]

This isn't true- the monster manual includes in statistics everything mechanical about the monster, and considers 'Stat Block' as being just another name for them.

It actually depends on the monster. Some monsters treat "game statistics" and action options separately, others have (shapechanging) rules that make sense only if you assume they are the same thing. There's no single consistent interpretation.

[BerzerkerUnit]

If there is no DM, and Sage Advice is framed by WotC as advice to DMs as they are making their own rulings, then how can Sage Advice be relevant?

Also, you're not quoting Sage Advice, you're quoting a random website which collect Tweets, which are explicitly NOT official rulings even according to WotC. (Eventually they realized that Twitter is a terrible place for official rulings.) The fact that the random website happens to have "SageAdvice" in its URL does not make it Sage Advice.

Bolded by me: the bolded text here is argumentative semantic nonsense. It seems a willful effort to disregard the spirit of the discussion (clearly stated in the initial post and later) which is rooted in a disagreement about the relative level of depth between 3.x and 5e theorycrafting, and height of shenanigans the rules' elucidation could allow for outside the context of a playable game.

You're taking the breezy passtime of theory crafting and trying hard to make it as grueling and unfun as possible and I struggle to understand why you would do something like that unless you're either confusing the callous thrill of ruining someone else's fun (a habit you should have grown or been educated out of) or are in fact trapped in a sadomasachistic spiral of hating something but being unable to step away from it.

Either of those is better addressed with a close friend or family member or perhaps a caring professional. If you need such help and are struggling to figure out to whom you can turn, feel free to DM me and I will make an earnest effort help you find someone.

[MaxWilson]

Bolded by me: the bolded text here is argumentative semantic nonsense. It seems a willful effort to disregard the spirit of the discussion (clearly stated in the initial post and later) which is rooted in a disagreement about the relative level of depth between 3.x and 5e theorycrafting, and height of shenanigans the rules' elucidation could allow for outside the context of a playable game.

You're taking the breezy passtime of theory crafting and trying hard to make it as grueling and unfun as possible and I struggle to understand why you would do something like that unless you're either confusing the callous thrill of ruining someone else's fun (a habit you should have grown or been educated out of) or are in fact trapped in a sadomasachistic spiral of hating something but being unable to step away from it.

Either of those is better addressed with a close friend or family member or perhaps a caring professional. If you need such help and are struggling to figure out to whom you can turn, feel free to DM me and I will make an earnest effort help you find someone.

FWIW I didn't understand this word salad.

Apparently I'm argumentative, willful, unfun, callous, and sadomasochistic for pointing out that RAW (Rules As Written) are in the rulebooks and not on the Internet?

[Frogreaver]

FWIW I didn't understand this word salad.

I think he failed his insult check.

[MaxWilson]

I think he failed his insult check.

Next time maybe he should try mentioning elderberries.

[BerzerkerUnit]

does your cucumber stop being blue when you kill it? - as per polymorph?
Your analogy doesn't work.

If I die i stop having a Heartbeat.
If I cut of flesh, that part immediately stops having one.

... Fyi what you are trying to do is invent & justify your own rulings. You can't do that: tot are not the DM.

Find us the RAW that deals with cutting of limbs - Because theorycrafting doesn't care about your personal interpretation of the tules. That's RAI, not RAW

Bold by me.

None of the bolded text is true. Death as a concept is strange enough but we understand cessation of life to be brain death which can take several minutes. Note: when the heart stops, death is imminent, but not simultaneous unless it's a full body giblet situation. As for cell death, such as when an organ fails or is lopped off, it depends. Organs remain viable for transplant for 12 hours on average with kidneys being good for up to 36. Tissues like bone and corneas can be good for up to 24.

Italicized by me.
This is irrelevant based on the context of the discussion, clearly stated in the OP and again later. Consensus is the DM in a white room, and not general consensus where you can petulantly object from the side and expect to be counted and further derail. No, the only consensus necessary is by those engaging in good faith with specific points that take into account that no one is sitting down at your table with 5 books and a 4 page character sheet tittering at how they'll one shot your boss or dig a hole to the final dungeon room with a cantrip, we're just some people trying to have a good time by reading and thinking about what we've read.

[JoeJ]

If I die i stop having a Heartbeat.
If I cut of flesh, that part immediately stops having one.

But the pine tree in my front yard never had a heartbeat at all, or even a heart. Does that mean it's dead, even though it's still growing?

[Valmark]

It actually depends on the monster. Some monsters treat "game statistics" and action options separately, others have (shapechanging) rules that make sense only if you assume they are the same thing. There's no single consistent interpretation.

Really? I don't think I've ever seen a stat block without actions. Can you make an example?

[BerzerkerUnit]

FWIW I didn't understand this word salad.

Apparently I'm argumentative, willful, unfun, callous, and sadomasochistic for pointing out that RAW (Rules As Written) are in the rulebooks and not on the Internet?

My RAW are all on DND Beyond... on the internet... so maybe?

For not understanding what I wrote you sure got the gist of it.

But seriously, I meant what I said, I'm here to help if you need it.

I got to a later post where someone (maybe you) also made it clear they felt that this kind of analysis is ill suited to a game edition that steered clear of an effort toward precise wording. Again, begging the question of why one would engage with it unless the goal is to threadcrap.

In any case, I disagree. I think this edition rewards such analysis even more because it helps further refine what we as a community understand to be the intent of the rules. Most notably because resources like SA and developer tweets are given in response to our nonsense. Then we as DMs and players can then find a satisfactory middle ground for our own games. The more of these loopholes that are brought up in forums like this, the fewer times they create a pause in an actual game where a DM has to make a decision on the spot.

Now on to the fun.

Clone, True Polymorph, and Shapechange.

My hard and fast is that Shapechange doesn't work with Clone. Dropping to 0 ends it, broken concentration ends it. You have to have seen the creature, more trouble than it's worth. I agree that a strict reading leaves open the interpretation that form abilities are cumulative, but from there a lot of fine lines have to be drawn, like spell casting yes, spell slots no, etc.

True Polymorph is a different beast.

You True Polymorph into a Medium Dragon (Clone's gotta be medium) and get cloned, the clone is a dragon. Full stop. You get dispelled and turn back into nerd wizard and then die, your soul goes in the Clone, which is a dragon. That's my reading. The Clone doesn't have to duplicate spell effects but it does have to duplicate form, which was a dragon. True Polymorph (if permanent from concentration) no longer ends on death or 0 hp, so it is reasonable to believe a part cut off for a clone will be a Dragon part unless it is dispelled.

HOWEVER
Do you keep all your Wizard stuff in your new Dragon body? Yes. Clone says you retain all your memories and abilities. The Clone spell makes no mention of Class levels, features, spell slots etc, so it is reasonable to believe you would keep them from nerd body to nerd clone, therefore nerd body to dragon clone should work the same.

No DM in the white room? Then yes definitely. Dragons can cast spells, dragons can read, etc.

Someone griped that using the most permissive interpretation wasn't 3.x philosophy. It exactly was. 3.X was exactly "if it doesn't say I can't, then I can."

Do you have the Dragon's mentals? NO. It says you retain your abilities, ie the ones you had when you died so you'd keep your 20 int, etc. HOWEVER, that also means your awesome dragon body now has your 8 Str, 10 Dex etc.

Dragon HP or your HP, I'm leaning toward dragon since it says the form is physically identical to the original and you're going to take a hit on Con so they'll drop.

If the new Drago wizard gets dispelled, does he turn back into nerd wizard. My gut says no, the Clone was not under the effect of a spell, it is a dragon shaped clone occupied by a wizard soul.

If it were my table:
I'm fine with most of it. I'd probably poo poo the Shapechange stacks just because I'd have to make so many rulings it would be a drag. But spend a few days and 10s of thousands of gold to make yourself a dragon? At a level where the game shifts toward multistage fights with armies and annihilating illithid nautilus ships, it's drops in the bucket. If a wizard decided to do this instead of just be a Lich, I'd be shocked.

[qube]

> If I die i stop having a Heartbeat.
> If I cut of flesh, that part immediately stops having one.

But the pine tree in my front yard never had a heartbeat at all, or even a heart. Does that mean it's dead, even though it's still growing?

no ... are you under the impression that the *I* in the quote refers to a pine tree?
I mean, I know my english is bad ... but is it really that bad you think I'm a tree?

wait. Maybe I *am* a pine tree. Did anyone cast True polymorph recently?

> If I die i stop having a Heartbeat.
> If I cut of flesh, that part immediately stops having one.

None of the bolded text is true. Death as a concept is strange enough but we understand cessation of life to be brain death which can take several minutes. Note: when the heart stops, death is imminent, but not simultaneous unless it's a full body giblet situation. As for cell death, such as when an organ fails or is lopped off, it depends. Organs remain viable for transplant for 12 hours on average with kidneys being good for up to 36. Tissues like bone and corneas can be good for up to 24.

As someone with a degree in biotechnologie I actually already know what you're saying. You might have missed

does your cucumber stop being blue when you kill it? - as per polymorph?
Your analogy doesn't work.

Being pedantic on how death works in details does not work. Considering typically, a heart beat stops when you kick the bucket, a heatbeat fits the specified behavior of polymorph better then something being painted blue.

This is irrelevant based on the context of the discussion, clearly stated in the OP and again later. Consensus is the DM in a white room

(a) there is a control+f function. You're the only one who mentions consensus

(b) the OP note multiple times that there is no DM. That this a - to quote "DMless vacuum", and that, again to quote

There is no game involved, no players and most importantly no DM. Rules are followed to the letter, even if the letter leads to something ridiculous

I have no clue where you get that Consensus would be the DM.

You True Polymorph into a Medium Dragon (Clone's gotta be medium) and get cloned, the clone is a dragon. Full stop.

"Full stop" is not an argument. It's also not RAW. You can't willy nilly decide what happens. Or you could decide that the cosmic powers of The Weave crackle as you seperate one single target spell into two targets - becomming Pun-Pun in the process, leaving your mortality in the severed body part.

[MaxWilson]

Really? I don't think I've ever seen a stat block without actions. Can you make an example?

One example of treating statistics and actions separately is in the shapechanging text for dragons, which always says something like this: In a new form, the dragon retains its alignment, hit points, Hit Dice, ability to speak, proficiencies, Legendary Resistance, lair actions, and Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores, as well as this action. Its statistics and capabilities are otherwise replaced by those of the new form, except any class features or legendary actions of that form. Implication: capabilities (such as shapechanging) are not included in statistics.

Archdruid: While in a new form, the archdruid retains its game statistics and ability to speak, but its AC, movement modes, Strength, and Dexterity are replaced by those of the new form, and it gains any special senses, proficiencies, traits, actions, and reactions (except class features, legendary actions, and lair actions) that the new form has but that it lacks. In this context it's very unclear to me what "statistics" is even meant to refer to. Perhaps just abilities besides Str/Dex, plus HP?

Couatl: In a new form, the couatl retains its game statistics and ability to speak, but its AC, movement modes, Strength, Dexterity, and other actions are replaced by those of the new form, and it gains any statistics and capabilities (except class features, legendary actions, and lair actions) that the new form has but that it lacks. If the new form has a bite attack, the couatl can use its bite in that form. Implication: AC, movement modes, Strength, Dexterity, and other actions are not included in game statistics.

Barghest: The barghest can use its action to polymorph into a Small goblin or back into its true form. Other than its size and speed, its statistics are the same in each form. And yet, its bite attack says explicitly that it's usable in true form only. Apparently the bite attack is not part of its "statistics."

There's a bunch of other creatures with similar wording (death slaads, werebears, deep scions). I won't find them all.

Cloud Giant Smiling one: The giant magically polymorphs into a beast or humanoid it has seen, or back into its true form. Any equipment the giant is wearing or carrying is absorbed by the new form. Its statistics, other than its size, are the same in each form. It reverts to its true form if it dies. And yet it has a Rock attack listed in its action block, and has 40' movement. I defy anyone who claims that a tiny little Seahorse (Smiling One) can throw rocks up to 240' for 4d10+8(+4d6) damage when it doesn't have hands. Clearly that's not intended to be included in the "statistics" it retains. (Moving 40' on land without feet is also kind of dubious.)

There are some other creatures with similar wording (devas, vampires) but I won't hunt them all down.

Eidolon is the opposite of the above cases: When the eidolon moves into a space occupied by a sacred statue, the eidolon can disappear, causing the statue to become a creature under the eidolon's control. The eidolon uses the sacred statue's statistics in place of its own. In this case it's clearly intended that the Eidolon use everything in the Sacred Statue's stat block including attack options, otherwise there would be no point in even listing attacks for the Sacred Statue at all since it can't attack without an Eidolon in it.

Of course, we all know that the MM isn't carefully written anyway, or it wouldn't have stuff like this for vampires and yochlols: Mist Form. The yochlol transforms into toxic mist or reverts to its true form. Any equipment it is wearing or carrying is also transformed. It reverts to its true form if it dies. While in mist form, the yochlol is incapacitated and can’t speak. It has a flying speed of 30 feet, can hover, and can pass through any space that isn’t airtight. It has advantage on Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution saving throws, and it is immune to nonmagical damage. The RAW here is that the Yochlol turns into toxic mist and can't turn back, because doing so requires an action and incapacitated creatures can't take actions. Turning to toxic mist is a permanent self-gimping. That is why "RAW" is not a compliment--calling something RAW is often a way of calling attention to a defect.

TL;DR the MM is not using a single definition of "statistics", and also is not carefully written in the first place.

[JoeJ]

You True Polymorph into a Medium Dragon (Clone's gotta be medium) and get cloned, the clone is a dragon. Full stop. You get dispelled and turn back into nerd wizard and then die, your soul goes in the Clone, which is a dragon. That's my reading. The Clone doesn't have to duplicate spell effects but it does have to duplicate form, which was a dragon. True Polymorph (if permanent from concentration) no longer ends on death or 0 hp, so it is reasonable to believe a part cut off for a clone will be a Dragon part unless it is dispelled.

My take is a little different: the clone doesn't have any particular form at all until you die and your soul goes into it. Then it becomes whatever you were. I came to this interpretation by looking at the intended non-shenanigan use of the spell, which is to provide a contingency in case of unexpected death. Used in that way, a great deal of time might have passed between the casting of the spell and the activation of the clone (there has to be at least 120 days, but it could easily be years). If you come back as a clone after dying, do you still know the things you learned after casting the spell? If you've gained a language or tool proficiency through downtime, does the clone have the proficiency? If you've gone up in level, do you come back as your current level? If the answer to any of these questions was no, given the stated intent of the spell ("a safeguard against death"), the description would have said so. I have to conclude, therefore, that the clone takes it's form at the moment you die, not the moment the spell was cast.

But what about spells that are active? When you die, you stop concentrating. Any spell that requires you to concentrate, therefore, won't carry over. For the sake of consistency, I would say the same thing applies if somebody else was concentrating on a spell they'd cast on you. (Your clone will probably be well out of range anyway.) Any other spell that affects your body also doesn't carry over to a different body, unless there's something in the spell description that says it down.

For True Polymorph, after it has become permanent, I've never had that come up. I would probably rule that your clone takes the permanent form you died in, and that it can't be dispelled.

[JoeJ]

no ... are you under the impression that the *I* in the quote refers to a pine tree?
I mean, I know my english is bad ... but is it really that bad you think I'm a tree?

wait. Maybe I *am* a pine tree. Did anyone cast True polymorph recently?

Okay, so you're not a pine tree. But if you've cast Shapechange, you could be a fire elemental, a violet fungus, a gelatinous cube or a treant.