| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 10:40 AM | I'm going to address the comments by a triad member (who ought to have known better on most of what he wrote anyways) in this thread, since the Dispel Confusion still isn't up. Frankly, I think that moving LGCS to the hatchet-job that is the "Polymorph Errata" is pointless and hurts the campaign. I'm going to take on Chris Wachal's comments here, anyone else who has anything else, PLEASE speak up. If you disagree with the decision to ban polymorph and implement the erratic errata, PLEASE speak up. I'll admit that I was one of the people fighting to see this happen. I saw many, many druids with an 8 con who stayed wildshaped all day long. That's just abusive. Hardly. When wildshaped, they lost access to most of their equipment slots, couldn't wear armor unless it was special wilding armor, and had to spend a feat to be able to spellcast. I don't think those are unreasonable. I saw many druids who claimed they got to keep ALL of their equipment while wildshaped and had an ac of 40 because of it. That's broken too. No, that's called "cheating", as the wording on Wild Shape in the PHB and the wording in the LGCS 596 and prior clearly stated to the contrary. Unless they were shapechanging into a Medium-sized humanoidish creature, in which case they can STILL DO THIS. Nothing is changed with the new approach with respect to this complaint, therefore it does no good in this regard. The day I saw a sorcerer cast polymorph into an Annis Hag and share it and all of his buff spells with his familiar and the play 2 Annis Hags for every combat in a mod, well that just took the cake. He made everyone in the group feel next to useless because he had a better AC and did more damage than the fighters in the group while still having a near full compliment of sorcerer spells. Again, this is called CHEATING. No Familiar has a size above Tiny. LGCS 596 clearly states that shapechanging magic cannot alter a creature to more than one size larger than its normal form. By changing to a creature Medium or larger, the Sorcer was cheating, breaking the rules, etc. I'm not sure how you are saying that we "fixed" Polymorph or Wildshape. We didn't do anything to it at all. We just didn't use the errata. Now we are using the errata so that Druids now have to spend points in their Con score so that they have hit points and they don't get to use all of their equipment in wildshape so they don't have way too high ACs. The LGCS limited the number of forms they could take. It limited how much of a size change users of size-change magic could make. It reiterated that equipment didn't resize, making it perfectly clear. I'm already planning on making a druid who will use wildshape on a fairly regular basis, and I don't feel hurt by the errata at all. Bully for you. I don't play a Druid at all in LG, but I think this is detrimental to the campaign. WOTC's article on why they issued the errata is very correct. I prefer the term "hatchet job." It is impossible to balance a spell or ability with so many options. But we already took away the major complaint options, which were the stuff out of MM2/MM3/etc that are clearly just broken. If you factor in every possible creature you can change into, every piece of equipment your character might own, the table variation on what melds into you and what doesn't, plus what spell effects you might have on you....well, it's impossible to tell what effect the spell will have on you. Not at all. Everyone I've known who used these spends time pre-generating what their possible forms are, and being ready to cast the spell if needed. No major concern, and adjudicating the spell is just fine if you keep a level head. One time it may increase your AC by 2 and lower your to hit by one, the next time it might increase your AC by 20, your to hit by 20 and your damage by 20. Plus, when new books come out, it only increases the possibilities. That's the nature of a changing spell. OPTIONS. Wildshapers still can do all the things you just complained about, even though their HP don't change (which is stupid, since you can then easily get Con-drained to death even when you don't run out of Constitution points). And your second complaint in this segment is completely without merit, since the "new books" were never valid resources for Polymorph/Wildshape forms anyways under the LGCS. If you remove the number of options, however, you increase the balance of an ability or spell since you can more accurately predict what effect it will have. And that was the point of LG's campaign errata with regard to Polymorph/Wildshape, and it made a hell of a lot more sense. Thus, if you remove equipment as a factor from wildshape, you can simply look at the list of animals to see if any of them are too powerful to change into. See above. Polymorph, however, can't be fixed since it allows you to change into too many things. So, it needs to be removed. Chris Wachal POC - Ket Triad Again, see above. Size limitation and limiting to MM only for options kills your complaint without doing a hatchet job on the books. As far as I can tell, the only complaints you have are about people who broke the rules (and we, the players, shouldn't be punished because you couldn't be up on the rules enough as a TRIAD to recognize rulebreaking in action) and stuff that the old LGCS polymorph/wildshape policy already addressed. I think the old way was better. The reason for this change last year was that WotC were aghast over people using Wildshape/Polymorph in their Mark of Heroes campaign and using broken cheesy monsters from the MM2 and MM3. The Circle last year rightly recognized that the issues WotC was trying to "fix" didn't exist in LG - or at least didn't exist to the extent that they were breaking the game - and so we the players weren't punished for WotC's inability to run a decent campaign last year. We shouldn't be punished for that this year either. |
| Mommy was an Orc02-08-07, 10:52 AM | Re: 6 Con Grey Elf Druids The problem with 6 Con Grey Elf Druids is that regardless of whether or not Wildshaping is broken or not, 6 Con Grey Elf Druids are metagaming that as long as they survived until 5th-7th level, they'd never have to worry about their Con stat again. At which point, the Druids who did do this are at a huge advantage over the Druids who didn't. Having an extra 6-10 build points to put on Wisdom and Intelligence essentially turned Druids into Skill monkeys. This was especially true for MoMFs. |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 10:57 AM | Re: 6 Con Grey Elf Druids The problem with 6 Con Grey Elf Druids is that regardless of whether or not Wildshaping is broken or not, 6 Con Grey Elf Druids are metagaming that as long as they survived until 5th-7th level, they'd never have to worry about their Con stat again. One dispel magic later, blammo. |
| Itsa_Trika02-08-07, 11:00 AM | One dispel magic later, blammo. Wild shape is a supernatural ability. |
| Periac02-08-07, 11:02 AM | :weep: |
| Lupo02-08-07, 11:06 AM | the problem i see with the inclusion of the wildshape "errata" is that the in game balancing effects and gadgets i.e. the whole "bite of the you-name-it" chain is CLOSED for LG druids. apart from the basic silliness of the whole "errata", IF someone feels that druids became way superior to pure fighters, due to some combination of additional published material, the additional material should get the errata and not the druid OR do something for the fighters - and yes, pure fighters are somehow behind the power-curve of any other combination of frontliners; be it a tweaked druid, a tweaked frontliner build with "occult slayer" and "pious templar" levels or even a simple ranger-barbarian-fighter combination to some extend. but this is not the fault of the druid :rant: ciao martin m. |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 11:07 AM | I have a 10th level gnome druid, who never actually used wildshape in combat specifically BECAUSE his natural con is high enough that most forms would have caused him to LOSE hp by wildshaping. Going with the errata, I can actually do it now and not worry about lowered HP. Of course, I probably still won't bother, instead enjoying my dragonhide full plate and stone form wild feat for happy AC, especially while mounted. I do agree however that if nothing else, the shapechanging effects do tend to slow down gameplay if the caster/user isn't prepared with adjusted stats. Even worse is when the caster unexpectely polymorphs the fighter, who now has no idea what he is capable of. On a side note, the spell "Animal Shapes" still seems to be open...So druids could turn the whole party into any animal from the MM, depending on HD and caster level...A sad drawback of the erratta is that you retain your own type and subtype, with exceptio to gaining the aquatic subtype, so druids can no longer Animal Growth themselves.... |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 11:07 AM | Post removed, Periac has removed his which was posted to wrong thread. Thank you Periac :) |
| trollbill02-08-07, 11:19 AM | I prefer the term "hatchet job." Yes, we are well aware of you propensity to use derogatory and condescending monikers for anything thing and anyone who just happens to disagree with your personal point of view. But at least you are freely clearly declaring your feelings that only your opinion matters and that you have no intention of treating anyone who disagrees with you with a modicum of respect. |
| Mommy was an Orc02-08-07, 11:21 AM | One dispel magic later, blammo. Dispel Magic doesn't work on Wild Shape because it is a Supernatural ability. |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 11:25 AM | Yes, we are well aware of you propensity to use derogatory and condescending monikers for anything thing and anyone who just happens to disagree with your personal point of view. But at least you are freely clearly declaring your feelings that only your opinion matters and that you have no intention of treating anyone who disagrees with you with a modicum of respect. Oh, my opinion's not the only one that matters, but I prefer not to see the campaign damaged whenever possible. And the craziness that happened last time, with the massive unintended effects of the "polymorph errata" when it was released, pretty much convinced me that this was a kludge that hadn't really been thought through. |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 11:26 AM | Dispel Magic doesn't work on Wild Shape because it is a Supernatural ability. You are correct. It used to, but I see that has been changed. There are still ways to force a druid to un-wildshape, however. |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 11:30 AM | You are correct. It used to, but I see that has been changed. There are still ways to force a druid to un-wildshape, however. Only 2 ways I can think of: Death, and Anti-Magic Field... |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 11:31 AM | Only 2 ways I can think of: Death, and Anti-Magic Field... Dominate. Or Suggestion: "You'd fight better as yourself." |
| Mommy was an Orc02-08-07, 11:37 AM | Dominate. Or Suggestion: "You'd fight better as yourself." If you're failing your save vs dominate or suggestion, most enemies have a lot better options than telling the you to keep fighting them... |
| trollbill02-08-07, 11:37 AM | Oh, my opinion's not the only one that matters, but I prefer not to see the campaign damaged whenever possible. And the craziness that happened last time, with the massive unintended effects of the "polymorph errata" when it was released, pretty much convinced me that this was a kludge that hadn't really been thought through. If you truly wish to effect change, I strongly suggest you cut back on the aggressive terminology. It immediately puts the people you are trying to convince in a defensive frame of mind and lessens the value of otherwise reasoned arguments by giving the perception that you cannot be reasoned with. Squeeky wheel arguments aside, that doesn't mean you have to be a rude squeeky wheel. I don't disagree with some of the arguments I have seen you make, but I tend to ignore them because of their aggressive and inflamitory verbiage. |
| Gelth02-08-07, 11:38 AM | Dominate. Or Suggestion: "You'd fight better as yourself." And how often have you seen that in a module? Seriously? Once WotC errattaed the books, LG had no choice but to follow suit, even if after a delay. As the books get reprinted with the erratta, people will be turning up to play with them, and will be expecting things to work they way they are written. Old books get erratta to work like the new books. People understand this. New books don't get erratta to work like the old ones, that would be silly. --Penn, Ket Triad |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 11:47 AM | And how often have you seen that in a module? Seriously? Once WotC errattaed the books, LG had no choice but to follow suit, even if after a delay. As the books get reprinted with the erratta, people will be turning up to play with them, and will be expecting things to work they way they are written. Old books get erratta to work like the new books. People understand this. New books don't get erratta to work like the old ones, that would be silly. --Penn, Ket Triad Do you know how many times I've seen "Suggestion: you'd fight better with a melee weapon" used to screw the archers, or "Suggestion: fight barehanded" on the fighters? PLENTY. |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 11:51 AM | Do you know how many times I've seen "Suggestion: you'd fight better with a melee weapon" used to screw the archers, or "Suggestion: fight barehanded" on the fighters? PLENTY. Big difference is that most fighters and archers don't have good will saves and high wisdom. That and, depending on what they are fighting, a suggestion to un-wildshape could be construed as obviously harmful, causing the spell to automatically fail. |
| Howie2302-08-07, 11:51 AM | As far as I can tell, the only complaints you have are about people who broke the rules I can't speak to the accuracy of the entire post, but I thanks for the point-by-point refutation of a number of non-rules based examples of why the ability was problematic. What Chris' post did convey was the confusion that was experienced by a wide variety of players and judges in being able to adjudicate the ability. However, refuting the rules errors does not argue in favor of your position. I think the old way was better. There are a number of basic design premises in this LGCS. One of them is to keep LG more in line with mainstream DnD, (bye-bye pre-errata crafting CL errata). Adopting the Polymorph Errata puts LG in line with mainstream DnD and the other Living Campaigns that already adopted it. This decision derives from fundamental campaign design philosophies. If you want to spend the negative energy gnashing your teeth about it, that is your choice to make. If your point is to complain about what is a very fundamental decision, that is your time to waste. I think the message is clear that this is not a borderline decision, but it was something that was delayed from a year ago; it has been written on the wall for a long time. The only question remaining is to what extent the Dispel Confusion will enable players with druids to make a decision about whether to continue to develop the character. David |
| Madfox1102-08-07, 11:59 AM | Not to mention that you would need to know beforehand you are facing a druid, and all too often that would be meta-gaming on the DMs part. In the end though the real reason why we needed to change to the new rules was because everything new published by WotC includes them and the longer we wait the more confusion it causes. Although, I will admit I do prefer the new rules concerning polymorph spells and the much easier shape change abilities of monsters. Pieter Sleijpen RPGA Living Greyhawk Circle Member The Splintered Suns |
| Mommy was an Orc02-08-07, 12:13 PM | Do you know how many times I've seen "Suggestion: you'd fight better with a melee weapon" used to screw the archers, or "Suggestion: fight barehanded" on the fighters? PLENTY. Or in other words, do you realize how many times you've been lucky that your DMs doesn't know how to use Suggestion? Suggestion is best used to convince people that their friends are planning to kill them and the only hope of survival is to join up with the BBEG. It only has to sound reasonable - it doesn't have to be reasonable. |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 12:20 PM | Or in other words, do you realize how many times you've been lucky that your DMs doesn't know how to use Suggestion? Suggestion is best used to convince people that their friends are planning to kill them and the only hope of survival is to join up with the BBEG. It only has to sound reasonable - it doesn't have to be reasonable. I'd say that falls under obviously harmful, causing it to fail. More reliable uses of suggestion are ones that simply remove the character from combat entirely. Like "Wouldn't want to soil yourself. Now might be a good time to take care of that. Why don't you run off into to the woods. And make sure you are REALLY finished before you come back, even if it takes an hour. Wouldn't want to have to go again in the middle of the cave/dungeon/whatever." |
| MikeJS02-08-07, 12:22 PM | Do you know how many times I've seen "Suggestion: you'd fight better with a melee weapon" used to screw the archers, or "Suggestion: fight barehanded" on the fighters? PLENTY.Be that as it may, the average druid is going to have a will save of about +8 over the average archer or mutt tank. Unless a mod contains a Church Inquisitor, or the druid rolls 1s frequently or is ineptly built by the player, he is pretty much immune to being forcibly reverted. |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 12:25 PM | There are a number of basic design premises in this LGCS. One of them is to keep LG more in line with mainstream DnD, (bye-bye pre-errata crafting CL errata). Adopting the Polymorph Errata puts LG in line with mainstream DnD and the other Living Campaigns that already adopted it. What other living campaigns, precisely? Living Force is dead. Living Death is dead. I know of no other Living campaigns that have adopted this. MoH/Xendrik have, but they're not living campaigns. This decision derives from fundamental campaign design philosophies. If you want to spend the negative energy gnashing your teeth about it, that is your choice to make. If your point is to complain about what is a very fundamental decision, that is your time to waste. I think the message is clear that this is not a borderline decision, but it was something that was delayed from a year ago; it has been written on the wall for a long time. Not so, the impression I and many other players got last year, from the Circle's own comments, was that the Polymorph errata wouldn't be implemented specifically because we already had campaign fixes that worked and LG was not seeing the problems that MoH was with regard to the spell and to wildshape. |
| Gelth02-08-07, 12:28 PM | Quoted from the main LGCS thread. And when you can't normally wear armor at all and you're talking about total AC 25-28 at APL 10 (base 10, +3 Dex, +4 Shield, +4 Mage Armor, +6 natural armor, possibly a ring of prot or amulet of natural armor though that neck slot ought to be a CON amulet), it's not so amazing; most of the tanks are at 34+ and the "guideline" is usually that AC should be APL+20. Any tank who is sitting at 34 AC at APL 10 spend a whole lot more than that to get there. My Dwarven Fighter has concentrated on defense above all, and has the following: +2 Fullplate (+10) +2 Tower Shield (+6) +1 Ring of Protection (+1) (never seen a +2) Heavy Armor Optimization and Improved Heavy Armor Optimization (+2) Dex 13 (+1) That's a 30 AC. Now, he also has Dodge, Mobility, Titan Gighting, and Combat Expertise so that he can get his AC higher under certain circumstances, but he's spent numerous feats, a fair bit of cash, and taken penalties (tower shield gives a -2 to hit) in order to get where he is. He also has a lot of hitpoints and a lot of tactical flexibility (10 feats will do that), but he has no spells. So, most of the tanks are at 34 AC? Last time he played with someone with higher AC than him he was 5th level, and it was a 10th level character. Most 'tanks' I se have low AC and lots of hitpoints, and rely on killing things quick with power attack. AC 30+ is still rare at APL 10 in my area. Wizards getting a +6 that stacks with everything they have as a 2nd level spell that lasts hours... not intended. --Penn, Ket Triad |
| Howie2302-08-07, 12:28 PM | MoH/Xendrik have, but they're not living campaigns. This is what I was referring to. Different label, same point. David |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 12:29 PM | Not so, the impression I and many other players got last year, from the Circle's own comments, was that the Polymorph errata wouldn't be implemented specifically because we already had campaign fixes that worked and LG was not seeing the problems that MoH was with regard to the spell and to wildshape. I do agree with you on this point, that implementing the errata as well as removing polymorph were COMPLETELY unexpected. There was no talk of it. No controversy. Everything was fine. Then BAM! No more polymorph. Totally blindsided there. |
| AnexCDC02-08-07, 12:29 PM | I understand the need of the campaign to shift to using the errata, due to the reasons stated above. Its the nature of a living campaign. I believe that clarification of polymorph and wildshape were needed due to how confusing the abilities were, but I consider this a hack job since it does not resolve the issues with polymorph / wildshape and introduces some new ones. But seeing as we do have to live with it, my main concern now is to the nature of the rebuild being offered to druids. I personally believe that people should not be punished for using rules from the core books no matter how cheesy they utilize them. Thus I believe the rebuild should allow a druid to change any aspect of their character that has been affected by the errata. PS As a side note, I have watched one character get maimed by an errata and do not look forward to another character being maimed as well (neither of which were my characters) |
| Howie2302-08-07, 12:31 PM | I do agree with you on this point, that implementing the errata as well as removing polymorph were COMPLETELY unexpected. There was no talk of it. No controversy. Everything was fine. Then BAM! No more polymorph. Totally blindsided there. If I've mischaracterized this, my apologies. I've had conversations with druid playing characters recently in which they were finding this to be a likely action. This is what I based my writing on the wall statement on. Regardless. It's here. David |
| JohnduBois02-08-07, 12:41 PM | I think it would be wise to see what the DC offers before offering such severe and inflammatory criticisms. Based on my reading of the DC, the Circle knew how big of a change this was, and tried to adapt accordingly. The people who have Polymorph or other similar spells also get an automatic replacement; see the LGCS FAQ for details. As for the timing of the DC and its posting, I think it was made clear that it's at Wizards and any delay is up to the web guy. |
| sir_lune02-08-07, 12:46 PM | Only 2 ways I can think of: Death, and Anti-Magic Field... A specific weapon from DMG can also do it Shifter’s Sorrow This +1/+1 two-bladed sword has blades of alchemical silver. The weapon deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against any creature with the shapechanger subtype. When a shapechanger or a creature in an alternate form (such as a druid using wild shape) is struck by the weapon, it must make a DC 15 Will save or return to its natural form. Strong transmutation; CL 15th; Craft Arms and Armor, baleful polymorph; Price 12,780 gp; Cost 6,780 gp + 480 XP; Weight 10 lb. "And now the Amazing Dervish will transmute this monstrous dire bear in a dead little grey elf" |
| ZX67002-08-07, 01:09 PM | Getting into this late, but better late than never. I am doubting any change will come about to this, as it's already been decided on, but I for one am a bit disappointed in this decision. This isn't because I play a 6 CON druid, only because I feel the rules are detrimental to one of the few unique abilities of the class. I actually play a 16 CON gnome druid, also with Improved Toughness, and two Wild Shape feats in Natural Spell and Fast Wild Shape. I am a bit of a mix of a casting druid and a Wild Shaping druid. I don't use Wild Shape along with any other ability to get a ridiculous AC or anything of the like. I use it either for recon or the ability to go toe to toe with a monster in melee and actually be effective. I generally have a 15 or so AC when Wild Shaped (I barkskin the tanks, not myself, generally). I may not be affected very much, as with most animals I would turn into, I would lose a point of CON overall, and some HPs. I still, however, think it's a bad idea to nerf this unique ability like this. Besides, if CON changes do not turn into HP changes, then should we also change Bear's Endurance to not affect HP? No, because that would be silly. Well, so is having any CON change not effect HP. It just doesn't make sense with the way the rest of the game works in my opinion. |
| sibyl02-08-07, 01:10 PM | The only problem I have with the Druid changes is losing spells when I wildshape and not getting them back. That will hurt. I'm still wearing my periapt (+2 at 9th level, I should have +4 soon) for the benefits when I'm playing my Druid as herself, but I guess I won't be quite the mobile spell platform I was going for. Although memorizing Owl's Wisdom daily suddenly seems like a really good idea... I know this change does hurt a lot of people's character concepts and ideas. And its going to take a while to adjust. But Druids are, as a class, flexible and adapatable more than anything else. Even with the new Polymorph errata. I don't necessarily like it, but I can live with it. Flex a little, even. |
| Mortepierre02-08-07, 01:12 PM | Wizards getting a +6 that stacks with everything they have as a 2nd level spell that lasts hours... not intended. Greater Mage Armor is a 3rd level spell, not 2nd level. And just be glad we have it, else NPC would just have to sneeze to hurt us :weep: |
| Mortepierre02-08-07, 01:17 PM | The only problem I have with the Druid changes is losing spells when I wildshape and not getting them back. You're not losing spells, you're losing the benefit of magical items. Big difference. You can still memorize (and cast) buff spells to compensate (assuming you have Natural Spell, of course..) |
| jstorrie02-08-07, 01:20 PM | Alter Self is a 2nd level spell, that granted +6 natural armor (troglodyte form)... I think that's what he was referring to. |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 01:26 PM | You're not losing spells, you're losing the benefit of magical items. Big difference. You can still memorize (and cast) buff spells to compensate (assuming you have Natural Spell, of course..) He's talking about the fact that if his periapt melds, he also loses all bonus spells granted by the wisdom boost. However, one way around this is to cast owls wisdom on yourself, take off your periapt, wild shape, then put it back on. Then you don't lose any spells if you are using a +4 or less periapt. Just requires some order of operations is all. |
| Mortepierre02-08-07, 01:29 PM | Alter Self is a 2nd level spell, that granted +6 natural armor (troglodyte form)... I think that's what he was referring to. Ooops! Me bad :blush: |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 01:35 PM | He's talking about the fact that if his periapt melds, he also loses all bonus spells granted by the wisdom boost. However, one way around this is to cast owls wisdom on yourself, take off your periapt, wild shape, then put it back on. Then you don't lose any spells if you are using a +4 or less periapt. Just requires some order of operations is all. This was one of the silliest things caused by the Polymorph Errata last time too - the Druid who takes off all their gear, shapes, and then puts it back on every morning just so that it won't meld. |
| Dominick02-08-07, 01:44 PM | As I read it, the Wisdom bonus from the Periapt is retained in wildshape. It is retained since it is a neck item. You can then add things to the wild shaped druid. Most of the time I wildshape for Eagle form, and use Natural spell. As I read it nothing has changed. So the question is where do you get the idea that the Periapt is useless when melded? I don't read the errata that way. |
| bitznarf02-08-07, 01:48 PM | As I read it, the Wisdom bonus from the Periapt is retained in wildshape. It is retained since it is a neck item. You can then add things to the wild shaped druid. Most of the time I wildshape for Eagle form, and use Natural spell. As I read it nothing has changed. So the question is where do you get the idea that the Periapt is useless when melded? I don't read the errata that way. From the official errata download: "Any gear worn or carried by the druid melds into the new form and becomes nonfunctional." Seems pretty black and white to me. |
| ZX67002-08-07, 01:49 PM | So the question is where do you get the idea that the Periapt is useless when melded? I don't read the errata that way. You must be reading an old version or something. New one states that every piece of gear you have on you when you Wild Shape is melded into your new form, and thus, unusable. Even your neck slot item. |
| Dominick02-08-07, 01:57 PM | Since neck and cloak items were wearable in new form, the assumption was they were functional. Thats why I ignored it up to now. I reread it. The simple thing would be to except neck and cloak items for stat boosts to Druid wildshape. |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 02:02 PM | Since neck and cloak items were wearable in new form, the assumption was they were functional. Thats why I ignored it up to now. I reread it. The simple thing would be to except neck and cloak items for stat boosts to Druid wildshape. But, since the new errata says otherwise, Circle are not allowed to "Errata the Errata." The best way would be to keep the status quo, I have yet to see the issues raised by these people - and I have been at plenty of cons with people who use these spells and abilities - actually cause a problem at any table. The mages are still squishy, the Fighter/Casters still get hit with regularity, and the Druids aren't "broken" as LG currently stands. |
| ZX67002-08-07, 02:12 PM | What disturbs me the most about this change is that it is apparently about stopping some ridiculous builds and are ruining it for those of us who used Wild Shape regularly without ripping the system. What especially sucks is this is the second time my druid has been screwed by the LGCS, first by removing (rightfully so, but still) the old 3.0 builder books, and thus, my Ooze Master class levels (only one I've ever heard of afaik), and now, ruining my second turn as a Wild Shaper/Caster druid. Ah well. |
| Gelth02-08-07, 02:16 PM | Alter Self is a 2nd level spell, that granted +6 natural armor (troglodyte form)... I think that's what he was referring to. Indeed. Greater Mage Armor is a 3rd level spell that provides a +6 Armor bonus to AC. That doesn't stack with Bracers or a Mage Armor spell. Alter Self allows the same bonus, at one lower level slot, in Natural Armor, which most Wizards will have none of without it. Neither will most fighters, or really anyone but Druids. --Penn Ket Triad |
| Gelth02-08-07, 02:19 PM | What disturbs me the most about this change is that it is apparently about stopping some ridiculous builds and are ruining it for those of us who used Wild Shape regularly without ripping the system. What especially sucks is this is the second time my druid has been screwed by the LGCS, first by removing (rightfully so, but still) the old 3.0 builder books, and thus, my Ooze Master class levels (only one I've ever heard of afaik), and now, ruining my second turn as a Wild Shaper/Caster druid. Ah well. Your 'ruined' character can be completely rebuilt, stats and all, which has never been allowed in the campaign before. For anyone. If you don't like the direction that the erratta goes, then rebuild to something you would like. All you are losing is having your hitpoints change when you wildshape, and being able to keep items when wildshaped. The first is balance, and the second... well... I'd like to see a clarification that items that you could keep wearing don't meld. :) And I don't play a Druid. --Penn, Ket Triad |
| ZX67002-08-07, 02:19 PM | Indeed. Greater Mage Armor is a 3rd level spell that provides a +6 Armor bonus to AC. That doesn't stack with Bracers or a Mage Armor spell. Alter Self allows the same bonus, at one lower level slot, in Natural Armor, which most Wizards will have none of without it. Neither will most fighters, or really anyone but Druids. Everyone assumes druids cast barkskin only on themselves. A good druid will buff those who will use whatever spell you're casting most. i.e. casting barksin on the tank, who'll be taking the most hits assumably, would be better for the party than casting it on yourself. |
| AnexCDC02-08-07, 02:22 PM | The errata doesn't prevent the "broken" builds. What people call "broken" builds are done through investing the large majority of their wealth and character power to achieve, and these investments still provide the same returns for the characters power. The change only changes how you have design your base to build into being a wildshaper. |
| ZX67002-08-07, 02:22 PM | All you are losing is having your hitpoints change when you wildshape, and being able to keep items when wildshaped. The first is balance, and the second... well... I'd like to see a clarification that items that you could keep wearing don't meld. :) And I don't play a Druid. Well, my druid has a standing, non-buffed 16 CON with Improved Toughness currently, so HPs aren't the problem, although I still do not like the change, mainly because now dropping in CON when I wild shape has no effect either, and it should. Changing into a tiny animal with a low CON should have some negative aspects, other than being really small, and now it has none. My character could be tiny and still have 90 standing HPs at 10th level, something's wrong there. I agree though, I'd love to be able to keep my Wis amulet on post wild shape. Then I would effectively be the same as before. |
| dkay80702-08-07, 02:57 PM | Of course, I probably still won't bother, instead enjoying my dragonhide full plate and stone form wild feat for happy AC, especially while mounted. I asked WotC customer service about this, as well as a number of triad members. While you are in Stone Form, you are still considered to be wildshaped, thus losing the benefit of all your items, even though you are the same size and are still humanoid. |
| sibyl02-08-07, 03:19 PM | Actually, the other big problem is that a Druid is no longer an Animal. I think they fixed the errata so Druids can breathe underwater if they shift into a water-based form. So therefore, as far as I can see only limits Animal Growth buffs (but does Enlarge Person work)?, but I am at work and thus bereft of my rulebooks. Also, Jay_Ibero_911 He's talking about the fact that if his periapt melds, he also loses all bonus spells granted by the wisdom boost. However, one way around this is to cast owls wisdom on yourself, take off your periapt, wild shape, then put it back on. Then you don't lose any spells if you are using a +4 or less periapt. Just requires some order of operations is all. I'm a she. No big deal, that...just pointing it out. And I do (did?) recognize that workaround. Its not the end of the world, just something else to keep track of. I love playing a Druid, but the sheer amount of options and stuff to track can be a little overwhelming (especially during a con). :) |
| ZX67002-08-07, 03:59 PM | So therefore, as far as I can see only limits Animal Growth buffs (but does Enlarge Person work)?, but I am at work and thus bereft of my rulebooks. Afaik, you would still be a person in animal form, so Enlarge Person would work, although the actual buff factor of the spell is severely limited compared to that of animal growth. Still, even when wild shaped, unless the quarters were tight, I always summoned, sent in summon and animal companion, and animal growthed them, not myself. |
| Jay_Ibero_91102-08-07, 04:12 PM | I asked WotC customer service about this, as well as a number of triad members. While you are in Stone Form, you are still considered to be wildshaped, thus losing the benefit of all your items, even though you are the same size and are still humanoid. Funny, I asked Customer Service the same thing a number of times and got just the opposite response. And anyway, because your size and shape remain the same, I can simply take off all equipment, use stone form, then put all equipment back on again. Because I am still in gnome shape, all my equipment is still useable in stone form. No change. |
| sibyl02-08-07, 04:17 PM | I just got to 9th level and the Animal Growth spell - haven't had a chance to use it yet. I was kind of looking forward to 'sharing' that spell, but I can live without it. I'm still looking forward to sending in my animal growthed, elite constrictor. :) I admit I was annoyed when the errata was first proposed, and happy when LG decided not to adopt it. When I heard it was adopted with the new LGCS I was prepared to be annoyed all over again. But I just can't muster it up. Every objection I can think of has a work around (including a complete rebuild in the offering, including changing stats if you need to). My main issue now is remembering the changes the first few times I play, which is not the fault of anyone but myself. |
| JamesMaissen02-08-07, 04:46 PM | Once WotC errattaed the books, LG had no choice but to follow suit, even if after a delay. As the books get reprinted with the erratta, people will be turning up to play with them, and will be expecting things to work they way they are written. Old books get erratta to work like the new books. People understand this. New books don't get erratta to work like the old ones, that would be silly. --Penn, Ket Triad I'm sorry, but I had thought that when this originally came out and the campaign decided (wisely) not to follow it that this wasn't just a delay period. If that's the case, why wasn't it so said? (If it was I appologize that I missed it, but it seems like I'm not the only one). I fully agree with the idea that we should follow core rules whenever possible. I think we should include permanency and other things removed in LG personally. However the melding of otherwise wearable gear frankly just really galls me as silly. But the surprise factor is the worst here. If it really was inevitable, then making that clear would have been nice. Heck just knowing that it was being debated would have been nice. -James |
| bitznarf02-08-07, 05:02 PM | But the surprise factor is the worst here. If it really was inevitable, then making that clear would have been nice. Heck just knowing that it was being debated would have been nice. -James I'm with him. |
| Sieylianna02-08-07, 05:35 PM | I'm sorry, but I had thought that when this originally came out and the campaign decided (wisely) not to follow it that this wasn't just a delay period. If that's the case, why wasn't it so said? (If it was I appologize that I missed it, but it seems like I'm not the only one). I fully agree with the idea that we should follow core rules whenever possible. I think we should include permanency and other things removed in LG personally. However the melding of otherwise wearable gear frankly just really galls me as silly. But the surprise factor is the worst here. If it really was inevitable, then making that clear would have been nice. Heck just knowing that it was being debated would have been nice. I agree. I expressed displeasure with the errata last year when it was released and thought the Circle was listening, so I was quite surprised to see this change inflicted on us now. Ed |
| Bob_the_Theurge02-08-07, 05:41 PM | I agree. I expressed displeasure with the errata last year when it was released and thought the Circle was listening, so I was quite surprised to see this change inflicted on us now. Ed Likewise. We weren't told this was a "temporary reprieve." We were given the opposite impression by forum posts and I've checked multiple regional boards just to be sure: no warning was given to any players, either there or here or in the Dispel Confusion, that this was a "temporary" decision and that this errata was going to be implemented later. |
| scon4002-08-07, 05:50 PM | We did not know whether or not it would be temporary at the time. What we did know was that we could not realistically implement the changes last year when they occurred. So we put in the ban on the errata. And we took a year to look things over. In the end, there are still too many problems with the old polymorph/wildshape rules AND too many new rules coming out from WotC that depend on using the new polymorph/wildshape rules. So we decided that the time had come to implement those new rules. |
| JamesMaissen02-08-07, 05:59 PM | We did not know whether or not it would be temporary at the time. What we did know was that we could not realistically implement the changes last year when they occurred. So we put in the ban on the errata. And we took a year to look things over. In the end, there are still too many problems with the old polymorph/wildshape rules AND too many new rules coming out from WotC that depend on using the new polymorph/wildshape rules. So we decided that the time had come to implement those new rules. And that's reasonable. This is mainly shock and surprise. The question is can this be mitigated? Would it be possible to have a place where these discussions could go on, say between triad and circle (or just circle depending on choice), but open for public viewing? This would avoid these issues. -James |
| Eric Anondson02-08-07, 06:47 PM | I think it may have gone down a bit better if when the errata on polymorph was released following the 596 LGCS for the Circle to have mentioned in the months preceeding the 597 LGCS that the LG campaign WILL be moving to the errata on polymorph in the next LGC update. If it was clear where it was going for so long to the Circle where it was going on it, it would have been nice for some heads up. I know I would have likely dismissed my current cohort back then for one that doesn't abuse polymorph. *shrug* |
| just_be_glad_now02-08-07, 08:01 PM | "Errata Q: Recently, there was a substantial amount of errata issued regarding the polymorph family of spells, and abilities that let characters change form. How is the Living Greyhawk campaign handling this? A: Unlike other pieces of official errata, the Living Greyhawk campaign will not be adopting any of the changes that came about from the polymorph errata update." ~DC 2/2 That's a fairly strong statement implying both now and forever into the future. I suspect the change in leadership during the interim is to blame. |
| scon4002-08-07, 08:16 PM | "Errata That's a fairly strong statement implying both now and forever into the future. I suspect the change in leadership during the interim is to blame. Nope. As one of the members of the Circle before and after the errata, I can assure you that we did not intend the issue to be completely closed for all eternity then. We also did not expect to change to the new rules either, but as I mentioned, as we observed the campaign and the rules over the last year, we realized switching to the new rules was the decision that was in the best interest of the campaign. |
| MikeJS02-08-07, 08:20 PM | A specific weapon from DMG can also (revert shapechange) Shifter’s Sorrow This +1/+1 two-bladed sword has blades of alchemical silver. The weapon deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against any creature with the shapechanger subtype. When a shapechanger or a creature in an alternate form (such as a druid using wild shape) is struck by the weapon, it must make a DC 15 Will save or return to its natural form. Strong transmutation; CL 15th; Craft Arms and Armor, baleful polymorph; Price 12,780 gp; Cost 6,780 gp + 480 XP; Weight 10 lb. "And now the Amazing Dervish will transmute this monstrous dire bear in a dead little grey elf"If the druid rolls a 1 and hasn't crafted or bought a luckstone. Your 'ruined' (druid) character can be completely rebuilt, stats and all, which has never been allowed in the campaign before. --Penn, Ket TriadNo kidding; the druids are better off than the CHA16 DMM:Q clerics stuck with overpowered charisma and no option to rebuild it down to a 14 and toss 4pts at other stats. |
| arpster02-08-07, 08:23 PM | Besides, if CON changes do not turn into HP changes, then should we also change Bear's Endurance to not affect HP? No, because that would be silly. Well, so is having any CON change not effect HP. It just doesn't make sense with the way the rest of the game works in my opinion. This got me to thinking since we are suppose to be focus groups why not suggest something that will accomidate or come up with a solution that works for both side. Why not make the resulting Con from wildshaping not stack with spells or items for that matter that alter the Con. That would elimate someone from using an item after they wildshape or casting a spell on them before changing. Could also make a limit of how much your resulting Con from wildshaping can be. like no more than +6 from the charcters orginal. So at 15th level never could get a boost of more than 45 hp's to your over all total. Just something i thought up while reading the discussion. Thanks Mel |
| arpster02-08-07, 08:46 PM | Taking a defeatist stand point. The only thing I will miss is the racial skill bonus of the animals we got when changing into the animal forms. Because at least then I knew I was better at something then anyone else at the table. :weep: But I believe those are now gone because you keep your own type/subtype. If I am wrogn please correct me. Mel |
| WizO_Shadow02-12-07, 10:20 PM | No idea why this hasn't been posted to in 4 days but I'm beginning cleanup. If the topic needs .. fleshing out still I'll unlock it. WizO_Shadow |