3.0 polymorph other [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.0 polymorph other [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Vrellum
05-06-04, 09:24 AM I am wondering if the DC 19 will save to avoid the -2 penalty to attack rolls, etc. was removed in any errata or later releases of the spell? For some reason I thought it was, but I don't know the source. Also, does polymorph self give the same penalty (if one actually does exist)?
ksbsnowowl
05-06-04, 10:49 AM Those penalties were removed in one of the first erratas for the PHB.

And no, even in their original incantations, poly self did not suffer the same penalty from which did poly other.
Vrellum
05-06-04, 11:15 AM Thanks, is the 3.0 errata for the PHB still around somewhere?
DungeonMaster
05-06-04, 11:21 AM I think you should keep it in actually. The spell is very powerful and the penalties and drawbacks are there to make it less powerful.
ksbsnowowl
05-06-04, 11:25 AM I actually agree with DM on that point. Polymorph would have been less of a problem if WotC hadn't removed that clause.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Vrellum 05-06-04, 09:24 AM	I am wondering if the DC 19 will save to avoid the -2 penalty to attack rolls, etc. was removed in any errata or later releases of the spell? For some reason I thought it was, but I don't know the source. Also, does polymorph self give the same penalty (if one actually does exist)?
ksbsnowowl 05-06-04, 10:49 AM	Those penalties were removed in one of the first erratas for the PHB. And no, even in their original incantations, poly self did not suffer the same penalty from which did poly other.
Vrellum 05-06-04, 11:15 AM	Thanks, is the 3.0 errata for the PHB still around somewhere?
DungeonMaster 05-06-04, 11:21 AM	I think you should keep it in actually. The spell is very powerful and the penalties and drawbacks are there to make it less powerful.
ksbsnowowl 05-06-04, 11:25 AM	I actually agree with DM on that point. Polymorph would have been less of a problem if WotC hadn't removed that clause.