Design Discussion - Shapechanging

All Posts

1 2
>
Forum Index › Pathfinder
#1: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Jeremy.Smith , Location: Allen, TX Post Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 08:25 PM
    ----
So, this is a discussion I've had with both Phil and Andreas and want to get some player feedback.

In 3.5, Metamorphosis introduced a fair bit of balance problems due to its rather far-reaching nature, especially when combined with the Metamorphic Transfer feat.

In Untapped Potential, we introduced Formbinding and Assume Form, severely limiting accessible creatures and special abilities.

In Pathfinder, Paizo broke the shapechanging spells into varied ranks of different types - beasts vs elementals vs dragons, etc.

What sort of style have folks found works best in their games? I've heard that Formbinding is too strict, but Assume Form is OK without it. I've heard Formbinding isn't bad, but needs to be loosened up. I've heard that Metamorphosis isn't a problem, just Metamorphic Transfer. I've heard that we should go the route of Pathfinder, with 2-3 different shapechanging powers based upon type, possibly leaving out elementals entirely.

What do YOU think?
#2: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Frerezar Post Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 08:54 PM
    ----
Sadly enught for consistency´s sake it should be dealt with the way polymorph was dealt with. Divide it up.
#3: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Atlatl_Jones Post Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 09:45 PM
    ----
I agree, it should work like it does in PF, albeit with augmentable powers instead of multiple powers. So there would be a single Beast Shape power that could be augmented, and so on.

The main change I would make would be to change the types of forms available to psions. Perhaps create a Construct Form power that would also allow shapechanging into inanimate objects. An Aberration Form power would also suit the psionic flavor IMO.

Also, I'd replace Polymorph with Metamorphosis. Polymorph is a catch-all power that enables changing into multiple types of shapes, albeit as a higher level spell. Metamorphosis should work the same, but with the types of shapes that psions can turn into.

One addition that I think would be cool is to add new augmentation options for the various shapechange spells. It was broken to be able to use Metamorphic Transfer to use any supernatural ability for free, but it would be cool to allow use of certain supernatural, spell like, or extraordinary powers as augmentation options.
#4: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: mindbornlich Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 02:49 AM
    ----
I think it would be better just t make it into all the same power but just augment it t achieve different effects. I personally believe psionics should keep its flexibility with augmentations; one power should be able to turn the manifester into multiple forms.
#5: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: tevolria , Location: Topsham, Maine Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 03:11 AM
    ----
I agreewith the lich... (does that make me a bad person?)
#6: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Superkid Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 05:37 AM
    ----
I concur with following the polymorph breakup, but each shape/form would have augmentations, logically. Varying the available creature types is also a splendid idea.
#7: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Jaid Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 08:02 AM
    ----
not knowing fully how pathfinder works, i can't say which i would prefer as a player. however, if your stated goal is to match pathfinder's design philosophy, then the obvious decision is to match pathfinder's design philosophy...
#8: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: MaverickWolf , Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 09:32 AM
    ----
mindbornlich wrote:
I think it would be better just t make it into all the same power but just augment it t achieve different effects. I personally believe psionics should keep its flexibility with augmentations; one power should be able to turn the manifester into multiple forms.
The major problem with this (beyond the balance issues that come with handing it all out with one power, even if it requires augments) is that the power quickly becomes painfully complicated when you give it enough augments to do that much stuff.
#9: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Lordmonkeysama Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 04:53 PM
    ----
Would keeping the forms seperate but augmentable be reasonable? say Beast Form is one power and the other versions of the spell become augments priced based upon the level of the spell. So if BF II is a sixth level spell than its augment cost could be what a 6th lvl power costs or maybe 6 PPs or something.
#10: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: MaverickWolf , Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 06:23 PM
    ----
Lordmonkeysama wrote:
Would keeping the forms seperate but augmentable be reasonable? say Beast Form is one power and the other versions of the spell become augments priced based upon the level of the spell. So if BF II is a sixth level spell than its augment cost could be what a 6th lvl power costs or maybe 6 PPs or something.
That's what I think should be done. We shouldn't have as many powers as there are spells for it, but Beast Shape needs to be separate from Giant Form, etc.
#11: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Atlatl_Jones Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 07:39 PM
    ----
MaverickWolf wrote:
That's what I think should be done. We shouldn't have as many powers as there are spells for it, but Beast Shape needs to be separate from Giant Form, etc.
I agree. This would have the nice side effect of allowing the designers to give some powers as general Psion powers, while keeping others as Egoist specialty powers. Also, if we're using Pathfinder spells as a model, there can be a Metamorphosis equivalent of the Polymorph spell, which allows multiple types of forms, albeit at a higher spell level.
#12: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: mindbornlich Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 08:12 PM
    ----
I suppose splitting it into multiple powers makes sense as long as there is a higher level polymorph/ Shapechange equivalent. I still personally think it should all be one augmentable power, but I can see why that would be unfeasible.
#13: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: MaverickWolf , Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 08:16 PM
    ----
mindbornlich wrote:
I suppose splitting it into multiple powers makes sense as long as there is a higher level polymorph/ Shapechange equivalent.
I would propose having metamorphosis & greater metamorphosis being the functional equivalent (though we'd have to work out the wording since the powers would be augmentable), and have them Egoist-only powers, leaving the other powers open for all psions.
#14: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: mindbornlich Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 08:22 PM
    ----
If you do make a separate greater metamorphosis power, how do you plan to do xp costs; if I remember correctly pathfinder took out most of the xp costs for spells.
#15: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Snowpaws Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 08:24 PM
    ----
Polymorph
School transmutation (polymorph); Level sorcerer/wizard 5
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a piece of the creature whose form you choose)
Range touch
Target living creature touched
Duration 1 min/level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
This spell transforms a willing creature into an animal, humanoid or elemental of your choosing; the spell has no effect on unwilling creatures, nor can the creature being targeted by this spell influence the new form assumed (apart from conveying its wishes, if any, to you verbally).

If you use this spell to cause the target to take on the form of an animal or magical beast, the spell functions as beast shape II. If the form is that of an elemental, the spell functions as elemental body I. If the form is that of a humanoid, the spell functions as alter self. The subject may choose to resume its normal form as a full-round action; doing so ends the spell for that subject.

Polymorph, Greater

School transmutation (polymorph); Level sorcerer/wizard 7

This spell functions as polymorph except that it allows the creature to take on the form of a dragon or plant creature. If you use this spell to cause the target to take on the form of an animal or magical beast, it functions as beast shape IV. If the form is that of an elemental, the spell functions as elemental body III. If the form is that of a humanoid, the spell functions as alter self. If the form is that of a plant, the spell functions as plant shape II. If the form is that of a dragon, the spell functions as form of the dragon I. The subject may choose to resume its normal form as a full-round action; doing so ends the spell.

Copy and pasted from the pathfinder srd site.
#16: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Jeremy.Smith , Location: Allen, TX Post Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 09:01 PM
    ----
Greater metamorphosis had an XP cost because Polymorph had a material component cost. It doesn't look like Pathfinder's Polymorph has that, so Greater Metamorphosis wouldn't need it.
#17: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Requia Post Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 05:18 AM
    ----
Use the pathfinder model, its a pathfinder update after all. That said, each chain of powers should probably be different than the wizard chains. Elementals fit, but not so much animals or dragons. (also augmentation, maybe each chain is one power, with a polymorph one that does all chains but at a higher cost).

I'm not sure what you would do for the psion forms though. But since polymorph doesn't give you the exact abilities of the target form anymore, it should make it easy to balance.
#18: Re: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: MaverickWolf , Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA Post Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 05:20 AM
    ----
Requia wrote:
Elementals fit, but not so much animals or dragons.
Wow, that's a huge disparity from my thought. To me, the egoist is the classic shapechanger, which makes animals one of the most definite form, and since there are psionic dragons, leaving dragons out doesn't make much sense.

That said, Elementals don't make any sense to me at all. They feel completely magical to me. Psychokinesis just doesn't interact with the elements in the way magic does to me.
#19: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: tevolria , Location: Topsham, Maine Post Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 06:12 AM
    ----
I feel the same as Maverick on this one. elementals are just that. what a kineticist uses he is creating on the spot, not being pulled from a different plane. you could flavor otherwise, but as written it does no such thing. I could see a kineticist having a shapechanging power that allowed an elemental form though.
#20: Design Discussion - Shapechanging Author: Requia Post Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 07:55 AM
    ----
Taking the form of an elemental isn't the same thing as drawing from another plane, its just transmuting the body and adding an elemental power to it.

I always saw the egoist more as taking unique forms (usually variants rather than than taking on the forms of other things. Which is why I see elementals as fitting (see above) but not becoming a bear.

Hmm, half dragon forms (identical statistics to form of the dragon, but with a different appearance). Would fit that idea pretty well.
Forum Index › Pathfinder

1 2
>
Page 1 of 2