Question for Frank

[Username17]

That's a very much harder question. The 3.5 rules set is extremely unclear as to what exactly happens when a Monk is Polymorphed into a Bear.

Here are the following rules that apply:

* The character gets no additional attacks for having multiple limbs.

* The character has one attack for each claw, and a bite.

* The character can make one attack per BAB granted attack with his unarmed damage.

* The character may Flurry and recieve an additional attack with unarmed damage.

* The character cannot attack with any natural weapon imbued appendage more than once.

The following FAQ/Sage answers apply:

* The character may choose to inflict claw or bite damage with each unarmed attack.

* The character may only use natural weapons if he uses any natural weapons.

* The character may freely combine Natural Weapon and Manufactured Weapon progressions (including the Unarmed attacks as manufactured weapons for this purpose).

* The character may not use manufactured weapon progressions (including unarmed attacks) while in Bear form.

Uhhhh..... the astute have probably noticed immediately that there is more than one direct contradiction in the original text and the deisgner explanations of what the hell it is supposed to mean.

The most restrictive answer is that the Monk gets exactly one attack - a Claw or Bite. This comes from the interpretation that the character may not use manufactured weapon progressions while in bear form and the rule that you can't attack with a natural weapon more than once and the rule that you don't get extra attacks for having multiple natural weapons.

The most liberal answer is that the Monk gets his entire Unarmed Attack Progression, with flurry, which all inflict full Bite damage, and 2 claw attacks and a bite attack (these three attacks are all secondary natural weapon attacks). This comes from the interpretation that you can freely combine natural weapon attacks with manufactured weapon attacks and the rule that you get both claws and the bite and the interpretation that the unarmed attacks can do natural weapon damage for some reason.

The variance here, of course, is huge - with the basic interpretation of the spell varying from transforming the character into anywhere from a lobotomized CR 3 damage soak to a whirlwind cuisinart of death and destruction.

And I can't even tell what the design intent on this is supposed to be!

-Username17

[da_chicken]

1072129984[/unixtime]]The difference is that if I say "but allows access to the elemental type" then I am only overriding the type restriction.

However, if I say "but allows you to become a creature which has the elemental type" then I am overriding any and all restrictions that would keep you from becoming any particular creature which has the elemental type.

I still disagree. Mainly because it's only one possible valid interpretation. And one that I've never seen anyone else arrive at.

That and Frank still draws too much meaning in general from the semantics of a rule to arrive at that rule. Being able to separate English from C++ is good!

[fbmf]

Uhhhh..... the astute have probably noticed immediately that there is more than one direct contradiction in the original text and the deisgner explanations of what the hell it is supposed to mean.

With this up in the air, are you sure the T Rex-Fu of 3.0 still works?

Game On,
fbmf

[Username17]

With this up in the air, are you sure the T Rex-Fu of 3.0 still works?

No. I happen to know for a fact that it doesn't. Creatures in the Monster Manual for 3.5 had their natural weapons normalized to do the same damage as other creatures with the same size.

So now a Tyranosaurus only inflicts 3d6 damage with its bite instead of 5d8 - which means that it is flat impossible for a Tyranosaurus to put out damage fast enough to make an 8th level party care - and it is equally pointless to become one, regardless of what the rules are for fighting once you become one. A 3d6 base damage doesn't mean anything at all by the time you are high enough level to afford Huge Wildshape.

However, while there is one set of notable official answers floating around whch explicitly lays out the same principles that brought us T Rex Fu in the first place - there is another set of notable official answers which directly contradict those principles on every important point.

So, can I put down a set of rules citations and official answers which collectively clearly and unambiguously force us to come to the conclusion that we would be able to use TRex Kung Fu (albeit with an entirely different creature that hadn't been hit so hard with the nerfing stick - probably a Dire Wolf)? Absolutely. But I can also slap down other rules quotes and official answers which say the opposite and I can't tell which they are supposed to mean.

---

Like with Polymorph Any Object: They seem to really mean for that spell to have no hit die restriction. They also seem to mean for it to have no size or type restiction. It doesn't have the no templates restriction - and I can't tell whether that part is intentional or not. As written it also doesn't have the specific creature restriction. And I'm damn sure that's not intentional (as written you can just build a statue of Elminster out of Wax - and then permanently transform it into Elminster).

It is, in fact, entirely intentional that this spell can permanently transform a piece of wolf fur into a completely real wolf. Based on some story evidence - I believe that it is also completely intentional that this spell be able to transform a statue of a Movanic Deva into a real Movanic Deva.

But that just has all of the problems of Simulacrum - and more. Because while it is actually fine to be able to change WolfFur into Wolves - or even Pidgeons into Rocs - once you get your hand on the fingernail of a Solar things pretty much go south real fast. For that matter, while it's all well and good to create new creatures - you can apply the same logic as above and transform yourself into creatures far more powerful than yourself - forever.

And the part where you start making armies of cut-rate Solars for free, or transform your party Fighter into having the physical stats and abilities of a Titan... that's hopefully not supposed to happen. But I can't figure out any way that isn't legit from the things you are actually supposed to do with the spell.

-Username17

[Psifon]

So in order to avoid shooting myself in the foot as a DM, what it sounds like I should do is just tranform our monk into some type of giant, and dance the kung fu dance with that. This seems the least problematic. I don't even need poly any obj to pull it off.

[Username17]

Well, if you don't want to commit to one of the many possible interpretations of what the hell is supposed to happen with natural weaponry and polymorphing... then you only need POly Any Object if...

* You want to become a templated creature (such as a Fire Element Fire Giant to do extra burning damage with your punches).

* You want to become something which exceeds the hit die cap of Polymorph (such as a Cloud Giant or Titan).

* You want the spell effect to last more than 45 seconds (Polymorph lasts for 1 minute a level - Poly Any Object has a tendency to last forever).

If you are perfectly happy having the creature transform into a Firbolg and beat the crap out of people with kung fu (or just be a Barbarian and Rage on top of the new huge strength and hit people with very large weaponry) - then regular old Polymorph works fine.

Note however that regardless of how polymorph generally works... the Marilith fighting routine is a form-dependent natural ability which means that when you become specifically a Marilith you get their ability to fight separately with all six weapons without penalty. And you do need Poly Any Object to do that unless you are yourself a Tiefling or Githyanki to begin with.

That and Frank still draws too much meaning in general from the semantics of a rule to arrive at that rule.

So because I actually bother to exhaustively compare all of the possible meanings and eliminate ones which lead to contradictions my final, well reasoned conclusion is wrong? I'm sorry, that makes no sense whatsoever. We've been over the syntax and word choice from every possible angle and have winnowed it down to just a very small set of possible meanings - none of which forbid you from becoming a Fire Element Tiger.

That you've never seen anyone else actually tear it apart word for word only means that you normally deal with imbeciles - not that my conclusion is faulty.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

Here's an excerpt of my WotC .sig:
Tony Vargas: At some point, what's 'reasonable' has to win out over literalist interpretation...
Frank: No, it doesn't.

You have a fundamentally different approach to rule interpretation that Tony (and I) have. Neither of us is wrong. They're just different way of interpreting things. You rely on semantics driven logic. I rely on intuition and perceived intent.

Your conclusions are not faulty. They are perfectly valid. And so are mine. The fact that they're different, however, merely shows weakness in the existing rules.

[Draco_Argentum]

I've pointed out that that quote is out of context how many times?

The real reason Frank's most semantic rules analysis is pointless is that for it to mean anything the designers would have to go to similar efforts when they wrote the rules. I think we can all agree that they paid no attention to capitalisation etc at all.

[da_chicken]

1072248225[/unixtime]]I've pointed out that that quote is out of context how many times?

Including this one? Once, AFAIK.

Really, the quite is just there because it show exactly the point when debate has ceased and arguing begins. Neither party in the quote is going to be able to discuss the topic on the same level, and it's just become obvious.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

The only reason to forbid elemental wildshape to include elemental templates is because it's really out there.

Keep in mind that there is nothing in the book that says it, it is simply my expert analysis after seconds and seconds of thought.

[da_chicken]

To me, Elemental Wild Shape means you can become any of the 4 basic Elementals. Even ignoring that, alter self explicitly denies templates, and neither polymorph, Wild Shape, nor Elemental Wild Shape explicitly grant them.

"At 16th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a Small, Medium, or Large elemental (air, earth, fire, or water) once per day."

Rather than fuss about semantics, this to me just adds one explicit exception to the rule about "no creatures of elemental type". This exception in no way invalidates other restrictions or parameters of the ability any more than the alteration of polymorph's duration invalidates it's other restrictions or parameters.

Whether this only allows the 4 basic elementals, any creature with one of the 4 subtypes whose name includes the word "elemental", or any creature of type elemental with one or more of the subtypes is reasonably open to interpretation. I would probably allows Para- and Quasi- elementals, if the druid were familiar with them.

"In addition to the normal effects of wild shape, the druid gains all the elemental’s extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities. She also gains the elemental’s feats for as long as she maintains the wild shape, but she retains her own creature type."

Emphasis mine. A template is not any of the explicitly listed alterations to Wild Shape rules. Normal Wild Shape allows no templates, so neither does Elemental WS.

Exalted Wild Shape [BoED] is an example of a feat that does explicitly grant templating, and also implicitly grants Wild Shape to magical beasts (which all celestial animals are, as are the special forms).

Dragon Wild Shape [Draconomicon] is as poorly worded as Elemental WS. It similarly can either be interpreted as only allowing chromatic and metallic (and gem, I suppose) dragon varieties, or allowing any Small or Medium size creature of type dragon. However, Draconic [Dra] and Half-dragon creatures are right out.

That's my interpretation. Just as valid as Frank's.

I will say that those two Wild Shape feats should be on every druid's list if allowed. I'd say they even make Nature's Warrior (CW) worthwhile.

[Username17]

That's my interpretation. Just as valid as Frank's.

No, it's a lot less valid. For your interpretation to work the statement: "becomes able to use wild shape to..." has to override restrictions when refering to creature type (becoming an elemental is explicitly denied by alter self and not granted by polymorph nor regular wildshape), and then not override restrictions when referring to templated forms (becoming a templated form is explicitly denied by alter self and not granted by polymorph nor regular wildshape).

In short, you are requiring one piece of text to do double duty - meaning entirely different things when applied to what is in fact the same thing: inherited restrictions from Alter Self.

Either it breaks the restrictions - in which case templating is OK; or it does not - in which case it doesn't work at all unless the Druid is already of type Elemental. Those are the two valid interpretations (although one is extremely silly). Your claim that it can override exactly the restrictions that you want it to and not others is not valid.

So no, your interpretation is not more valid than mine. Your "interpretation" is a classic fallacy - using different interpretations of the same text within the same argument to draw your conclusion. Your conclusion requires P and ~P to be properly derived. Which means that with your same set of premises you could just as well prove that monkeys drive spaceships around Jupiter or that you are really the bastard child of Elvis and Santa.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

1072293156[/unixtime]]

That's my interpretation. Just as valid as Frank's.

No, it's a lot less valid.

Careful, Frank. I do not care if you disagree with me, but I will not tolerate being insulted by you. Please try to be less hostile.

For your interpretation to work the statement: "becomes able to use wild shape to..." has to override restrictions when refering to creature type (becoming an elemental is explicitly denied by alter self and not granted by polymorph nor regular wildshape), and then not override restrictions when referring to templated forms (becoming a templated form is explicitly denied by alter self and not granted by polymorph nor regular wildshape).

Yep. It says you can become an elemental. It mentions nothing about teplates at all, so the restriction remains. If your interpretation is correct, then I can also become templated plants (at 12th).

Both of those interpretations are against the design intent as I comprehend it from the ability, polymorph, and alter self.

In short, you are requiring one piece of text to do double duty - meaning entirely different things when applied to what is in fact the same thing: inherited restrictions from Alter Self.

Either it breaks the restrictions - in which case templating is OK; or it does not - in which case it doesn't work at all unless the Druid is already of type Elemental.

False Dilemma. There's no reason it can't break some of the restriction (those explicitly noted) and not others (everything else).

Those are the two valid interpretations (although one is extremely silly). Your claim that it can override exactly the restrictions that you want it to and not others is not valid.

I don't want anything. My interpretation is based on the idea that only explicit exceptions are those granted.

So no, your interpretation is not more valid than mine.

You interpretations are not less valid. I said mine were just as valid. That is, they are equally valid.

Your "interpretation" is a classic fallacy - using different interpretations of the same text within the same argument to draw your conclusion.

Where did I interpret things differently? My logic is internally consistent. Let me know and I'll try to explain better.

Your conclusion requires P and ~P to be properly derived.

You missed me and got too abstract. What's my claim P?

Which means that with your same set of premises you could just as well prove that monkeys drive spaceships around Jupiter or that you are really the bastard child of Elvis and Santa.

Still owes us child support, too.

My interpretations are, fundamentally, base on these phrases and rules:

• 
  
• Polymorph: "This spell functions like alter self, except [...]". The spell description then notes explicit changes from alter self. Otherwise, it is identical to alter self.
  
  
• Wild Shape: "This ability functions like the polymorph spell, except as noted here." The ability description then notes explicit changes from polymorph. Otherwise, it is identical to polymorph.
  
  
• Elemental Wild Shape: This ability is a subset of Wild Shape. It therefore implicity functions exactly as Wild Shape, except where explicitly noted (but see below). Otherwise, it must be identical to Wild Shape.
  
  
• Alter self explicitly denies templates.
  
  
• Elemental Wild Shape does not explicitly grant templates.
  
  
• Therefore: no templates by alter self.
  

It is possible to argue that Elemental Wild Shape is not a subability of Wild Shape but instead a different ability unto itself, and therefore not bound by the restrictions of Wild Shape. That breaks the chain of inheritence from alter self. However, the manner in which Elemental Wild Shape is portrayed leads me to dismiss this interpretation, and instead accept it as a subability.

Elemental Wild Shape explicitly grants the following:

• 
  
• Small, Medium, or Large elemental (air, earth, fire, or water) type (subtype) forms
  
• The extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities of the chosen form
  
• The feats of the chosen form
  
• Huge elemental type forms (presumably with the same subtype restrictions)
  

Other than that's its functionally identical to normal Wild Shape (again, assuming you believe it to be a subability). None of those exceptions refers to templates -- not even indirectly as far as I can tell.

[Note: I have said elsewhere that in game we play, Elemental Wild Shape only allows the forms of the creatures actually named Small/Medium/Large/Huge Air/Earth/Fire/Water Elemental. Basically, the creatures presented on pp95-101 of the 3.5 MM, excepting Elder and Greater Elementals. Not that this is relevant here, but it might be confusing WRT my previous posts. Allowing any creatuure of type elemental is another valid interpretation, and it's the one I used in discussion here.]

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

I'm not exactly sure what your argument is, but it seems to either be a composition/hasty generalization:

• 
  
• Elemental Wild Shape allows elemental type creatures
  
• Wild Shape does not allow elemental creatures
  
• Wild Shape does not allow templated creatures
  
• Elemental Wild Shape does not have the same restrictions as Wild Shape
  
• Therefore: Elemental Wild Shape allows templated elementals
  

Or circular reasoning:

• 
  
• Elemental Wild Shape allows elemental type creatures
  
• Some elemental creatures have templates
  
• Therefore: Elemental Wild Shape allows templated elementals
  

I'm sure neither of these is your actual argument, but I'm having trouble seeing your exact line of reasoning. Especially through your vehement claims that my interpretation is wrong.

[Username17]

But it doesn't mention its ability to override the elemental type restriction of Alter Self.

The only reason you can become one is that it fulfills the statement If the form is a Small, Medium, or Large elemental (air, earth, fire, or water), then you can transform into it.

The restriction that you can't transform into a creature with the elemental type is not addressed at all - but it specifically allows you to become a creature that fulfills the criteria of the elemental wildshape ability.

So an Immoth matches the criteria of the ability - so despite the fact that it violates the restrictions of Alter Self you can transform into it anyway. The specific statement that you can transform into it because it matches the Elemental Wildshape Criteria overrides the general rule that you can't transform into it because of the type restrictions of the inherited ability.

A Fire Element Tiger matches the criteria of the ability - so despite the fact that it violates the restrictions of Alter Self you can transform into it anyway. The specific statement that you can transform into it because it matches the Elemental Wildshape Criteria overrides the general rule that you can't transform into it because of the template restrictions of the inherited ability.

The specific overrides the general. The elemental wildshape ability does not say "now you can use wildshape to become forms which include the elemental type" they are simply a list of criteria which if the form meets you can transform into it.

The entire argument that it only overrides the type restriction is not based on the actual wording of the ability - it is based only on your own interpretation of how the ability should have been worded. So it's not valid.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

But that same argument allows you to ignore every other restriction in place for the ability. Hit die limits, incorporeal, etc.

Elder elementals at 20th
Fire element verimurge [ELH]
Fire element will-o’-wisp

Why is only the template restriction dropped, and nothing else? What makes it special?

It also seems to me that plant Wild Shape is written in the same language. Can I now also just ask the question "If the form is a Small, Medium, or Large plant, then you can transform into it."?

Does it lose the other restrictions that Elemental does, too? Forget the Elemental Creature template. I'll just use the Wood Creature template, and turn the same creatures into plants.

[fbmf]

Just a friendly reminder to everyone to please keep the discussion civil.

Game On,
fbmf

[Essence]

Wild Shape (Su): At 5th level, a druid gains the ability to turn herself into any Small or Medium animal and back again once per day. Her options for new forms include all creatures with the animal type. This ability functions like the polymorph spell, except as noted here. The effect lasts for 1 hour per druid level, or until she changes back. Changing form (to animal or back) is a standard action and doesn’t provoke an attack of opportunity.
The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with.
A druid loses her ability to speak while in animal form because she is limited to the sounds that a normal, untrained animal can make, but she can communicate normally with other animals of the same general grouping as her new form. (The normal sound a wild parrot makes is a squawk, so changing to this form does not permit speech.)
A druid can use this ability more times per day at 6th, 7th, 10th, 14th, and 18th level, as noted on Table: The Druid. In addition, she gains the ability to take the shape of a Large animal at 8th level, a Tiny animal at 11th level, and a Huge animal at 15th level.
The new form’s Hit Dice can’t exceed the character’s druid level.
At 12th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a plant creature with the same size restrictions as for animal forms. (A druid can’t use this ability to take the form of a plant that isn’t a creature.)
At 16th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to change into a Small, Medium, or Large elemental (air, earth, fire, or water) once per day. These elemental forms are in addition to her normal wild shape usage. In addition to the normal effects of wild shape, the druid gains all the elemental’s extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities. She also gains the elemental’s feats for as long as she maintains the wild shape, but she retains her own creature type.
At 18th level, a druid becomes able to assume elemental form twice per day, and at 20th level she can do so three times per day. At 20th level, a druid may use this wild shape ability to change into a Huge elemental.

Always helps to look at the source material.

I, personally, would argue that Elemental Wildshape is definitively a subability of Wild Shape given that it doesn't even have it's own heading anymore. I would also argue that the wording "all creatures with the animal type" overrides *any* restriction given within the Polymorph spell, because it specifically and explicitly states that the only requirement of the chosen form is that it have the animal type.

Which, of course, totally breaks the game right there at 5th level, as a Druid can then Wild Shape into a Psionic Paragon Feral Cheetah, and manifest Emulate Power as an SLA at will with it's Schismed mind while simultaenously ripping the shit out of some poor CR 5 slob with natural attacks that could easily kill creatures with a CR ten higher than that. This, of course, is a delimma.

At this point, we have to decide on a solution to this delimma. Either the Wild Shape text needs to be rewritten, at which point we need to decide on the intent and on the wording necessary to achieve that intent, or we have to decide that the "all creatures with the animal type" wording does not, in fact, act to eliminate all of the restrictions that the Polymorph inheritance puts on Wild Shape.

Assuming we choose the latter option: given that we are then accepting the restrictions of Polymorph, an using the "all creatures with the animal type" as an additional restriction, I think we have to also accept that the similar language used for the plant and elemental forms still leaves us hampered with all of the restrictions of Polymorph, which means no Wood-Element Genies or Earth-Element Hagunemnon or whatnot, but still allows Immoth, Xorn, and other non-templated elementals.


No matter which of the above you decide is true, the Wild Shape abilities are in dire need of rewriting, and here's why:

If there are any "plant creatures" or "elementals" out there that are not, in fact, of the plant/elemental type, this ability allows access to them, because the word "type" is not used in either of those abilities. So, for example, if someone wanted to write up an Outsider called a "Holy Oak" with an ability called "Plant Traits", this ability seems to grant the Druid the ability to become it.

Similarly, the lack of use of the word "creature" in the elemental Wild Shape text is an interesting one, because it allows the Druid to become objects that can, for any reason, be considered "an elemental". I can't imagine what they would be, or why the Druid would want to become one, but if they were out there, this ability would let them do it.

These are obvious errors that need cleaning up. I'd probably scrap the entire wording of the ability as part of that "clean up", figure out what the most balanced method of wording the ability is, and adopt that. Probably something based on the CR of the 'creature of X type' being transformed into.


Essence

[da_chicken]

Well, Wild Shape does say "This ability functions like the polymorph spell, except as noted here." That certainly seems to me that Essence's second interpretation is what is intended.

The really stupid part is how far you have to go to figure this out. Elemental Wild Shape is based on Wild Shape which is based on polymorph, which is based on alter self.

Nevermind the whole "do my hp change as a result of Con changes" debate raging at WotC.

[Essence]

The problem being that the "options for new forms include all creatures with the animal type" line is "noted here". Which means that the ability works as Polymorph except that, among other things, it allows access to *all* creatures of the animal type, not those "those creatures of the animal type that do not break any of the restrictions inherent to the Polymorph spell".

<sigh>

It just flat needs to be rewritten.


Essence

[Username17]

While that is certainly a valid reading of the rules, it is not a particularly likely one, IMO.

The key here is that the only way the Wildshape rules are going to do anything differently than Polmorph is if there is a rules conflict. After all, Polymorph already gives you a quite explicit (if broken and inane) list of exactly what it does and does not allow you to transform into.

Here's where things get sticky: under 3.5's fabulous inheritance rules, the more specific rule trumps the more general rule if there is a conflict. So in order to discover whether or not Polymorph allows different forms we must ask ourselves if there is one.

In general, a restriction never conflicts with another restriction. Similarly, an allowance never conflicts with another allowance. Simply: when the rules say that you can't prepare spells into slots that have been used within the last 8 hours, and they also say that you can't prepare spells into your slots unless you've had a total of 8 hours of rest - there's no conflict. They say diffferent things, but since they are both restrictions, there's therefore no conflict. It therefore makes no difference which rule is the narrower one in your present circumstance - as if either prevents you from preparing a spell into your slot you are up a creek.

So we have to ask ourselves if the Druidic admonission "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with." is itself an allowance or a restriction. If it is a restricition, it is the narrower rule and supercedes any of the allowances of the more general rule (that of Polymorph) - and thus overirdes the statement that you can transform into an aberration or dragon; it however has no effect at all on any other restrictions prsented in the general rules as it does not conflict with them. If, on the other hand, it is instead an allowance, then it jolly well overrides the restrictions of the normal rules and does bugger all to the other allowances.

So if the statement "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with." is indeed a restriction; then you can't use wildshape to transform yourself into a Meenlock, nor can you transform into a Paragon Badger. If instead it is an allowance, then you can use wild shape to become either a Meenlock or a Paragon Badger (although not a Paragon Meenlock).

However, if you will permit me to editorialize for a moment: the statement "The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with." seems to me to be phrased as a restriction, and thus there is no rules conflict with Alter Self's original "no templates" restriction, and no possibility exists to become a Paragon Anything with that ability.

And that's all well and good. But the fact is that elemental wildshape in fact, is most definately an allowance. Perched as it is on the back of wildshape, previous allowances still apply, but restrictions contrary to the elemental wildshape ability do not. So you can use an elemental wildshape use to become a Badger or a Shambling Mound (although not a Meenlock as that has not been allowed by the elemental wildshape ability and has been out of the inheritance pool for some time). You can also become a Fire Element Tiger as templatted forms are only restricted by a more general rule which is itself overruled by the most narrow rule's allowance to permit the form of a large elemental (fire).

-Username17

[da_chicken]

So why is the template restriction tied to creature type, but hit dice, etc are not? What makes templates special? And, again, isn't plant wildshape phrased the exact same way as elemental wildshape? What makes elemental wildshape special? Why can I change into a fire element dire ape, but not an elder fire elemental?

Nevermind that I don't ever remeber seeing inheritence rules outlined anywhere in any of the core books. You provide exactly one example of a situation where two restrictions don't conflict. No examples of two allowances that don't conflict, and no examples of an alloance and restriction that do conflict. You're claiming general rules exist -- but that they're not defined anywhere.

[Username17]

And, again, isn't plant wildshape phrased the exact same way as elemental wildshape?

What possible difference does that make?

When a new, more specific rule comes out, the statement "you can use this ability to do X" is a restriction if the more general rule was "you can use this ability to do (set of which X is a subset)" and it is an allowance if the more general rule was "you can use this ability to do (set which does not include the entirety of X)".

You can make a valid claim that Plant Wildshape is either a restriction or an allowance, because at different stages of the inheritance tree you can and cannot become a Plant. It is therefore up to interpretation whether you can become a Yellow Musk Zombie or not.

However, since at no time does the inheritance tree ever allow a character to become an elemental anything - the statement in elemental wildshape must be an allowance.

Nevermind that I don't ever remeber seeing inheritence rules outlined anywhere in any of the core books.

They are not - it's a universal property of English Language, Logic, and Law.

You provide exactly one example of a situation where two restrictions don't conflict. No examples of two allowances that don't conflict, and no examples of an alloance and restriction that do conflict. You're claiming general rules exist -- but that they're not defined anywhere.

There's no other possible way to consistently interpret anything - that's how language works.

If it didn't work like that, simple strings of definitions would by definition conflict all the time. For example:

Evasion can only be used while wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk (such as one who is unconscious or paralyzed) does not gain the benefit of evasion.

This is two restrictive statements, and if for some reason they conflicted, it would mean that under some circumstances when a character was helpless but not wearing armor (or perhaps, wearing armor but not helpless) - that evasion could be used.

Needless to say, that's preposterous. Not only because attempting to interpret such a system would be next to impossible - but also because neither natural language nor legal exactitudes actually supports such madness.

Similarly:

At each new wizard level, she gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new wizard level) for her spellbook.

A wizard can also research a spell indepently, duplicating an existing spell or creating an entirely new one. The Dungeon Master's Guide hasinformation on this topic under Creating New Spells in Chapter 2.

Now this again says two things, but this time they are allowance statements. If they conflicted you either couldn't research a new spell except when you went up a level, or you could not get a spell when going up a level unless you were conducting research as outlined in Chapter 2 of the DMG.

Of course, both of these possibilities are also inane and wrong. Not truly possibilities at all.

When I say "You can't go to the Boardwalk if you have not cleaned your room" and I say "You can't go to the Boardwalk if you don't finish your homework" - there's no conflict - if either condition is met you can't go to the Boardwalk. On the other hand, if I say "You can go to the Boardwalk if you do your homework" and I say "You can go to the Boardwalk if you have cleaned your room" there is again no conflict - if either condition is met you can go to the Boardwalk. However, if I say "You can go to the Boardwalk if you do your homework" and I say "You can't go to the Boardwalk if you have not cleaned your room" there is a conflict - one of the statements must be determined to be stronger in that instance.

That's how English works. And if your case is now based on "It does not say that normal English syntax and word meanings apply in this piece of English Language Text, therefore they don't." - then your argument is sadly worthless in the same vein as the "Where does it say my sword can't summon dragons to fight for me when I swing it?" fallacy.

-Username17

[Oberoni]

Ok, I'm still skeptical.

So it's possible to gain the ability to turn into an elemental without using a template, right?

Wildshape says "no templates," because Alter Self says "no templates."

Elemental Wildshape says "you can turn into an elemental, and this follows all of the rules for Polymorph spell, with any noted exceptions."

Adding templates is NOT a noted exception, it's not mentioned anywhere at all in the Wildshape description.

So I turn into an elemental from the Monster manual. I don't need to use a template to do so.

No conflict whatsoever.

[Username17]

Wildshape says "no templates," because Alter Self says "no templates."

No. It does not say that.

Wildshape says "any untemplated creature of your own type, or aberration, animal, dragon, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, ooze, plant, or vermin - provided that that creature is a small or medium animal that the character is familiar with."

That's how inheritance works.

Now, elemental wildshape introduces a secondary allowance - that of becoming a smal, medium, or large elemental. That's not actually contained within the previous list of possibilities at all - and is thus a separate consideration entirely.

-Username17

[Oberoni]

But the new allowance doesn't toss any old rules out the window, except where noted.

This part of Alter Self:

You cannot take the form of any creature with a template, even if that template doesn’t change the creature type or subtype.

Is still in full effect. There's nothing that strikes it--nothing at all.

If you can find something that explicitly allows templates, please tell me, because then you're a-ok. But I myself can't find the part of the rules that allows them.