So I know a changeling specifically states "You can make yourself appear as a member of another race, though none of your game statistics change."
For the most part, I can justify this idea. Just because it appears you have gills or wings (Yes I know they wouldn't actually get wings, but for RP I would say they have them) doesn't mean the gills or wings are functions. Just because you have talons/claws, doesn't mean they are hard enough to actually work as talons/claws. Just because you look all of the sudden bigger and more powerful, you actually still have your same stats, so your not so no powerful build for you.
The problem I have here is bugbears. Because you do literally have longer arms, so why wouldn't a changeling get reach? Is it purely because the game says you don't? Would it be overpowering for a changeling to get reach if it took the form of a bugbear?
To be clear, I would allow this in my campaign, I couldn't find a way to justify them not having the feature. However, I was curious if anyone could give me feedback on why this shouldn't exist or at least have a discussion with me to better understand the Changeling. I really do love the race idea.
This is an interesting question, because you're pushing the fuzzy limit of the ability. If I can change into an elf, why can't I change into an elf with really long arms? Like 'longer than is natural for elves' arms? The notion that "you haven't seen an elf with really long arms" seems implausible. I've seen an elf, how hard is it to imagine that same thing, but the arms are longer? If I can turn into a dwarf at 4' tall, and I can turn into a half-orc at 7' tall, why couldn't I change into a dwarf with the arm span of a 7' half-orc? Why can't I turn into a dwarf body with an elf head? Why can't I turn into a headless dwarf? Or add an arm in the middle of my back?
If you take 'you have to have seen it' too strictly, then you can only change into exactly people you have seen--facial features and everything. But if you allow me to change into 'a human' with facial features I haven't seen before, now the door is opened for the above questions. If I can make facial features I haven't seen--or mix and match ones I've seen--why not skin colors, and why not number of fingers, and length of arms, and number of limbs, and etc etc.
At some point, the answer is going to be some amount of ad hoc. You just need a line somewhere--but that line at that point won't perfectly make sense. So you shouldn't expect it to.
For example, you can go with Dx's muscle mass explanation, which is as good as any. But if someone pushes it, you'll find it can be pushed. The rules don't say that I have any difficulties with my significant size changes (anything that is size M, from dwarf to bugbear). If my changeling is naturally 5'8", I actually should experience some difficulties if I turn into a 7' tall thing. Either I can't add mass, and so my bugbear would be a really skinny and weak bugbear, or I can add mass, in which case the 'muscle mass' explanation goes away. But the rules don't say my 7' form would be skinny and weak. So... does a changeling add mass when they change? Conversely, if my mass stays the same, then packing it all into a 4' dwarf body should make me considerably tougher and stronger. But the rules say I don't get stronger. So...do I lose mass when I change?
But the rules say my 'game statistics' stay the same. Does that include my weight? The rules gave us a game mechanic, a really interesting one, that is just begging to have its limits pushed. Not that I mind, I like changelings, and am having a lot of fun playing one right now.
/END NON-RANT
The way I might rule is to say that, while your arms do become long enough, you are not experienced with super-long arms to the point that you can make effective use of them to gain Reach. You're just uncoordinated with your long arms. You could overcome that...if you spent a bunch of time walking around as a bugbear. With all the associated problems. If the player does that, then, sure...let 'em have reach.
But...make sure from that point on you pay very close attention to what clothes they are wearing, particularly armor and helmets, when they shapechange. You are normally 5'10, and you're turning into a bugbear? Ouch, okay. Take 1d10 bludgeoning damage from your armor constricting you before it pops off and becomes unwearable until you fix it. And your boots and pants are trashed too. In fact, another 1d6 from the boots before they go.
If they want the benefits, they need to take the consequences :)
The way I might rule is to say that, while your arms do become long enough, you are not experienced with super-long arms to the point that you can make effective use of them to gain Reach. You're just uncoordinated with your long arms. You could overcome that...if you spent a bunch of time walking around as a bugbear. With all the associated problems. If the player does that, then, sure...let 'em have reach.
But...make sure from that point on you pay very close attention to what clothes they are wearing, particularly armor and helmets, when they shapechange. You are normally 5'10, and you're turning into a bugbear? Ouch, okay. Take 1d10 bludgeoning damage from your armor constricting you before it pops off and becomes unwearable until you fix it. And your boots and pants are trashed too. In fact, another 1d6 from the boots before they go.
If they want the benefits, they need to take the consequences :)
I understand the point of your "Rant" I would like to say I always went with this logic. You did change mass when you changed size because its fun to go from a skinny beggar to an overweight politician. And without the mass change that wouldn't really be a thing. Yes, it was all for roleplay whereas this question wasn't. On top of that, for the disfigured aspect I personally never really thought of it that way. Given it if my player could justify the reason other than trying to break the game I would allow it. Otherwise, I would kindly ask them to stay within reason of what you think that race looks like. Changing common aspects such as hair and eye color, height and weight.
For the most part, this seems like a reasonable request that my player and I have stuck to. Which is why I didn't feel like his request for reach when changed into a bugbear was unreasonable. His reason was sound, he is actually the one who gave me the point of "I don't expect to have working gills as Triton because lets be honest, I don't know how that anatomy works, but if I was an average bugbear why couldn't I reach something 10 feet away with my axe?"
To me, his request made sense so we let it happen. Now I did have a talk with him about this after the game. Where we talked about things like. Don't start cutting up fish to learn how gills work and we should be fine. As Always this game works best when the players and GM work together and not against one another. As I said, in the OP I already ruled this as fine in my game. I was just curious about the feedback and other ideas.
The way I might rule is to say that, while your arms do become long enough, you are not experienced with super-long arms to the point that you can make effective use of them to gain Reach. You're just uncoordinated with your long arms. You could overcome that...if you spent a bunch of time walking around as a bugbear. With all the associated problems. If the player does that, then, sure...let 'em have reach.
But...make sure from that point on you pay very close attention to what clothes they are wearing, particularly armor and helmets, when they shapechange. You are normally 5'10, and you're turning into a bugbear? Ouch, okay. Take 1d10 bludgeoning damage from your armor constricting you before it pops off and becomes unwearable until you fix it. And your boots and pants are trashed too. In fact, another 1d6 from the boots before they go.
If they want the benefits, they need to take the consequences :)
I understand the point of your "Rant" I would like to say I always went with this logic. You did change mass when you changed size because its fun to go from a skinny beggar to an overweight politician. And without the mass change that wouldn't really be a thing. Yes, it was all for roleplay whereas this question wasn't. On top of that, for the disfigured aspect I personally never really thought of it that way. Given it if my player could justify the reason other than trying to break the game I would allow it. Otherwise, I would kindly ask them to stay within reason of what you think that race looks like. Changing common aspects such as hair and eye color, height and weight.
For the most part, this seems like a reasonable request that my player and I have stuck to. Which is why I didn't feel like his request for reach when changed into a bugbear was unreasonable. His reason was sound, he is actually the one who gave me the point of "I don't expect to have working gills as Triton because lets be honest, I don't know how that anatomy works, but if I was an average bugbear why couldn't I reach something 10 feet away with my axe?"
To me, his request made sense so we let it happen. Now I did have a talk with him about this after the game. Where we talked about things like. Don't start cutting up fish to learn how gills work and we should be fine. As Always this game works best when the players and GM work together and not against one another. As I said, in the OP I already ruled this as fine in my game. I was just curious about the feedback and other ideas.
I agree that I don't think it's a big deal, and your attitude towards it is the way I like to go too. There's a 'reasonable' standard there--arm length isn't magical or super complicated, it should be allowed. And if it's not breaking things, I wouldn't be too big of a jerk about armor sizes :)
The gills thing is interesting. Making your arms longer is pretty simple, but changing the way your bodily systems work--it may just be that changelings don't have that fine level of control. There will be a 'fuzzy area' if you dig deep enough, but on the surface there's an explanation, even if they start cutting up fish :) "Yep, you now know how gills work. You just can't change your body that way."
But even that could be tricky--can a changeling change his fingerprints? :)
The gills thing is interesting. Making your arms longer is pretty simple, but changing the way your bodily systems work--it may just be that changelings don't have that fine level of control. There will be a 'fuzzy area' if you dig deep enough, but on the surface there's an explanation, even if they start cutting up fish :) "Yep, you now know how gills work. You just can't change your body that way."
But even that could be tricky--can a changeling change his fingerprints? :)
Yeah Changelings could be rather destructive if you had a creative player and DM that did play well together. Like I said, in my specific example, we get along fine so their wasn't really an argument, he made a creative choice and gave a pretty solid reason. I said sure but then we talked it over after to make sure it didn't go to far.
But I could honestly see that whole thing going another way if the GM and Player didn't get along so well or didn't have the same level of trust.
The gills thing is interesting. Making your arms longer is pretty simple, but changing the way your bodily systems work--it may just be that changelings don't have that fine level of control. There will be a 'fuzzy area' if you dig deep enough, but on the surface there's an explanation, even if they start cutting up fish :) "Yep, you now know how gills work. You just can't change your body that way."
But even that could be tricky--can a changeling change his fingerprints? :)
Yeah Changelings could be rather destructive if you had a creative player and DM that did play well together. Like I said, in my specific example, we get along fine so their wasn't really an argument, he made a creative choice and gave a pretty solid reason. I said sure but then we talked it over after to make sure it didn't go to far.
But I could honestly see that whole thing going another way if the GM and Player didn't get along so well or didn't have the same level of trust.
Totally a recipe for bad if there's a conflict there. Or a method for total abuse if the DM is too permissive. OR...a recipe for a really nice villain if the DM disallows them as a player race and ramps up their abilities. Or lets a changeling improve their ability.
Which is interesting. There is no race-specific feat for changelings...improved shapechange?
Totally a recipe for bad if there's a conflict there. Or a method for total abuse if the DM is too permissive. OR...a recipe for a really nice villain if the DM disallows them as a player race and ramps up their abilities. Or lets a changeling improve their ability.
Which is interesting. There is no race-specific feat for changelings...improved shapechange?
Yeah, I wish all the races had race-specific feats. Some of them are pretty cool.
Totally a recipe for bad if there's a conflict there. Or a method for total abuse if the DM is too permissive. OR...a recipe for a really nice villain if the DM disallows them as a player race and ramps up their abilities. Or lets a changeling improve their ability.
Which is interesting. There is no race-specific feat for changelings...improved shapechange?
Yeah, I wish all the races had race-specific feats. Some of them are pretty cool.
I'm putting a little bit of occasional thought to this idea now of a Changeling racial feat of Improved Shapeshifting.
What about the changeling choosing a race when they get the feat--and they get the racial benefits of that race when they are shapeshifted to that race? Allow the feat to be taken multiple times, maybe, with a different race selected each time. The feat represents the changeling having spent a lot of time as that race, observing that race (physically and socially), playing the role of that race, etc. You have spent so long being a dwarf, diving into the persona, that you have developed proficiency with mason's tools and new weapons while you are that persona, and you have studied dwarves physically to the extent that you can now shapeshift your eyes when you are a dwarf to gain darkvision.
One race per Feat selection doesn't sound too OP compared to other feats. The Tiefling's innate spells seems hard to justify at first glance, though. Not OP, just hard to explain how you get those via shapeshifting.
Would it be overpowering for a changeling to get reach if it took the form of a bugbear?
It would be overpowering for any existing race to have reach. That is the reason for playing a Bugbear; it's their unique defining feature, and I would absolutely never allow a player to stomp on it.
I couldn't find a way to justify them not having the feature.
I'd say the RAW/RAI on Changeling explicitly stating that they cannot do this is a pretty good justification.
To me, it sounds like your player wants to have all the benefits of both Polymorph & Change Appearance, without any of the consequences/restrictions of either.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I already stated that I know what RAW says and why it says. My point was for every situation outside of the Reach of a Bugbear I could easily justify why I changeling couldn't have that ability logically outside of RAW. For example, just because you can look like an elf doesn't mean you change how your eyes function to see in the darkness.
However when it comes to a bugbear specifically. When you look like a bugbear, your arms are physically longer which is the thing that gives them reach. Now yes, if you are playing straight rules as written, you do not gain reach. But at least at my table, if my players make a sound argument and it makes sense logically then yeah I let it go as long as it seems within reason. Which a changeling having reach as a bugbear logically makes sense.
Now in your game, you can rule however you want, as a GM that would be your call.
Lastly, I guess you didn't read the thread either because you would have seen this statement which handles your last point of my player wanting to "have all the benefits of Polymorph" in the game. We have already talked about specific other features and why he can't have them.
Yeah Changelings could be rather destructive if you had a creative player and DM that did play well together. Like I said, in my specific example, we get along fine so their wasn't really an argument, he made a creative choice and gave a pretty solid reason. I said sure but then we talked it over after to make sure it didn't go to far.
But I could honestly see that whole thing going another way if the GM and Player didn't get along so well or didn't have the same level of trust.
Also good to keep in mind that it is still in playtest and not "official" 5e material. It's Keith Baker's interpretation of the 3.5 rules/sourcebooks and might change. If you wanted to develop it yourself, I recommend looking through the 3.5 books if you have access to them. There are several changeling racial feats in there (including one that is an improved disguise/ability). My Eberron campaign started as 3.5 and went 5e, and even though there are updated stats I still use the 3.5 books quite a bit. For example, in the original, it specifically states that it functions like disguise self from a physical change standpoint. (Height and weight limitations, etc)
So, with it just released I wanted to chime in with another possible interpretation: The races and racial features described in the rules are for Player-Characters. As usual any PC is already an exceptional being just by virtue of being a PC. So the racial features are features of an exceptional bugbear, or worded differently: Of a bugbear that is hero material. Now a Changeling would have no issues turning into an average bugbear, but that average bugbear would not have the same bodily features as an exceptional one.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I know a changeling specifically states "You can make yourself appear as a member of another race, though none of your game statistics change."
For the most part, I can justify this idea. Just because it appears you have gills or wings (Yes I know they wouldn't actually get wings, but for RP I would say they have them) doesn't mean the gills or wings are functions. Just because you have talons/claws, doesn't mean they are hard enough to actually work as talons/claws. Just because you look all of the sudden bigger and more powerful, you actually still have your same stats, so your not so no powerful build for you.
The problem I have here is bugbears. Because you do literally have longer arms, so why wouldn't a changeling get reach? Is it purely because the game says you don't? Would it be overpowering for a changeling to get reach if it took the form of a bugbear?
To be clear, I would allow this in my campaign, I couldn't find a way to justify them not having the feature. However, I was curious if anyone could give me feedback on why this shouldn't exist or at least have a discussion with me to better understand the Changeling. I really do love the race idea.
You could pass it off as insufficient muscle structure. Their arms are longer, but they can't support them when they are fully outstretched.
FUN NON-RANT
This is an interesting question, because you're pushing the fuzzy limit of the ability. If I can change into an elf, why can't I change into an elf with really long arms? Like 'longer than is natural for elves' arms? The notion that "you haven't seen an elf with really long arms" seems implausible. I've seen an elf, how hard is it to imagine that same thing, but the arms are longer? If I can turn into a dwarf at 4' tall, and I can turn into a half-orc at 7' tall, why couldn't I change into a dwarf with the arm span of a 7' half-orc? Why can't I turn into a dwarf body with an elf head? Why can't I turn into a headless dwarf? Or add an arm in the middle of my back?
If you take 'you have to have seen it' too strictly, then you can only change into exactly people you have seen--facial features and everything. But if you allow me to change into 'a human' with facial features I haven't seen before, now the door is opened for the above questions. If I can make facial features I haven't seen--or mix and match ones I've seen--why not skin colors, and why not number of fingers, and length of arms, and number of limbs, and etc etc.
At some point, the answer is going to be some amount of ad hoc. You just need a line somewhere--but that line at that point won't perfectly make sense. So you shouldn't expect it to.
For example, you can go with Dx's muscle mass explanation, which is as good as any. But if someone pushes it, you'll find it can be pushed. The rules don't say that I have any difficulties with my significant size changes (anything that is size M, from dwarf to bugbear). If my changeling is naturally 5'8", I actually should experience some difficulties if I turn into a 7' tall thing. Either I can't add mass, and so my bugbear would be a really skinny and weak bugbear, or I can add mass, in which case the 'muscle mass' explanation goes away. But the rules don't say my 7' form would be skinny and weak. So... does a changeling add mass when they change? Conversely, if my mass stays the same, then packing it all into a 4' dwarf body should make me considerably tougher and stronger. But the rules say I don't get stronger. So...do I lose mass when I change?
But the rules say my 'game statistics' stay the same. Does that include my weight? The rules gave us a game mechanic, a really interesting one, that is just begging to have its limits pushed. Not that I mind, I like changelings, and am having a lot of fun playing one right now.
/END NON-RANT
The way I might rule is to say that, while your arms do become long enough, you are not experienced with super-long arms to the point that you can make effective use of them to gain Reach. You're just uncoordinated with your long arms. You could overcome that...if you spent a bunch of time walking around as a bugbear. With all the associated problems. If the player does that, then, sure...let 'em have reach.
But...make sure from that point on you pay very close attention to what clothes they are wearing, particularly armor and helmets, when they shapechange. You are normally 5'10, and you're turning into a bugbear? Ouch, okay. Take 1d10 bludgeoning damage from your armor constricting you before it pops off and becomes unwearable until you fix it. And your boots and pants are trashed too. In fact, another 1d6 from the boots before they go.
If they want the benefits, they need to take the consequences :)
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
I understand the point of your "Rant" I would like to say I always went with this logic. You did change mass when you changed size because its fun to go from a skinny beggar to an overweight politician. And without the mass change that wouldn't really be a thing. Yes, it was all for roleplay whereas this question wasn't. On top of that, for the disfigured aspect I personally never really thought of it that way. Given it if my player could justify the reason other than trying to break the game I would allow it. Otherwise, I would kindly ask them to stay within reason of what you think that race looks like. Changing common aspects such as hair and eye color, height and weight.
For the most part, this seems like a reasonable request that my player and I have stuck to. Which is why I didn't feel like his request for reach when changed into a bugbear was unreasonable. His reason was sound, he is actually the one who gave me the point of "I don't expect to have working gills as Triton because lets be honest, I don't know how that anatomy works, but if I was an average bugbear why couldn't I reach something 10 feet away with my axe?"
To me, his request made sense so we let it happen. Now I did have a talk with him about this after the game. Where we talked about things like. Don't start cutting up fish to learn how gills work and we should be fine. As Always this game works best when the players and GM work together and not against one another. As I said, in the OP I already ruled this as fine in my game. I was just curious about the feedback and other ideas.
I agree that I don't think it's a big deal, and your attitude towards it is the way I like to go too. There's a 'reasonable' standard there--arm length isn't magical or super complicated, it should be allowed. And if it's not breaking things, I wouldn't be too big of a jerk about armor sizes :)
The gills thing is interesting. Making your arms longer is pretty simple, but changing the way your bodily systems work--it may just be that changelings don't have that fine level of control. There will be a 'fuzzy area' if you dig deep enough, but on the surface there's an explanation, even if they start cutting up fish :) "Yep, you now know how gills work. You just can't change your body that way."
But even that could be tricky--can a changeling change his fingerprints? :)
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Yeah Changelings could be rather destructive if you had a creative player and DM that did play well together. Like I said, in my specific example, we get along fine so their wasn't really an argument, he made a creative choice and gave a pretty solid reason. I said sure but then we talked it over after to make sure it didn't go to far.
But I could honestly see that whole thing going another way if the GM and Player didn't get along so well or didn't have the same level of trust.
Totally a recipe for bad if there's a conflict there. Or a method for total abuse if the DM is too permissive. OR...a recipe for a really nice villain if the DM disallows them as a player race and ramps up their abilities. Or lets a changeling improve their ability.
Which is interesting. There is no race-specific feat for changelings...improved shapechange?
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Yeah, I wish all the races had race-specific feats. Some of them are pretty cool.
I'm putting a little bit of occasional thought to this idea now of a Changeling racial feat of Improved Shapeshifting.
What about the changeling choosing a race when they get the feat--and they get the racial benefits of that race when they are shapeshifted to that race? Allow the feat to be taken multiple times, maybe, with a different race selected each time. The feat represents the changeling having spent a lot of time as that race, observing that race (physically and socially), playing the role of that race, etc. You have spent so long being a dwarf, diving into the persona, that you have developed proficiency with mason's tools and new weapons while you are that persona, and you have studied dwarves physically to the extent that you can now shapeshift your eyes when you are a dwarf to gain darkvision.
One race per Feat selection doesn't sound too OP compared to other feats. The Tiefling's innate spells seems hard to justify at first glance, though. Not OP, just hard to explain how you get those via shapeshifting.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
It would be overpowering for any existing race to have reach. That is the reason for playing a Bugbear; it's their unique defining feature, and I would absolutely never allow a player to stomp on it.
I'd say the RAW/RAI on Changeling explicitly stating that they cannot do this is a pretty good justification.
To me, it sounds like your player wants to have all the benefits of both Polymorph & Change Appearance, without any of the consequences/restrictions of either.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I already stated that I know what RAW says and why it says. My point was for every situation outside of the Reach of a Bugbear I could easily justify why I changeling couldn't have that ability logically outside of RAW. For example, just because you can look like an elf doesn't mean you change how your eyes function to see in the darkness.
However when it comes to a bugbear specifically. When you look like a bugbear, your arms are physically longer which is the thing that gives them reach. Now yes, if you are playing straight rules as written, you do not gain reach. But at least at my table, if my players make a sound argument and it makes sense logically then yeah I let it go as long as it seems within reason. Which a changeling having reach as a bugbear logically makes sense.
Now in your game, you can rule however you want, as a GM that would be your call.
Lastly, I guess you didn't read the thread either because you would have seen this statement which handles your last point of my player wanting to "have all the benefits of Polymorph" in the game. We have already talked about specific other features and why he can't have them.
Also good to keep in mind that it is still in playtest and not "official" 5e material. It's Keith Baker's interpretation of the 3.5 rules/sourcebooks and might change. If you wanted to develop it yourself, I recommend looking through the 3.5 books if you have access to them. There are several changeling racial feats in there (including one that is an improved disguise/ability). My Eberron campaign started as 3.5 and went 5e, and even though there are updated stats I still use the 3.5 books quite a bit. For example, in the original, it specifically states that it functions like disguise self from a physical change standpoint. (Height and weight limitations, etc)
So, with it just released I wanted to chime in with another possible interpretation: The races and racial features described in the rules are for Player-Characters. As usual any PC is already an exceptional being just by virtue of being a PC. So the racial features are features of an exceptional bugbear, or worded differently: Of a bugbear that is hero material. Now a Changeling would have no issues turning into an average bugbear, but that average bugbear would not have the same bodily features as an exceptional one.