This kind of question has been answered by the designers as well.
By Crawford specifically and six years ago. There have been changes to the game since then.
Unfortunately for your argument, his answer is evergreen (unlike the ones on the first page of this post).
Did it make it into the official Sage Advice compendium or is it forever just in that tweet? Being 'evergreen' does not mean it has been considered actually officially official. Players should not be expected to know every thing Crawford has tweeted.
What's the question here? Are you saying a druid is now (but was not previously) designated a shapechanger? If then I'm not sure how the age of the post is relevant?
In case you're confused, the rules for changeling DID change between the OP and today (I checked other sources), making an evergreen answer like this still valid while the answers on page 1 spelling out the actual current state invalid when that state changes.
What I dispute is Crawford's tweet being considered an official anything.
Why? If his tweet agrees with what the rules seem to say, then it helps to confirm that that's correct. While a proper sage advice would be nice, it's still a form of evidence to consider.
In this case it doesn't really serve any purpose, as it only serves to backup the obvious interpretation of the rules; if he were contradicting it then it would be more remarkable, but in that case most people would probably just argue it was a bad ruling (he does make those, or at least he sometimes makes comments that aren't clear in their meaning, or that may have misunderstood the question).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Which brings us around to my original point, if it isn’t being limited in any way then druids are immune because they are shapechangers. Draconic sorcerers are immune because when they grow their wings they change shape, and by definition that makes them shapechangers. And so on.
"Shapechanger" is not a defined word in the english language, it's a term in D&D that refers only to things that share that term, i.e- a "shapechanger" is anything that says "shapechanger" on its rules. Again, being able to change shape does not make a creature a shapechanger.
And again, the distinction being made is most likely that a true shapechanger is a creature for whom changing shape is a fundamental part of its nature; while some dragons can change shape, this is not fundamental to what they are (wyrmlings can't do it), it's something they must learn to do as they age. Likewise a druid must learn how to magically wildshape into another creature and so-on.
Sounds like a druid using wildshape to me, or the draconic sorcerer. But the point I was trying to make is that Kotath was specifically trying to claim that there were no restrictions or limits on his interpretation of a Changeling being a shapechanger. My argument is that if there are no restrictions or limitations on the interpretation then a druid is also immune because by definition they use wildshape to change their physical shape, and that makes them a shapechanger, which in turn makes them immune. I am trying to point out how silly that argument is. It seems to be going over most peoples heads though.
But you are ignoring game components to use your ruling. I can go find a definition of wizard that makes druids wizards. Does that make them wizards in 5e?
Which brings us around to my original point, if it isn’t being limited in any way then druids are immune because they are shapechangers. Draconic sorcerers are immune because when they grow their wings they change shape, and by definition that makes them shapechangers. And so on.
"Shapechanger" is not a defined word in the english language, it's a term in D&D that refers only to things that share that term, i.e- a "shapechanger" is anything that says "shapechanger" on its rules. Again, being able to change shape does not make a creature a shapechanger.
And again, the distinction being made is most likely that a true shapechanger is a creature for whom changing shape is a fundamental part of its nature; while some dragons can change shape, this is not fundamental to what they are (wyrmlings can't do it), it's something they must learn to do as they age. Likewise a druid must learn how to magically wildshape into another creature and so-on.
Sounds like a druid using wildshape to me, or the draconic sorcerer. But the point I was trying to make is that Kotath was specifically trying to claim that there were no restrictions or limits on his interpretation of a Changeling being a shapechanger. My argument is that if there are no restrictions or limitations on the interpretation then a druid is also immune because by definition they use wildshape to change their physical shape, and that makes them a shapechanger, which in turn makes them immune. I am trying to point out how silly that argument is. It seems to be going over most peoples heads though.
but there is a limitation on the interpetation.
Changeling has a trait called shapechanger, making them shapechangers and thus are immune to Polymorph.
Druids, do not. Draconic sorcs, do not. Shifters, do not. Dragons, do not (and if they were, then their Polymorph wouldn't work because they are treated as being targeted by Polymorph...). There are no references to the exact phrase "shapechanger" in their rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
I would consider them Shapechangers. That is, of course, just my opinion, for whatever it is worth.
Then their Change Shape feature is moot because they change shape via Polymorph. By your opinion, as presented, that renders them immune to their own Change Shape, and thus... cannot be shapechangers because they can no longer change their shape.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
I would consider them Shapechangers. That is, of course, just my opinion, for whatever it is worth.
Then their Change Shape feature is moot because they change shape via Polymorph. By your opinion, as presented, that renders them immune to their own Change Shape, and thus... cannot be shapechangers because they can no longer change their shape.
And so we have a paradox.
Magically polymorphs does not equal polymorphs magically by casting Polymorph or True Polymorph. I will concede that 'magically' implies using an external force rather than it being a true innate ability to change shape, so that might still disqualify. In other words that they have an innate ability to use an external force to achieve this rather than simply being able to achieve this.
However an arguable counter to that would be that it retains the ability to so so even in other forms.
...Alright, I'll concede to that. I just checked the Adult Gold Dragon and it does say magically polymorphs, and does not specify "as per the spell with any modifications to be humanoid" or whatever. But still, it is a learned ability, not an innate one, seeing as Gold Dragon Wyrmlings do not have the Change Shape ability, and as of Fizban's, *any* dragon could use it whether or not it's on the statblock, ergo it's effectively the same as druid wildshape (being a learned ability to adjust, versus the Changeling's natural shapechanger trait)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
The fact that you do not bother to name this mysterious dictionary says a lot.
Cambridge English, Oxford English, Merriam-Webster; no actual dictionary defines "shapechanger" as a word. It looks like you've done a search and got either yourdictionary.com or wiktionary.com (which is what yourdictionary.com uses); neither of these are valid dictionaries as you could have literally submitted the word yourself.
You'll note also a search for "shapechanger" definition (with the quotes) returns almost entirely results related to people asking about the polymorph spell; it's a D&D term, not a recognised English language word.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I would consider them Shapechangers. That is, of course, just my opinion, for whatever it is worth.
Then their Change Shape feature is moot because they change shape via Polymorph. By your opinion, as presented, that renders them immune to their own Change Shape, and thus... cannot be shapechangers because they can no longer change their shape.
And so we have a paradox.
Magically polymorphs does not equal polymorphs magically by casting Polymorph or True Polymorph. I will concede that 'magically' implies using an external force rather than it being a true innate ability to change shape, so that might still disqualify. In other words that they have an innate ability to use an external force to achieve this rather than simply being able to achieve this.
However an arguable counter to that would be that it retains the ability to so so even in other forms.
...Alright, I'll concede to that. I just checked the Adult Gold Dragon and it does say magically polymorphs, and does not specify "as per the spell with any modifications to be humanoid" or whatever. But still, it is a learned ability, not an innate one, seeing as Gold Dragon Wyrmlings do not have the Change Shape ability, and as of Fizban's, *any* dragon could use it whether or not it's on the statblock, ergo it's effectively the same as druid wildshape (being a learned ability to adjust, versus the Changeling's natural shapechanger trait)
My counter on that is that every Gold Dragon gains it on sufficient maturity. It is literally grown into rather than learned. Druids, being a class rather than a race, are arguably different in that respect too.
Except that isn't the case. Chromatic Dragons should Change Shape (and per Fizban's, can) if they put in the effort to learn it. It's generally assumed Metallics do, since they're more likely to interact with mortals in a non-hostile manner.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
1) Generally assumed by whom? Gold Dragons are based on dragons from East Asian myths and the ability of such dragons to shapechange comes straight out of said mythology. Chromatic dragons come from western European concepts of dragons and have no such traditional ability.
The fact that they don't start with Change Shape as wyrmlings makes it pretty clear that it's either a learned ability or one that requires some extra developmental step before they can use it, this makes it a lot less fundamental to their nature than a Changeling's ability to change whenever they want.
There's also a big difference between being able to change shape, and it being a way of life; a gold dragon might choose to live in disguise most of the time, but it's still ultimately a giant fire breathing reptile, its true form is who and what it is, everything else is simply a disguise, no matter how much they might wear it.
A changeling by comparison essentially is the ability to change shape; it's simply what they are, without it they are nothing as they have no culture of their own, they live within others' cultures in order to establish an identity for themselves.
But this is all pretty off topic as it's lore justifications for things; it doesn't change the fact that Changelings are shapechangers, and dragons aren't, even if they have the Change Shape ability. A DM is always free to rule differently if they want of course, for example because the party is trying to turn an ancient gold dragon into a weasel so they can use power word kill on it, but that's just the realm of DM fiat, and what makes sense mechanically at the time can override the lore reason for something.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The fact that you do not bother to name this mysterious dictionary say a lot.
Cambridge English, Oxford English, Merriam-Webster; no actual dictionary defines "shapechanger" as a word. It looks like you've done a search and got either yourdictionary.com or wiktionary.com (which is what yourdictionary.com uses); neither of these are valid dictionaries as you could have literally submitted the word yourself.
I don’t think that you understand what I am saying at all. So I am going to stop responding.
The fact that you do not bother to name this mysterious dictionary say a lot.
Cambridge English, Oxford English, Merriam-Webster; no actual dictionary defines "shapechanger" as a word. It looks like you've done a search and got either yourdictionary.com or wiktionary.com (which is what yourdictionary.com uses); neither of these are valid dictionaries as you could have literally submitted the word yourself.
I don’t think that you understand what I am saying at all. So I am going to stop responding.
I understood what you were saying just fine, but if you're going to go down the "you must be stupid" route, your not responding may be for the best.
"Shapechanger" is simply not a word, it's a D&D term, and it only applies to certain creatures that use that specific term; it simply does not apply to every creature that can alter its appearance. Indeed we have separate terminology for creatures that can change themselves by other means, as I've already pointed out.
You don't need to descend into semantics to try and make that case; a Druid is simply not a shapechanger because their rules don't say that they are. They may have the wildshape ability that lets them change into beasts, but this is not the same thing. There is no rule anywhere that says "any creature that can change its physical appearance is a shapechanger".
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
So in humans and other species, puberty is learned behaviour? In every animal species, bodies are taught how to increase mass beyond that at birth and are taught when to stop growing? Taught how to grow adult teeth? Avians are taught how to go from the down they were born to proper feathers? And are formally giving flying lessons rather than just being tossed out of the nest when old enough to fly? Traditionally, Dragons get age related abilities by aging, rather than assuming they all find similar instruction at the exact same points in their life spans.
I'm not sure of your point here; puberty is not a core feature of a human, they are still human both before and after. A Changeling's ability to shapechange is a core part of what they are, without it they wouldn't be changelings.
By the way, a changeling only gets the new shape. A dragon with Change Shape gets all the abilities associated with the new shape and do not have the limb configuration limitation.
So? They're both changing shape, but one is a shapechanger and the other isn't. In order to change its shape a dragon must "magically polymorph" itself, a changeling simply changes.
And to restate my argument, I was saying that since the definition of Shapechanger is actually not formally presented anywhere in game, it is indeed up to the DM to adjudicate what is, or is not covered. I am not saying I am citing RAW, merely my own opinion on interpretation.
Then why are you arguing with everyone stating what the rules say? People are welcome to their opinion on whether to use the actual rules or not, but what the actual rules say is clear.
What a shapechanger is does not need to be defined, because it's simply a term that some creatures have, and some effects (like polymorph) use; nothing beyond that is required for the rules to function. And it's only up to the DM in the sense that everything is up to them, but if they want to use the rules as written, then there's a correct answer; they can either use it or not use it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
What the rules say is not clear. If Shapechanger did not need to be defined, this thread would not exist. 'A term some creatures have' is a definition. It is not a definition that is stated outright anywhere in the rules.
The rules are absolutely, 100% unambiguously clear on this issue; polymorph says it doesn't work on "a shapechanger", so it doesn't work on anything that has the term "shapechanger" on it, whether that's a monster tag, racial trait, or something else doesn't matter. If it says "shapechanger", it's a shapechanger, if it doesn't then it's not.
It might be confusing because things that can "change shape" are not always "shapechangers", but that's just a result of a poor choice of term, which is exactly the kind of thing that forums threads etc. are good for clearing up. However, the existence of a thread asking for clarification about what the correct answer is, is not somehow magically proof that an incorrect answer is any less wrong.
Again, if it doesn't say "shapechanger", it's not a shapechanger, because no rule tells you to assume any differently, and it really doesn't get any simpler than that. If you're adding complexity then you're inventing a problem for yourself that doesn't actually exist; the correct thing to do in that case is to step back, return to the simplest possible interpretation and see what you're left with, because it's almost always the right answer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I seem to remember Changeling not having the "shapechanger" trait in the printings available when this thread was relevant. I seem to remember thinking 'without the shapechanger trait or type, they're not shapechangers,' just like Saga says above. I think that the changeling was updated some time ago (with the release of E:RftLW? Was there some other Eberron update?), and with new information should come new analysis.
But there's no need to imply bad intent on anyone. Shapechanger is not a race and no one, i think even then, claimed so. What I thought is that it is a type tag or a trait that at the time neither of these races had. Under the current printing, Changeling does and Shifter does not.
I am quite certain no one here is taking the disagreements personally.
The Changeling statblock gives them the Shapechanger and Changeling tags. Even the PC version has trait 'Shapechanger.' It is a trait, not a type. And to be fair, the listing in the monsters listing does not show the trait. You actually have to go into the statblock to see it, which may be why some missed it.
What the rules say is not clear. If Shapechanger did not need to be defined, this thread would not exist. 'A term some creatures have' is a definition. It is not a definition that is stated outright anywhere in the rules.
The rules are absolutely, 100% unambiguously clear on this issue; polymorph says it doesn't work on "a shapechanger", so it doesn't work on anything that has the term "shapechanger" on it, whether that's a monster tag, racial trait, or something else doesn't matter. If it says "shapechanger", it's a shapechanger, if it doesn't then it's not.
It might be confusing because things that can "change shape" are not always "shapechangers", but that's just a result of a poor choice of term, which is exactly the kind of thing that forums threads etc. are good for clearing up. However, the existence of a thread asking for clarification about what the correct answer is, is not somehow magically proof that an incorrect answer is any less wrong.
Again, if it doesn't say "shapechanger", it's not a shapechanger, because no rule tells you to assume any differently, and it really doesn't get any simpler than that. If you're adding complexity then you're inventing a problem for yourself that doesn't actually exist; the correct thing to do in that case is to step back, return to the simplest possible interpretation and see what you're left with, because it's almost always the right answer.
Citation needed.
Are you making a coherent argument in this thread or just trying to disagree?
My citation is the rules; literally everything you need to know is in the polymorph spell, feel free to read it.
It says it doesn't work on "a shapechanger"; if a thing does not say that it is a shapechanger, then it is not a shapechanger. It literally cannot be made any simpler than this, so if you still cannot understand it, then I'm going to suggest that the problem is not with the rules because you've been told this approximately 80 billion times now by this point.
Frankly I'm sick of going back and forth on this, and refuse to continue doing so; I am unsubscribing from this thread now, because the question was answered five pages ago, and it isn't getting any less answered just because you don't want to accept the answer.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Right. In English, when we use different words like "magically polymorph" and "shapechange" to describe similar effects where specificity matters, there's probably a linguistic reason for that, such as distinction within rules.
This kind of question has been answered by the designers as well.
Unfortunately for your argument, his answer is evergreen (unlike the ones on the first page of this post).
What's the question here? Are you saying a druid is now (but was not previously) designated a shapechanger? If then I'm not sure how the age of the post is relevant?
In case you're confused, the rules for changeling DID change between the OP and today (I checked other sources), making an evergreen answer like this still valid while the answers on page 1 spelling out the actual current state invalid when that state changes.
Why? If his tweet agrees with what the rules seem to say, then it helps to confirm that that's correct. While a proper sage advice would be nice, it's still a form of evidence to consider.
In this case it doesn't really serve any purpose, as it only serves to backup the obvious interpretation of the rules; if he were contradicting it then it would be more remarkable, but in that case most people would probably just argue it was a bad ruling (he does make those, or at least he sometimes makes comments that aren't clear in their meaning, or that may have misunderstood the question).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
From a dictionary:
shapechanger
But you are ignoring game components to use your ruling. I can go find a definition of wizard that makes druids wizards. Does that make them wizards in 5e?
but there is a limitation on the interpetation.
Changeling has a trait called shapechanger, making them shapechangers and thus are immune to Polymorph.
Druids, do not. Draconic sorcs, do not. Shifters, do not. Dragons, do not (and if they were, then their Polymorph wouldn't work because they are treated as being targeted by Polymorph...). There are no references to the exact phrase "shapechanger" in their rules.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Then their Change Shape feature is moot because they change shape via Polymorph. By your opinion, as presented, that renders them immune to their own Change Shape, and thus... cannot be shapechangers because they can no longer change their shape.
And so we have a paradox.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
...Alright, I'll concede to that. I just checked the Adult Gold Dragon and it does say magically polymorphs, and does not specify "as per the spell with any modifications to be humanoid" or whatever. But still, it is a learned ability, not an innate one, seeing as Gold Dragon Wyrmlings do not have the Change Shape ability, and as of Fizban's, *any* dragon could use it whether or not it's on the statblock, ergo it's effectively the same as druid wildshape (being a learned ability to adjust, versus the Changeling's natural shapechanger trait)
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
The fact that you do not bother to name this mysterious dictionary says a lot.
Cambridge English, Oxford English, Merriam-Webster; no actual dictionary defines "shapechanger" as a word. It looks like you've done a search and got either yourdictionary.com or wiktionary.com (which is what yourdictionary.com uses); neither of these are valid dictionaries as you could have literally submitted the word yourself.
You'll note also a search for "shapechanger" definition (with the quotes) returns almost entirely results related to people asking about the polymorph spell; it's a D&D term, not a recognised English language word.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Except that isn't the case. Chromatic Dragons should Change Shape (and per Fizban's, can) if they put in the effort to learn it. It's generally assumed Metallics do, since they're more likely to interact with mortals in a non-hostile manner.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
The fact that they don't start with Change Shape as wyrmlings makes it pretty clear that it's either a learned ability or one that requires some extra developmental step before they can use it, this makes it a lot less fundamental to their nature than a Changeling's ability to change whenever they want.
There's also a big difference between being able to change shape, and it being a way of life; a gold dragon might choose to live in disguise most of the time, but it's still ultimately a giant fire breathing reptile, its true form is who and what it is, everything else is simply a disguise, no matter how much they might wear it.
A changeling by comparison essentially is the ability to change shape; it's simply what they are, without it they are nothing as they have no culture of their own, they live within others' cultures in order to establish an identity for themselves.
But this is all pretty off topic as it's lore justifications for things; it doesn't change the fact that Changelings are shapechangers, and dragons aren't, even if they have the Change Shape ability. A DM is always free to rule differently if they want of course, for example because the party is trying to turn an ancient gold dragon into a weasel so they can use power word kill on it, but that's just the realm of DM fiat, and what makes sense mechanically at the time can override the lore reason for something.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I don’t think that you understand what I am saying at all. So I am going to stop responding.
I understood what you were saying just fine, but if you're going to go down the "you must be stupid" route, your not responding may be for the best.
"Shapechanger" is simply not a word, it's a D&D term, and it only applies to certain creatures that use that specific term; it simply does not apply to every creature that can alter its appearance. Indeed we have separate terminology for creatures that can change themselves by other means, as I've already pointed out.
You don't need to descend into semantics to try and make that case; a Druid is simply not a shapechanger because their rules don't say that they are. They may have the wildshape ability that lets them change into beasts, but this is not the same thing. There is no rule anywhere that says "any creature that can change its physical appearance is a shapechanger".
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I'm not sure of your point here; puberty is not a core feature of a human, they are still human both before and after. A Changeling's ability to shapechange is a core part of what they are, without it they wouldn't be changelings.
So? They're both changing shape, but one is a shapechanger and the other isn't. In order to change its shape a dragon must "magically polymorph" itself, a changeling simply changes.
Then why are you arguing with everyone stating what the rules say? People are welcome to their opinion on whether to use the actual rules or not, but what the actual rules say is clear.
What a shapechanger is does not need to be defined, because it's simply a term that some creatures have, and some effects (like polymorph) use; nothing beyond that is required for the rules to function. And it's only up to the DM in the sense that everything is up to them, but if they want to use the rules as written, then there's a correct answer; they can either use it or not use it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The rules are absolutely, 100% unambiguously clear on this issue; polymorph says it doesn't work on "a shapechanger", so it doesn't work on anything that has the term "shapechanger" on it, whether that's a monster tag, racial trait, or something else doesn't matter. If it says "shapechanger", it's a shapechanger, if it doesn't then it's not.
It might be confusing because things that can "change shape" are not always "shapechangers", but that's just a result of a poor choice of term, which is exactly the kind of thing that forums threads etc. are good for clearing up. However, the existence of a thread asking for clarification about what the correct answer is, is not somehow magically proof that an incorrect answer is any less wrong.
Again, if it doesn't say "shapechanger", it's not a shapechanger, because no rule tells you to assume any differently, and it really doesn't get any simpler than that. If you're adding complexity then you're inventing a problem for yourself that doesn't actually exist; the correct thing to do in that case is to step back, return to the simplest possible interpretation and see what you're left with, because it's almost always the right answer.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Are you making a coherent argument in this thread or just trying to disagree?
My citation is the rules; literally everything you need to know is in the polymorph spell, feel free to read it.
It says it doesn't work on "a shapechanger"; if a thing does not say that it is a shapechanger, then it is not a shapechanger. It literally cannot be made any simpler than this, so if you still cannot understand it, then I'm going to suggest that the problem is not with the rules because you've been told this approximately 80 billion times now by this point.
Frankly I'm sick of going back and forth on this, and refuse to continue doing so; I am unsubscribing from this thread now, because the question was answered five pages ago, and it isn't getting any less answered just because you don't want to accept the answer.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
And the way to know if something fits into a made up category is if the rules tell you.
Right. In English, when we use different words like "magically polymorph" and "shapechange" to describe similar effects where specificity matters, there's probably a linguistic reason for that, such as distinction within rules.