I'm DM'ing in a Homebrew campaign, which took off years ago (pre-covid times), and has been going on and off with some interval.
I've tried creating this campaign-arc where the Vedalken (which didn't exist yet as an option when we started playing) are as such, a lost and extinct race and culture. Some sort of technologically superior race that has left traces behind, and is being investigated by the current races of the world. (Yes, think of all those conspiracy Youtube-Shorts about advanced progenitor races if you will...).
My querry: one of my players, plays a Changeling. Who loves to change things up, given half a chance. And the party will soon enter upon this ancient temple-complex in a jungle where, almost Angkor-Wat style, there will be overgrown statues of the Vedalken to be seen. Since the official artwork of Changelings shows a person that's changing form to be according to that of a painting he holds, I was wondering if the Changeling in question might be able to change into this extinct race's features?
Follow up-question in the event that he can: consider the statues of, for example, Akhenaten (for those who don't know, an Egyptian Pharaoh before the better-known "King Tut") and the very specific artistic style in which they were made. Those statues weren't nearly meant to be a realistic interpretation of how he really looked, but rather a heavily idealized beauty standard. Basically sculptor-photoshop 14th century BC.
==> If this is the only thing he'd have a go on, and statues are enough to go on, then I assume he'd take on that highly idealized (longer, thinner skull, longer limbs,...) image, of said race, instead of how they actually looked?
The text for changelings allows you to choose the specifics of: Skin colouration; hair length; biological sex; voice patterns; height; and weight (limited by not being able to change your limb quantity). It says you can change into another race, but not that you must change into a defined race. It says you cannot change into a specific individual you have not seen - but that applies only to mimicking a specific individual, not a race in the generic. Additionally, it would be up to DM discretion if “seen” includes a painting or sculpture.
Rules as written, even if they have never seen a Vedalken, they would be able to emulate their bald heads (changing hair length), tall and thin bodied (height and weight) and other features. They might not know skin colour if they have only seen sculpture set in stone, but they could become blue also.
I would personally follow the same line of thought if I were DMing - they can change their appearance to try and match, but they have imperfect data to base it on and will look more like how they envision a Vedalken, rather than an actual one. Statues might have exaggerated features and no skin colours. Wall paintings might allow them learn more about skin colouration (though pigments fade with time, so even that might have flaws and result in a very pale blue, rather than the deeper blue they are known for).
Point 1 - You are the DM. If it can happen or not is up to you. If you have story related reasons you REALLY don't want him to be able to mimic them then say no. "Your body rejects the changes, perhaps knowing on a cellular level that the image you see is untrue... Or at least not close enough to true." Or if you want to allow it... then just allow it.
Point 2 - The above are correct in that some statues are better than others. And you are talking giant statues which are generally less perfect. Statue of David? Pretty spot on accurate what a person looks like. Or can look like. Mount Rushmore? They look good from a distance but up close there are a lot of flat planes and sharp edges which aren't true to human form.
Point 3 - Also corrent on coloration. From a statue alone one would have no clue of the natural skin pigment.
But Point 1 again - You are the DM. It is your call. If you want him to perfectly emulate, you can allow. If you want him to emulate but be wrong on specifics and coloration? Makes total sense and you can allow it. You do not want to allow it? A statue, specially a large on, does not fully capture enough of the life essence of the race to really allow your body to adapt to it's state... Sorry. DM's call.
Point 1 - You are the DM. If it can happen or not is up to you. If you have story related reasons you REALLY don't want him to be able to mimic them then say no. "Your body rejects the changes, perhaps knowing on a cellular level that the image you see is untrue... Or at least not close enough to true." Or if you want to allow it... then just allow it.
Point 2 - The above are correct in that some statues are better than others. And you are talking giant statues which are generally less perfect. Statue of David? Pretty spot on accurate what a person looks like. Or can look like. Mount Rushmore? They look good from a distance but up close there are a lot of flat planes and sharp edges which aren't true to human form.
Point 3 - Also corrent on coloration. From a statue alone one would have no clue of the natural skin pigment.
But Point 1 again - You are the DM. It is your call. If you want him to perfectly emulate, you can allow. If you want him to emulate but be wrong on specifics and coloration? Makes total sense and you can allow it. You do not want to allow it? A statue, specially a large on, does not fully capture enough of the life essence of the race to really allow your body to adapt to it's state... Sorry. DM's call.
(Art historian rant) The statue of David (if you are referring to the famous one in Florence) does not have naturalistic proportions at all. First of all it is 17 feet tall and its intended location was well above the viewer, so nobody was looking it right in the eye. The size of its head and hands are completely out of proportion with the rest of his body. That being said, we as human(oid)s correct for these factors, in part because someone's head and hands are the most expressive part of the body and so making them larger (within reason) can seem logical on a static figure, especially one that the viewer is not right next to. Essentially everyone has been conditioned to bring what we see in art into line with what we know/expect of the real world.
I do not know much of the lore on how Vedalken look, but I'd think a Changeling would be fairly adept at making assumptions to correctly mimic the features of a variety of humanoids from artwork even though different cultures may emphasize different aspects of physiology (proportions, color, etc.). What I would expect to result in a situation like this would be for the Changeling to shape themselves into a reasonable facsimile of an actual Vedalken, but would probably have slightly more human-like (if humans are the most common species in your world) features than the actual Vedalken. Of course, if nobody else in the world has had any experience with an actual Vedalken, but have seen the artwork, the form the Changeling takes would probably line up pretty accurately with their expectations.
Interesting. I kind of knew that happens / is done but was not specifically aware of it regarding the Statue of David. I was more talking about the form and flow of the features but of course proportion would be relevant as well. Still, I’m bettering his head is a better representation of real life humans than those on My. Rushmore… yes? lol
Hi All
First time I've made a thread on this forum.
I'm DM'ing in a Homebrew campaign, which took off years ago (pre-covid times), and has been going on and off with some interval.
I've tried creating this campaign-arc where the Vedalken (which didn't exist yet as an option when we started playing) are as such, a lost and extinct race and culture. Some sort of technologically superior race that has left traces behind, and is being investigated by the current races of the world. (Yes, think of all those conspiracy Youtube-Shorts about advanced progenitor races if you will...).
My querry: one of my players, plays a Changeling. Who loves to change things up, given half a chance. And the party will soon enter upon this ancient temple-complex in a jungle where, almost Angkor-Wat style, there will be overgrown statues of the Vedalken to be seen. Since the official artwork of Changelings shows a person that's changing form to be according to that of a painting he holds, I was wondering if the Changeling in question might be able to change into this extinct race's features?
Follow up-question in the event that he can: consider the statues of, for example, Akhenaten (for those who don't know, an Egyptian Pharaoh before the better-known "King Tut") and the very specific artistic style in which they were made. Those statues weren't nearly meant to be a realistic interpretation of how he really looked, but rather a heavily idealized beauty standard. Basically sculptor-photoshop 14th century BC.
==> If this is the only thing he'd have a go on, and statues are enough to go on, then I assume he'd take on that highly idealized (longer, thinner skull, longer limbs,...) image, of said race, instead of how they actually looked?
Looking forward to your insights on this.
The text for changelings allows you to choose the specifics of: Skin colouration; hair length; biological sex; voice patterns; height; and weight (limited by not being able to change your limb quantity). It says you can change into another race, but not that you must change into a defined race. It says you cannot change into a specific individual you have not seen - but that applies only to mimicking a specific individual, not a race in the generic. Additionally, it would be up to DM discretion if “seen” includes a painting or sculpture.
Rules as written, even if they have never seen a Vedalken, they would be able to emulate their bald heads (changing hair length), tall and thin bodied (height and weight) and other features. They might not know skin colour if they have only seen sculpture set in stone, but they could become blue also.
I would personally follow the same line of thought if I were DMing - they can change their appearance to try and match, but they have imperfect data to base it on and will look more like how they envision a Vedalken, rather than an actual one. Statues might have exaggerated features and no skin colours. Wall paintings might allow them learn more about skin colouration (though pigments fade with time, so even that might have flaws and result in a very pale blue, rather than the deeper blue they are known for).
Point 1 - You are the DM. If it can happen or not is up to you. If you have story related reasons you REALLY don't want him to be able to mimic them then say no. "Your body rejects the changes, perhaps knowing on a cellular level that the image you see is untrue... Or at least not close enough to true." Or if you want to allow it... then just allow it.
Point 2 - The above are correct in that some statues are better than others. And you are talking giant statues which are generally less perfect. Statue of David? Pretty spot on accurate what a person looks like. Or can look like. Mount Rushmore? They look good from a distance but up close there are a lot of flat planes and sharp edges which aren't true to human form.
Point 3 - Also corrent on coloration. From a statue alone one would have no clue of the natural skin pigment.
But Point 1 again - You are the DM. It is your call. If you want him to perfectly emulate, you can allow. If you want him to emulate but be wrong on specifics and coloration? Makes total sense and you can allow it. You do not want to allow it? A statue, specially a large on, does not fully capture enough of the life essence of the race to really allow your body to adapt to it's state... Sorry. DM's call.
(Art historian rant) The statue of David (if you are referring to the famous one in Florence) does not have naturalistic proportions at all. First of all it is 17 feet tall and its intended location was well above the viewer, so nobody was looking it right in the eye. The size of its head and hands are completely out of proportion with the rest of his body. That being said, we as human(oid)s correct for these factors, in part because someone's head and hands are the most expressive part of the body and so making them larger (within reason) can seem logical on a static figure, especially one that the viewer is not right next to. Essentially everyone has been conditioned to bring what we see in art into line with what we know/expect of the real world.
I do not know much of the lore on how Vedalken look, but I'd think a Changeling would be fairly adept at making assumptions to correctly mimic the features of a variety of humanoids from artwork even though different cultures may emphasize different aspects of physiology (proportions, color, etc.). What I would expect to result in a situation like this would be for the Changeling to shape themselves into a reasonable facsimile of an actual Vedalken, but would probably have slightly more human-like (if humans are the most common species in your world) features than the actual Vedalken. Of course, if nobody else in the world has had any experience with an actual Vedalken, but have seen the artwork, the form the Changeling takes would probably line up pretty accurately with their expectations.
Interesting. I kind of knew that happens / is done but was not specifically aware of it regarding the Statue of David. I was more talking about the form and flow of the features but of course proportion would be relevant as well. Still, I’m bettering his head is a better representation of real life humans than those on My. Rushmore… yes? lol
Let the dice gods decide with a Intelligence (Deception) check.