Pseudo-infinite Turning attempts?

[.Zero]

Diggin' in the MMIII i found two creatures, the Rakshasa Ak'chazar and the Rot Reaver. Those two creatures posses Rebuke Undead as a Su ability, so if your neutral aligned cleric 17 (who chose to Turn Undead) casts shapechange to become one of those two creatures, he'll gain Rebuke Undead, and will gain an additional pool of turning.

Now, if you happen to have a base Cha of 10 + 4 from cloak and + 4 from eagle's splendor, each of your turning pools consists of 7 attempts, and you know that 7 is the magic number. But we don't care about your "real" cleric pool.

Round 1: Cast Shapechange, become a Rakshasa Ak'chazar
Round 2: use the Rakshasa's pool to feed DMM, then turn into a Rot Reaver as a free action.
Round 3: use the Rot Reaver's pool to feed DMM, then turn into a Rakshasa Ak'chazar as a free action.

Repeat number 2 and 3 until you persisted all the spells you want, then go to town.

[Fouredged Sword]

Nononononoo.

Step 1 - At the start of the day cast DMM persist shapechange.

Step 2 -profit

[Chronos]

This assumes that limited-use abilities are refreshed by Shapechange, which is a hotly-debated topic. Though this is, I suppose, a less abusive use of it than Zodar wishes.

EDIT: Oh, and a base of 10 plus 4 from a cloak plus 4 from Eagle's Splendor equals only 14. The cloak and the spell are both enhancement bonuses, and so do not stack with each other. Though there are plenty of other ways to get a large enough pool.

[.Zero]

Nononononoo.

Step 1 - At the start of the day cast DMM persist shapechange.

Step 2 -profit

oh sure, that was obvious!

This assumes that limited-use abilities are refreshed by Shapechange, which is a hotly-debated topic. Though this is, I suppose, a less abusive use of it than Zodar wishes.

EDIT: Oh, and a base of 10 plus 4 from a cloak plus 4 from Eagle's Splendor equals only 14. The cloak and the spell are both enhancement bonuses, and so do not stack with each other. Though there are plenty of other ways to get a large enough pool.

You're right, i intended to write cloak + a single nightstick.

I don't see why a limited-use ability cannot be refreshed by shapechange. After all, you transform in a typical exemplar of a given species, and a typical rot reaver has rebuke undead, as an Ak'chazar. When talking about this i often saw people arguing "ok, you shapechange into a zodar, but that zodar has already used its once-per-year wish, you have to try again with another zodar, and you might have only a X% probability that it has its wish available.", but that's an erroneous reading of the spell text. This reading impies that shapechange lets you somehow take the place of an already existing zodar, which is not true. If it would be like that I'm ok with those who say thhat you have only a given percentage probably to gain the Su wish, but fortunately or not, it's not like this.

What i mean is that if the world population of zodar is made by 1000 exemplars, when you cast shapechange that number is increased by one. And by the fact that you transform into a typical exemplar of your chosen monster, and by the fact that every typical zodar has wish once per year, you gain wish. And that's true for every other limited use ability a creature has. I simply can't see issues here.

[Gullintanni]

-snip-

I believe that those arguing in favor of the non-refresh scenario are arguing that when you Shapechange, if there are 10 Zodars in the world, you become Zodar XI, and each time you assume the form of Zodar, you are assuming the form of Zodar XI. You are the eleventh Zodar.

They are arguing that your Shapechanged forms each have a unique identity that is created the first time you assume that form, and that each time you assume that form thereafter, you are returning to that identity, and as such, all SLA's or abilities remain in the same state as when you were last in that form.

This is thematically a very interesting house rule, and one that I might throw my hat behind were I sitting at the table in that game, but it is a house rule. The RAW doesn't specify at all beyond, "...assume the form of any single nonunique creature."

Emphasis mine. In what is probably the most contemptible, but also the most accurate reading of the RAW, and the dictionary, if you are assuming the form of the same, identical Zodar each time, then among the community of Zodars, you are assuming the form of a uniquely singled out Zodar, an action that the bolded language above seems to prohibit. Given the language above, and depending on how you choose to interpret "nonunique" in the context of the spell, it seems to me that there's a reading of the spell that forces you to take the form of a new Zodar each time you choose that form.

I don't think that's the RAI, and if it is, then shame on WoTC for their lazy editing...but I think that's the closest you're going to come to specific language on the subject.

Edit: Alternately, Shapechange may simply not have enough descriptive language to function without houserules governing its use. In which case, the spell is, as written, dysfunctional, IMO.

[Anlashok]

I believe that those arguing in favor of the non-refresh scenario are arguing that when you Shapechange, if there are 10 Zodars in the world, you become Zodar XI, and each time you assume the form of Zodar, you are assuming the form of Zodar XI. You are the eleventh Zodar.

They are arguing that your Shapechanged forms each have a unique identity that is created the first time you assume that form, and that each time you assume that form thereafter, you are returning to that identity, and as such, all SLA's or abilities remain in the same state as when you were last in that form.

I actually agree with your interpretation, but that's not the argument in favor of non-refreshing.

The argument has more to do with the fact that you don't stop being you when you shapeshift:

Bob the Wizard becomes Bob the Zodar, makes a wish, then changes back and later shapeshifts again. When he shapeshifts again, he's still Bob the Zodar and therefore does not have his abilities refresh.

So they rely on the idea that despite becoming a "non-unique" example of the species, you don't necessarily become a different one each time you shapeshift.

There's also the argument that because Bob never stops being Bob, shapeshift never works in the first place because by taking the form of a creature it, by definition, would become a unique creature because it's Bob the Zodar, not Generic Zodar 63.

[.Zero]

It seems to me you're missing something here.

If the world total population of zodars is X, when you shapechange you become the zodar number X+1.

Bob the wizard is always Bob, no matter what. What you are missing is that he does not become Bob THE zodar, because that's not allowed by the spell.

Bob becomes Bob the zodar n°X+1, and that zodar entity n°X+1 is created in the same time he shapechanges into a zodar. The tricky part is that when he is no longer a zodar, the zodar entity ceases to exist. There's no tracking of it, nothing has "memory" of the zodar n°X+1, so if he ever shapechanges again in *a* zodar, he will become *another* zodar n°X+1 (because the previous n°X+1 does no longer exist), thus gaining another use of the Su wish, because every typical zodar has a once in a year wish.

You'll probably ask me rules quotes for this, and i have nothing on my side except the spell's very text.

You just cannot become a unique crearure, and the spell's texts gives no tracking of which creature you have shapechanged into or such. You transform into a generic exemplar of your chosen monster, and surely you retain your identity of Bob, but you cannot become Bob the zodar, because, again, the spell doesn't allow this. What you are is "Bob the wizard transformed into a zodar".

I mean, you gave yourselves an answer that contradicts your thesis.

Bob is still Bob. Off course the spell changes your type etc, but your identity (and it's worth noting that the concept of identity has no in-game explanations) is always the same.
You cannot be Bob the zodar. The spell doesn't allow it. The spell changes your form, aspect, size type etc, but really, this concept of identity-changing is crazy.

Infinite wishes is not a thing i like, granted, but if your table supports it, you'll be happy to know that the rules allow it.

And this obviously applies even to an Ak'chazar rebuke undead pool.

[icefractal]

It has nothing to do with "what" Zodar you turn into. And incidentally, you're not a "different" creature when you use Shapechange, you are yourself with some changes made to your stats, and if you weren't it would change a lot more than whether abilities got refreshed.

But that's all beside the point anyway. The argument against the pool refreshing is that abilities count up times used/day, rather than counting down remaining uses/day. Why? Because otherwise, you already have infinite turn undead, no Shapechange required.

Turn Undead (count-down model):
1) You have 5 uses today.
2) Put on a Cloak of Charisma +6. Now you have 8 uses.
3) Turn Undead three times. Now you have 5 uses.
4) Take off the cloak. Still 5 uses, it's not above your maximum.
5) Put the cloak back on. Back to 8 uses, since we don't track times used, just times remaining.

Turn Undead (count-up model):
1) You have 5 uses today. You have used turn undead 0 times.
2) Put on a Cloak of Charisma +6. Now you have 8 uses.
3) Turn Undead three times. Now you've used it 3 times today, so 5 uses left.
4) Take off the cloak. It's still been used three times, so 2 uses left.

So - Shapechange (count-up model):
1) Turn into a Rot Reaver. You have 7 uses in the pool, and have used rot_reaver_turning 0 times.
2) Use all 7. You have used rot_reaver_turning 7 times.
3) Turn back into a human. You have still used rot_reaver_turning 7 times.
4) Turn back into a Rot Reaver. You have still used rot_reaver_turning 7 times.

Does this mean that the more different types of creatures you can find with an ability, the more times you can use it. Yes. Is that kind of silly? Also yes. Do you get to complain about silly not being in your favor when you're pulling free Wishes and class abilities out of a single poorly designed spell? Hell no.

[icefractal]

Sidebar:

Bob becomes Bob the zodar n°X+1, and that zodar entity n°X+1 is created in the same time he shapechanges into a zodar.

Please point out where in the text the Shapechange spell creates any kind of entity. You change form. This changes your stats. So does Bull's Strength. Nobody claims that Bull's Strength creates "Bob the Stronger Guy X+1". The spell you are thinking of that creates new entities is perhaps Simulacrum.

[Gemini476]

As an aside, do note that the "non-unique" qualifier in Gate and Shapechange is most likely just grandfathered in from AD&D where "Unique" was the frequency of certain creatures such as gods and demon lords.

Although since a lot of the Zodar debate is centred around being a "generic" Zodar, that may or may not be relevant.

[The Viscount]

Or you could just... be an anima mage and use Tenebrous.

[Phelix-Mu]

Pretty much all of the polymorph stuff says you get the "form of x." Not you "become an x." The abilities that do get copied aren't all-encompassing, and you retain many of your normal abilities and spellcasting schtick (happily).

When you shapechange, you assume the form of a non-specific zodar. It can't be a different zodar each time. It's always a generic one, and thus it can't be assumed that it's a different one.

As previously noted, you don't become a zodar. You borrow some of the zodar's powers, and they become your own. The wish 1/year is now your power, not the zodar's. Just because you use the power now, get rid of it, then get it back, doesn't mean it's magically refreshed.

Compare with a belt of battle. That belt let's you do an extra full-round action 1/day. If you take it off and put it on again, it's still used up. The spell is the same. There's only the one zodar that the spell borrows the form of, a generic one, just like when you have only one belt of battle.

The same holds for the examples of the rot reaver and that rakshasa.

[Oddman80]

Pretty much all of the polymorph stuff says you get the "form of x." Not you "become an x." The abilities that do get copied aren't all-encompassing, and you retain many of your normal abilities and spellcasting schtick (happily).

When you shapechange, you assume the form of a non-specific zodar. It can't be a different zodar each time. It's always a generic one, and thus it can't be assumed that it's a different one.

As previously noted, you don't become a zodar. You borrow some of the zodar's powers, and they become your own. The wish 1/year is now your power, not the zodar's. Just because you use the power now, get rid of it, then get it back, doesn't mean it's magically refreshed.

Compare with a belt of battle. That belt let's you do an extra full-round action 1/day. If you take it off and put it on again, it's still used up. The spell is the same. There's only the one zodar that the spell borrows the form of, a generic one, just like when you have only one belt of battle.

The same holds for the examples of the rot reaver and that rakshasa.

Your latter example doesn't hold. If you use the belt of battle, and take it off, and your fellow party member puts it on, they cannot use it that day, as its uses are all out. Because the power is inherent in the object not the user.

But to assume that the object (I.e. The zodar) has used up its uses per day (or per year), when you have "removed it and put it back on again" would require that it be a unique zodar. Just as the used up belt of battle is a unique belt of battle. But we know that cannot be the case.

[Pan151]

Your latter example doesn't hold. If you use the belt of battle, and take it off, and your fellow party member puts it on, they cannot use it that day, as its uses are all out. Because the power is inherent in the object not the user.

But to assume that the object (I.e. The zodar) has used up its uses per day (or per year), when you have "removed it and put it back on again" would require that it be a unique zodar. Just as the used up belt of battle is a unique belt of battle. But we know that cannot be the case.

The problem is, as people have already said, it's neither a unique zodar nor a non unique zodar. It is the caster, in the form of a non unique zodar. The abilities the caster gains do not belong to the zodar - they belong to the caster.




Caster A shapechanges into a zodar.

Caster A has not used his zodar wish yet this year. The zodar wish is usable once per year.

Caster A uses his zodar wish. He has now used his zodar wish once this year.

Caster A shapechanges into a zodar again.

Caster A has used his zodar wish ability once this year. The zodar wish is usable once per year.

Caster A cannot use his zodar wish ability until next year.

[Phelix-Mu]

Your latter example doesn't hold. If you use the belt of battle, and take it off, and your fellow party member puts it on, they cannot use it that day, as its uses are all out. Because the power is inherent in the object not the user.

But to assume that the object (I.e. The zodar) has used up its uses per day (or per year), when you have "removed it and put it back on again" would require that it be a unique zodar. Just as the used up belt of battle is a unique belt of battle. But we know that cannot be the case.

But there is no zodar. It's just you, the caster. You don't actually get the form of any zodar, it's a generic one, and it's now your Su wish 1/year.

My example was not perfect. My point is that it's the caster using up their own limited use power, not that of anyone else (because there is no zodar that is "a generic zodar"...any one zodar is specific). All that is generic about it is that you borrow some of the stats of non-specific zodar.

Anyway, all that all of this highlights is that it is incumbent on DMs in all but the most high-op environments to make sure that there aren't spells that grant hyperbolically large numbers of additional spells. It's pretty insane that there is a spell that grants more spells, especially when that wasn't really the label on the box. There are many offenders, but shapechange is far and above the worst (even with a conservative reading).

[Oddman80]

But there is no zodar. It's just you, the caster. You don't actually get the form of any zodar, it's a generic one, and it's now your Su wish 1/year.

My example was not perfect. My point is that it's the caster using up their own limited use power, not that of anyone else (because there is no zodar that is "a generic zodar"...any one zodar is specific). All that is generic about it is that you borrow some of the stats of non-specific zodar.

Anyway, all that all of this highlights is that it is incumbent on DMs in all but the most high-op environments to make sure that there aren't spells that grant hyperbolically large numbers of additional spells. It's pretty insane that there is a spell that grants more spells, especially when that wasn't really the label on the box. There are many offenders, but shapechange is far and above the worst (even with a conservative reading).

Fair enough. I may have been unnecessarily pedantic. That said, it would seem like every player starts with the ability to do every possible thing in D&D 0 times/time increment. as you gain abilities, that number increases per the ability descripion. So you never needed to turn in to a Zodar to gain the Wish (Su) ability, you already had the ability, it was just you could only use it 0 times per lifetime. By taking the form of the zodar, that increased to 1/lifetime.

now this brings up an interesting point - it was agreed upon higher up in the thread, that if you took the form of a creature that had 4 turn attempts/day, and you used all of them up, and then you shapechanged into a second (different) creature type that also had 4 turn attempts/day, you would be able to use those turn attempts. Correct? it didn't seem like anyone was denying this...

However, I would say that by your own logic, if the ability that is granting those turn attempts is called the same thing [i.e. Rebuke Undead (Su)], then you would not get the additional 4 turn attempts per day when you shapechanged into the second form, as it would be considered multiple identical bonuses from the same source (in this case, the shapechange spell/ability).

[Phelix-Mu]

Your latter example doesn't hold. If you use the belt of battle, and take it off, and your fellow party member puts it on, they cannot use it that day, as its uses are all out. Because the power is inherent in the object not the user.

But to assume that the object (I.e. The zodar) has used up its uses per day (or per year), when you have "removed it and put it back on again" would require that it be a unique zodar. Just as the used up belt of battle is a unique belt of battle. But we know that cannot be the case.

Fair enough. I may have been unnecessarily pedantic. That said, it would seem like every player starts with the ability to do every possible thing in D&D 0 times/time increment. as you gain abilities, that number increases per the ability descripion. So you never needed to turn in to a Zodar to gain the Wish (Su) ability, you already had the ability, it was just you could only use it 0 times per lifetime. By taking the form of the zodar, that increased to 1/lifetime.

now this brings up an interesting point - it was agreed upon higher up in the thread, that if you took the form of a creature that had 4 turn attempts/day, and you used all of them up, and then you shapechanged into a second (different) creature type that also had 4 turn attempts/day, you would be able to use those turn attempts. Correct? it didn't seem like anyone was denying this...

However, I would say that by your own logic, if the ability that is granting those turn attempts is called the same thing [i.e. Rebuke Undead (Su)], then you would not get the additional 4 turn attempts per day when you shapechanged into the second form, as it would be considered multiple identical bonuses from the same source (in this case, the shapechange spell/ability).

Separate forms granted by polymorph would count as separate sources. One is (making this up) movanic deva form's protection from evil 3/day which you get, the other is leonal's protection from evil 3/day, which you get.

This is all pretty pedantic, anyway. All it points out, as I said, is that shapechange is horribly borked (in addition to polymorph being borked), and should likely be heavily houseruled outside of a more aggressive op-environment. Too much flexibility and power in a single spell, by several leagues.

[Fax Celestis]

When a cleric has a temporary bonus to his Charisma score, does it affect his turning check or turning damage? Does it change the number of times he can turn or rebuke per day?

Unless otherwise stated, a temporary bonus to an ability score has the same effect as a permanent one. For example, a cleric with a temporary +4 enhancement bonus to Charisma (such as from eagle’s splendor) adds 2 to his turning check and to his turning damage while the spell was in effect, since his Charisma modifier is 2 points higher than it was before. Things get a little stickier when talking about powers with daily limits, such as turn/rebuke undead or lay on hands. (Hold on, because this gets worse before it gets better.) In this case, a change to the key ability score indeed affects the daily limit—in the example above, the cleric would gain 2 additional turn/rebuke attempts per day—but these aren’t just “free” uses. Here’s why:

Assume the cleric above has a normal Charisma score of 12, granting him 4 turn attempts per day (3 + 1 for Cha bonus). Casting eagle’s splendor increases his Charisma to 16, which would grant 6 attempts per day. At the end of the spell, however, his daily limit would drop back down to 4 attempts. At that point, the player must compare the number of daily uses expended to the daily limit to see if any still remain.

Here’s how that might work in play. Our cleric turns undead twice, then casts eagle’s splendor right before a big fight with a horde of zombies. During the duration of the spell, he makes four more turning checks. When the spell ends, he compares his new daily limit (4) to the number of attempts used (6)—whoops, no turns left. Hope all the undead have been destroyed, because even if the cleric cast eagle’s splendor again, he wouldn’t have any more turning attempts available, since he’s already used all 6 of his allotted attempts. If he could increase his Charisma to 18, he’d “gain” one more turning attempt (since he has now used 6 out of his allotted 7 daily attempts), usable only during the duration of the Charisma-boosting effect.

The same is true of the paladin’s lay on hands ability. If the paladin gains a temporary Charisma boost, her total capacity of healing via lay on hands improves accordingly, but she must keep track of the healing “used up” to see if any remains after the boost ends.

Temporary ability reductions (such as penalties or damage) work similarly. When applying a reduction, do the math as if a bonus had just elapsed to see if any daily uses are left, and reverse that when the reduction goes away to see what (if anything) the character regains. If our cleric is hit by touch of idiocy and suffers a –4 penalty to Charisma, his daily limit of turning attempts is reduced from 4 to 2; if he’s already used 2 or more, he has none available as long as the spell’s effect lasts. This seems more complicated than it actually is. As long as you remember that the important number to track is not uses remaining, but uses expended, everything else should fall into place.

For what it's worth, this language in the FAQ seems to indicate that reapplying the same effect doesn't magically recharge your features.

[Oddman80]

For what it's worth, this language in the FAQ seems to indicate that reapplying the same effect doesn't magically recharge your features.

Exactly, once you are no long in the form of the Rakshasa Ak'chazar, you have 4 fewer turn attempts per day than you did, while you were in that form. Transforming, then, into Rot Reaver won't matter, as it just gets you back up to the #/day you already used up

Base turn attempts =7/day
turn into Rakshasa Ak'chazar: 7+4 = 11/day
turn into Rot Reaver: 7+4=11/day

if you used up your 11th turn per day while in Rakshasa Ak'chazar form, you wont have any more turn attempts per day when you take the form of a Rot Reaver.

[Phelix-Mu]

Exactly, once you are no long in the form of the Rakshasa Ak'chazar, you have 4 fewer turn attempts per day than you did, while you were in that form. Transforming, then, into Rot Reaver won't matter, as it just gets you back up to the #/day you already used up

Base turn attempts =7/day
turn into Rakshasa Ak'chazar: 7+4 = 11/day
turn into Rot Reaver: 7+4=11/day

if you used up your 11th turn per day while in Rakshasa Ak'chazar form, you wont have any more turn attempts per day when you take the form of a Rot Reaver.

Ah, so extra uses would overlap, not stack? That seems a sensible compromise, and one with some precedent in the way the rules negotiate other issues. Might use that.

[Fax Celestis]

Ah, so extra uses would overlap, not stack? That seems a sensible compromise, and one with some precedent in the way the rules negotiate other issues. Might use that.

Exactly. Like how if your CHA goes up, you get extra Lay on Hands healing points, but if it goes back down and then up again, those extra points are still used.

[Oddman80]

Wouldn't this would totally prevent Nightstick abuse as well?
you don't need to hold the nightstick to get the extra 4 turning attempts from it, just possess it. So, I could be wrong, but the abuse that comes from using multiple nightsticks is through using them in succession, rather than simultaneously. Correct? nobody is trying to pull off the use of 16 turn attemps at a time, but rather in succession.

So multiple bonuses from same source don't stack - therefore possessing 4 nightsticks at once still only yield an additional 4 turn attempts per day.

If your apprentice/cohort, is standing beside you, though, as you use up one nightstick, drop it, and then grab one of his on your next turn... This is where the enraged DM comes in complaining about nightstick abuse.

But if we figure, Base cleric had 7 turn attempts +4 from possessed nightstick = 11 turn attempts per day.

Upon using up all turn attempts, the cleric drops the used up nightstick, and drops to a capacity of 7 turns/day (of which he has used 11!)

He then grabs the new nightstick, and once again has 11 turns/day (of which he has used 11).


Or, is the wording of the nightstick different enough from how the cloak of charisma works, that you are only using up turn attempts that are inherent in the rod? (more like using up the wishes contained within a ring of 3 wishes... if you had two of those, you could make up to 6 successive wishes)

Anyone who possesses the rod and is able to turn or rebuke undead gains four more uses of the ability per day.

[Fax Celestis]

They're not a bonus, it's just four more uses. Having multiple nightsticks therefore gives you four more uses per nightstick. It boils down to terrible phrasing.

[icefractal]

A case could be made that if you didn't have all the nightsticks held simultaneously, they wouldn't stack. In which case you'd want to get some extra arms (at least temporarily) for the best results. Unless the wording is actually so bad you don't even have to hold them to use them; I don't have the book right now.

Re: Rebuke Undead. I could see three ways to rule it -
Loose: "Rakasha Rebuke Undead" is a different ability from "Rot Reaver Rebuke Undead", with its own uses.
Stricter: "Rebuke Undead" is the same ability. If one of them was named differently, "Corpse Power" for example, it would be a different ability with more uses.
Strictest: If it does the same thing, it counts as the same ability, regardless of name.

[Oddman80]

A case could be made that if you didn't have all the nightsticks held simultaneously, they wouldn't stack. In which case you'd want to get some extra arms (at least temporarily) for the best results. Unless the wording is actually so bad you don't even have to hold them to use them

Different rods work differently. some require that you hold them, others just require that you be touching them, and yet others just say you must possess them.
the last (including nightsticks) could be in a pack on your back and still be used. The ones that could be used through touch alone could, in theory be strapped to an appendage, so that you can use both hands still. the rods are 2-3 feet long, however, so other than strapping one to your back (sticking up out of armor) you would probably need to be of large size to strap it to an arm or shin without being extremely awkward.