My Druid Player found a polymorph cheat code?

[pwykersotz]

As a DM, I feel that it's my job to bring forward creative and interesting encounters that the players need to complete. If they are solving every encounter with summoning pixies and polymorph, then I'm not being creative enough. Yes it alot of work (sometimes) but for me that is part of the fun of being a DM, thinking up challenges that cannot always be solve the same way.

You and I just disagree on what constitutes creative and interesting then. Compensating for the party isn't creative or interesting to me. It's rather boring.

[Malifice]

We're in the rules does it say the DM choose the creatures summon?

Where in the rules does it say the Player chooses?

The DM has final say on what creatures get summoned (like he does with everything).

Confirmed as RAI by Crawford.

The DM also plays those creatures (like he plays every other creature in the world that isnt a PC). They're NPCs.

IMG summon Pixies at your own risk. They're mischevious little buggers, who love to troll people and who are known interpret orders rather... liberally.

[Malifice]

PIXIE #1: What's a "T-Rex"?

PIXIE #2: Oooooh I know! It's a type of underwear that the big people use to cover their crotchies.

PIXIE #3: Shaped like a "T"!

PIXIE #4: Okay then! Everyone turns into T-Rexes! Underwear for all!

PIXIES #1-3: YAAAAAAAAAAY!

DRUID: No, wait! W-

This.

Or [not really knowing or understanding what T-Rex's are] they turn you into one of a million different things, or things with one of a million different abilities. Or [even knowing what they are] decide to interpret your orders to mean something wildly different.

Also; dont forget to ensure that when polymorphed it's done for maximum trolling/ laughter value by the pixies.

The [Dwarf fighter/ T-Rex] keeps his beard. The [wizard/ T-Rex] heeps his pointy hat. Etc.

[Saiga]

The spell itself doesn't say "the DM chooses the creature" but it also doesn't say "choose the exact creature". It does say the DM has the creature statistics.

I think it's a pretty unclearly worded spell, but if you compare it to the wording of other spells and how exact they are in what choices the PC makes, the RAI makes sense.

[SharkForce]

The spell itself doesn't say "the DM chooses the creature" but it also doesn't say "choose the exact creature". It does say the DM has the creature statistics.

I think it's a pretty unclearly worded spell, but if you compare it to the wording of other spells and how exact they are in what choices the PC makes, the RAI makes sense.

the RAI doesn't make any more sense than the complete opposite way of interpreting it though. there is nothing that says either way, RAW. it's reasonable for any person to read it an interpret it either way, though i for one find it odd that the DM would be in charge of telling me what i get when i use my ability.

and as a DM, i am juggling enough balls that i don't need or want to juggle anyone else's at the same time. just fix the actual problems, and the players can choose whatever they want again. you want pixies? sure thing! you get two of them. and their polymorph has a max CR of 1. but i won't troll you with them, because they're there to be helpful and follow your orders, and you get to pick what you want so that it will actually be useful for what you want to do.

when you fix the problems, the symptoms go away on their own. pixie spam is a symptom, not the problem.

[Tanarii]

The spell itself doesn't say "the DM chooses the creature" but it also doesn't say "choose the exact creature". It does say the DM has the creature statistics.

Exactly. Raw doesn't say. So asking where it says the DM chooses, implying that therefore the player chooses, isn't helpful.

Nor is it helpful to claim that RAW the DM chooses. The DM choosing, the player choosing, the DM & player collaborating, the DM banning some creatures as not appropriate to his campaign world, the DM setting broad limits but the player otherwise choosing, etc are all RAW.

JC provided his version of RAI. IMO it's not a very helpful one. Like Tides of Chaos (which is explicit the DM chooses), I think it should be the player chooses but needs to be aware there will be more DM oversight and/or rulings than most other mechanical parts of the game. Or Hiding for that matter (another ongoing thread).

I mean, JC could have said all this just as easily. I'm sure some people would call it waffling and not mechanical enough, or want to know if it's Player's *right* or DMs *right* to choose. As opposed something in between.

I think it's a pretty unclearly worded spell, but if you compare it to the wording of other spells and how exact they are in what choices the PC makes, the RAI makes sense.

I initially assumed the unclear wording & RAI was so that it would work with newly introduced creatures from splats and/or creatures appropriate to a DM's campaign world. Including homebrew.

[Finback]

You're about to get pissed when you find out that there's a new Titanosaurus.

Yes. Titanosaurus.

Yeah, but people won't choose a sauropod over a theropod. Even if the sauropod could trample an entire party, or tail-whip the wizard into the next country.

[Rhedyn]

You can tell that rules here have problems given how combative and antagonistic all the advice OP is getting.

Maybe 5e is just a bad game and the real solution is to play pathfinder?

[Strangways]

There’s no question that the DM, not the player, decides which specific creature shows up in response to the summons:

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/04/09...nd-giant-apes/

[jaappleton]

You can tell that rules here have problems given how combative and antagonistic all the advice OP is getting.

Maybe 5e is just a bad game and the real solution is to play pathfinder?

Your avatar is the same as Deleted, but your username isn't.

-Fry squinting .jpg-

[Unoriginal]

You can tell that rules here have problems given how combative and antagonistic all the advice OP is getting.

Maybe 5e is just a bad game and the real solution is to play pathfinder?

Whoa, this got to be the most spiteful post I've read on the 5e forum.

Why do you keep posting here instead of playing/posting about Pathfinder? Your loath for 5e is well-known.

Your avatar is the same as Deleted, but your username isn't.

-Fry squinting .jpg-

There are several people on this forum with Beholder avatar pics who like to pretend 5e is a badwrong game that doesn't work and that shouldn't be played because it's badwrong.

Especially hilarious/sad when they try to imply 5e is a broken mess while praising Pathfinder. Or when they pretend things that are common to RPGs/DMing styles are 5e's fault.

Dunno why they keep posting here, though.

[Nu]

Whoa, this got to be the most spiteful post I've read on the 5e forum.

Why do you keep posting here instead of playing/posting about Pathfinder? Your loath for 5e is well-known.

There are several people on this forum with Beholder avatar pics who like to pretend 5e is a badwrong game that doesn't work and that shouldn't be played because it's badwrong.

Especially hilarious/sad when they try to imply 5e is a broken mess while praising Pathfinder. Or when they pretend things that are common to RPGs/DMing styles are 5e's fault.

Dunno why they keep posting here, though.

5th edition may be poorly designed, but Pathfinder is far worse in that regard.

I do tend to agree that the OP appear to be getting a lot of antagonistic advice that furthers the "DM versus the players" mindset, though. As if it's your job as the DM to intentionally foil any attempt by the players to make their characters feel powerful (the desire to feel powerful and useful is a perfectly legitimate and reasonable approach to a tabletop RPG, by the way). I'll second everyone who says to talk it out with the player before doing anything rash. It's not the DM's job to try and "outsmart" the players by creating a bunch of situations where their tactics aren't viable. It is the DM's job to work with their players to create interesting and fun challenges for them.

[Rhedyn]

Your avatar is the same as Deleted, but your username isn't.

-Fry squinting .jpg-

My salt is my own thank you very much.

I do find 5e more trouble to deal with than PF and less functional than PF. The core math of 5e just doesn't hold up as well and puts far too much of the onus of a good time on the DM. Once you are as rules heavy as 5e, you have a duty to do some work for the DM.

Polymorph itself is just the start of your game breaking problems in 5e and every answer is either blatant houserules or just being an ass of a DM.

In PF, you can just ban problematic options and there is still 5 other ways to make that character and they did a lot better than 3.5 in keeping the options pretty tame.

"Oh but pf breaks down at high levels" it can but 5e breaks by level 7, which I don't even consider the game started until that level.

[Shining Wrath]

Almost all the high level spells of pixies require concentration, including polymorph.
The pixies have invisibility as per the spell, which requires concentration.
A pixie that has polymorphed someone has to remain visible while doing so. This trick, then, works only when the druid can summon the pixies away from combat, because otherwise those pixies are 1 HP creatures within range of spells and arrows.

Also, if you want to go RAW but jerk DM: the summoned creatures obey the summoner's verbal commands. From SRD:

Conjure Woodland Beings
4th-level conjuration
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S, M (one holly berry per creature
summoned)
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 hour
You summon fey creatures that appear in unoccupied spaces that you can see within range. Choose one of the following options for what appears:

One fey creature of challenge rating 2 or lower
Two fey creatures of challenge rating 1 or lower
Four fey creatures of challenge rating 1/2 or lower
Eight fey creatures of challenge rating 1/4 or lower
A summoned creature disappears when it drops to 0 hit points or when the spell ends. The summoned creatures are friendly to you and your companions. Roll initiative for the summoned creatures as a group, which has its own turns. They obey any verbal commands that you issue to them (no action required by you). If you don’t issue any commands to them, they defend themselves from hostile creatures, but otherwise take no actions. The GM has the creatures’ statistics.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using certain higher-level spell slots, you choose one of the summoning options above, and more creatures appear: twice as many with a 6th-level slot, three times as many with a 8th-level slot.

Note the bolded text. But if you look at the pixie (not available in SRD, sorry), you see that pixies only speak Sylvan. So ...
If the druid does not speak Sylvan, the druid cannot issue a verbal command to the pixies. Pantomime, charades, sign language, elven, and so on, do not work. Those who live by RAW, can die by RAW. No mention is made in the spell description of the creatures gaining the ability to understand your language.

Before you start yelling, note that I did say it was a jerk move. So it's not something for a DM to simply do with no warning. It's a thing to bring up if the druid starts getting munchkiny when you discuss the problem.

EDIT: Rheydn is now on my ignore list. Thinking 3.75 is better than 5 is a valid opinion. Proclaiming that it's no contest and obvious, on a 5e board, is simply obnoxious.

[Contrast]

The Shapechange feature allows you to self-Polymorph and maintain it, but it seems it's an instance of "specific trumps general".

Polymorph says: "The target's game Statistics, including mental Ability Scores, are replaced by the Statistics of the chosen beast. It retains its alignment and personality."

A beast has no spellcasting capacity, ergo a spellcaster that get polymorphed cannot cast or maintain a spell.

Being unable to cast spells isn't listed as one of the things that automatically breaks concentration so its really up to the DM what counts are disruptive enough to trigger it. I would consider a DM quite harsh if they even forced a concentration check for a friendly polymorph, let alone an instant failure.

I would also point out to everyone saying 'kill the pixies' that there's no range on maintaining concentration so there's really no need for the pixies to be anywhere near the combat. Even if its mid combat if the pixies split up so they can't just be AoEd, I'd take the action economy of forcing the enemy to kill them individually plus a turn or two of TRexing before they got them all. That's even assuming the opponents know whats going on (which admittedly news would spread fast if the party is doing this a lot). This is a pretty well known foul up in balance and as others have said is best dealt with by asking your players to not do it.

[Rhedyn]

@Shining Wrath

I wouldn't say it's obvious. You only learn that 5e is bad when you reach mid levels and try to pace your narrative outside of "6 encounters and 2 short rest per long rest".

[Knaight]

"Oh but pf breaks down at high levels" it can but 5e breaks by level 7, which I don't even consider the game started until that level.

I wouldn't call either a bad game, but I'd call PF frustrating to run for people who don't favor really rules heavy games - and that frustration starts at level one and just increases. There's a reason it has the Mathfinder nickname. Meanwhile 5e is generally not frustrating to run for many of this same group of people.

Personally I don't like either, but there's a lot I respect about the designs of both, as well as a lot of design decisions in both that I'd consider outright mistakes (given the rest of the designs, neither has any mechanics so awful that they should never be used anywhere).

[Byke]

You and I just disagree on what constitutes creative and interesting then. Compensating for the party isn't creative or interesting to me. It's rather boring.

So we disagree. But I am interested in how you are designing encounters if you are not taking into consideration the parties abilities.

[Malifice]

You only learn that 5e is bad when you reach mid levels and try to pace your narrative outside of "6 encounters and 2 short rest per long rest".

It also breaks down when you use a D4 instead of a D20. It becomes really bad when you do that.

What's your point?

Considering a long rest is an arbitrarily long period of time (8 hours by default, but can be up to week if you so desire) and short rest are equally arbitrary (the game recommends anywhere from five minutes to an entire day, with one hour being the default) if the game is mechanically not matching with your narrative it's not the games fault, it's the DMs.

Also; take it to the Pathfinder board.

[Rhedyn]

If a DM wants to do a dungeon one day and a single encounter day the next without arbitrarily changing what a long rest is then they are hosed.

It's also key to this thread's problem. 4th level spells should only break some of your encounters each day. But these kinds of exploits are more prominent when the DM doesn't run a slog of encounters reach short rest.

[Sigreid]

If a DM wants to do a dungeon one day and a single encounter day the next without arbitrarily changing what a long rest is then they are hosed.

It's also key to this thread's problem. 4th level spells should only break some of your encounters each day. But these kinds of exploits are more prominent when the DM doesn't run a slog of encounters reach short rest.

It really doesn't matter how many encounters per day as long as your players can never be sure and thus will always try to use resources efficiently and not think "well, this is the only encounter we will have today so I'm going Super Nova!".

[Nu]

If a DM wants to do a dungeon one day and a single encounter day the next without arbitrarily changing what a long rest is then they are hosed.

I don't think any modern edition of DnD solves this issue, to be fair. Any edition where one class has daily powers and another does not will run into class-balance issues when the assumed adventuring day is bypassed. Lots of people just ignore this in the case of 3.x/PF, but it's still an issue there to be sure.

[pwykersotz]

So we disagree. But I am interested in how you are designing encounters if you are not taking into consideration the parties abilities.

I don't ignore them, I just don't compensate for them by targeting them. For example, if I know the Gnome Bard dumped strength, I don't single him out as a target for grapples. I might put a grappling monster in the game though, and if the chips fall a certain way, it might end up happening. My belief is that versatile encounter design allows all the players to shine or struggle pretty evenly. I create a large variety of situations and let the party tackle it how they want. But if a mechanic or ability starts to make itself known that dominates a wide swath of those versatile encounters, then it's clear the system is not performing. If encounters that can't be dealt with via a certain method are the exception instead of the rule, it's probably not best for the game. T-Rex polymorph fits that scenario. As does Wish Simulacrum. As do a small handful of other exploits. These are the vast minority though. They become obvious when they are shown, and most of the time they can be dealt with by cutting down on my typically generous reading of the rules.

[Dudu]

That's... a pretty old trick. Conjure Woodland Beings is one of the most broken spells, as well as polymorph. The combo itself is extremely over the top.

I'm joining the crowd here. I the caster must be familiar. Same applies for wildshaping.
If the same druid conjured bears and wolves, or is an artic druid, for example, I would simply rule out t-rexes.

Also, conjure X is supposed to be conjure random allies. It's not a universal rule, and many tables play with the players chosing the summons, but balance-wise it's better that way. If he gets pixies, the pixies are supposed to know what a T-rex is, and unless they are really hardcore pixies, they likely won't.

If you want a more neutral aproach. Say the druid needs a nature check to see if he knows what a T-rex is. Being an extinct creature, it would take a very steep DC to know a T-rex enough to polymorph someone into it. And not merely knowing about "this big lizard called T-rex". He needs a thorough knowledge. The DC shouldn't be lower than 25.

Monster Manual is meta knowledge. Character knowledge is a whole other thing.

[KorvinStarmast]

1. I lost my reply, so I'll boil this down to a few points.

A. At first, there is no way any other enemy party knows about this since this exploit seems to have made each encounter a slaughter.

B. You need to structure an encounter where someone flees before being consumed by Team TRex.

C. That NPC starts spreading a rumor about a band of werelizards who transform into giant lizards and slaughter/consume anyone in their path. Make sure this rumor spreads at a reasonable rate. Initially, the party has no idea the rumor is spreading.

D. The party may hear in a tavern about the dreaded werelizard gang ...

E. For darned sure, another group of NPC adventurers (of just the right level) hears of this band of marauders and in sheer murder hobo fashion, head out hunting them in search of XP ad hides for new boots, belts, and purses.

2. On the pixie side

A. Over time, some of the same pixies have been summoned. This druid is boring. Always wants to do the same thing.
B. They complain to the queen of faerie, or the pixie queen, or whatever.
C. One day, four pixies and four blink dogs show up for the summons; the pixie leader presents a hand written note to the druid that he's boring, and the word is getting out such that most pixies are loathing the summons by this darned boring druid; her majesty the queen has been sympathetic to their complaints. (So has the Arch Fey, if need be).
D. The next time, 1 pixie and seven blink dogs. This time, the letter is written in big letters: boring doesn't cut it.
E. If the player doesn't get the message, you all seriously need to have an out of character talk.

One of the pervious answers said "They only speak Sylvan"
If that's the case, and the druid does not speak Sylvan, a lovely response to the Druid, upon arrival, is no parlo la lingua common no molto bene can make for a hilarious situation. (That's poor Italian for "I don't speak the common tongue very well" ...) enjoy. Try to have some fun with this. Pick a language, but use that as leverage for fun role play across the language barrier.

There's also the tactical matter of shatter or fireball going off when the pixies are initiall summoned. They have few HP. Dead pixies don't cast polymorph. Can't concentrate either, when dead.

3. Lastly: pixies, to survive a battle usually need to be invisible. As they are chaotic, a random determination based on the Druid's Charisma for a pixie choosing to go invisible to preserve itself might be a way around this.
Not all of them will do this at once, but some might during a given round. This is a pre 5e methodology at work here, a "rules lawyers are the enemy" approach, but using a random roll makes it fit pixies. As I said, the pixies are chaotic, so their reactions will be variable, almost random ... and d20 gives some RNG.

4. Last but not least: T Rex is powerful but stupid.

Whomever polymorphs into a TRex now has an Int of 2. Hold the other players to that; no talking during the fight, but growling is fantastic! Reward awesome role play of 2 Int beast with an Inspiration point! (It's in the DMG!)

[Citan]

Spoiler: spoilered for length

Show

1. I lost my reply, so I'll boil this down to a few points.

A. At first, there is no way any other enemy party knows about this since this exploit seems to have made each encounter a slaughter.

B. You need to structure an encounter where someone flees before being consumed by Team TRex.

C. That NPC starts spreading a rumor about a band of werelizards who transform into giant lizards and slaughter/consume anyone in their path. Make sure this rumor spreads at a reasonable rate. Initially, the party has no idea the rumor is spreading.

D. The party may hear in a tavern about the dreaded werelizard gang ...

E. For darned sure, another group of NPC adventurers (of just the right level) hears of this band of marauders and in sheer murder hobo fashion, head out hunting them in search of XP ad hides for new boots, belts, and purses.

2. On the pixie side

A. Over time, some of the same pixies have been summoned. This druid is boring. Always wants to do the same thing.
B. They complain to the queen of faerie, or the pixie queen, or whatever.
C. One day, four pixies and four blink dogs show up for the summons; the pixie leader presents a hand written note to the druid that he's boring, and the word is getting out such that most pixies are loathing the summons by this darned boring druid; her majesty the queen has been sympathetic to their complaints. (So has the Arch Fey, if need be).
D. The next time, 1 pixie and seven blink dogs. This time, the letter is written in big letters: boring doesn't cut it.
E. If the player doesn't get the message, you all seriously need to have an out of character talk.

One of the pervious answers said "They only speak Sylvan"
If that's the case, and the druid does not speak Sylvan, a lovely response to the Druid, upon arrival, is no parlo la lingua common no molto bene can make for a hilarious situation. (That's poor Italian for "I don't speak the common tongue very well" ...) enjoy. Try to have some fun with this. Pick a language, but use that as leverage for fun role play across the language barrier.

There's also the tactical matter of shatter or fireball going off when the pixies are initiall summoned. They have few HP. Dead pixies don't cast polymorph. Can't concentrate either, when dead.

3. Lastly: pixies, to survive a battle usually need to be invisible. As they are chaotic, a random determination based on the Druid's Charisma for a pixie choosing to go invisible to preserve itself might be a way around this.
Not all of them will do this at once, but some might during a given round. This is a pre 5e methodology at work here, a "rules lawyers are the enemy" approach, but using a random roll makes it fit pixies. As I said, the pixies are chaotic, so their reactions will be variable, almost random ... and d20 gives some RNG.

4. Last but not least: T Rex is powerful but stupid.

Whomever polymorphs into a TRex now has an Int of 2. Hold the other players to that; no talking during the fight, but growling is fantastic! Reward awesome role play of 2 Int beast with an Inspiration point! (It's in the DMG!)

Just cannot go for the night without massively plussing the whole post.

Especially the "growl-only" RP. Excellent idea. :)

[Malifice]

If a DM wants to do a dungeon one day and a single encounter day the next without arbitrarily changing what a long rest is then they are hosed.

They can change it if they want. Plenty of campaigns do just this (gritty realism week long rests in the wilderness and in town, and switching to shorter rests in dungeons).

You're also making a huge mistake about 5E. That EVERY long rest must feature 6 encounters and 2 short rests. It doesnt.

Thats the median. Many long rests can (and should) feature less encounters (and a few will feature more). Many long rests will feature more short rests (and some less).

You might do a meatgrinder one session (a dungeon where there is no chance to rest due to you being pursued etc) that has a series of combat and environmental challenges before you get the chance to rest (and/or your long rest is interrupted and only counts as a short rest).

You might get a different session where you only need to deal with the single encounter before long resting.

Get it yet?

It's also key to this thread's problem. 4th level spells should only break some of your encounters each day. But these kinds of exploits are more prominent when the DM doesn't run a slog of encounters reach short rest.

If your DM is cleaving to the longer 'adventuring day' [may not in fact be a day; could be an entire month if using gritty realism] then your players will naturally conserve resources (like high level spells) in the expectation of more encounters, even on the single encounter days. They catch onto the meta, and roll with it.

Nothing sucks more than blowing your load early, and being stuck with cantrips when it really matters.

Your inability to police the adventuring day isnt my fault, or the systems. Its your own.

[Quoxis]

Cave combat. You can't fit a T-Rex in a narrow cave, especially not a group of them.
Dense forests. Age old oaks close to each other, so that large and larger creatures can hardly move.
Ranged combat. Have a gang of goblins attack the party with arrows from a cliff above them or over a river.

Look at the downsides of being a giant dinosaur and use them against the group from time to time.

[Officer Joy]

There are a lot of similar advice.
But one suggestion I haven't seen is to just lvl the players some. Eventually The Plain fighter will do more damage. Than the T-rex.
They loose all their PC abilities when the become T-rexes.

[Knaight]

I don't think any modern edition of DnD solves this issue, to be fair. Any edition where one class has daily powers and another does not will run into class-balance issues when the assumed adventuring day is bypassed. Lots of people just ignore this in the case of 3.x/PF, but it's still an issue there to be sure.

This isn't a modern edition thing - resource management tied to in game time has been at the heart of D&D since the very beginning. It's one of the major ways that D&D is actually an extremely specialized game, and not the generic fantasy game WotC likes to present it as.