Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is there any limit to how much a Warshaper (Complete Warrior) can grow their limbs using their Morphic Weapons ability? As far as the rules say, it is possible for a Tiny creature to then grow to Colossal weapons with enough move actions.

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 4 down vote accepted

Quoting the ability: (Emphasis mine)

Morphic Weapons (Su): As a move action, a warshaper can grow natural weapons such as claws or fangs, allowing a natural attack that deals the appropriate amount of damage according to the size of the new form (see Table 5—1 on page 296 of the Monster Manual). These morphic weapons need not be natural weapons that the creature already possesses. For example, a warshaper polymorphed into an ettin (Large giant) could grow a claw that deals 1d6 points of damage, or horns for a gore attack that deals 1d8 points of damage. If the warshaper's form already has a natural weapon of that type, the weapon deals damage as if it were one category larger. For example, a warshaper who used wild shape to become a dire wolf (Large animal) could grow its jaw and snout, enabling a bite attack that deals 2d6 points of damage (as a for Huge animal), not the normal 1d8. A warshaper can change morphic weapons as often as it likes, even if it is using a shapechanging technique such as the polymorph spell or the wild shape class feature that doesn't allow subsequent changes after the initial transformation.

I understand from the description that you can grow natural weapons according to the size of the shape you turn into, or if the shape you turned into already has natural weapons, you can enhance them to act as ONLY one size category larger. So I believe, that it's actually a matter of what kind of shape you chose to turn into, as the prestige class has a shapechanger type perequisite.

share|improve this answer
    
Yes, one size category larger... on this use of the ability. But if you use the ability again, your form already has a natural weapon of that type (you just grew it), so you can increase its size, can’t you? Which is, I think, @Garan’s question. –  KRyan Sep 9 '13 at 13:30
    
Important bit here, it deals damage "AS IF" it was one size larger. The weapon doesn't actually increase in size category. –  aslum Sep 9 '13 at 13:42
    
@aslum except the ability text gives us contradictory fluff : "a warshaper [...] could grow its jaw and snout". It's just fluff but it helps understand what was intended. –  Trajan Sep 9 '13 at 15:54
add comment

Morphic Weapons (Su): [...] If the warshaper's form already has a natural weapon of that type, the weapon deals damage as if it were one category larger.

It totally depends on how you understand "the warshaper's form" :

  1. if you consider it's the current form of the warshaper, using Morphic Weapon actually increase the natural weapon size each time you use it.
  2. if you consider it's the existing form the warshaper shaped into (like a Dire Wolf), then using Morphic Weapon on the Large natural weapon of the Dire Wolf just makes it Huge, no matter how many time you use it.

I think the second option is what rules intended, but as they are written, nothing prevents you from using the first option.

Next questions are: can the increase in size of the natural weapon change creature's size ? What a kitty with a Colossal bite attack looks like ?

EDIT about the "as if" highlighted by @aslum's comment :

Although the ability says that a warshaper assuming a dire wolf shape may "grow his jaw and snout", it also says that only damage must be considered as if the weapon was one size bigger, so there's no real size augmentation, and a kitty with a Colossal bite attack just has the sharpest-est teeth ever. So the above questions are unfounded, but I leave them here.

share|improve this answer
    
The example text in the rules to me implies the second interpretation is the best fit, as does your thought experiment of Tiny animal with Colossal bite. –  Neil Slater Sep 9 '13 at 13:00
    
I believe it is the second too, because in the first case it refers to the form as the New Form, while on the second it is just a form. I think that it is some kind of typo. –  Drunken_Guy Sep 9 '13 at 13:10
3  
Surely that should be a rabbit with a colossal bite? –  Rob Sep 9 '13 at 13:27
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.