Shapeshifting into a Magical Creature

One may or may not agree with you that someone whose shape is changed against his own volition should be considered a "shapeshifted" rather than a "shapeshifter" (Kevinschultz does have an excellent point though, about Lycanthropes). But the issue is moot; the rules in the box tell us what happens at least to those who change of their own volition. As you yourself point out, others follow the same rules because it makes no sense for the magic to differentiate.

The MuCo guidelines don't say anything at all about the Characteristics of the shapes assumed except that "...they leave the transformed person's Intelligence and knowledge intact." Which seriously suggests that all others ARE changed. Which, in turn, is completely consistent with HoH:MC. - Intelligence and Abilities are maintained, although your human instincts (in the form of human General Abilities) are locked away until you are transformed back, and are instead replaced by the Animal instincts.

Or to put it another way - can you find anything that says that a total MuCo effect ONLY affects Str/Sta/Dex/Qck? Because I'm not seeing them.

Which leaves us in a bit of a quandary - because if such an explicit claim doesn't exist, then we're just inferring things. If we don't want to do that, then either we follow the rules in HoH:MC for all transformations, or else a MuCo(an) is not NEARLY as useful as I've understood it.

See .
I don't see, how Siz increased by MuCo must not alter Prs, and eyes improved by MuCoAn must not change Per. It is dependent on a lot of context: just where to put the Characteristic, and where the context modifiers, looks like a troupe decision. A Siz +8 dragon in his cave might have an increased Prs due to his Siz, while in front of Notre-Dame de Paris he might not.




As Ezzelino pointed out - yes, it does. The rules also say "if the shapechanger is a lycnthrope" - which makes complete sense if we assume that "shapechanger" refers a general "people who change shape" rather than the rather strict definition you are using. Hence my "logical gymnastics" comment.

Yes, this is a reason to apply Statistics of Shapechangers also to lycanthropes - so to all the category 2 of . That still doesn't make somebody affected by a MuCo spell into a shapeshifter, though.


OneShot, just re-read the passage I cited and you quoted half-snipped, and you'll see that in the box on p.23, shapeshifter and shapechanger are used interchangeably, and appear to apply to all folks defined as shapechangers in the box on p.22. This includes characters who have their shape changed into an animal by Hermetic magic. It's not that hard :slight_smile:

What it is is evidence that a shapechanger and a shapechanged are covered by the same rules. Which means that one of your arguments against considering MuCo(An) as a "shapeshifter" ability is no longer valid. In own words:

So - that line of argumentation is no longer valid, as we have established that there is at least one instance (a lycanthrope) of it not being the case. Lycanthropes are affected by an outside force, and yet, by the rules, are still considered "shapechangers". Unless your argument is that "it's not a Muto effect, it's a demonic curse, which is a completely different external change, and thus not relevant."

Or, if you like: an explicit reference that tells us to use these rules:

Magi of Hermes, pg. 10.

In context, this is for a Jerbiton magi who has a number of ReCo(An) spells that allow him to shapeshift into the aforementioned animals: cobras, bats, and camels.

Now, to be fair - this is MoH - which, from what I recall, is considered somewhat apocryphal in these parts. Still - it's further evidence that shapeshifter and shapechanger are, in fact, synonomous in the context of these rules.

That was clearly stated in HoH:MC p.22 box, and never contested. Why bring it up at all?

([sic!] added by me)
This argument is only apparently weak. Since MoH is edited by David Chart and part of ArM5, for rules reference it is certainly as good as the other ArM5 books. And while the text you found does not change a bit of Statistics of Shapechangers, in its place it makes only sense if the MuCo(An) spells on MoH p.12f are affected by that Hoh:MC chapter. So it shows how Statistics of Shapechangers was authoritatively understood in 2009 to cover MuCo(An) spells.

Which AFAICS resolves our discussion.


Fair enough. Moving on to an unrelated point...

OK, in the research for the previous issue, I managed to actually find that "categories of medieval beasts" that I thought existed. Turns out it's in (you guessed it), HOH:MC, pg. 38

So it looks like a Dragon would probably not be a Bird - as from the above description, I'd argue that (despite a modern understand of evolution), only a bird is self-explanatory as a Bird. Rather, it would either be a Fish (because it's arguably a big lizard), or else a Clawed Beast.

That being said, if you take it to be a fish, you have the advantage of keeping it in the same magnitude as a bird; however, personally this feels odd to me. For lack of a better argument, it 'sounds' better to me to categorize a Dragon as a Clawed Beast - probably only due to the name. However, I still would put a +1 mag addition for the complexity/hybridization of its wings. This may be a YSMV issue, unless we can get clarification from someone who understand medieval taxonomy better than I.

Of course - in looking at a water dragon: one that lives in a swamp, for example - probably doesn't have wings, and lives in water - which means it's really like a Fish. Which means that the more simple animal is at a higher magnitude of difficulty. However, I suspect this is me using a modern understanding of animal physiology, rather than the mideval mindset of "it lives in water - it's more complex than something that lives properly on land."

Nice find. Dumb luck on my writing that it stays at the same level. Given the way the book ref divides up all creatures into just those four types a bit of fudging is healthy anyway.

I'd say Dragons are orthogonal to this, in the same way Mammals can be bird, fish or either beast.

Although implies fish.