Quote:
Originally Posted by jdzik
My view is that the text is unclear on the question. I think either interpretation would be reasonable - that it's what-you-see-is-what-you-get or the full morph. I've told Badmash that while I think the full-morph is right, I'm not going to fight any decision he comes up with.
But one bit of text that I think strongly supports my case: you can morph into the appearance of anyone you can see or touch. I'm hard pressed to see how the "touch" part works unless a touch anywhere on the person means that you can turn into the person entire. If it's what-you-see-is-what-you-get, or in this case, what-you-touch-is-what-you-get, does that mean you have to run your hands over the entire person in order to morph into him?
|
Agree completely that either interpretation is reasonable. Consistency in application is the real issue in this case. I always overlook the "or touch" bit, but it is a strong argument in favor of making it work like ZMC says. OTOH, the connection between Cosmetic Morph and Elastic Skin suggests the need for visual cues for perfect disguises, and I prefer not adding effects beyond those implied by the name. It fits my sensibilities that a now-blind shapeshifter would be limited to perfect copies of forms known before.