Anyone who is at all familiar with speedrunning these games will know that you can teleport through walls by polymorphing. (Basically, transform into a creature that doesn't fit in the space and the game will place that character at the nearest space where the character does fit, even if it's on the other side of a wall.)

Do you consider this to be a legitimate strategy?

Also, are there any nice non-speedrunning uses of this trick?

(Of course, I could ask this question about other tricks such as cutscene breaking and gem underflow.)

It's a strategy, yes, but a legitimate one? By definition, absolutely not. It conforms to no rules, and breaks them all.

Actually, I would argue that it follows the engine rules: If you can't fit after polymorphing, you are sent to the nearest place you can fit.

It's worth noting that the d20 system (D&D 3.5) has at least one instance where a similar mechanic is applied. From http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/fusion.htm:

When the power ends, the fused being separates. The other creature appears in an area adjacent to you that you determine. If separation occurs in a cramped space, the other creature is expelled through the Astral Plane, finally coming to rest materially in the nearest empty space and taking 1d6 points of damage for each 10 feet of solid material passed through.

Engine rules? You have to be kidding! Keep scraping the barrel.

As for d20, Baldur's Gate has no relationship to it. It's irrelevant, and not worth noting.

What you're talking about is exploiting what the game engine allows the player to do regardless of what the game designers intended called emergent gameplay.

Quite legitimate until a patch is installed to fix the error.

:)

Viable, not legitimate. If it was never intended, it can never be considered legitimate.

I wouldn't say never.

:)

I used the term legitimate by virtue of the original post's words. The term viable works as well, in a synonym pool of optional choices, kind o' way.

Whether you use the term to mean conforming to a rule, or to mean defensible, my point stands: it was never intended that polymorphing could do that, so it can *never* be considered legitimate. It's not rocket science.

Of course, it's not rocket science. We're talking about video games.

:)

The only point that matters is the original post and yes, I agree with the original post that the exploit is legitimate.
Why do I say this?

Throughout the years (we're talkin over 30 now) I've seen players find all the little exploits in the most well crafted games.
Even the coin operated arcade games designed to earn money on the minute.
So, legitimate is a more accurate term than yours.

You speak nonsense. Trust an American to abuse language.

O.K. ...

I'll correct myself:

It's not rocket science. It's computer science.

:)