Baleful Polymorph Into a Baby?

[Chilingsworth]

Inspired by this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11959757&postcount=41) post, starting a new thread to avoid derailing that one.

So: Would it be possible to baleful polymorph something (or someone) into a newborn infant? And if you did, would it grow up and gain adult mental and physical stats?

[Zombimode]

By "newborn infant" you probably mean a humanoid baby, which is still a humanoid.
Baleful Polymorph allows to polymorph creatures into small or smaller animals.
Thats the first "No" by RAW.

The spell also sets the stats of the target to those of an "average member" of the new form. Now, "average member" is not a hard defined game term, but it is reasonable to assume the normal monster entries as an representation of an average member. By that an younling is not an average member, so even IF you somehow could choose a humanoid form for Baleful Polymorph the target would probably come out as a level 1 warrior with no age penalties of that species.
But since humanoids are an illegal form anyway, this point is rather moot.

[MikolasTheAngry]

Solution: Polymorph Any Object.

Bonus points for making a rod or staff or something. Go on a villainous bender with your baby-ray.

[Madcrafter]

Yep, PAO is the solution. For all your transformation needs, works every time, all the time. As for if it would grow into an adult again, I would think so. Depends on if you consider it to change the biological age of the creature's cells, if that is the way you want to have such things work in the game. I remember a thread on here a little while back that talked about becoming immortal by PAOing yourself back to a younger version of yourself. I believe the consensus was that such a strategy would work (and would allow you to reap the mental benefits of aging without the physical degradation).


Go on a villainous bender with your baby-ray.

That's good. Makes the villain better when they can spew dead baby jokes all day (in a more literal fashion, perhaps).

[MikolasTheAngry]

That's good. Makes the villain better when they can spew dead baby jokes all day (in a more literal fashion, perhaps).

If I was more clever I'd write up some witty one-liners to go with that. Even better thought: some way to cast the spell at multiple things simultaneously. Turn all the bricks in a building into babies! Or every plank in a bridge! Really screw with people.

Surprise! Your horse and carriage? It's now babies! Sword? Baby.

Spellbook? Baby! (Edit: I just realized, the idea of an evil wizard-type using human children as some manner of power source for his spells, or as a consumable storage method for arcane power akin to scrolls is actually kind of awesome).

Maybe, for giggles, fluff some Deflect Arrows to allow use of the rod. Fire arrows at him? Turn into babies mid-flight!

Let's see how well you can fight the BBEG when he turns your full plate into BABIES.

[gkathellar]

If I was more clever I'd write up some witty one-liners to go with that. Even better thought: some way to cast the spell at multiple things simultaneously. Turn all the bricks in a building into babies! Or every plank in a bridge! Really screw with people.

Surprise! Your horse and carriage? It's now babies! Sword? Baby.

Spellbook? Baby!

Maybe, for giggles, fluff some Deflect Arrows to allow use of the rod. Fire arrows at him? Turn into babies mid-flight!

Let's see how well you can fight the BBEG when he turns your full plate into BABIES.

You win the thread. Here, have an internet.

[Hague]

Yet another reason why PAO should go away and never reveal itself ever again. If you start turning random objects into souled creatures (you'd think Devils would've figured this one out. PAO that rock into a soul shell for free influence) you'd think you'd have Inevitables popping in to pay you a visit. :P

[MikolasTheAngry]

Well they aren't necessarily sapient babies.

You could easily PAO rocks into creepy, silent, 'technically alive' babies. They'd probably still have all functioning biology and eat/drink (as breastfeeding/swallowing are reflexes) but just be... totally silent.

They'd stare blankly, blinking every so often, but otherwise do nothing. Eventually they would grow up into completely blank, soulless teenagers and adults. Probably be kind of atrophied muscularly speaking.

But hey, if your goal is to cultivate yourself a new body to jump your mind in to, I'm sure you have the resources to jump THAT hurdle too!

Cripes, I'm starting to creep MYSELF out. :smalleek:

[Doorhandle]

Would this still work in pathfinder? (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/polymorphAnyObject.html#polymorph-any-object)

[No brains]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2eUUHkpvQA
3:40

It's relevant, I swear.:smallsmile:

EDIT: You can also have fun by polymorphing monsters into babaies and babies into monsters with secret traps that dispel the polymorph at points! You rescued a baby? Nope, Hydra. Killed a manticore? Nope, baby. See some baby taxidermy? Nope, Chuck Testa.

[BlackestOfMages]

Let's see how well you can fight the BBEG when he turns your full plate into BABIES. this has been sigged, as soon as I can remeber how to change my signiature

to my players: I apologise, but hopefully you'll see the funny side :smallbiggrin:

[NNescio]

If I was more clever I'd write up some witty one-liners to go with that. Even better thought: some way to cast the spell at multiple things simultaneously. Turn all the bricks in a building into babies! Or every plank in a bridge! Really screw with people.

Surprise! Your horse and carriage? It's now babies! Sword? Baby.

Spellbook? Baby! (Edit: I just realized, the idea of an evil wizard-type using human children as some manner of power source for his spells, or as a consumable storage method for arcane power akin to scrolls is actually kind of awesome).

Maybe, for giggles, fluff some Deflect Arrows to allow use of the rod. Fire arrows at him? Turn into babies mid-flight!

Let's see how well you can fight the BBEG when he turns your full plate into BABIES.

"Hasta la vista, baby."

[Fax Celestis]

Solution: Polymorph Any Object.

Not quite. There are no rules that differentiate a young member of a given race from a fully mature one (except for dragons with their age categories--freaking dragons), and as such PAOing someone into an infant would not change their statistics. By RAW, there is no mechanical difference between an infant and an adult, so technically Conan as an infant had a 22 STR.

[No brains]

Not quite. There are no rules that differentiate a young member of a given race from a fully mature one (except for dragons with their age categories--freaking dragons), and as such PAOing someone into an infant would not change their statistics. By RAW, there is no mechanical difference between an infant and an adult, so technically Conan as an infant had a 22 STR.

Now I'm imagining a baby in a viking helmet with a sword angrily crying before shouting in a baby voice:
"BY CRRRROOOOOOOOMMMMM!!!"

An making a team of a adventurers turn into flying body parts.

[Fax Celestis]

As well you should be!

[No brains]

Not quite. There are no rules that differentiate a young member of a given race from a fully mature one...

Well actually, the PHB says all characters have to be adults (or 16, close enough) so you actually ruin a character by making them a baby.

This is how is babby formed.

[Psyren]

Note that PAO, even if you finagle the factors to get a result of 9+, merely has a duration of "Permanent." This means that the spell is still active, and all someone has to do to ruin your careful handiwork is dispel the baby.

Also, the ability score thing is very relevant. Quite apart from the thorny issue of superstrong babies, you'd likely have a superintelligent one too.

[Runestar]

Considering that you could just as easily turn the foe into some other helpless creature like a toad or fish, I see nothing wrong with the baby option power-wise. You could just say that he stays a baby for the duration of the spell, and will not grow up or older.

[Psyren]

Considering that you could just as easily turn the foe into some other helpless creature like a toad or fish, I see nothing wrong with the baby option power-wise. You could just say that he stays a baby for the duration of the spell, and will not grow up or older.

That's pretty abusable; I could PAO myself into a Young Adult for immortality with that ruling. Since I'm turning myself into myself, getting the Permanent factor is trivial.

[Safety Sword]

Note that PAO, even if you finagle the factors to get a result of 9+, merely has a duration of "Permanent." This means that the spell is still active, and all someone has to do to ruin your careful handiwork is dispel the baby.

Also, the ability score thing is very relevant. Quite apart from the thorny issue of superstrong babies, you'd likely have a superintelligent one too.

Dispel Baby - 3rd level spell? :smallbiggrin:

[Coidzor]

Dispel Baby - 3rd level spell? :smallbiggrin:

Considering a 3rd level and a 4th level spell guarantee you're going to get one....:smallamused: Sounds about right.

[Sith_Happens]

Considering a 3rd level and a 4th level spell guarantee you're going to get one....:smallamused: Sounds about right.

Okay, so the 3rd level spell you're referring to is almost certainly Suggestion... But what's the 4th level? I guess Lesser Geas would work? (First one I thought of was actually Evard's Black Tentacles.:smalleek: Something's wrong with me...)

[Runestar]

That's pretty abusable; I could PAO myself into a Young Adult for immortality with that ruling. Since I'm turning myself into myself, getting the Permanent factor is trivial.
Well, immortality isn't really a factor that is readily abusable in the game, though I see where you are coming from. Is it okay to just say "We use it in this one specific way, and don't think about its other abuses?" :smalltongue:

[Panartias]

Well, I wouldn’t allow temporal effects with ”polymorph” for obvious reasons. So if you would try to polymorph a baby into a frog you would end up with a tadpole in my game.

[Ravens_cry]

I would either allow it or allow the player to research a special version that did. There is a certain poetic justice to being turned into a baby.
Now they have a second chance at life, something most of us don't get.

[Psyren]

Okay, so the 3rd level spell you're referring to is almost certainly Suggestion... But what's the 4th level? I guess Lesser Geas would work? (First one I thought of was actually Evard's Black Tentacles.:smalleek: Something's wrong with me...)

He's probably referring to something from the Book of Sex, Really Bad Art, And Did We Mention Sex (aka BoEF.)

[Sith_Happens]

He's probably referring to something from the Book of Sex, Really Bad Art, And Did We Mention Sex (aka BoEF.)

Still probably doesn't beat Suggestion + Evard's Black Tentacles though.:smallwink::smalleek:

[dextercorvia]

Even better thought: some way to cast the spell at multiple things simultaneously.

You are looking for the Chain spell metamagic feat -- available via rod. It allows you to target CL things instead of just one. As a bonus, unattended objects like bricks and planks don't get saving throws.

[Madcrafter]

Alternatively, the villain can turn his own full plate into babies, and gain Invincibility to Good. As long as the babies know to stay in an armour shape.

[Urpriest]

While it's a bit of a stretch, humanoid and giant monster entries tend to describe beings under a certain age as explicitly statless noncombatants (IIRC there are rules for Giant children, but there's still a minimum level of development). And you can't PAO something into something statless.

[dextercorvia]

While it's a bit of a stretch, humanoid and giant monster entries tend to describe beings under a certain age as explicitly statless noncombatants (IIRC there are rules for Giant children, but there's still a minimum level of development). And you can't PAO something into something statless.

You can PAO something into a sapling -- why not a baby?

[Urpriest]

You can PAO something into a sapling -- why not a baby?

Saplings, like all inanimate plants, are objects. Objects always have hit points and usually have hardness. These are stats. By contrast, giant infants are explicitly statless, with "no combat ability".

[MikolasTheAngry]

... you can't PAO something into something statless.

Quick, someone stat a baby!

[MesiDoomstalker]

Quick, someone stat a baby!

Somebody already did. :smallamused: Dang can't find a link. It's a little onesie for babies that have a stat block and something like "Future Adventurer" on it.

[dextercorvia]

Saplings, like all inanimate plants, are objects. Objects always have hit points and usually have hardness. These are stats. By contrast, giant infants are explicitly statless, with "no combat ability".

Are you claiming that babies are neither objects nor creatures, but some heretofore unmentioned classification? Having stats in not a requirement of the spell.

[No brains]

Are you claiming that babies are neither objects nor creatures, but some heretofore unmentioned classification? Having stats in not a requirement of the spell.

Babies are, as no doubt supported by their ubiquitous functions mentioned in this thread, miracles.

[Coidzor]

Somebody already did. :smallamused: Dang can't find a link. It's a little onesie for babies that have a stat block and something like "Future Adventurer" on it.

I think it had a really disproportionately high Cha and was more of a future bard or sorcerer.

[No brains]

http://verydemotivational.memebase.com/2010/04/28/demotivational-posters-re-roll/

Your google-fu is weak! Weak like a BABY!

[The Glyphstone]

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p116/ArcherYiZe/babyarmor.jpg

[Chilingsworth]

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p116/ArcherYiZe/babyarmor.jpg


You should put that up on the demotivator thread, lol.

[The Glyphstone]

The picture's been used quite a few times over the course of the multiple threads, I think. It was just unusually topical here.

[Chilingsworth]

The picture's been used quite a few times over the course of the multiple threads, I think. It was just unusually topical here.

Oh, right. That slipped my mind. Nevermind then.

[Urpriest]

Are you claiming that babies are neither objects nor creatures, but some heretofore unmentioned classification? Having stats in not a requirement of the spell.

That's exactly what I'm claiming. Babies aren't objects or creatures, they're plot devices. You interact with them purely via fluff means. That's the only thing that "noncombatant" can mean in this context, as the alternate interpretation (pile of hp that doesn't fight back except to make loud noises) is clearly not a noncombatant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/fungus.htm). Basically, noncombatant means that you can't have any rules-mediated interaction with them. Polymorph Any Object is part of the rules. As such, you can't use it to turn something into a baby (or at least a giant baby, but I'm arguing that it should logically be generalized).

[dextercorvia]

That's exactly what I'm claiming. Babies aren't objects or creatures, they're plot devices. You interact with them purely via fluff means. That's the only thing that "noncombatant" can mean in this context, as the alternate interpretation (pile of hp that doesn't fight back except to make loud noises) is clearly not a noncombatant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/fungus.htm). Basically, noncombatant means that you can't have any rules-mediated interaction with them. Polymorph Any Object is part of the rules. As such, you can't use it to turn something into a baby (or at least a giant baby, but I'm arguing that it should logically be generalized).

How about this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/dungeons.htm) for a rules quote that they are creatures?


Living Quarters

All but the most nomadic creatures have a lair where they can rest, eat, and store their treasure. Living quarters commonly include beds (if the creature sleeps), possessions (both valuable and mundane), and some sort of food preparation area. Noncombatant creatures such as juveniles and the elderly are often found here.

PAO Babies Away!

[No brains]

*snip*...noncombatant means that you can't have any rules-mediated interaction with them. *snip*

You can do many rules-meditated interactions with them. You can buy their stuff, gather their information, and raise your affiliation rating with them. So if you sunder their babies, by RAW none of those interactions are affected? Or is anyone with anything useful to say or in their possession fully stated-out and ready to do you harm?

And don't forget that the BoEF has lots of rules about babies. Particularly under Craft: Baby.

[Fax Celestis]

How about this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/dungeons.htm) for a rules quote that they are creatures?

And where, pray tell, do you find stats for such creatures?

[The Glyphstone]

Are there stats for pebbles? That's one of the given examples in PaO itself for something that can be transmuted to/from.

[dextercorvia]

And where, pray tell, do you find stats for such creatures?

What part of PAO requires the creature you are polymorphing something into to have stats? Give it 1 HP, and a 3/day SLA of Stinking Cloud that has a random (1 in 6) chance of happening any time the baby is threatened.

[Fax Celestis]

Are there stats for pebbles? That's one of the given examples in PaO itself for something that can be transmuted to/from.

Actually, yes, there are (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#hitPoints).

[Urpriest]

You can do many rules-meditated interactions with them. You can buy their stuff, gather their information, and raise your affiliation rating with them. So if you sunder their babies, by RAW none of those interactions are affected? Or is anyone with anything useful to say or in their possession fully stated-out and ready to do you harm?

And don't forget that the BoEF has lots of rules about babies. Particularly under Craft: Baby.

Dipolmacy can be used in combat, so noncombatants cannot be subject to diplomacy.

You can't sunder their babies, because sundering things is rules-mediated. You only do things to their babies consistent with the fluff of your other actions. So if you piss them off with other methods then you might have sundered their babies.

@dextercorvia
That rules quote does indeed establish that noncombatant creatures can exist. However, just being creatures doesn't make them viable targets for PAO, because they also have to be within the rules of the game. You can't PAO someone into a Yeddim and have it fight using piles of d10s because despite Yeddim being creatures, they are creatures from a different game. Similarly babies and other noncombatants are creatures from the "describe what happened after you use the rules to have combat" game, which is distinct from 3.5 D&D.

[dextercorvia]

So why is it not in the rules of PAO to turn something into a noncombatant? Can I not turn them into a loaf of bread?

[Fax Celestis]

So why is it not in the rules of PAO to turn something into a noncombatant? Can I not turn them into a loaf of bread?

A loaf of bread is defined in the rules.

[dextercorvia]

A loaf of bread is defined in the rules.

It has a price, but does it have combat statistics?

[gkathellar]

Dipolmacy can be used in combat, so noncombatants cannot be subject to diplomacy.

Except when they are. All the time.

[Urpriest]

Except when they are. All the time.

Example? Again, all of the mentions of noncombatants in the rules seem to be rather explicitly in the "these guys are in there to spice up room descriptions and should not actually be interacting with the PCs" angle. And again, things that don't fight and just talk do have combat statistics, so the refusal to give such statistics isn't because they don't fight.

[Fax Celestis]

It has a price, but does it have combat statistics?

It has a hardness.

[The Glyphstone]

Actually, yes, there are (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#hitPoints).

That doesn't have stats for pebbles though. It has rules for determining the stats of pebbles based on their thickness, but you can also determine the stats for an elderly (noncombatant) orc by taking an Orc Warrior monster entry and applying the Venerable age category adjustments to it.


I think it's kinda silly to say that old people (or babies) are somehow immune to swords and cannot be talked to, by redefining 'noncombatant' as 'something that cannot be interacted with in combat' as opposed to 'something not intended/statted for combat'. If it doesn't have stats, make them up on the fly.

[dextercorvia]

It has a hardness.

Does it have HP? Where do you find this?

[Fax Celestis]

I've no problem extrapolating stats for old creatures: the rules for such already exist in the core books.

But, as it stands, there are no rules for creatures younger than adulthood (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm#age), and attempting to reverse-engineer stats for such will devolve into nothing but arguments about relative intelligence, strength, and constitution levels, hit die quantity, and other inanities.

[hookbill]

All good now :D


http://www.photobasement.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/dungeonsdragonsbaby.jpg


link - http://www.photobasement.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/dungeonsdragonsbaby.jpg

[dextercorvia]

My point is that you don't need to PAO into something with stats. Why do you need to make some up? There are objects out there without an explicit Hardness or HP -- that doesn't make it an invalid form for PAO.

[GungHo]

Note that PAO, even if you finagle the factors to get a result of 9+, merely has a duration of "Permanent." This means that the spell is still active, and all someone has to do to ruin your careful handiwork is dispel the baby.

Also, the ability score thing is very relevant. Quite apart from the thorny issue of superstrong babies, you'd likely have a superintelligent one too.
Somehow, I don't see a large win for me taking on an evil Necromancer in a spell duel and turning him into Stewie Griffin. Probably because the last thing I need around the table is incessant Seth MacFarlane impressions.

[Urpriest]

My point is that you don't need to PAO into something with stats. Why do you need to make some up? There are objects out there without an explicit Hardness or HP -- that doesn't make it an invalid form for PAO.

In the cases of those objects, though, you are allowed to make up hardness/hp. They're not explicitly statted, but neither are they explicitly statless. You can choose the stats for something that's not explicitly statted, but if it's explicitly statless you don't have that choice. Babies might have HD 1000. They might have stats similar to Neutronium golems. They are defined to have no stats, so there is no way to argue that they are candidates for the spell because there is no way to rule out their not being candidates, in contrast for things like loaves of bread that the DM is allowed to make up stats that say whether they're candidates for.

[dextercorvia]

In the cases of those objects, though, you are allowed to make up hardness/hp. They're not explicitly statted, but neither are they explicitly statless. You can choose the stats for something that's not explicitly statted, but if it's explicitly statless you don't have that choice. Babies might have HD 1000. They might have stats similar to Neutronium golems. They are defined to have no stats, so there is no way to argue that they are candidates for the spell because there is no way to rule out their not being candidates, in contrast for things like loaves of bread that the DM is allowed to make up stats that say whether they're candidates for.

Why are you hung up on needing stats? What about PAO says that you need to have either form statted up?

[Fax Celestis]

Everything that exists has stats. Gods, creatures, objects. A creature without stats is not a creature, it is an object. But a living object (such as what a baby would result as) is something that doesn't fit within the rules, nor is it something that makes logical sense.

Do babies have hardness (as all objects do) and as such are more resilient than both real infants and adult creatures? If they are not objects, do they have Hit Dice? If so, how many? What happens to any said HD when the creature matures, particularly in the case of a ECL 0 race? Do they retain baby versions of their racial features? What about features that are not scalar? How do you determine ability scores?

There are just so many questions that are impossible to answer, but need to be answered so the newly PAO'd creature can be interacted with (and possibly even killed).

[Telonius]

There are just so many questions that are impossible to answer, but need to be answered

I think this calls for a new sourcebook: "Complete Youngling." Covers adventuring for characters from birth through maturity.

[MesiDoomstalker]

All good now :D

/snip

link - http://www.photobasement.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/dungeonsdragonsbaby.jpg

Thank you!

[jvluso]

I've actually been working on something for that. I was going to post it in homebrew after some editing, but it seems relevant here, so here it is. It has almost no editing, and while it all made sense in my head at one point, I probably left some crucial pieces of information out.
Each parent passes on a random one of their two dice for each stat. Determine this randomly for each stat before birth. Also determine randomly for each stat which die is primary for each stat, and which is secondary.
All babies start as 1st level commoners. They have spent no skill points, and have no traits, flaws, or feats. In some campaigns, the DM may decide that some character options are granted at birth, such as sorcerers. In that case, use the DM’s rules. A baby with a Str of 1 or a Dex of 1 can only crawl; a baby with an Int of 1 or 2 can’t talk, though a baby with an Int of two might be able to communicate some basic phrases. They may not make long term checks (such as craft or profession).
1: Use their primary dice and half their racial boni minus 4, with a minimum of one in a given stat. Their size is reduced by two. Move speed is ¼ normal
2: As 1, but reduced by 2 instead of 4, and the minimum Int becomes 2.
3: As 2, but no reduction, and move speed is ½ normal.
4: As 3, but all stats are increased by one (before minima are applied). They also gain their first trait and flaw, if they will have one. Also the minimum Int becomes 3.
5: As 4, but size is reduced by one instead of two. Move speed is ¾ normal.
6: As 5, but their stats become the sum of their primary and secondary dice rather than just their primary die plus one. They also gain their full racial bonus to stats
7: As 6, but they gain their second trait/flaw. They may also make long term checks with a DC of less than ten.
8: As 7, but their stats are all increased by one
9: As 8, but full move speed
10: As 9, but size is not reduced and they may make any long term checks
For the next five increments, the teen at each increment chooses three different stats (or has them randomly decided). Each of those stats is increased by one.
They may also choose to allocate skill points at any time, to a maximum of (10 + Int mod) per increment (humans get +2 to this in addition to skill points per level). They may also chose to chose one of their feats at any time; however it counts as allocating five skill points for how much they can allocate. If a character has not been able to allocate all skills/feats by adulthood they may allocate them then.
If a character spends two increments doing nothing but training for eight hours per day, or four increments training and not being able to make long term checks with a DC higher than 10, they may gain an NPC class (though they may voluntarily reduce the benefits) instead of being a commoner. If a person with NPC classes spends an additional two tiers training, they may gain a PC class which looses nothing from the NPC class (a warrior may become a fighter, but not a wizard). Any first level character with an NPC class, even adults, may gain the benefit of two years of training (for class upgrades only) for 500 xp.

By the way, as stated, this is homebrew. By RAW, I agree with Fax.

[MikolasTheAngry]

... Do babies have hardness ...


Baby: Hardness 0, HP 1

[Fax Celestis]

Baby: Hardness 0, HP 1

...which would make a baby an object, instead of a creature (like it is).

[dextercorvia]

But a living object (such as what a baby would result as) is something that doesn't fit within the rules, nor is it something that makes logical sense.

cf. Plants

[Fax Celestis]

cf. Plants

...which are either statted creatures with the Plant type or are for all game purposes objects.

A baby is neither: they eat, have intelligence, and are mobile (like creatures), but do not possess combat faculties (like objects), but are typed (like creatures, unless you want to tell me an enlarge person spell wouldn't affect an infant human), but have no appreciable Hit Dice (like an object) or nonsensically are statistically identical to their adult parents (which is ludicrous). They need to mimic weaker versions of existing adult creatures (a function which has no analogue in existing rules) and mature into those adult creatures given time (which also has no analogue).

[dextercorvia]

...which are either statted creatures with the Plant type or are for all game purposes objects.

A baby is neither: they eat, have intelligence, and are mobile (like creatures), but do not possess combat faculties (like objects), but are typed (like creatures, unless you want to tell me an enlarge person spell wouldn't affect an infant human), but have no appreciable Hit Dice (like an object) or nonsensically are statistically identical to their adult parents (which is ludicrous). They need to mimic weaker versions of existing adult creatures (a function which has no analogue in existing rules) and mature into those adult creatures given time (which also has no analogue).

So why would Enlarge Person work on a baby, but not PAO?

[Fax Celestis]

It wouldn't, because according to D&D, babies don't exist.

[The Glyphstone]

Not to sharpen an old saw, but this is the same D&D that says you can staunch someone's bleeding wounds by submerging their head in a bucket of water, right? Sane and sensible people have fixed that, why can't we fix this as well?

[Fax Celestis]

While it may be a sensible house rule, it is still a house rule and not RAW.

[dextercorvia]

It wouldn't, because according to D&D, babies don't exist.

No, they exist, even just as window dressing. Juvenile members of a community are listed as noncombatant creatures that are usually in the living quarters. I linked to it above.

[gkathellar]

But a living object (such as what a baby would result as) is something that doesn't fit within the rules, nor is it something that makes logical sense.[/i]

...which are either statted creatures with the Plant type or are for all game purposes objects.

Some plants are living. Ergo, they cannot be objects. However, some living plants are objects. Ergo ... some living plants are not living?


There are just so many questions that are impossible to answer, but need to be answered so the newly PAO'd creature can be interacted with (and possibly even killed).

This sounds like an excellent, logical reason to disallow PAO: Baby as a DM. That said, it does nothing to indicate that you cannot, by RAW, Polymorph something into a baby.

You're trying to say that allowing PAO: Baby would introduce logical inconsistencies into the game, and you're right, but keep in mind that this is the game where you can inflict bleed damage on iron golems and use infinite damage loops at 4th level to grant you the omniscience necessary to prevent a kobold from becoming omnipotent at 5th. It already doesn't make sense by RAW.

[Ravens_cry]

I think this calls for a new sourcebook: "Complete Youngling." Covers adventuring for characters from birth through maturity.
I prefer the one one known as Its Warm Inside, AKA Wombscape.
I played a Foetus Psion/Thrallherd once.
The campaign ended after nine months.

[No brains]

I just remembered that in Heroes of Horror there is a template that can be applied to babies, even ones unborn! The Unholy Scion template makes rules references specifically mentioning children and birth. Babies can be combatants, ergo babies can be affected by rules-mediated effects.

[The Glyphstone]

Well great. Now we can Baleful Polymorph enemies into fetuses, but infants are off-limits...:smallamused:

[No brains]

Well great. Now we can Baleful Polymorph enemies into fetuses, but infants are off-limits...:smallamused:

Oh, don't forget about the Atropal and Atropal Scion! They're stillborn fetuses... of gods.

[No brains]

I also found in HH an encounter that specifically names a human baby as a villain. I don't know if this qualifies as a RAW baby, but it is there and you have the option to 'fight' it. It even has a CR of 2.:smalleek:

The Unholy Scion template states it is applicable to any living humanoid. Since a a baby is a legal base, it is therefore a creature. A creature with a CR of 1, since the Challenge Rating entry of the template says it raises the CR of a creature with 4HD or less by +1. A baby MAY be a creature of a CR of 0 with 5 or more HD, but that is extremely suspect.

A baby (albeit an unholy scion baby) even has stats, as they are increased by the application of the template.

You are now able to make babies.
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/570552 (NSFW, just to be safe)

[Coidzor]

Living plants are objects, that's why Disintegrate doesn't work against them.

If babies count as living objects, then baby armor is even better because the part that would have to be touched by the spell shrinks dramatically to the amount of flesh not covered by baby-shield.

[dextercorvia]

Living plants are objects, that's why Disintegrate doesn't work against them.

If babies count as living objects, then baby armor is even better because the part that would have to be touched by the spell shrinks dramatically to the amount of flesh not covered by baby-shield.


Disintegrate
Transmutation
Level: Destruction 7, Sor/Wiz 6
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect: Ray
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object)
Spell Resistance: Yes


I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Edit: Never mind. It won't damage a plant unless it passes its save. That is what you are trying to say.