Stone golum vs flesh to stone

[tim01300]

So in the 3.5 PH under stone to flesh they give an example "this spell would turn a stone golem into a flesh golem but an ordinary statue would become a corpse.

But in the monster Manuel under stone golem it says "A stone to flesh spell does not actually change the golem's structure but negates its damage reduction and immunity to magic for 1 full round.

Last week my players fought a stone golem and one of them used the flesh to stone spell on it, I had the MM and read him the above quote. Now he is upset after rereading the players handbook spell description. Which is correct and should I give him any bonuses this week? (They didn't finish the fight, we had to stop because of time mid-battle.)

[With a box]

It became a Schrödinger's golum
Nobody knows what will happen before player observe individual result
Toss a coin in secret

[DeltaEmil]

The description in the Monster Manual 1 is the correct application of the stone to flesh spell against a stone golem.

However, applying two stone to flesh spells in the same round might do the trick of turning a stone golem into a flesh golem, now that the first stone to flesh spell negated the stone golem's immunity to magic special quality. You just have to do it quickly before the stone golem regains its immunity to magic special quality again.

[hymer]

I see three possible outcomes:

1: You do as the spell dictates. It is SR: Yes, so it won't affect the golem.

2: You do as the golem description dictates. The golem is temporarily nerfed.

3: You compromise. While the golem is temporarily nerfed, a second flesh to stone would turn it into a flesh golem.

Edit: Swordsaged.

[eggynack]

If he specifically prepared the spell because it would have his intended effect on the stone golem, then you should probably let him retroactively prepare a different spell, and then presumably cast it, if such is his desire. If he prepared the spell generally, and cast it for his intended effect, then you should probably let him cast something else, if such is his desire. If he still thinks casting this spell is the right idea, given its actual effect, then he just gets what actually happens. I don't think any of these outcomes are unfairly beneficial towards the player, as in the first case, he was preparing a spell particularly for stone golem fighting anyway, so the replacement shouldn't be out of line with what he would have done, and in the second case he's not really gaining an advantage at all. You probably shouldn't give him random bonus effects, however.

[Erik Vale]

Whichever was printed later superseeds the former. *Checks* Both were made in July, but I'm not sure as to days. Check those and you'll have your answer as to how to rule...
Unless it's the same day. In which case I think the 3rd option is the good option.

[Killer Angel]

I have a fourth alternative.
Now, the players know thare are two different, very specific rules about it, both in Core.
Rule that this is due to the fact that, precedent empirical evidences, showed both those reactions (every golem can react in a different way to that spell); then roll, in front of the player, a 50% possibility that that particular golem, is subject to one effect, or the other one.

[Karnith]

Whichever was printed later superseeds the former. *Checks* Both were made in July, but I'm not sure as to days. Check those and you'll have your answer as to how to rule...
Unless it's the same day. In which case I think the 3rd option is the good option.
The Core rulebooks were released simultaneously (as you might expect for the books that are necessary to play the game), so going by publishing date isn't going to help.

How would turning a Stone Golem into a Flesh Golem even work? Would it become a typical Flesh Golem (and therefore suddenly lose HD, ability scores, height, mass, etc.)? Would you need to make new stats for a Stone-Golem-turned-Flesh-Golem??

[With a box]

What Rule Compendium / Spell Compendium says?

[Bronk]

I don't know for sure, but it seems as if that's just a 'helpful' example that they added without checking up on the rules for the actual monsters.

Maybe its a holdover from 3E? It isn't from 2E... that wording isn't in the old spell, and flesh golems were specifically immune to pretty much everything...

"Flesh golems can only be struck by a magical weapon. Fire and cold based spells merely slow them for 2-12 (2d6) rounds. Any electrical attack restores 1 hit point for each die of damage it would normally have done. All other spells are ignored by the creature.)"

[SpawnOfMorbo]

The Core rulebooks were released simultaneously (as you might expect for the books that are necessary to play the game), so going by publishing date isn't going to help.


Tell that to 5e :smalltongue:

But I think that you could allow the player the chance to have learned a different version of the spell, if a god gave the player the spell because the PC specifically asked for it to battle stone golem's... Maybe that deity changed it.

I wouldn't punish the player because WotC can't hire a damn editor.

[Kantolin]

Personally, given two ways to rule it, the more interesting one is that it turns into a flesh golem, so I'd probably go with that. This is especially true if this isn't like 'the land of stone golems' or something, which would make this a rare occasion.

I mean... who actually uses stone to flesh on flesh golems nowadays? Most people either... uh, are fireball happy wizards and thus do literally nothing, or have buffs/battlefield control/spells without SR and just use those.

Heck, I'd let the wizard in question /pick/ which effect he wanted to have happen as a reward for actually playing the 'Use this specific spell on a golem to cause a helpful effect' game. :smallsmile: I highly encourage people doing that rather than just sledgehammering everything.

Of course, this isn't at all a RAW response, so it may not be helpful.

[tim01300]

I didn't mention in the first post but this is actually a druid that has a ring that let's him cast the spell once per day. So he didn't actually go out of his way to prepare anything, it's just a custom ring that I put in a treasure pile a long time ago. But he was pretty upset because he had been doing very little against these golum. And while they are not in the land of golums, they are in a massive wizard laboratory with a couple more stone golums.

I guess i feel that the example in the spell description seems a little less formal or serious then the one in the MM. I think I'll end up actually flipping a coin to at least try and make everyone happy.

Thanks for the input everyone

[Shining Wrath]

The Core rulebooks were released simultaneously (as you might expect for the books that are necessary to play the game), so going by publishing date isn't going to help.

How would turning a Stone Golem into a Flesh Golem even work? Would it become a typical Flesh Golem (and therefore suddenly lose HD, ability scores, height, mass, etc.)? Would you need to make new stats for a Stone-Golem-turned-Flesh-Golem??

Just as an observation, D&D Next is coming out at about 2 month centers: PHB, MM, DMG.

[eggynack]

I didn't mention in the first post but this is actually a druid that has a ring that let's him cast the spell once per day. So he didn't actually go out of his way to prepare anything, it's just a custom ring that I put in a treasure pile a long time ago. But he was pretty upset because he had been doing very little against these golum. And while they are not in the land of golums, they are in a massive wizard laboratory with a couple more stone golums.

In that case, provide him with the option of doing otherwise with his action, and tell him to summon something if he wants to beat up golems. He also has the option of wild shaping and eating face, sending in his animal companion, and casting some of the many druid spells that work just fine on golems, if he has them prepared. Druids have no shortage of options against golems, is what I'm saying.