Statue (7th level spell) how does it actually work?

[Synchaoz]

Hey folks. I have a session starting tomorrow (I'm the GM) and one of my players had the excellent idea of memorizing a couple of Statue spells for use to buff the party's melee combatants. They all thought it was a good idea because their understanding (and mine, at the time) was that there's basically no downsides to it. You get to shift in and our of statue form as a free action, in between your normal actions. So for example: Move->Attack->Statue and benefit from Hardness 8 and crit immunity during the opponent's turn. Sounds pretty sweet.

But... the more I look over the spell now, the more I feel like it's not half as good as assumed, but the actual RAW is extremely lacking and vague about the details.

The spell turns you, and all of your equipped gear, into solid stone. But does this make you an object, subject to rules governing objects? The spell doesn't touch upon this, it just reads "turns the subject to solid stone". Which leads me to:

1. As an immobile statue (whether you are an object or not), you lose your Dex score (it becomes 0, meaning -5 AC and Reflex saves) in addition to a flat -2 AC penalty. Agree?

2. All of your equipment, including armor, shield and weapon, also turns to solid stone. Does this mean that you lose all AC bonuses derived from them? Let me extrapolate: An armor's AC is based on its design, materials, movement restriction and magical enchantments - damaging someone wearing a +3 full-plate is difficult because the armor is able to absorb/deflect a high amount of punishment because its effectiveness is derived from those specific factors. If it turns to stone, then most (if not all?) of those benefits would logically be negated, right? Hardened, reinforced (and possibly magically enhanced) steel is presumably more durable than plain stone, but the Statue spell specifically reads "turns the subject to solid stone, along with any garments and equipment worn or carried". So if my assumption holds true, that would essentially mean turning into a statue, our AC 30 fighter would become an AC 3 fighter with Hardness 8. I'm not sure that's a good trade-off.

3. What happens to bonuses from magical items? Would the +3 enchantment bonus on that full-plate still be active, even though the armor's own AC is reduced due to the material change from metal to stone? My personal take would be yes, because magic is magic. It doesn't care that the armor turned to stone, so any magical enchantments to AC would stay in effect while in statue form, making the AC loss slightly less (but still fairly significant)

4. While in statue form you do not provoke attack of opportunities. But can you perform one?

5. Are you considered eligible for flanking rules while in statue form?

Would love some feedback from you guys, as I'm getting the feeling that Statue is a spell that's very subject to the GM's discretion and not nearly as effective as initially assumed.

[InvisibleBison]

1. As an immobile statue (whether you are an object or not), you lose your Dex score (it becomes 0, meaning -5 AC and Reflex saves) in addition to a flat -2 AC penalty. Agree?

The subject's Dex becoming 0 seems to logically follow from them becoming unable to move, yes. They wouldn't suffer an additional -2 AC penalty, though, because that penalty applies to objects, and the subject of the spell is not an object - they retain their Wisdom and Charisma scores, because the spell doesn't say they don't, and therefore are still a creature.


2. All of your equipment, including armor, shield and weapon, also turns to solid stone. Does this mean that you lose all AC bonuses derived from them? Let me extrapolate: An armor's AC is based on its design, materials, movement restriction and magical enchantments - damaging someone wearing a +3 full-plate is difficult because the armor is able to absorb/deflect a high amount of punishment because its effectiveness is derived from those specific factors. If it turns to stone, then most (if not all?) of those benefits would logically be negated, right? Hardened, reinforced (and possibly magically enhanced) steel is presumably more durable than plain stone, but the Statue spell specifically reads "turns the subject to solid stone, along with any garments and equipment worn or carried". So if my assumption holds true, that would essentially mean turning into a statue, our AC 30 fighter would become an AC 3 fighter with Hardness 8. I'm not sure that's a good trade-off.

I suppose you could rule this way, but I woundn't, since the spell doesn't say it changes the AC value of the subject's armor. If you want a fluff explanation, say that armor turns into some kind super-hard stone and thus retains its protective value.


3. What happens to bonuses from magical items? Would the +3 enchantment bonus on that full-plate still be active, even though the armor's own AC is reduced due to the material change from metal to stone? My personal take would be yes, because magic is magic. It doesn't care that the armor turned to stone, so any magical enchantments to AC would stay in effect while in statue form, making the AC loss slightly less (but still fairly significant)

This seems like a correct interpretation of the spell; since it doesn't say it changes the subject's magic items, then the magic items don't change.


4. While in statue form you do not provoke attack of opportunities. But can you perform one?

No. You can't move in statue form, and thus can't perform any actions.


5. Are you considered eligible for flanking rules while in statue form?

I don't think you can flank someone while you're turned into a statue. I don't think you can be flanked, either, because flanking represents it being harder to defend against two opponents on opposite sides of oneself, and a statue isn't doing anything to defend itself at all. I might actually rule that you'd be flat-footed in statue form for that reason.

Hope this helps!

[Irreverent Fool]

But... the more I look over the spell now, the more I feel like it's not half as good as assumed, but the actual RAW is extremely lacking and vague about the details.

Actually, it's better. Statue is one of those spells that includes some description that is fluff and doesn't have any meaning in the case of the RAW. The full spell description reads:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/statue.htm

A statue spell turns the subject to solid stone, along with any garments and equipment worn or carried. In statue form, the subject gains hardness 8. The subject retains its own hit points.

The subject can see, hear, and smell normally, but it does not need to eat or breathe. Feeling is limited to those sensations that can affect the granite-hard substance of the individual’s body. Chipping is equal to a mere scratch, but breaking off one of the statue’s arms constitutes serious damage.

The subject of a statue spell can return to its normal state, act, and then return instantly to the statue state (a free action) if it so desires, as long as the spell duration is in effect.


At no point does it state that the target becomes an object. That's pretty straightforward. There are rules for creatures with hardness. It's effectively DR but can have more or less effect based on the type of attack. Some attacks ignore hardness. I won't get into that part.

What is particularly interesting is that the spell never says the target becomes a statue.

Let that sink in.

If the spell said the target becomes a statue, there could be an argument that the spell does in fact turn the target into an object, since "statue" is a common enough term to be clear.

No, what the spell turns the subject into is solid stone. It is a magic effect that makes the target's body and all its items into solid stone. Ignore the part about breaking off an arm. That's fluff and just clarifies what the subject can "feel" which there aren't rules for, just like there aren't rules for what you can "feel" with thickly-callussed hands. There are plenty of examples of creatures made of solid stone, so there is no good argument in RAW to suggest a creature made of solid stone can't move and take actions unless the rules specifically say so.

The spell refers to "statue form" but this is given in the context of the "normal state." The fact that the target can do this at will is interesting, but doesn't appear to limit what the target can do in normal form.

Statue doesn't stop the target from taking actions.

The one downside is that all the target's stuff turns to stone, which makes it easier to sunder. Iron and steel have a hardness/hp of 10/30 per inch of thickness. Stone is 8/15. The spell doesn't say that it robs items of their magical properties, so enhancement bonuses to items would still increase this. Per the SRD, Each +1 gives a weapon or shield +2 hardness and +10 hp. It's hard to break magic items.

What we have is a 7th level spell that turns the target into solid stone, grants hardness 8, changes all items on the target's person to stone, and can be toggled on an off for the duration by the target.

All-in-all this doesn't seem at all overpowering for a 7th-level spell. I do not believe it is the intent of the spell to allow the target to take actions while in stone form, but since the spell never says anything that would prevent it, this appears to be the necessary interpretation by RAW.

This begs the question: Why would anyone want to shift out of the statue form, then? The only good reason I can think of is to do something like retrieve an item or to use something that wouldn't work in stone form like a potion or unrolling a scroll.

So, to respond to your questions:


1. As an immobile statue (whether you are an object or not), you lose your Dex score (it becomes 0, meaning -5 AC and Reflex saves) in addition to a flat -2 AC penalty. Agree?

This spell does not immobilize the target and therefore does not make it lose its DEX score or impose any penalty.


2. All of your equipment, including armor, shield and weapon, also turns to solid stone. Does this mean that you lose all AC bonuses derived from them? Let me extrapolate: An armor's AC is based on its design, materials, movement restriction and magical enchantments - damaging someone wearing a +3 full-plate is difficult because the armor is able to absorb/deflect a high amount of punishment because its effectiveness is derived from those specific factors. If it turns to stone, then most (if not all?) of those benefits would logically be negated, right? Hardened, reinforced (and possibly magically enhanced) steel is presumably more durable than plain stone, but the Statue spell specifically reads "turns the subject to solid stone, along with any garments and equipment worn or carried". So if my assumption holds true, that would essentially mean turning into a statue, our AC 30 fighter would become an AC 3 fighter with Hardness 8. I'm not sure that's a good trade-off.
Armor continues to be armor and enhancement bonuses grant additional hardness and HP. The base hardness and HP become based on stone rather than steel, reducing hardness by 20% (8 for stone vs 10 for steel) and HP by 50% (15 per inch for stone vs 30 per inch for steel - note that weapon hardness/hp are fractional in the SRD because a sword is not a full inch thick of steel). Since the target remains a creature, its AC is based on armor worn. Since it is not immobilized, it retains its full AC in statue form.


3. What happens to bonuses from magical items? Would the +3 enchantment bonus on that full-plate still be active, even though the armor's own AC is reduced due to the material change from metal to stone? My personal take would be yes, because magic is magic. It doesn't care that the armor turned to stone, so any magical enchantments to AC would stay in effect while in statue form, making the AC loss slightly less (but still fairly significant) Nothing. This spell turns the object's material to stone, but does not alter their magical properties.


4. While in statue form you do not provoke attack of opportunities. But can you perform one?
The spell does not limit your actions, but also does not say you do not provoke. Targets still provoke and can still perform opportunity actions.


5. Are you considered eligible for flanking rules while in statue form?
If the spell limited your actions or said you did not threaten while in statue form or said it turned you into an object, then you would not be eligible for flanking. However, the spell says none of these things and never says anything about preventing the subject from acting normally, so the answer is: Yes, you are eligible for flanking in statue form.

[Calthropstu]

Actually, it's better. Statue is one of those spells that includes some description that is fluff and doesn't have any meaning in the case of the RAW. The full spell description reads:

At no point does it state that the target becomes an object. That's pretty straightforward. There are rules for creatures with hardness. It's effectively DR but can have more or less effect based on the type of attack. Some attacks ignore hardness. I won't get into that part.

What is particularly interesting is that the spell never says the target becomes a statue.

Let that sink in.

If the spell said the target becomes a statue, there could be an argument that the spell does in fact turn the target into an object, since "statue" is a common enough term to be clear.

No, what the spell turns the subject into is solid stone. It is a magic effect that makes the target's body and all its items into solid stone. Ignore the part about breaking off an arm. That's fluff and just clarifies what the subject can "feel" which there aren't rules for, just like there aren't rules for what you can "feel" with thickly-callussed hands. There are plenty of examples of creatures made of solid stone, so there is no good argument in RAW to suggest a creature made of solid stone can't move and take actions unless the rules specifically say so.

The spell refers to "statue form" but this is given in the context of the "normal state." The fact that the target can do this at will is interesting, but doesn't appear to limit what the target can do in normal form.

Statue doesn't stop the target from taking actions.

The one downside is that all the target's stuff turns to stone, which makes it easier to sunder. Iron and steel have a hardness/hp of 10/30 per inch of thickness. Stone is 8/15. The spell doesn't say that it robs items of their magical properties, so enhancement bonuses to items would still increase this. Per the SRD, Each +1 gives a weapon or shield +2 hardness and +10 hp. It's hard to break magic items.

What we have is a 7th level spell that turns the target into solid stone, grants hardness 8, changes all items on the target's person to stone, and can be toggled on an off for the duration by the target.

All-in-all this doesn't seem at all overpowering for a 7th-level spell. I do not believe it is the intent of the spell to allow the target to take actions while in stone form, but since the spell never says anything that would prevent it, this appears to be the necessary interpretation by RAW.

This begs the question: Why would anyone want to shift out of the statue form, then? The only good reason I can think of is to do something like retrieve an item or to use something that wouldn't work in stone form like a potion or unrolling a scroll.

So, to respond to your questions:



This spell does not immobilize the target and therefore does not make it lose its DEX score or impose any penalty.


Armor continues to be armor and enhancement bonuses grant additional hardness and HP. The base hardness and HP become based on stone rather than steel, reducing hardness by 20% (8 for stone vs 10 for steel) and HP by 50% (15 per inch for stone vs 30 per inch for steel - note that weapon hardness/hp are fractional in the SRD because a sword is not a full inch thick of steel). Since the target remains a creature, its AC is based on armor worn. Since it is not immobilized, it retains its full AC in statue form.

Nothing. This spell turns the object's material to stone, but does not alter their magical properties.


The spell does not limit your actions, but also does not say you do not provoke. Targets still provoke and can still perform opportunity actions.


If the spell limited your actions or said you did not threaten while in statue form or said it turned you into an object, then you would not be eligible for flanking. However, the spell says none of these things and never says anything about preventing the subject from acting normally, so the answer is: Yes, you are eligible for flanking in statue form.

Practically none of this is correct. Stone cannot move. Stone can be sundered, chipped, destroyed. As solid stone, you cannot move or act. It's a great defense except... solid stone can be destroyed outright. Your hp is meaningless if something simply sunders you. The intent of this spell is quite clear, if not the best worded.

You are solid stone. Unless it says you are solid stone that can move, you default to the abilities and movement speed and abilities of solid stone... ergo none. You gain the movement types of solid stone and the natural attacks of solid stone... none. You gain hardness 8. Your objects and items become solid stone... essentially melding into your form as per the normal polymorph rules.

Essentially, this spell folliws normal rules for changing form, with the form you turn into being "solid stone" which has the stats of... stone. Which is an object type.

[Anxe]

Actually, it's better.
*Snip*

I've always thought this interpretation was wrong but it makes a lot more sense for what a 7th level spell should be doing.

[InvisibleBison]

Actually, it's better.
<SNIP>

This interpretation seems wrong to me. You're arguing that statue is a lower-level version of iron body, but iron body explicitly says that it turns you into living iron and that you retain the ability to move (albeit more slowly) and take actions. Statue lacks any such clauses, and to assume they exist is purely wishful thinking.

[Synchaoz]

Actually, it's better.

I disagree. Mainly due to this line from RAW: "The subject of a statue spell can return to its normal state, act, and then return instantly to the statue state". If you were not subject to the logical limitations of being a statue - an inanimate, unmoving object - then the above sentence makes absolutely no sense. There is no reason to ever NOT remain in statue state. The very notion that the spell mentions the act of turning 'normal' in order to act, and then returning to statue state after finishing your action, is just a convoluted way of litterally saying "If you want to take actions, you must cancel your statue form first."

It is even referred to as a state. It's not even a form; you literally change state into that of stone, implying that you are now stone, including everything that applies to being stone. Basically Calthropstu nails it in his post, I feel.

While in statue form you are absolutely unable to move or take any actions, and you have no Dex score at the very minimum. As for the properties of your armor and gear turning stone, I still personally feel it makes most sense that they literally become stone, and therefor have the same properties as stone, but in all fairness retain their magical properties. However after talking it over with my group, I've for now decided to settle on them retaining all of their armor AC as well, and simply taking the Dex and movement penalties.

It is a 7th level spell, after all. It should be pretty powerful. Losing almost all of your AC is arguably a poor trade-off for 8 hardness, but I think the crux of the concept is that you are essentially permanently immune to critical hits at will. That's pretty bloody powerful in and off itself.

Thanks for all your input so far!

[Irreverent Fool]

Practically none of this is correct. Stone cannot move. Stone can be sundered, chipped, destroyed. As solid stone, you cannot move or act. It's a great defense except... solid stone can be destroyed outright. Your hp is meaningless if something simply sunders you. The intent of this spell is quite clear, if not the best worded.

You are solid stone. Unless it says you are solid stone that can move, you default to the abilities and movement speed and abilities of solid stone... ergo none. You gain the movement types of solid stone and the natural attacks of solid stone... none. You gain hardness 8. Your objects and items become solid stone... essentially melding into your form as per the normal polymorph rules.

Essentially, this spell follows normal rules for changing form, with the form you turn into being "solid stone" which has the stats of... stone. Which is an object type.

If you're going to say "Practically none of this is correct," you'll need to back it up with some clear examples from the rules or we'll get nowhere.

Your arguments make sense with the assumed intent of the spell, but the spell says none of what you are saying. You can certainly rule it that way in your games, but if the spell followed the normal rules for changing form, it would reference those rules somewhere in its description. For example, polymorph any object (which is also terribly worded) says "this spell functions like polymorph except..."

A stone golem is solid stone. An animated statute (animate object) is solid stone. Both move. Stone can be sundered if it is an object, but a creature, even one with hardness, cannot be sundered unless its entry contains specific rules for that effect. For example, an animated object cannot be sundered because the spell turns it into a creature. Attempting to sunder it is treated as an attack (and why wouldn't it be?)

Edit: Actually, sundering is only something you can do on an attended object. If an object isn't attended, then you attack it (AC 10 + size modifier - dex penalty -2 for being immobile = AC 3 + size mod.) This raises some interesting questions about items in the statue's possession. Do they all become part of the same object? Or are the separate items? If they are separate items, can I then attack your armor to break it? Or, if they are attended, how do we handle a sunder roll since you can't fight back? Or do you still get to oppose the roll? If they're all one object, then how would you handle it if someone wanted to just break of the statue's drawn sword? It would give it away if you didn't let them do it, right?

This spell targets a creature and at no point states that it turns the target into an object.

I agree that it's not RAI that it works that way, but by RAW it does.


This interpretation seems wrong to me. You're arguing that statue is a lower-level version of iron body, but iron body explicitly says that it turns you into living iron and that you retain the ability to move (albeit more slowly) and take actions. Statue lacks any such clauses, and to assume they exist is purely wishful thinking.

Actually, I think it's a worse version of stoneskin, which gives you DR 10/adamantine and is a 5th-level spell. Hardness 8 is effectively DR 8/adamantine, since adamantine bypasses hardness. The only advantage statue has over stoneskin is how long it lasts and the fact it has no damage cap. If you have to be immobile and sacrifice most your AC in order to gain that, it doesn't seem like it should be 2 spell levels higher.


I disagree. Mainly due to this line from RAW: "The subject of a statue spell can return to its normal state, act, and then return instantly to the statue state". If you were not subject to the logical limitations of being a statue - an inanimate, unmoving object - then the above sentence makes absolutely no sense. There is no reason to ever NOT remain in statue state. The very notion that the spell mentions the act of turning 'normal' in order to act, and then returning to statue state after finishing your action, is just a convoluted way of litterally saying "If you want to take actions, you must cancel your statue form first."

Again, I definitely agree that statue is not intended to allow you to move in "statue form" but the lack of definition in that state leaves us with only those defined mechanical effects if we are reading the spell strictly by the RAW. Nowhere in the spell does it say you cannot move. Nowhere does it say you cannot take actions in "statue form." This is - and always has been - a huge issue with the 3.x spells. The fluff description and the mechanical effects are described in the same text. You can always come up with how it works in your own games, but I challenge you to find anything in the rules that says a solid stone creature cannot move.

The critical hit immunity is something I hadn't considered, but becoming immune to critical hits at the cost of pretty much being guaranteed to be hit seems like a terrible trade-off. As a medium creature, you will be AC 4, which means anything you'll be facing when you can cast this spell is only going to miss on a 1.

When the question is, "what do the rules say about this," in order for any real discussion to occur, we have to look at the objective definitions. This is not strictly true in AD&D or D&D Next, but 3.x was very much about sticking to the black-and-white rules. If the question is, "how do you handle this in your games," or "how should this situation be handled," then absolutely argue common sense. This is a really poorly written spell.

Now, were I to re-write the spell with the intent that the statue cannot move, I would be very clear and do something like this:



Statue
Transmutation
Level: Sor/Wiz 7
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 round
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: 1 hour/level (D)
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

Effect: The subject creature and all items worn or carried by it become objects of solid stone. The subject retains its place in initiative order (if any) but may take no actions while in the form of an object except to hold its action or to return to its normal form either on its own turn as a free action or on another creature's turn as an immediate action. While in normal form, for as long as this spell persists, the creature may take a free action on its own turn to return to the form of an object, allowing the subject, if it so desires, to begin a turn in the form of an object, take its actions, and then instantly return to the form of an object.

While in the form of an object, the creature appears to any non-magical inspection to be a well-made statue identical to the character's normal appearance (skill checks to discern its actual nature as anything but a statue automatically fail.) Although this spell changes the material of all items worn, held, or carried by the subject to stone, those items retain all magical properties while so transformed.

As an object, the subject creature's AC becomes 3 + its size modifier and all rules applicable to damaging the creature as an object apply (See "Breaking and Entering.) As a stone object, the subject gains hardness 8. The subject's hitpoints remain unchanged. Objects in the subject's possession have hardness 8, but their HP remains unchanged by this spell. Enhancement bonuses affect hardness and HP normally. If an object in the subject's possession is targeted by an attack, the subject may take an immediate action as above to return to normal form and treat the attack as a sundering attempt, including taking any applicable attacks of opportunity. However, the subject may only return to the form of an object on its own turn.

While in the form of an object, the subject can see, hear, and smell normally, but it does not need to eat or breathe.

Material Component
Material components are dumb and you shouldn't use them in your games unless they are a costly material component.

Alternately, I might just add that the creature can chose to return to flesh form if the wish, but is free to remain in stone form and act normally. I could also add that if they stay still, they can make a disguise check as a free action with a +20 to disguise themselves as a statue as long as they remain immobile (if I wanted the spell to allow them to have the ability to move in stone form.)

But that gets into the realm of homebrew and quite honestly, I've never played a game where someone has considered using this spell because there are probably better things (from an optimization standpoint) that a character who can cast this spell could be doing, so I've never had to address this, although I like the theme.

[Calthropstu]

I did list rules backing me up. Namely, the rules for changing shape. You turn to stone. Coincidentally, this is the same wording as the medusa ability, though it has the caveat of "permanently." Are you going to argue that you can move there as well?

Seriously,your position has no basis. Stone can't move unless magically animated such as animated object or stone golem.

[Telonius]

The "solid stone" state is pretty clearly not just turning the character into an inert lump of rock. They're capable of sensing what's around them, and explicitly capable of performing at least one kind of action (the Free Action it would take to change back to "normal"). The spell doesn't mention changing type to Construct (as per Animated Object), doesn't say the character is Petrified, Immobilized, denied Dex to AC, Helpless, immune to Critical Hits, or any defined condition in the Condition Summary. The only explicitly mechanical things it says, are that the subject and all its gear are now made of stone, the subject gains Hardness 8, and doesn't need to eat or breathe.

On the other hand, this sentence:


The subject of a statue spell can return to its normal state, act, and then return instantly to the statue state (a free action) if it so desires, as long as the spell duration is in effect.

implies that the subject of the spell can't act if it's in the stone state. (Otherwise, why would it be returning to the regular state?)

Furthermore, the "Stone Body" spell from Spell Compendium more explicitly turns you into "living stone" as opposed to a statue, one spell level earlier (and at a much reduced duration).

Taken together I think the intent was for the "Statue" spell to allow the caster to hide out as a statue for a few hours, and wasn't intended as a combat buff. Stone or Iron Body are what you're looking for if you want in-combat bonuses.

[Irreverent Fool]

The "solid stone" state is pretty clearly not just turning the character into an inert lump of rock. They're capable of sensing what's around them, and explicitly capable of performing at least one kind of action (the Free Action it would take to change back to "normal"). The spell doesn't mention changing type to Construct (as per Animated Object), doesn't say the character is Petrified, Immobilized, denied Dex to AC, Helpless, immune to Critical Hits, or any defined condition in the Condition Summary. The only explicitly mechanical things it says, are that the subject and all its gear are now made of stone, the subject gains Hardness 8, and doesn't need to eat or breathe.

On the other hand, this sentence:

"The subject of a statue spell can return to its normal state, act, and then return instantly to the statue state (a free action) if it so desires, as long as the spell duration is in effect."

implies that the subject of the spell can't act if it's in the stone state. (Otherwise, why would it be returning to the regular state?)

Furthermore, the "Stone Body" spell from Spell Compendium more explicitly turns you into "living stone" as opposed to a statue, one spell level earlier (and at a much reduced duration).

Taken together I think the intent was for the "Statue" spell to allow the caster to hide out as a statue for a few hours, and wasn't intended as a combat buff. Stone or Iron Body are what you're looking for if you want in-combat bonuses.

Yup, I think that's RAI, but not RAW. Since we can't have a collaborative discussion without a solid baseline, the "what does this do" conversation must adhere to RAW. What should this do, is another matter. I think most DMs will interpret it to make the subject immobile during the duration but that brings up some other questions, especially for anything with an opposed roll like disarm, sunder, bull rush, grapple, etc. Those are all issues that each DM and group will need to work out at their own table since the spell doesn't provide any direction. I've posted my recommended fix, which I think is closer to the intent but also allows for the subject to immediately break statue form to oppose a roll, if they so choose. Considering this is the same level spell as Limited Wish, I don't think that additional option is unbalancing.

I pulled out my AD&D player manual and that version of the spell is much a little more clear, specifying that the creature is petrified. That's important within the context of petrified was an understood condition in AD&D and exists as a rules-defined condition in 3.x. Leaving the petrified language in the spell description would have gone a long way toward clarifying what the spell actually does. They could have just added that the creature in the spell is petrified except for the ability to see/hear/smell and remove or reapply the condition at will as a free action. But they didn't.

Fun note: the AD&D version also had a chance of killing you because apparently being turned to stone is traumatic.

[The_Iron_Lord]

Isn't everybody missing the fact that you can turn back and forth as a free action? Aka:

Oh, you beat my AC with a critical hit? *turns into a statue* enjoy crit immunity and hardness 8 , sucker.

After the hit is resolved: *turns back to normal*

I mean, I might be thinking of the rules wrong, but I'm pretty sure a free action is unlimited and at will.

[torrasque666]

I mean, I might be thinking of the rules wrong, but I'm pretty sure a free action is unlimited and at will.
And can't be taken on someone elses turn, unless otherwise stated.

[Calthropstu]

Yup, I think that's RAI, but not RAW. Since we can't have a collaborative discussion without a solid baseline, the "what does this do" conversation must adhere to RAW. What should this do, is another matter. I think most DMs will interpret it to make the subject immobile during the duration but that brings up some other questions, especially for anything with an opposed roll like disarm, sunder, bull rush, grapple, etc. Those are all issues that each DM and group will need to work out at their own table since the spell doesn't provide any direction. I've posted my recommended fix, which I think is closer to the intent but also allows for the subject to immediately break statue form to oppose a roll, if they so choose. Considering this is the same level spell as Limited Wish, I don't think that additional option is unbalancing.

I pulled out my AD&D player manual and that version of the spell is much a little more clear, specifying that the creature is petrified. That's important within the context of petrified was an understood condition in AD&D and exists as a rules-defined condition in 3.x. Leaving the petrified language in the spell description would have gone a long way toward clarifying what the spell actually does. They could have just added that the creature in the spell is petrified except for the ability to see/hear/smell and remove or reapply the condition at will as a free action. But they didn't.

Fun note: the AD&D version also had a chance of killing you because apparently being turned to stone is traumatic.

No, it's RAW as well. Like I pointed out earlier, this is the exact same wording as the Medusa's petrifying gaze. "You are turned to stone" means just that. It needs no interpretation. You aren't "turned to stone that moves and acts" just stone.

By changing shape rules, you can do anything a stone can do, with the caveat you can change to non-stone state as a free action.

[The_Iron_Lord]

And can't be taken on someone elses turn, unless otherwise stated.

But talking is a free action, right? I'm pretty sure my character can talk on someone else's turn...

[InvisibleBison]

But talking is a free action, right? I'm pretty sure my character can talk on someone else's turn...

You can speak on someone else's turn, because the rules for speaking (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#speak) say that you can. Normally, you can only take actions on your turn.

[ericgrau]

0. No, you're still a creature. You still have a wis, a cha and are aware of your surroundings and other creatures. The rules define this as absolutely a creature and not an object.
1. Yes, absolutely. You are immobile by RAW and RAI and should suffer all the penalties.
2. No, stone armor is still armor. By both RAW and RAI. By RAI you could make armor out of glass and it would still deflect blows just as well... until sundered. As long as the armor isn't sundered there's no change. By RAW you can't sunder armor except shields. By thinking about it conceptually this makes sense too because it's hard to break something without destroying what's underneath at the same time.
3. Like 0, not actually turned into a stone object, just turned to stone.
4. No, you may not perform free actions when it is not your turn. Except for special exceptions that are noted as such. But how often do most things leave/enter your threat range, especially at high level? If you mean the melee protecting the back line, then how about you tag the back line with statue instead?
5. Nope per 4. Because you aren't threatening creatures while in statue form.

The hour/level bit and free action on/off are what make this buff exceptionally powerful. There's no drawback at all to at least casting it except for the lost spell slot. Even then if you have 8th level spells and 1-6th level spells, the spell slot is a very small cost. I wouldn't use it at level 13, but at level 15+ it's great. If for example it were a standard action to turn off then you might accidentally screw yourself. As it stands players can use it only when advantageous.

But with a -7 or more to AC, when can hardness 8 actually benefit you? Well you forgot the bit where energy damage does 1/2 to 1/4 to objects before hardness. Though sonic and acid do full damage, they are still subject to hardness (some people think otherwise due to ambiguous wording, but they are). And they tend to deal low damage, so that still helps. Many high level creatures get their damage from having several attacks rather than a single powerful attack, so reducing each one by 8 can dramatically reduce their damage. Other foes have special abilities which probably still affect you since, again, you aren't actually an object. Others do single powerful blows. That's the time when you don't use statue. Again, with no drawback at all for not using it. Plus -7 AC doesn't affect those that dumped AC as much. Again, consider tagging the back line instead of the melee. Or tag both.

There are also utility purposes. Being stone triples your weight. You also can survive various obstacles and traps. Say that you ready an action to turn to stone the instant anything weird happens and dampen some traps.

So no it's not all-powerful, and nothing hour/level and free action should be. Can you imagine the value of permanent haste? Permanent greater invis? Heck, a generously interpreted PAO shatters the game in half. Statue is super strong just because it's hour/level and free action on/off. That's enough right there, you don't need more. As long as you reserve some spell slots to burn on your wonderfully untouched action economy, buffing with statue is a good move.