Polymorph any object query

[Laesin]

I have just read the PAO spell description in the SRD and think that it could be used as a much cheaper true ressurection. After all a cadaver is the same kingdom, class and size as the person it was and is related. this is enough to make the spell permanent.
Am I missing something?

[MeklorIlavator]

It never restores life. So you still have a dead thing on your hands.

[DaMullet]

So what you're saying is, the Pebble-Human example given in the book can't work? It would turn a pebble into a corpse?

[Viscount Einstrauss]

Yeah, it would. Whatever you'd make would be devoid of life.

A neat trick, however, would be to pair polymorph other with a simple raise dead at lower levels to basically let you cast true ressurection (without the expanded time-since-decease, though) on a party member that was, say, turned into ashes.

[Emperor Tippy]

Where do the rules say POA can't create or give life?

[Viscount Einstrauss]

To be more specific, it doesn't say it creates life, which in effect means it doesn't. After something living dies, it's spirit moves on in D&D. A spirit is incorpreal, hence you can't create one with polymorph. And since the spirit would have left before you'd attempt this, you'd just make a meat bag.

[Emperor Tippy]

In ever said it created a spirit. But what stops it from creating a representation of life that is completely lacking in spirit? Spirit is not a physically necessary part of the body.

While I would say that you can't resurrect a creature given life with PAO (it having no spirit) it should be able to create someone or something that is physically alive for all purposes.

[Laesin]

But by the description it can give social stats. Surely that implies self-awareness and thus life?

GAH just realised the permanent duration would make it an ongoing magical effect anyway. One greater dispel and you have a corpse again.

[Emperor Tippy]

yeah. But one more PAO and you have your person alive again.

[The_Snark]

Yeah... corpses don't have any need for Charisma or Wisdom. It seems like it creates the creature, at least temporarily.

Looking at the pebble->human example given, that's actually really interesting. You've just created a fully sapient human being, whose life will last maybe 20 minutes before he turns back into a rock.

[NullAshton]

I had an idea for a plot using that. You could have two dead corpses transmuted into a human, both say sorcerers. Whenever the other one 'dies', the remaining one casts Polymorph Any Object on him to turn him back into 'himself', fully healed. Neither of them would have souls, but polymorph any object works fine as a resurrection method.

[Laesin]

But would the ressed character have the old character's memories?

[Emperor Tippy]

It gets real fun if your DM lets you use PAO for custom creature creation.

[Emperor Tippy]

Well as memory is a physical characteristic then yes, it would have the old memories.

[Cybren]

Well as memory is a physical characteristic then yes, it would have the old memories.

That's getting into some deep metaphysical...uhm...stuff.

[Laesin]

I had an idea for a plot using that. You could have two dead corpses transmuted into a human, both say sorcerers. Whenever the other one 'dies', the remaining one casts Polymorph Any Object on him to turn him back into 'himself', fully healed. Neither of them would have souls, but polymorph any object works fine as a resurrection method.

Wouldn't work. By RAW the spell caps out at creating things with 15HD, not enough for the sorcerers to cast the spell. Wizards could do it though.

[Cruiser1]

The special and expensive part of a Raise Dead spell is drawing the original soul back into the body from whatever plane it went to. You could certainly cast Polymorph Any Object to convert a character's corpse to a living human, but that human wouldn't contain the soul of the dead character. It would contain a temporary random soul drawn from wherever, and be a DM character until Polymorph Any Object wears off or gets dispelled. I hope you didn't try this method while adventuring in the Abyss, otherwise the alternate soul is likely to be very unfriendly!

[UglyPanda]

I personally think it's just a clone. Clones don't have the same experience and/or skills as an original, so you're just making a level 1 version of your buddy.

[Laesin]

Didn't try it but was contemplating it as our only healer has gone AWOL repeatedly and we are now in the mid teen levels. But if it used the body to create a new being with all the memories and stats of the old one what difference would it make what soul was in it?

[Laesin]

I personally think it's just a clone. Clones don't have the same experience and/or skills as an original, so you're just making a level 1 version of your buddy.

Beg to differ. The spell allows creation of anything up to 15HD so it could create an exact (down to personality and abilities) duplicate of a 15th level adventurer. How is that different from ressurecting him in practice?

[TheOOB]

Why is it the the most broken spell in D&D is also the most confusing and vague spell in D&D?

[Bears With Lasers]

That's getting into some deep metaphysical...uhm...stuff.

...metaphysical stuff like neurology? Memory is in people's heads. Take certain parts of what's in their heads out and they'll lose it. It's pretty well-known.

[kamikasei]

...metaphysical stuff like neurology? Memory is in people's heads. Take certain parts of what's in their heads out and they'll lose it. It's pretty well-known.

In the real world I certainly agree that the ability to transform any random thing into an exact physical duplicate of another thing would allow you to duplicate a human, memories, personalities and all. Whether that's possible in D&D, where "souls" are part of the mechanics, is another question.

[Sardia]

I suppose a comparison with the Clone spell might give some insight-- cloned flesh minus a soul gives just inert, lifeless flesh.

[Fax Celestis]

Why is it the the most broken spell in D&D is also the most confusing and vague spell in D&D?

It's not a question. Its the reason.

[Cybren]

...metaphysical stuff like neurology? Memory is in people's heads. Take certain parts of what's in their heads out and they'll lose it. It's pretty well-known.

The parts that aren't well known are the parts that aren't parts of science. Nice attempt at sounding smart but you missed the whole point.

Are we our memories? Are we just the accumulation of our past experiences? Are we the continuity of our past experiences? If there is no difference between me, and an identical copy made of me given the same memories as me, is the copy not just as real? It thinks so. And you'd be hard pressed to tell us apart.

[Laesin]

I suppose a comparison with the Clone spell might give some insight-- cloned flesh minus a soul gives just inert, lifeless flesh.

Except one of the examples given in the spell description is pebble to human. Even though that example is only temporary it would be pretty useless to turn a pebble into a lump of inert flesh in the shape of a human, therefore the spell seems at least to give life temporarily as it certainly doesn't give its creation the construct subtype.

[Sardia]

Except one of the examples given in the spell description is pebble to human. Even though that example is only temporary it would be pretty useless to turn a pebble into a lump of inert flesh in the shape of a human, therefore the spell seems at least to give life temporarily as it certainly doesn't give its creation the construct subtype.

Perhaps just no exact duplication?

[kamikasei]

The parts that aren't well known are the parts that aren't parts of science. Nice attempt at sounding smart but you missed the whole point.

Are we our memories? Are we just the accumulation of our past experiences? Are we the continuity of our past experiences? If there is no difference between me, and an identical copy made of me given the same memories as me, is the copy not just as real? It thinks so. And you'd be hard pressed to tell us apart.

Your tone seems unwarranted. The issue is how our real-world expectation that a perfect physical duplicate of an individual would share that individual's traits that rely on physical features (which as far as I'm concerned is everything - and as far as any reasonable person, in my opinion, would agree, certainly includes memories) maps to a D&D world where there are these mysterious "souls" wandering around, doing... something for/to people. The question is whether a polymorphed duplicate of a dead person is a) that person, raised, with their soul restored from whatever outer plane it had gone to; or b), a duplicate of the person entirely independent of their soul, which raises the question of whether the duplicate has a soul, whether it has a duplicated soul, whether it differs in any way other than physical from its original, etc. These question may be irrelevant in the real world, but they have to be answered in D&D.

Looking at the spell descriptions, though, I don't see anything about polymorphing an object into a specific individual creature; nor is there any mention of classes or skills (ability scores, base saves, and so on only). Unless I'm missing something (and I might well be), I would find it amusing to allow PAO to produce a being that looks exactly like its model, has the same ability scores, but is (say, if the original was a level 15 human wizard) just a basic human advanced to 15HD with no class levels, and no memories or real relationship beyond appearance to the original.

This is at least partly motivated by how annoying I find the idea of "a clone is like a copy!", though, so it may not be an entirely fair ruling for a polymorph spell.

[Sardia]

Are we our memories? Are we just the accumulation of our past experiences? Are we the continuity of our past experiences? If there is no difference between me, and an identical copy made of me given the same memories as me, is the copy not just as real? It thinks so. And you'd be hard pressed to tell us apart.

Fortunately, in this context it just matters if the guy who cast PAO thinks whatever he winds up with is a suitable substitute for the dead guy. If it is, great. If it isn't really, he still can laugh over the same bar stories and do the stuff the old version did so it might not be worth worrying about.