Possibly unlimited stone Golems? does this work?

[Thirdhorseman]

So in my current campaign, I'm playing an impossible bloodline sorcerer, and I was looking at some of my bonus spells, and a thought occurred to me, but I do not yet have a full mastery of some of the more high level rules, so could you tell me if this would work?

if I have a pile of rocks, I cast Fabricate to turn them into a large statue.

Then, I cast animate object onto the rocks to turn them into a construct

Then, Cast polymorph any object to turn it into a stone golem.
they are both constructs, so they should be in the same kingdom, and they certainly are the same size and have the same int score, so the polymorph any object should have a duration of permanent.

bottom line though, would this create actual stone golems? I normally try not to break the game too badly, but I was mostly just wondering if this worked the way it seems to.

Thanks for any help!

[Tacticslion]

At first, I thought it does not because of the Construct immunities (found here), but then I realized I was mixing it up with plants (the ones immune to polymorph).

Huh. I guess it would.

Bear in mind, it's dubious, at best, if the resultant stone golem would have all of that creature's traits - whether or not it would work to statistically give you an actual stone golem - and it would have a unique vulnerability to dispel magic. Also bear in mind, you'd have to (at minimum) expend money for a permanency for the animate objects spell, as, otherwise, as soon as that other spell's duration expired, so, too, would the similarity of the target to the result, which would revert the duration to something shorter.

Otherwise, because animate object is not a polymorph spell, it doesn't run into the restrictions on multiple polymorph effects, it should work; though see that linked section for more details on what, exactly, your "stone golem" gets and doesn't (I'm not sure and am on the phone - sorry if the coding is off - and this have a more difficult time checking than normal right now).

[Thirdhorseman]

Tacticslion wrote:

At first, I thought it does not because of the Construct immunities (found here), but then I realized I was mixing it up with plants (the ones immune to polymorph).

Huh. I guess it would.

Bear in mind, it's dubious, at best, if the resultant stone golem would have all of that creature's traits - whether or not it would work to statistically give you an actual stone golem - and it would have a unique vulnerability to dispel magic. Also bear in mind, you'd have to (at minimum) expend money for a permanency for the animate objects spell, as, otherwise, as soon as that other spell's duration expired, so, too, would the similarity of the target to the result, which would revert the duration to something shorter.

Otherwise, because animate object is not a polymorph spell, it doesn't run into the restrictions on multiple polymorph effects, it should work; though see that linked section for more details on what, exactly, your "stone golem" gets and doesn't (I'm not sure and am on the phone - sorry if the coding is off - and this have a more difficult time checking than normal right now).

Would the polymorph any not simply supersede the animate object's duration? and it does seem to say you still get the new creature's resistances, would that include magic immunity? these don't need to be perfect imitations to be fair, we are running through a heavily modified version of king maker, I was intending to use some down time to make some army units out of them mostly.

Thank you for your help, I am mostly just seeking to gain a better understanding of the rules

[quibblemuch]

I'm going to agree with Tacticslion on this. There's no reason to think that polymorph any object would supersede or nullify all pre-existing spells on the target. So the situation is (assuming a 16th level caster):

1. There is a pile of rocks.
2. The pile of rocks affected by fabricate to turn it into a statue.
3. Statue is the target of animate objects, which gives it the Construct Type for 16 rounds.
4. Animated Statue construct is turned into Stone Golem construct via polymorph any object.
5. 15 more rounds go by.
6. Stone golem is no longer affected by animate objects, which removes its construct type, turning it into an inanimate object (or at least removes the permanent polymorph any object, lowering the duration to whatever it would be if cast on a statue).

This isn't inarguable, of course. Polymorph any object throws exceptions when you use it to add types to things that don't have types (like objects). So there is a lot of room for interpretive variation. EDIT: But I would think that if the original prerequisites for a spell like polymorph any object were retroactively removed, the spell would then function like it would had that condition not been in place at time of casting.

Now if you do have permanency on the animated objects, this could work fine. And it might be cheaper than making stone golems.

[Tinalles]

I think it works per RAW, subject to quibblemuch's observation that the limited duration of animate object may cause issues. But a permanency on that only costs 15,000 gp -- just 27% of the price of crafting a stone golem normally, and much, MUCH faster.

That said, if I were GM'ing such a shenanigan, I'd impose limits on the resulting golem's behavior. An ordinary golem is carefully built from the ground up to recognize its master and follow their instructions.

By contrast, Animate Objects says "Each such animated object ... immediately attacks whomever or whatever you initially designate." None of the other spells in this chain offer you any control over the resulting golem, so I would limit its course of action to attacking things, or not attacking things, and following the caster around.

If you wanted it to do something more complicated, even something comparatively simple like "Pick me up and put me on top of that ledge", you have to have some other way of conveying your order. Like, say, a Suggestion spell. And, of course, as an impossible-blooded sorcerer, you can use your mind-affecting spells on constructs. So that would let you do your thing, but also put a few limits on how you can use it.

[Ridiculon]

ah, but just "attacking things" becomes way more effective when you can get 3 golems for the price of one

[Tinalles]

True!

[ryric]

It wouldn't really be a true stone golem, IMO. There is no polymorph spell for changing into constructs that I know of, but basing the effect on other polymorph spells you wouldn't get the golem's DR, spell immunities, or HD(including BAB). I'd probably take the ability scores from the base animated object and apply something from a similar-levelled Large polymorph effect to get ability scores as well. So basically you'd be getting a Large animated object with slightly better Str and slam attacks, and no hardness or DR. Woot?

Also, arguably golems are magic items(they do require an item creation feat) and you can't use polymorph any object to make magic items.

[Tinalles]

I totally overlooked that. Polymorph Any Object works by imitating other spells. Once you walk back through the chain of "this spell functions like" references, it can do the following:

polymorph any object functions as:
. greater polymorph functions as:
. . beast shape iv
. . elemental body iii
. . alter self
. . plant shape ii
. . form of the dragon i
. baleful polymorph
. flesh to stone
. stone to flesh
. transmute mud to rock
. transmute metal to wood
. transmute rock to mud

Plus it gives you longer durations and it works on objects.

But none of those allow you to turn anything into a construct. So it probably doesn't work after all. Pity, it was amusing.

[Tacticslion]

Actually, no: it expressly allows you to do things that the listed spell's cannot accomplish.

None of those spells permit you to change a human into a rock or rock into human, but PaO does, and it allows similar freedom across the board.

While ryric is correct that it wouldn't be a "true" golem, what the resultant creature would gain is not defined by any of the listed spells; hence you default to the most basic (polymorph) sub school rules. A GM is always free to determine otherwise, but that would be a house rule. To be fair, PAO is a spell begging for house rules, so.

[Tacticslion]

To build off of that point:

Link.

Quote:

This spell functions like greater polymorph, except that it changes one object or creature into another. You can use this spell to transform all manner of objects and creatures into new forms- you aren’t limited to transforming a living creature into another living form. The duration of the spell depends on how radical a change is made from the original state to its transmuted state. The duration is determined by using the following guidelines.

The first sentence seems to limit what forms you can take, but it is immediately overwritten by that sentence and the subsequent paragraph.

Notice the bolded part: that pretty much opens the door. But just in case, it provides a host of examples that cannot be accomplished by that spell:

- marionette to human or the reverse
- sheep to wool coat
- rock to human and the reverse

These are nonsensical - there is nothing like that existing in PF. The most interesting effect is the human to Marionette or pebble: this turns the person into an object which could then be affected by animate objects. I can't find anything to disallow it beyond personal preference - which, it should be noted, is very valid, even if it is not RAW (not being RAW is not necessarily wrong).

[_Ozy_]

Why would the stone golem do anything other than just stand in one place?

[MichaelCullen]

Would you really need the animate objects permanacied? All descisions for a spell are made when it is cast.

Also would you even need the animate objects?

A stone golem and a stone statue are both:
Stone +5 (maybe even +7)
Same size +2
Same or lower intelligence +2
Related +2

Anything over 9 is permanant.

[quibblemuch]

I'd argue that both of them being made of stone wouldn't count as being the "same kingdom" for the +5. The fact that one is a creature and one is an object precludes that, in my interpretation of the game's taxonomy.

I'd also not give the +2 for "same or lower Intelligence". Not having an Intelligence score as a creature is different from being an object, which have no ability scores at all, not even "null value" ones. A stone golem has Int -. A rock has no ability scores at all, not even entries for them. It's like a plant creature can have a move speed of 0 so it can benefit from spells that increase move speed, but a stick doesn't have an entry for a move speed at all.

At most I'd give the similarities between a stone statue object and a stone golem creature a 4, meaning 3 hours. If you cast animate objects on the stone statue, however, you suddenly give it a creature type and ability scores and all of those other bonuses kick in for the duration of that spell.

[MichaelCullen]

You could argue on the kingdom, there is space for that.

But both a statue and a stone golem don't posses intelligence score, therefore have the same intelligence. An int of "-" is "not possessing an intelligence score".

wording from ability scores wrote:

Some creatures do not possess an Intelligence score.

Even if you don't see them as the same kingdom (mineral[stone]). They still should last for two days, skipping the animate objects.

[Daw]

How about you enchant a bunch of walking bombs.
The effect is permanent, but dispellable, just like any cheater golems.

Of course the dispeller's feelings of victory will be short lived.

[Tinalles]

Tacticslion wrote:

The first sentence seems to limit what forms you can take, but it is immediately overwritten by that sentence and the subsequent paragraph.

Notice the bolded part: that pretty much opens the door. But just in case, it provides a host of examples that cannot be accomplished by that spell:

- marionette to human or the reverse
- sheep to wool coat
- rock to human and the reverse

These are nonsensical - there is nothing like that existing in PF. The most interesting effect is the human to Marionette or pebble: this turns the person into an object which could then be affected by animate objects. I can't find anything to disallow it beyond personal preference - which, it should be noted, is very valid, even if it is not RAW (not being RAW is not necessarily wrong).

Let me see if I've understood your argument:

Proposition 1) PAO allows you to turn one inanimate object into another inanimate object.

Proposition 2) None of PAO's precursor spells deal with inanimate objects at all.

Thesis: Therefore, PAO can convert any inanimate object into any other inanimate object without any limitation whatsoever.

Arguing from the absence of mechanics puts us squarely in homebrew territory, which -- as you rightly note -- is perfectly fine.

It also suggests that arguing about it further is pointless, and that I have just wasted 20 minutes of my life writing this post.

I think I'll just go use Polymorph Any Object to turn myself into a rock for a while and contemplate the follies of humanity from that perspective.

*poof*

[Tacticslion]

Um... no.

Good guess, though!

I don't argue that you can become anything, but rather anything that is permitted without explicit prevention.

My argument is that the spell can explicitly permit forms - animate or not - that the spells it is supposed to function similarly to can not permit. It most certainly cannot create anything - it explicitly calls and explains out its own limits.

Sorry for the headache - I have one, too, but for reasons entirely unrelated to this discussion which I otherwise find enjoyable. :)