Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrankTrollman" data-source="post: 1159418" data-attributes="member: 14225">And yet it doesn't state that it ignores the type restrictions - and yet it clearly must. Otherwise, since no object is within any creature type, then despite your ability to turn things into objects you'd still have a null set of objects to choose from!So it ignores type restrictions - otherwise it can't function.How many hit dice to objects have?Zero.Therefore PAO ignores the hit die limit, bcause Polymorph's hit die limit would not allow something with zero hit dice to be transformed into any creature.This isn't selective - it simply has to ignore the type and hit die restrictions. And the the implied statement is:When it says "another" - it is implied that the second choice comes from the same set as the first choice. That set is any creature or any nonmagical object of up to 100 cubic feet/level. So you can turn anything you transform into any other thing that you could have transformed with the spell in the first place. That's how implied objects work in English.It does not mean  That's a very complicated thought, and you can't have that be an implied object. You can only use an implied object if it was already referenced in the same lingual reference frame.Since the only "creature or object" referenced by the spell is: "one creature or one nonmagical object of up to 100 cubic feet/level" - that's what the implied object must be.While it is amusing to see you go through contortions to make it say something that you think is more balanced - that simply isn't what it says. Not to mention the fact that you still haven't figured out a way short of DM fiat to keep it from doing any of the most broken gimics (such as transforming dragon corpses - which are objects - into living breathing good dragons of equal size permanently).That's what PAO really says it does. What it should do is up for debate - I personally feel that it should have a duration set based on the CR of the creatures you create with it - but that's a discussion for the house rules forum - not for here at all.-Frank</blockquote>

Verification