Ultimately it's up to the DM, but the petrified condition does leave room for thinking.
I agree. If the DM wants the petrified person to be aware and turned to stone, they could do that. If they want them to just be completely petrified and have no thoughts or awareness, they could do that too. If you're the DM, just do what you think would be most fun or impactful towards the story.
There's obviously something very different about a petrified creature VS a stone statue. If you really were just an inanimate object you'd be fully dead and probably require something like True Resurrection to bring back, and you can't cast Greater Restoration on a statue and expect it to turn into a person either. I don't think either of those effects are accidental. I also don't think it's accidental that the rules say you stop aging and are unaware of your surroundings.
The original creature is definitely alive in some way despite having their flesh replaced with an inanimate substance. In a fantasy world where earth elementals, mimics, dragons and werewolves can exist I don't think it's outlandish to say the creature could still be capable of thought. If your reasoning is that rocks don't think, you're going to have to take that to its logical conclusion and say the creature's dead.
Well, not to sound snotty, but my reasoning is that inanimate means inanimate. Maybe that means "dead" or just that one's animation becomes "suspended," to coin a phrase. I think at a minimum it means the player is off the board for the duration. If someone can affect the plot by reading your thoughts, then Flesh to Stone is just a long Hold Person spell. Also Detect Thoughts says that the target is aware of your attempts to probe it and the Petrified condition, as opposed to the Paralyzed condition, specifically says that the sufferer is unaware of their surroundings.
Again, I wouldn't prevent any DM from ruling differently, but the black letter text seems clear to me. If it were my game, and Greater Retoration wasn't available, I'd rather bend the rules of Legend Lore to let someone scry the target's past, or let them rifle through the target's diary or something.
This is one of those "Only the DM of this particular campaign knows the answer for sure." questions.
If a petrified/inanimate creature has actual thoughts that the spell can target, their experience vastly differs. If they've been petrified for 1,000 years and have thoughts that can be detected, that's 1,000 years of isolation! Vs. 1,000 thoughtless years if they don't.
Which is more of a story thing, but would they be insane? How aware of their surroundings would they be? There area lot of questions this generates and the answer is subject to a lot of variables - so I'd as the DM. If I'm the DM, I'd just choose one, communicate it clearly, and run the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If a person is petrified would the spell detect thoughts allow you view their memories or anything?
Nope, they're an inanimate lump of stone.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Not quite. A petrified creature is still a creature; a lump of stone is an object. The condition doesn't say the creature is unconscious either.
Ultimately it's up to the DM, but the petrified condition does leave room for thinking.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I agree. If the DM wants the petrified person to be aware and turned to stone, they could do that. If they want them to just be completely petrified and have no thoughts or awareness, they could do that too. If you're the DM, just do what you think would be most fun or impactful towards the story.
The petrified does say "inanimate substance (usually stone)" though, so I could see an argument for either case.
Sometimes the rules are just not specific enough.
I think this means the opposite, tbh. I think it's dispositive.
Inanimate - Not endowed with life or spirit. Lacking in consciousness or power of motion.
Ergo, no thoughts to detect.
ETA: DMs can do what they like obviously, but I think the RAW are clear.
The original creature is definitely alive in some way despite having their flesh replaced with an inanimate substance. In a fantasy world where earth elementals, mimics, dragons and werewolves can exist I don't think it's outlandish to say the creature could still be capable of thought. If your reasoning is that rocks don't think, you're going to have to take that to its logical conclusion and say the creature's dead.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Well, not to sound snotty, but my reasoning is that inanimate means inanimate. Maybe that means "dead" or just that one's animation becomes "suspended," to coin a phrase. I think at a minimum it means the player is off the board for the duration. If someone can affect the plot by reading your thoughts, then Flesh to Stone is just a long Hold Person spell. Also Detect Thoughts says that the target is aware of your attempts to probe it and the Petrified condition, as opposed to the Paralyzed condition, specifically says that the sufferer is unaware of their surroundings.
Again, I wouldn't prevent any DM from ruling differently, but the black letter text seems clear to me. If it were my game, and Greater Retoration wasn't available, I'd rather bend the rules of Legend Lore to let someone scry the target's past, or let them rifle through the target's diary or something.
Can a spell like True Resurrection bring back a petrified creature? Or will the spell fail because the creature is not dead.
A petrified creature is not eligible target for True Resurrection since it's not dead.
This is one of those "Only the DM of this particular campaign knows the answer for sure." questions.
If a petrified/inanimate creature has actual thoughts that the spell can target, their experience vastly differs. If they've been petrified for 1,000 years and have thoughts that can be detected, that's 1,000 years of isolation! Vs. 1,000 thoughtless years if they don't.
Which is more of a story thing, but would they be insane? How aware of their surroundings would they be? There area lot of questions this generates and the answer is subject to a lot of variables - so I'd as the DM. If I'm the DM, I'd just choose one, communicate it clearly, and run the game.