|
p. 174 Even animated objects, which are otherwise considered creatures,
p. 175 Animated Objects: Animated objects count as creatures
for purposes of determining their Armor Class (do not
treat them as inanimate objects)
p. 242 School transmutation; Level bard 6, cleric 6
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Targets one Small object per caster level; see text
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
You imbue inanimate objects with mobility and a semblance
of life. Each such animated object then immediately attacks
whomever or whatever you initially designate.
An animated object can be of any nonmagical material. You may
animate one Small or smaller object or a corresponding number
of larger objects as follows: A Medium object counts as two Small
or smaller objects, a Large object as four, a Huge object as eight,
a Gargantuan object as 16, and a Colossal object as 32. You can
change the designated target or targets as a move action, as if
directing an active spell. See the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary for the
statistics of animated objects.
This spell cannot affect objects carried or worn by a creature.
Animate objects can be made permanent with a permanency spell.
When you weild another creature, they don't like it...
When you try to enchant other creatures, they don't like it...
Nope (ie. if worn, it stops being animated)
Yes, you can ride other creatures, provided they don't mind...
Then you'd be grappling it good sir, and consequently giving yourself the grappled condition.
In all fairness, I think wielding an animate object would be like wielding a snake.
If your GM is being flexible, he might find some way to incorporate the building and modifying construct rule: construct limb.
Can you ride an animate object? Yes. You can ride a horse, and they're animated. Usually...
then I'm sure you can order it not to move, and wield it normally
|
I mean, you create an animated object, it works with you. Now these are just assumptions, but...
If it's a cup, you can drink out of it.
If it's a winter coat, you can wear it to stay warm.
So, with that, I was thinking...
If it's a dagger, you can stab someone with it.
If it's a shield, you can use it to deflect blows.
no, because then you'd have to enchant it with the 'dancing' property, and why have that, if you can just use a basic spell instead?
you really need to make it clear what exactly you'd like to do with it. i assumed you'd think you'd get an attack bonus, or shield bonus, or something from the weapon.
then my previous answer stands. ask it to do nothing, then spend a move action picking it up. stab someone.
So... you want your animate object to stop moving so you can stab someone with it? I guess it would make sense that you could say, as a free action order it to stop wigglin'.
If you permanently animate it, and decide to enchant it I think you may have to pay both the cost of enchanting it as a weapon, and any Construction Point costs to reflect the animated object.
More seeing the issue being why do it than legality. Kind of pricy for a dagger that is quite destroyable and doesn't even have the requisite intelligence to coup de grace someone of its own accord.
Now if you animated an intelligent magic dagger...
(this may the same train of thought that was the genesis of the mimic)
Animated objects still function as the objects they originally were. That is clearly spelled out. Also, seeing as animated objects are mindless constructs, there is nothing that they do or do not mind; they simply obey the orders of their creators.
For example, you can still wear animated armor, and it still functions in every way as armor.
One of my players, a magus specializing in construct creatures, wears animated full plate. He has two more sets of identical full plate that he takes into combat so the enemy has difficulty determining which is which. The animated plate also assist him in getting in and out of the armor so he doesn't need a second person.
The line that says "this spell cannot affect objects carried or worn by a creature" only applies when you are casting it. That way you can't turn someone's own armor or weapon against him while he is wearing/wielding it.
Now the spell say non-magical, but it could still be a adamantine consecrated dagger, right?
I'm not familiar with consecrated. Is that a spell effect?
An adamantine item could certainly be animated. It cuts down on the construction points available, however.
EDIT: If you are referring to the consecrate spell, that can only be applied to an area, not an object.
What's the CP for silversheen?
I would treat channel foci and silversheen the same way as I would for mundane weapons and armor.
What size would an animated musket be?
The same as an unanimated one; which I'm guessing is Tiny.
But the real questing on my mind is: can you wield a party member as an impromptu weapon? And does he have to be willing? ;)
There is? ...I'm going to have to read up on the Barbarian!
What size would an animated musket be?
The animated object monster entry says a chair is a small object. So I'd say that a musket would be about the same. That, or tiny.
Okay. As a magic item, can I later make it an intelligent item?
No more or less than you can make a golem an intelligent magical item (kind of GM territory, that).
Personally, I think if it is an animated object, it is now a creature and cannot be further enchanted. If you enchant it as a magic item first, than it does not qualify to become an animated object.
Well, with the Weapon Modification, I can enchant it as a magic weapon, and as such, it is a magic item, as well as a creature.
That's not quite the same. That's essentially giving it a magic weapon and bolting it onto its form. The construct is still a creature, not a magic item.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, an intelligent item can sprout limbs and move, but is not a creature? An animated object is item, with the power to move, granted by magic, but is not a magic item?
That sounds like the same thing, but they are not?
Because by game definitions they are different. This is one of those cases where if it looks like a duck, it is not a duck.
Intelligent items are not constructs either. They are treated as constructs because they have mental scores. That is important because it ensures the the line between constructs and magic items is not erased. It is kind of like how spell-like abilities are not spells, but are treated like spells in certain situations.
So, the walking talking intelligent item is what?
You keep saying that, but what intelligent item walks and talks?
So, the walking talking intelligent item is what? Not a creature? The moving armor is creature, but not an item?
That is correct. Yeah as a character in the story I probably would not know one from the other.
The dancing intelligent sword with some magical ability to fly and the animated sword look the same to me in many ways, but rules wise they are not the same, and that is really what matters.
Both are listed in the intelligent item section under powers they can have.
Right here.
Ah. I see. No wonder you're confused. That's an unofficial 3rd-party site that likes to mix in unofficial stuff (and thus often confuses people).
Try the PRD itself, it's run by Paizo themselves and has only the official rules. You will clearly see that anything that allows intelligent magical items to move about on their own was never published by Paizo.
The PRD has the same rule RD. I think he was referring to his line-->"Treat them as constructs. "
That is why I said this in my other post-->"...They are treated as constructs because they have mental scoresThat is important because it ensures the the line between constructs and magic items is not erased. It is kind of like how spell-like abilities are not spells, but are treated like spells in certain situations. "
It also says they can be considered to be creatures, but does not say they are creatures. I am assuming it says "can be" so that the choice is left up to the GM to decide on a case by case basis.
edit:Dont assume that d20srd is incorrect just because it is a 3rd party site. Most of the information is copied and pasted from the PRD. Sometimes errors are made with the coding. As example is the Tataka Rakshasa not having all of its feats among other things. If it is not fixed when I get home I will go ahead and take care of it though.
Wraithstrike, everyone says that about that site, and I try not to, but it seems I am constantly encountering people who have had misunderstandings as a direct result of visiting that web site in their ignorance.
|
|
Both are listed in the intelligent item section under powers they can have.
Right here.Ah. I see. No wonder you're confused. That's an unofficial 3rd-party site that likes to mix in unofficial stuff (and thus often confuses people).
Try the PRD itself, it's run by Paizo themselves and has only the official rules. You will clearly see that anything that allows intelligent magical items to move about on their own was never published by Paizo.
No, it says the same thing.
Item can sprout limbs and move with a speed of 10 feet +5,000gp
Odd. I've never seen that before.
In the case of an intelligent magic item (NOT an animated object) I would treat it as both.
So, when a intelligent item is walking around, talking, casting spells, is it treated as an item, creature, or both?
It would depend on the specific circumstance. As for as improving it I would say it is a magic item. For purposes of interacting with it socially I would treat it like a creature.
The PRD has the same rule RD. I think he was referring to his line-->"Treat them as constructs. "
That is why I said this in my other post-->"...They are treated as constructs because they have mental scoresThat is important because it ensures the the line between constructs and magic items is not erased. It is kind of like how spell-like abilities are not spells, but are treated like spells in certain situations. "
It also says they can be considered to be creatures, but does not say they are creatures. I am assuming it says "can be" so that the choice is left up to the GM to decide on a case by case basis.
edit:Dont assume that d20srd is incorrect just because it is a 3rd party site. Most of the information is copied and pasted from the PRD. Sometimes errors are made with the coding. As example is the Tataka Rakshasa not having all of its feats among other things. If it is not fixed when I get home I will go ahead and take care of it though.
I just fixed the Tataka. :)