Detect Magic vs Contructs


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I've read several threads on this but can't seem to find a definitive ruling on how it works (or not). Does anyone know if there is an official ruling on how detect magic works vs constructs ?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Detect magic detect the aura of magic items and spells, the golems are creatures.


The closest you can get to anything is "Outsiders and elementals are not magical in themselves, but if they are summoned, the conjuration spell registers."

So, the spells that went into the construction of the golem could be detected if it was within 1d6 minutes of the construction.


If the golem has some sort of magical aura on it then you could detect it, however just because golems are made with magic does not automatically give them a magic aura.

Looking through several golems quickly, I didn't find one that would be innately detectable to detect magic.


How does the fact that an item creation feat is used to craft a construct play into this? Or does it? This is an interesting case I have honestly never considered.


Exactly, you use item creation feats and spells exactly as you would to create a magic item, so why wouldn't the end result recognise the same on detect magic ?


Java Man wrote:
How does the fact that an item creation feat is used to craft a construct play into this? Or does it? This is an interesting case I have honestly never considered.
Boaty McBoatface wrote:
Exactly, you use item creation feats and spells exactly as you would to create a magic item, so why wouldn't the end result recognise the same on detect magic ?

Because it's a creature which doesn't have magical abilities to even detect as magic. You can detect the magic of a golem's creature for a bit after it's been created, but it's a short time frame.

It's the same as how Undead don't automatically detect as magical after their initial creation.

Just because magic is used in their creation does not make them able to be detected.

It's also why Undead and Golems don't stop functioning in antimagic fields.


The creation rules for golems list a CL, the way we determine aura strength for a magic ring is to recerence it's CL from creation rules. This makes me think that detect magic should ping a golem. I haven't checked creation rules for any other constructs, but why would they be different?

Craft construct is an item creation feat, item creation feats make magic items, this makes me think constructs are magic items. Detect magic detects magic items, so...

Scarab Sages

Java Man wrote:

The creation rules for golems list a CL, the way we determine aura strength for a magic ring is to recerence it's CL from creation rules. This makes me think that detect magic should ping a golem. I haven't checked creation rules for any other constructs, but why would they be different?

Craft construct is an item creation feat, item creation feats make magic items, this makes me think constructs are magic items. Detect magic detects magic items, so...

You may use an item creation feat to make a golem but the end result is a creature and not an item. Think of it this way, when you start your golem creation you do have just a magical item. You carve or sculpt or sew or what-have-you a vessel for magical and living energies. But before you imbue it with life it is, for all intents and purposes, a magical item. But then you forge a living force for the golem and bring the golem to life. This makes the golem no longer an item(unlike an intelligent item, which is still an item despite its intelligence).

Basically... a magical item needs to be an "item" and will follow the rules for items. A creature is a creature and follows the rules for creatures.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Look, I can't explain very well (apparently) why golems or undead don't detect as magical but I can assure you they do not.

The problem is you're asking me to provide proof of something that doesn't exist. Go find the rule that says creatures detect as magic.

Detect magic says it detect magical auras. It also says:

Quote:
Aura Strength: An aura's power depends on a spell's functioning spell level or an item's caster level; see the accompanying table. If an aura falls into more than one category, detect magic indicates the stronger of the two.

It doesn't mention creatures, constructs and undead are creatures not items. Just because they're created with magic, doesn't make them magical items.

Detect magic even throws in this line which isn't about our specific situation but does help clarify the picture some:

Quote:
Outsiders and elementals are not magical in themselves, but if they are summoned, the conjuration spell registers. Each round, you can turn to detect magic in a new area. The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it.

Occult Adventures has this to say with regard to magic auras:

Quote:

Magic Aura

Magic auras are usually the result of external forces working on an object, creature, or location. Each magical effect swirls together in the greater aura, but remains discrete. It's possible to target specific effects within the aura to, for example, dispel a single magical effect while leaving the others intact.

Other magic auras are the result of a creature's inherent supernatural abilities, and can have game effects on those who approach too closely. Such auras (such as a dragon's frightful presence) often force creatures to attempt saving throws to resist their effects. For more information on magic auras, see detect magic.

Again, the assumption here seems to be creatures don't have magic auras innately, but their abilities (supernatural or SLA) can be detected when they are in use. However, you will also note golem's abilities are all extraordinary, non-magical, abilities.


The end result here is:
Magic items, spells, and spell like abilities have magical auras.
Creatures do not have magic auras.

Golems, constructs (generally speaking), and undead do not have magical auras because they are creatures not items.


They are magically infused and created by a creation feat. I cannot imagine that they do not detect as magic.


If I turn a longsword into a masterwork longsword using Masterwork Transformation, will that longsword detect as magical three years later?

If it detects as magic, does it overcome DR/Magic?

If I create a longsword out of a mass of steel using Fabricate, does the longsword detect as magical?

Does that longsword overcome DR/Magic, even though Fabricate explicitly states it cannot be used to create magic items?


TPK wrote:
They are magically infused and created by a creation feat. I cannot imagine that they do not detect as magic.

Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it's not correct.


TPK wrote:
They are magically infused and created by a creation feat. I cannot imagine that they do not detect as magic.

It's quite simple. Despite being created like magic items, the process does not leave detectable magical aura.

Also note that despite being created like magic items constructs and undeads are not affected by antimagic field, unless summoned (or created with spells instead of feats, eg.g animated object with permanency) so they are not walking magic items.


So I follow the points that have been made, and can find no fault with the reasoning. I understand that not all things created or modified or what not with magic are magic themselves. What I am trying to reconcile is that Craft Construct is an Item Creation feat, and according to the CRB "An item creation feat lets a character create a magic item of a certain type."

So am I to assume an unwritten exception that constructs are the only things made with item creation feats that are not magic items? This would seem simpler than throwing out all of the evidence and discussion which has been cited above, but both cases require me/ us to ignore or add unwritten qualifications to portions of the rules.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Java Man wrote:

So I follow the points that have been made, and can find no fault with the reasoning. I understand that not all things created or modified or what not with magic are magic themselves. What I am trying to reconcile is that Craft Construct is an Item Creation feat, and according to the CRB "An item creation feat lets a character create a magic item of a certain type."

So am I to assume an unwritten exception that constructs are the only things made with item creation feats that are not magic items? This would seem simpler than throwing out all of the evidence and discussion which has been cited above, but both cases require me/ us to ignore or add unwritten qualifications to portions of the rules.

And... here is where I say welcome to Pathfinder. ^.^ Most especially the CRB. It can get pretty confusing at times and many things aren't especially clear. So, if it is your table I can't imagine any reason why you shouldn't allow detect magic to sense golem. Well, other than the best golem strat is pretending to be an inanimate object vs players.


Pathfinder is a game of exceptions. This is an implicit exception. It does not need to be stated because it is self-evident. Constructs are not magic items. Craft Construct allows you to create a creature. Creatures cannot also be a magic item*. Therefore in this specific instance this craft item feat does not craft a magic item.

Creatures do not detect as magic*.

*except when something tells you otherwise - there are always exceptions!


"3rd Round: The strength and location of each aura. If the items or creatures bearing the auras are in line of sight, you can make Knowledge (arcana) skill checks to determine the school of magic involved in each."


There is clearly an exception here, but is it the exception you propose, or is the exception that golems are creatures and magic items?


Changing the bolding for a different emphasis:

silverrey wrote:
"3rd Round: The strength and location of each aura. If the items or creatures bearing the auras are in line of sight, you can make Knowledge (arcana) skill checks to determine the school of magic involved in each."
Auras wrote:

Magic Aura

Magic auras are usually the result of external forces working on an object, creature, or location.

If you are affected by a spell such as bull's strength you will bear that magic aura.


There are a lot of things that would make more sense that Constructs would be treated the same as magic items. Magic treats them as objects (with very few exceptions), modifications are written the same as magic items, animated objects are listed as constructs with the only difference being that they can be created "in one of two ways, either by using the animate objects spell in conjunction with permanency, or by making use of the Craft Construct feat." So would you have to figure out how each one was created to determine if it had an aura?


silverrey wrote:
There are a lot of things that would make more sense that Constructs would be treated the same as magic items. Magic treats them as objects (with very few exceptions), modifications are written the same as magic items, animated objects are listed as constructs with the only difference being that they can be created "in one of two ways, either by using the animate objects spell in conjunction with permanency, or by making use of the Craft Construct feat." So would you have to figure out how each one was created to determine if it had an aura?

Yes, absolutely. If it was made with the spell and Permanency, you can just dispel it and it falls down (or whatever). If it's made using Craft Construct, you cannot use Dispel Magic on it. One is an active spell effect. The other is an unliving creature. They have very, very different rules.

Also, magic doesn't treat constructs as objects. The construct type prevents spells with a Fort save from working on them unless it also works on objects, but only a Fort save. Magic Missile still works fine, despite literally not being able to damage objects.


Java Man wrote:

So I follow the points that have been made, and can find no fault with the reasoning. I understand that not all things created or modified or what not with magic are magic themselves. What I am trying to reconcile is that Craft Construct is an Item Creation feat, and according to the CRB "An item creation feat lets a character create a magic item of a certain type."

So am I to assume an unwritten exception that constructs are the only things made with item creation feats that are not magic items? This would seem simpler than throwing out all of the evidence and discussion which has been cited above, but both cases require me/ us to ignore or add unwritten qualifications to portions of the rules.

That particular discussion occurs in the CRB and context dictates it is clarifying specific instances to which that would be relevant (i.e., it is referring to those things that appear under the header Item Creation Feats in the CRB).

Craft Construct appears in the Bestiary, not the CRB, and states, "You can create any construct whose prerequisites you meet." This can be contrasted with the CRB Item Creation Feats, all of which in their first lines explicitly state which type of known magic item they create (meaning they all refer to a category of magic item which already appears in the same CRB). Construct is not a category of magic item that appears in the CRB.

For more recent examples of Item Creation Feats that also do not create magic items, see Craft Ooze and Grow Plant Creature.

So, if you want to categorize it, Craft Construct (like these other two) would be an exception to the general statement that Item Creation Feats allow the creator to make magic items.


Okay, we almost have a trend here, except, craft ooze says you can craft an ooze "as if it were a magic item," neither of these two feats list a CL in the construction requirements for specific usages (unlike golems), and should we really need to look into peripheral texts like these to answer a question concerning topics from the CRB and Bestiary 1?


Only construct I could ever see pinging on Detect Magic would be an animated object created by using a (probably permanent) Animate Objects spell.

All other constructs lack a caster level to denote the strength of their effect. This tells us two things.

A) Animated objects created via Animate Objects spell (permanence probable, but optional) can be dispelled, all other constructs cannot.
B) Animated objects created via Animate Objects spell (permanence probable, but optional) retain a magical aura, all other constructs do not.


But golems have a caster level listed in their construction requirements, just like every magic item.


Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Also, magic doesn't treat constructs as objects. The construct type prevents spells with a Fort save from working on them unless it also works on objects, but only a Fort save. Magic Missile still works fine, despite literally not being able to damage objects.

Anything with a Fort save, Make Whole, and Phase Strike off the top of my head. You also use a craft feat to repair them following the same rules as repairing a magic item. As Java Man pointed out, everything about a magic item that Detect Magic looks for is listed in the description on the crafting of said construct.

*Edit* For example an Iron Golem would have a strong aura (caster level is 16) and if you can tell the school it would (most likely) be Transmutation due to that being the school of the strongest spell used.


Java Man wrote:
But golems have a caster level listed in their construction requirements, just like every magic item.

They are created using the rules for magic items, and those include Caster Levels as a means to set a prerequisite. Not all magic items have much use for a CL in their operation, but all of them have it as a prereq to make it more difficult for low level crafters to attempt too early.


That caster level is also how you determine the strength of the aura that detect magic pings when you peruse the loot for enchanted goodies.

Scarab Sages

Personally, I'd argue that there is a magic device somewhere inside the construct, and that would detect, but the material the construct is made of may be thick enough to repel detect magic. You'd only need a "thin sheet" of lead encasing the device to make it ignore detection spells.

I think I'd allow detect magic on damaged constructs, as I think it is reasonable to say their magical circuitry is "exposed" to the detection, but I think otherwise having constructs immune to detection spells that don't specify constructs seems reasonable.


Creature Types wrote:
A construct is an animated object or artificially created creature.
Animated Object wrote:
A caster can use the animate objects spell to instantly create a temporary construct. A permanency spell cast upon an animated object makes the construct permanent; however, it can still be dispelled or suppressed by antimagic. Craft Construct creates permanent animated objects not susceptible to dispelling and antimagic. The CR of a potential animated object depends on its size and abilities, as explained in the animated object entry.
Golems wrote:
Golems are magically created automatons of great power. They stand apart from other constructs in the nature of their animating force—golems are granted their magical life via an elemental spirit, typically that of an earth elemental. The process of creating a golem binds the spirit to the artificial body, merging it with this specially prepared vessel and subjecting it to the will of the golem's creator.

Not all Constructs use the Craft Construct Feat.

So some would have a constant Magical Aurora.
Golems are a Magical Container, it would be up to the DM if it would have a Magical Aurora.


Java Man wrote:
Okay, we almost have a trend here, except, craft ooze says you can craft an ooze "as if it were a magic item," neither of these two feats list a CL in the construction requirements for specific usages (unlike golems), and should we really need to look into peripheral texts like these to answer a question concerning topics from the CRB and Bestiary 1?

No. That wasn't the point of bringing it up. The point is to demonstrate that there is too much emphasis being put on the solitary line under Item Creation Feats in the CRB that likely wasn't really written while contemplating things outside the CRB.


Fair enough, so you clearly come out on the side of ignoring that line, which resolves the issue very nicely, all settled and wrapped in a bow.

I'm not trying to be arguementative, just that my curiousity has latched onto this question and I'm interesting in finding a resolution to it that holds up. It appears, as I have said that something in the text needs to be ignore, or an assumption added, to accomplish this. For purposes of my own game I have no problem making the call, not sure what it should be, but I have no problem making it. But running down the actual result of various rule statements interests me, and I enjoy hearing the input and insights of the community here.

Sovereign Court

fretgod99 wrote:

If I turn a longsword into a masterwork longsword using Masterwork Transformation, will that longsword detect as magical three years later?

If it detects as magic, does it overcome DR/Magic?

No, it's an Instantaneous spell. The spell does it's job and ends. The masterwork item does not become magical.

fretgod99 wrote:


If I create a longsword out of a mass of steel using Fabricate, does the longsword detect as magical?

Does that longsword overcome DR/Magic, even though Fabricate explicitly states it cannot be used to create magic items?

No, for the same reason.


Java Man wrote:

Fair enough, so you clearly come out on the side of ignoring that line, which resolves the issue very nicely, all settled and wrapped in a bow.

I'm not trying to be arguementative, just that my curiousity has latched onto this question and I'm interesting in finding a resolution to it that holds up. It appears, as I have said that something in the text needs to be ignore, or an assumption added, to accomplish this. For purposes of my own game I have no problem making the call, not sure what it should be, but I have no problem making it. But running down the actual result of various rule statements interests me, and I enjoy hearing the input and insights of the community here.

No, I don't come out in favor of ignoring that line. That isn't at all what I argued. The point is that perhaps there a bit of unspoken context with that line and that Constructs are a corner case that had to be shoe-horned in somewhere. So while Item Creation maybe isn't the most apt heading for that feat to fall under, it was "close enough". The rules can't always be read as strictly as you're trying to do here.


Ascalaphus wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:

If I turn a longsword into a masterwork longsword using Masterwork Transformation, will that longsword detect as magical three years later?

If it detects as magic, does it overcome DR/Magic?

No, it's an Instantaneous spell. The spell does it's job and ends. The masterwork item does not become magical.

fretgod99 wrote:


If I create a longsword out of a mass of steel using Fabricate, does the longsword detect as magical?

Does that longsword overcome DR/Magic, even though Fabricate explicitly states it cannot be used to create magic items?

No, for the same reason.

Precisely.


fretgod99 wrote:
Java Man wrote:

Fair enough, so you clearly come out on the side of ignoring that line, which resolves the issue very nicely, all settled and wrapped in a bow.

I'm not trying to be arguementative, just that my curiousity has latched onto this question and I'm interesting in finding a resolution to it that holds up. It appears, as I have said that something in the text needs to be ignore, or an assumption added, to accomplish this. For purposes of my own game I have no problem making the call, not sure what it should be, but I have no problem making it. But running down the actual result of various rule statements interests me, and I enjoy hearing the input and insights of the community here.

No, I don't come out in favor of ignoring that line. That isn't at all what I argued. The point is that perhaps there a bit of unspoken context with that line and that Constructs are a corner case that had to be shoe-horned in somewhere. So while Item Creation maybe isn't the most apt heading for that feat to fall under, it was "close enough". The rules can't always be read as strictly as you're trying to do here.

Sorry, bad wording on my part, when I referred to you "ignoring" that line I was thinking pretty much what you said here when you elaborated your position. ( a position with an awful lot of appeal.) What I was trying to get at is that we need to add that nuanced bit of understanding somewhere to make sense of this, and my interest now is examining where, and how many places, to do that.

Sovereign Court

I suppose it is odd that there isn't a Detect Constructs spell. How often has a GM described a room with statues in it only to have the players descend into paranoia?

Maybe it's for the good of the game that you can't really decide if a statue can move before it actually does. Keeps the suspense.


If you lost an arm and it was regenerated via magic, would your arm forver register as magic?

No! The magic goes away after doing its job, leaving a permanent effect that is not magical anymore, although it was created via magic.

Your restored arm is a perfectly fine normal common arm, despite being created with Magic.
It won't stop working in an AMF. It won't have any aura.

Constructs are the same.


We all understand that nonmagical things are often the result of magic. The question is if comsteucts in general, or golems in particular, are ongoing magical effects or items.

Simply stating one opinion or another with no evidence or reasoning to support it does nothing to advance the discussion.


Java Man wrote:

We all understand that nonmagical things are often the result of magic. The question is if comsteucts in general, or golems in particular, are ongoing magical effects or items.

Simply stating one opinion or another with no evidence or reasoning to support it does nothing to advance the discussion.

Permanent Constructs and Undead keep their properties inside an AMF, therefore they cannot possibly be anything that would stop working in an AMF.

This means that no active magic is required for them to be alive. This is a fact, and it automatically excludes most hypotesis.


Ascalaphus wrote:

I suppose it is odd that there isn't a Detect Constructs spell. How often has a GM described a room with statues in it only to have the players descend into paranoia?

Maybe it's for the good of the game that you can't really decide if a statue can move before it actually does. Keeps the suspense.

Constructs are not generally smart enough to try to hide, so without them ambushing people it is not really needed. Things such as vampires, ghouls, and morghs are good reasons for a detect undead spell.


Java Man wrote:

We all understand that nonmagical things are often the result of magic. The question is if constructs in general, or golems in particular, are ongoing magical effects or items.

Simply stating one opinion or another with no evidence or reasoning to support it does nothing to advance the discussion.

We know constructs are creatures because they are classified as creatures. They are not classified as items/objects anywhere in the games. Using a magic item feat doesn't change that. The feat just gives a way to create the creature. It never says creatures created by this feat will also count as items.

If constructs are objects, what is their break DC and hardness? All objects have a break DC and hardness unless it is otherwise stated, and in that case it will normally be an artifact.

Quote:
Hardness: Each object has hardness—a number that represents how well it resists damage. When an object is damaged, subtract its hardness from the damage. Only damage in excess of its hardness is deducted from the object's hit points (see Table: Common Armor
Quote:

Breaking Items

When a character tries to break or burst something with sudden force rather than by dealing damage, use a Strength check (rather than an attack roll and damage roll, as with the sunder special attack) to determine whether he succeeds.

As for the caster level, there is no rule saying that using a CL to create something makes it into an object/item. Undead created with magic require certain CL's also.

The rules do state that golems are creatures.
The rules do state that hardness and break DC's are things that objects have.
The rules do not supply both of these for constructs or golems.

The rules do that detect magic will pick up magical object/items, and spells.
A creature using either of the above or that has an aura due to an SU will also be picked up. None of this applies to constructs or golems as a whole, even if there may be a golem that has some type of supernatual aura of an ongoing SLA, not that I know of any.
If they were ongoing magical affects or items they would shut down when put into an antimagic field. However the field has no affect on them.

There is also a line that says: "The construct type prevents spells with a Fort save from working on them unless it also works on objects."
This means that they are not object/items.
Magical items are also objects so we know it is not an object.

As for the ongoing emanation that sounds like the lingering aura from detect magic, which has a limited time, and is not permanent. So after the golem is created it would make sense for an aura to linger for a certain time, but after that time the aura is gone.

So yes, if you happen to run across a newly detected golem it might have an aura that you can detect, but other than that detect magic has no way of detecting them.

If there is another meaning of ongoing magical affect there would need to be some support from the book. There is nothing that states it. As I have show there is a much evidence that they are not items or ongoing emanations, such as the antimagic field proposition.

Antimagic field also says "The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting", which means not supported by magic. Otherwise they would be supported by magic, and not self-supported.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:

The rules do that detect magic will pick up magical object/items, and spells.

A creature using either of the above or that has an aura due to an SU will also be picked up. None of this applies to constructs or golems as a whole, even if there may be a golem that has some type of supernatual aura of an ongoing SLA, not that I know of any.

To open a can of worms, I bring you Selective Antimagic Aura!

Yes, it's probably the single most awkward ongoing (Su) pseudo-SLA a golem could have for the purposes of Detect Magic, but we work with what we've got.


Chemlak wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

The rules do that detect magic will pick up magical object/items, and spells.

A creature using either of the above or that has an aura due to an SU will also be picked up. None of this applies to constructs or golems as a whole, even if there may be a golem that has some type of supernatual aura of an ongoing SLA, not that I know of any.

To open a can of worms, I bring you Selective Antimagic Aura!

Yes, it's probably the single most awkward ongoing (Su) SLA a golem could have for the purposes of Detect Magic, but we work with what we've got.

I put that phrase in there because in other debates I have said ____ does not exist, only to find out some mostly unknown feat or spell existed, and I was sure that if it(abnormal golem/construct) did not exist yet, that it may be created later. :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oh, I know how that goes (none of us have a truly comprehensive understanding of the rules, and there's always something somewhere) - I just had cause to look at the Colossi recently and that stuck in my head as an example which... probably makes this discussion harder, tbh.

After all, how well does detect magic detect antimagic fields?

Sovereign Court

wraithstrike wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

I suppose it is odd that there isn't a Detect Constructs spell. How often has a GM described a room with statues in it only to have the players descend into paranoia?

Maybe it's for the good of the game that you can't really decide if a statue can move before it actually does. Keeps the suspense.

Constructs are not generally smart enough to try to hide, so without them ambushing people it is not really needed. Things such as vampires, ghouls, and morghs are good reasons for a detect undead spell.

There are so many scenarios with a construct standing there doing nothing until you trigger it. Like a golem that looks like a statue standing in a crowd of other statues, and it does nothing until you pick up the treasure from the altar. Until then, it's motionless. Doesn't smell any different, doesn't look any different, doesn't breathe, doesn't have a heartbeat, doesn't show up to Deathwatch, Detect Magic, Detect Undead, Detect Evil, Detect Thoughts - nothing.


Chemlak wrote:

Oh, I know how that goes (none of us have a truly comprehensive understanding of the rules, and there's always something somewhere) - I just had cause to look at the Colossi recently and that stuck in my head as an example which... probably makes this discussion harder, tbh.

After all, how well does detect magic detect antimagic fields?

Good question, maybe it can't. I guess this would be up to table variation.


Ascalaphus wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

I suppose it is odd that there isn't a Detect Constructs spell. How often has a GM described a room with statues in it only to have the players descend into paranoia?

Maybe it's for the good of the game that you can't really decide if a statue can move before it actually does. Keeps the suspense.

Constructs are not generally smart enough to try to hide, so without them ambushing people it is not really needed. Things such as vampires, ghouls, and morghs are good reasons for a detect undead spell.

There are so many scenarios with a construct standing there doing nothing until you trigger it. Like a golem that looks like a statue standing in a crowd of other statues, and it does nothing until you pick up the treasure from the altar. Until then, it's motionless. Doesn't smell any different, doesn't look any different, doesn't breathe, doesn't have a heartbeat, doesn't show up to Deathwatch, Detect Magic, Detect Undead, Detect Evil, Detect Thoughts - nothing.

That doesn't matter. Unless it is disguised a knowledge check should identify it unless it has some ability that says you need a _____ DC perception check to notice that A is not B. An example of this is the Assassin Vine. Otherwise it looks like any normal vine.

A specific construct that has this wording is the Caryatid Column,w which is actually designed to ambush adventurers and it still need a special sentence to allow it to not be noticed.

Quote:

Statue(Ex)

A caryatid column can stand perfectly still, emulating a statue (usually one that is holding up the ceiling, like a carved column). An observer must succeed at a DC 20 Perception check to notice the caryatid column is alive. If a caryatid column initiates combat from this pose, it gains a +6 bonus on its initiative check.

I know GM's and writers have allowed constructs to get away with this, but by the rules this creature which comes from 3.X, shows that constructs were not intended to just be given free auto-disguise across the board.

PS: Basically the rule of cool took precedence, but outside of that there is no need for a detect construct feat.

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Detect Magic vs Contructs All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.