Can mindless creatures cast spells and spell-like abilities?

[Cyrad]

I would say "no" as spellcasting requires concentration and a mental action. However, my interpretation has been challenged, and I've been asked for a rules precedent.

[Zhayne]

Nothing in the rules I can find says they can't, so by default, they can.

[Jeraa]

Zhayne wrote:

Nothing in the rules I can find says they can't, so by default, they can.

Intelligence-based casting wouldn't be likely. Wisdom/Charisma-based I don't see why not.

[Cyrad]

The issue is that all spellcasting requires mental actions and concentration. I find it difficult to believe you can concentrate when you are incapable of thinking.

[Mindless Zombie Wizard]

Rrarerrrroh?

[Claxon]

Do you have an example of a mindless creature that has any spellcasting ability?

Normally mindless creatures can't take levels in anything, so to me it's a mystery how they would get the ability to cast spells.

As far as SLAs...if the creature naturally has an SLA they can probably use that. But I again, I don't know how they would gain any other SLAs since they can't level.

Also, challenge them right back with this:
Where does it say they can cast spells?

Pathfinder doesn't (typically) have rules telling you what you can't do. It has rules telling you what you can do.

Otherwise, you run into funky problems like "It doesn't say a dead character can't take actions".

[Yorien]

Cyrad wrote:

The issue is that all spellcasting requires mental actions and concentration. I find it difficult to believe you can concentrate when you are incapable of thinking.

As it's name states, a spell-like ability is an ability, not a spell. A (sp) ability generates a magical effect that normally duplicates a spell, but it's clearly stated that they're not spells, and their activation may not require spellcasting or concentration.

Sure, the (Sp) rules also state that you can concentrate to Use (wording specifically says USE, not cast), a (Sp) ability defensively, something that mindless creatures will be unable to.... but mindless creatures might have access to continuous effects (like some sort of magical aura, for example) that may activate innately or based on pure instinct.

[Cyrad]

Spell-like abilities still require concentration. They function identically like spells except for a number of listed exceptions. Concentration is not one of those exceptions.

[wraithstrike]

From a flavor based perspective they should not be able to know what spell to cast in my opinion unless someone can show one with special abilities to choose from. In that case I would say if they are supposed to know their SA's well enough then they can choose what is the best spell to cast, but I would not let them use the spell creatively.

From a rules perspective nothing stops them from being able to cast or activate an SLA. As for actual spells they would need class levels, and I don't see that happening since a mindless being should be able to learn how to advance in a class.

Intelligence is not a requirement for concentrating on a spell. Whatever mental ability applies to the spell applies to the concentration check, and another factor is your caster level. It is basically your ability to hold(not lose) the spell while other things are going on that might cause you to lose the spell such as an earthquake.

[Daw]

Could I imagine a magical termite colony that generates an anti-magic field? yeah sure.

Would I allow a player to make fey zombies to have their spell-like abilities on call? nope

[wraithstrike]

Daw wrote:

Could I imagine a magical termite colony that generates an anti-magic field? yeah sure.

Would I allow a player to make fey zombies to have their spell-like abilities on call? nope

I think that zombies lose access to special abilities, and SLA's are special abilities so the player is already losing that battle.

But I think most of us agree that unless someone can find a mindless creature that uses its special abilities tactically that this idea is not meant to happen.<----Not a rules answer, but a "what makes sense" answer.

@Cyrad
What I am curious about is the specific situation which allowed a mindless creature to have access to SLA's or spells.

Is this a mental exercise or an actual situation? If it is an actual situation then having more info would be helpful

[Flashblade]

wraithstrike wrote:

@Cyrad
What I am curious about is the specific situation which allowed a mindless creature to have access to SLA's or spells.

Is this a mental exercise or an actual situation? If it is an actual situation then having more info would be helpful

I am not @Cyrad, but the specific question is whether a Skeletal Dragon retains the ability to cast its spells and spell-like abilities, the caster level for which are determined by its HD rather than by class levels. Bloody skeleton variants even have 14 Charisma, so non-cantrips are at issue. The skeleton template notably does not mention spells or spell-like abilities, so in the absence of a rule specifically saying that a creature must have an Intelligence score (or otherwise not be "mindless") then I see no reason why a Bloody Skeleton Adult Gold Dragon would not have the usual spells and spell-like abilities due its hit dice.

[David C Smith]

I know HeroLab should not be used to determine whether a rules question is official or not, but I thought I would give it a shot and see what happens.

I created a Bloody Skeletal Adult Gold Dragon using HeroLab. It removed the following abilities: Fly, Frightful Presence, Low Light Vision, Swim, Water Breathing, Blindsense, Breath Weapon, Change Shape, and Dragon Senses.

All spells and SLA were kept on the character sheet. I read through the changes that doing that skeleton and bloody added to the base character and neither are mentioned.

Like I said, HeroLab should not be used as official, but it is a good indicator that that might be the correct view.

[wraithstrike]

Looking at the skeleton entry, it only addresses what it loses and keeps with regard to special attacks and special qualities.

Spells and SLA's are not addressed at all. That does not default to a yes or no. It defaults to "it is up to the GM".

In addition 3.5, which has the same wording as Pathfinder did not allow skeletal dragons to retain spells or SLA's.

If a player wanted to convince me that Paizo changed the rule he would have to explain why the words did not change if the intent did since the rules were pretty much copied and pasted.

Both Cloud Giants and the dragon here had SLA's, and the dragon had both spells also.

edit:Before anyone becomes focused on the 3.5 thing the main issue is that SLA's are not addressed. With most templates this is a non-issue since they are going to make someone mindless, and also don't remove other things that creatures have.

The devs want you to make context based rulings, so the context, not just the words matters, unless of course you are in a group that has claimed to run things by RAW unless otherwise spoken.

[Flashblade]

The entirety of the rules for Pathfinder and every game are open to GM-and-player agreement and interpretation; so, to say so is not wrong, but it is also not helpful in this case. Cyrad and I are both looking for a determination based on official developer feedback, published example, or unambiguously transferable rules-as-written.

[djdust]

If I'm following the train of forum posts correctly, this dragon skeleton is raised by a extremely powerful (if corrupted) artifact. That alone justifies GM fiat. In other words, a wizard did it.

[Daw]

Flashblade wrote:

The entirety of the rules for Pathfinder and every game are open to GM-and-player agreement and interpretation; so, to say so is not wrong, but it is also not helpful in this case. Cyrad and I are both looking for a determination based on official developer feedback, published example, or unambiguously transferable rules-as-written.

That's all?

[Claxon]

Alright, so the example creature in question is one that has had the skeleton template applied?

Yeah, I'd remove the spell casting. The template doesn't actually address spells specifically, but I'm willing to bet they should lose the ability to cast them. Of course, this is unlikely to ever get official commentary from the developers, so you do you.

I don't find any compelling argument that the skeleton should keep them.

In any event, I would simply say "You're doing it wrong" by using the skeleton template.

You should use the Ravener template, I mean sure the dragon doesn't technically qualify because Gold dragons aren't evil but ignoring that part everything else fits way more thematically with what you're trying to do. And there's no question that it would keep its spell casting.

[Flashblade]

@Cyrad — I think I have found some examples of mindless creatures that can cast spell-like abilities.

Okay so I think maybe what we're looking for has not been fully communicated. We do not expect JJ to hop in here and say yea or nay; what we were expecting is people delving into the books and bringing up potentially transferable examples of the rules-as-written like the one I'm about to do.

From the rules for Constructs: "Skill points equal to 2 + Int modifier (minimum 1) per Hit Die. However, most constructs are mindless and gain no skill points or feats. Constructs do not have any class skills, regardless of their Intelligence scores."

While this rule is not 100% unambiguously transferable, this at least gives us an entire Type of creatures which might potentially be both Mindless and able to cast Spell-like abilities and/or spells — even a single example of which would illustrate the possibility. Looking at the list of CR 1–10 constructs from the Advanced Monster Search tool available on d20pfsrd gives me the following examples of things that might qualify:

CR 1 Wood Idol (AP 27)
CR 2 Soulbound Doll (Bestiary 2)
CR 3 Guardian Doll (Irrisen)
CR 3 Stone Idol (AP 27)
CR 4 Jade Idol (AP 27)
CR 4 Marble Sentinel (AP 62)
CR 4 Mask Golem (Masks of the Living God)
CR 5 Graven Guardian (Bestiary 3)
CR 5 Mirror Man (AP 68)
CR 7 Soulbound Mannequin (Bestiary 4)
CR 7 Tupilaq (Bestiary 3)

All the creatures on the above list are Constructs which have Spell-Like Abilities on their stat block, which is the minimum criteria for inclusion. I specifically excluded creatures whose descriptions explicitly mention being self-aware, sentient, etc. Several of the creatures above have "Weakness susceptible to mind-affecting effects," so perhaps you would also discount them; however, at least some meet all the criteria I can imagine. For example, the Graven Guardian and Tupilaq have all of the following: Immune construct traits; n/day (rather than constant) Spell-Like Abilitiies; Int —; lack Weakness susceptible to mind-affecting effects; and, lack feats and skills. I would blindly hypothesize that were I to extend the search to include all CRs of Construct (or all creatures in general), I'd likely be able to find more creatures that fit the same criteria filled by the Graven Guardian and Tupilaq.

@Cyrad — Does that criteria satisfy you? If so, then do you agree with my intuition that it could serve as evidence for the lack of an exclusion to the general rule that templates only change the things they explicitly say they do? If so, then it would seem a Skeleton Dragon would indeed be able to cast at least its spell-like abilities as normal.

[Flashblade]

Daw wrote:

Flashblade wrote:

The entirety of the rules for Pathfinder and every game are open to GM-and-player agreement and interpretation; so, to say so is not wrong, but it is also not helpful in this case. Cyrad and I are both looking for a determination based on official developer feedback, published example, or unambiguously transferable rules-as-written.

That's all?

Yes, we came to the Rules Questions forum looking for responses grounded in the rules rather than peoples' opinions about what works best; otherwise, instead of Pathfinder we'd all be playing Regdar Gets a Hummer and a Burrito.

[wraithstrike]

Just because some creatures can do so that does not mean that was the intent for the skeleton or zombie template.

Even in 3.5 some mindless creatures could use spells or SLA's, but zombies and skeletons could not.

I understand that the game being played may need an immediate ruling, but for a more precise ruling this thread can be FAQ'd.

[toastedamphibian]

Side stepping the issue: As far as I can tell, red dragons get SLA by AGE CATEGORY, not HD. It is no longer alive, and no longer a dragon. It is dead, skeletons do not have draconic age categories.

[Tarik Blackhands]

If people are still looking for mindless creatures that have SLAs, I can point to Zygominds for one. Int -, at will Greater Mindscape, still packs the generic plant immunity suite which includes mind-altering. No other significant weaknesses that imply this is an anomaly.

Also worth mentioning that the bloody thing is quite capable of trapping people in the Matrix (or did they escape?!) pretty effectively despite being utterly mindless.

[Flashblade]

toastedamphibian wrote:

Side stepping the issue: As far as I can tell, red dragons get SLA by AGE CATEGORY, not HD. It is no longer alive, and no longer a dragon. It is dead, skeletons do not have draconic age categories.

Dragons also gain size and natural weapons by virtue of their age category. Should the skeletal dragon revert to Tiny and lose all attacks but its bite and claws?

[Cyrad]

The issue with the examples is that monster creation follows a precedent where if a creature has an ability in their stat-block, they can use it even if they normally shouldn't be able to. It is however interesting that only two constructs out of the research are mindless and have spell-like abilities.

I'm more-so interested if a creature with SLA and spells that somehow becomes mindless retains the ability to use those abilities. I would say "no" as you need to concentrate to cast a spell or spell-like ability and you can't concentrate when mindless.

[Flashblade]

Cyrad wrote:

The issue with the examples is that monster creation follows a precedent where if a creature has an ability in their stat-block, they can use it even if they normally shouldn't be able to.

I'm more-so interested if a creature with SLA and spells that somehow becomes mindless retains the ability to use those abilities. I would say "no" as you need to concentrate to cast a spell or spell-like ability and you can't concentrate when mindless.

I can fully understand your logical reasoning, and I will concede that the entire premise could be easily avoided by just picking a different template like Skeletal Champion or Lich. But can you provide a rules-as-written justification for why a mindless creature cannot cast spells or use spell-like abilities? Nothing in the description of the Intelligence ability score says this; nothing in the rules for casting spells says this; and, there does not even exist to my knowledge a condition or trait called mindless.

The only thing I can find in support of your position is this line: "You must concentrate to cast a spell. If you can’t concentrate, you can’t cast a spell." This line clearly refers to making concentration checks when presented with actions or situations that might prevent successful spell casting (i.e., cause a spell to "fizzle"), and spell fizzle is explicitly described as the result of being unable to concentrate. The rules even then go on to say that when a spell fizzles, it still uses up the spell slot; so, even when a creature "can't concentrate" it retains its ability to cast spells. In order to even get to the part of the successful spell casting flow chart where it is possible to fizzle a spell because one "can't concentrate," one must possess spell-casting ability in the first place. It's not logically possible that the inability to concentrate, described here, could retroactively remove the ability to cast spells, which is itself a prerequisite to getting to the point int he flow chart where ability to concentrate is checked.

I think the confusion here is that you're reading "concentrate" as the capacity of a self-aware creature (which a Skeleton is, by virtue of it having a Charisma score) to engage in mental effort, which is a reasonable definition of that word in general English usage. But the use of the word "concentrate" in the spell casting rules clearly conveys very specific meaning separate from its usage in (American) Standard English.

[Murdock Mudeater]

Flashblade wrote:

Yes, we came to the Rules Questions forum looking for responses grounded in the rules rather than peoples' opinions about what works best;

Unfortunately, the way the this game functions, the best you can do is mostly opinion on how the game functions. Sure, you can find rules and get quotes, but not everyone will play with strict rules as written - most won't. And ultimately, the validity of any rule is up to the GM, which is esentially an opinion of what the rule is. So this game is mostly opinion.

Regarding your question, I think, techincally, if the source of the spell casting is not a special ability/quality AND if the casting stat for that spell casting isn't reduced to -, then the mindless quality does not affect the ability to cast spells.

That said, the ability to cast spells and the ability to cast spells, can be seperate, and it really depends on how the GM roleplays mindless. Personnally, I don't think I would have a mindless creature ever cast spells, even if they could, just because casting spells would not occur to a mindless creature. They just don't have the mental capacity to remember to cast spells instead of just using their physical body to do things. I'm even on the fence if a mindless creature could use ranged weapons to make ranged attacks. But that's how I would GM it, not how your GM will do it.

GM "Do you want to cast spells?"
Mindless Creature "...."

[Cyrad]

Spells are clearly mental actions that require thought as even the paralysis condition describes spellcasting as a "mental action."

There's also...

Choosing a Spell wrote:

To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell.

And then there's...

Concentration Checks and Casting Spells wrote:

To cast a spell, you must concentrate. If something interrupts your concentration while you’re casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell.

This makes it clear that concentration isn't just about resisting effects that disrupt spellcasting but rather a requirement for spellcasting in itself.

[Daw]

Flashblade wrote:

Daw wrote:

Flashblade wrote:

The entirety of the rules for Pathfinder and every game are open to GM-and-player agreement and interpretation; so, to say so is not wrong, but it is also not helpful in this case. Cyrad and I are both looking for a determination based on official developer feedback, published example, or unambiguously transferable rules-as-written.

That's all?

Yes, we came to the Rules Questions forum looking for responses grounded in the rules rather than peoples' opinions about what works best; otherwise, instead of Pathfinder we'd all be playing Regdar Gets a Hummer and a Burrito.

Flashblade,

The problem is that, especially on the forums, NOTHING will ever be universally unambiguous. Really. Even barring deliberate alternate rule interpretations to support a clever exploit, people can just not see things the same way, or fail to put all the moving parts together. People have put a lot of effort into showing you both how the rule evolved, and the theorycrafting behind it. You have shut them down cold. Do you have any idea how arrogant your position looks?

The Devs have a history of letting the forums work a lot of this out on our own, stepping in only when they feel they have something important to add. After all, we are also a resource to them, and might come up with something better or at least more interesting to them. They happily let people explore alternate interpretations on the off chance a stroke of genius occurs, and just as happily take note of the object lessons of the many unnatural disasters. Experiment at your own table, and come back and tell us how it worked out. Provide useful data and you might actually get a Dev to respond. Demanding the Sages of Paizo come down from their Towers of Frozen Dreams to make all things Clear is not the best approach.

I do wish you good luck with this, and hope whatever conflict that is behind this can be worked out.

[Flashblade]

I'm not asking for a Paizo dev to post. I am asking for people who don't actually know to refrain from cluttering up the thread with responses of "well this is what I, a person who does not know and who is not citing an example, would personally do it". I already know how I, a person who does not know and is not citing an example, am going to run the Bloody Skeleton Adult Gold Dragon in my game next weekend. What I don't know is what the rules-as-written or rules-as-intended say, since I've not read every single Paizo material, and there might exist in some book I haven't read a rule that shows one way or the other. I'm asking for ForumUser452 to make a post saying something like:

Page 17 of Adventure Path Eleventy-three has a Weurhfeuihefr Skeleton encounter that isn't given a separate stat block, just a reference to its entry on page 63 of the CruelCreaturesChronicle, and the text of the encounter explicitly mentions that starts the encounter having cast Greater Invisibility on itself — which is one of its frequently-prepared spells in its monster entry. Later on in the adventure there's another creature that's also treated as a standard Skeleton, and the text of the encounter references the spell-like abilities of the base creature being used. From this we can conclude that the Skeleton template did not strip its spell casting ability, and since the adventure does not mention these skeletons being special in any way we can transfer this conclusion to other Skeletons and conclude that the Skeleton template does not remove spell-casting.

There is no conflict intended here, and I sincerely and respectfully apologize for giving the impression I was impetuously demanding the attention of Paizo devs. I just want my fellow forums posters to help with research of what has already been tweeted, posted in other threads, published in books I don't own, etc. With respect, if the intention were to solicit Advice or Homebrew options, I imagine this thread would have been posted in one of those forums rather than Rules Questions.

[Flashblade]

Cyrad wrote:

Spells are clearly mental actions that require thought as even the paralysis condition describes spellcasting as a "mental action."

There's also...

Choosing a Spell wrote:

To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell.

This is something I overlooked, and is relevant: without an intelligence score (and lacking the relevant anatomy), a Skeleton normally cannot speak a language. Even if Skeletons do retain spell-casting ability, the inability to speak would prohibit a great number of spells from being cast.

Cyrad wrote:

And then there's...

Concentration Checks and Casting Spells wrote:

To cast a spell, you must concentrate. If something interrupts your concentration while you’re casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell.

This makes it clear that concentration isn't just about resisting effects that disrupt spellcasting but rather a requirement for spellcasting in itself.

Just so we're clear, I personally agree with your conclusion that Skeletons do not cast spells because even if they could because it's not thematically appropriate. I still disagree with you analysis of the rules here that concentration is used in its more general definition rather than specific to concentration checks.

[Murdock Mudeater]

Flashblade wrote:

CruelCreaturesChronicle

is this a pathfinder book? I'm looking online, but can't find it.

[Flashblade]

Murdock Mudeater wrote:

Flashblade wrote:

CruelCreaturesChronicle

is this a pathfinder book? I'm looking online, but can't find it.

It should be. :(

[The Sideromancer]

Flashblade wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Spells are clearly mental actions that require thought as even the paralysis condition describes spellcasting as a "mental action."

There's also...

Choosing a Spell wrote:

To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell.

This is something I overlooked, and is relevant: without an intelligence score (and lacking the relevant anatomy), a Skeleton normally cannot speak a language. Even if Skeletons do retain spell-casting ability, the inability to speak would prohibit a great number of spells from being cast.

what about psychic skeletons? :P

[Murdock Mudeater]

Flashblade wrote:

This is something I overlooked, and is relevant: without an intelligence score (and lacking the relevant anatomy), a Skeleton normally cannot speak a language. Even if Skeletons do retain spell-casting ability, the inability to speak would prohibit a great number of spells from being cast.

This one is common with undead, but never explained in the rules. There are many abilities which require being able to communicate with undead, but the abillity to do so is never really explained. And it's really all the sensory organs...

They have no eyes, but are not listed as being blind and are even granted Darkvision. They have no tongue, so should not be able to speak. They have skin or nerves, so should have no sense of touch. They have no ears, but lack the deafened condition. They have no nose, so should have no ability to smell anything. They can be Commanded, but lack language and the physical to communicate or be commicated with.

And more so, why do undead have alliegence to other undead? I mean, shouldn't a mindless skeleton be just as motivated to attack adventurers as they are to attack other skeletons? A mindless creature shouldn't be able to distinguish between friend and foe, and certainly not to determine that another skeleton is inherently an ally. And yet, we always see undead working together towards a common goal.

Up to the GM on how to handle Undead. It's really not well explained in the rules.

For example, I sneak up behind a skeleton and put a bucket over it's head. Is it blinded? It has no eyes, so it could be argued to be unaffected. On the other hand, if it doesn't see with those holes where eyes were, how does it see?

[Talonhawke]

Flashblade wrote:

I'm not asking for a Paizo dev to post. I am asking for people who don't actually know to refrain from cluttering up the thread with responses of "well this is what I, a person who does not know and who is not citing an example, would personally do it". I already know how I, a person who does not know and is not citing an example, am going to run the Bloody Skeleton Adult Gold Dragon in my game next weekend. What I don't know is what the rules-as-written or rules-as-intended say, since I've not read every single Paizo material, and there might exist in some book I haven't read a rule that shows one way or the other. I'm asking for ForumUser452 to make a post saying something like:

Page 17 of Adventure Path Eleventy-three has a Weurhfeuihefr Skeleton encounter that isn't given a separate stat block, just a reference to its entry on page 63 of the CruelCreaturesChronicle, and the text of the encounter explicitly mentions that starts the encounter having cast Greater Invisibility on itself — which is one of its frequently-prepared spells in its monster entry. Later on in the adventure there's another creature that's also treated as a standard Skeleton, and the text of the encounter references the spell-like abilities of the base creature being used. From this we can conclude that the Skeleton template did not strip its spell casting ability, and since the adventure does not mention these skeletons being special in any way we can transfer this conclusion to other Skeletons and conclude that the Skeleton template does not remove spell-casting.

There is no conflict intended here, and I sincerely and respectfully apologize for giving the impression I was impetuously demanding the attention of Paizo devs. I just want my fellow forums posters to help with research of what has already been tweeted, posted in other threads, published in books I don't own, etc. With respect, if the intention were to solicit Advice or Homebrew options, I imagine this thread would have been posted in one of those forums...

Keep in mind that adventure stat blocks do have a tendency to slip through with errors so even if we see a zombie Nargle can still use its Invisibility SLA that doesn't mean its supposed to.

Also keep in mind that since we are unlikely to get a dev answer on most questions talking about how we would rule it does 2 things.
1. it allows us to debate the semantics which might lead us to notice an inconsistency we missed before.
2. Someone who also wants to know the answer will probably find this on a search and while we might not have the dev answer it might let them know enough to allow them to make a decision for their game.

[wraithstrike]

We already know that mindless creatures can use spells and SLA's. That has been true for about 15 years. The question is, does this also apply to skeletons and zombies.

At least up until 2009 the answer was no.

[Daw]

^-^
Wraithstrike, you really need to stop calling your fellow party members mindless creatures.

Good point on specifying the question.

[Cyrad]

wraithstrike wrote:

We already know that mindless creatures can use spells and SLA's.

How?

[Tarik Blackhands]

Instinct would be the easiest justification in my mind. Otherwise you're stuck with "the statblock says it can"

[wraithstrike]

Cyrad wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

We already know that mindless creatures can use spells and SLA's.

How?

Because there are published(official) mindless creatures that can do it.

To be clear I am not saying that all can do it. I am saying that it is possible because some exist, however that does not mean that it is intended for every mindless monsters. That is why I have tried to redirect the question to the skeleton and zombie templates because they may not be able to do so, even if others can.

[shadowkras]

I believe they use spell-like abilities because those are much easier to write on a statblock than a new supernatural ability that will simply say works as certain spell.