So following on from the RAW discussion
Example the Golem Antimagic of the Wood Golem
A golem is immune to spells and magical abilities other than its own, but each type of golem is affected by a few types of magic in special ways. These exceptions are listed in shortened form in the golem's stat block, with the full rules appearing here. If an entry lists multiple types (such as “cold and water”), either type of spell can affect the golem. For the wood golem its vulnerability is of course fire.
Which means no attack rolls or saving throws the Golem just takes damage if you target it with its vulnerability.
Area effect spells mostly don't target so by the rules a Fireball does no damage to a Wood Golem
Its unclear where spell immunity ends, probably permanent effects don't count for spell immunity. What about indirect enviroment effects, sensory illusions. What should the Golem actualy immune to?
Wall of Stone
Darkness
Illusionary Object
Illusionary Creature
Invisibility (on a 3rd party)
Stoneskin (on a 3rd party)
Mudpit
Black Tentacles
Fire damage on a Flaming Sword?
How do you play it? How should you play it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How should you play it?
In a way that your table feels is consistent, predictable, and fair.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How do you play it?
I don't have the magic immunity apply to effects that change the terrain or affect other creatures. So Stoneskin would still add the damage resistance against the golem's attacks, and Mud Pit would still be difficult terrain for the golem to move through. Wall of Stone would still be a barrier that the golem would have to go around or bash through.
Things that affect senses would also still work. So Darkness and Illusory Object are good to go.
For spells that cause damage, at least the damage effect is subject to Golem Antimagic. so Illusory Creature, the creature will be seen and probably still provide flanking bonus, but the damage will not affect the Wood Golem.
For spells that directly cause other effects, those effects are also subject to Golem Antimagic. So the Grabbed effect of Black Tentacles won't work.
For spells that require attack rolls, the attack roll needs to succeed. It is too strange from a narrative perspective to think that throwing Produce Flame and missing the golem will still affect the golem. This also includes spells like Spiritual Weapon - the attack has to be successful and the Golem Antimagic applies to the damage (meaning a Wood Golem would ignore Spiritual Weapon).
Physical damage from magical weapons affects the golem normally - the same as physical damage from non-magical weapons.
Other damage coming from items with the magical trait is subject to Golem Antimagic. So a Flaming rune will trigger 'harmed by fire', and a Frost rune will be ignored.
Persistent damage coming from a spell or from an item with the magical trait is also subject to Golem Antimagic for the entire duration of the persistent damage.
If an effect triggers the 'harmed by' section, targets the golem directly and explicitly, and only affects the golem instantaneously, then it takes the first damage entry.
If an effect triggers the 'harmed by' section and is an effect with a duration (including persistent damage, effects with a fixed duration, or effects that can be sustained), or targets the golem indirectly (usually by way of the golem being in an area of effect), then the golem takes the second damage entry.
Some clarifications that I thought of for my own rulings:
Persistent damage coming from a spell or from an item with the magical trait is also subject to Golem Antimagic for the entire duration of the persistent damage.
Persistent damage coming from an item or effect without the magical trait affects the golem as though it didn't have the Golem Antimagic entry. Same with other damaging effects that are not magical.
If an effect triggers the 'harmed by' section and is an effect with a duration (including persistent damage, effects with a fixed duration, or effects that can be sustained), or targets the golem indirectly (usually by way of the golem being in an area of effect), then the golem takes the second damage entry.
If a spell has both an instantaneous effect and a persistent effect, such as clinging ice, then it takes the first damage entry immediately and the second damage entry (the persistent damage entry) at the start of its turn while the effect is still affecting it.
How should you play it?In a way that your table feels is consistent, predictable, and fair.
What is consistent, predictable, and fair? Never an easy question. I'd like some guidance.
What is consistent, predictable, and fair? Never an easy question. I'd like some guidance.
Wouldn't we all. But I can't answer that for you and your table. Only for me and mine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still searching for where to draw the line that makes the most sense in my own corner cases but I also like to come up with narrative justifications for rules. When I was contemplating translating Golem Antimagic for a free-form context, the idea for something I like to call the 'golem core' came to me.
The narrative justification I gave for golems being immune to (most) magic came down that all golems are powered by a complex magical engine which constantly absorbs ambient magical energy to make the golem do what it does. This same engine, when presented with a source of 'free' magical energy, such as a spell targeting it, will readily consume that energy. Spells that don't target the golem don't automatically get absorbed because that energy isn't inbound, and magic weapons don't because that energy is tied up in the physical weapon and so less free to flow.
Of course, golem cores are fiendishly complex devices and there's no such thing as a perfect machine. Owing to the idiosyncrasies of the complex magical arrays needed to power the different kinds of golem, they don't all interact with all kinds of magic the same way. Certain flavours of magic are absorbed especially efficiently and overcharge the system (electricity for a flesh golem, plant for a wood golem) while others clog up the system when absorbed or even cause destructive interference that can damage the golem core.
Would this narrative hold up to scrutiny? I'm almost certain it wouldn't--the published rules text doesn't even hold up to scrutiny in this case--but I find it a satisfying explanation as long as nobody interrogates too deeply into an interaction I don't yet have an answer for.
---
In general, I figure spell effects targeting the golem are obvious (and I include damage AoEs here, at least as far as the area that affects the golem goes). For weapon runes I know that at least striking runes must get through the immunity or else I'd never actually use a golem again given their damage resistances and I am thankful for the other thread's reasoning for this.
For magic that doesn't directly target or affect the golem I figure most of that I would allow to indirectly affect it, but reserve the right to judge that a particular indirect interaction would trigger. If golems weren't immune to the mental damage of Illusory Creature due to being mindless, that would probably be the question to stump me on. I would reason that Darkness is affecting the light level, Stoneskin is affecting a creature's body, Illusory Object is creating an image in the air, not interacting with the golem aside from changing its environment in ways that might in turn affect it.
I can sort of see the logic behind Wall of Force 'affecting' the golem but it doesn't satisfy me--the golem moving through the wall by being unaffected by its existence feels like it opens a can of worms that jeopardizes the rest of my slapdash logic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Realizing that I've done it wrong (luckily only one golem encounter with my pf2e group so far, and nothing icky happened), I'm probably going to rule this way:
- Instant area of effect spells like Fireball work fine, I consider them as targeting all golems in the zone.
- Spell attack rolls will only miss the golem on a critical fail. I consider this a good compromise, also based on how splash alchemical bombs work (a simple miss is still affecting the target, but a critical one means that you botched completely).
- For consistency, I'm considering allowing the golem to roll a save against spells they would be harmed by, granting it immunity on a critical success (unless the spell still has an effect in that case, but I don't think there are any).
- Weapon runes will do normal damage regardless of their element; persistent damage will trigger the golem's 'harmed by' rule, but that's because I read that section as applying to all damage of that kind, not only magical one. A wood golem put in a mundane fire should burn.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, how do I run golem antimagic? With what I believe is RAI.
Which means no attack rolls or saving throws the Golem just takes damage if you target it with its vulnerability.
No, attacks have to hit, and in the case of (basic) save effects, the golem would have to not roll an "unaffected"/critical save result. Any result other than unaffected results in the vulnerability damage.
Area effect spells mostly don't target so by the rules a Fireball does no damage to a Wood Golem
Disagree, I think the RAI is that it would affect them and do the vulnerability damage (unless it critically saves).
Its unclear where spell immunity ends, probably permanent effects don't count for spell immunity. What about indirect enviroment effects, sensory illusions. What should the Golem actualy immune to?
Wall of Stone
Darkness
Illusionary Object
Illusionary Creature
Invisibility (on a 3rd party)
Stoneskin (on a 3rd party)
Mudpit
Black Tentacles
Fire damage on a Flaming Sword?How do you play it? How should you play it?
I generally look at whether it is (1) a spell or magical ability (2) whether it's directly affecting the golem directly.
* A Striking Rune changes the weapon's damage dice. It doesn't affect the golem directly, so it works. (And fundamental runes not working would be too bad to be true, if you had to fight golems without them then the creature building guidelines would also tell you that golems should have lower than normal stats for their level. But they have normal stats for their level.)
* A flaming rune deals fire damage to creatures you hit, that's more direct. I'd let a flaming rune trigger a wood golem's Harmed By, but the golem would be immune against a frost rune.
* Wall of Stone doesn't directly affect the golem so immunity doesn't apply.
* Darkness doesn't directly affect the golem, it affects light sources. Immunity does not apply.
* An Illusory object doesn't directly affect the golem, so it initially works. If the golem interacts with it directly thouch (touching, Seeking) it would automatically disbelieve it.
* Attacks from an illusory creature that hit the golem would be a spell directly affecting the golem and it would be immune. This would also result in immediate automatic disbelief because of the improbably low damage clause in the spell. However, until the illusory creature attacks the golem, it's just an external illusion and the golem might mistake it for a real enemy and waste time on it.
* Invisibility on a 3rd party doesn't directly affect the golem so immunity doesn't apply.
* Stoneskin on a 3rd party doesn't directly the golem so immunity doesn't apply.
* Mud Pit: I'm leaning towards this one affecting the environment, and the environment affecting the golem, so it's indirect and immunity doesn't apply.
* Black Tentacles: it's a spell effect that's making spell attacks against the golem. That's direct and immunity should apply.
* Wall of Force: it's not directly affecting the golem, there's no save or attack involved. The spell is also verbose about how hard it is to bypass or destroy. So golems blithely ignoring it would require a more explicit rule for me. On the other hand, it could be a neat shocking plot twist in a combat.
* Summoned creatures: the creature itself is not a spell or magical ability, so its attacks can hurt the golem.
* Battle form spells: these talk a lot about giving you special abilities based on the form you choose, and are magical. Golem immunity might apply. Then again, those strikes are quite similar to magic weapons with fundamental runes and we'd already decided those work normally.
* Arcane Cascade: makes your strikes arcane/magical, but I think that's supposed to make them equivalent to magical weapons, not transform them into magical abilities.
* Spellstrike: the spell part wouldn't work, but the regular strike is just a strike and would work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
* Summoned creatures: the creature itself is not a spell or magical ability, so its attacks can hurt the golem.
Not arguing with your interpretation, since I believe it is perfectly valid, but to slip in a complication: according to my understanding of the narrative logic behind most Summon spells, the summon is actually a magical recreation of the creature it resembles, not necessarily a flesh and blood being (so to speak) getting pulled from its home and deposited in your battle.
In this way its actually kind of hard to distinguish between how a Summon and a Illusory creature work in terms of golem antimagic, since both are creations of different kinds of magic, one simply being more tangible and powerful.
If pressed, I would probably rely on my headcanon from 1e, that summons are a body of magic given shape by the spiritual energy of the creature which is what is actually summoned by the spell. Ad it is I haven't clearly decided, though I am leaning in favor of summons being able to affect without issue. To do otherwise would call into question my decision to allow a polymorphed creature to affect, which was rather critical when stone golems burst out of the warehouse on the weakened casters while the frontliners chased the vampire boss. And as we know, my decisions, once made, are infallible.
(cough)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I feel you there. I think to maintain a sense of consistency, I would like to use the same answer for:
- can polymorphed creatures hurt a golem?
- can summoned creatures hurt a golem?
- can wall of force, mud pit and other non-instantaneous magical obstacles obstruct a golem's movement?
All of these involve magical substance that the golem comes into contact with, but the interaction between the golem and the magic is not totally direct.
From a "not too bad to be true" standpoint I'm leaning towards golem immunity not applying here. While casters experience some difficulty with golems, I don't really relish the idea of summons being entirely ineffective, golems being immune to 95% of all battlefield control, and wild shaping druids being entirely hosed.
A bit like I firmly decided fundamental runes weren't going to be blocked by golem immunity. That'd just be unplayable.