|
(TL;DR tag at the end - seriously, sorry. Didn't meant for this to end up so long)
Didn't realize this was even an issue until one of my players absconded with a recently slain juvenile red dragon corpse and cast animate dead on it and I discovered while writing up its stats the debate that's been going on for years on these forums about what exactly a dragon skeleton actually gets to keep from its original form (and KUDOS to Paizo for never weighing in on a single forum topic despite repeated FAQ requests). Specifically, here's the choice parts:
FROM THE SKELETON TEMPLATE
1) Type: Retains subtype other than alignment subtypes and subtypes related to the original creature (in the case of a humanoid). Also, text says "Uses all the base creature's statistics and special abilities except as noted here."
2) Defensive Abilities: Loses base creature's defensive abilities and gains DR 5/bludgeoning and immunity to cold, as well as undead traits.
>>>> Ok so already we have a weird situation where a skeleton red dragon keeps the fire subtype, but LOSES immunity to fire and weakness to cold. Whatever, that's not the worst thing ever.
3) Special Attacks: A skeleton retains none of the base creature's special attacks.
>>>> Great, so no breath weapon. I have to assume that's the only thing lost by this point, since nothing else is listed on the "special attacks" line for the juvenile red dragon.
4) Special Qualities: Skeleton loses most special qualities of the base creature. It retains any extraordinary special qualities that can improve its melee or ranged attacks.
>>>> Here's where things get crazy. Pathfinder doesn't have anything defined regarding what the difference between Special Attacks and Special Qualities are, and if they include things that aren't listed in the SQ line in a creature's stat block (like low-light vision and in the case of this example, frightful presence). On paper, frightful presence seems like it should stick with the skeleton - it's an extraordinary ability and it specifically "improves melee attacks" since its activated during a melee attack and therefore makes that melee attack a more dangerous thing. Saying it out loud, however, with everything else a skeleton loses, it feels like frightful presence SHOULD go away.
Lost in all this is what exactly happens to spells and spell-like abilities. There doesn't seem to be a general consensus on what happens to a creature's spell-like abilities when it becomes a skeleton. Are spells and spell-like abilities special attacks? No not really, they're not listed in the special attacks line and not all spells are meant for combat. Are they a special ability? That depends on the creature, but some creatures list their spellcasting abilities IN their special abilities section, while others don't. The Juvenile red dragon, for instance, does list its spell-like abilities in its special abilities section, but not its spells (that's covered in the general dragon write-up). Are they special qualities? Nope, they're never listed in the SQ line of a stat block. The best we have so far to an official ruling on this are the random stat blocks that have appeared in various adventures Paizo has published where a SLA-having creature was skeletonized. A derro skeleton from Ironfang Invasion lost its SLAs. Another adventure has a skeleton cloud giant and it also lost its SLAs.
Spells are a different story, however. Dragons cast like they're sorcerers, so they cast with Charisma (and therefore don't lose spellcasting by virtue of becoming mindless). Charisma drops to 10 for a skeleton, so in theory if a red dragon kept its spellcasting it could only cast cantrips. A bloody skeleton, however, gets a Charisma of 14, so it would in theory keep its spellcasting prowess. Is all this a moot point, however, and spellcasting is lost also the way SLAs were in those 2 creature examples from published sources?
The Juvenile red dragon lists the following in its "Special Abilities" column of the table on page 98 of the Bestiary by the time it's a juvenile:
- Fire subtype (listing it here as a special ability implies IT WOULD BE LOST! *facepalm*)
- Smoke vision (presumably lost)
- Detect magic (SLA, so presumably lost)
- Frightful presence (unknown if lost)
- Pyrotechnics (SLA, so presumably lost)
- Not listed or listed in the general dragon write up beforehand: dragon senses.
TL;DR If you apply the bloody skeleton template to a juvenile red dragon, what of its original abilities would it actually keep? Specifically, its dragon senses, smoke vision, spell-like abilities, spells, and frightful presence?
The only consensus is that every first-party printed mindless skeleton or zombie template creature I've seen has dropped all spells and spell-like abilities (example), so it'd be a bit disingenuous for me to ignore precedent without a reasonable justification.
Edit: The linked example also drops the original creature's senses (low light vision). I'd expect the same of a skeletal dragon as it has the same relevant text.
|
|
I'm inclined to agree. The only thing left that has me perplexed is frightful presence. On paper it looks like it should stay based on the fact that it's an extraordinary ability and "improves a melee attack", but I'm not sure if logically it should. I saw in one published adventure (which one escapes me) where an owlbear skeleton lost its grab ability attached to its claws, and I thought surely that should mean frightful presence gets the axe, but losing grab may have been an error on the writer's part.
An owlbear skeleton should retain grab. CotCT has one that does, though I don't have the Anniversary Edition and can only check the original 3.5 version. There's a fast zombie wolf in Carrion Crown that retains trip as well, and that is for Pathfinder RPG. If CotCT:AE removed grab from the owlbear, I'd consider that a mistake.
That said, while frightful presence can be used as part of an attack (melee or ranged) or charge, it doesn't technically improve the attack; it's just an extra thing they can do. I wouldn't consider it subject to being kept under those conditions. Heck, IIRC in some previous editions it was just an aura that happened all the time rather than being "pinged" while attacking or charging, and I still run it that way--technically, it says that it's "usually" part of an attack or charge, but there's no real reason the dragon couldn't exert its presence without attacking. Unless I missed some clarifying text somewhere--the dragon rules are a bit scattered.
If I were the GM designing a monster, I'd have no qualms keeping frightful presence if there were some special reason to do so--it would have little impact on CR by itself. But such a special reason would probably accompany other changes, and it wouldn't be just a bloody skeleton anymore.