Rameth |
I think the main thing is the players have to choose to stop it in order to be damaged. Otherwise they will just be moved. So it's probably better for the Golem to March once, or when advantageous, and then attack. Cause if it did it three times in a round and did no damage that would be pretty silly lol.
CyberMephit |
I think one action is probably intentional and if a PC is persistently trying and failing to stop the golem it will rightfully get shredded. Note that while Inexorable March doesn't suffer from MAP, it also cannot deal critical damage.
However, Adamantine Golem's Inexorable March is worded differently than the other two. In particular, I am unclear as to what happens on a Success. Am I right to think that the creature is damaged, but its armor is not, as per the other golems? Or both are damaged as per Failure?
shroudb |
I think one action is probably intentional and if a PC is persistently trying and failing to stop the golem it will rightfully get shredded. Note that while Inexorable March doesn't suffer from MAP, it also cannot deal critical damage.
However, Adamantine Golem's Inexorable March is worded differently than the other two. In particular, I am unclear as to what happens on a Success. Am I right to think that the creature is damaged, but its armor is not, as per the other golems? Or both are damaged as per Failure?
i'm inclined to believe that on a success you do stop the golem at the cost of taking damage and your armor taking damage (upgrading from the failure that you and your armor takes damage but you fail to stop it)
in short: the golem goes wherever he pleases, you better not try to block his path ^^