What are some good ways casters can deal with Hardness? Seems the martials are better suited to pound through it?
I guess I meant to say how to get through physical resistance of a golem.
I guess I meant to say how to get through physical resistance of a golem.
Golems specifically have two energy damages that you latch onto to beat them. One slows them, the other hurts them and ignores their resistances.
Ahh, so would recall knowledge be the play then? For Constructs how do casters general deal with there resistance?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So Resistance and Hardness are two different things. Some constructs have hardness (I think just animated objects) but most just have Resistance like any other creature, often to physical damage except for adamantine. So against non-golems energy damage will generally work fine.
But really, constructs are pretty varied, and there's no catch all solution to them. You should be able to find out what their resistance or hardness options are with a Recall Knowledge when you actually fight one and then hopefully you'll have a spell for that. (This is why Shadow Blast can be so handy.)
So Resistance and Hardness are two different things. Some constructs have hardness (I think just animated objects) but most just have Resistance like any other creature, often to physical damage except for adamantine. So against non-golems energy damage will generally work fine.
But really, constructs are pretty varied, and there's no catch all solution to them. You should be able to find out what their resistance or hardness options are with a Recall Knowledge when you actually fight one and then hopefully you'll have a spell for that. (This is why Shadow Blast can be so handy.)
Problem with constructs is that they are 95% of the time immune to magic except for a listed weakness in their stat block, which only a successful/critically successful Recall Knowledge check will tell you that they either just have it or what it actually is. In short, unless you have a spell prepared that afflicts their weakness (cantrips are usually the best in this case), spellcasters are useless against Constructs, and if you can't reasonably Recall Knowledge, you're spending several rounds figuring out what the potential weakness is. (Some of them can even be buffed by your spell choice, so it's very risky!)
Problem with constructs is that they are 95% of the time immune to magic except for a listed weakness in their stat block, which only a successful/critically successful Recall Knowledge check will tell you that they either just have it or what it actually is. In short, unless you have a spell prepared that afflicts their weakness (cantrips are usually the best in this case), spellcasters are useless against Constructs, and if you can't reasonably Recall Knowledge, you're spending several rounds figuring out what the potential weakness is. (Some of them can even be buffed by your spell choice, so it's very risky!)So Resistance and Hardness are two different things. Some constructs have hardness (I think just animated objects) but most just have Resistance like any other creature, often to physical damage except for adamantine. So against non-golems energy damage will generally work fine.
But really, constructs are pretty varied, and there's no catch all solution to them. You should be able to find out what their resistance or hardness options are with a Recall Knowledge when you actually fight one and then hopefully you'll have a spell for that. (This is why Shadow Blast can be so handy.)
Those are golems, though, not all constructs. Lots of constructs are hurt by spells just fine.
Golems are indeed pretty dangerous, since casters without the right spells can't affect them and martials without the right weapons will struggle to punch through their Resistance.
Ahh, so would recall knowledge be the play then?Recall Knowledge is a great choice for almost any creature you face.
I've seen several people say otherwise on these forums.
*Puts on Devil's advocate cap*
Between having to spend an action essentially doing nothing, not getting any say in what you learn, and only learning the most well known aspects of the creature that you likely already knew...it's kind of a bitter pill to swallow.
Also, nearly every creature isn't known for its energy vulnerability first, so you're not likely to learn that anyways.
Making multiple checks at higher DCs to learn more means you're just wasting more time doing nothing.
You could have used those same actions to probe its resistances with attacks, possibly dealing damage in addition to determining its weaknesses.
Not getting any say in what you learn shouldn't be relevant. GMs are supposed to be playing the game with the other players, not against them. And the book even says that if a rule seems like it's not functioning properly make it work for your group (to paraphrase).
That's the third time today I've heard somebody reference that section in support of breaking clearly stated rules.
Page 506 of the Core Rulebook:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not getting any say in what you learn shouldn't be relevant. GMs are supposed to be playing the game with the other players, not against them. And the book even says that if a rule seems like it's not functioning properly make it work for your group (to paraphrase).That's the third time today I've heard somebody reference that section in support of breaking clearly stated rules.
Page 506 of the Core Rulebook:
In the context of golems I think it is reasonable to say golem antimagic, one of the features that defines the monster category, is one of the best-known features about golems and available with a success.
While the exact utility of Recall Knowledge is going to vary from table to table, one should keep in mind what the Recall Knowledge action actually says happen:
"You recall the knowledge accurately or gain a useful clue about your current situation."
That means that when you Recall Knowledge about a monster, you either need to be given information you specifically asked for or the information needs to be useful. Useful information means something that you can use, not just something the creature has that you can't do anything about.
In practice, it is going to take a while for everyone to realize this as it is a new rule set with connected rules on opposite ends of the book. I've personally seen a PFS GM give me nothing useful from repeated successes to ID a sea devil. But the PF1 PFS monster identification norm (let the player pick from a menu of categories) was basically just a house rule that became popular. Given time, I'm sure one of those will emerge for PF2 PFS as well. And hopefully, unlike the previous norm, you won't have the option of picking a dead category, like resistances on a creature without them.
In the context of golems I think it is reasonable to say golem antimagic, one of the features that defines the monster category, is one of the best-known features about golems and available with a success.
I agree. I think that would be totally reasonable.
While the exact utility of Recall Knowledge is going to vary from table to table, one should keep in mind what the Recall Knowledge action actually says happen:
"You recall the knowledge accurately or gain a useful clue about your current situation."
That means that when you Recall Knowledge about a monster, you either need to be given information you specifically asked for or the information needs to be useful. Useful information means something that you can use, not just something the creature has that you can't do anything about.
This has always been a thing, even in 1st Edition. Sadly, I had a few GMs who didn't seem to realize that.
We once had a cloaker swoop down and envelop one of the PCs. AFTER having witnessed that and rolling a natural 20 on my knowledge check, the GM told me that it can fly, and envelops its victims. I was pissed because he didn't give us anything we didn't already know.
We once had a cloaker swoop down and envelop one of the PCs. AFTER having witnessed that and rolling a natural 20 on my knowledge check, the GM told me that it can fly, and envelops its victims. I was pissed because he didn't give us anything we didn't already know.
My immediate response to that GM would have been, "No s#+! sherlock, I got a critical success, tell me something I didn't know." While pointing at the player who got enveloped.
We once had a cloaker swoop down and envelop one of the PCs. AFTER having witnessed that and rolling a natural 20 on my knowledge check, the GM told me that it can fly, and envelops its victims. I was pissed because he didn't give us anything we didn't already know.
If it is something you have clearly observed *and* no new information is presented I would also be quite snarky and rightly so.
However if a GM would tell me that a monster is able to use an AoE effect that could possibly be viable informatation even after witnessing it firsthand if for example the GM would include a clue to the availability of said AoE, as you might be able to use that information to your advantage. An AoE that is only usable once per day or has an otherwise long recharge timer mandates a different set of counterplay options in comparison to an AoE that can be used once every other round.