True Speak vs Golems

[Incriptus]

Golems are immune to any spell or spell like ability that allows spell resistance.

Utternaces are spell-like abilities that spell resistance applies to

Truenamers can voluntarily increase the DC of a Truespeak check by 5 to automatically overcome a target’s spell resistance.



Would you allow a True Namer to directly effect a golem with an utterance or no?

[kestrel404]

immune to any spell or spell like ability that allows spell resistance.
...
automatically overcome a target’s spell resistance.

Looks like a Truenamer has a +5 DC to affect golems, to me. I mean, they're boned anyway, why not throw them one?

[Psyren]

There's two ways to read this:

1) Spell immunity is technically just arbitrarily high SR, so automatically overcoming SR should be equivalent to bypassing SI.
2) Utterances are technically "SR: Yes" even if the overcome check is made, and therefore SI would still apply.

This is really a DM call; personally, I see no reason to nerf the class further so I'd probably allow it.

[Garwain]

Golem has no spell resistance to overcome. He is plain old immune. (arbitraraly high isn't the same as immunity)

No love for Truespeak here, sorry.

[Cieyrin]

Classic Immovable Object vs. Unstoppable Force argument. Let's leave it to the wording:

A golem is immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance.

In addition, when speaking an utterance, you can voluntarily increase the DC of a Truespeak check by 5 to automatically overcome a target's spell resistance.

The clause to overcome doesn't change Utterances from SR: Yes to SR: No, it makes it auto-succeed. Golem's Magic Immunity just says it's immune, so it appears it wins, since there's nothing for the Utterance to auto-succeed against.

[Incriptus]

Golem's are immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows for spell resistance
Utterances are Spell-like abilities that allow for spell resistance

Simple enough the answer should be No.

But by increasing the Truespeak check by 5 the Utterance can automatically overcome spell resistance. While automatically over-coming spell resistance is not the same as not allowing spell resistance in the first place, do you find the spirit of the rules "close enough"


So simply vote Yay or Nay . . . would you allow the True Namer to directly effect a golem if they succeeded on the TrueSpeak check +5?

[CTrees]

For a generic system, which worked exactly like Truenaming, but with different fluff? I would not allow it to affect Golems. As you said, automatically overcoming SR is different than not being affected by SR in the first place.

For truenaming, with all its attendant fluff, versus golems? Because of the "real world" legends on the creation of golems, and how truenaming theoretically works, I actually like the idea of it tapping into/interfering with the magic that animates golems, and so I would definitely allow it, even if I can't support that permission by RAW. Sometimes, fluff should win, if it's awesome enough.

[Bonzai]

In this instance it's a case of the irresitable force meeting the immovable object, and really is a DM call. Golems have an SR that can not be over come, while True Namers can always over come SR. Which wins? In my case the DM ruled that a Truenamer can aways over come SR, if it is possible to do so with a check. Fair enough, but by the RAW it is completely up in the air and can go either way.

[Flickerdart]

It's Truenamers. Throw them a bone.

[Tyndmyr]

Golems are immune to any spell or spell like ability that allows spell resistance.

Utternaces are spell-like abilities that spell resistance applies to

Truenamers can voluntarily increase the DC of a Truespeak check by 5 to automatically overcome a target’s spell resistance.



Would you allow a True Namer to directly effect a golem with an utterance or no?

By RAW, ignoring SR via the +5 DC does work, yes. You automatically overcome the resistance, even if it is infinite(as golems effectively are). The important detail is that Spell Immunity is not complete immunity, it's infinitely high resistance.

Let us consider, for instance, an explicit example from the SRD:

Immunity to Magic (Ex)

An iron golem is immune to any spell or spell-like ability that allows spell resistance. In addition, certain spells and effects function differently against the creature, as noted below.

A magical attack that deals electricity damage slows an iron golem (as the slow spell) for 3 rounds, with no saving throw.

A magical attack that deals fire damage breaks any slow effect on the golem and heals 1 point of damage for each 3 points of damage the attack would otherwise deal. If the amount of healing would cause the golem to exceed its full normal hit points, it gains any excess as temporary hit points. For example, an iron golem hit by a fireball gains back 6 hit points if the damage total is 18 points. An iron golem gets no saving throw against fire effects.

An iron golem is affected normally by rust attacks, such as that of a rust monster or a rusting grasp spell.

Now, the observant will note that the fireball is SR yes, so...the monster should be immune, right? Not so. The rule Immunity to Magic is not actually immunity to magic. It's merely a label for a collection of abilities. The writers at the time of writing of the SRD golems could not be expected to know of the future truenamer, so they used "spell immunity" as a term they considered practically equal to infinite SR.

Using the +5 modifier means that it does not, in fact, allow spell resistance to ever stop it. So, the golem's ability, by RAW, does not apply.

[Chronos]

Spell immunity works like infinite spell resistance. You can't beat it by boosting your CL, but you can just bypass it entirely. I vote aye.

[Tyndmyr]

This is basically a duplicate of this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=231271).

I don't see the purpose for dividing them out.

Truenamer's automatically overcome SR if they take the +5 modifier.

Golem's "Immunity to Magic" only functions on spells or SLAs that "allow spell resistance". It is quite clear that a modified utterance never allows SR to resist it. So, there is no conflict, and the golem is not immune.