Questions about 'Incarnated Construct' template

[ShurikVch]

Is it worth it for player or cohort?

First question: why construct must be human-shaped: "two arms, two legs, one head"?
Isn't it a bit silly - ettin with some construct template is not legal target for incarnation, but with hill giant construct it's OK? Gorilla dustform accepted, but not girallon effigy?
And what about the one-armed or one-legged golems?
Even more - later it mention wings! Wings - on humanoid? O rly? Then incarnated drolem is technically legal!

Speed
Is decrease of land speed work only on "base" speed or various boosts such as from shadow/dark templates also affected?
What if construct can somehow fly without wings? Does he keep it after incarnation?
Also rules don't say anything about swim, climb and burrow speeds. Does they don't change at all? If yes, any ideas about possible 'base' construct? For example, burrow can be achieved troth Mineralize Warrior spell...

Attacks
"... loses all its original attacks."
Even weapons? :smallconfused:
A nimblewright's rapiers, sword of caryatid column...
And what's with a natural weapons? No-slam is OK, but if incarnated troll or dragon lose their claw/bite, isn't it kinda strange?

Special Attacks
"... loses all its special attacks."
Even spellcasting and psionics?

Special Qualities
"... loses all its special qualities."

What if some interesting feature of 'base' construct not listed in "Attacks", "Special Attacks" or "Special Qualities"?

Abilities
"... Constitution and Intelligence are rolled ..."
Does Maximize Spell metamagic applicable here?

Level Adjustment
" –2 (minimum 0)."
Can it be interpreted as: "LA always 0 unless it was initially greater then +2"?

"... The spell does not work on constructs that are only constructs temporarily (such as objects affected by an animate objects spell). "
Does Permanency spell take care of this problem?

If constuct was originally absolutely human-like, does he gain after incarnation bonus feat and skillpoints?

[theUnearther]

I don't know where the template is from, so bear that in mind as I try my best to answer you.

Is it worth it for player or cohort?
That will depend on what kind of construct you are.

First question: why construct must be human-shaped: "two arms, two legs, one head"?
Because it is so. A template can be written for whatever the writter wants, this one seems to be for "guys that can pass for humanoids". If you don't like that, you may be able to talk to your GM about it, sure, but per the rules, the prerequisite is not voided because it is ridiculous.

Speed
Is decrease of land speed work only on "base" speed or various boosts such as from shadow/dark templates also affected?
Is this decrease a percentage or something? The other templates should say if they change your base speed or just give you some sort of bonus. If the former, then yes, Incarnating yourself will change that.
I'd guess that, generally, unless a template gives you a temporal boost that you have to activate, then it is a change to your base and becomes fair play for further templates. But of course, magic is nothing but exceptions.

What if construct can somehow fly without wings? Does he keep it after incarnation?
If it specifies wings, it leaves wingless flight alone. This may or may not be the intent, but that's how it is.

Also rules don't say anything about swim, climb and burrow speeds. Does they don't change at all? If yes, any ideas about possible 'base' construct? For example, burrow can be achieved troth Mineralize Warrior spell...
Again, if it does not say it changes them, it does not. Unless your speed was originally based on your land speed (which tends to be the default), since that one was changed and so the changes would spread.

Attacks
"... loses all its original attacks."
Even weapons? :smallconfused:
A nimblewright's rapiers, sword of caryatid column...
And what's with a natural weapons? No-slam is OK, but if incarnated troll or dragon lose their claw/bite, isn't it kinda strange?
Not weapons, probably. By which I mean, you can still use weapons since it presumably does not take away your hands/tentacles/whatever. But if weapons were a part of your body, as I think is the case with the nimblewright, that gets a bit sketchy. I'd guess it would count as a "natural" weapon and be gone.
As for natural weapons, yes, obviously, they are gone. The template is not contractually obligued to be "worth it" for every conceivable valid target. Also, wasn't a dragon an invalid target?

Special Attacks
"... loses all its special attacks."
Even spellcasting and psionics?
That is a heavy debate that I'm not getting into here, but let's just say that if they are class features, they should probably be fine. If you have racial casting, see the start of the preceding sentence.

What if some interesting feature of 'base' construct not listed in "Attacks", "Special Attacks" or "Special Qualities"?
You would keep those I guess, but let me say it would probably be a huge mistake of whoever wrote the construct in question.

Abilities
"... Constitution and Intelligence are rolled ..."
Is Maximize Spell metamagic applicable here?
I guess it would be, possibly. Unless there is a reason for it to not be.

Level Adjustment
" –2 (minimum 0)."
Can it be interpreted as: "LA always 0 unless it was initially greater then +2"?
I guess you can, but why would you? It strictly tells you less than the original wording. I'm not sure what you are trying to pull here, sorry.

"... The spell does not work on constructs that are only constructs temporarily (such as objects affected by an animate objects spell). "
Does Permanency spell take care of this problem?
Probably, yes. Animate Objects seems to have nothing related to Permanency, except the fact that you can. I'd be wary of the fact that it's dispellable and antimagicable, but other than that, it should be fine-ish.

If constuct was originally absolutely human-like, does he gain after incarnation bonus feat and skillpoints?
If you have an Intelligence and Hit Dice, you gain feats and skills. No ifs, no buts.

[AlchemicalMyst]

Speed
Is decrease of land speed work only on "base" speed or various boosts such as from shadow/dark templates also affected?
There is no reduction in speed. The Land Speed changes to a new value. ie Medium construct's speed becomes 30. this is a base speed before modifiers. So if somehow you made the construct Dark after making it "alive" then the bonus would make the creature's speed 40 not 30.


What if construct can somehow fly without wings? Does he keep it after incarnation?
Depends on the source. Magical jet engines of sort? Most GM's will say no.


Also rules don't say anything about swim, climb and burrow speeds. Does they don't change at all? Hard time understanding what you are asking, but I'll assume you're asking if they go away. No they do not, template specifically says, "An incarnate construct has all the base creature’s characteristics except as noted here." Since there is no mention of losing other modes of movement there is no change.


Attacks
"... loses all its original attacks."
Even weapons? :smallconfused:
A nimblewright's rapiers, sword of caryatid column...
Weapons are not a creature's attacks. They are things creature's can attack with. Natural attacks are the only thing affected.


And what's with a natural weapons? No-slam is OK, but if incarnated troll or dragon lose their claw/bite, isn't it kinda strange? First off, both of those are impossible. Neither are constructs. Also a dragon is no where near humanoid in shape.



Special Attacks
"... loses all its special attacks."
Even spellcasting and psionics?
Again, these are not special attacks...


Special Qualities
"... loses all its special qualities."
Such as damage reduction and darkvision, what is the question?


What if some interesting feature of 'base' construct not listed in "Attacks", "Special Attacks" or "Special Qualities"?
If somehow you manage this scenario, then it remains unchanged.


Abilities
"... Constitution and Intelligence are rolled ..."
Does Maximize Spell metamagic applicable here?
No...
The roll is not part of the spell, it is just like Stat Generation at character creation.


Level Adjustment
" –2 (minimum 0)."
Can it be interpreted as: "LA always 0 unless it was initially greater then +2"?
It means exactly what it says.
If a construct with a +5 LA becomes an Incarnate Construct, it becomes +3 LA. Simple as that. All it means is that a construct with +1 LA becomes 0 LA not -1 LA.


"... The spell does not work on constructs that are only constructs temporarily (such as objects affected by an animate objects spell). "
Does Permanency spell take care of this problem?
Depends on GM. I would rule no as spells effected by permanency can be dispelled.


If constuct was originally absolutely human-like, does he gain after incarnation bonus feat and skillpoints?
You are misreading the template. There are no bonus skill points or feats. It just says that if the incarnate gains levels it requires them normally.

Ie, a level 12 (EL 14 with 66,000 XP) construct becomes living and drops from +2 LA to 0 LA. The construct doesn't drop EL, it still has 66,000 XP, so it gains 2 class levels gaining feats and skill points as normal.

If the same construct had no LA to begin with the template would cause no drop in LA and thus the construct would gain no class levels due to LA change (no feats or skills from them obviously).

[ShurikVch]

Thanks for the answers! :smallsmile:



Because it is so. A template can be written for whatever the writter wants, this one seems to be for "guys that can pass for humanoids". If you don't like that, you may be able to talk to your GM about it, sure, but per the rules, the prerequisite is not voided because it is ridiculous.

And what's with my point about one-armed/one-legged golems? Does ettin construct legal for incarnation after I rip one of it's heads off? What if I take Stormcloud of Thoon and remove the "extra" tentacles?
Also, do You aware of such thing as construct customization? Basically, creator of the construct can make his creation looks whatever he likes, as long as this looks not give it any extra bonuses or penalties. And for no extra cost!
Somewhere on the WotC website was a drow lich with phylactery in the form of spider-shaped iron golem.
So will it be enough to add to the description of construct: "... custom-made human-shaped ..."?



As for natural weapons, yes, obviously, they are gone.

But the template description explicitly mentioned wings! Wing slam anyone?



Also, wasn't a dragon an invalid target?

Why? Looks very humanoid to me!:smallbiggrin:
Two arms, tho legs, one head (usually)...
Wings? Allowed! Tail? Description not forbid it directly, but if something wrong with it, tail can be removed.:smallwink:
Yes, there are some clearly non-human-shaped dragons such as lung, linnorm, sunwyrm, wyvern... But, on the other hand we have such examples as Dragonwrought Kobold and this http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/draco_gallery/75669.jpg dragon. Is it humanoid enough for You? :smallbiggrin:



I guess you can, but why would you? It strictly tells you less than the original wording. I'm not sure what you are trying to pull here, sorry.

I trying to get rid of this annoying "LA -". Admit it, absolute majority of constructs in game have it, and therefore not allowed even as cohorts. Game have only six playable constructs! And if DM disallow to incarnate living constructs and half-golems, it leaves only dustform and dust-stuffed. Latter not only have unhealthy high LA (+5), but also setting-specific (Eberron)...



If you have an Intelligence and Hit Dice, you gain feats and skills. No ifs, no buts.
Obviously my question was not clear enough. I elaborate it:
1. Playable races have racial features. Such as dwarven ability to run in full plate or human bonus feat/skillpoints.
2. If incarnated construct was close enough to particular race - say, was made from the body of this race's representative - is he get whose racial features after incarnation?


There is no reduction in speed. The Land Speed changes to a new value. ie Medium construct's speed becomes 30. this is a base speed before modifiers. So if somehow you made the construct Dark after making it "alive" then the bonus would make the creature's speed 40 not 30.

When it set speed to specific value, it can accidentally reduce speed, if it was greater pre-spell, or increase it if original speed was lower. What I ask is if it count only speed of base unmodified creature or all adjustments from templates, traits, feats, CFs also will be nullified?



Depends on the source.

Such as flight of some outsiders, ogre magi and so on. Not elaborated in the description. But clearly not a wings.



Weapons are not a creature's attacks. They are things creature's can attack with. Natural attacks are the only thing affected.

A nimblewright's rapiers clearly stated as natural weapons. They folds in it's arms when not used.
Weapon of caryatid column, as said in the description, " is incorporated into a
caryatid column at the time of its creation". Also, "Whenever it is out of the caryatid column’s hands, it reverts to stone and becomes a nonmagical sculpture. Should the caryatid column then pick up the weapon, it regains its normal form and magical qualities.
If a caryatid column needs both hands free, it can stow its weapon by simply pressing it against its side; the weapon then merges with the caryatid column’s body and can be retrieved by the caryatid column as any character would draw a weapon".



First off, both of those are impossible. Neither are constructs.

Why? Do You seriosly mean wartroll dustform is not legal target for the spell IC? Are trolls not humanoid enough for You? What's wrong with them?
Also, they have claws and bite. :smalltongue:



Again, these are not special attacks...

Yes, they are! Listed as such in the Monster Manuals. :smalltongue:
But, as people says, it's debatable...

[ThiagoMartell]

The dragon in that picture a half-humanoid lung dragon. Yeah, half-dragons have humanoid shapes when the other half is humanoid.

EDIT: Also, you're expecting the template to work in a way it was not intended to. Dustform + Incarnate Construct is an exploit. Of course it leads to weird situations and corner cases. I don't think it's a good exploit, though, since Dustform makes you so easy to kill.

[ShurikVch]

The dragon in that picture a half-humanoid lung dragon. Yeah, half-dragons have humanoid shapes when the other half is humanoid.
Yes, I know. :smallsmile: But half-dragon is still dragon.



EDIT: Also, you're expecting the template to work in a way it was not intended to.
And You know it how? :smallconfused: Do You assist in it's creation? :smallsmile:
Even creators often don't remember what's they were intended. So I deciphering RAI: "Read As Interpreted", not "Read As Intended".
And who ever even care about RAI? :smallamused: Matter the RAW and words of DM. :smallcool:

But, actually, yes. I well aware what I stretched it. But!.. It's the only existing way to get instant LA reduction (and 2 extra class levels to boot)! Opportunity looks too good to just leave it. But by possible RAI it simply horrible! It was probably intended to be used on MM golems (judging by template's example). Do You remember there ECL? Even lowest of them - flesh one - is 15 without class levels! And stone one will become epic at the very first class level !!! Minus 2 LA and plus 2 lvl doesn't save this build. Hell, no sane player probably would play them with zero LA: 9 - 14 RHD just kill it. (Well, unless DM is OK with burning RHD through cycle of "death - Raise Dead" and adjust the ECL to final value).:smallwink:

Also:


Special Attacks
"... loses all its special attacks."
And sneak attack too? By MM description it is special attack. And not necessary springs from class...

[Urpriest]

Class features that fall in the Special Attacks block count as special attacks, and Incarnate Construct can indeed take away class features.

Having wings does not give you wing attacks, having paws does not give you claw attacks. Look at the picture of the example incarnate construct: it doesn't turn you into the creature you resemble, it turns you into a generic humanoid/giant approximation, which will likely lack any sharp edges or striking surfaces.

Since you can't remove an ettin's head or a Stormcloud's tentacles, those questions are meaningless.

[ShurikVch]

Class features that fall in the Special Attacks block count as special attacks, and Incarnate Construct can indeed take away class features.
And what if Green Star Adept decide to incarnate himself? It take away his magic?



Since you can't remove an ettin's head or a Stormcloud's tentacles, those questions are meaningless.
And why I can't?:smallamused:
Vorpal weapon intended exactly for removing head(s)!:smalltongue:
Next time you say what halfling with the dagger can't remove heads from hydra!:smallbiggrin:

[Urpriest]

And what if Green Star Adept decide to incarnate himself? It take away his magic?


And why I can't?:smallamused:
Vorpal weapon intended exactly for removing head(s)!:smalltongue:
Next time you say what halfling with the dagger can't remove heads from hydra!:smallbiggrin:

A GSA would lose all Special Attacks and Special Qualities, yes, which will likely include all GSA class features, not just casting.

Ok, indeed heads can be chopped off, with vorpal weapons or when fighting hydras. But most limbs can't be. Also, I'm AFB at the moment, but is their rules support for the idea that an ettin can survive having one of its heads chopped off with Vorpal?

[ShurikVch]

Also, I'm AFB at the moment, but is their rules support for the idea that an ettin can survive having one of its heads chopped off with Vorpal?
Yes.
1. Vorpal is not instakill if victim has more then one head.
2. We are talking about construct ettin. (Dustform, effigy, elder eidolon, ice beast or simple dead ettin animated by Animate Objects) It can "survive" loss of all his heads.

[Urpriest]

Yes.
1. Vorpal is not instakill if victim has more then one head.


I agree on the construct bit, but this is where I think you've got it wrong. Reading the Vorpal description, it doesn't have any exception for creatures with more than one head.

[JBento]

I agree on the construct bit, but this is where I think you've got it wrong. Reading the Vorpal description, it doesn't have any exception for creatures with more than one head.

Debatable. The srd says, and I quote:

"Most other creatures, however, die when their heads are cut off."

This could be interpreted as you having to cut off all heads, or as the plural "their" being there only because the sentence refers to "Most other creature*S*".

We know a hydra can survive multiple decapitations. Ettins would probably kick the bucket anyway, as nowhere is it stated that they go through vasoconstriction upon decapitation.

On to the original post (I'm AFB, so I'm going by what has been said here):

For starters, the construct must be human-shaped because the template says so. You may argue it makes no sense, but them's the rules. Your DM may rule it otherwise, but this is pretty unambiguous.

Speed: It changes your speed. That's not a +X ft. or -X ft. Your base speed is now Y, regardless of what it was before. If it only states land speed, other speed are unaffected (unless, of course, their calculated from your land speed).

Attacks: weapons are weapons and not lost. A caryatid column would still have a stone sword (note that stone swords suck, and the original weapon is no longer buffed by the construct's magic - it's now crap). Presumably, the incarnation process will fuse the nimblewright's rapiers into his arms, and thus they disappear.

Specials: If it's listed in its entry as special quality/attack, it's gone. Poof. Goodbye.

Abilities: I'm pretty sure it's not, as the stat generation is not a direct effect of the spell. Pushing someone off a cliff with maximised gust of wind doesn't maximise falling damage, for instance.

LA: I'm not sure what you0re tyring to pull here, but it says what it says.

On to 2nd post:

If the template says "one head, two arms, two legs", you can't apply it to a one-armed or -legged construct. Also, if you "remove" an ettin's head or a stormcloud's tentacles, chances are the thing dies of massive bloodloss upon incarnation, anyway (see Flesh to Stone and Stone to Flesh).

Having wings does not give you wing slam. Having wing slam in your stat block gives you wing slam.

Concerning creatures of the dragon type: there was a template hierarchy somewhere, but I can't recall where. I don't see why this is important anyway; doesn't Incarnate construct specify what creature type the ex-construct becomes?

Racial abilities: Again, doesn't the template specify what kind of creature the ex-construct becomes? It probably just says "Humanoid", in which case that golem made to look like a dwarf? It's now a Humanoid and gets diddly-squat racial abilities, as the template doesn't specify otherwise.

[theUnearther]

Okay, I said I didn't know where the template came from, so more knowledgeable people already answered some. Still got some things to say though:

And what's with my point about one-armed/one-legged golems? Does ettin construct legal for incarnation after I rip one of it's heads off? What if I take Stormcloud of Thoon and remove the "extra" tentacles?You did not HAVE a point there. The template says what it allows and what it does not; not my fault if it is ableist.

Also, do You aware of such thing as construct customization? Basically, creator of the construct can make his creation looks whatever he likes, as long as this looks not give it any extra bonuses or penalties. And for no extra cost!
Somewhere on the WotC website was a drow lich with phylactery in the form of spider-shaped iron golem.
So will it be enough to add to the description of construct: "... custom-made human-shaped ..."?Okay, this one does work. Most golems are humanish-looking anyway; I thought you were looking for ways to apply it to animals and such made constructs in one of the many ways listed over there. Which I'm pretty sure are non-customizable, since they should resemble the thing they used to be. Though, I admit it'd be pretty cool if that was wrong. "What effigy turtle? It's a turtle-shaped effigy Balor!".

But the template description explicitly mentioned wings! Wing slam anyone?As stated, wings do not automatically equal wing attacks, for the same reason humans do not get bite attacks.

Why? Looks very humanoid to me!:smallbiggrin:
Two arms, tho legs, one head (usually)...
Wings? Allowed! Tail? Description not forbid it directly, but if something wrong with it, tail can be removed.:smallwink:
Yes, there are some clearly non-human-shaped dragons such as lung, linnorm, sunwyrm, wyvern... But, on the other hand we have such examples as Dragonwrought Kobold and this http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/draco_gallery/75669.jpg dragon. Is it humanoid enough for You? :smallbiggrin:Nnnnnnnnnnnno, you said "dragons", which do not look humanoid at all and thus fall under the "this template is racist" prevision. Dragonblooded (or any of the other myriad ways) does not equal "dragon".

I trying to get rid of this annoying "LA -". Admit it, absolute majority of constructs in game have it, and therefore not allowed even as cohorts. Game have only six playable constructs! And if DM disallow to incarnate living constructs and half-golems, it leaves only dustform and dust-stuffed. Latter not only have unhealthy high LA (+5), but also setting-specific (Eberron)...
And so I understand what you were trying to pull. Thank you.
To which the answer is a very resounding "Nope". A level adjustment of "—" is not the same as one of "0", precisely for that one reason. It should probably have been called "Not Available" or something, yes.

Obviously my question was not clear enough. I elaborate it:
1. Playable races have racial features. Such as dwarven ability to run in full plate or human bonus feat/skillpoints.
2. If incarnated construct was close enough to particular race - say, was made from the body of this race's representative - is he get whose racial features after incarnation?Your question was clear enough, and also not this question at all. As stated above, no, you do not get racial features by being a lookalike.

When it set speed to specific value, it can accidentally reduce speed, if it was greater pre-spell, or increase it if original speed was lower. What I ask is if it count only speed of base unmodified creature or all adjustments from templates, traits, feats, CFs also will be nullified?Nope, when it is set to a specific value, it can purposely increase or reduce it. In that case, I it eats previously existing templates, but if you can add a template later, that gains priority of course.
I had my answer on the asumption that it was sort of a "-50% speed", because I assumed there'd be no point in asking otherwise. Only there was. Sorry about that.

A nimblewright's rapiers clearly stated as natural weapons. They folds in it's arms when not used.Then it is clearly lost, yes. I kinda remembered it that way.

Weapon of caryatid column, as said in the description, " is incorporated into a
caryatid column at the time of its creation". Also, "Whenever it is out of the caryatid column’s hands, it reverts to stone and becomes a nonmagical sculpture. Should the caryatid column then pick up the weapon, it regains its normal form and magical qualities.
If a caryatid column needs both hands free, it can stow its weapon by simply pressing it against its side; the weapon then merges with the caryatid column’s body and can be retrieved by the caryatid column as any character would draw a weapon".This is all mostly irrelevant; if it is a Natural Weapon, it is gone. If it is some magic weapon that they are listed as having, it presumably still has it (and sets it aside while it is getting Incarnated).
Though as noted above, it loses its magic since you are no longer a caryatid column.

Why? Do You seriosly mean wartroll dustform is not legal target for the spell IC? Are trolls not humanoid enough for You? What's wrong with them?
Also, they have claws and bite. :smalltongue:If they are made into constructs, they become valid of course. But they won't have claws nor a bite anymore.


something about spells being special qualities/attacks, I guess (why can't we have nested quotes by default?)Yes, they are! Listed as such in the Monster Manuals. :smalltongue:
But, as people says, it's debatable...As I said, this is some HEAVY debate. Some creatures have spellcasting listed as an Extraordinary ability, which is normally (ab)used to gain a lot of spells at the cost of one spell.
In your case, you better hope it is not, which is a nice reversal.


Next time you say what halfling with the dagger can't remove heads from hydra!:smallbiggrin:And if this is referencing what I think it is, and it better be considering whose forum we're on: That was a Chimera.Edit: Nevermind, I just remembered there was an hydra as well. The test of the muscle or however that was phrased. My bad.

[LordDrakulzen]

Only one point/question- Doesn't the Ettin description say if one head is removed it is stunned for a round to reorient its one remaining head with full control of the body? I'm AFB but IIRC there is a creature with multiple heads that has that ability/option.

[ThiagoMartell]

ShurikVch, what is your native language?

[ShurikVch]

Next question: there are Verran’s Flesh Golems (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/mm/mm20010511a). They are like normal Flesh Golems, but smaller in size and with less HD.
I think, it can have potential for Incarnated Construct. Remove all this RHD... But what number can be removed before golem become too small for play?:smallconfused:
Also, if progressing constructs by adding HD is expensive and cost "... gp per HD", does it mean what smaller variants is cheaper then originals?:smallamused: How much for 1HD golem?:smallbiggrin:


ShurikVch, what is your native language?
I am Russian. Is my English this bad? Or just strange/funny?



Also, if you "remove" an ettin's head or a stormcloud's tentacles, chances are the thing dies of massive bloodloss upon incarnation, anyway (see Flesh to Stone and Stone to Flesh).

Contingency Heal



Having wings does not give you wing slam. Having wing slam in your stat block gives you wing slam.
Oh, so You say it's possible to have wing slam without having wings? :smallsmile: I want it! :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:
Really I doesn't mean what after spell target mysteriously get wing slam if it has wings. Assumption is target of the spell has both wings and wing slam before spell.



Concerning creatures of the dragon type: there was a template hierarchy somewhere, but I can't recall where. I don't see why this is important anyway; doesn't Incarnate construct specify what creature type the ex-construct becomes?
Someone there says dragons are off-limit. I disagree.
I think standard dragons from MM is look very humanoid-like. Let's see:
1. Size - does it matter?
2. Snout - there we have lizardfolk and kobolds. They are humanoids.
3. Wings - deviation, but explicitly allowed by template.
4. Tail - troglodytes and, again, kobolds.
5. Front legs - admit it, they have functional hands. I say - much more functional then, say, claws of cave troll.
So, the only major difference in shape of the body between unspecified humanoid and vanilla dragon is long neck.
Long neck! Is it all?
Even more - does RAW specified relative length of the neck for humanoids? I doubt it...



Racial abilities: Again, doesn't the template specify what kind of creature the ex-construct becomes? It probably just says "Humanoid", in which case that golem made to look like a dwarf? It's now a Humanoid and gets diddly-squat racial abilities, as the template doesn't specify otherwise.
You see, sentient living creatures in the game usually have races (and thus racial abilities). You can be a hill giant or frost giant, not just "giant". White dragon or Hex dragon, but not simple "dragon". And let's not even start about sub-races of humanoids... So, phrase "It's now a Humanoid" not more meaningful then just statement what target now a living creature - technically accurate, but begs for specification.



It's a turtle-shaped effigy Balor!

:smallamused::smallsmile::smallbiggrin:
http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/characters/images/bowser/bowser_070704c-l.jpg



Nnnnnnnnnnnno, you said "dragons", which do not look humanoid at all and thus fall under the "this template is racist" prevision. Dragonblooded (or any of the other myriad ways) does not equal "dragon".
Dragonwrought Kobold is dragon by RAW.
On this picture is elf/half-dragon(Li lung). Half-dragons are dragons!



If they are made into constructs, they become valid of course. But they won't have claws nor a bite anymore.
And what about minogon? It's looks like minotaur, it's controlled by the spirit of deceased minotaur. So, after incarnation it probably will look like minotaur.
It's have gore attack on charge ("...lowers it's head and runs it's opponent through on it's wicked horns.") Minotaurs also have gore attack on charge. And incarnated minogon lose it? Seriosly?:smallconfused:

[Zombimode]

Dragonwrought Kobold is dragon by RAW.
On this picture is elf/half-dragon(Li lung). Half-dragons are dragons!

You are confusing semantics, specifically descriptive terms like "humanoid form" and game terms like the creature types.

A Dragonwrought Kobold is a creature with a humanoid form of the "dragon" creature type.
A Mind Flayer is a creature with a humanoid form of the "aberration" creature type.
A human is a creature with a humanoid form of the "humanoid" creature type.
A hill giant is a creature with a humanoid form of the "giant" creature type.

Normally when you talk about a dragon, a "true" dragon is meant, like a red or silver dragon.


And what about minogon? It's looks like minotaur, it's controlled by the spirit of deceased minotaur. So, after incarnation it probably will look like minotaur.
It's have gore attack on charge ("...lowers it's head and runs it's opponent through on it's wicked horns.") Minotaurs also have gore attack on charge. And incarnated minogon lose it? Seriosly?:smallconfused:

Yes, seriously. And why do you think it would look like a minotaur after incarnation? The template explicitly changes the morphology of the base creature.

[JBento]

You can't reduce monsters HD beneath the "base". What you see is the lowest you get, Verran's Flesh Golems included.

Contingency only works on YOU. Unless you manage to find a way to have the construct cast Contingency-Heal on itself, the point is moot. But the point is moot anyway, because stuff without a head (minus Hydras, Hydrae?) dies, and dead stuff isn't targetable by Heal.

As much as you'd like to argue the point, (true) dragons aren't humanoids. I don't see why this is important anyway, since I'm pretty sure Incarnate Construct specifies the new creature has the Humanoid type. And no, you don't get any subtypes or abilities based on what you look like. You're not an ex-golem that has been made into a dwarf, you're an ex-golem that has become an unique creature that happens to very closely resemble a dwarf.

In the same lines, an incarnate minogon isn't a minotaur, it's an ex-minogon that has become a unique creature that very closely resembles a minotaur (possibly; I don't have the book with me, but the horns might very well fall off). It's not even animated by the minotaur spirit, since the incarnation creates a new spirit to inhabit the new creature, while the minotaur spirit goes off to the bug farm in the sky (or, possibly, to Baphomet's corrals in the Abyss).

[TuggyNE]

Next question: there are Verran’s Flesh Golems (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/mm/mm20010511a). They are like normal Flesh Golems, but smaller in size and with less HD.
I think, it can have potential for Incarnated Construct. Remove all this RHD... But what number can be removed before golem become too small for play?:smallconfused:

LA -2 and RHD simply do not interact at all. RHD cannot be removed by the same mechanisms you reduce LA, and vice versa. (The only way I know of to reduce RHD is cheesy level-drain shenanigans; LA can be reduced by a couple of templates, including this one, a race or two, or LA buyoff.)

[ShurikVch]

You can't reduce monsters HD beneath the "base". What you see is the lowest you get, Verran's Flesh Golems included.

But the "base" HD of Flesh Golem is 9. Verran's Flesh Golems have 6, so it's kinda already "below minimal". What can it be for a small-sized Flesh Golem? How about even smaller sizes?



Contingency only works on YOU. Unless you manage to find a way to have the construct cast Contingency-Heal on itself, the point is moot.
But contingent spell from Complete Arcane is not. Yes, I was inaccurate. :smallsigh:
Also, Contingency can be charged with Mass Heal. Or Chain spell (Regeneration).
At last, there is such spell as Death Pact.



But the point is moot anyway, because stuff without a head (minus Hydras, Hydrae?) dies, and dead stuff isn't targetable by Heal.
Oh yeah? Then what about trolls? And ogre magi?..
Also, there are a difference: stuff dies without head as "without any head on there body" or "at the loss of any single head from whatever number they have"?
If first, i generally agree (minus specifics). But ettin still have his another head.
If second - do I got it right? Creature can have two, three, five, ten, fifty heads - it doesn't matter. Enough to chop off one of them with your trusted vorpal handaxe - and it instantly drops dead? :smallannoyed: Or, maybe, your say vorpal chop off all fifty heads in the single stroke?:smallconfused:



As much as you'd like to argue the point, (true) dragons aren't humanoids. I don't see why this is important anyway, since I'm pretty sure Incarnate Construct specifies the new creature has the Humanoid type.

As helpfully explained Zombimode, it's not about type, but about shape. Spell works if target looks like humanoid.
They say anything remotely resembling true dragon doesn't fit the requirement. I use the point of view which considered dragons close enough to humanoids in body-shape... In D&D humanoid is not necessary mammal, can have scales, wings, tail, claws, bite and even breath weapon. So what is the mysterious difference which allow to predict if particular construct will be legal target for the spell? Length of the neck?




You're not an ex-golem that has been made into a dwarf, you're an ex-golem that has become an unique creature that happens to very closely resemble a dwarf.
So, for example, there are elven wizard/Green Star Adept. He disenchanted in his chosen path and decide to rebuild. So he want to get rid of his construct body. He cast the spell on himself and turn not into the elf, but to the "unique creature that happens to very closely resemble" an elf? And, therefore, doesn't get the elven ability to detect secret doors?


It's not even animated by the minotaur spirit, since the incarnation creates a new spirit to inhabit the new creature, while the minotaur spirit goes off to the bug farm in the sky (or, possibly, to Baphomet's corrals in the Abyss).
Oh, it's get even better. Our supposed elven wizard not just lost his racial abilities. He literally killed himself!:smalleek: What if he has Death Pact for such case?

[JBento]

Varran's Flesh Golem =/= Flesh Golem. They're two different kinds of golem, created by different processes. The GM MAY let you research how to create lower HD flesh golems, but even if he does, that will, most likely, take an inordinate amount of time and money.

All of those spells are moot. You incarnate, it has minus one head, it dies (unless it's an Hydra). There's no time in-between for anything to happen. You can't even Death Pact, seeing as the target has to be one living creature (which neither a golem nor the dead ex-golem are).

If you're talking about their regeneration, it doesn't matter, because as soon as you incarnate them, they lose it (Regenration is a Special Quality and therefore goes "poof" upon reincarnation).

For starters, (true) dragons are natural quadrupeds, and therefore do not have humanoid shape. The best you might get is out of, say, a dragonwrought kobold. But that's all unimportant because as soon as you de-golemise whatever it becomes, by RAW, a Humanoid-type creature with no racial subtype.

For starters, GSA is bad. As in, really, really bad. Secondly, yes. As soon as he de-constructises he loses all of that, because elven racial traits are special qualities, and those are very specifically lost upon incarnating.

His body continues on, under new direction - that of the soul that incarnating a construct creates. His soul goes... to wherever pointy eared stuff goes, which is the deepest torture pits of hell if I have any say about it.

On the other hand, and as a fun side note, according to strict RAW the elf's soul doesn't exist anymore, as GSA (at least the one up on WotC's website) says that he is "a human mind in a magically animated body." :smallbiggrin:

Of course, if he actually looked at GSA and thought "this looks good," the world is probably better with him gone anyway. :smallamused:

[ShurikVch]

RHD cannot be removed by the same mechanisms you reduce LA, and vice versa.
But can be reduced by diminishing size of construct, as nicely demonstrated by Verran’s Flesh Golems.


All of those spells are moot.
Maybe Last Breath?..



You can't even Death Pact, seeing as the target has to be one living creature (which neither a golem nor the dead ex-golem are).
Spell Greater Humanoid Essence temporally gives a construct the humanoid type thus make him a living creature.
And living constructs a living creatures anyway.

[TuggyNE]

But can be reduced by diminishing size of construct, as nicely demonstrated by Verran’s Flesh Golems.

In specific cases you can have analogous monsters that serve as "lesser" versions of another. There is no direct linkage between the two, nor any general mechanism to extend this further. You cannot, for example, make a "Verran's Verran's Flesh Golem" with 3 RHD. Verran's Flesh Golem is completely separate, in a technical sense, from Flesh Golem, and is not a reduction of RHD from it; therefore, the only way to further reduce RHD is through homebrew, which should presumably roughly follow the patterns laid down in reducing RHD, but has no available rules text to guide it.

There is by RAW no way to reduce RHD without e.g. level drain shenanigans.

[theUnearther]

Next question: there are Verran’s Flesh Golems (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/mm/mm20010511a). They are like normal Flesh Golems, but smaller in size and with less HD.
I think, it can have potential for Incarnated Construct. Remove all this RHD... But what number can be removed before golem become too small for play?:smallconfused:
Also, if progressing constructs by adding HD is expensive and cost "... gp per HD", does it mean what smaller variants is cheaper then originals?:smallamused: How much for 1HD golem?:smallbiggrin:

But the "base" HD of Flesh Golem is 9. Verran's Flesh Golems have 6, so it's kinda already "below minimal". What can it be for a small-sized Flesh Golem? How about even smaller sizes?No, it's not "below minimal". As noted, it is a different golem with fewer hit dice, even if it's marketed as "the same but smaller". It does not give you a blank check to erase their hit dice.

I am Russian. Is my English this bad? Or just strange/funny?It's pretty bad, but perfectly understandable. I was going to bring it up, but then decided it was meaningless.
If you care, you seem to jump around between "do" and "does" at random. "Does" is for he, she, and it; everybody else gets "do". There are other mistakes of the same sort, mostly with am/are/is, which leads me to think you should brush up on numbers and pronouns.
It's pretty jarring because english is such an easy language, but again, it does not hurt.

As an aside, russian is a pretty interesting language, I think. My hat's off to you, sir.

Oh, so You say it's possible to have wing slam without having wings? :smallsmile: I want it! :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:No, he (she/it/whatever) did not say that at all. You can have wings which cannot be used to attack. Because they are weak or too small or fragile or what have you.
You most definitely need wings to attack with your wings.

Really I doesn't mean what after spell target mysteriously get wing slam if it has wings. Assumption is target of the spell has both wings and wing slam before spell.

And what about minogon? It's looks like minotaur, it's controlled by the spirit of deceased minotaur. So, after incarnation it probably will look like minotaur.
It's have gore attack on charge ("...lowers it's head and runs it's opponent through on it's wicked horns.") Minotaurs also have gore attack on charge. And incarnated minogon lose it? Seriosly?:smallconfused:

So, for example, there are elven wizard/Green Star Adept. He disenchanted in his chosen path and decide to rebuild. So he want to get rid of his construct body. He cast the spell on himself and turn not into the elf, but to the "unique creature that happens to very closely resemble" an elf? And, therefore, doesn't get the elven ability to detect secret doors?Yes. You just lose these things. That is the entire thing that it says.
If it troubles you so much that you can have horns without having a gore attack, just say that the horns fall off. Though I'm pretty sure some variety of fiend-imbued creatures can have useless horns.
As for your Green Star Adept, he stopped being an elf a long time ago. He's been a construct for a while. His means of becoming a construct may have let him gain special qualities of his previous race, but he's still not a member; he's a construct with special qualities that mimic those of an elf. Incarnate Construct will not be so kind.

Someone there says dragons are off-limit. I disagree.
I think standard dragons from MM is look very humanoid-like. Let's see:
1. Size - does it matter?
2. Snout - there we have lizardfolk and kobolds. They are humanoids.
3. Wings - deviation, but explicitly allowed by template.
4. Tail - troglodytes and, again, kobolds.
5. Front legs - admit it, they have functional hands. I say - much more functional then, say, claws of cave troll.
So, the only major difference in shape of the body between unspecified humanoid and vanilla dragon is long neck.
Long neck! Is it all?
Even more - does RAW specified relative length of the neck for humanoids? I doubt it...

As helpfully explained Zombimode, it's not about type, but about shape. Spell works if target looks like humanoid.
They say anything remotely resembling true dragon doesn't fit the requirement. I use the point of view which considered dragons close enough to humanoids in body-shape... In D&D humanoid is not necessary mammal, can have scales, wings, tail, claws, bite and even breath weapon. So what is the mysterious difference which allow to predict if particular construct will be legal target for the spell? Length of the neck?
That is not really a point of view, it is just a list of the differences and why you want to ignore each.
Any of these is small, yes, but the point is that you have all of them, at once. They do add up.
In other words, True Dragons are not human-shaped, because they do not look at all like humans. Because look at one, come on!
I agree that it's a bit ridiculous to have a rule that requires you to look at the thing's picture, but that's how it goes.

You see, sentient living creatures in the game usually have races (and thus racial abilities). You can be a hill giant or frost giant, not just "giant". White dragon or Hex dragon, but not simple "dragon". And let's not even start about sub-races of humanoids... So, phrase "It's now a Humanoid" not more meaningful then just statement what target now a living creature - technically accurate, but begs for specification.Technically, it does not beg for specification, as it is perfectly specific. In practice, you may be missing a bit of data.
When it says "you are now humanoid", it's not saying "you now look like those puny animals who think they're so great but they're not". I mean, it probably says that too, but what it really says here is that you are now Humanoid, the creature type.
In other words, your racial hit dice are now d8, your racial skills are now 2+int per hit die, your good save is Reflex, and your base attack bonus is now 75% of your hit dice.
(On a related note, I just realized that Commoner is actually worse than Humanoid. What the hell?)

Dragonwrought Kobold is dragon by RAW.
On this picture is elf/half-dragon(Li lung). Half-dragons are dragons!Yes and no. "Dragon" is a creature type, of which there are about twelve. Plant, Dragon, Humanoid, Undead, Giant, Construct, Fey, Outsider, Animal, Monstruous Humanoid, Magical Beast, there are most certainly more but I'm listing them from memory.
So do you or do you not want a True Dragon Incarnate Construct? Because if so, the fact that there are some human-looking creatures of the Dragon type has no bearing at all on if True Dragons are human-looking, regardless of their shared type.
Also, aren't half-dragons not dragons? I thought they were the same as before, with the "dragonblooded" subtype.

Oh, it's get even better. Our supposed elven wizard not just lost his racial abilities. He literally killed himself!:smalleek: What if he has Death Pact for such case?In this case, yes, casting the spell on yourself is suicide. So you don't.
As for Death Pact, can it give you a new body? If so, the former elf appears, naked, presumably in the same space the new incarnate construct is. If it can't, it probably just fails, since the body is being occupied.

If you're talking about their regeneration, it doesn't matter, because as soon as you incarnate them, they lose it (Regenration is a Special Quality and therefore goes "poof" upon reincarnation).Actually, it was lost already, since a creature must have a Constitution score to have the regeneration ability (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#regeneration).

On the other hand, and as a fun side note, according to strict RAW the elf's soul doesn't exist anymore, as GSA (at least the one up on WotC's website) says that he is "a human mind in a magically animated body." :smallbiggrin:This doesn't mean the soul stops existing though. I think there's a big chance that the writter was going with "mind=soul". There was a guy in my high school who seriously tried to invoke that in a "debate" about artificial intelligence, that was pretty hilarious.
But even if not, that would mean the soul is "gone"; that is, the adept's original person died, and her soul goes away normally.



Edit: As a personal side note, can somebody tell me which book is Incarnate Construct from? I kinda want to read it now.

[Urpriest]

Edit: As a personal side note, can somebody tell me which book is Incarnate Construct from? I kinda want to read it now.

Savage Species. It's basically the template which makes Pinnochio a Real Boy.

[theUnearther]

Savage Species. It's basically the template which makes Pinnochio a Real Boy.
Yeah, I gathered that it was going for that rather than "now you can be a neutrinum golem". Thank you for the source. I'll read it later or tomorrow in case this thread keeps going. (It's been fun).