Golems and magic immunity

[molten_dragon]

Can a golem voluntarily lower its magic immunity if ordered to do so? And would spells cast on it while it was lowered still be in effect when it reactivated the spell immunity?

Basically could I order my golem to deactivate its magic immunity, buff it, then reactivate the magic immunity and have the buffs still on it?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Spell Immunity (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellImmunity)
"This works exactly like spell resistance, except that it cannot be overcome."

Spell Resistance
"A creature can voluntarily lower its spell resistance. Doing so is a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Once a creature lowers its resistance, it remains down until the creature’s next turn. At the beginning of the creature’s next turn, the creature’s spell resistance automatically returns unless the creature intentionally keeps it down (also a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity)."

I would say yes.

[Garktz]

i.ll go for the no since it cant be overcome...

what i understand is that not matter what you cant overcome it, like its something inherent to the creature

[Psyren]

My problem is that golems are mindless - ordering it to do something isn't "voluntary." So if you told it to do so, even if that is possible, the golem wouldn't know how.

[Inevitability]

My problem is that golems are mindless - ordering it to do something isn't "voluntary." So if you told it to do so, even if that is possible, the golem wouldn't know how.

Then how about an awakened golem?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Then how about an awakened golem?

Awaken Construct (SC, 9th) gives it an Int score, and frees it from anyone's control. You would have to hire the golem which you just granted sentience at an extraordinary price, but at least it's initially friendly toward you. There are golems and other constructs that have an Int score by default, though.

[Graypairofsocks]

I have seen official rulings which go both way on this issue.

[Forrestfire]

Also note that if you voluntarily fail a saving throw for any spell that allows one, it bypasses any defenses you have against it.


A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic (for example, an elf’s resistance to sleep effects) can suppress this quality.

[Psyren]

There too, the key sticking point I have is "voluntarily." Volition requires autonomous choice, which mindless creatures lack.

[Forrestfire]

"If I cast a spell on you, accept its effects" seems like a reasonable order that would allow it to voluntarily fail the save (i.e. when given a choice between saving and intentionally failing the save, it chooses the latter). Whether or not it has self-awareness doesn't mean it can't make that choice when given instructions regarding it.

[Psyren]

"If I cast a spell on you, accept its effects" seems like a reasonable order that would allow it to voluntarily fail the save (i.e. when given a choice between saving and intentionally failing the save, it chooses the latter). Whether or not it has self-awareness doesn't mean it can't make that choice when given instructions regarding it.

But it did not choose to do so voluntarily. It is doing it because you forced it to.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

But it did not choose to do so voluntarily. It is doing it because you forced it to.

I don't think there's any support in the RAW for this. It looks like all the instances of 'voluntarily' (http://www.d20srd.org/search.htm?q=voluntarily) pertain to a conscious decision by the creature, rather than a game mechanic or outside effect. Even a mindless creature makes its own decisions for what it does, whether moving, attacking, or standing still, based on what it was told to do. You can tell a golem to pummel your enemies, you can tell it to pick up one side of the wagon so you can fix the wheel, you can tell it to stand on one foot, and you should be able to tell it to lower its SR/immunity just like anything else that's possible within the confines of the rules. The RAW do not indicate that a creature must have an Int score to be able to do that, and I doubt you'll find many gaming groups that house rule such an arbitrary limitation on things.

[Psyren]

I don't think there's any support in the RAW for this.

Of course not - there is no RAW definition for what consitutes "voluntary."


It looks like all the instances of 'voluntarily' (http://www.d20srd.org/search.htm?q=voluntarily) pertain to a conscious decision by the creature, rather than a game mechanic or outside effect. Even a mindless creature makes its own decisions for what it does, whether moving, attacking, or standing still, based on what it was told to do.

No, it doesn't make a "decision" at all. It does what it is ordered to do. That's not a decision, any more than my car "decides" to start because I turn the key in the ignition, or my bedside lamp "decides" to give me light because I flipped the switch.

And your own search backs up my point - "conscious decision by the creature" is not something a mindless creature is capable of.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Of course not - there is no RAW definition for what consitutes "voluntary."

No, it doesn't make a "decision" at all. It does what it is ordered to do. That's not a decision, any more than my car "decides" to start because I turn the key in the ignition, or my bedside lamp "decides" to give me light because I flipped the switch.

And your own search backs up my point - "conscious decision by the creature" is not something a mindless creature is capable of.

"Go into that forest and kill anything that moves!" or "Stand here and kill anyone who tries to walk in without telling you this password..." are not things you can tell your car to do. Yes you must give a mindless creature orders, but it decides on its own how to carry out those orders. You can't tell your car to drive you to Phoenix while you take a nap, but you can do that with a wagon and Animate Objects as long as it only involves following a single, easily distinguishable path. It may be mindless, but it's still conscious.

[Psyren]

"Go into that forest and kill anything that moves!" or "Stand here and kill anyone who tries to walk in without telling you this password..." are not things you can tell your car to do. Yes you must give a mindless creature orders, but it decides on its own how to carry out those orders. You can't tell your car to drive you to Phoenix while you take a nap, but you can do that with a wagon and Animate Objects as long as it only involves following a single, easily distinguishable path.

None of those examples are voluntary. It cannot choose not to follow your orders.

I think we're going in circles.

[Forrestfire]

It can choose how to follow your orders, though. It's still making a decision that you did not order it to.

[Psyren]

It can choose how to follow your orders, though. It's still making a decision that you did not order it to.

I still don't see it. If you say "kill anyone that moves" it can't choose to push a boulder down a hill to crush them or choose to operate a nearby ballista - it will just go down there and slam them. There is no decision-making process there, just "do what I am told."

[Forrestfire]

Let's take a stone golem, for example. Every two rounds, it has a free action slow it can apply to someone. If it's fighting more than one thing, that's a decision it has to make. Shadesteel Golems aim their negative energy pulses, and any golem in a fight has to choose between targets somehow.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

None of those examples are voluntary. It cannot choose not to follow your orders.

I think we're going in circles.

It may be mindless, but it's still conscious. Say you cast Animate Object on a wagon and then tell it to follow this road until it reaches a city, then stop, while you go to sleep in the back. If that wagon happens upon a fallen tree across the path, it will make its own decision on how to deal with that obstacle but still follow your orders. It may try to roll over it, or it may try to go around but still follow the road. Stopping would not be an option because it hasn't reached a city yet. If you tell a golem to kill anyone who tries to enter your tower without telling it the secret password, it's going to decide its own actions every round in a fight if you're not present. You have to micro manage a car, as it won't do anything you didn't specifically tell it to do such as accelerate, apply the brakes, turn, use a turn signal, turn up the radio, etc. You don't have to steer a golem, or tell it exactly what to do every round in a fight. It does make conscious decisions, based on what you tell it to do.

[Psyren]

It may be mindless, but it's still conscious. Say you cast Animate Object on a wagon and then tell it to follow this road until it reaches a city, then stop, while you go to sleep in the back. If that wagon happens upon a fallen tree across the path, it will make its own decision on how to deal with that obstacle but still follow your orders. It may try to roll over it, or it may try to go around but still follow the road. Stopping would not be an option because it hasn't reached a city yet.

See, I would disagree with that ruling too. You would have to tell it to go around obstacles or else wake up to find it trying to bull rush the fallen tree.


If you tell a golem to kill anyone who tries to enter your tower without telling it the secret password, it's going to decide its own actions every round in a fight if you're not present.

This is completely incorrect. "They follow instructions explicitly and are incapable of any strategy or tactics."

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

See, I would disagree with that ruling too. You would have to tell it to go around obstacles or else wake up to find it trying to bull rush the fallen tree.

This is completely incorrect. "They follow instructions explicitly and are incapable of any strategy or tactics."

They're incapable of strategy and tactics, such as placing two golems on guard and expecting them to flank opponents, but they'll still full attack if they start their turn within 5 ft. of reaching their intended target, or charge if their target is further away. They'll still select from multiple targets.

[Psyren]

They're incapable of strategy and tactics, such as placing two golems on guard and expecting them to flank opponents, but they'll still full attack if they start their turn within 5 ft. of reaching their intended target, or charge if their target is further away. They'll still select from multiple targets.

Attacking the nearest target isn't "selecting" and anything beyond that must be ordered.

Full attack vs. normal attack isn't a choice - it will always do the former if it can and if it cannot, it will do the latter. (Unless specifically ordered otherwise.)

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Attacking the nearest target isn't "selecting" and anything beyond that must be ordered.

Full attack vs. normal attack isn't a choice - it will always do the former if it can and if it cannot, it will do the latter. (Unless specifically ordered otherwise.)

Two creatures an equal distance away from it would require a decision. Regardless, lowering SR/immunity is not about a decision, it's about making a conscious effort. A mindless creature is still conscious and still makes a conscious effort to move, turn, stop, attack, etc. and could also make a conscious effort to lower its SR/immunity if ordered to do so.

[Psyren]

Two creatures an equal distance away from it would require a decision.

Nah, determine randomly.


Regardless, lowering SR/immunity is not about a decision, it's about making a conscious effort. A mindless creature is still conscious and still makes a conscious effort to move, turn, stop, attack, etc. and could also make a conscious effort to lower its SR/immunity if ordered to do so.

It's about making a "voluntary" effort. Ordering someone to do something is not voluntary.

[Story]

You can't tell your car to drive you to Phoenix while you take a nap

Nitpick: Some cars can

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Let's back up. We've establish this:


And your own search backs up my point - "conscious decision by the creature" is not something a mindless creature is capable of.

Let's check that:

Nonabilities (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#nonabilities)
"Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks."

Given the differences in the definitions of decide and instinct, I'll reverse my position and agree that a mindless creature should not be able to lower its own SR/immunity.

[Zombimode]

One could also question the possibility of lowering magic immunity. Keep in mind that I don't actually support this argument (I have no strong feelings either way), I just bring it up as food for thought.

1. Magic Immunity means spell resistance of infinity.

2. For lowering a certain number of spell resistance (SR), the following needs to be true: there is a number A with SR - A = 0

3. There is no A if SR is infinity for the equation in 2) to be true.

4. Therefore magic immunity can't be lowered to zero.

[Story]

Except that non numerical defenses, such as an Elf's outright sleep immunity can explicitly be lowered. The word lower does not here mean decrease in value, but to forgo entirely.

[Psyren]

Given the differences in the definitions of decide and instinct, I'll reverse my position and agree that a mindless creature should not be able to lower its own SR/immunity.

Let me just say that this sort of thing is a rarity in internet debates and I salute you for it.


Except that non numerical defenses, such as an Elf's outright sleep immunity can explicitly be lowered. The word lower does not here mean decrease in value, but to forgo entirely.

On this part of the issue I can see both sides. One could argue that the only way to forego it is to lower it to zero, which isn't possible with a number that is basically infinite. Its mostly academic though until you get to creatures like a Will o Wisp.

[Forrestfire]

Let's back up. We've establish this:



Let's check that:

Nonabilities (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#nonabilities)
"Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks."

Given the differences in the definitions of decide and instinct, I'll reverse my position and agree that a mindless creature should not be able to lower its own SR/immunity.

Yeah, I think that solves it. Rudimentary Intelligence is the way to go, then.

[Eighthling]

By RAW, they can't because they can't do things voluntarily. But by RAW drowning and heal you and constructs can suffocate, and I'm pretty sure the majority of DM's would allow golems to lower their magic immunity just as they would not make drown healing work or let a warforged die from lack of air in a bag of holding.

[Story]

One could argue that the only way to forego it is to lower it to zero, which isn't possible with a number that is basically infinite.

How then would an elf lower their sleep immunity, which involves no numbers at all?

[tonberrian]

Of course, this is all moot for beguilers, who can cast spells that ignore spell resistance if the target is flatfooted.