Ways to Cause Int damage to undead (preferably mundane)

[Yogibear41]

Other than the Lichbane positoxin is there anyway to cause int damage (or drain) to an undead, preferably something mundane that targets fortitude saves. Say you are a fighter, or a rogue, or a paladin or something and you are trying to quickly cripple an undead wizard(by bashing down its int so it can't cast higher level spells) assume for some reason that the wizard only has an int of 18-20 or so, so that it is actually possible.

[Curmudgeon]

The Jade Water ravage (Book of Exalted Deeds, page 35) causes INT damage as a secondary effect.

[Necroticplague]

Outside of things that specifically say they overcome immunity, undead are immune to all ability damage because their constitution is a nonability. So only positoxins and ravages will work. Plus, that same constitution also means any fort saves have to be things that also target objects. Not sure if anything outside the ravages and positoxins already mentioned do this and aren't spells, though.

[FearlessGnome]

Outside of things that specifically say they overcome immunity, undead are immune to all ability damage because their constitution is a nonability. So only positoxins and ravages will work. Plus, that same constitution also means any fort saves have to be things that also target objects. Not sure if anything outside the ravages and positoxins already mentioned do this and aren't spells, though.

Incorrect. (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Undead_Type) Undead are immune to damage to their physical ability scores, as well as all ability drain.

[Fouredged Sword]

Actually it is due to their type, rather than their lack of ability scores. If you can use an ability to change their type, you can lower their stats. The only real practical ways to do this is magic, but I stated it for completeness.

[Crake]

to add to the last two posts, the immunity due to lack of con that you're thinking of is poison immunity. Lacking a con score means you have no metabolism, meaning you're immune to poison

[Curmudgeon]

The Undead type description has the following elements:

No Constitution score.
Not subject to critical hits, nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution), as well as to fatigue and exhaustion effects.

No Constitution score (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#constitution) normally makes any creature immune to all ability damage, but the Undead type (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType) description specifies an exception, limiting the immunity to physical abilities. (The 3.0 Undead type listed them as being immune to all ability damage, so this was a deliberate change for 3.5.)

[Eskil]

The Lurk Augment Mental Assault is an (Ex) ability that adds Int or Wis damage on a successful melee attack.
Complete Psionic p. 15. Requires Lurk levels.

[Crake]

The Undead type description has the following elements:

No Constitution score.
Not subject to critical hits, nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution), as well as to fatigue and exhaustion effects.

No Constitution score (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#constitution) normally makes any creature immune to all ability damage, but the Undead type (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType) description specifies an exception, limiting the immunity to physical abilities. (The 3.0 Undead type listed them as being immune to all ability damage, so this was a deliberate change for 3.5.)

schooled by curmudgeon, as per usual, i stand corrected

[Necroticplague]

Incorrect. (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Undead_Type) Undead are immune to damage to their physical ability scores, as well as all ability drain. they also always have con as a nonability. Take a gander over here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_nonabilities&alpha=). Heck, I'll quote and bold to how you.
Constitution: Any living creature has at least 1 point of Constitution. A creature with no Constitution has no body (a spectre, for example) or no metabolism (a golem). It is immune to any effect that requires a Fortitude save unless the effect works on objects or is harmless. For example, a zombie is unaffected by any type of poison but is susceptible to a disintegrate spell. The creature is also immune to ability damage, ability drain, and energy drain, and automatically fails Constitution checks. A creature with no Constitution cannot tire and thus can run indefinitely without tiring (unless the creature's description says it cannot run).
Thus, the undead, who have constitution as a nonability, are immune to ability damage in general.


to add to the last two posts, the immunity due to lack of con that you're thinking of is poison immunity. Lacking a con score means you have no metabolism, meaning you're immune to poison No, I was referring to what I bolded in the previous response.


The Undead type description has the following elements:

No Constitution score.
Not subject to critical hits, nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution), as well as to fatigue and exhaustion effects.

No Constitution score (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#constitution) normally makes any creature immune to all ability damage, but the Undead type (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType) description specifies an exception, limiting the immunity to physical abilities. (The 3.0 Undead type listed them as being immune to all ability damage, so this was a deliberate change for 3.5.)
Where does it say the undead traits overwrite the benefits from having constitution as a nonability? Far as I can see, they have both, even if they are somewhat redundant.

[Curmudgeon]

Where does it say the undead traits overwrite the benefits from having constitution as a nonability?
Rules Compendium, page 5 ("ORDER OF RULES APPLICATION") and page 13 ("IT’S REALLY AN EXCEPTION") lay out how D&D uses exception-based rules. In this case we have a general rule which says the creature's Constitution nonability makes it immune to all ability damage, followed by a specific rule for the Undead type which says it's immune to physical ability damage. This specific rule is changed from the older (3.0) rule which said the Undead type was immune to all ability damage. Consequently, this intentional change in the 3.5 rules makes the Undead type limited immunity to ability damage an exception to the overall immunity to ability damage they would otherwise have.

[Psyren]

The Soulknife's "Knife to the Soul" ability can also damage int without being mind-affecting or a poison or the other things undead typically ignore.

[Necroticplague]

Rules Compendium, page 5 ("ORDER OF RULES APPLICATION") and page 13 ("IT’S REALLY AN EXCEPTION") lay out how D&D uses exception-based rules. In this case we have a general rule which says the creature's Constitution nonability makes it immune to all ability damage, followed by a specific rule for the Undead type which says it's immune to physical ability damage. This specific rule is changed from the older (3.0) rule which said the Undead type was immune to all ability damage. Consequently, this intentional change in the 3.5 rules makes the Undead type limited immunity to ability damage an exception to the overall immunity to ability damage they would otherwise have.

Specific overides general only comes into play if the rules contradict each other. In this situation, they don't. You might have a case if it specifically said they were vulnerable to mental ability damage (like if it said 'undead are immune to damage to their physical scores, but not their mental scores'). However, as-is, there is no contradiction. They are immune to damage to their physical abilities, yes. They are also immune to ability damage in general, because having one is not exclusive with having the other.

[The Viscount]

Psychic Rogue's Mind Cripple ability plus penetrating strike, gravestrike, etc will damage undead Int.

[Rubik]

Actually it is due to their type, rather than their lack of ability scores. If you can use an ability to change their type, you can lower their stats. The only real practical ways to do this is magic, but I stated it for completeness.This. A device (from Ravenloft: Legacy of the Blood) of Polymorph Any Object could do it, allowing you to use other Int-damaging effects on a once-undead creature. Perfectly nonmagical, if not actually "mundane." (I wouldn't classify nonmagical magic as "mundane," not even then.)

[Khedrac]

Not so mundane (well wand + Use Magic Devise) but the Sandstorm spell Parboil is a possibility.

If I remember correctly it is AoE fire damage with a fortitude save for half.
I think it deals damage to objects, but I am not certain.
Anyway if you fail the fort save you also take Int damage...

[Necroticplague]

Not so mundane (well wand + Use Magic Devise) but the Sandstorm spell Parboil is a possibility.

If I remember correctly it is AoE fire damage with a fortitude save for half.
I think it deals damage to objects, but I am not certain.
Anyway if you fail the fort save you also take Int damage...

Nope, doesn't effects objects, so the undead are immune.

[atemu1234]

The Soulknife's "Knife to the Soul" ability can also damage int without being mind-affecting or a poison or the other things undead typically ignore.

Doesn't that have the nasty little downside of having to track down a Soulknife who's survived long enough to get to that level and gain that ability?

[gooddragon1]

It's not mundane, but bestow curse (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/bestowCurse.htm) could work.

[Curmudgeon]

Specific overides general only comes into play if the rules contradict each other. In this situation, they don't.
So your claim that the change in the Undead type language from 3.0 (immune to all ability damage) to 3.5 (immune to physical ability damage) was entirely without effect or meaning? Because I see it as a specific rule contradicting a general rule.

[Necroticplague]

So your claim that the change in the Undead type language from 3.0 (immune to all ability damage) to 3.5 (immune to physical ability damage) was entirely without effect or meaning? No. The new way it works means that if you use a spell to make an undead creature living, you could then damage its mental ability scores . Previously, even a living undead creature (possibly made under the effects of some spell) would be immune to damage to its mental stats. Now, if you removed its constitution as a nonability, you could then ping it with INT damage. It's kinda like how Requiem lets you effect a lich, but not a skeleton (because even once you overcome the undead type with Requiem, it doesn't let you get over the fact the latter is also mindless, and thus has 2 layers of 'immunity to mind-effecting effects'.)



Because I see it as a specific rule contradicting a general rule.

Except the rules aren't contradicting. One says 'you're immune to physical ability damage', and the other it 'you're immune to all ability damage'. These don't contradicting, they actually reinforce each other. If the undead type specifically said they were vulnerable to mental ability damage, instead of doing so by implication, you would be right. Unfortunately, it doesn't actually do so.

[Psyren]

Look, we can agree that it may not have been worded in such a way that makes them contradict, but the intent was clearly that you can damage an undead creature's mind. As mentioned earlier, there are ravages and positoxins that target mental ability scores and explicitly work on undead. The "no con score = no ability damage of any kind ever" rule is for constructs.

It makes no sense to me that having a physical nonability should protect your mind and soul from harm. It should only be protecting your body. It might be RAW but so is drowning to heal.