Does Animation Magic Also Preserve?

[unseenmage]

Does the energy or magic that allows your zombie to shamble also either slow its rot or prevent it from rotting entirely?
Is it left in a perpetually rotting state magically never actually losing mass or does it evolve into a skeleton eventually?

What of Constructs? Will your wax golem melt? Your stone golem eventually erode? Your awakened iron golem eventually seize up becoming barely able to whisper the words, "Oil can.", to a passing girl and her dog?

I am curious both in how folk handle this in their own games and whether the rules or lore set any kind of precedent either way.

[Covenant12]

Strict RAW, no. They last forever until damaged, unending power source.

Note that skeletons/zombie/most non-intelligent undead don't heal innately, and can take small amount of damage easily. I'd rule they could wear out over very long period, if doing labor or similar. Standing still in a tomb, I'd say they last pretty much forever. I don't think I'd support zombies becoming skeletons over time, they act very different.
Best to think they are actually powered by negative energy, because magic?

Hps in D&D are an abstraction that doesn't hold up well to close inspection, though. Negative energy restores them to full durability, I wouldn't want to change that.

Any golem with 5 or more adamantine DR is immune to minor damage, and could labor forever until it took some very big hits.

Game description lorewise I don't think these types change much, but there's a lot I've never seen.

[unseenmage]

Part of what made me curious was this response (http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=23024) over at Candlekeep when I mentioned wanting the first lich/golem to still be around at the end of time.

Made me wonder if anyone actually has their magically animated creatures decay.

[Buufreak]

Tough call. On one hand, you have the evolved undead template, that has more strength, more armor, and even fast healing. On the other hand, demilich. It's kinda hard to nail it down when some undead build up over time, while others break down, and yet somehow both are more powerful.

[Missing]

IIRC Demi-liches aren't created when a Lich gets really old and deteriorates but when a lich attains enough power and knowledge that they feel their bodies are no longer necessary. They then augment themselves with soul gems after which most of their body falls away leaving a small core body, often a skull but realistically it could also have a spine, rib-cage or similar.

[The Glyphstone]

IIRC Demi-liches aren't created when a Lich gets really old and deteriorates but when a lich attains enough power and knowledge that they feel their bodies are no longer necessary. They then augment themselves with soul gems after which most of their body falls away leaving a small core body, often a skull but realistically it could also have a spine, rib-cage or similar.

That depends on the edition. In every edition prior to 5th, demi-liches were the ascended form of a lich. In 5e, Lichs must consume souls to fuel their immortality, and if they fail to do so they devolve into a demilich.

[ShurikVch]

Note: for Undeads who have damaging or draining touch, it keeps off bacteria and fungi (since they die at the touch); for Undead without such special attacks, we may presume it's still there, just too weak to affect any "real" creature (i. e. with HD)

[Crake]

That depends on the edition. In every edition prior to 5th, demi-liches were the ascended form of a lich. In 5e, Lichs must consume souls to fuel their immortality, and if they fail to do so they devolve into a demilich.

And it's different again even in pathfinder, where a demi lich is the result of a lich who's consciousness has been so detatched from their body by centuries of astral projecting, or even simply inactivity through centuries long contemplation, that their bodies have become mindless automata that consume the souls of creatures that get too close.

[unseenmage]

On the Construct side or things there's the Golem Remnant (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fw/20041126a).

Do we have any examples of Constructs which get more powerful with time?

[Kaiwen]

Do we have any examples of Constructs which get more powerful with time?

Awakened constructs can eventually gain class levels, I think.

[afroakuma]

I see this question has endured beyond the other thread. Is it the first lich? :smalltongue:

Demiliches are a weird thing in 1E and 2E, basically an extremely elaborate trap or construct guardian moreso than a sentient adversary. They operate in totally programmed fashion and are almost totally passive unless directly hassled. It would be utterly illogical for Acererak, if actually reliant on his remains and present within them, to eat a single soul, only when touched, and then settle right back down again.

So in a way, the demilich really is "less than" a lich; just imbued with enough insta-murdery wickedness to make it seem like your day is so much worse. The actual psyche is off surfing strange planes.

unseenmage, just as an fyi, Tomb of Horrors actually points out that eventually, even the magic animating Acererak's undead servants wasn't going to maintain them, so the likely answer is that there is some degradation over time, though a zombie's animation, being reliant on the presence of certain physical elements the skeleton does not possess, would likely fail if it was skeletonized. That would be how I'd call it, at least. :smallwink:

[Zaq]

Demiliches are a weird thing in 1E and 2E, basically an extremely elaborate trap or construct guardian moreso than a sentient adversary. They operate in totally programmed fashion and are almost totally passive unless directly hassled. It would be utterly illogical for Acererak, if actually reliant on his remains and present within them, to eat a single soul, only when touched, and then settle right back down again.

This isn't true in 2e Ravenloft. At least not according to Van Richten's Guide to Liches. Which is an excellent, if super weird, read.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Rot is largely caused by microorganisms. I bet those are mostly or entirely killed off by the negative energy powering undead, giving them an incredibly long shelf-life.

[NNescio]

Rot is largely caused by microorganisms. I bet those are mostly or entirely killed off by the negative energy powering undead, giving them an incredibly long shelf-life.

Waaaait a minute... is that how the Gentle Repose spell works?

[Fizban]

Does the energy or magic that allows your zombie to shamble also either slow its rot or prevent it from rotting entirely?
Is it left in a perpetually rotting state magically never actually losing mass or does it evolve into a skeleton eventually?

What of Constructs? Will your wax golem melt? Your stone golem eventually erode? Your awakened iron golem eventually seize up becoming barely able to whisper the words, "Oil can.", to a passing girl and her dog?

I am curious both in how folk handle this in their own games and whether the rules or lore set any kind of precedent either way.
(No sources) A zombie will always retain enough flesh to count as a zombie, but a fresh zombie and an old zombie will be visibly different. Even if "microorganisms" (whatever those are) don't function, negative energy itself causes some amount of decay. But as the zombie is a negative energy construct, the decay is superficial only and eventually stops once the zombie reaches its optimal "resting" stasis point of decay/flesh. A skeleton has no flesh, but the bones would probably bleach/yellow, weather, maybe crack, again up to a certain point at which the process ceases. While they do not naturally recover hit points, as long as they suffer no hit point damage they will function forever, because that's what undeath is.

Constructs depend on the individual. A Wax Golem that has nothing in its entry about melting does not melt unless melted (by fire damage). A stone golem may weather, but again the magic that makes it capable of movement also prevents this from progressing to any significant point, and as long as it has hit points it continues functioning (and as very few accidents will penetrate that DR, it's gonna keep functioning). An Iron Golem could go either way: I like the idea that it never gains more than a patina of rust, but technically they're vulnerable to all "rust attacks" including the Rust Monster's apparently Ex ability, which suggests the even a low rust over time effect should eventually do the job if they don't receive healing (all the more reason to use stone)- though magical fire heals them and will thus mend the rust. A Shield Guardian's wooden components will not warp or rot. In general, the same rule applies: Constructs don't age or die normally, which means hit points must be reduced to zero. Intelligent constructs may be subjected to metal consequences, or not, depending on situation/construction/temperment/etc.

[Elves]

Even if "microorganisms" (whatever those are) don't function

Saying that fantasy worlds operate as some kind of simplified video game space where microorganisms don't exist -- if that's what you're saying -- is really dumb and undesirable, because it removes depth from those worlds and makes them uninteresting and (in this case literally) sterile.

The D&D rules are still clearly based on being a model of reality, even if in some specific cases like capped falling damage it's more like comic book physics.


Rot is largely caused by microorganisms. I bet those are mostly or entirely killed off by the negative energy powering undead, giving them an incredibly long shelf-life.

Headcanoned.

[Fizban]

Saying that fantasy worlds operate as some kind of simplified video game space where microorganisms don't exist -- if that's what you're saying -- is really dumb and undesirable, because it removes depth from those worlds and makes them uninteresting and (in this case literally) sterile.
The world can function partially according to RL-known science without that science being the root cause of everything :smallsigh: Find me a quote that says characters in universe know what microorganisms are and I'll amend the statement to include that group.

[Elves]

And before we knew how gravity works, clearly it wasn't in effect.

[Covenant12]

Saying that fantasy worlds operate as some kind of simplified video game space where microorganisms don't exist -- if that's what you're saying -- is really dumb and undesirable, because it removes depth from those worlds and makes them uninteresting and (in this case literally) sterile.

The D&D rules are still clearly based on being a model of reality, even if in some specific cases like capped falling damage it's more like comic book physics.I completely disagree.

D&D certainly doesn't try hard to closely follow real-world physics. Sometimes it neither tries nor intends to follow it, even a little bit. See the elemental plane of air, astral plane/projection, and spelljammer from previous editions. I don't think believing micro-organisms in cause disease in a specific setting is default or praise-worthy.

Basically I read this as rudely and aggressively wrong, "agreeing to disagree" is about the nicest proposal I can make.

[RatElemental]

Another angle to consider: Over time, what if the animating effect itself is subject to waning? Maybe the connection to the weave gets gummed up as the centuries pile on, maybe the elemental you trapped inside that golem's head eventually gets stir crazy enough to start cracking the metaphorical chains, maybe eventually the link to the negative energy plane keeping that skeleton going starts to close without the regular upkeep of a creator?

[Elves]

D&D certainly doesn't try hard to closely follow real-world physics. Sometimes it neither tries nor intends to follow it, even a little bit. See the elemental plane of air, astral plane/projection,
You misunderstand what I'm saying. The elemental plane of air and magic spells are both inherently fantastical elements, which is very different, and even here there's a lot of complexity that the game rules are just a high-level representation of.

High fantasy is great. It's much more interesting and fantastical to treat the game rules as what they are -- a gamified model of the world they describe -- than as encompassing the totality of that world. (Though sometimes there's an intentional misrepresentation for the sake of the game, like falling damage.)

To treat a fantasy setting as a sterile world of video game laws clamps down on imagination, because it makes the world less primary -- you're playing in a toy world instead of in a world that you use toys to represent. It also reduces complexity.

[rel]

This reminds me of the old question of zombies in the snow. Do they actually freeze like corpsicles?

To answer the OP's question, I would say no. Animation magic has no inherent preservative quality.

Undead or constructs will under certain circumstances change or fail over long periods of time.

However, this process would not be that consistent and it would happen SLOWLY.

A zombie left to wander the stepes might dry out and eventually look like jerky but function more or less as normal.
A zombie dumped in a well might break down entirely or it might become a skeleton as the flesh falls off.
A zombie in a swamp might bloat up and gain some sort of additional qualities or it might remain more or less normal.

All of these changes would take years and decades and so be outside the scope of a normal game. The PC necromancers' minions are safe, they simply don't break down that much over a regular game timeline.
However, if you want to justify some unique poison marsh zombies in the Black Swamp then you have a ready mechanism to do so.

Some final notes;
There would be mundane and magical methods to preserve corpses and materials for the long term. The zombies in the above examples could be dried or pickled or treated alchemically to keep them functional over the centuries. Such efforts might be the mark of a good necromancer and could even offer mechanical benefits.
Intelligent undead and constructs can probably maintain themselves quite competently and would probably do so as part of their regular lives. With regular maintenance, such a creature would last nearly forever.
The healing of HP would repair at least some of the physical damage caused by deterioration. Creatures that receive regular healing either from their own abilities or from others would deteriorate much more slowly and be able to tolerate environments that would normally damage them over the long term

[Mister Rex]

I'd agree with the common consensus. Animation magic doesn't preserve anything. Something like a zombie could theoretically fall apart, but how long that'd take nobody really knows.