The "That's Unrealistic!" Retort Compendium

[Dausuul]

You can't backstab a column of stone. If you apply enough force to exceed it's ability to resist shear, it will snap in half. But this is done by applying massive amounts of force to it over time...not by chipping at it. If you're chipping away at the column, it doesn't matter where you strike- as long as you strike the same spot, you'll make it through at the same rate you would anywhere else on the column.

I think it's fairly clear that adventurers fighting a golem are doing more than just knocking chips off. If that were what they were doing, it'd crush them long before they dealt any noticeable damage.

And that is what most golems are- undifferentiated, solid matter- animated by magic. They are not articulated like action figures; they have no joints; they have no internal frame, just solid matter. They are animated statues. The same magic that animates them also keeps their jointless bodies from disintegrating due to structural fatigue.

Exactly what the magic is doing is not entirely clear, but regardless, a statue most certainly has weak points. There are crevices where force could be applied to split the stone; there are narrow places like neck and wrists where a well-aimed blow might cause a break.

IMO, the place where complaints of unrealism apply to golems is much more basic: You can kill them with nonmagical weapons*! Flesh golems, okay. Clay golems, maybe. Stone or iron? Please. Try whacking a stone statue with a sword and see how far you get. You'll break the sword long before you damage the statue.

[size=-2]*From 3E onward, at least. This is one area where I think AD&D's "magic weapon or go home" rules make some sense.[/size]

 

[ProfessorCirno]

No, not unkillable- except things like vampires or liches- just that there is no one spot more important to the undead's survival than any other spot, so there is no damage bonus to hitting them here or there. You just keep hitting them until they stop moving.

Then they aren't entirely animated purely to move by magic, otherwise every bit you chop off would still come after you. Cut a zombie to pieces and each piece starts twitching to attack you. That's not how the game works though, so clearly it isn't JUST 100% animated by magic. It has a spine ;p

Every real living thing has a spine, yes. Solid undifferntiated pieces of matter have centers of mass which some people compare to a spine.

You can't backstab a column of stone. If you apply enough force to exceed it's ability to resist shear, it will snap in half. But this is done by applying massive amounts of force to it over time...not by chipping at it. If you're chipping away at the column, it doesn't matter where you strike- as long as you strike the same spot, you'll make it through at the same rate you would anywhere else on the column.

And that is what most golems are- undifferentiated, solid matter- animated by magic. They are not articulated like action figures; they have no joints; they have no internal frame, just solid matter. They are animated statues. The same magic that animates them also keeps their jointless bodies from disintegrating due to structural fatigue.

Um. No.

In this example the golem isn't a column, it's a statue - and they most definately do have structural weak points.

Everything has structural weak points. And every moving thing has a main structural support system most likely found in its spine.

Again, either the thing is 100% magic - at which point it is unkillable as each part is still animated and comes after you - or it's not, at which point it has places you can sneak attack.

The only time sneak attack wouldn't work is against things like oozes.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I stand by my analysis: it is clear by RAW, powerful undead, golems and the like do not conform to mundane reality when it comes to having weak points to exploit. Besides their immunity to sneak attack and crits, there is this language:

SRD, Vorpal weapon property:

...This potent and feared ability allows the weapon to sever the heads of those it strikes. Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll to confirm the critical hit), the weapon severs the opponent’s head (if it has one) from its body. Some creatures, such as many aberrations and all oozes, have no heads. Others, such as golems and undead creatures other than vampires, are not affected by the loss of their heads. Most other creatures, however, die when their heads are cut off. A vorpal weapon must be a slashing weapon. (If you roll this property randomly for an inappropriate weapon, reroll.)

(emphasis mine)

Decapitate a golem and it will continue to attack you as surely as if you had just stabbed it in the kiester. You don't even get bonuses in combat from doing so. It's head is not a vital spot, nor is anywhere else.

If not for the magic that animates these statues- these non-articulated statues- the stresses created by merely moving would tear them apart with their first movements because the force required to move such mass with any speed exceed the force brought to bear by a PC swinging a weapon. Clay is brittle, try bending a leg sculpted of clay and it will shatter. One of stone would snap. One of metalmwould bend...slowly...once or twice, then metal fatigue would cause it to crack & break like Saddam's statue.

But that doesn't happen because the magic animating a golem abates those physical constraints. And if the magic prevents a golem from tearing itself apart due to titanic forces at the non-existent joints, why would an additional poke from the outside make any difference in the same spot?

As for why the parts you chip off don't come after you as well? In some legends, the parts don't do that, they just re-attach until some other act is performed, such as by destoying the seal on the spell that animates it- IOW, you do a ritual act- when it has been rendered temporarily quiescent. P
In other cases, the magic only affects the more contiguous portions of the body.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Again, you're claiming that the statue is 100% animated by magic, at which point it is unkillable.

Make up your mind. Is it purely magical, or is there an actual construct (wording very specifically chosen here) underneath with a structure that can be exploited?

Incidentally, certainly decapitating a golem may not do anything. We aren't talking about the head though. We're talking about the spine.

 

[Janx]

I see valid points from both sides of this "golems vs. sneak attack" debate.

I think Danny is arguing in support of the RAW. Basically choosing an interpretation that doesn't require changing the RAW. That's something I advocate, as to do otherwise could lead to a ton of rules changing (which is what this thread is about).

The opposing argument, that despite this magic, there are key structural points that would logically be better targets of attack than others has validity.

Take a skeleton. the ribs protect a good portion of the spine. But not all of it. Take out the lower section of the spine, and you'll have cleaved it in two. 2 half-skeletons is not as dangerous as 1 full skeleton. It moves slower, and its reach is diminished. At most the bottom half can kick you, and the bottom half will spend most of its time dragging itself around. Similar would be true for golems, though they are made of sterner stuff.

However, the rules don't really support this point. There's no real hit locations in D&D. You can't aim for a specific body part. So you can't target the spine on a skeleton. At best, Sneak Attack was intended to emulate that, by implying you generically aim for something vital.

It appears that animating magic lets an object move and bend and stick together where normally it could not. This is effectively how it bypasses "realism". Thus skeletons bones stick together and bend, long after connective tissues have vanished or stiffened. Golems get to move and bend where their joints symbolically would have been.

the fact that you can swing your long sword and actually do damage (and not track damage to your weapon) is already a concession that the animated creature has some structural integrity issues. Basically, you get a chance of snapping off a limb or some such with each blow, effectively by whittling the HP down.

I suppose a GM could then houserule that a sneak attack is a fancier version of this. If the impact to game play is minimal, then what's the harm?

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Well, Pathfinder has both golems and undead being sneak attack-able. It's a topic that comes up a lot there

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Again, you're claiming that the statue is 100% animated by magic, at which point it is unkillable.

Make up your mind. Is it purely magical, or is there an actual construct (wording very specifically chosen here) underneath with a structure that can be exploited?

There is no logical fallacy within my position that requires I "make up my mind."

The ritual that creates a golem requires as one of its components a physical body constructed of a physical substance (which substance in particular depends upon the particular ritual in question).

A Clay golem is constructed either of hollow clay or solid clay, which is probably hardened. The Stone is carved from a single block of stone. An Iron or Bronze golem is cast. They are not robots or puppets, so have no joints, they have no internal structure, no pulleys, no gears. FWIW, this idea that golems have no internal structure dates back before D&D to the first legends of golems in ancient Judaic texts: in the Talmud (Tractate Sanhedrin 38b), Adam was initially created as a golem when his dust was "kneaded into a shapeless husk". Like Adam, all golems are created from mud. (Greek legends of Talos had him 1) originally as a giant, later either transformed into metal (made of bronze) or 2) as the last of a race of bronze men- not a construct, or 3) created by Hephastus as a construct, but with phenomenal speed and burning hot skin, he bears little resemblance to what shows up in D&D.)

The resultant golem is 100% animated by magic. However, since the physical form is the anchor for the magic, enough damage to the physical form will disrupt the magic...just like erasing part of the magic circle that holds an extraplanar being in place or at bay means the barrier falls.

The only difference is that a golem is far more durable than a magic circle.

Incidentally, certainly decapitating a golem may not do anything. We aren't talking about the head though. We're talking about the spine.

What does a spine do? It supports the rib cage; it is an anchor point for things like hips or shoulders; it protects the spinal chord.

...none of which a golem has, because there is nothing inside a golem except solid matter or trapped air (depending on its construction method).

 

[Saeviomagy]

My point was really to point out that halfling and humans don't just stand around and have a fencing match with giants.

It wasn't your point. It was hussars, to whit:

I have to admit, size is one thing that has always bothered my "realism radar". A halfling using a dagger just can't hurt a huge creature, no matter how skilled he is. It's not a question of knowing the right techniques or whatnot, it's pretty simple physics. A five inch knife is not going to hurt a dinosaur.

That's why I specifically called out claw lengths. I'd doubt that there's a man alive who could face up to a full sized elephant armed with a 5 inch knife and kill it: but it's not physically impossible.

And that is what most golems are- undifferentiated, solid matter- animated by magic. They are not articulated like action figures; they have no joints; they have no internal frame, just solid matter. They are animated statues. The same magic that animates them also keeps their jointless bodies from disintegrating due to structural fatigue.

Imagine a statue of a man, made of solid concrete, standing with it's arm outstretched.

Imagine you have a sledgehammer.

Imagine you swing at the trunk of this statue. How hard do you think it is to smash him in two?

Now, imagine you swing at the outstretched arm of the statue.

Is it easier to break the arm off the statue than to smash through it's torso?

Of course it is. In fact it may only take a single swing to remove the arm.

Imagine the arm has a single, pointed finger. Imagine how hard it is to remove the finger. It may in fact be possible to do with your bare hand: a single snap and it's off.

Are you likely to think that's possible with the torso? No, don't be ridiculous.

So - how can you possibly claim that this statue does not have weak points?

Unless your golem continues to levitate in the air after it's legs are smashed off, and pounds you with the ghosts of it's smashed arms, there is a definate point where a lack of areas that can be considered comparitively weak is going to impact it's performance.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So - how can you possibly claim that this statue does not have weak points?

Because the amount of force it takes for you break off the finger with the sledgehammer is at least equalled by the force that the golem would have to exert to make that same finger make a 90deg angle...without an articulated joint.

And not only doesn't it break- thanks to the animating magic- it bends as if it were articulated, which it isn't.

Unless your golem continues to levitate in the air after it's legs are smashed off, and pounds you with the ghosts of it's smashed arms, there is a definate point where a lack of areas that can be considered comparitively weak is going to impact it's performance.

It's legs smashed off, it crawls. It's hands cut off, it swings it's stumps.

RAW or by legend, it is not impeded from doing so; for most of the combat, it attacks relentlessly and without being hindered by it's damage.

And the point at which its perfomance IS affected is defined as 0HP.

 

[Hussar]

That's why I specifically called out claw lengths. I'd doubt that there's a man alive who could face up to a full sized elephant armed with a 5 inch knife and kill it: but it's not physically impossible.

Well, a couple of things. The lions don't kill with claws, they kill with teeth. But, that's a quibble. The other quibble is that a huge creature can be a LOT bigger than an elephant.

But, really, it's your second point which tends to ping my "BS Meter". I'm pretty darn sure that if someone attacked an elephant with a sword, he'd get squished.

Fortunately, my ability to suspend disbelief is pretty healthy and it only bugs me if I start thinking about it too much. So, don't do that.