Golem and Dispel magic

[Shin Okada]

Su abilities are not affected by dispel magic, however, so that would imply that golems are unaffected by dispel magic entirely.

But, constructs are animated objects. Golems are not only magical items, but also creatures and objects. Just like zombies are creatures and objects, but not magical items.

No. Animated Objects and Zombies (and other non-intelligent undead monsters) are not objects. They are creatures. IIRC nowhere in the core rules they are defined as objects.

Edit : And Golems are Golems and not Animated Objects. They are different kind of creatures. Though both of them are constructs.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I missed the or in the construct description for some reason. So, constructs are not necessarily animated objects (in the sense of being objects and self-moving, not per the creature named animated objects), but I do say they (constructs) are objects as far as spells are concerned. Now, I just need to prove it...

PS I'm arguing the general case of constructs, not just golems, which includes animated objects as well as others. Not having my books with me and only the SRD, I'm not sure I can make a strong case yet.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Okay, the point I was thinking about was the nonability Con of the golem. From the glossary: "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." My emphasis. It may not prove my point, true, but it helps show that golems, or rather anything with a Con of --, is an object as far as effects are concerned.

 

[Nail]

It may not prove my point, true, but it helps show that golems, or rather anything with a Con of --, is an object as far as effects that require Fort saves are concerned.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Nail]

Does Dispel Magic require a Fort save?

 

[Infiniti2000]

Hey, I did say it may not prove my point.

 

[Shin Okada]

Okay, the point I was thinking about was the nonability Con of the golem. From the glossary: "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." My emphasis. It may not prove my point, true, but it helps show that golems, or rather anything with a Con of --, is an object as far as effects are concerned.

No. That does not support Construct = Object. It is only saying that something which requires a fort save affects on a creature without con score if that effect works on objects. There are various effects, such as Disintegrate spell, which can target a creature and also works on objects.

And as already mentioned, Anything that has both a Charisma score and a Wisdom score is a creature.

 

[Nail]

Hey, I did say it may not prove my point.

Still, I'm intrigued. I wonder if there's more taxt hidden in there somewhere that you could build a case on.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I missed the or in the construct description for some reason. So, constructs are not necessarily animated objects (in the sense of being objects and self-moving, not per the creature named animated objects), but I do say they (constructs) are objects as far as spells are concerned. Now, I just need to prove it...

You'll strike a problem. We know that golems are creatures with the construct type.

From the glossary definition of [glossary]creature[/glossary]:
A living or otherwise active being, not an object. The terms "creature" and "character" are sometimes used interchangeably.

Since a golem is a creature, it is by definition not an object.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Su abilities are not affected by dispel magic, however, so that would imply that golems are unaffected by dispel magic entirely.

Su abilities are not dispelled by dispel magic, but they are magical properties; therefore if something's magical properties are suppressed, it will be unable to activate those Su abilities until no longer suppressed.

-Hyp.