Golems

[Markn]

Does anyone find golems not as effective as previous editions? If I am right, the golem is only immune to spells that have SR but spells without SR (which there is more and more of nowadays) still affect the golem normally.

 

[shilsen]

You're right about the SR thing. As for whether golems are not as effective as earlier editions, I haven't played enough before 3e to be able to judge, but I think a golem's effectiveness is very dependent on the circumstances that the PCs meet it in. While that's true for most enemies, a golem's mindless nature makes it especially true.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I'm pretty sure that golems were always immune to direct magic, but perfectly susceptible to indirect magic.

Which is basically what the divide between SR and non-SR IS.

With some bizarre exceptions (stupid damage-causing conjurations...)

 

[Markn]

Non SR Spells

I'm pretty sure that golems were always immune to direct magic, but perfectly susceptible to indirect magic.

Which is basically what the divide between SR and non-SR IS.

With some bizarre exceptions (stupid damage-causing conjurations...)

Actually, if you flip through the splatbooks you'll see a whole host of direct damage spells that ignore SR, many of which are either sonic or force. It's not a big deal but just an observation that they don't seem to be as strong as they used to be.

 

[Crothian]

Ya, Golems are easier but I blame the badly designed spells more then the Golem.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Actually, if you flip through the splatbooks you'll see a whole host of direct damage spells that ignore SR, many of which are either sonic or force. It's not a big deal but just an observation that they don't seem to be as strong as they used to be.

That's more a problem with splatbooks. IMHO, if its direct damage, it should have SR, no matter what school it comes from or method it professes to use.