good creatures to animate as skeletons

[Asmor]

The undead traits are not feats.

Having an armor proficiency feat grants you proficiency in armor.

Armor does not require an armor proficiency feat, it requires armor proficiency. Ditto for weapons. Note that none of the classes specifically give weapon or armor proficiency feats, they just give you the proficiency (and yes, I'm sure there's some class which gets heavier armor proficiency feats as bonus feats later on, you know what I mean).

 

[Pale Master]

I prefer to raise skeletons from creatures with the [fire] subtype, so that the resulting creature is immune to fire and cold.

Also, although skeletons of winged creatures cannot fly, the skeletons of creatures that flew magically can still do so.

Are there any [fire] subtype creatures with magical flight?

 

[evilbob]

Or any creatures at all with magical flight?

The best I could think of was any creature with the Air subtype, although that precludes Fire. But those all have fly speeds by definition of the subtype. A genie is one that has a skeleton (although it has few HD and only ok Str).

However... a cloud giant is also an Air-subtype creature, and it does not have a fly speed. (It's also an example of a good skeleton - and a specific skeleton example in the MM1.) How odd.

 

[Shin Okada]

How about oriental dragons (lung)? I don't have Oriental Adventure book in my hand but IIRC they have age category like other true dragon (thus, there should be something with appropriate HD) and some have fly speed without wings.

 

[Pinotage]

The undead traits are not feats.

Having an armor proficiency feat grants you proficiency in armor.

Armor does not require an armor proficiency feat, it requires armor proficiency. Ditto for weapons. Note that none of the classes specifically give weapon or armor proficiency feats, they just give you the proficiency (and yes, I'm sure there's some class which gets heavier armor proficiency feats as bonus feats later on, you know what I mean).

Good point. Does that solve the problem, though?

I mean, if you take a human fighter converted into a skeleton, it loses the armor feats of the class, meaning it can't wear armor without taking a penalty. Looking at what you're saying, the designer of the skeleton can simply add an armor to the skeleton and the creature would be automatically proficient because of the Undead type? I suppose it's designer choice, which makes sense.

Pinotage

 

[Elethiomel]

Good point. Does that solve the problem, though?

I mean, if you take a human fighter converted into a skeleton, it loses the armor feats of the class, meaning it can't wear armor without taking a penalty. Looking at what you're saying, the designer of the skeleton can simply add an armor to the skeleton and the creature would be automatically proficient because of the Undead type? I suppose it's designer choice, which makes sense.

Pinotage

No, the point is that the Fighter's proficiency in heavy armour does not come from a feat and hence is not lost.

 

[Pinotage]

No, the point is that the Fighter's proficiency in heavy armour does not come from a feat and hence is not lost.

LOL! Missed that completely.

Thanks

Pinotage

 

[evilbob]

...But skeletons lose all class levels. That level 1 human fighter is no longer a fighter; thus he no longer gets heavy armor prof. from the class - thus the question remains.

The way it's worded, a strict interpretation seems to lead to the idea that if it were wearing armor when it was animated, then it can wear armor without penalty. If not, it can't. This, however, seems... dumb. You could say maybe that a skeleton gets any armor profs granted by its previous race, perhaps - since monsters listed in the MM are supposed to be proficient with whatever they're wearing in their description - but that could mean a githzerai skeleton would be proficient with some armor but a human would not. Also seems a bit odd.

I think I'm going to just stick with the "keeps weapon AND armor profs" interpretation. Simpler.

 

[Asmor]

Long story short: If you stat up a creature with a piece of equipment, it's proficient in the use of the equipment. It's one of the few shortcuts the game gives DMs, quit knockin' it!

I think the biggest issue here is how literally you want to interpret it. Thinking over it more, I'd probably not allow my PCs to give their undead armor unless the undead's statblock already had armor. I would, however, give the PC's undead all the feats it deserves for its HD, so a 3 HD undead would have 2 feats and a 9 HD undead would have 4. They're welcome to use those feats for armor proficiencies!

 

[evilbob]

But I'm pretty sure creatures without Int scores don't get feats.

Either way, yes: let them have armor. As a GM I would be willing to throw armored skeletons at the party, so sure: animated skeletons can have armor.