How dumb are golems?

[Nail]

If the golem ignores the summoned creatures, the fight gets even easier.

After all, the golem has but two options: bullrush or move around. Either requires an action from the golem that's not an attack. Done right, summoning monsters could deny the golem any attack for several rounds in a row. Considering the summoned monsters can move too.....

Meanwhile the party warriors are plinking away with their adamantine arrows. Sure, 1d8 + 2 isn't much, but it sure can add up..especially because golems don't get a Con bonus to their hp.

The point is never to stop the golem completely...merely use up all of its actions on things other than attacking you. And since the golem can have no significant strategy, it's dirt simple to do that.

 

[Nail]

A handful (up to five ) of adamantite arrows normally are not enough to slay a stone golem.

5 arrows * (1d8+2 damage per arrow) = 32.5 hp of damage

A stone golem has 107 hp. Seems like a couple of competent archers could make short work of a stone golem. And since that's exactly what my fellow players and I have done.......I know it works. Without tactics, a golem is not so tough....just a tad boring for the magic-users.

Still: we each carry at least 10 arrows (or bolts!) of each material type. 10 adamantine arrows cost 600gp (60 gp ea) -- hardly a huge sum for mid-level adventurers.

 

[yennico]

I know the weakness of the golem for ranged combat.
If an archer shoots and moves in one turn and the golem takes the damage and only moves, the golem will catch the archer after some time.
Flying archers are also an option.
Because of their weakness in ranged combat a fellow GM gave them special bows

5 arrows * (1d8+2 damage per arrow) = 32.5 hp of damage

32.5 hp damage only if every arrow hits the golem

 

[Lord Pendragon]

5 arrows * (1d8+2 damage per arrow) = 32.5 hp of damage

A stone golem has 107 hp. Seems like a couple of competent archers could make short work of a stone golem. And since that's exactly what my fellow players and I have done.......I know it works. Without tactics, a golem is not so tough....just a tad boring for the magic-users.

Well, this is great if your party has a handful of competent archers. Considering that if the golem is in melee with your summoned monsters any archer without Precise Shot is at a -4, and if the summoned monsters are directly between the archer and the golem, the golem gets an additional +4 cover bonus to AC, my party only has one archer who has the feats and bow specialization to consistantly make those shots. Aside from the ranger, the paladin and fighter have ranged weapons, but at -8 to hit, they aren't going to be hitting the golem very often...

Still: we each carry at least 10 arrows (or bolts!) of each material type. 10 adamantine arrows cost 600gp (60 gp ea) -- hardly a huge sum for mid-level adventurers.

This definitely makes a huge difference. Nobody in my party has several material types except the paladin in my group, and he's only got them in melee weapons.

Guess some of it depends on the group.

 

[Nail]

It definitely depends on the group....and how much they've thought about the problem.

I'm not talking about the "golf bag" approach, BTW. No PC has enough money to carry around lots of different weapons. However, every PC has enough money to carry around arrows (or bolts!) of different materials. It's money well spent, even for the sorcerer and his silly light x-bow.

As I've played through published (print or 'web) adventures, I've noticed that golems tend to be in larger areas, guarding throne rooms, treasure rooms, and such. On first pass this is a good idea -- a logical place for a guardian that doesn't need to rest, eat, etc. The problem is that these same places tend to have lots of room to manuever -- which is exactly what the PCs need when they want to make short work of a golem! A summoned monster or wall of stone and a flying archer and its all over but the crying.

Golems, to be truely nasty, need to be in areas of limited access and manueverability. A narrow twisting hallway would be truely hideous, as would........wait, my DM isn't reading this, is he?

 

[Nail]

Well, this is great if your party has a handful of competent archers.

Even just one is plenty. And I'll bet most of you have missile weapons of some kind or another....even the wizard! With everyone shooting, the law of averages comes over to your side.

Considering that if the golem is in melee with your summoned monsters any archer without Precise Shot is at a -4, and if the summoned monsters are directly between the archer and the golem, the golem gets an additional +4 cover bonus to AC,

True. But that's if the archer and the summoner aren't being careful. The cover is dependent on the angle, as you well know, and the summoned monsters don't have to actually be in melee with the golem....and thus no -4 "no Precise Shot" penalty. Wasn't someone about saying the golem should ignore the summoned monsters? In this senario, they are being used as road blocks.

Still, the -4 melee penalty, combined with golem's decent (tho' not really high, actually!) AC means it isn't a slam dunk.

Nobody in my party has several material types except the paladin in my group, and he's only got them in melee weapons.QUOTE]And I'll bet there are several creature types that consistantly give them problems. ....Unless they've never run into these types, they'd be fools not to do something about it.

 

[Philip]

We just use obscuring mist together with a Spring Attacking fighter. Fighter appears out of mist, hits and damages golems and goes back into the mist. On hi action the golem sees no opponent, and usually is not instructed to probe the mist, so there is nohing in its programming that will cause it to respond. Easy.

Golems are too tough for their CR, if allowed to fight inteligently. Good creator's combine their golems with traps, other opponents etc. If given enough time (and some wits) even a 1st lvl party should be able to defeat/bypass a non-intelligent Golem.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Interesting. Perhaps my gut instinct is wrong about the golem. I can see your points regarding an optimized party and, since you mentioned you've seen it in play, I won't argue with the effectiveness of summoned creatures. While it seems to me that, in theory, the golem would just blast through enough summoned creatures to clear a path, then move and squash the summoner, perhaps this is not held up in practice.

I mean, were I a wizard creating a golem, that'd be one of my first instructions to the golem. "When engaging intruders, prioritize spellcasters first and summoned creatures last with regards to CRUSHING THE LIFE FROM THEIR BODIES. Engage summoned creatures only if such creatures cannot be bypassed in order to strike spellcasters, or if all other intruders have already been destroyed."

Edit to add:

We just use obscuring mist together with a Spring Attacking fighter. Fighter appears out of mist, hits and damages golems and goes back into the mist. On hi action the golem sees no opponent, and usually is not instructed to probe the mist, so there is nohing in its programming that will cause it to respond. Easy.

As a DM I would never allow this to work. While D&D combat is turn-based, it's meant to represent simultaneous combat. The fighter can spring attack on his turn, but as soon as he hits the golem, it's going to start moving toward him to squash him. Just because its action occurs in the turn-based representation does not mean the golem looks around, sees nothing, and ignores the fact that it was just struck.

Also, smart wizards give golems instructions against any tactic they can think of to defeat a golem. It's not like a wizard who can create a golem isn't going to be familiar with Obscuring Mist!

 

[hong]

I think it's quite reasonable for the golem to concentrate on whoever's doing the most damage to it. It's part of the basic programming that anything would have, along with being able to tie your shoelaces.

 

[Kast]

I my adventure the other day the party ran up against a Stone Golem. I thought it would be a challenge for them, but it was easy. A simple grease spell and some summoned monsters (meat shields) was all that was needed to neutralize the golem for several rounds while the fighter, with an adamanite battle axe, beat it down. Should I have played the golem “smart” and had it use all its attacks against the only guy doing damage to it?

He should have gone after the fighter with the axe. Slow fighter then pound with fists. No need to figure out if this is part of it's instruction set or not - it's the obvious choice. Rules are for players (my new mantra).