When you have a - for a save, do you automatically fail?

[darthkilmor]

Title says it all, monster in question is this guy , who has Ref - .

 

[Blackrat]

Wow, haven't noticed that before. It says no-where what it means either. I think you got it right. At least with an immobile creature like that I'd say it means that it fails automatically.

 

[Nifft]

Huh, never seen that either.

I'd go with auto-fail, in part because CR 1 shouldn't be all that hard.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Hypersmurf]

It says no-where what it means either.

Sure it does. It's because he also has a Dex of --, meaning a nonability.

So we look up nonabilities, Dexterity:

Dexterity
Any creature that can move has at least 1 point of Dexterity. A creature with no Dexterity score can’t move. If it can perform actions (such as casting spells), it applies its Intelligence modifier to initiative checks instead of a Dexterity modifier. The creature automatically fails Reflex saves and Dexterity checks.

You'll see the same if you look up the Formian Queen, for example, who also has a Dexterity of --.

-Hyp.

 

[Cage-Rattler]

Just wanted to point out that having a "nil" statistic doesn't automatically mean that the relative saving throws automatically "fail"; it more accurately means that the saving throws do not apply.

A construct or undead with a "-" Constitution doesn't automatically fail Fortitude saving throws, for example.

 

[darthkilmor]

Sure it does. It's because he also has a Dex of --, meaning a nonability.

So we look up nonabilities, Dexterity:

Dexterity
Any creature that can move has at least 1 point of Dexterity. A creature with no Dexterity score can’t move. If it can perform actions (such as casting spells), it applies its Intelligence modifier to initiative checks instead of a Dexterity modifier. The creature automatically fails Reflex saves and Dexterity checks.

You'll see the same if you look up the Formian Queen, for example, who also has a Dexterity of --.

-Hyp.

Except the Formian Queen doesn't have a -5 Dex penalty to AC like the Shrieker does. So which is correct as far as AC goes ?

 

[werk]

I'd say it means 'not applicable'

That means either immunity or auto-fail, and since immunity isn't called out in the monster or type description...speed 0...str and dex 0...no attack...

I'm gonna default to the rules for items or objects, "Nonmagical, unattended items never make saving throws. They are considered to have failed their saving throws, so they always are affected by spells."

 

[werk]

A construct or undead with a "-" Constitution doesn't automatically fail Fortitude saving throws, for example.

Because it is specifically called out in its type description. This is an exception, not a rule.

"-"means automatic failure unless specifically stated otherwise.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Just wanted to point out that having a "nil" statistic doesn't automatically mean that the relative saving throws automatically "fail"; it more accurately means that the saving throws do not apply.

A construct or undead with a "-" Constitution doesn't automatically fail Fortitude saving throws, for example.

A Fortitude saving throw can still apply to a construct or undead with a -- for Constitution. They're immune to effects with Fortitude saves that cannot affect objects. But they still need to save against, for example, Disintegrate. In this case, the Constitution modifier is considered +0.

"-"means automatic failure unless specifically stated otherwise.

-- for a saving throw means automatic failure. -- for an ability doesn't necessarily; in the case of a Fortitude save, a Con of -- means a +0 modifier. In the case of a Will save, a Wisdom of -- means an object, not a creature. Non-magical objects don't make saving throws, and magic items use their caster level, not their ability scores, to determine saving throws. In the case of a Reflex save, -- for Dexterity means automatic failure per the rules of nonabilities.

Except the Formian Queen doesn't have a -5 Dex penalty to AC like the Shrieker does. So which is correct as far as AC goes ?

Well, we know that:
Nonabilities: Some creatures lack certain ability scores. These creatures do not have an ability score of 0—they lack the ability altogether. The modifier for a nonability is +0.

So the modifier for a Dexterity of -- is +0.

However:
A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier).

If we consider "The queen does not fight", "She has no ability to move", and "Despite her utter lack of physical activity" to mean the Formian Queen is effectively paralyzed, then while her Dexterity is -- (+0 modifier), since she is helpless it is treated as 0 (-5 modifier). She is also subject to sneak attacks and coup de grace, and melee attacks against her are made at +4.

If we assume that just because someone has a Dex of -- and cannot move, it doesn't make them helpless, then the modifier should be +0 for both the Queen and the Shrieker, and neither of them are automatically subject to sneak attacks or CDG, and the +4 bonus to melee attacks does not apply.

(Note that John Cooper's MM list calls the Queen's AC an error, and he assigns the -5.)

-Hyp.

 

[darthkilmor]

Well, we know that:
Nonabilities: Some creatures lack certain ability scores. These creatures do not have an ability score of 0—they lack the ability altogether. The modifier for a nonability is +0.

So the modifier for a Dexterity of -- is +0.

However:
A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier).

If we consider "The queen does not fight", "She has no ability to move", and "Despite her utter lack of physical activity" to mean the Formian Queen is effectively paralyzed, then while her Dexterity is -- (+0 modifier), since she is helpless it is treated as 0 (-5 modifier). She is also subject to sneak attacks and coup de grace, and melee attacks against her are made at +4.

If we assume that just because someone has a Dex of -- and cannot move, it doesn't make them helpless, then the modifier should be +0 for both the Queen and the Shrieker, and neither of them are automatically subject to sneak attacks or CDG, and the +4 bonus to melee attacks does not apply.

(Note that John Cooper's MM list calls the Queen's AC an error, and he assigns the -5.)

-Hyp.

Interesting to compare also with the text for attacking objects:

Armor Class

Objects are easier to hit than creatures because they usually don’t move, but many are tough enough to shrug off some damage from each blow. An object’s Armor Class is equal to 10 + its size modifier + its Dexterity modifier. An inanimate object has not only a Dexterity of 0 (-5 penalty to AC), but also an additional -2 penalty to its AC. Furthermore, if you take a full-round action to line up a shot, you get an automatic hit with a melee weapon and a +5 bonus on attack rolls with a ranged weapon.

So a table has a Dex of 0 , but a Shrieker has a Dex of --.
.....
I think I'll just go with "Dex -- is the same as Dex 0 == being effectively paralyzed/helpless" for my party. This I think it one of those things that just doesn't quite all click together.