Mindless Creatures are affected by Illusions

[Username17]

That's all. I've heard one too many people say that undead are immune to minor image recently, and I wanted to vent:

Figments do not have the "Mind Affecting" tag on them, so mindless creatures are affected by them normally. Just because it's mindless, doesn't mean it automatically passes Will Saves.

So you can totally bone any number of skeltons with Major Image by simply feeding them information that relates to their programing in such a manner as to keep them from actually physically interacting with the illusion.

For example, you can create a fake wall in front of your party and a fake creature just outside a zombie's charge - the zombie will turn around and run after it. The next round you can alter the illusion any way you want, so the fake creature can dissapear and be replaced by another creature - back where the zombie was originally.

And so on, for as long as you maintain concentration on the spell. The zombie will lurch back and forth along the hallway while the party throws rocks at it until it dies, and it will never ever learn and has no way to escape unless an evil cleric is on hand to give new orders.

Mindless doesn't mean "immune to figments" it means "immune to mind affecting spells" - which includes and is limited to: spells which actually say "Mind Affecting" on them.

Thank you for your time.

-Username17

[canamrock]

Sounds legit to me... that's one of the common misinterpretations (though it's odd since there's nothing technically there to misinterpret) that makes a lot of people underestimate the power of illusions.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

Sure. You're absolutly right. However, I don't like it, and consider it a problem with the system. Well two problems really. Firstly, I think it's very odd that illusions aren't all mind-effecting from one end of the spectrum to the other.

Secondly, I really REALLY wish there were implicit "Default actions" that mindless undead fall back on. I think it's entirely appropriate for uncontrolled zombies to wander around aimlessly, attacking anything living that comes close enough. I think that it should be normal that if a zombie who has been instructed to attack anyone in the hallway sees you and charges, and suddenly a wall springs up between you and the zombie, the zombie will try to climb, batter or plow through the wall.

Still, none of this is explicitly supported by the rules. On the other hand, the love/hate relationship with the rules around here is well-documented.

-Des

[User3]

Though illusory input should effect undead and other "mindless" creatures there are some problems with some of your examples.

And that is the assumption that the "mindless" creatures will react to (what they percieve as real) input in the least productive possible manner.

Admittedly I think there are (kinda) some guidelines about the kind of tactical decisions that a creature could make based on things like Int and Wis scores BUT...

1) Being incapable of making a tactical decision doesn't mean they don't accidentally make actions which would be tactically good choices.

The zombie with two bones (hehehe, ok two lures) that you describe being pummelled to death at range, WHY does it attack the nearest percieved target, that implies an intelligent awareness of the best choice followed by a deliberate choice to avoid the smart action. Surely as long as it percieves the real targets as well their is some chance it will lumber off to attack the further targets out of the sheer randomness of its inability to make methodical or correct decisions.

After all if the zombies were told to "attack all who enter this vast cavern" (or are in a vast cavern and are assumed to be in a wild hostile natural state) why wouldn't they ignore the guys pummelling them to death in mellee and charge the guy up the back shooting them with missiles (who is perhaps even too far away to reach in time for productive results). Its equally stupid, why wouldn't they do it? Do they have an overriding impatience or motivation to maul targets as soon as possible?

In other words I'm trying to say being mind numbingly stupid doesn't mean you can't behave brilliantly by accident (or have several options in your stupidity).

2) Mindless creatures (in particular those ever popular zombies) often follow instructions. They seem to be assumed to be smart enough to capably follow those instructions (and do all sorts of funky things like recognize people and places and things).

Even the very simplest of instructions can enable a very very stupid creature to foil all kinds of illusions and deceptive tactics.

Dropping a bunch of zombies into the entrance of a maze with a "Grope your way along the left hand wall and eat anything you encounter that feels soft and fleshy" has all kinds of draw backs, (like groping your way past heavily armored dudes and every zombie in the voodoo conga line walking into the same obvious pit trap), but it DOES mean they will walk straight through any illusory barriers they encounter in their hunt for fleshy targets. They might even walk out the other side of the maze, turn left, follow the outside wall back to the entrance and do it again... forever.

In other words as long as they can follow instructions, especially ones to do with simple methodology (and one assumes if they lack so much of their own intellect and motivation they surely NEED explicit instructions on methodology) then it isn't nessacarily the zombie you are matching wits with, but the guy who gave it the instructions.

[canamrock]

Problem is how 'mindless' exactly mindless is...

Reacting to the pain of the attacks, most animals would decide to attack the source of the attackers, or alternatively decide to run from the threat.

Now, I'd take it, and Frank as well, apparantly, that mindless creatures are like old computers: unless they have sufficient room and the controller has sufficient knowledge and desire to load them with all the 'necessary' functions to be truly competent combatants, they'd likely just target the closest available target fitting into their paradigm of what a target is.

[User3]

But thats the thing, even in the context of incredibly simple automata with limited memory capacity a zombie, or better yet a group of them, can achieve all kinds of interesting behaviour.

If it can handle the instructions "From enumerated targets, attack nearest" then why not "From enumerated targets, attack random" its a better instruction for the creator to give tactics wise (regardless of the number of automata available, though not possibly in larger areas of operation) mind you why would the creator be fool enough to give all the automata the SAME instruction.

If he has a bunch to mess with then setting several to "nearest target", several to random and several to furthest etc... might be a better tactical choice, by the intelligent instigator, not the mindless automata. Hell the instruction "attack target being attacked by least number of other automata" is an instruction that should see a fairly reasonable spread of automata among the potential targets.

Simple instructions that the tiniest of logical machines can handle can solve complex situations, for instance a couple of tiny lines of code instigating a left hand rule will negotiate MOST mazes (though not often by the most efficient route).

Throw in a whole bunch of separate simple automata and the potential for giving separate instructions to different indivuals or sub groups can cause the group to behave in complex and seemingly intelligent ways.

Zombies aren't mindless killing machines, they are independent problem solving agents/automata with severely limited individual capacity but potentially significant computational power when gathered in larger groups.

Every necromancer should study zombie algorithm subjects at necromancer school.

[Username17]

The thing is, the zombie does not perceive any other attackable enemies. There is one enemy 35 feet away, and a wall. Also they got hit in the back of the head with a rock and can't see any source.

Naturally, of course, a learning creature would eventualy decide that the apparently close dude who keeps teleporting away is less important than the enemy who is completely non-apparent but actually hurting it.

However, the zombie can't learn. So it won't ever decide to abandon an enemy it "knows" how to attack to chase after an enemy which it does not know how to attack and may not exist.

Of course, if it did, that's an exploitable loophole as well - simply give the zombie a large number of unassailable targets - say fifty, or a hundred. And watch while each zombie randomly assigns targetting amongst way too many potential threats. Whatever your algorythm, Illusions win, because you can make up literally anything you want.

-Username17

[User3]

The illusion, or other exploit, only wins (for sure) if you know the algorithm.

If you DO know the instructions given to a creature which has no choice but to follow them to the letter then you have the creature in the bag. But how the heck do the attackers know the instructions so exactly and reliably?

Dependant on the allowable complexity of instructions for the zombies there is no reason the person who gave them the instructions couldn't have programmed a response that accounts for almost any potential possibility.

Even WITH severe limitations on the complexity the fact that the limited instructions that are applied come from a massive list of potential instructions that exist and are not reliably known to the zombies attackers means that the zombie can still behave in manners quiete unexpected to the attackers that foil cunning but misguided attempts by them to exploit the zombies presumably weak mental capabilities.

Your zombies guarding a corridor could have been instructed to permanently patrol up and down the length of a corridor looking for targets, but the patroling instruction is given as a distance rather than a response to the apparent visual end of the corridor thus they walk right through any illusory barriers in their path.

Infact the assumption that the zombie stops for the new visual input despite instructions to the contrary or which didn't account for such visual input implies a greater degree of intelligence, decision making, awareness and free will on its part than the zombie following a fixed distance patrol walking right through it.

Yeah sure if you KNOW that the instruction is for the VISUAL end of the corridor, bam, the zombies in the bag, but if you THINK you know that when its infact fixed distance based ('cause the necromancer outsmarted you in advance) then you may have a little nasty surprise awaiting you.

And why the hell wouldn't a necromancer, in advance, instruct the zombies to charge toward any source of mysterious missile attacks and kill whatever they find?

In some cases its not the zombie you match wits with its the necromancer. There is just an extra step in between and a need by the necromancer to anticipate possibilities in advance.

All undead slayers should also study zombie algorithms so they can try and identify the instructions zombies are following and thus exploit them into defeating themselves.

[Username17]

Even WITH severe limitations on the complexity the fact that the limited instructions...

You mean like how the instructions aren't allowed to be more than half a dozen words long? All this monkeying around with zombie algorythms and pace distances and stuff is a waste of your intellectual energy, because necromancers can't leave instructions like that - too many words. If it takes you a whole sentence to explain what it is that they should be doing, that's too long.

Here's an actual example:

1. Kill
2. Any
3. Living
4. Creature
5. Except
6. Me

Yeah, that's the limit of the complexity right there. After that it follows standard zombie protocols, which means that the only person who really benefits from an extensive understanding of zombie protocols is the Illusionist.

-Username17

[User3]

But you see a zombie capable of following the instructions commonly given them MUST have several mental capabilities.

Now the ability to understand complex language, some very advanced image recognition and the HUGE assumed knowledge base to have any idea of what you are talking about is of relatively minor relevance (but an indication of some very complex calculations and mental capabilities going on inside).

The part of significant relevance is the state machine.

What state machine?

Well unless zombies are WAY less useful than commonly implied they MUST have a state machine.

"kill every living creature other than me" doesn't really need states, as with any other "do this now" command, but any kind of command involving guarding a place and killing all, or any subset, of targets entering it needs one.

Because otherwise the zombies get lured away in the fight and never know to go back to their posts. In order to be remotely effective guards (which zombies are scripted for in the story ALL the time) they need at least three or so states, "guarding position/scanning for targets", "Engaging targets", "No more targets Returning to post".

You NEED a state machine to meaningful follow some instructions that can be summed up in very brief sentences. "Guard this room against intruders" is a simple statement just a tad shorter than your kill everyone but me, but it implies much greater complexity in its mental requirements to follow in a meaningful way.

And once you have a state machine that can change states based on input and programmed conditions you have the basis of all kinds of wacky prepped responses and complex or co-operative behaviour/tactics.

Any zombie without at least a simple state machine in its head is almost utterly useless for ANY purpose if left on its own for ANY length of time. OK, maybe thats the way they "should" be according to a poorly thought out mental stat somewhere, but thats not how they are commonly inserted into or used in the game or story is it?

Of course you can go with your "standard zombie protocols" as soon as the boss turns his back, which by your book is defaulting to trying to gnaw on the nearest moving object, but even THAT implies a state machine ("Gnaw moving object", "Determine nearest moving object", "Lurch toward nearest moving object", "No moving objects, Lurch to new location seeking moving objects"). And if so why the hell program your zombie with those standard protocols and not a more useful set? I mean you (or some other intelligent creature) DID create the zombie (or other "mindless" minion lets not forget) so presumably the base protocols WERE up to you.

[Username17]

The point is, you can't change the state machine, save to eliminate all previous state machines.

So while you could tell them to "find, attack creatures that attack you" - which would have them harrying off after the people behind the illusionary wall throwing rocks - it also wouldn't have them doing anything until then.

They'd just stand there until they were attacked and the puzzled adventurers would be able to walk right past.

On a half dozen words you can give them a task (guarding, raiding, piling rocks on top of each other), or you can give them a tactical protocol (such as swarming nearby targets or chasing archers, or whatever), and you can't give them both.

If you give them a tactical protocol that's your whole set of instructions, and they aren't actually doing anything - which in turn means that they probably won't even engage in combat in the first place.

So if zombies are fighting at all, they'll be doing it the same way every time (having been given a task that causes them to enter combat, which in turn precludes them having been given tactical instructions). Now the rules don't actually say what that way is, but whatever game world you are running in is going to have a standard zombie protocol, and once you know what that is an illusionist automatically wins every single time.

-Username17

[Josh_Kablack]

1090510622[/unixtime]]"kill every living creature other than me" doesn't really need states,

What the fvck are you talking about?

Obviously the definition I have of "state machine" is very different from the one which is being used in this thread.

[Username17]

What the fvck are you talking about?

I think that the Guest was saying that you could create an arbitrary interpretation function which would then symbolically interpret your orders. And that as such, once you had programmed your zombies up you could give it six pieces of command input which would then combine with the sense data it continued to see to generate actions, which in turn would generate new sense data and new actions.

Under that interpretation, each Necromancer would issue commands like "Alpha, Chaupan, Ee, Greepo!" of which each word would correspond to a complex three dimensional world interactivity protocol ("Alpha", for example, might be a priority 6 protocol which means that the zombie moved around the fifteen foot square room in an doubly-inverted spiral path, switchin directions along the path every 10-30 minutes, until another protocol overrode, while "Chaupan" might mean that if the zombie perceived a living creature other than a member of the order of the black chalice, that it would leap to attack a random enemy creature within reach, or failing that to move towards a random enemy which it can identify a path to, until another protocol took over).

Which is hogwash, of course, since casting Animate Dead is a three-second flick of the wrist done in the middle of combat and there is no possible way you could be writing an AI protocol capable of getting a zombie to figure out how to hold the correct end of a sword to hold on sight in that time frame.

Zombies are also created by unintelligent creatures and even as the aftereffects of magical events unprogrammed by any necromancer or creature at all. That being said, it is clear that you don't get to write zombie protocols, and in the absense of a direct order otherwise, they simply shamble towards the nearest creature they perceive as a target in the shortest possible path and attempt to eat their brain.

That's it. So you can make illusionary floor over a pit and an illusionary enemy on the other side and they will all shamble into the pit. Or whatever. It's a third level attack spell, you're lucky they can be given orders at all.

-Username17

[User3]

Now you're just getting silly. Not only do zombies handle some pretty damn "complex three dimensional world interactivity" crap in your own examples (along with might I add the ability to recognise what people are, who specific people are, etc...) but they NEED to in order to so much as lurch about and function as humanoid creatures at all, let alone as usefully threatening opponents in a combative rpg.

Even single cell organisms switch from various states on various input, no reason a zombie (and again remember, OTHER mindless creatures, lets not forget contructs) shouldn't, in fact as I mentioned above, it already does, even under "zombie protocol".

And a hell of a lot of other magic spells cast at the flick of the wrist have all kinds of spur of the moment variables thrown in for a complex series of results, magic missile can be spread between all sorts of combinations of differing targets, wall of stone can be shaped, and those god damned illusions you keep mentioning can be, and do, on the spur of the moment, get this almost ANYTHING

(within the boundaries of, if I recall, some pretty big ranges with multiple areas of effect with only specific limitations of number of senses effected yaddayaddayadda, yes there is a concentration duration but the additional rounds on minor and major image mean you only need the standard action cast and it does WHATEVER for 2 or 3 rounds, and programmed image along with its trigger conditions STILL takes only 1 standard action to cast.).

Yes, some zombies are not deliberate creations, but there is no reason not to say there wouldn't be a difference in behaviour then.

Your assumption that ALL zombies MUST follow your rather poor set of zombie instructions is the application of some rather narrow ideas of zombie behavior to the game that actually contradict themselves and commonly used zombie roles.

The only thing I can see in the MM to vaguely support the argument you give is the "simple sentence" malarky but the example they give is "kill anyone that enters this room" which is in the end a really rather complex instruction that in order to be followed productively AT ALL requires the complex reasoning and knowledge required to recognize what an anyone is, what the room is, what killing means, the concept of inside and outside the room, the act of entering it, how to watch for it, how to kill, etc... Not to mention other things if you expect them to be able to KEEP following the instruction productively in anything like the long term.

Certainly it mentions nothing about standard immutable zombie fallback combat tactics being uniformly a bunch of ludicrously counterproductive trash (I mean sure, it doesn't say they're not).

And while I'm looking I'll point out, a nulled Int is not the same as a zero, and zombies have reasonable Wisdom.

And If you DO imply that a nulled stat is the same as a zero then you have no business implying that zombies can even understand language beyond that (very badly thought out) line in the description about short sentence instructions which would directly contradict the concept of a zombie having an Int below 3.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

Here's what I'm thinking:

When you obtain control of a zombie, either by means of casting Animate Dead or by successfully making your Control/Rebuke undead roll, you create a minor link between yourself and the undead. This explains why you can only control so much undead at a time, the rest of which usually become uncontrolled. The link, when established, gives the zombie a symbolic representation of whatever command you issue. This must happen period, or the zombie cannot follow orders at all. So, when you say "Attack anything other than me that enters this hallway" The zombie knows what you are and what the boundries of the hallway are even if it has no means of knowing that on its own, and it continues to know this until new orders are given to override the old ones, or until control is broken.

-Desdan

[User3]

I've always been a proponent of the "a bit of the caster is always with his effects" school of thought. It makes things like zombie commands and ranged touch attack traps (like a Scorching Ray trap) or a caster level trap (like a Dispel Magic trap) make any sense at all.

And I do believe that there is a defualt behavior for zombies to "eat the living."

[RandomCasualty]

1090540175[/unixtime]
they simply shamble towards the nearest creature they perceive as a target in the shortest possible path and attempt to eat their brain.

But that alone requires some degree of intelligence. They need to be able to percieve something as a creature, as opposed to a wall or other inanimate object. and then they have to discern if its a valid target or not. I dont' see how you can do that without either some kind of absolute "creature sense", which would nullify illusions, or some degree of actual reasoning capability. I mean you typically can have uncontrolled zombies walking around wtih other undead, and they don't all of a sudden attack each other. So somehow the zombie by default can tell itself from other zombies, and that requires that the zombie either have some form of intelligence or not be fooled by illusions, because obviously it has some means of detecting real creatures from other zombies, and from inanimate objects.

The whole concept of mindless stuff isn't well thought out. Just being able to interpret commands and interact with a 3D environment while doing so pretty much requires some degree of int.

[Username17]

But that alone requires some degree of intelligence.

Who's overthinking this?

-Username17