Control module for power armor?


Homebrew

51 to 97 of 97 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

AucturnTheStranger wrote:
Anywho, let's not turn this thread into a flame war?

Agree.

And for the record, the lack of quotes is related to the difficulty of quoting via the medium I'm using to type, not actual lack of quotable rules. Honestly, pretty proud of doing as well as I am without a functioning spellcheck or autocorrect.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pax Miles wrote:

Regarding the control module, the use of skills, attack rolls and so forth, is based on the qualifier that the "device can already operate autonomously." Page 215, second sentance of the second paragraph under the heading of "control."

So, prior to the control module being installed, can the Powered Armor operate Autonomously? I read it no.

I do think an Automated Turret can opperate autonomously, but I'm basing that on it's name, not any reading on automated turret rules.

Automated Turrets do present a case for an object (in this case a gun) operating without a PC.

Anti-personnel Weapons wrote:
An antipersonnel weapon must be mounted near the boarding ramp of a Medium or smaller starships. This weapon can be any longarm whose item level is equal to or less than the starships’s tier. By spending 5 additional Build Points, the installed weapon can be a heavy weapon (of creature scale, not starships scale). When an antipersonnel weapon is activated, if a hostile creature approaches within the weapon’s range increment, it begins firing with an attack roll modifier equal to the ship’s tier (minimum 1). It fires once per round during combat until its ammunition is depleted or the hostile creature is disabled or flees. The weapon can’t detect invisible (or similarly hidden) creatures. This weapon can’t be removed and used by characters. Anyone with access to the starships’s computer system can activate or deactivate the weapon, as well designate what kind of targets are considered hostile. Once installed, this weapon can’t be removed from the starships without destroying it.

If these didn't exist then I'd probably agree with you about that line talking about robots. The automated turrets make that line seem pretty nonsensical, I don't know how to handle that and I hope that they clarify the rules on control modules more.

I'm headed home from work and probably wont be responding any more till tomorrow

Pax Miles wrote:
And for the record, the lack of quotes is related to the difficulty of quoting via the medium I'm using to type, not actual lack of quotable rules. Honestly, pretty proud of doing as well as I am without a functioning spellcheck or autocorrect.

Fair enough, it is pretty impressive in that light hah.


The Anti-personnel is different it is hardwired into the ships computer with no mention of a control module and is not therefore autonomous


Autonomy: without external control or influence; independent

Although a robot might have an AI, most of the time robots like loader bots and manufacturing bots are considered autonomous. They are given a task and do it.
Computers are the same way. You consider them autonomous in the book as an example. But what does it do without input? It does computation.
Power armor is a tool that holds up the armor plates with a use of motors. Thats why it depletes a battery. The characters strength must be 14 to send signals to whatever moves the motors.
Thats why you need power armor proficiency; it's to adjust to moving in combat with the signals by your own strength. Until you get used to it then it's hard to fight.
I will have that proficiency at 7th and program it into the Tier 3 rig. Under the computer section there is the fact that you put data into the computer, with the feat I know.


Okay show me a control module with a str score of 14 then


Robert Gooding wrote:
Okay show me a control module with a str score of 14 then

the sensors feed into a computer to the motors. The STR score is to operate the sensors. You don't need a data jack to control the power armor.

The armor upgrade on the battle harness would be a computer to alter the signals from operator to the computer for the motors.


You can’t have it both ways, say we’re not providing rules then ignore them


Robert Gooding wrote:
You can’t have it both ways, say we’re not providing rules then ignore them

You sound kinda like an ex of mine :D


I kinda sound like a few of my exes


Alright, I think I've gotten enough good answers and ideas to get the pitch to the GM.
Cheers!


Ridiculon wrote:

Automated Turrets do present a case for an object (in this case a gun) operating without a PC.

Anti-personnel Weapons wrote:
An antipersonnel weapon must be mounted near the boarding ramp of a Medium or smaller starships. This weapon can be any longarm whose item level is equal to or less than the starships’s tier. By spending 5 additional Build Points, the installed weapon can be a heavy weapon (of creature scale, not starships scale). When an antipersonnel weapon is activated, if a hostile creature approaches within the weapon’s range increment, it begins firing with an attack roll modifier equal to the ship’s tier (minimum 1). It fires once per round during combat until its ammunition is depleted or the hostile creature is disabled or flees. The weapon can’t detect invisible (or similarly hidden) creatures. This weapon can’t be removed and used by characters. Anyone with access to the starships’s computer system can activate or deactivate the weapon, as well designate what kind of targets are considered hostile. Once installed, this weapon can’t be removed from the starships without destroying it.

If these didn't exist then I'd probably agree with you about that line talking about robots. The automated turrets make that line seem pretty nonsensical, I don't know how to handle that and I hope that they clarify the rules on control modules more.

Not sure your point. Sounds like these are controlled by the computer, but that they are autonomous once activated (they just shoot at hostile creatures based on their settings in the ship's computer). Once on, they do their own thing. Sounds autonomous.

I suppose if the OP has a very simple task for their powered armor. For example, mindlessly following the PC at a fixed distance (like the follow command in WoW). You'd still need to burn energy as if you were in it, and the armor would not have any sort of tactical movement, just mindlessly keeping the distance that you set (so if you fall off a cliff, it jumps down with you).

But the impression I was getting was that OP is looking have a competent Drone-like companion that enables them to have both a drone and an exocortex. I think the intention is that you get one or the other, until level 17th.


Yes I want it to walk around and follow me as a simple program. It will not have an Int score and is as basic as a mobile turret but it can move. I can use my exocortex to make a Computers check with Wireless Hack. I can also use this with Remote Hack from custom rig. It will act like the turret and follow basic tasks until I tell it what to do. It will cost my actions to use. It can't shoot at all. It is hackable. The anti personnel weapon was a good comparison.
If the power armor itself is not autonomous, then it would fall into the basic category and not even require a control module.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just to be clear if you had put this in the home brew section the rest of us would have been a lot more cooperative


Robert Gooding wrote:
Just to be clear if you had put this in the home brew section the rest of us would have been a lot more cooperative

Ok...but in my first post I pointed out I was asking how it would work, and asked

what I could do to provide balanced rules based off of RAW. It's phrased in the book that the options for computers are too many to list, and it requires GM interpretation to fill in the blanks.
That's not homebrew, that's what it says in the book. I think you're giving the book too much credit, and a GMs judgement not enough. After all, if a starship is a device listed as an example for a control module, would you pay 10% of your ship's BP for it?
I have a hard time listening to people who can find all their answers in a book.


AucturnTheStranger wrote:

Yes I want it to walk around and follow me as a simple program. It will not have an Int score and is as basic as a mobile turret but it can move. I can use my exocortex to make a Computers check with Wireless Hack. I can also use this with Remote Hack from custom rig. It will act like the turret and follow basic tasks until I tell it what to do. It will cost my actions to use. It can't shoot at all. It is hackable. The anti personnel weapon was a good comparison.

If the power armor itself is not autonomous, then it would fall into the basic category and not even require a control module.

When you were describing it at following you arround and providing cover fire, I'm picturing a drone that is making tactical movement on it's own initiative and firing while you are firing.

Tweaking the Powered Armor to Mindlessly follow you at a fixed distance and then to be able to shoot only when you hack into it and use your actions to fire, really doesn't sound like an issue. Especially if you already have all the feats related to weapons being fired and for wearing the armor itself.

Anyway, this will be a houserule (just because the rules don't directly allow it), but sounds reasonable enough where you aren't going to run into huge problems.

I would strongly suggest that your GM bans you from increasing the Item level of the powered armor above your character level (like with tensile reinforcement). Just because I think the hardness may otherwise create unreasonable situations in game mechanics. Might not matter.

Stat-wise, it won't have any creature Stats. It's an object, not a construct. It has HP and hardness based on it's item level. AC is based on size. For strength, just ignore that. It can carry anything it can carry while you wear it, it won't drop things just because you got out.

I will note that even as an object, just having a man-shaped object will draw fire to it and as an object only it's not going to be very durable. Honestly, I think it may be more a liability than an asset, having it follow you around. Having an NPC follower that wears it when you aren't would be far more practical here.


AucturnTheStranger wrote:
After all, if a starship is a device listed as an example for a control module, would you pay 10% of your ship's BP for it?

You keep mentioning this 10% bit. Just to be clear, you understand that it's 10% of the ship AND attached systems, not just 10% of the ship's base price, right?

For the powered Armor it would be 10% of the armor, the armor upgrades, any weapon attachments and so forth. Anything that the Control Module can access has to be include in that whole you are paying 10% of. That would include any ammunition should the weapons in question be able to reload via the Control Module.

Should add up pretty quick, but is still a pretty low price compared to the ship or powered armor itself.


AucturnTheStranger wrote:
Robert Gooding wrote:
Just to be clear if you had put this in the home brew section the rest of us would have been a lot more cooperative
I have a hard time listening to people who can find all their answers in a book.

Robert is just pointing out that this section of the forum is specifically for answers that can be found in the book. There's nothing wrong with using homebrew or houserules, it's just how this site sorts itself. Rules are handle one place, houserules another place.

In theory, posting a question in this section means that you are looking for an answer that is findable in the printed rules. So if you have trouble "listening to people who can find all their answers in the book" this really is the wrong part of the forum to be posting your question.

I do think that some of Robert's comments may have appeared overly hostile (doubt it's intentional), but I do think he's trying to answer your question as per the rules in this section of the site. Suggesting it should be in the homebrew section is a good suggestion because they would answer your question much better than one of us in the rules section.

Does that make sense?
PS: Hope I didn't misrepresent you robert.


Oh I was getting pretty hostile towards ridiculon after the whole why shouldn’t I have a whole army acting on my turn making everyone else wait half an hour every round


Robert Gooding wrote:
Oh I was getting pretty hostile towards ridiculon after the whole why shouldn’t I have a whole army acting on my turn making everyone else wait half an hour every round

Once again, that was your idea, not mine lol. Also its not a viable option til level 9 or 10, and even then none of the "robots" will have guns.

Even with all that there's nothing wrong with the idea.

@Pax Miles Those anti-personnel weapons are just longarms or heavy weapons, they are the only examples of computer controlled guns in the CRB and so i took the intuitive leap that they must be what you get when you hook a control module up to a gun.

Normally guns aren't autonomous, but if you install a control module, which includes the turret mounting and whatever sensors are needed to detect enemies as per the control module rules, you get an autonomous weapon.

Unless the SDT comes out with some clarification this is the best example we've got of how to actually use control modules.


GM here! I have some issues:

The first issue is that I don't think this is remotely rules legal. Control modules state

Quote:
When in charge of a device that can already operate autonomously (such as a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device. When operating a device that requires a skill check or attack roll (such as a computer hooked to a med-bed or weapon), the controlling computer can either allow a creature with authorized access to attempt a skill check or attack roll, or attempt the skill check or attack roll itself. When making its own check, the computer is assumed to have an attack bonus equal to its tier, proficiency with any weapon it controls, and a total skill bonus equal to 2-1/2 × its tier.

Emphasis mine. It specifies autonomy as being a requirement for giving commands. Things that are autonomous are listed as such, from what I can see. In the vehicle section anything that can be autonomous or controlled via autopilot is actually listed out.

Beyond that, it specifically calls out making skill checks or attack rolls for non-autonomous objects, but nothing else. Adding a turret to a gun as part of the control module cost makes sense, as that's an attack roll. It doesn't also add wheels and an engine to move it around.

Ignoring all that, we'll assume that I give the ok for the power armor to have sophisticated enough electronics that a control module can get it to walk in a straight line. This brings me to my second concern: balance.

Does it have proficiency, or does it take penalties? Having an AC equal to that which the armor provides a PC or NPC doesn't make sense: it's just a dumb not-bot putting one foot in front of another. Not only should it be taking flat footed penalties, it probably can't handle any sort of moderately difficult terrain. I'm not certain it can handle things like cords strewn about the floor or curbs on the side of the road. The remote computer is simply giving a command: left foot forward. Right foot forward. Repeat.

How does the gun even function? In most cases, the turret is attached to a computer and a gun, which aims itself. In this case, a computer in the PC's head is somehow aiming the power armor's arms remotely from a perspective it can't see? What happens if the PC doesn't have line of sight on either the armor or the target?

Does taking the effort to tell the AI to tell the PA what to shoot take an action? What type? What if you tell it where to move and who to shoot?

Does the PC's head AI make perception checks while walking it in formation with the party?

What if people shoot at the giant power armor standing out of cover? Does it have hardness? Is there a chance for them to blow out the control module? What if someone tries to climb into it, do the manual controls override the computer?

What if someone bull rushes it? It can't brace itself, so it's probably as difficult as shoving a loaded bookshelf hard enough to topple over. Can the control module stand it back up?

I'm not super worried about it throwing off the encounter balance because I think this thing is as worthless as (I apparently can't finish that statement), but it's sure as hell going to bog the table down.

Lastly: how in the hell do I deal with this as a GM? If you go down a hallway too tight for it, do you leave it behind? Do I roll a percentage chance for it to be stolen? Even if the thief can't open it, they can just toss it onto a dolly and wheel it off. "Let's go recover my power armor!" might be a fun subplot... once.

Does every firefight dissolve into the baddies shooting at the giant power armor that isn't standing in cover, unless there's a vastly more obvious target?

I'm all for cool stuff, but this kind of screams "headache". Hiring an NPC to follow the party around wearing it when the PC doesn't need it on seems like a much more elegant solution. Hell, Figurine of the Concealed Companion seems like a much more elegant solution.


A couple of those issues are covered

In the control module section it says

Control Module wrote:
When controlling a basic device that essentially has an on/off switch, the computer simply gains access to that switch and can activate or deactivate the connected device as instructed. When in charge of a device that can already operate autonomously (such as a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device. When operating a device that requires a skill check or attack roll (such as a computer hooked to a med-bed or weapon), the controlling computer can either allow a creature with authorized access to attempt a skill check or attack roll, or attempt the skill check or attack roll itself. When making its own check, the computer is assumed to have an attack bonus equal to its tier, proficiency with any weapon it controls, and a total skill bonus equal to 2-1/2 × its tier. Such controlled objects are normally mounted to a specific location (such as a controlled longarm placed in a turret with line of sight to the computer’s terminal), in which case the mount and related components are included in the control unit price.

But the others would be GM fiat for the most part. On a related note, none of those things are covered for Starships fitted with a control module either, and those are explicitly called out as examples for this tech.


I would assume that starships would fall under either autonomous or autopilot, so the computer would be able to make piloting checks with a skill bonus of 2.5x tier. Starship weapons would be an attack bonus equal to it's tier.

Neither of those gives the control module power armor proficiency (as it is neither autonomous nor a weapon) and walking is not a skill check anyway.


Wish you could edit:

I'd potentially be ok with it walking around as non-proficient: so half speed, EAC and KAC reduced by 4, off kilter and flat footed.

I don't think it's rules legal, and honestly it makes it even worse than I was already thinking it'd be.


Jay M wrote:

I would assume that starships would fall under either autonomous or autopilot, so the computer would be able to make piloting checks with a skill bonus of 2.5x tier. Starship weapons would be an attack bonus equal to it's tier.

Neither of those gives the control module power armor proficiency (as it is neither autonomous nor a weapon) and walking is not a skill check anyway.

Autopilot starships are not a thing in Starfinder, every movement a ship makes needs a pilot. I still don't see how a control module attached to a suit of powered armor is in any way a different case than a control module attached to a starship, if one is legal the other must be.

(The only instance of the word Autopilot in the CRB is in the vehicle section, it doesn't apply to starships)


Ridiculon wrote:
Jay M wrote:

I would assume that starships would fall under either autonomous or autopilot, so the computer would be able to make piloting checks with a skill bonus of 2.5x tier. Starship weapons would be an attack bonus equal to it's tier.

Neither of those gives the control module power armor proficiency (as it is neither autonomous nor a weapon) and walking is not a skill check anyway.

Autopilot starships are not a thing in Starfinder, every movement a ship makes needs a pilot. I still don't see how a control module attached to a suit of powered armor is in any way a different case than a control module attached to a starship, if one is legal the other must be.

(The only instance of the word Autopilot in the CRB is in the vehicle section, it doesn't apply to starships)

That's a pretty big logical leap. It specifically says that it controls ships, which makes it a very specific exception to the otherwise autonomous-only rule if autopilot on ships is indeed not a thing.


That's exactly my point, if you accept that the given examples can be autonomous then you must be able to extend the rules to other devices and make them autonomous as well. A gun doesn't have any way to turn itself, aim, and fire and yet when you attach a control module (based on the presumption that this is what makes anti-personnel weapons) you get an autonomous turret that can do those things.

EDIT: for clarification, Autopilot is not a default thing on starships in starfinder. it is a default option on vehicles.

This says to me that prior to installing a control module starships cannot be autonomous.


Yes I'll treat it as an object. AC as an object with hardness and HP. The power armor will basically walk around, follow me, and carry a heavy weapon on its weapon mount, which will also have a control module.
There is an example for a longarm being controlled by a control module, and it is turned into an autonomous weapon by the computer with a control module. A longarm is not autonomous. The control module gives the computer ability to use the connected device to do what the device already does. It is also written that if the device isn't autonomous, then it's a basic device and no control module is needed.


Quote:
A gun doesn't have any way to turn itself, aim, and fire and yet when you attach a control module (based on the presumption that this is what makes anti-personnel weapons) you get an autonomous turret that can do those things.

What? Yes it does, it's in the rules for control modules:

Quote:
Such controlled objects are normally mounted to a specific location (such as a controlled longarm placed in a turret with line of sight to the computer’s terminal), in which case the mount and related components are included in the control unit price

I have no idea where you're getting the idea that it needs to be expanded to apply to other objects, that's nowhere in the rules as written.

Autonomous objects can be given a control module. Things with on/off can be given a control module. Weapons can be given a control module with an included turret mount. Computers can be given a control module. Starships can be given a control module.

By RAW, nothing else can be given a control module. I see no rules stating that this can be extended to anything else.


Those are examples, that is not a definitive list of things that can have control modules. Notice the words "such as" in front of those things.


Ridiculon wrote:
Normally guns aren't autonomous, but if you install a control module, which includes the turret mounting and whatever sensors are needed to detect enemies as per the control module rules, you get an autonomous weapon.

No. The control Module doesn't include turret mounting or sensors. Nor does it make things autonomous.

If anything, the control module makes autonomous weapons cease to be, since the control module is all about removing the object's ability to be self reliant so you can control it.

That said, OP clarified that they were not picturing a robot ally that was shooting in addition to their own shooting, but was instead only firing while they gave up their actions via hacking.

And while hacking, doesn't strike me as unrealistic to suggest that the Powered armor weapon mounts could be on a turret and could have enough sensors/cameras where a hacker could make shooting attempts with the weapons. I don't think it's close enough to an automated turret where the PC could set their armor to patrol an area, but if they a manually telling the weapons to fire at "that" target, I don't see why it couldn't be done.

Additionally, I don't think powered armor can normally be hacked, but the OP doesn't mind the double edged sword of making their armor hackable, so as far as house rules go, this one doesn't seem too broken.


Pax Miles wrote:
Ridiculon wrote:
Normally guns aren't autonomous, but if you install a control module, which includes the turret mounting and whatever sensors are needed to detect enemies as per the control module rules, you get an autonomous weapon.

No. The control Module doesn't include turret mounting or sensors. Nor does it make things autonomous.

If anything, the control module makes autonomous weapons cease to be, since the control module is all about removing the object's ability to be self reliant so you can control it.

Yes those things are included, that is the explicit example in the control module section

Control Module wrote:

Such controlled objects are normally mounted to a specific location (such as a controlled longarm placed in a turret with line of sight to the computer’s terminal), in which case the mount and related components are included in the control unit price.


You're right, it's not a definite list.

Quote:
When in charge of a device that can already operate autonomously (such as a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device.

Doesn't apply, can't operate autonomously already.

Quote:
hen operating a device that requires a skill check or attack roll (such as a computer hooked to a med-bed or weapon), the controlling computer can either allow a creature with authorized access to attempt a skill check or attack roll, or attempt the skill check or attack roll itself.

Doesn't apply, not a skill check or attack roll.

Sadly, power armor does not fit any of the conditions of the "such as".


You don't think firing a weapon requires an attack roll? (all but one of the power armor suits have weapons)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like we're going around in circles. Guns can be automated by putting them into an included weapon turret mount - this is specified by the text.

That's not the same as controlling the power armor to raise it's arm, take aim, and fire. But even assuming that does work, it still doesn't give it the ability to make the power armor walk as that doesn't require an attack roll or ability check. On top of that it doesn't have proficiency with the power armor so it's half speed and -4 to both ACs.


The control module can control non autonomous and autonomous devices.
"When in charge of a device that can already operate autonomously (such as a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device. When operating a device that requires a skill check or attack roll (such as a computer hooked to a med-bed or weapon), the controlling computer can either allow a creature with authorized access to attempt a skill check or attack roll, or attempt the skill check or attack roll itself."
You seem to think it can only operate autonomous devices, when this is written right in the book it can control any complex device with more than an on/off switch.


You're still not reading the text.

The first says it can control autonomous devices, which a power armor is not.

The second says it can control more complex devices that require skill checks or attack rolls, which a power armor does not.

The power armor having a gun means that at best attack rolls fall under this and the computer can shoot. Walking is a function outside of skill checks or attack rolls.

And even if it can do both, it's still moving at 15 ft and taking -4 to both ACs.


It also gets flat footed condition so another -2 to both acs


Jay M wrote:

You're still not reading the text.

The first says it can control autonomous devices, which a power armor is not.

The second says it can control more complex devices that require skill checks or attack rolls, which a power armor does not.

The power armor having a gun means that at best attack rolls fall under this and the computer can shoot. Walking is a function outside of skill checks or attack rolls.

And even if it can do both, it's still moving at 15 ft and taking -4 to both ACs.

If you are really going to deny them the ability to move the powered armor then they will simply have to make charge attacks to go anywhere, since every suit of powered armor has a melee attack and that requires an attack roll.

You are being ridiculous, there is no reason that a control module that can control a vehicle or a starship or a robot cannot also control a suit of powered armor. Would you say no to a control module operating an elevator because its not on the list of examples?


Easy answer, a character makes a charge attack, the power armor itself does not. To preempt your obvious reply to this: a gun can make an attack on it's own because the control module specifically includes a turret allowing it to in the text.

There is a reason that a control module can control a vehicle: a vehicle is autonomous, as is a robot. Starships are specifically quantified as being controllable. A power armor is not.

I would rule an elevator as being similar enough to an on/off function to qualify. Hitting the call button is an on function. Hitting a floor is an on function. The default state is off. It's vastly less complex than making a non-autonomous suit of armor move and attack on it's own.


"Computers are good at storing data, making calculations, manipulating and sorting information, performing rote tasks, and combining these tasks (often in the form of apps or programs). A computer may be set up to perform any of these functions in a general way, and it’s impossible to define everything a computer can possibly do."
This is clearly stating that the given examples (computer, robot, weapon, med-bed) are in no way a complete list of a computers potential.
"Anything more complex that would NORMALLY REQUIRE A CREATURE TO OPERATE must be controlled through a control module."
"The control module allows the computer to operate a complex device, to which it must be in some way connected. (Simpler devices can be controlled as part of a computer’s basic functions.)"
I interpret that the book is giving the specifics for rules on the device types which need these rules. It is not saying these are the only devices that can be controlled. Vehicles can be controlled, and vehicles move. It's safe to assume that the power armor can move, since it requires a battery. If the power armor must make skill checks to walk over a curb, that's provided by the computer.


Quote:

"Computers are good at storing data, making calculations, manipulating and sorting information, performing rote tasks, and combining these tasks (often in the form of apps or programs). A computer may be set up to perform any of these functions in a general way, and it’s impossible to define everything a computer can possibly do."

This is clearly stating that the given examples (computer, robot, weapon, med-bed) are in no way a complete list of a computers potential.

You're correct that you can't define everything a computer can do. Unfortunately, the list of things a control module can control is pretty hard defined (I've listed them repeatedly, you can read my other posts).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree that this one is going in circles. Just houserule it and be done. Don't bother looking for exact rules support because at best it's murky and at worst it just isn't there. Houserule that guy and stop wasting your time on this thread.

Anyway, I'm done here. Thank you those that contributed. I hope you reach an acceptable conclusion.


We compromised on basically Figurine of the Concealed Companion for power armor, and an eventual quest to get something similar to JARVIS for power armor, allowing basic movement and shooting.


The rules are not clearly defined enough for either side to agree on. At this point, the GM and player need to work out an answer that both sides agree on. It's best for both GM and player to work with each other to keep the game going.


Ridiculon wrote:
Metaphysician wrote:
There's nothing wrong with the *idea* of remote controlling powered armor. However, there is a lot wrong with the idea that you should be able to do this essentially for free. Which is to say, the cost of necessary upgrades and improvements on the PA to make it work? Should be basically the same as the cost of buying a combat robot of the same CR, since that is essentially what you are doing.

A: Robots do not have a listed cost, they are creatures

B: You can remotely control Starships for these same costs, how is this different?

A: Yes, which suggests that, despite existing in the setting as tech that is sold on the market? Players are not supposed to simply by them, especially in bulk.

B: You sure about that? Because the cost of a control module is based on the cost of the thing it *controls*. . . and ships do not have credit costs. I mean, I suppose if you *really* wanted to spend 10% of your BP on making your ship remote controllable, there's nothing stopping you beyond that its a bad idea. . .


Metaphysician wrote:
Ridiculon wrote:
Metaphysician wrote:
There's nothing wrong with the *idea* of remote controlling powered armor. However, there is a lot wrong with the idea that you should be able to do this essentially for free. Which is to say, the cost of necessary upgrades and improvements on the PA to make it work? Should be basically the same as the cost of buying a combat robot of the same CR, since that is essentially what you are doing.

A: Robots do not have a listed cost, they are creatures

B: You can remotely control Starships for these same costs, how is this different?

A: Yes, which suggests that, despite existing in the setting as tech that is sold on the market? Players are not supposed to simply by them, especially in bulk.

B: You sure about that? Because the cost of a control module is based on the cost of the thing it *controls*. . . and ships do not have credit costs. I mean, I suppose if you *really* wanted to spend 10% of your BP on making your ship remote controllable, there's nothing stopping you beyond that its a bad idea. . .

Also both starships and vehicles both have ai assisted guidance, power armor does not


Starships do not have ai autopilot, only vehicles have that

51 to 97 of 97 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Starfinder / Homebrew / Control module for power armor? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew