I have an android mechanic with an exocortex. At 7th level I will take Power Armor Proficiency, and will get Expert Rig, which is integrated with the exocortex.
Now I want to add a control module to the rig, costing 345 credits (10% of device). Using artificial personality, and remote hack and wireless hack, I should be able to control the battle harness through voice commands.
The GM makes a great point. Would the armor have proficiency with itself? The example controlled longarm under control module is given proficiency and a mount for a functioning turret. Would this work? Any answers or thoughts appreciated!
From the armor's perspective, the armor would be its body, like a creature. As such even if it didn't get proficiency in itself for some reason, it wouldn't matter, because the armor bonus would basically be its natural armor bonus and it would just be wielding its weapons like a creature, rather than being impeded like a nonproficient creature inside the armor. Given the example of the longarm, though, I'd say it would have proficiency and you don't have to think about it too hard.
You might have to separately add a control module to each weapon attached to the armor, though.
I suspect that this is, while not exactly *impossible*, probably much harder and more expensive than you think. For starters, powered armor is not a robot, and doesn't have any intrinsic capacity to move and fight itself. A simple control module probably wouldn't do the trick, because the thing its trying to control doesn't have the capability to follow commands.
My inclination would be to say, you probably need to take some kind of armor upgrade in order to make the armor semi-autonomous, before a control module can do anything.
Computer miniaturized until it can fit inside the armor with ai upgrade, then no need for control module, then use the antipersonnel turret in starship rules for attack bonus guideline based on computer tier
Great, thanks for the advice. Here's what I'm thinking now.
The power armor will need an armor upgrade. I'm thinking a miniaturized computer with a camera and microphone, maybe tier 1 or 2. This is to replace control commands from operator to a control computer.
My custom rig from mechanic will be a tier 3 computer with artificial personality, and 2 control modules. One for the upgrade computer, the other for a weapon control on the weapon mount.
The power armor by itself will function like a creature. STR 18, Dex 10, Con -, Int -, Wis 10, Cha -.
AC=battle harness, HP=as object (30)
AucturnTheStranger wrote: I have an android mechanic with an exocortex. At 7th level I will take Power Armor Proficiency, and will get Expert Rig, which is integrated with the exocortex.
Now I want to add a control module to the rig, costing 345 credits (10% of device). Using artificial personality, and remote hack and wireless hack, I should be able to control the battle harness through voice commands.
The GM makes a great point. Would the armor have proficiency with itself? The example controlled longarm under control module is given proficiency and a mount for a functioning turret. Would this work? Any answers or thoughts appreciated!
Okay, so you were given the choice between having a drone and having an exocotex at 1st level. You picked exocortex and now you are trying to ALSO have a drone? I'd call that an attempt at cheating, if I were your GM.
But if the GM doesn't care...
I also think that you'll run into lots of game balance problems, since Powered Armor is intended to be an object, not a creature.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
So the object being controlled seems to need to have robotic parts that are electrically operated in order to control the object by computer. Heavy armor couldn't, but powered armor is clearly digitally controlled, and doesn't require a human body for structural support. The fact that a vehicle can be controlled is what makes me feel there's room to control powered armor.
But I don't think it would be very good. If you assume based on the fact that the computer is proficient with weapons it control that it's also compatible with the armor and its weapons, then you're still relying on its tier or your own abilities for skill checks. And you'd be relying on the armor's hp and you'd have no saves because items don't get them unless they're worn by a creature with saves.
Raw, you probably shouldn't be able to do it but you can make an argument for it. Is it worth it? I dunno
VoodooSpecter wrote: So the object being controlled seems to need to have robotic parts that are electrically operated in order to control the object by computer. Heavy armor couldn't, but powered armor is clearly digitally controlled, and doesn't require a human body for structural support. The fact that a vehicle can be controlled is what makes me feel there's room to control powered armor.
But I don't think it would be very good. If you assume based on the fact that the computer is proficient with weapons it control that it's also compatible with the armor and its weapons, then you're still relying on its tier or your own abilities for skill checks. And you'd be relying on the armor's hp and you'd have no saves because items don't get them unless they're worn by a creature with saves.
Raw, you probably shouldn't be able to do it but you can make an argument for it. Is it worth it? I dunno
I'll add that the Overload (Ex) Specifically doesn't affect Powered Armor, and the Override (Ex) improvement doesn't add Powered Armor to list of affectable items.
Even if, logically, Powered Armor may be functionally a robot, it's very clear that the rules themselves do not intend Powered Armor to be considered a robot for mechanic purposes.
From a balance stance, it would be easier to handle this as a Drone wearing Powered Armor, than it would be to create Powered Armor that is being controlled without a pilot. And this would be easy to implement, as you'd just need a Small/Medium Drone, and GM permission to take the armor proficency feats on your drone (or just accept the non-proficency penalties).
Artificial Personality (CRB page 216) wrote: Artificial personalities ... can attempt Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Sense Motive checks Except for Intimidate, I don't see how that helps with remote-control combat. An artificial personality has no BAB, DEX, or weapon or power armor proficiencies.
I'd say the remote control lets you operate your battle harness remotely, but it doesn't give you or the harness any more actions in combat than if you were wearing it. Also, if you don't spend any actions to move it, what is its DEX?
(On second thought, an artificial personality also lets you operate your remote control without using any hands, so it's great for anyone who doesn't have an exo-cortex.)
VoodooSpecter wrote: So the object being controlled seems to need to have robotic parts that are electrically operated in order to control the object by computer. Heavy armor couldn't, but powered armor is clearly digitally controlled, and doesn't require a human body for structural support. The fact that a vehicle can be controlled is what makes me feel there's room to control powered armor.
But I don't think it would be very good. If you assume based on the fact that the computer is proficient with weapons it control that it's also compatible with the armor and its weapons, then you're still relying on its tier or your own abilities for skill checks. And you'd be relying on the armor's hp and you'd have no saves because items don't get them unless they're worn by a creature with saves.
Raw, you probably shouldn't be able to do it but you can make an argument for it. Is it worth it? I dunno
It's not that it needs to be good or powerful, but versatile. I'm not trying to get a superpowered robot. I want my power armor to follow me around until I need it, at 20 ft range. And provide covering fire, because at 7th lvl the custom rig has an attack bonus of +3. Also I'm using an armor upgrade computer to allow signals the operator normally provides to be given by a tier 3 computer. RAW, there is a passage under computers that says it might be possible with the right system.
Page 214 "...and it's impossible to define everything a computer can possibly do."
Anyway, the computers section seems to be very open ended, and it does require GMs judgement.
Thanks!
Pax Miles wrote: AucturnTheStranger wrote: I have an android mechanic with an exocortex. At 7th level I will take Power Armor Proficiency, and will get Expert Rig, which is integrated with the exocortex.
Now I want to add a control module to the rig, costing 345 credits (10% of device). Using artificial personality, and remote hack and wireless hack, I should be able to control the battle harness through voice commands.
The GM makes a great point. Would the armor have proficiency with itself? The example controlled longarm under control module is given proficiency and a mount for a functioning turret. Would this work? Any answers or thoughts appreciated!
Okay, so you were given the choice between having a drone and having an exocotex at 1st level. You picked exocortex and now you are trying to ALSO have a drone? I'd call that an attempt at cheating, if I were your GM.
But if the GM doesn't care...
I also think that you'll run into lots of game balance problems, since Powered Armor is intended to be an object, not a creature. It's not that I wanna slide this under the GMs radar, but I'm trying to come up with a good system of rules for pitching to him that sounds reasonable. I honestly dont wanna kill the game as the other players groan as I dominate with walking power armor. It doesnt really look like it would. Its nowhere near as versatile or powerful as a drone. Also, if it reaches 0 HP, it is destroyed just like an item. I'm aware of that risk. No one wants to lose thousands of credits. I want the mechanic to be a cyborg soldier, and the power armor is an extension of that.
If you called me out for cheating with this idea, how would you work with me to make this idea reasonable? Or would you just ban hammer?
Oh I’d ban hammer it hard but for theoretical musings, a computer can control weapons and have an attack bonus as precedent is set by the antipersonel turret in the starship rules, now moving is a different question....there isn’t exactly a precedent for that...so it may not be able to walk and chew gum
AucturnTheStranger wrote: It's not that I wanna slide this under the GMs radar, but I'm trying to come up with a good system of rules for pitching to him that sounds reasonable. I honestly dont wanna kill the game as the other players groan as I dominate with walking power armor. It doesnt really look like it would. Its nowhere near as versatile or powerful as a drone. Also, if it reaches 0 HP, it is destroyed just like an item. I'm aware of that risk. No one wants to lose thousands of credits. I want the mechanic to be a cyborg soldier, and the power armor is an extension of that.
If you called me out for cheating with this idea, how would you work with me to make this idea reasonable? Or would you just ban hammer?
Look, if you want a creature that isn't your character, but does stuff for you, that's a Drone. If you don't want a helper creature, take an Exocortex. If you are trying a way to have both, I call foul - that is, I call foul until you reach 17th level, where you gain Control Net (Ex) which specifically grants both an Exocortex and a Drone to the same PC.
As to your character concept. I'm not sure I understand the concept. How is controlling a suit of powered armor that you don't wear related to being a Cyborg Soldier?
As an aside, you could always take a Drone design it to look like a suit of powered armor.
Could also look into either the Drone Meld (Ex) Mechanic Trick or the Riding Saddle (Ex) Drone Upgrade to represent your drone as a suit of Powered Armor. Wouldn't be in game mechanics, but you could have the asthetic of having "armor" that is also a robot.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
If you're trying to make the power armor more mobile you can try storing it in a null space chamber.
And yeah, roboticizing powered armor is a bit of a stretch.
Another technique I've seen people try is to build an artificial body from prosthetic cybernetic limbs... but I also don't think THAT is really how it's meant to be done, either. Those are supposed to be brain-controlled not computer-controlled.
Honestly I anticipate that we'll see more robots in the Armory when it comes out but until then I think we're out of luck.
Because I have an exocortex and not a drone shouldn't keep me from having a control module drive something. If you looked at the drone's comparable attack bonus and other stats, that increase by level for free, maybe a machine I build and pay for isn't the same as a class ability. I can see the similarity to Drone Meld. But I wanted the exocortex over drone. A cyborg soldier augments himself. The armor is supposed to be an extension. I'll usually wear the armor, but I also want it to act as a decoy I can fix, give covering fire, and carry my loot.
My GM has not said I can't have it because I didn't pick drone. He said I need to come up with reasonable rules and cost to make it work.
There's nothing wrong with this idea at all, power armor is essentially a vehicle and we already know you can fit those with control modules (up to and including starships).
Its totally ridiculous to suggest that you can remote control a car, a gun, or a spaceship but not a gundam/powered suit.
Turns out computers are really damned useful. It follows that a character who carries one everywhere they go will be able to do stuff that computers can do. Any player character could do this if they had a mobile computer, I see no reason to punish the guy who chose one as their class ability.
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.
AucturnTheStranger wrote: Because I have an exocortex and not a drone shouldn't keep me from having a control module drive something. If you looked at the drone's comparable attack bonus and other stats, that increase by level for free, maybe a machine I build and pay for isn't the same as a class ability. I can see the similarity to Drone Meld. But I wanted the exocortex over drone. A cyborg soldier augments himself. The armor is supposed to be an extension. I'll usually wear the armor, but I also want it to act as a decoy I can fix, give covering fire, and carry my loot.
My GM has not said I can't have it because I didn't pick drone. He said I need to come up with reasonable rules and cost to make it work.
What you want from your armor is not an augmention of yourself. I agree that the Exocortex is the better choice in terms of cyborgs, but I don't think the Powered armor fits at all, since it's an external upgrade.
I also see a further conflict because part of your class grants you both the exocortex and the drone at 17th level, so for the GM to grant what is basically a drone and an Exocortex at 7th level goes well beyond the written intentions of Mechanic Class. I think the GM is reasonable to ask you to wait until 17th level.
Looking into the Control Module option. Definitely does not apply to Powered Armor, but ignoring that for a sec:
Control Module doesn't grant the same level of control as a Drone would. The Drone is a Player control companion creature. The Control Module is either directly controlled by the PC (as in, activating the Control Module INSTEAD of making their own actions in combat) or is essentially an NPC (thus under the GM's control).
So I think you might be able to get the GM to create an NPC of "Animated Empty Powered Armor" which would be the GM's character, but one that could be *convinced* to be Powered Armor for players as well. That could work out well, since it would allow the GM to offer the players impressive armor or support only when they felt the PCs needed it, which would help balance encounters during play.
My other suggestion would be to ask the GM if you can play two player characters at the same time.
In anycase, I think the GM should consider this another PC in terms of determining CR for encounters.
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?
Because your next argument after you beg someone else to agree with you is to get 10 of them
Robert Gooding wrote: Because your next argument after you beg someone else to agree with you is to get 10 of them Your point?
Cargo lifter 4 2,150
Battle harness 5 3,450
Spider harness 10 19,500
Flight frame 11 27,100
Jarlslayer 15 125,500
If a player wants to spend a minimum of 21.5K credits for 10 Cargo lifters + the money needed to upgrade and fit them with control modules why are you as the GM trying to stand in their way? Outside of reasonable inventory limits for the settlement they're in there's no reason you should disallow this.
According to WBL that makes 10 Cargo Lifters an option at level 7 at the earliest, as long as 94% of what they own is in fact cargo lifters.
More realistically this is a 9th or 10th level option, for the cheapest, least capable, and totally unarmed power armor
Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
Robert Gooding wrote: Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
You are the one who took it to a unrealistic extreme, not me.
Do you ban followers too? How about NPC hirelings?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this concept and you are stretching to ridiculous lengths to say otherwise, including ruling that a player cannot use their money and class abilities in a way permitted by the rules of the game.
Ridiculon wrote: Robert Gooding wrote: Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
You are the one who took it to a unrealistic extreme, not me.
Do you ban followers too? How about NPC hirelings?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this concept and you are stretching to ridiculous lengths to say otherwise, including ruling that a player cannot use their money and class abilities in a way permitted by the rules of the game. We’ve been discussing the rules and possibilities for a while and still haven’t fount a way for it to be allowed the way you want within them and you agreed that that was your next step, I just predicted it based on your actions in the thread
Followers and npc hirelings generally aren’t under your direct control and are ongoing expenses vs a one time cost
Ridiculon wrote: Do you ban followers too? How about NPC hirelings?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this concept and you are stretching to ridiculous lengths to say otherwise, including ruling that a player cannot use their money and class abilities in a way permitted by the rules of the game.
As mentioned, I think this would be a fine NPC for the GM to add to the party.
I personally don't really see an issue of a Player playing two characters, one of which is essentially a Powered Armor "Caddy." Much easier to balance an extra PC than it is to give a single PC abilties that are ourside of the game rules.
The Control Module does not work on Powered Armor. If the PC wants a vehicle, or a starship, or a robot, or weapon turret, they can do that.
If the GM wants to houserule, that's fine too.
As an aside, this thread has me thinking about making a mechanic that take the upgrade to make the drone into a mount, and then rides the drone as if it were mobile suit. Wouldn't provide AC, but should do everything else I want Powered armor to do with the added bonus of being able to "don" it much faster, plus it would be able to perform it's own actions in combat. Also the Drone Mount can be taken at 1st level, so no waiting. Plus no strength requirement for a drone mount, since it is really opperating itself.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
You can also use survival to use drone for cover increasing your ac
Maybe some sort of disabling of the exocortex for an amount of time, to simulate it being 'busy' running the power armor caddy?
Robert Gooding wrote: You can also use survival to use drone for cover increasing your ac Exactly. Some really cool mount mechanic potential.
Plus it wouldn't affect your PC's actual armor, so you could still benefit from light or heavy armor.
Pax Miles wrote:
The Control Module does not work on Powered Armor. If the PC wants a vehicle, or a starship, or a robot, or weapon turret, they can do that.
If the GM wants to houserule, that's fine too.
This is completely false, Control Modules can be applied to any complex device that is connected to a computer, as per the CRB.
Modules wrote: Modules define what a computer is capable of doing beyond its basic functions. Computers can have any number of modules. These typically fall into one of four categories: control, secure data, Spell chips, and upgrades. Control modules can operate a device or object that is in some way linked to the computer, such as a video camera or even a connected robot. A secure data module contains a vast amount of information, from technical blueprints to financial ledgers or perhaps personal correspondence. Spell chips are special magic items that allow a computer to generate Spell effects. Finally, upgrades are simply improvements to the computer system that increase the Difficulty of hacking the computer, expand its reach, or make it faster and easier to use. For more information about common computer modules, see Modules on page 215. Control Module wrote: 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.)Some countermeasures might make use of a computer’s control modules when activated. Gaining control of a computer allows the user to activate the devices in any way allowed by the control module. The price of a control module depends on the complexity of the object being controlled. The control module for a more complex device, such as a spy Drone, Starship, Vehicle, or weapon turret, costs 10% of the device to be controlled. The complex objects listed are obviously examples, not a definitive list, which you would know if you had actually read this section.
Robert Gooding wrote: We’ve been discussing the rules and possibilities for a while and still haven’t fount a way for it to be allowed the way you want within them and you agreed that that was your next step, I just predicted it based on your actions in the thread I did not agree, what i did was calculate the actual costs of the suggestion you presented. It is an unrealistic extreme that you are trying to use as justification for ignoring part of the rules given in the CRB, but it does not actually mean that those rules don't apply despite the fact that you would rather they didn't.
As to the possibility, look at the rules that i quoted above. You can connect them to any complex device, with examples including guns, Starships, ground vehicles, robots, or drones.
Again you want a fully autonomous robot which it doesn’t support
Robert Gooding wrote: Again you want a fully autonomous robot which it doesn’t support How does it not support this? Explain that to me, because if you can't i'm gonna go with the rules that say when i install a computer that controls a device it uses the computer's skills and Tier for skill checks and attack rolls, which seems like the definition of autonomous.
Control Module wrote: 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. And look, there's another example of a complex device here! Add med-bed to the list of examples.
Ridiculon wrote: The complex objects listed are obviously examples, not a definitive list, which you would know if you had actually read this section.... I did read the rules.
But it does not state that Powered Armor can have a Control Module. For this to be RAW, it need state that you *can* do this.
So, you could ask the GM to allow Powered Armor to have a Control Module, but suggesting that the rules allow it is outside of the written rules.
**************
But sure, sake of arguement you do attach a Control Module to a suit of Powered Armor. Now we just reach further rules questions.
First, Given that a suit of Powered Armor CANNOT already opperate Automonously, are we further houseruling the Powered armor to be a robot for the puposes of giving it skills, proficency, and attack bonus?
Second, since Powered Armor, in rules, is designed to be Worn, are we houserulling the armor to be considered the wearer for all the many powered armor rules that reference the wearer (like in determining the strength score)?
Third, now that Powered Armor is moving on it's own, do rules that refer to Armor or objects apply to the Powered Armor, do we regard it as a creature of some sort?
Forth, Does autonomous powered armor retain it's Hardness and HP stats from being an object? Furthermore, do armor upgrades which increase the Powered Armor's effective level for HP and Hardness function on the Powered Armor (like Tensile Reinforcement)?
Fifth, Does the autonomous powered armor revert to being armor when worn? Or does it remain autonomous?
And that's really the main list. Other ones are things like wondering how certain spells interact.
AucturnTheStranger wrote: I have an android mechanic with an exocortex. At 7th level I will take Power Armor Proficiency, and will get Expert Rig, which is integrated with the exocortex.
Now I want to add a control module to the rig, costing 345 credits (10% of device). Using artificial personality, and remote hack and wireless hack, I should be able to control the battle harness through voice commands.
Back to the Original question. You are using Remote Hack/Wireless Hack to control the the Battle Harness.
Ignore all of the other issues with this. If the Battle Harness can be Hacked...does this mean you accept that the GM's NPCs can hack your Battle Harness and attack you with your own Powered Armor?
This is the other, rather huge issue, with houseruling Powered Armor to be able to include a control module. I can't imagine that the other players in your party would be thrilled to learn that because you insisted on Powered Armor being hack-able, that the enemy is able to hack their powered armor too.
Well for the 4th question since the hp is determined by the operator ie the computer controlling it means just about any hit will finish it off and under the construct rules it is therefore completely destroyed
Pax Miles wrote:
First, Given that a suit of Powered Armor CANNOT already opperate Automonously, are we further houseruling the Powered armor to be a robot for the puposes of giving it skills, proficency, and attack bonus?
Vehicles cannot already operate autonomously, Starships cannot already operate autonomously, guns cannot already operate autonomously, med-beds cannot already operate autonomously. Thats kind of the entire point of the Control Module, it allows you to let things operate autonomously.
As to the skills and proficiency, the rule for control modules clearly states: Control Module wrote: 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. Pax Miles wrote: Second, since Powered Armor, in rules, is designed to be Worn, are we houserulling the armor to be considered the wearer for all the many powered armor rules that reference the wearer (like in determining the strength score)? This is a non issue. Every set of power armor has a listed strength score.
Pax Miles wrote: Third, now that Powered Armor is moving on it's own, do rules that refer to Armor or objects apply to the Powered Armor, do we regard it as a creature of some sort? It is a construct, just like any controlled vehicle or gun.
Pax Miles wrote: Forth, Does autonomous powered armor retain it's Hardness and HP stats from being an object? Furthermore, do armor upgrades which increase the Powered Armor's effective level for HP and Hardness function on the Powered Armor (like Tensile Reinforcement)? Yes, just like any construct. Why wouldn't armor upgrades work on the armor if they are installed? If the armor is turned on and using charge per minute of usage then of course they work. (this is also the difference between Autonomous powered armor and robots, Robots don't have an operational time limit)
Pax Miles wrote: Fifth, Does the autonomous powered armor revert to being armor when worn? Or does it remain autonomous? I would either issue a command to the computer to switch it to manual control or turn the computer off, either way this is a non-issue for the person controlling the computer.
If some hostile tries to take the armor that would be interesting though, I'd probably have them make checks to find the control module (which has to be installed on the armor somewhere) and then let them try to destroy it. Alternatively they could attempt to hack the computer that has control of the control module.
Pax Miles wrote: And that's really the main list. Other ones are things like wondering how certain spells interact. It's a construct, things that affect constructs will affect it.
Houseruling up a storm...
I'm going to suggesting moving this one to advice, since neither you nor the OP seem to be looking for a rule written in the rulebook.
Pax Miles wrote: Houseruling up a storm...
I'm going to suggesting moving this one to advice, since neither you nor the OP seem to be looking for a rule written in the rulebook.
How is this house ruling? I've quoted the relevant rules that say exactly what I'm saying. The fact is that you have not referred to any rules for your interpretation.
How about this, please answer all of the questions you asked, only instead of Powered Armor substitute a starship or a vehicle.
"The following rules are designed to give GMs the tools necessary to design computer systems thats are both interesting and challenging." - page 213
"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. In general, computers can be treated as tools that streamline tasks that would otherwise demand significant bookkeeping, computation, sorting, tracking, or viewing, as long as the needed data can be input....and ultimately it is up to a GM to determine a computers total capacity for performing such basic functions....Anything more complex that would normally require a creature to operate must be controlled through a control module." - page 214
What would my Tier 3 custom rig DO without the control module? The control module itself allows control and provides "related components" for the controlled device. But the Tier 3 computer cannot perform the computations to move the armor's motors because....why? According to RAW, it's not IF it can, but HOW can it? I'm asking for suggestions of rules and costs for the idea.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
But sure, point by.
1: A Control Module is an upgrade for an existing computer (as are all modules). It does not grant Autonomy, but if it is installed on something that already has autonomy (examples in the book are a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device. It does not make them into constructs, they are still whatever type of object/creature they were before.
Regarding Powered Armor, the armor may have a computer installed, but the armor is not controlled by the computer. The Wearer is controlling the Powered Armor. Without Wearer, the powered armor lacks control.
2: If you read the description for the list strength of all Powered Armors, you will note that strength stat is not the strength of the object, but the strentgh that of the wearer while they are wearing the Powered Armor. A Battle Harness has no strength stat of it own, only while being worn does the strength of the Powered Armor have any effect in-game.
That's not alone, most of the Powered Armor features modify the wearer, not the armor. AC, for example, is modifying the Wearer's AC and has no affect on the object's AC.
3: No, Control Module does not transforms ordinary objects into constructs. That is not a listed feature.
4: Powered Armor, with or without a Control Module, is not a Construct. Normally, the durability of an object is determined by their item level, but is only used when the object is attacked directly (like via sunder).
A Battle Harness, for example, with Tensile Reinforcement is a 10th level item for the purposes of HP and Hardness, so as a sturdy object is has 25 hardness (5 + 2 x item level) and 45 HP (15 + 3 x item level). The HP isn't much of an issue, but -25 to the damage of all attacks against pretty strong....Especially when the PC in question is only 7th level.
5: So now you have an Object that can transform between being object and being a Construct. What messy rules interactions.
As for spells, it really counts as both armor AND a construct, whichever is currently being used? What a mess of rules.
Pantshandshake wrote: Maybe some sort of disabling of the exocortex for an amount of time, to simulate it being 'busy' running the power armor caddy? The exocortex itself is like a cybernetic prosthetic. It's a different class feature. The custom rig class feature is what would be operating the power armor, through use of artificial personality and control module. But it might be reasonable to say while the power armor is being operated by the rig, that I couldn't access the computer for checking the web or hacking or engineer tools. I'm ok with being locked out of my computer while it's busy processing.
Thanks!
Robert Gooding wrote: Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
Before this comment I clearly mentioned that I did not want to overshadow the other players or bog down the game. I think this armor idea will be faster to run as a player than a drone or other "pet" class, because most of the time I'll be wearing it. I'd like to find reasonable rules to make this idea work before I even bring this to the GM.
AucturnTheStranger wrote: Robert Gooding wrote: Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
Before this comment I clearly mentioned that I did not want to overshadow the other players or bog down the game. I think this armor idea will be faster to run as a player than a drone or other "pet" class, because most of the time I'll be wearing it. I'd like to find reasonable rules to make this idea work before I even bring this to the GM. That was directed at the fanatical person supporting you, while we disagree with you you have at least kept semi reasonable
Pax Miles wrote: But sure, point by.
1: A Control Module is an upgrade for an existing computer (as are all modules). It does not grant Autonomy, but if it is installed on something that already has autonomy (examples in the book are a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device. It does not make them into constructs, they are still whatever type of object/creature they were before.
Regarding Powered Armor, the armor may have a computer installed, but the armor is not controlled by the computer. The Wearer is controlling the Powered Armor. Without Wearer, the powered armor lacks control.
2: If you read the description for the list strength of all Powered Armors, you will note that strength stat is not the strength of the object, but the strentgh that of the wearer while they are wearing the Powered Armor. A Battle Harness has no strength stat of it own, only while being worn does the strength of the Powered Armor have any effect in-game.
That's not alone, most of the Powered Armor features modify the wearer, not the armor. AC, for example, is modifying the Wearer's AC and has no affect on the object's AC.
3: No, Control Module does not transforms ordinary objects into constructs. That is not a listed feature.
4: Powered Armor, with or without a Control Module, is not a Construct. Normally, the durability of an object is determined by their item level, but is only used when the object is attacked directly (like via sunder).
A Battle Harness, for example, with Tensile Reinforcement is a 10th level item for the purposes of HP and Hardness, so as a sturdy object is has 25 hardness (5 + 2 x item level) and 45 HP (15 + 3 x item level). The HP isn't much of an issue, but -25 to the damage of all attacks against pretty strong....Especially when the PC in question is only 7th level.
5: So now you have an Object that can transform between being object and being a Construct. What messy rules interactions.
As for spells, it really counts as both armor AND a...
Pax Miles, I would appreciate if you would read my previous posts. Not including the "relevant components" provided by the control module, earlier I figured I would build a mini computer armor upgrade to allow computer input to emulate manual input by the driver. The control module will talk to this upgrade. I figured to pitch this idea I need to show I'm making reasonable sacrifices and paying costs.
Pax Miles wrote: But sure, point by.
1: A Control Module is an upgrade for an existing computer (as are all modules). It does not grant Autonomy, but if it is installed on something that already has autonomy (examples in the book are a robot or another computer), the controlling computer can give orders to that device. It does not make them into constructs, they are still whatever type of object/creature they were before.
You are ignoring the rules: Control Module wrote: 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. Are you really trying to argue that Automated Turrets don't exist in Starfinder? Because I assure you they do.
Pax Miles wrote: Regarding Powered Armor, the armor may have a computer installed, but the armor is not controlled by the computer. The Wearer is controlling the Powered Armor. Without Wearer, the powered armor lacks control. If the Armor has a Control Module installed then it is controlled/operated by the computer. Again, this is the entire point of installing a Control Module.
Control Module wrote: 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.)Some countermeasures might make use of a computer’s control modules when activated. Gaining control of a computer allows the user to activate the devices in any way allowed by the control module. The price of a control module depends on the complexity of the object being controlled. The control module for a more complex device, such as a spy Drone, Starship, Vehicle, or weapon turret, costs 10% of the device to be controlled. Pax Miles wrote: 2: If you read the description for the list strength of all Powered Armors, you will note that strength stat is not the strength of the object, but the strentgh that of the wearer while they are wearing the Powered Armor. A Battle Harness has no strength stat of it own, only while being worn does the strength of the Powered Armor have any effect in-game. You need to read the rules, the armor has its own strength, it is not an augmentation:
Strength wrote: Strength
When wearing powered armor, the armor determines your effective Strength. You use it for all Strength-based rolls. Even if your Strength is higher, you’re limited to the armor’s Strength.
Battle Harness wrote: EAC Bonus +9; KAC Bonus +12
Max Dex Bonus +2; Armor Check Penalty –4; Speed 30 feet
Strength 18 (+4); Damage 1d10 B; Size Medium
Capacity 20; Usage 1/hour
Weapon Slots 1 Upgrade Slots 1; Bulk 20
The battle harness is the basic powered armor frame used by infantry units in professional militaries.
Notice how there is a strength score listed. That means it has a strength score... i cant believe i have to explain that.
Pax Miles wrote: That's not alone, most of the Powered Armor features modify the wearer, not the armor. AC, for example, is modifying the Wearer's AC and has no affect on the object's AC. Correct, there is no wearer therefore it can't grant AC to the wearer. This has absolutely no bearing on whether or not it can be controlled by a computer.
Pax Miles wrote: 3: No, Control Module does not transforms ordinary objects into constructs. That is not a listed feature.
4: Powered Armor, with or without a Control Module, is not a Construct. Normally, the durability of an object is determined by their item level, but is only used when the object is attacked directly (like via sunder).
A Battle Harness, for example, with Tensile Reinforcement is a 10th level item for the purposes of HP and Hardness, so as a sturdy object is has 25 hardness (5 + 2 x item level) and 45 HP (15 + 3 x item level). The HP isn't much of an issue, but -25 to the damage of all attacks against pretty strong....Especially when the PC in question is only 7th level.
Fair enough, its an object then. I must have been conflating it with robots. This is another major difference between Autonomous power armor and robots.
As to the Tensile Reinforcement, thats allowed by default. Its just as difficult to destroy the armor with a PC wearing it as it is when its walking around on its own, this doesn't have any relevance to the discussion.
Pax Miles wrote: 5: So now you have an Object that can transform between being object and being a Construct. What messy rules interactions. Which you solved, its only an object.
Pax Miles wrote: As for spells, it really counts as both armor AND a construct, whichever is currently being used? What a mess of rules. Its an object, whatever spells affect objects will affect the autonomous power armor. Also whatever spells affect armor specifically, although most of those will probably be pointless without someone actually wearing the armor.
Robert Gooding wrote: AucturnTheStranger wrote: Robert Gooding wrote: Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
Before this comment I clearly mentioned that I did not want to overshadow the other players or bog down the game. I think this armor idea will be faster to run as a player than a drone or other "pet" class, because most of the time I'll be wearing it. I'd like to find reasonable rules to make this idea work before I even bring this to the GM. That was directed at the fanatical person supporting you, while we disagree with you you have at least kept semi reasonable
Robert Gooding wrote: AucturnTheStranger wrote: Robert Gooding wrote: Proving my point. When you get your army of robots the entire game will revolve around your turns and no one else will enjoy the game.
Making you the person deliberately trying to ruin everyone else’s fun, leaving your gym with 2 choices to constantly ban hammer you or not invite you to future sessions.
Please take a serious look at your behaviour and play style before there’s no one left who will play with you
Before this comment I clearly mentioned that I did not want to overshadow the other players or bog down the game. I think this armor idea will be faster to run as a player than a drone or other "pet" class, because most of the time I'll be wearing it. I'd like to find reasonable rules to make this idea work before I even bring this to the GM. That was directed at the fanatical person supporting you, while we disagree with you you have at least kept semi reasonable I don't agree. Despite their name, Ridiculon has been offering facts from the book and ideas about getting this idea to fly. Other posters are either stuck in denial when quotes from the book are read to them, or make no clear sense. Take that with a grain of salt, because Ridiculon agrees with me and understands the point of this thread. Anywho, let's not turn this thread into a flame war? I'd just like to take a cool idea and make it happen.
At least you dropped the idea that control modules transform objects into constructs...
Regarding the strength score of Powered Armor, please read again. Pg 203, under "using powered armor" it explains that powered armor augment's the wearer's strength score. You are correct that the armor has a listed strength, but it's very clear that this is not a strength that the armor can autonomously provide, but the strength that the wearer uses while wearing the powered armor.
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.
|
