Androids dont need to breath, they are also immune to the environmental effects of the void.
1. Are Android (and people who dont need to breath?) Affected by thick and thin, and/or extremely thick and thin atmospheres?
[Game text]
Thick
A nonacclimated creature operating in a thick atmosphere treats it as somewhat harmful, due to the extra chemical compounds in the air and the increased atmospheric pressure, every hour such a creature must succeed at a Fortitude save (DC = 15 + 1 per previous check) or become sickened.
Severely thick atmospheres are far more dangerous. Every minute, a creature in such an atmosphere must succeed at a Fortitude save (DC = 15 + 1 per previous check) or begin to suffocate (see Suffocation and Drowning) as its lungs cease coping with the density of the oxygen inhaled and lose the strength to keep pumping air into its bloodstream.
Thin
Thinner atmospheres tend to cause a nonacclimated creature to have difficulty breathing and become extremely tired. A typical thin atmosphere requires such a creature to succeed at a Fortitude save each hour (DC = 15 +1 per previous check) or become fatigued. The fatigue ends when the creature returns to a normal atmosphere.
Severely thin atmospheres can cause long-term oxygen deprivation to those affected in addition to the effects of a standard thin atmosphere. The first time a creature in a severely thin atmosphere fails its Fortitude save, it must succeed at a DC 25 Fortitude save or take 1 damage to all ability scores. A creature acclimated to high altitude (see Hill and Mountain Terrain) gains a +4 insight bonus to its saving throw to resist this effect.[end game text]
And for specifically androids, are they immune to the effects cause by Decompression in a vacuum?
[Game text]Decompression occurs when a creature suddenly transitions from a pressurized environment to a vacuum, such as by being flung out of an airlock or being inside a sealed structure that becomes heavily damaged. Such a creature takes 3d6 bludgeoning damage (no saving throw) in addition to any suffocation damage.[end game text]
Creatures that do not need to breathe are not affected by changes in atmospheric density.
From the spell "Control Atmosphere".
Decompression rules seem to refer to the act of being violently flung free from a spaceship, so I'd argue the bludgeoning damage come into effect, but not any suffocation damage.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
They don't like it when you try to flag topics as staff answer. There's a lot of unanswered rules questions, many of them a lot crunchier than this one. Don't discount the communities ability
I know the game has legalistic raw and whatnot, but common sense and versimilatude are a thing you can use (in fact, have to use) to adjudicate rules that aren't clearly spelled out.
An android doesn't breathe. They can sit in no atmosphere which.. by definition is the thinnest atmosphere possible..pop open a lawn chair and read a book without any problem. So they're immune to thin and no atmosphere.
The line about chemicals in the atmopshere makes be a BIT less sure on thick atmosphere, but " its lungs cease coping with the density of the oxygen inhaled" makes it pretty clear it's not a problem that androids would have.
Not sure about decompression. From the sound of it the android is fine with the suffocation damage, but would take the bludgeoning damage.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with the wolf.
The Paizo staff has told us in the past that they actively ignore requests for "official clarification only", especially when they're advertised in the subject line.
Nobody's question is any more important than the next. What the Rules Designers do pay attention to is a well-worded, succinct question with appropriate links and/or quotes that highlights a clear conflict or ambiguity in the rules and that the online community legitimately cannot come to a conclusion on.
Many long time posters sometimes know the rules better than the designers themselves ^_^
A couple bullet holes in an otherwise intact wall/bulkhead isn’t going to matter, in terms of objects or characters being moved.
That's not what sci-fi movies have taught me...
I think this is a question up to the GM: it relies on whether they want to be realistic with their space, or more like "hollywood space".
(Unless there's an official rule about it, of course)
I can only imagine it's from the idea of being thrown around or hitting things. Else, I feel like it would be untyped damage.
As a GM, I'd say it only comes into play for a character who is thrown free from the room or ship, with the assumption that they hit SOMETHING. The awkward part, to me, is that there's no Reflex save or anything included.
It's a strange hazard, for sure.
The bludgeoning damage from decompression is almost certainly meant to cover the physical trauma from the rapid pressure drop. It should effect androids just fine, they aren't immune to being pummeled, and this is essentially the same kind of effect.
I would note that "thick atmosphere" presumably covers atmospheres that are thick, but still plausibly breathable. If the pressure is sufficiently high, then you eventually represent this via continuous bludgeoning damage as an ambient environmental effect.
If you don't breath, the change in environmental pressure is mostly negligible.
Some blood vessels would burst in soft tissue like your eyes, nose and lungs, possibly embolisms. But you don't have lungs. And they're they biggest thing you have to worry about. I guess the 3d6 could represent your chance of getting an embolism, but I don't think that's what it's meant to represent either.
Remember, you're going from presumably 14.7 psia, to 0. So, that's 15 lbs of force per each of surface, but the exact dimension of the breach and the over which the pressure changes make a big difference. In real life, decompression of a spaceship due to a breach is rarely going to be as exciting as how its shown in science fiction. Not that Starfinder is hard science fiction, it's science fantasy.
Which is a long way of saying, that without clarity on why you take the 3d6 damage, you just take it. At least you don't have to worry about breathing.
The bludgeoning damage from decompression is almost certainly meant to cover the physical trauma from the rapid pressure drop. It should effect androids just fine, they aren't immune to being pummeled, and this is essentially the same kind of effect.
I would note that "thick atmosphere" presumably covers atmospheres that are thick, but still plausibly breathable. If the pressure is sufficiently high, then you eventually represent this via continuous bludgeoning damage as an ambient environmental effect.
And that's the other way this could go.
I don't have a good idea, and I don't have the time to learn right now, what exactly happens to a living thing during/after drastic pressure changes.
So, that being said... does a being that is unaffected by atmospheric pressure of any level, including its absence, care about pressure changes? I can't wrap my head around something that can live in a vacuum, but is damaged by the trip to the vacuum.
It greatly depends on the biology of the organism.
Jellyfish for example, due to their body structure, are virtually immune to pressure changes in water. However, they need something to support their body structure, so getting the pressure so low that liquid water will rapidly convert to mostly gas would leave them without anything to support their bodies, which would be harmful if left that way.
The bludgeoning damage from decompression is almost certainly meant to cover the physical trauma from the rapid pressure drop. It should effect androids just fine, they aren't immune to being pummeled, and this is essentially the same kind of effect.
I would note that "thick atmosphere" presumably covers atmospheres that are thick, but still plausibly breathable. If the pressure is sufficiently high, then you eventually represent this via continuous bludgeoning damage as an ambient environmental effect.
If you don't breath, the change in environmental pressure is mostly negligible.
Some blood vessels would burst in soft tissue like your eyes, nose and lungs, possibly embolisms. But you don't have lungs.
Whoa, hold on. Androids don't breathe, but that doesn't mean they don't have "lungs." In fact they must, since there is no rule depriving them of a lungs augmentation slot, and they'd need at least some air space inside to facilitate speaking unless they have some novel speech mechanism that strays from their biomechanical imitation of humans origins. (Similarly, androids don't procreate, but that doesn't mean some of the more realistic designs don't have quasi functional equipment in that direction, if you catch my drift.)
In a setting where every species is equally vulnerable to all poisons and diseases it's not too wise to dig deeply into this stuff from a realism point of view. Personally the idea that androids don't breathe, are biomechanical, and eat and can be poisoned and diseased annoys me greatly. What novel cell biology are they using that doesn't rely on a steady supply of oxygen but is still vulnerable to poisons and disease and requires organic food as a fuel source?
A space technowizard did it, probably.
Whoa, hold on. Androids don't breathe, but that doesn't mean they don't have "lungs." In fact they must, since there is no rule depriving them of a lungs augmentation slot, and they'd need at least some air space inside to facilitate speaking unless they have some novel speech mechanism that strays from their biomechanical imitation of humans origins. (Similarly, androids don't procreate, but that doesn't mean some of the more realistic designs don't have quasi functional equipment in that direction, if you catch my drift.)
In a setting where every species is equally vulnerable to all poisons and diseases it's not too wise to dig deeply into this stuff from a realism point of view. Personally the idea that androids don't breathe, are biomechanical, and eat and can be poisoned and diseased annoys me greatly. What novel cell biology are they using that doesn't rely on a steady supply of oxygen but is still vulnerable to poisons and disease and requires organic food as a fuel source?
A space technowizard did it, probably.
Strongly disagree thematically. If you don't breath, lungs would have no function. Just because the rules don't say it doesn't mean it shouldn't be true. The fact that they aren't restricted from taking augments for lungs is an oversight in my opinion. Looking through the lung augments most of them deal with letting you breath in situation where you normally couldn't.
Only cleansing breath and grave wind provide non-breathing related benefits.
Strongly disagree thematically. If you don't breath, lungs would have no function.Whoa, hold on. Androids don't breathe, but that doesn't mean they don't have "lungs." In fact they must, since there is no rule depriving them of a lungs augmentation slot, and they'd need at least some air space inside to facilitate speaking unless they have some novel speech mechanism that strays from their biomechanical imitation of humans origins. (Similarly, androids don't procreate, but that doesn't mean some of the more realistic designs don't have quasi functional equipment in that direction, if you catch my drift.)
In a setting where every species is equally vulnerable to all poisons and diseases it's not too wise to dig deeply into this stuff from a realism point of view. Personally the idea that androids don't breathe, are biomechanical, and eat and can be poisoned and diseased annoys me greatly. What novel cell biology are they using that doesn't rely on a steady supply of oxygen but is still vulnerable to poisons and disease and requires organic food as a fuel source?
A space technowizard did it, probably.
So what? What is the function of the appendix? Does it nevertheless exist? Does everything on a biomechanical construct designed to imitate humanity need to have a function?
Their designers wanted them built in the image of humanity. It's not bizarre to imagine they did that as closely as they could given design/technical constraints and the desire/capability to add some improvements.
And again, if androids have normal voice box/throats (and why not?) then they need something approximating lungs (in the sense of interior sacs that move air, not oxygen/blood transfer capability) to facilitate speech.
The appendix is a bad argument. Humans beings evolved to a point where the appendix no longer has a useful function (although we're not so confidant in that anymore). We don't know how appendices may have worked as part of human evolution in the past, even though now it appears we can remove this with little effect. With Androids, there isn't evolution. Androids do not reproduce, they "renew" which has a new soul inhabit the android body.
I guess I can agree that android probably have some sort of cavity in their body that allows them to move air across voice boxes to produce sound, but when talking about lungs I mostly think about them in their capacity to pull oxygen out of the atmosphere and oxygenate the blood. As for how Androids manage to use lung augments...I guess they could place augments in that body cavity.
As for how androids biology works without oxygen. On our planet we discovered a multicelural organism called loricifera which does not require oxygen. It doesn't have mitochondria, or at least normal mitochondria. It has Hydrogenosomes (which produce hydorgen, not use it). So it's possibly Androids we're engineered with cells that produce energy in a similar fashion.
|
The initial post is also wrong. Androids do not "suffer the normal environmental effects of being in a vacuum." - That does NOT mean their ok in the Void. The dangers of Space (page 394) are vacuum and Cosmic Rays. And if you're not inside an atmosphere, that's equivalent to constant Medium to Severe Radiation.
Armor will deal with that most of the time, but it deals with the air too.
They don't like it when you try to flag topics as staff answer. There's a lot of unanswered rules questions, many of them a lot crunchier than this one. Don't discount the communities ability
I appreciate your advice, I just wish this were mentioned somewhere in the board rules or community guideline link(which I think is broken on the board rules post, it took me to a general info page on paizo.).
I appreciate your advice, I just wish this were mentioned somewhere in the board rules or community guideline link(which I think is broken on the board rules post, it took me to a general info page on paizo.).They don't like it when you try to flag topics as staff answer. There's a lot of unanswered rules questions, many of them a lot crunchier than this one. Don't discount the communities ability
It's two lines above the bit about agreeing to the terms and conditions gives paizo the perpetual rights to your immortal soul...
|
|
I appreciate your advice, I just wish this were mentioned somewhere in the board rules or community guideline link(which I think is broken on the board rules post, it took me to a general info page on paizo.).They don't like it when you try to flag topics as staff answer. There's a lot of unanswered rules questions, many of them a lot crunchier than this one. Don't discount the communities ability
I actually wanted to link to the Sticky post as the top of the Forum, because that's where it was posted when this Forum was created a couple years ago, but the post has been edited since I last saw it.
It's a common enough comment of the moderators, though.