One thing I was very surprised by when reading the mech rules was:
For the purpose of resolving effects, treat a mech as a vehicle, though use mechs’ different rules for movement, operation, and damage detailed in the Mech Combat section starting on page 12.
This one rule, to treat the mech as a vehicle for the purpose of resolving effects, introduces a lot of puzzles. Mechs have been designed in such a way that they don't interact with the vehicle rules at all except for this one specific statement. They don't use the rules for piloting vehicles, such as top speeds, race actions, ramming maneuvers, vehicle headings, collision damage, etc. They don't have the stats a vehicle would have. Effects that target vehicles often try to adjust stats that mechs don't even use.
A mech in combat functions exactly like a really big construct creature. It has actions like a creature (except it can gain more with multiple pilots), moves like a creature, attacks like a creature, makes saves like a creature, and so on.
----------
So why don't they just treat it as a creature with the creature type construct (technological)? After all, there are currently Alien Archive creatures that are essentially giant mechs, like the Tripod or Siege Robot. Other than being piloted, any player mech is essentially the same kind of tactical combatant as any of these creatures. The construct type would grant mechs all the logical construct immunities that they deserve, like immunity to mind-affecting, immunity to Fort save effects that don't function on objects, and so on.
The only thing that would need to be specified is that a mech can't take actions when it doesn't have at least one pilot. Something like the following new subtype:
(Subordinate): Creatures with the subordinate subtype are treated as unconscious while they are not being actively controlled or piloted by another creature. Subordinate creatures use the INT, WIS and CHA modifiers of their pilots (if there are multiple pilots, use the highest of each modifier).
It might have to do with spells.
I think as vehicles they are currently not target-able by any spells, while they would be as technological constructs. This would, e.g. allow healing of mechs with magic.
It might have to do with spells.
I think as vehicles they are currently not target-able by any spells, while they would be as technological constructs. This would, e.g. allow healing of mechs with magic.
There's something like five spells that hit vehicles. One of those (discharge) is a save or become non-functional for 1d4 rounds if it hits a vehicle.
There's something like five spells that hit vehicles. One of those (discharge) is a save or become non-functional for 1d4 rounds if it hits a vehicle.
Oh man, that spell has suddenly become much more interesting with mechs around.
I mean, they ARE vehicles.
Like yeah they don't have identical rules, but still.
Its not that they don't use identical rules. They don't use ANY of the rules vehicles do (except for rules that creatures are already using).
And making them creature makes them suspectible to things like polymorph... Which is just weird when you can't transform a car but you can a mech
Is it more or less weird than being able to transform a security robot with polymorph? From my perspective, the sole difference between a security robot and a mech is that a mech always needs to be piloted.
----I dug into reviewing all the spells the more I thought about how this would turn out.
As far as magic vs. mechs is concerned, there are definite rules issues if they were considered creatures. Control Machines, for example, doesn't even seem to work (what's a mech's CR?) and both creates a lot of puzzles (do you still have to pilot it if you're controlling this way?) and potentially huge balance swings in combat. I can see why they chose to consider them vehicles for the purpose of what spells can target or affect them.
Neither treating them as vehicles nor as creatures is free of rules questions, and neither seems particular intuitive to me now.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm more of a fan of updating the vehicle rules a little then leaving mechs as vehicles and calling it a day.
Maybe just note that vehicles count as creatures for area damage spells, or something similar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NPC mechs do have CRs, just not PC ones. Similar to how PCs don't have CRs, just class levels.
I'd leave the rule as treating them as vehicles for resolving effects alone, but I would add a sidebar with how to handle some exceptions.