No robotic love?

[jkwleisemann]

You know, I was poking through some of the character lists that are out there (and books full of them), and something occurred to me.

There are incredibly few super-robots in the current Champions Universe.

By 'super-robot,' for the record, I mean artificial, technologically created, lifeforms that have intelligence (to a large degree, at any rate), powers that put them beyond normal humans and usually give them combat capability, and the big one - free will.

So Mechanon is in, but the Viper combat-drones and Destroids are out.

The thing is... unless I've missed something... it's pretty much *just* Mechanon out there.

Is it backlash against Mechanon? "The last time somebody did that, look what happened?" Or just no love for mechanical menaces (or good guys, for that matter) anymore?

[Hermit]

Player wise, I think they're just costly to make. Life Support can get expensive (20 points to have my robot immune to diseases and poisons? yowch). Official universe wise... mm you got me. There are some AI computers, but they aren't particularly ambulatory.

[Tom]

Syzygy in VVV qualifies I believe...

[Asperion]

Here is something that could be a good reason for why the mechoniods do not exist: Money and Time. Think of it this way - the AI brain will take months to years to develop at millions of dollars each year, the motor systems will need to be created in a manner that will all work together (no easy task), weapons arrays that will do its fuction with no harm to the robot, etc. In the end, the time, effort, and expense that goes into a simple humaniform robot will cost millions to billions and take more than 18 months. Unless you have the backing of some major corporation or government, there is no way that you will even be a fraction of the way to covering these problems. Most of the time these entities will want to have something that they can totally control, which cancels the AI.

[assault]

More to the point, the old CU robots from the Enemies books were written out. At least a couple of them were alien, and didn't really fit the current CU.

[BobGreenwade]

Hopefully we can get some return to the "High Tech Enemies" area in the 2007-2008 schedules. (I think we may be getting a little help in the high-tech area in CCC, at least generally, but not much in the way of robots.) That -- not just the robots, but the broader high-tech scene of which robots are just a part -- is one thing I've desperately missed in the new CU, especially with all of the coverage we've gotten from the mystical side of things.

[Metaphysician]

I tend to think that most of the aspects of Life Support are overpriced for a supers game, disease and poison immunity in particular.

[ghost-angel]

Here is something that could be a good reason for why the mechoniods do not exist: Money and Time. Think of it this way - the AI brain will take months to years to develop at millions of dollars each year, the motor systems will need to be created in a manner that will all work together (no easy task), weapons arrays that will do its fuction with no harm to the robot, etc. In the end, the time, effort, and expense that goes into a simple humaniform robot will cost millions to billions and take more than 18 months. Unless you have the backing of some major corporation or government, there is no way that you will even be a fraction of the way to covering these problems. Most of the time these entities will want to have something that they can totally control, which cancels the AI.

Given the large number of lab accidents that result in mutants. in the CU I would say the chances of an AI spontaneously forming on a Commadore64 are relatively high, much less an more advanced machine.

[gmurie]

Given the large number of lab accidents that result in mutants. in the CU I would say the chances of an AI spontaneously forming on a Commadore64 are relatively high, much less an more advanced machine.

Plus "The Commodore" would be a pretty cool name for a character.

From a story/role playing perspective robots just aren't that interesting. Marvel had something good going with VISION, but in the end he was just a dude with powers and red skin. Little of the fact that he was a robot showed through in the story lines.

A lot of the rest of the "robot" characters in comics like Robotman were brains or personality engrams scooped out of a meatbody and shoved into a machine body. The Champions universe does have plenty of those.

[braincraft]

I hate things like robots, because once you have one, you open the door for lots of others, and then the tech levels in your world start exploding beyond your control.

It's easier to scale back on robots and hyper-scientists.

[Enforcer84]

What fun is that?

[Lucius]

Player wise, I think they're just costly to make. Life Support can get expensive (20 points to have my robot immune to diseases and poisons? yowch). Official universe wise... mm you got me. There are some AI computers, but they aren't particularly ambulatory.

Crossposted from: What I Learned Playing a Robot

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just because you technically don't "eat" or "breathe" or "sleep" or even "get sick" does NOT mean that you need to take the full suite of Life Support Powers.

You don't eat, but you do need to input energy in some form, and even materiels (spare parts, perhaps.) Do you really need "Does not eat?"

Unless you were specifically designed for multiple environments, that does not mean you won't suffer deleterious effects if dropped into water, methane, a high pressure atmosphere, or vaccuum. Just because you don't "breathe" as such, doesn't mean you can't be deactivated or even destroyed if out of the environment you were designed for.

You don't "sleep" but you may need regular downtime for self-maintenance, internal computer diagnostics, and to correlate and properly assimilate the day's experiences into your memory banks.

Just because you're not organic, doesn't mean you can't catch a virus. Or a worm. Just because you can ignore some or most of the things that poison a Human, doesn't mean there aren't substances that will do you serious damage. Instead of taking a broad-based immunity, ask if you can be assumed to be vulnerable to different things - the way a fish doesn't need "life support" to breathe water, it just has a different "default" environment.

Just because you don't feel "pain" (trust me, you're not missing anything) doesn't mean you should have Takes No Stun. If you get hit by a lightning bolt, it's still a shocking experience. You can be "stunned" just as effectively as if you felt pain, and you can be rendered temporarily inoperable as readily as a Human can be rendered unconscious - and they are the same thing mechanically (pardon the expression.)

Parts wear out. Quantum effects and background radiation eventually degrade even shielded positronic brains. Even personality programs that are repeatedly uploaded to new bodies become corrupt over time. Check out your warranty. Odds are, you DON'T really have "Immunity to Aging."




They are damned expensive characters to create.

Keith "Stupid 5th Ed. Life Support" Curtis

That depends on your assumptions. See above.


Lucius Alexander

Things I learned riding a palindromedary

[Hermit]

Just because you're not organic, doesn't mean you can't catch a virus. Or a worm. Just because you can ignore some or most of the things that poison a Human, doesn't mean there aren't substances that will do you serious damage. Instead of taking a broad-based immunity, ask if you can be assumed to be vulnerable to different things - the way a fish doesn't need "life support" to breathe water, it just has a different "default" environment.

IF you can get your GM to agree to this, it works fine, but not every GM will allow it ,and some will prefer if you take a physical limitation disad for what your character is affected by as a robot, while still demanding the full price for the immunity to diseases and toxins instead. In which case, you're back at square one of it being a pretty big bite into your character points.

[Narratio]

Even if allowed, or even desired, robots are a tricky to play. No matter what we write for characteristics, back history, actions etc, during a role play, the real you will start to creep in. The character will do things that you do, and then you have to spend time justifying it, etc.

With robots, the role play is truly wierd. Why on earth (mars/krypton) would a robot want to get involved with any of the things that humans do? Sitting in a cupboard, soaking up power and downloading information from the web appears to be the best course of action in most cases. Engaging Grond in hand to hand battle? Outracing missiles to save people you don't know (and whose probable net addition to culture, economic wealth or knowledge base is a negative number) seems pointless, especially when you could suffer immense damage.

Really players don't create robot characters because there's no persoanl connection to a machine. GM's don't create robot characters for the same reasons and because, when you've seen one Mechanon/Ultron, you've probably seen them all.

[wrestlinggeek]

Engaging Grond in hand to hand battle? Outracing missiles to save people you don't know (and whose probable net addition to culture, economic wealth or knowledge base is a negative number) seems pointless, especially when you could suffer immense damage.



Three Laws (thank you, Mr. Asimov)

1. A robot may not harm a human, or through inaction, allow a human to come to harm. (Better stop those missiles.)

2. A robot must follow any orders given to it by a human, unless they contradict the First Law. ("Hey, robot! Go fight Grond!")

3. A robot must preseve itself, unless this conflicts with the First or Second Laws. ("Hey, robot! Go fight Grond!")

Program any robot with these (and throw in the Zeroeth Law, for good measure), add appropriate capabilities, and you've got instant Superhero! Or, if you prefer something that gives the character a little more flexibility, there's always Robocop's Prime Directives:

1. Serve the Public Trust.

2.Protect the Innocent.

3.Uphold the Law.

And, yes, you can have free will and preprogrammed directives in the same character. But, if we're asking why a robot would be motivated to act as a superhero, we might as well ask why any super-powered individual would be motivated to act in such a manner. And, isn't asking that question a big part of superhero role-playing in the first place?

[Narratio]

Can't disagree with you too much, but players want thier characters to be human and that means doing what they want, no matter the effect to thier cause. Following the 3 (or 4) laws would put the robot leaving the fight against the villain to go and stop a flood/ fire/ whatever, as that other event placed more humans at risk than the current villain did. He/she/it would walk away from a theft in progress to rescue somebody from a fire say.

Too many limitations or restrictions of choice don't make the 'is a robot' choice attractive to players.

[Lucius]

Can't disagree with you too much, but players want thier characters to be human and that means doing what they want, no matter the effect to thier cause. Following the 3 (or 4) laws would put the robot leaving the fight against the villain to go and stop a flood/ fire/ whatever, as that other event placed more humans at risk than the current villain did. He/she/it would walk away from a theft in progress to rescue somebody from a fire say.

Too many limitations or restrictions of choice don't make the 'is a robot' choice attractive to players.

And how is this different from the limitations imposed by Psychological Limitations?

Lots of my characters would respond like the robot you describe.

Lucius Alexander

And an irrelevant palindromedary tagline

[Tech]

Even if allowed, or even desired, robots are a tricky to play. No matter what we write for characteristics, back history, actions etc, during a role play, the real you will start to creep in. The character will do things that you do, and then you have to spend time justifying it, etc.

With robots, the role play is truly wierd. Why on earth (mars/krypton) would a robot want to get involved with any of the things that humans do? Sitting in a cupboard, soaking up power and downloading information from the web appears to be the best course of action in most cases. Engaging Grond in hand to hand battle? Outracing missiles to save people you don't know (and whose probable net addition to culture, economic wealth or knowledge base is a negative number) seems pointless, especially when you could suffer immense damage.

Really players don't create robot characters because there's no persoanl connection to a machine. GM's don't create robot characters for the same reasons and because, when you've seen one Mechanon/Ultron, you've probably seen them all.

Have you seen "My Life As A Teenage Robot"? Now this robot breaks the mold. :thumbup:

[Tech]

In my group's campaign, several robot characters have been tried. Years ago... some of the current Hero Games players weren't born then... I tried a Vision rip-off and it failed. A couple years or so later, my brother tried a robot character and it failed. More recently within the past seven years (I think), one of my friends tried it and it didn't work - although I think it's more because of the way funky power(s) write-up.

And then recently within the past few months, I tried again...

And succeeded beyond anyone's expectations! If you get stuck on assumptions of what a robot character supposedly can and can't do, you've shot yourself in the foot. Some of the ideas I've read here of what a robot can and cannot do, what's it like and not like, etc etc are (again) assumptions based on stories and movies. I simply refused to go those routes and I've having a blast playing a robot. Do I have difficulties playing my character? Nope! Any differences in playing a robot versus oh, say a human, isn't a hurdle to jump over but something I use for interesting or funny effects.

[OddHat]

Genre-wise, outside of the CU, Robots aren't being used out there quite as much as they used to be. Biotech is in the public's imagination right now, and a bio-bot looks cooler when you blow it up / splatter it / or otherwise use it for the same purposes so many robots used to be used (something the Heroes can smash without messy questions about the morality of excessive force). Every other Hero these days seems to have massive regeneration and regrowth as well, so the old robot role of being the guy who gets maimed or eviscerated can now be taken by non-robot "heroes".

Within a CU campaign, assuming you don't want to just introduce whatever robots you feel like, the easiest assumption is that the huge numbers of rebellious, free willed robots created from the 40s to the 80s finally convinced inventors that the risks weren't worth the potential profits.

[CrosshairCollie]

Can't disagree with you too much, but players want thier characters to be human and that means doing what they want, no matter the effect to thier cause. Following the 3 (or 4) laws would put the robot leaving the fight against the villain to go and stop a flood/ fire/ whatever, as that other event placed more humans at risk than the current villain did. He/she/it would walk away from a theft in progress to rescue somebody from a fire say.

Too many limitations or restrictions of choice don't make the 'is a robot' choice attractive to players.

Just because a character is a robot doesn't mean they are automatically programmed with Asimov's laws, or any hard-coded limitations. That's a player decision. That's why they're free-willed robots, not automatons.

[Killer Shrike]

It might have something to do w/ it being expensive to model all the stuff a robot should have for not much game effect, and also that most robots end up looking very similarly to each other mechanically making it kind of boring / limiting.


Anyway, here are a couple of "robot" villains on my site that I tried to make interesting in some way other than just "its a robot":

Mr Roboto (http://www.killershrike.com/MillennialMen/CharacterFiles/Antagonists/MrRoboto.HTML)

THUG (http://www.killershrike.com/EnforcersINC/Characters/THUG.HTML)
THUGBE (http://www.killershrike.com/EnforcersINC/Characters/THUGBE.HTML)
THUGEE (http://www.killershrike.com/EnforcersINC/Characters/THUGEE.HTML)

[ghost-angel]

Can't disagree with you too much, but players want thier characters to be human and that means doing what they want, no matter the effect to thier cause. Following the 3 (or 4) laws would put the robot leaving the fight against the villain to go and stop a flood/ fire/ whatever, as that other event placed more humans at risk than the current villain did. He/she/it would walk away from a theft in progress to rescue somebody from a fire say.

Too many limitations or restrictions of choice don't make the 'is a robot' choice attractive to players.

Invoke the 0th Law. Worked for R. Daneel Olivaw

[Vestnik]

Player wise, I think they're just costly to make. Life Support can get expensive (20 points to have my robot immune to diseases and poisons? yowch). Official universe wise... mm you got me. There are some AI computers, but they aren't particularly ambulatory.

This is one reason why I hate the "only powers that cost END can go in an EC" rule. Without my Life Support in a "Robotic Body" EC, there's no way I can do it on 350 points.

[CrosshairCollie]

This is one reason why I hate the "only powers that cost END can go in an EC" rule. Without my Life Support in a "Robotic Body" EC, there's no way I can do it on 350 points.

This is what house rules are for. :)

[Lord Liaden]

This is one reason why I hate the "only powers that cost END can go in an EC" rule. Without my Life Support in a "Robotic Body" EC, there's no way I can do it on 350 points.

I took a similar tack with Elemental Controls for some of the Undead monsters in my last Digital Hero article. If the Gamemaster considers it a valid concept it falls within the "GM Discretion" exceptions to the rules that the Fifth Edition rulebook is peppered with.

Considering how often I've seen Steve Long break his own default rules in published character writeups to create the effect he wanted, I really don't feel too guilty about doing it myself. :rolleyes:

[pinecone]

If I get a chance I'll post "Robotman 010" though he is a Robotman homage...the best Robot I've seen in comics was the one in Invincable, I don't recall his name thogh (it might well be "Robot")

[gmurie]

Perhaps there needs to be an "Ultimate Robot" if only a free thing here on the forum. I think I might just do that. Seems like an interesting project.

[Lord Liaden]

Aside from the aforementioned Mechanon and Syzygy, I can't think of any other published examples, either. There has been mention of the Silver Age supercomputer villain Ultivac in Champions books and Digital Hero, but it never received a writeup.

That does seem kind of odd, particularly since artificial intelligences appear closer to reality today than ever. Then again, maybe that's why they're losing their appeal in fantastic fiction.

[assault]

I use a lot of robots as muscle for bad guys. These aren't necessarily sentient.

As NPCs, point totals aren't important.

The real benefit of using them is that you can re-use their character sheets over and over again without anyone noticing. Just like their boss, Generic Mad Scientist #17. :)

I haven't played one as a PC. There are some possibilities I would consider, though.

[input.jack]

Ive played several highly successful robot PCs. The key is deciding who built them, and why. The creator's intended role for the robot shapes its physical attributes, powers, and its initial programming. A robot built to learn and grow as a pure experiment in A.I. will have a very diiferent starting personality than one built with the intention of its being a bodyguard, a police officer, or military hardware. Also, the Player should decide if it was -supposed- to be A.I., or if its awakening was accidental (see Short Circuit).

Robot PCs are just as viable as aliens, mutants, or any other trope background. The problem is that a lot of people think "its a robot" and dont feel the need to examine the character any further.

Vision, Machine Man, Jocasta, Red Tornado...heck, even the T-100 from Terminator 2 were all robotic heroes. It can be done!

My most recent robot character, Ultima, was created specifically to avenge the crippling of her creator's daughter, yet managed to become a true heroine through the interactions she had with the other heroes she met.

PS: Robot-man of the Doom Patrol, and Robot from Invincible are both cyborgs; human brains in mechanical bodies. As such, they represent a similar, but different, set of background considerations.

[casualplayer]

I, for one, used to love running Avar-7 as an adversary for my players. More random than Max Headroom, he was!

As far as the CU goes, maybe Mechanon hunts them down and destroys or confiscates any self-willed mechanisms? He doesn't really seem to have the mechanical biological clock ticking away like Marvel's Ultron so maybe he likes being an only child.

I personally blame Data from Star Trek. He pretty much said it all about robotic/android characters and then kept on jabbering and hoggin the limelight til we were sick of him.

[Lucius]

This is one reason why I hate the "only powers that cost END can go in an EC" rule. Without my Life Support in a "Robotic Body" EC, there's no way I can do it on 350 points.

Two rules you should consider breaking:

The “Robots MUST have every conceivable kind of Life Support!” rule (as noted above, it is simply not the case)

The "only powers that cost END can go in an EC" rule. I can understand why the rule exists, especially for inexperienced Game Operations Directors, but,


If the Gamemaster considers it a valid concept it falls within the "GM Discretion" exceptions to the rules that the Fifth Edition rulebook is peppered with.

Considering how often I've seen Steve Long break his own default rules in published character writeups to create the effect he wanted, I really don't feel too guilty about doing it myself. :rolleyes::thumbup:


In my group's campaign, several robot characters have been tried.

Any of them convicted?

Errr…nevermind. :o

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary ponders impaneling a jury of robotic peers…and the lamentable opportunities it would provide the attorneys for jury-rigging.

[nexus]

Can't disagree with you too much, but players want thier characters to be human and that means doing what they want, no matter the effect to thier cause. Following the 3 (or 4) laws would put the robot leaving the fight against the villain to go and stop a flood/ fire/ whatever, as that other event placed more humans at risk than the current villain did. He/she/it would walk away from a theft in progress to rescue somebody from a fire say.

Too many limitations or restrictions of choice don't make the 'is a robot' choice attractive to players.

These really sound like many of the some issues that come up with a flesh and blood character. A robot/android/whatever can have free will or even a persona and interests. It's not much different from playing an alien character. It takees getting into a different mindset but isn't that what role playing is at least in part about? For example a character with "Protects innocents" as a psych limit probably SHOULD be torn between stopping a theft and saving the victims of a fire. I've had several players play robots, myself included and one of my longest running character is a highly advanced artificial intellience: Eve.

[JmOz]

This is one reason why I hate the "only powers that cost END can go in an EC" rule. Without my Life Support in a "Robotic Body" EC, there's no way I can do it on 350 points.

For the record that is NOT the rule, the rule is "Powers that do not cost END can only be placed in a EC with the GM Approval". It is a small but important difference as the books even give some comentary on when it is appropriate to allow it.

[Enforcer84]

I kinda think we've drifted from the original question. Why no Robots in the CU, it's not like Darren is constrained by points. He obviously hates robots. :)

[braincraft]

I kinda think we've drifted from the original question. Why no Robots in the CU, it's not like Darren is constrained by points. He obviously hates robots. :)

He's an anti-robite!

[Lord Liaden]

I, for one, used to love running Avar-7 as an adversary for my players. More random than Max Headroom, he was!


Avar-7 was one of several interesting robotic/android/AI heroes and villains from the Fourth Edition Champions Universe, including Mechanon's heroic "twin" Peacekeeper, Plasmoid of the 4E Ultimates, M.A.C.C.S. of the superhero team the Cyberknights, the android vigilante Angel-3, the conquering interstellar machine collective known as the Monad, and the 4E Supreme Serpent of VIPER.

Those and others were each products of different contributors to the Champions line. Maybe that's why we ended up with more of them than in the current CU, which is mostly Steve and Darren's creation.

[clsage]

Avar-7 was one of several interesting robotic/android/AI heroes and villains from the Fourth Edition Champions Universe, including Mechanon's heroic "twin" Peacekeeper, Plasmoid of the 4E Ultimates, M.A.C.C.S. of the superhero team the Cyberknights, the android vigilante Angel-3, the conquering interstellar machine collective known as the Monad, and the 4E Supreme Serpent of VIPER.

Those and others were each products of different contributors to the Champions line. Maybe that's why we ended up with more of them than in the current CU, which is mostly Steve and Darren's creation.

I really miss Plasmoid. And Angel-3 had a fair bit of potential. As did her
'sister', the ships computer named....well, the name escapes me right now..Was it 'First Mate' ??....
Those two gave me part of an idea for a onboard computer in one of my power armored character concepts.
Hmmmm. I think it's time to dig thru my old copies of 'High Tech Enemies' and 'Allies' again.

[casualplayer]

Was Silverfist from the Protectors a robot or brain-in-a-can? I forget.

[Lord Liaden]

Was Silverfist from the Protectors a robot or brain-in-a-can? I forget.

He was a cyborg. If you've seen Scott Heine's more recent color rendering of Silverfist (or "Mandroid" as he was named in Scott's campaign), he's obviously partly organic.

Incidentally, I would have loved to see the character sheet for Silverfist's creator and nemesis, "PsiBorg," a psychically powerful human brain in a fully robotic body, or a true "brain-in-a-can."

[Enforcer84]

Was Silverfist from the Protectors a robot or brain-in-a-can? I forget.
BiC

[Sketchpad]

I've played robots in the past, as well as have some steady robotic/android heroes and villains in my campaign. Never had a big problem with them myself.

As for the No END powers going into ECs, well, I use ECs for Invulnerability ;) So why not? :D

[pinecone]

Ive played several highly successful robot PCs. The key is deciding who built them, and why. The creator's intended role for the robot shapes its physical attributes, powers, and its initial programming. A robot built to learn and grow as a pure experiment in A.I. will have a very diiferent starting personality than one built with the intention of its being a bodyguard, a police officer, or military hardware. Also, the Player should decide if it was -supposed- to be A.I., or if its awakening was accidental (see Short Circuit).

Robot PCs are just as viable as aliens, mutants, or any other trope background. The problem is that a lot of people think "its a robot" and dont feel the need to examine the character any further.

Vision, Machine Man, Jocasta, Red Tornado...heck, even the T-100 from Terminator 2 were all robotic heroes. It can be done!

My most recent robot character, Ultima, was created specifically to avenge the crippling of her creator's daughter, yet managed to become a true heroine through the interactions she had with the other heroes she met.

PS: Robot-man of the Doom Patrol, and Robot from Invincible are both cyborgs; human brains in mechanical bodies. As such, they represent a similar, but different, set of background considerations.

Thanx...I guess they'd be "Full borg" chars then...:)

[pinecone]

"Fembot" lim: Vuln: Mojo, Stun and Body x2,x2.....

[OddHat]

Had some fun for a while playing AI Gai.

He was an AI housed in a light bee, flying around inside a hard light hologram. SFX and much of the power set borrowed from Red Dwarf. The hook was that he really didn't have emotions or think as such; he just had a long list of scripts allowing simulated behaviors, plus a limited capacity to learn. Some good RPing opportunities there. Campaign fizzled, but it was fun while it lasted.

[moquif]

For the Life Support question, I look to my own computer.

A computer needs air of some sort for cooling so I'd say the 5 point "Breathe in Gaseous atmosphere".

I would be "No eat/sleep" but include a physical limitation about parts maintenance.

If you put a circuit board in a microwave, the radiation fries it in a very cool way. Do not try this at home kiddies! So you don't have to by LS vs radiation. Robots would be affected by it, just in a different way than people.

CPUs overheat and the moving parts in a computer (fan, hard drive, etc) can freeze up so you don't have to buy LS vs temperature.

Diseases would be required since computers aren't biological based. But poisons are another matter. Since there are chemical poisons, it could be said some poisons affect circuitry by corroding it. So buy the LS vs disease, but some limited form of LS vs poisons. Plus you also get a physical limitation about being vulurnable to other kinds of "poisons" like rust and dust.

Computer parts wear out and programs become corrupt so reduced/no aging is optional. Maybe buy it later as an upgrade along with other forms of LS.

In the end, you'll probably need only 30 points but they're not "wasted" points. You get some good powers with them. You'd be almost immune to gas attacks unless it was something like methane. And every character needs to spend a few points to flesh them out a bit more.

On a side note, from the POV of the discussion how much of a difference is there between robots and undead?

[gmurie]

Lela: "Nibbler no! Don't drink the water it has chlorine!"

Nibbler: "BUUURRP!"

Bender: "Hahahaha! You inferior meatsacks are the only ones getting poisoned. Wait! CHLORINE!" (rusts and falls over)

[Lord Liaden]

For the Life Support question, I look to my own computer.

A computer needs air of some sort for cooling so I'd say the 5 point "Breathe in Gaseous atmosphere".

I would be "No eat/sleep" but include a physical limitation about parts maintenance.

If you put a circuit board in a microwave, the radiation fries it in a very cool way. Do not try this at home kiddies! So you don't have to by LS vs radiation. Robots would be affected by it, just in a different way than people.

CPUs overheat and the moving parts in a computer (fan, hard drive, etc) can freeze up so you don't have to buy LS vs temperature.

Diseases would be required since computers aren't biological based. But poisons are another matter. Since there are chemical poisons, it could be said some poisons affect circuitry by corroding it. So buy the LS vs disease, but some limited form of LS vs poisons. Plus you also get a physical limitation about being vulurnable to other kinds of "poisons" like rust and dust.

Computer parts wear out and programs become corrupt so reduced/no aging is optional. Maybe buy it later as an upgrade along with other forms of LS.

In the end, you'll probably need only 30 points but they're not "wasted" points. You get some good powers with them. You'd be almost immune to gas attacks unless it was something like methane. And every character needs to spend a few points to flesh them out a bit more.

Very logical. :thumbup:


On a side note, from the POV of the discussion how much of a difference is there between robots and undead?

From the POV of the discussion, the OP was looking for examples of technology-based robots in the official CU. The SFX of such creatures is usually very different from magic-based undead. Game-mechanically, it depends on how you define and write up specific types of undead. Many zombies, mummies, skeletons, and other mindless, immune-to-pain undead have been statted in HERO using the Automaton rules, which tends to match how they're depicted in much popular fiction, and mechanically there's rarely any difference between them and techno-robots. OTOH free-willed undead such as vampires and liches frequently use the standard character rules.

Then there are the undead I wrote up for my aforementioned DH article, some of which are just as much techno-robots. But they're a deliberate exception to the rule.

[Thia Halmades]

Won't The Ultimate Automaton answer 99% of all these questions? I do believe it's an official Champions supplement, so should go straight into the CU, n'est pas?

[BobGreenwade]

Won't The Ultimate Automaton answer 99% of all these questions? I do believe it's an official Champions supplement, so should go straight into the CU, n'est pas?Yes and no. It'll probably have an automaton character or four intended to fit into the CU, which would be some help for the question at hand, but as an Ultimate book its focus will be on expanding, revising, and fine-tuning the Automaton rules and related stuff, and discussing how to run things like robots, zombies, and the like.

[Lucius]

Yes and no. It'll probably have an automaton character or four intended to fit into the CU, which would be some help for the question at hand, but as an Ultimate book its focus will be on expanding, revising, and fine-tuning the Automaton rules and related stuff, and discussing how to run things like robots, zombies, and the like.

And AI?

I really want to know what will happen when I Multiform into an unfocused AI form...

Lucius Alexander

The palindromedary sneers and suggests that Lucius is too cowardly to just do it and find out the hard way....

[rjcurrie]

Won't The Ultimate Automaton answer 99% of all these questions? I do believe it's an official Champions supplement, so should go straight into the CU, n'est pas?

There is no The Ultimate Automaton planned as a separate book. The kind of information that might have gone into such a book is going to be included in The Ultimate Gadgeteer which is currently scheduled for some time in 2008. At least that was the situation the last time I saw Steve address the subject which was in a chat about a month ago.

[Shaft]

This isn't part of the offical CU, but I really liked Optik, from the Hudson City Blues 4th ed module. He was pretty cool.