薔薇語 Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 This might seem like a really stupid question but, Do automatons suffer the same disads as humans when it comes to needing to eat/sleep/breathe? Or do they get the LS by defualt? Didn't want to bother steve unless I had to. Thank you La Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 25, 2006 Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Re: automatons Automatons have to buy desired Life Support over and above any Automaton Powers that they have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
薔薇語 Posted July 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2006 Re: automatons that is what I kinda feared. But at least I set aside points for it anyway. thank you La Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 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." Lucius Alexander The palindromedary wants me to post a couple of links from Free Fall to illustrate the point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoresLost Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Re: automatons 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." Thinking on this, wear is not aging (in the biological sense) and radiation damage is not aging either. With a supply of parts, regular maintenence and some knowledge most any mechanical device can be kept going indefently. A more complex device in real life is serviced on regular intrvals. Examples of this are the US Navy's P-3 fleet of aircraft and the Air Force's fleet of B-52 Bombers. The air frames are all 50 years old, they are still servicible and used on a regular bases. (I will admit that the services all complain about the cost of maintenance and the age of air fleets but that does not make the aircraft less usable per individual flight) Also most (all?) mechanical devices are immune to artificial aging attacks. The matrials of a device could be aged a million years and as long as their is no chemical interactions or mechanical wear the device is still usable as intended. Now biologically age the average living thing that long and you will end up with a pile of dust or pile of supporting structures. So how do you represent something that does not "age" (in the biological sense) but does wear out??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
薔薇語 Posted July 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Re: automatons wouldn't the problem of it "wearing out" be more of an issue of taken and rec(repairing) damage. And on the 'Imortal' life support even a human has to do "rutine care" or it can just decay and fall apart(over a very long time). So I think the SF/X on the Imortal is just general care and upkeep needed.(not enough of a disad to be for a limitation either) la Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Re: automatons Also most (all?) mechanical devices are immune to artificial aging attacks. The matrials of a device could be aged a million years and as long as their is no chemical interactions or mechanical wear the device is still usable as intended. Now biologically age the average living thing that long and you will end up with a pile of dust or pile of supporting structures. So how do you represent something that does not "age" (in the biological sense) but does wear out??? But if you simply moved living things a million years through time, without movement or erosion (mechanical wear) or growth/reproduction (chemical interactions), they wouldn't wear out either. IMO you're excluding environmental conditions from one example that have to apply to both, or neither, for your analogy to be consistent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Re: automatons Thinking on this, wear is not aging (in the biological sense) and radiation damage is not aging either. With a supply of parts, regular maintenence and some knowledge most any mechanical device can be kept going indefently. A more complex device in real life is serviced on regular intrvals. Examples of this are the US Navy's P-3 fleet of aircraft and the Air Force's fleet of B-52 Bombers. The air frames are all 50 years old, they are still servicible and used on a regular bases. (I will admit that the services all complain about the cost of maintenance and the age of air fleets but that does not make the aircraft less usable per individual flight) It's true that wear isn't exactly the same as aging: but wear and tear does indeed make the aircraft less usable per flight, in a very real sense. The amount of time needed for maintenance relative to the duration of each flight goes up as the craft ages. The probability of component failures during flight also goes up. Eventually stress to the whole basic fabric of the machine weakens it and renders it unsafe for further use. The alternative, of course, is to completely rebuild the machine with new materials; but then you have, essentially, a new machine, not the original one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoresLost Posted July 26, 2006 Report Share Posted July 26, 2006 Re: automatons But if you simply moved living things a million years through time' date=' without movement or erosion (mechanical wear) or growth/reproduction (chemical interactions), they wouldn't wear out either. IMO you're excluding environmental conditions from one example that have to apply to both, or neither, for your analogy to be consistent.[/quote'] True, this is a comparison of apples to oranges on my part. The one point I had in mind when I wrote that though is that it is easier to get a machine in to a state of stasis then a living organism. I could, given time and equip create an environment where a device would have minimal degradation, such as a environment lacking oxygen (replaced/displaced by some other gas) at some static temperature. I could maintain that state at much lower cost (of energy) then a stasis system for a living organism. Another point I was trying to get to is through maintainance it is possible to extend the life of certain automations and other machines for greater then there designed life. (This is the point of the air craft examples). I realize in game terms this is actually a mute point, because this is now in the realm of the handwave mechanic and GM fiat. Also am not saying that automation need to take any or all life support (In fact I would say that it should not in most cases, extremes would destroy most automatons and the act operation to destruction is what the "takes no stun" advantage is for.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrosshairCollie Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Re: automatons To a limited degree, an Automaton with 'Takes No STUN' doesn't need Life Support against certain things. F'rexample, if you have a Knockout Gas bomb built as a 4d6 NND vs Breathing Life Support, AE Radius 4", and there's a 'Takes No STUN' automaton in the area, he effectively laughs it off, as the NND is Stun Only and he takes no Stun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Re: automatons To a limited degree, an Automaton with 'Takes No STUN' doesn't need Life Support against certain things. F'rexample, if you have a Knockout Gas bomb built as a 4d6 NND vs Breathing Life Support, AE Radius 4", and there's a 'Takes No STUN' automaton in the area, he effectively laughs it off, as the NND is Stun Only and he takes no Stun. But it would still fall down and do the "kickin' chicken" if it was hit with nerve gas... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
薔薇語 Posted July 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Re: automatons But it would still fall down and do the "kickin' chicken" if it was hit with nerve gas... Well by rules he wouldn't but a NND with Does Body respresenting Nerve Gas would still mess with an automoton that doesn't have the "doesn't breath" or "Imune to Chemical warfare agents." Although off hand I can't think of any way(not magical at least) that could hurt a Auto. that has all the Imunity LS but not "Doesn't breathe?" Is there somehting anyone can think of? La Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublefine Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons Although off hand I can't think of any way(not magical at least) that could hurt a Auto. that has all the Imunity LS but not "Doesn't breathe?" Is there somehting anyone can think of? La Rose Well, unless there's an Immunity:Crowbar, most of the can still be hurt. The Takes No Stun is meant to simulate the fact that an Automaton's "Nervous System", for lack of a better term, is setup radically differently than an average Human's (ie. it has better shock absorbers around it's positronic brain, or it's in a modified berserker mode like most mindless undead). Most Automatons with Takes No Stun simply react differently either calmly doing damage control listings in their processors, or don't have any way of really recognizing that they've been hit except that they've taken damage. Or so I've always thought. Would a nerve gas do BDY? I think I saw something once with a nerve gas that was actually corrosive to human flesh, but it's been a while. And I think that was in "Mr. Stich", which actually included a Shelly style reanimated Flesh Golem made out of various medically donated corpses. So, somehow, I would doubt the scientific veracity of such things... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons Umm....you don't even know what a nerve gas IS, do you? It kills people. Lucius Alexander The palindromedary observes a sign of the times: "Right Lane Ends. Wrong Lane Goes on Forever." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublefine Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons Umm....you don't even know what a nerve gas IS, do you? It kills people. Lucius Alexander Um...I do know what a nerve gas is...I was just mentioning a particular nerve gas that I saw in a SciFi movie. Although they normally only affect acetylcholinesterase and don't normally damage the rest of the body (which BDY is generally an expression of)...besides, nerve gasses are more expensive if you get them to do BDY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Anomaly Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons Well' date=' unless there's an Immunity:Crowbar, most of the can still be hurt.[/quote'] I think he was wondering why, SFX-wise, an automaton bought with "Does Not Breathe" would be affected by something bought as a nerve gas, game mechanics being "NND, Does Body". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons I think he was wondering why' date=' SFX-wise, an automaton bought with "Does Not Breathe" would be affected by something bought as a nerve gas, game mechanics being "NND, Does Body".[/quote'] Gasses absorbed through the skin rather than the respiratory system. Interestingly, "Skin-Absorbed Gasses" was part of the suite for Life Support before Fourth Edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons My earlier comment was based on an automaton WITHOUT LS Does Not Breathe. Someone mentioned that a Takes No STUN automaton wouldn't need the LS because NND damage is STUN Only. I pointed out, using SFX, that a Does BODY NND would affect such an automaton, the implication being that in most cases, the LS is still an important thing to buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublefine Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Re: automatons The thing you have to look at I suppose is what the characters are likely to buy...and also what the GM wants something to do...you don't have to create a full character sheet for this automaton if you don't want to...just scretch out what abilities YOU want it to have. I once had a GM that came up with some really cool villians. I asked him when the game was over if I could see the character sheets so that I could use some of the same abilities in a campaign I was thinking about running...no character sheets. The key point being, if you're running, come up with a special effect and the abilities presented by it and don't worry about how many points it would actually cost. Just make sure that the automaton, or whatever villain you build, aren't needlessly overpowered and that your players would actually have a chance against these things. For example, if your players have mainly gas attacks and the like, Does Not Breathe might be hopelessly overpowered and allow the villain in question to roll right over them. Other than that have fun. And...off the soapbox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LunaRagno Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 Re: automatons This might seem like a really stupid question but, Do automatons suffer the same disads as humans when it comes to needing to eat/sleep/breathe? Or do they get the LS by defualt? Didn't want to bother steve unless I had to. Thank you La Rose If by "default" you mean free of charge, no. That would be much like letting a power's special effects grant an ability the same as another power¹. If by "default" you mean "must be acquired as a house-rule of this campaign," I can see doing such a thing. ¹This raises a question: do you think the "Power" Skill could be used for "automaton tricks," such as a very rare "just like a Life Support" avoidance of such things as gas-based attacks? Obviously, it must be little used. Still, can "Being an automaton" be the basis for a "Power" Skill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemurion Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 Re: automatons If by "default" you mean free of charge, no. That would be much like letting a power's special effects grant an ability the same as another power¹. If by "default" you mean "must be acquired as a house-rule of this campaign," I can see doing such a thing. ¹This raises a question: do you think the "Power" Skill could be used for "automaton tricks," such as a very rare "just like a Life Support" avoidance of such things as gas-based attacks? Obviously, it must be little used. Still, can "Being an automaton" be the basis for a "Power" Skill? I would say that it's a valid option. We need some way to quantify things like that in the rules, and a power skill is an already existing method. In the meantime, one could rule that a nerve gas has a strange catalytic effect on some of the circuitry inside an automaton and just coincidentally has a similar effect to that which it does on living matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted August 3, 2006 Report Share Posted August 3, 2006 Re: automatons I think he was wondering why' date=' SFX-wise, an automaton bought with "Does Not Breathe" would be affected by something bought as a nerve gas, game mechanics being "NND, Does Body".[/quote'] Of course, one could also rule that being an inorganic construct constitutes a valid defense to some No Normal Defense attacks. Lucius Alexander And an Armor Piercing No Normal Defense Palindromedary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.