Inteligent Vehilces/Self piloting vehilces.

[BlackJaw]

Now I already have rules for allowing a simple autopilot component... but the question here is for vehilce that are inteligent.

Examples: Moya from Farscape is a living ship (I'd say an aberation as it is alien inteligence and form in the extream)
The Heart of Gold from Hitchiker's Gd is a Construct with an Artificial Inteligence.
The Enterprise from TNG has a very simple Int score but on more then one ocasion could fly itself.

All these vehilce would have Wis, Cha, and Int scores (even if just 0) and we could argue that they are vehilces that could, in theory, pilot themselves. How do we do that?

Harder thoughts:

If a powerful Lich animates the corpse of a massive whale (Collosal zombie/medium vessel) and loads it with vehilce components... that zombie has an INT score of "--" (IE: none) but can still move under its own power... can it pilot itself?

What about a Gollem Ship. Gollems have no INT scores either...

Do we use mounted rules in these situations or can they pilot themselves the same way a normal vehilce can be piloted by a nomral skeleton stuck at the controls.

BUT then how do we determine when a vehicle can be self piloting?

 

[barsoomcore]

Now I already have rules for allowing a simple autopilot component... but the question here is for vehilce that are inteligent.

Let's first of all keep in mind that there's all the difference in the world between an Intelligent vehicle and a creature. A vehicle, by definition, cannot fly itself. Anything, wether it be construct or undead, that can propel itself through the air or the ether or what have you, is a creature.

If a powerful Lich animates the corpse of a massive whale (Collosal zombie/medium vessel) and loads it with vehilce components... that zombie has an INT score of "--" (IE: none) but can still move under its own power... can it pilot itself?

A zombie doesn't have a fly speed so not unless the lich alters it significantly. But if it can pilot itself then it is no longer a vehicle.

BUT then how do we determine when a vehicle can be self piloting?

A vehicle is never self-piloting.

The real problem is that we have TWO qualities for vehicles: one, that they require a pilot, and two, that they can take Vessel components. I propose these two qualities be separated.

VEHICLES require a pilot. A vehicle cannot move itself. It has no DEXTERITY score, which means that unless it is supplied with Dexterity via a pilot, it cannot maneuver.

VESSELS can have vessel components. Whether a vessel is a creature or a vehicle is immaterial. There's no real reason you couldn't design a creature capable of carrying cargo and so on. Or a creature that required fuel or life support systems.

So do we now have two type modifiers to make use of? The Vessel modifier which can be applied to Aberrations, Constructs, Plants and Undead, and allows them to acquire vessel components according to their hit dice. By these rules a Griffin cannot be a vessel, though it is a flying creature. Possibly we could come up with a Vessel definition that could include the Griffin and other flying creatures, however. In this case it would appear that the Vessel type modifier could conceivably be attached to any creature type (indeed I can imagine Outsider, Ooze and Elemental vessels with ease).

The Vehicle modifier can only be applied to a creature with the type modifier of Vessel already applied to it. The Vehicle modifier removes a creature's Dexterity score, so that it requires a Pilot in order to maneuver. Perhaps the Vehicle type modifier can only be applied to Aberrations, Constructs, Plants and Undead.

 

[BlackJaw]

GREAT IDEA!

Ok, so a vehicle and vessel are now seperatly defined... allowing us to stick cargo racks/contaners/ect to a dragon or what not... or guns (that require operators, etc) but now I got a couple of questions... a griffin has 7 Hit dice... but my current "vehicle creation guides" that means up to 7 component slots can be added to a griffin... not all of which make much sense. especialy not 7 units of them. Unlike a vehicle hull a griffin is filled with internal organs/etc. only so much space on/in a griffen (or flying zombie/etc) is avalible.

More sense would be to say that vessels take components based on size (or fraction of HD), and vehicles based on hd (which unlike monseters, is connected to size) of the vehicle.

Also, I'll have to break my list of components up by what can go on any vessel and what goes on a vehicle only. (IE: do you want to stick a fuel tank and propeller on a griffen? If so would we calculate in the griffen's natural speed in some way? hmmm)

 

[barsoomcore]

Now I got a couple of questions... a griffin has 7 Hit dice... but my current "vehicle creation guides" that means up to 7 component slots can be added to a griffin... not all of which make much sense. especialy not 7 units of them. Unlike a vehicle hull a griffin is filled with internal organs/etc. only so much space on/in a griffen (or flying zombie/etc) is avalible.

Yeah, that's a problem, alright. Here's one solution:

We come up with a table. A row for each creature type. A column for each size category. At each intersection, the number of slots available for vessel components. So perhaps a griffin (Large Beast) only has one slot available, enough for a Basic Saddle/Cockpit. Whereas, say, a Yrthak (Huge Magical Beast) has three slots, enough for a saddle and a small cannon. A Vargouille (Small Outsider) has no slots.

That's for vessels. Anything that is a vehicle gets a slot for each and every hit die it possesses. So there's another difference between the two types.

This means that, for example, animating a dragon carcass and turning it into an interstellar transport means just applying the Vessel and Vehicle types to a dragon (maybe making it Undead first). But basically you're hollowing out the dragon when you make it into a Vehicle, so you get to use all of its hit dice (instead of some fraction, as when a dragon is made a vessel.)

This should save you from having to divide components up by vehicle/vessel. If you want to put a fuel tank on your griffin, you'll need a one-slot tank (which won't be very big) and you won't be able to connect it to anything -- since a griffin only has one slot. I think that with careful attention to component requirements and creature allowances we can make this work pretty well.

I'm not 100% that having Vessel and Vehicle both as type modifiers is the best solution. Perhaps Vessel is a template that can be applied to any creature. I like that solution best. It doesn't change anything about the creature but it does allow the creature to acquire vessel components. Vehicle remains a type modifier since it's not really for "applying" to existing creatures -- it's a quality that new, DM-created "creatures" can possess.

So that's my new idea -- Vessel is a template and Vehicle is a type modifier. Whatcha think? And then Vessel creatures have one table to consult for number of vessel component slots and Vehicles have another.

 

[barsoomcore]

I Hate It When I'm Wrong

Okay, Vessel can't be a template. Bad idea.

Forget about it. We don't need to come up with a way to define "Vessels". ANY creature can acquire Vessel Components, based on the table I described above. It doesn't need a template applied to it -- Templates are used to create entirely new creatures. Not what we're doing -- we just want to put a saddle on a griffin.

So, the Vessel Creation chapter has two sections: Creating Vehicles, and Creatures as Vessels. The Creating Vehicles section has the whole vehicle type modifier jazz -- no Dex, one slot per hit die, yada yada yada. The Creatures as Vessels section just has the table "Using Vessel Components on Creatures".

Whaddya think?

 

[barsoomcore]

Arg.

Okay, more thinking, had a shower, more ideas.

Right, Vessel is neither a template nor a type modifier. It's just a word we use to describe both flying creatures and flying vehicles.

Vehicle is a type modifier. Only Aberrations, Plants, Constructs and Undead can have this type modifier. A Vehicle has no Dexterity and cannot take move actions.

Note that this means a Vehicle CAN make attacks or cast spells. An attack is made with a vessel weapon and thus uses the Vessel Weapon Attack Modifier (which doesn't depend on BAB or Dexterity, natch). It can only make a single attack per round (like anyone else) unless it takes the full attack option, which would allow it to make two attacks if it had at least two Vessel Weapons -- with the usual penalties for making attacks with two weapons. A vessel can have the Multi-Attack feat to allow it to make more attacks per round.

Because a Vehicle has no Dexterity, it cannot cast spells with a somatic component. It can of course take the Still Spell feat and cast such spells without their somatic component.

This means Vehicles do roll Initiative. They don't apply any Dexterity bonus but they could have Improved Initiative as a feat.

Obviously, a Vehicle with a zero Intelligence cannot take any actions at all (DMG. page 72).

 

[BlackJaw]

So an inteligent vehicle (golem ship, living hull, undead etc)is capable of doing certain things within the limitations of its stats(which is anything not piloting and that doesn't require movement IE: no dex means you need Still Spell to cast spells with somatic components). It also means that vehicles can gain levels... including levels of spellcasters (magic) and levels of rogues (but many rogue skills are dex skills and therefore with no Dex... NO USING THOSE SKILLS) BUT all classes provide saving throw bonuses (ack OUR reflex save system!) and BAB.

Also, vessel weapons have operators... and some more then one. I can't imagine a gollem ship being able to work a cannon with no arms! Vessel weapons are also listed seperatly from normal weapons (which I'd guess most vehicles have none, and if they did; how does a vehicle with no DEX use one?). If a vehicle could use weapons on its own, the most it could do would be those weapons that are Remote operated (generaly 1 operator weapons designed to be fired from a bridge or cockpit)...

ug, my head hurts.

 

[barsoomcore]

So an inteligent vehicle (golem ship, living hull, undead etc)is capable of doing certain things within the limitations of its stats.

The limitation is: No move actions and no Dexterity. This means that any Dex-based skill cannot be used by a vehicle. This would of course include Piloting.

It also means that vehicles can gain levels...

Sure, why not?

BUT all classes provide saving throw bonuses (ack OUR reflex save system!) and BAB.

Right. So we have a couple of choices. We could say that a vehicle always fails its Reflex save -- the same way an object or undead always fails its Fort save. Class levels have no effect -- a vehicle will always fail a Reflex Save.

I like this notion. It's congruent with the "No Constitution" description of undead and objects. And frankly, Reflex Saves are unlikely to be that big a deal to most vehicles. It's not like they'll be setting off traps or anything...

Or we could say that vehicle just makes its own Reflex save -- which it will automatically fail (just like any object automatically fails a Fort save) unless it possesses a Reflex save bonus (i.e. it has at least one class level). So a 747 ALWAYS fails its Reflex Save.

I have some sympathy with that system. It's reasonably simple, even simpler than my next suggestion:

Vehicles use their pilot's Reflex save bonus or their own, which ever is higher.

I don't like that one. Certainly a vehicle without a pilot should always fail its saving roll. The final suggestion is:

Vehicles always use their pilot's Reflex save, adjusted by their Handling Modifier.

This is the system currently agreed to and while it has some advantages, I'm starting to lean to the first one -- that vehicles just always fail a reflex save.

Also, vessel weapons have operators... and some more then one. I can't imagine a gollem ship being able to work a cannon with no arms!

Part of the description of a vessel weapon needs to be what sort of operator is required -- local or remote. A vehicle can only use a vessel weapon that allows remote operators. A vessel weapon that requires more than one operator can only be used if the vehicle has the Multi-Attack feat.

Vessel weapons are also listed seperatly from normal weapons (which I'd guess most vehicles have none, and if they did; how does a vehicle with no DEX use one?).

Right. A vehicle has no natural weapons. It can only attack with remotely operated vessel weapons.

 

[BlackJaw]

And frankly, Reflex Saves are unlikely to be that big a deal to most vehicles. It's not like they'll be setting off traps or anything...

BUT guided weapons require reflex saves (target with ranged touch, then a reflex save for no damage or half damage depending on the missile.) In a modern, semi-modern, or high fantasy setting guided wepaons like missiles (or something that uses that mechanic) will be common. ALso remember that many monster attacks (dragon's breath) require reflex saves, and that many spells (fireball, lightning bolt) which a wizard might use in combat (in or out of a vehicle) use a reflex save.

Essentialy I'd say that a vehicle by itself (no pilot) can not make a reflex throw (auto-fails) BUT if it has a pilot then the pilot uses the current system... kinda like how a vehicle can't move unless it has a pilot to make it move, etc. Its just one of those things that a pilot does.

Speaking of which: its another reason why I support pilots affecting vehicle armor classes.... an unpiloted (out of control) vehicle would be eaiser to hit then one with a pilot (that knows he is in combat).

 

[barsoomcore]

This is actually really simple.

Monster Manual, page 10:

A creature with no Dexterity cannot move. If it can act, it applies its Intelligence modifier to initiative checks instead of a Dexterity modifier. The creature fails all Reflex saves and Dexterity checks.

Now I still agree that a piloted vehicle gets the pilot's Reflex Save (modified by the Handling Modifier) -- but an unpiloted vehicle always fails its save (which I believe we have mentioned in the Out Of Control condition).

And another good point on piloted vs. unpiloted vehicle ACs -- you're right, they ought to be different.

So:

A pilot can make Reflex Saves for a vehicle, modified by the vehicle's handling modifier.

A vehicle's AC is modified by the following bonuses to the pilot's AC:

(list of applicable AC bonuses)


Agreed?