Converting "generic setting" Second Edition monsters

[Cleon]

That all seems reasonable.

Good! All it needs is the ugly details.

How's this:

Clockwork Powered (Ex): Most of the time, a clockwork warrior golem is powered via a winding-sprocket set in the wall or floor which fits into the golem's back, chest, or one of its feet. Winding-sprockets are driven by some kind of magical or mechanical engine, usually a waterwheel. A sprocket is AC X, hardness Y and takes Z hit points to destroy.

A clockwork warrior golem can function continuously as long as it is powered by a winding sprocket. If a clockwork golem moves out of a square containing a winding-socket it must disconnect itself from its power source and switch to internal springs for power. These springs only hold enough energy for a short period of activity. A clockwork warrior golem will grow slower and weaker as its springs wind down, as indicated in the following table:

Rounds of spring-powered activity
01-10 rounds - Moves and fights normally.
11-20 rounds - Cannot run, -4 Strength penalty.
21-30 rounds - Single action only, -12 Strength penalty.
31-40 rounds - Speed reduced to 5 ft., -20 Strength penalty.
41+ rounds - Helpless and immobile.

A clockwork warrior golem can rewind its springs by reconnecting itself to a winding-sprocket. This typically requires 1 round of rewinding to regain 1 round of spring-powered activity, but the rate may vary depending on the power-supply.

It is possible to rewind a clockwork golem using a giant key, but this requires enormous strength (Str Z+).

How about 1:6 for the lesser, and 1:4 for the greater?

I'd prefer have it be the same for both, preferably 1:4.

Also, if you insist on a different rate for the Lesser/Greater version I'd rather the greater version has the 1:6 ratio, since.

A) Being so much bigger, it'll need more heat to warm up enough to reforge its components.
B) The Lesser version may be facing much lower level PCs who might only be able to do a few HPs of fire damage (via flaming hand or alchemist's fire, for example), in which case the effect would not be very noticeable.

 

[freyar]

On the other hand, the greater one is made with more powerful magic. Ehh, just go with 1:4 for both.

I like the winding down, but I'm worried that fights won't last long enough for it to come into play. Well, that is the original timing, so I guess it's not supposed to come up much.

 

[Cleon]

On the other hand, the greater one is made with more powerful magic. Ehh, just go with 1:4 for both.

I'll change the Working Draft.

I like the winding down, but I'm worried that fights won't last long enough for it to come into play. Well, that is the original timing, so I guess it's not supposed to come up much.

Well we could make it in steps of 5 rounds instead of 10, I suppose.

Maybe give the lesser version 3 round steps. Being smaller it could have a lower "battery life".

 

[Shade]

I'm fine with 1:4 for both, and don't have a strong preference on the number of rounds for winding down.

 

[Cleon]

I'm fine with 1:4 for both, and don't have a strong preference on the number of rounds for winding down.

I'd leaning towards reducing the duration as previously described, but am OK with the current 10 round steps.

Let's wait to see which Freyar prefers.

 

[freyar]

Let's leave the big ones with the original duration but reduce the smaller ones to 3 round increments. That works.

 

[Cleon]

Let's leave the big ones with the original duration but reduce the smaller ones to 3 round increments. That works.

Well I'm not sure about having such a big difference, but I'll stick it in and see what it looks like.

Updating Working Draft.

We need to decide on a Strength to rewind it with a key. I suggest Golem's Strength +3 (e.g. Str 18 for Lesser, Str 30 for Greater).

 

[Shade]

We need to decide on a Strength to rewind it with a key. I suggest Golem's Strength +3 (e.g. Str 18 for Lesser, Str 30 for Greater).

That makes good sense. However, I'd suggest a Str check rather than require a flat score, but based off those amounts.

 

[Cleon]

That makes good sense. However, I'd suggest a Str check rather than require a flat score, but based off those amounts.

I prefer a flat score myself. If you set it to an average roll (e.g. DC 20-21 for the +10 bonus of Str 30) then it's possible for a weedy "average joe" to wind up these giant death machines, which doesn't feel right.

I suppose if you use "take 20" DCs (DC 30 for Greater, DC 24 for Lesser) it could work, but it's take a long time (2 minutes per round-worth of rewinding).

That is workable, although it's effectively similar to a flat score.

 

[Shade]

I prefer a flat score myself. If you set it to an average roll (e.g. DC 20-21 for the +10 bonus of Str 30) then it's possible for a weedy "average joe" to wind up these giant death machines, which doesn't feel right.

I suppose if you use "take 20" DCs (DC 30 for Greater, DC 24 for Lesser) it could work, but it's take a long time (2 minutes per round-worth of rewinding).

That is workable, although it's effectively similar to a flat score.

"Effectively similar" is more appealing that using legacy mechanics.