Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kerrick" data-source="post: 4711267" data-attributes="member: 4722">I should be posting monster questions here instead of in the Godsend thread. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />UK, I've got a problem. Mithril and adamantine aren't real materials, so we don't have any densities for them, which makes it impossible to determine the golem stats. Mithril is much lighter than iron, so I'd place it around a +20 Strength bonus, but that would mean that it has only 40 Strength - lower than an iron golem - and 19 HD (vs. an iron golem's 22). I think adamantine is around the same as steel, density-wise, so about 27. Same story, though - it would be 43 Strength and 22-23 HD.I seriously think basing strength off material density is the wrong way to go about it. I can see the line of logic (strength increases in proportion to density), but it falls apart when you have materials that are extremely strong and yet light, like cast aluminum, titanium... and mithril. Gold is incredibly dense, but very soft - I don't think a golem made of gold would be very strong, though it would have a VSC or two due to its immense weight. I'll play around with some things, but I'm thinking right now that golem strength should be based directly off material strength - probably hit points per inch. Thus, a golem's power increases in direct proportion to the material from which it's made - mithril is better than iron, adamantine is better than mithril, and neutronium is better than adamantine. It also makes it much easier to make golems from random new materials - if you know the hardness and hit points, you're good to go; no more screwing around trying to figure out the density (and personally, I can't make heads or tails out of that table or how you got those numbers).</blockquote>

Verification