Converting Creatures from Other Campaign Settings

[Cleon]

Did you want to have the two slams for the wicker along with the claws and bite? I find that wording a bit confusing. Oh, I see from the table you meant "winged" for the claws and bite.

Oh dang it, how did that happen. Yes, the claws & bite are for the Winged Juggernaut.

I'd better correct that post.

Damage values are ok. And I do think the second table looks a bit better.

I'm wondering about including the number of attacks in the table - e.g."2 Slams" instead of "Slams". Upon second thoughts, existing SRD templates for creatures with twin attacks just use the singular term in the damage entry. (e.g. a Lycanthrope has 2 claw attacks in hybrid form but its damage table has a "Claw" column).

 

[Cleon]

Upon second thoughts, existing SRD templates for creatures with twin attacks just use the singular term in the damage entry. (e.g. a Lycanthrope has 2 claw attacks in hybrid form but its damage table has a "Claw" column).

Upon third thoughts, I ought to update the Guardian Juggernaut Working Draft.

 

[Cleon]

Upon reflection, should we not add a requirement that the base construct must be of a larger size than the base creature? That would seem to be a requisite for having the base construct have Equipment Slots that can contain the base creature's gear.

We could set it up so that you can have juggernauts that are smaller than the base creature but they are unable to use the base creature's oversized equipment, but that would perforce remove a large chunk of the advantages provided by the juggernaut.

A simple solution would be:

Size and Type
The guardian juggernaut has the size of the base construct (typically Huge) and is treated as a creature of the construct type. The base construct must have a size at least one size category larger than the base creature's size.

 

[Cleon]

Oh, I just remembered. I was toying with the idea of limiting the number of its iterative attacks to those of the base creature.

e.g. If the base creature has a +7 BAB giving it two iterative attacks at a base of +7/+2 then if it pilots a Stone Juggernaut granting +5 BAB it still only has two iterative attacks (at +12/+7) rather than the three it would normally have (+12/+7/+2).

That'd require an small tweak along the following lines:

Base Attack/Grapple
Add the base attack bonus for the base creature to the base attack bonus for the base construct (typically +2 for wicker, +3 for winged and wooden, or +5 for stone).

A juggernaut can make iterative attacks with weapons if the base creature is able to do so, but it can not make more iterative attacks than the base creature is capable of due to the additional base attack bonus granted by the base construct.

For example, a creature with BAB +8 has two iterative attacks with base attack bonuses of +8/+3. A standard wooden juggernaut (BAB +3) piloted by this base creature has BAB +11. The resulting guardian juggernaut can make two iterative attacks with base attack bonuses of +11/+6. It can not make three iterative attacks at +11/+6/+1 like a normal creature with BAB +11.

 

[Cleon]

Oh, I just remembered. I was toying with the idea of limiting the number of its iterative attacks to those of the base creature.

The more I reflect on this idea the more I like it. It gives more of a feel of a construct being piloted by another creature.

 

[freyar]

Yes, I agree with all of that, including listing the single form of the attacks.

Let's deal with abilities next. The simple thing to do would be to use the mental abilities of the base creature and the physical ones of the base construct, but I could possibly see some modification there.

 

[Cleon]

Yes, I agree with all of that, including listing the single form of the attacks.

Updating the Guardian Juggernaut Working Draft.

Let's deal with abilities next. The simple thing to do would be to use the mental abilities of the base creature and the physical ones of the base construct, but I could possibly see some modification there.

Using the mental stats of the base creature is a no-brainer (if you'll excuse the expression ). The whole point of these creatures is the juggernaut is operated by the will of the pilot.

However, for the physical stats I would rather have some kind of combination of both creature and construct. The original version used the pilot's Strength bonuses to attack and damage and added extra bonuses on top of that depending on the Juggernaut.

For example, the wooden juggernaut used the pilot's strength modifier to hit plus an additional +2 "wooden totem juggernaut bonus", and if it hits it added the pilot's strength modifier to damage and a +2d6 "wooden totem juggernaut bonus".

So I'm thinking of something like we take the pilot's Strength and add the size advancement Str modifier for the size increase from pilot => juggernaut and maybe add an additional modifier depending on the type of juggernaut.

So, a Medium humanoid piloting a Huge Juggernaut would have, say, +16 Str if it's Wooden (the normal size increase to Strength for that advancement), while a Wicker Juggernaut might only have +12 and a Stone Juggernaut might have +20.

That's a 4-point difference, which I think works a bit better with the slam damages we've got in the current working draft. I had it in the back of my mind while figuring out the damages of the Slam attacks.

An 8-point difference would produce +8/+16/+24 which might be closer to the original damage bonuses of +1d6/+2d6/+3d6, but it seems a little too large.

We might want to play around with the numbers a bit before we decide. Maybe consider nonstandard size advancement or something?

Hmm... like letting the Stone Juggernaut use oversized weapons to compensate for it not being quite as big a step up strength-wise as the original?

Well we don't have to decide in a hurry.

 

[freyar]

Ugh, I just don't like the mechanics of the original monsters from the "they make no sense" standpoint. Why on earth would a construct suddenly take on the physical abilities of the driver? A bonus from them, sure. I might be able to go along with your proposal, but I think I'd prefer to do something like pilot's Str plus construct's Str - 10 (ie, effectively adding the Str bonus of the pilot and construct).

 

[Cleon]

Ugh, I just don't like the mechanics of the original monsters from the "they make no sense" standpoint. Why on earth would a construct suddenly take on the physical abilities of the driver? A bonus from them, sure. I might be able to go along with your proposal, but I think I'd prefer to do something like pilot's Str plus construct's Str - 10 (ie, effectively adding the Str bonus of the pilot and construct).

Why on earth? Because magic, that's why!

My suggestion is effectively adding the Str bonuses of the creature or construct, but then it's adding a modifier based on the size difference between the two.

That way a Halfling would get more advantage from piloting a Gargantuan juggernaut than a Storm Giant would, since there's less of a "size up".

 

[freyar]

OK, I didn't get from your previous description that you wanted to add the construct's (Str-10) to the base creature's Str before addding the size modifier. Or did you want to add (Str-10-size modifier) from the construct?