Flying Golems/Construct for your use!

[Wolf72]

[unlurk] Well, since not working full time kinda bites the big one, I get some down time (currently substitute teaching) during the day. I've been on a flying mount kick and finding ways to make them available earlier for PC's and NPC's. This is what I have so far [still un-lurking]

Iron Hummingbird (for Pathfinder)
•	Unaligned Large Construct
Initiative/Senses: 	+7	 
Armor Class: 		19 (-1 sz, +7 dex, +3 Natural)
HD/HP:			2d10+30 (41 hp)	
Saves:			Fort +0, Refl +7, Will +0
Spec Qualities:		Construct	
Speed:			Fly 100 ft (perfect)	
Melee:			beak +5 (1d8+4) or wing buffet +5 (2d6+2)	
Space/Reach:		10 ft/5 ft	
Spec Attk:		Charge with beak (2x dmg)
Ability:	        Str 18 (+4), Dex 25 (+7), Con --, Int --, Wis 10, Cha 1 (-5)
BAB/CMB/CMD:		+2; CMB +7; CMD +24
Feats:			--
Skills:			Fly +13
Languages:		Follows creator’s language

Iron Hummingbirds are golems used by powerful kingdoms with a strong arcane tradition. They are used as official flying mounts and transports. Iron Hummingbirds can carry up to two medium sized humanoids with a light flight load of 200 pounds and maximum flight load of 600 pounds.

Iron Hummingbirds are made out of a combination of high quality metal alloys, wood, and fabric. Their wings are designed to take the most punishment due to the nature of their flying ability.

When not in use Iron Hummingbirds sit idly. They can operate for up to 24 hours at a time, requiring 1 full day of rest for 1 hour’s worth of flight time. These golems only attack when directed by a mounted rider.

(Dex & HD related areas ... basically everything from BAB to Skill, Init, Saves ... fixed, types I hopefully. sigh, as soon as I hit save I see that I did not account for size in the attack bonus, it should be +5)

 

[Wolf72]

Edit: carrying capacity for Large creatures is x2. It's light load should be 266 lbs and it's maximum load should be 800 lbs.

At that weight I might drop it's strength down to 18 ... which would make the light load 200 lbs, and max load 600 lbs.

 

[Cleon]

Edit: carrying capacity for Large creatures is x2. It's light load should be 266 lbs and it's maximum load should be 800 lbs.

At that weight I might drop it's strength down to 18 ... which would make the light load 200 lbs, and max load 600 lbs.

Normally, a creature can only fly when "carrying no more than a light load" so this Dragonfly is limited to 200 pounds - only enough for a single Medium humanoid if who's very skinny and has left most of their gear at home.

You can circumvent that by giving it the ability to fly when overburdened, like you get from the overland flight spell or a carpet of flying.

Or just increase the Strength. A Strength of 26 would let it fly with about 600 pounds. If you want to keep the +4 damage bonus on the bite just add "Its bite attack is treated as a secondary attack and adds only half the iron dragonfly's Strength bonus to damage" to the Combat section. That's give the bite and the wings the same attack and damage modifiers, though.

Its saves are all a point too high. It'd need to be a 3 to 5 Hit Dice Construct to have +1/+1/+1 saves.

Oh, and Dex 25 gives a +7 modifier, not +8.

 

[Wolf72]

Normally, a creature can only fly when "carrying no more than a light load" so this Dragonfly is limited to 200 pounds - only enough for a single Medium humanoid if who's very skinny and has left most of their gear at home.

You can circumvent that by giving it the ability to fly when overburdened, like you get from the overland flight spell or a carpet of flying.

Or just increase the Strength. A Strength of 26 would let it fly with about 600 pounds. If you want to keep the +4 damage bonus on the bite just add "Its bite attack is treated as a secondary attack and adds only half the iron dragonfly's Strength bonus to damage" to the Combat section. That's give the bite and the wings the same attack and damage modifiers, though.

Its saves are all a point too high. It'd need to be a 3 to 5 Hit Dice Construct to have +1/+1/+1 saves.

Oh, and Dex 25 gives a +7 modifier, not +8.

Flight Load ... Pathfinder not 3x (no so such rule in PF)

Dex: DOH! totally did that in my head and didn't double check

Saves: DOH! DOH! ... I originally had 3HD then downgraded to two after I read up on the bonus HP and never redid the saves.

right ... flight info stays the same, reduce dex, (check BAB too), reduce fort/refl/will by 1/2/1

thanks for the catches

W72

 

[Cleon]

Flight Load ... Pathfinder not 3x (no so such rule in PF)

Oh right, there's no mention of the weight limit rule in the PRD. It's from the D&D SRD. Pathfinder changed it to a "Fly Skill", which I don't care for much.

Come to think of it, where's the explanation for flight manoeuverability ratings in the PRD? Is the entirety of it the "A creature with a natural fly speed receives a bonus (or penalty) on Fly skill checks depending on its maneuverability: Clumsy –8, Poor –4, Average +0, Good +4, Perfect +8" in the Fly skill description?

right ... flight info stays the same, reduce dex, (check BAB too), reduce fort/refl/will by 1/2/1

The Base Attack Bonus ought to be +1 for a 2 Hit Dice construct.

If my sums are right, that gives it a CMB of +6 (BAB 1 plus 1 size plus 4 Str) and a CMD of 23 (10 plus BAB 1 plus 1 size plus 4 Str plus 7 Dex).

 

[Cleon]

The Base Attack Bonus ought to be +1 for a 2 Hit Dice construct.

Come to think of it, the lower BAB means its attack values are a point too high, so it ought to have bite +4, wings +4.

By the way, you might have noticed I've been using "bite" rather than "beak" for the first attack. Creatures that attack with beaks have it listed as a bite attack in both Pathfinder and D&D. Note the PRD Axebeak and Giant Dragonfly both have bite attacks.

 

[Wolf72]

bite is a type of 'chomp' ... as in closing between jaw bones. Beak is using the beak as a spear or lance. I could have gone with bite but that would require a possible explanation that I didn't want to type up. Besides, it seemed it would read really weird if a hummingbird had a bite attack.

In Pathfinder constructs have fast BAB (fighter), so BAB +2, Str +4, Size -1 = +5

 

[Cleon]

bite is a type of 'chomp' ... as in closing between jaw bones. Beak is using the beak as a spear or lance. I could have gone with bite but that would require a possible explanation that I didn't want to type up. Besides, it seemed it would read really weird if a hummingbird had a bite attack.

I had a quick look through the PRD and couldn't find any beaked creatures that didn't use a "bite" attack. Certainly all the avians (Eagles, Rocs etc) have bite attacks, not beak attacks.

A bit deeper digger and I found one on the PFSD website - the Snallygaster from Pathfinder AP #61.

Looks like the numbers are not in your favour.

In Pathfinder constructs have fast BAB (fighter), so BAB +2, Str +4, Size -1 = +5

They do? Glances at Pathfinder Creature Types. So they do!

That'd play havoc with "Backwards Compatibility".

OK, so that puts its BAB/CMB/CMD at +3/+7/+24 doesn't it?

 

[Wolf72]

yeah, backwards compatibility can be a minor issue ... just 'hand-wave' it and move on. Rather than try to convert a 3x module/monster/etc for a game I'd just use it as is or vice versa. If I thought it needed to be tougher I'd just add some HP (or give it a higher average ... instead of the 4.5, 5.5 or whatever).

BAB would be +2, CMB/CMD are being added in now (thanks for that bit of math, I don't have that formula, simple as it is, stuck in my head yet).

the Snallygaster? really that's my 'Ace in the hole'? ... well at least it's there, BEAK!!! ... nope, SPOON is still a better war cry. Roc's, Eagles, even ravens have a bite attack. They all seem to open and close their mouths for a good percentage of the damage. I like beak, if that confuses someone (who goes all lawyer on you), chalk it up to artistic license. The only 3x/PF analogy that comes to me is comparing Unarmed strike with Slam.

 

[Cleon]

yeah, backwards compatibility can be a minor issue ... just 'hand-wave' it and move on. Rather than try to convert a 3x module/monster/etc for a game I'd just use it as is or vice versa. If I thought it needed to be tougher I'd just add some HP (or give it a higher average ... instead of the 4.5, 5.5 or whatever).

Well it's only a point difference at that HD, which is no big deal.

Hold on, I've just noticed something else. Shouldn't it be "N Large Construct" rather than "Large Unaligned Construct". There don't appear to be any Unaligned Constructs in the PRD or PFSRD - or an "Unaligned" alignment for that matter.