Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="paradox42" data-source="post: 3263121" data-attributes="member: 29746">After reading and cross-checking between Plutonium and Iron in wikipedia, I see that in fact Plutonium weighs around 4.3 times as much as iron of equivalent size- the original statistics of the Plutonium Golem didn't appear to take this into account. This thing should be considerably more powerful than an Iron Golem, or even a Gold Golem for that matter (gold is around 3.5 times as heavy as iron).Now, the Bestiary table works off of Density rather than pure weight, but IMO weight could be as important a factor in a golem's abilities as density of the material- after all, even if a Plutonium Golem would be only slightly more dense than a Gold Golem (Plutonium density is 19.8 while Gold's is 19.3 as the Bestiary table shows), the weight ratio is higher (Plutonium has atomic mass 244 while Gold has 196.96). So perhaps it's worth figuring out what its statistics should be based on each ratio, and see which gives a more satisfying product.Going by density, we jump from 19.3 to 19.8, almost negligible in terms of the final output, but it does give a higher value on the table- rough interpolation of the existing table values suggests a STR estimate of +42 (given the principle that even numbers are preferable- otherwise +41 is probably just as valid). This, in turn, means the Golem has an actual STR score of 62, and two virtual size categories. HD are just as easily determined, being 9 + half the STR modifier calculated above- another reason why even numbers are to be preferred. In this case the number is 30. Slightly above that of Ltheb's original, but looking over those calculations again I see that Ltheb apparently gave his version 10 more HD than it should have had (HD use half the STR mod, not all of it), so it works out reasonably well really. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Natural armor should be 30 (its HD) + 2 (size bonus from being Large) + 7 (natural armor increase from 2 VSCs above size Large) = +39. Base damage for its Slam attack should be 2d6+26. Other abilities work out essentially as Ltheb calculated originally, though this does make the numbers for the Meltdown ability slightly more palatable (being based on 30 rather than 29). 60 dice rather than 58, 30 rather than 29, etc.Going by weight, we jump from "x16" (however that was determined- honestly I have no idea, since Gold's actual atomic weight is around 3.5 times that of Iron, so just use Gold as the basis ignoring Iron) to around "x20." This would yield a STR increase of about +43 or +44 given the exponential nature of the numbers in the table. Say +44, to go with even numbers again, though that's almost certainly a slight overestimate. I won't bother to show the calculations this time since they'll come out pretty close to the first version above anyway. STR = 64, HD = 31, natural armor = +40, base damage = 2d6+27, and other abilities work out based on 31 HD.Either way it probably won't make a huge swing in CR in the final analysis, though with stats based this way (and the extra VSC) it is looking more like a CR 30ish creature. Personally, I don't have a problem with the thing exploding in a "tactical nuke" for its Death Throes, though I could see why others might. The biggest problem I see with the creature concept is that putting so much Plutonium together at once should create a critical mass; then again, I suppose that's why it's burning and deals Fire damage to anything it touches. As the article in wikipedia points out, it would need to go beyond critical to supercritical in order to actually trigger an explosion.</blockquote>

Verification