Intelligent Weapon/EGO contest (unusual situation)

[Damon Griffin]

I'm trying to anticipate what kinds of EGO conflicts I might have in the future between Robyn (my non-spellcasting variant Ranger character) and Vere (his nifty magic bow.)

Vere was created as a Masterwork Mighty Longbow using wood from a legendary tree called Iolo's Yew; it is a property of items created from this wood that they can be invested with magical qualities, and ultimately become intelligent, by having the owner invest the item with some of his own XP over time. (The details aren't really relevant to this discussion, but can be found under Personal Growth Items in the Spells & Spellcraft book if anyone's interested.)

I'm going to be gradually advancing Vere through six stages of growth, as noted below. Right now she's at Stage 1.

[SIZE=-2]Stage__Characteristics________________ Communication_________Abilities
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1______INT 16, WIS 7, CHA 11, EGO 9____Semi-empathy__________Detect Magic at will

2______INT 16, WIS 9, CHA 13, EGO 11___Speech (Common plus___Detect Secret Doors at will
_______________________________________three languages)

3______INT 16, WIS 11 CHA 15, EGO 13___Reads all four________Find Traps at will
_______________________________________languages spoken

4______INT 16, WIS 12 CHA 16, EGO 18___Telepathy____________<Find the Path or Prying Eyes>

5______INT 16, WIS 13 CHA 17, EGO 22___Reads magic___________True Seeing at will
_______________________________________Reads all languages

6______INT 16, WIS 14 CHA 18, EGO 25_________________________See Invisible at will

OPTIONAL FINAL STAGE:
Special Purpose: Reveal that which is hidden (+4 to EGO)
Special Purpose Power: Discern Location [/SIZE]

Over the course of her development, Vere will manifest three noticeable personality traits, all of which are to some extent a consequence of being an artificially constructed intelligence: (1) in keeping with her name ("Vere" means "in fact", "real" or "true") and set of abilities, she will be Truthful; (2) she will have No Sense of Humor, able to recognize it occasionally but not appreciate it or participate in its use; (3) she will have Strong Opinions on Morals, on the theory that programmed automata tend to have the zeal of the converted and are actually incapable of deviating from their programmed alignment.

When you get into EGO contests with intelligent weapons, this normally involves a Will save with a DC equal to the weapon's EGO; if you lose, the weapon doesn't do what you want and may even be able to force you to do something you don't want to do, like attack an ally. Robyn's current Will save is only +5 (+9 if wearing his Cloak of Resistance) and isn't likely to be above +7 (+11 with the Cloak) by the time Vere's EGO reaches 25. This means that when EGO contests come up, Robyn's going to lose most of them. That makes it VERY important to figure out how likely such contests are to occur.

Here are some things to be considered:

(1) Vere is not a 100-year-old minor artifact Robyn found in a cave somewhere; Robyn created her and is shaping her growth and development. While this should not make Vere slavishly loyal to Robyn, it might be argued that their closer-than-normal relationship gives him some slack with regard ot EGO contests; a +2 circumstance bonus, perhaps?

(2) Vere, like Robyn, is Chaotic Good. The most likely time for a personality conflict is when Robyn goes into "scary half-elf" mode and does things our party's cleric doesn't approve of; this may be a deviation toward Chaotic Neutral. OTOH, it may simply be Robyn's personal interpretation of Chaotic Good, with appropriate situational ethics applied. If Vere's intelligence and persona develop as a direct result of Robyn investing himself (in the form of XP and time) into the weapon, then doesn't it make sense that Vere's view of the Chaotic Good alignment should match Robyn's? She's essentially a programmed artificial intelligence, and Robyn is the programmer. So the important question may be: Can a contructed artificial intelligence be taught situational ethics, or will they be too narrow minded for that?


Any thoughts?

 

[AuraSeer]

You want a sword that has "strong opinions on morals", yet is willing to go along when you bend your morals in a difficult situation? I think you're contradicting yourself there.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

It's a bow, not a sword.

 

[AuraSeer]

Right, I mistyped, but that's not the point. The OP wants to get the powers and benefits of an intelligent item without suffering its major drawback. That's unbalanced from a rules standpoint, and doesn't make sense on the flavor side either.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

(1) Vere is not a 100-year-old minor artifact Robyn found in a cave somewhere; Robyn created her and is shaping her growth and development. While this should not make Vere slavishly loyal to Robyn, it might be argued that their closer-than-normal relationship gives him some slack with regard ot EGO contests; a +2 circumstance bonus, perhaps?

Sure, but Vere gets a +2 circumstance bonus vs. Robyn as well. Remember that as well as Robyn knows Vere, Vere knows Robyn just as well. The familiarity doesn't work only one way. Also, I'd equate the relationship similiar to a mother-daughter one. The mother shapes the daughter's growth, and the daughter shares a lot of the mother's morals and worldview. But that doesn't mean the daughter won't fight to have her own way.

(2) Vere, like Robyn, is Chaotic Good. The most likely time for a personality conflict is when Robyn goes into "scary half-elf" mode and does things our party's cleric doesn't approve of; this may be a deviation toward Chaotic Neutral. OTOH, it may simply be Robyn's personal interpretation of Chaotic Good, with appropriate situational ethics applied. If Vere's intelligence and persona develop as a direct result of Robyn investing himself (in the form of XP and time) into the weapon, then doesn't it make sense that Vere's view of the Chaotic Good alignment should match Robyn's? She's essentially a programmed artificial intelligence, and Robyn is the programmer. So the important question may be: Can a contructed artificial intelligence be taught situational ethics, or will they be too narrow minded for that?

Again, in my view, you're giving the creator too much control over the created item. It is not, IMO, accurate to use a programmer/program relationship. The item is a sentient being, a personality that develops from a shard of Robyn's experiences, but is not under her direct control or directly shaped by her wishes. Indeed, the fact that the item's personality is based on Robyn's might make it less tractable, if Robyn herself is a particularly independent-minded individual.

I'd stick with the mother/daughter relationship as a working model, and note that while a daughter may be raised to share a lot of her mother's ideals, she can at times interpret those ideals in a radically different way, or reject them entirely.

 

[Damon Griffin]

Right, I mistyped, but that's not the point. The OP wants to get the powers and benefits of an intelligent item without suffering its major drawback. That's unbalanced from a rules standpoint, and doesn't make sense on the flavor side either.

I don't think it's out of line to want to create a powerful item that doesn't cripple my ability to act every time I try to use it. What's the good of having an incredibly nifty bow, custom built to my exact specs, if it's going to be constantly arguing with me and refusing to hit what I aim at?

I *expect* some differences of opinion; the interplay between a PC and an intelligent weapon can be fun, and it makes sense that things shouldn't always go exactly like the player would want them to.

I *chose* the personality traits I listed, knowing they might be inconvenient at times, because I thought they made sense for the item being created. If I'd wanted to make things easy on myself, I could have given the bow different personality traits, like Obsequious, Easy Going and Forgiving (all these traits are coming from Table 5-5 in the DMG, incidentally.)

All that said, the main questions in my original post were:

Will the bow be open to an ethical dialogue, or does the nature of its "programming" preclude recognition of shades of gray or the adoption of situational ethics?

If not, whose interpretation of Chaotic Good is indelibly imprinted on the bow, if not that of the Chaotic Good character who created it?

Should my character have any greater "pull" with the item when EGO contents occur, given that he's the items creator and not some random bozo who found the bow in a treasure hoard?

I know there will be differences of opinion between Robyn and Vere. I'm hoping that will be part of the fun. What I'm trying to figure out here is how often such contests are likely to take place and whether there's anything I can do to improve my chances of winning a few more of them.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Will the bow be open to an ethical dialogue...?

Yes. It's not a computer program, it's a sentient being with an intelligence fully capable of grasping the nuances of ethical dialogue.

whose interpretation of Chaotic Good is indelibly imprinted on the bow, if not that of the Chaotic Good character who created it?

I would base the item's view of Chaotic Good on the characters, though it would not be an exact copy of it.

Should my character have any greater "pull" with the item when EGO contents occur, given that he's the items creator and not some random bozo who found the bow in a treasure hoard?

No.

 

[Damon Griffin]

Sure, but Vere gets a +2 circumstance bonus vs. Robyn as well. Remember that as well as Robyn knows Vere, Vere knows Robyn just as well. The familiarity doesn't work only one way. Also, I'd equate the relationship similiar to a mother-daughter one.

The parent-child thing did occur to me, but there are some important differences here:

(1) a child's worldview is going to be shaped by those of her parents, siblings, friends, and possibly the entertainment media. With all those different sources of input, of course the child will not always have the same opinions as her parent; Vere on the other hand received her alignment from a single source.

(2) the parent is assumed to be in a superior position. You never hear things like "I'm your daughter and you'll do as I say" or "Because I'm your daughter and I say so." So, yes, the relationship is equally close from either perspective, but only one of us is the "grown up." Incidentally, Robyn is male, so this would be a father-daughter relationship.

(3) Once a child gets to a certain point in feeling independant, he can try to strike out on his own. Vere doesn't really have that option. She can choose to be willful, stubborn, uncooperative and so forth, but it's not like she can move out of the house, or run away from home.

It's not really control I'm looking for here, just a playing field that's a little more level, or which I can avoid visiting too often.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

(1) a child's worldview is going to be shaped by those of her parents, siblings, friends, and possibly the entertainment media. With all those different sources of input, of course the child will not always have the same opinions as her parent; Vere on the other hand received her alignment from a single source.

Alignment is a personality trait. Not a set of rules on how to act on it. Two creatures with the same alignment can easily come to opposing views on how to act in a certain situation. I'm not saying that Vere will act completely differently than Robyn, but rather that the fact that the two share a Chaotic-Good alignment will not always mean that Vere agrees that a certain course of action is the best.

(2) the parent is assumed to be in a superior position. You never hear things like "I'm your daughter and you'll do as I say" or "Because I'm your daughter and I say so." So, yes, the relationship is equally close from either perspective, but only one of us is the "grown up."

Only when the daughter is a child. When both are adults, there is respect, but not superiority. The relationship I'm suggesting is of a father/daughter as adults. Vere should respect Robyn as her creator, but that's as far as it goes.

(3) Once a child gets to a certain point in feeling independant, he can try to strike out on his own. Vere doesn't really have that option. She can choose to be willful, stubborn, uncooperative and so forth, but it's not like she can move out of the house, or run away from home.

Actually,

Should an item gain dominance, it resists the character’s desires and demands concessions such as any of the following.

• That the character relinquish the item in favor of a more suitable possessor

So yes, it can leave home.

It's not really control I'm looking for here, just a playing field that's a little more level, or which I can avoid visiting too often.

The more powerful the item, the more certain of it's own power it is. Personally, I think that treating it as an adult daughter will get you what you want. You might have to argue/pursuade her occasionally, but that's about it.

 

[AuraSeer]

I don't think it's out of line to want to create a powerful item that doesn't cripple my ability to act every time I try to use it. What's the good of having an incredibly nifty bow, custom built to my exact specs, if it's going to be constantly arguing with me and refusing to hit what I aim at?

I've heard the same argument about the Leadership feat. "What's the good of having a cohort character or monster, designed/raised/trained to my exact specs, if he's going to be constantly arguing with me and refusing to attack what I order him to?"

The answer, in either case, is that it's a lot of good in almost all situations. There are just some limitations on it. A cohort won't follow an order that conflicts with his alignment, and neither will an intelligent weapon-- especially one that has "strong opinions on morals."

An intelligent item is not just an extension of its creator. It is an independent being with its own mind, motivation, and view of the world. Vere is likely to see things the same way Robyn does-- as a child learns her worldview from her parents-- but it's not a sure thing. And remember, some of the most bitter arguments in the world are those between family members.

Will the bow be open to an ethical dialogue, or does the nature of its "programming" preclude recognition of shades of gray or the adoption of situational ethics?

Considering that the item is chaotic rather than lawful, it's almost certain to be open to an "ethical dialogue." However, you also keep using the phrase "situational ethics," which has a different connotation. It usually implies a willingness to perform an evil act to effect a Good outcome. In my campaign world, that would imply a CN aligmnent rather than CG. (The gods in my world don't believe that the ends justify the means.) But in your campaign world, it depends on your DM's interpretation of the alignment system.

If not, whose interpretation of Chaotic Good is indelibly imprinted on the bow, if not that of the Chaotic Good character who created it?

The interpretation of Vere herself. The bow has her own mind, she makes her own decisions.

Should my character have any greater "pull" with the item when EGO contents occur, given that he's the items creator and not some random bozo who found the bow in a treasure hoard?

Again this is up to the DM, but were you in my campaign, Vere would at least start out with a healthy respect for her creator. That means she wouldn't be likely to try and exert control over Robyn-- she'd have faith that he would do the right thing, or at least that she could talk him into it without using force.

However, if Robyn abused that respect (constantly doing things of which the bow disapproved), or failed to maintain the close relationship (ignoring her input and treating her as just another magical item), Vere would stop being so nice. If she couldn't be heard any other way, she'd eventually exert control just to try and get her wielder's attention.

Long story short: If the item is your friend, personality conflict should be less frequent, but you still don't get a numerical bonus on the check.

I know there will be differences of opinion between Robyn and Vere. I'm hoping that will be part of the fun. What I'm trying to figure out here is how often such contests are likely to take place and whether there's anything I can do to improve my chances of winning a few more of them.

How often? That depends on whether the character and item have compatible goals, and agree on how to attain those goals. Also, any personal idiosyncracies of the item will come into play. If you're drifting out of Good alignment and you sneak around hiding all the time (which conflicts with her special purpose) and you forget to change her bowstring after it's gotten wet, expect a conflict almost every day.

As for your chances of winning the conflict... it doesn't look good. You're creating an item that is smarter than yourself and has more willpower. Be nice to her and try to keep her in a good mood.