Robot Handbook rule clarifications

[CthulhuStig]

As I've mentioned in a couple of other threads, I'm currently in the process of adding support for robot construction to Auto-Jimmy. It's still a fair bit off being released, but I'm now at the point where the vast majority of the rules are implemented, with just a few cases remaining where the wording in the book is a little unclear (or more likely I'm just misunderstanding something). I've messaged @Geir (author of the Robot Handbook) and he's kindly agreed to try and clarify things where he can. Hopefully some of the info might be of use to others.

In no particular order other than saving the longer ones for the end, the things I was hoping to get clarified were:

1. What is the base Speed Band for Aeroplane and Thruster locomotion? The Vehicle Speed Locomotion table (p23) doesn't specify them.

2. The Robot Brains table (p66) has a Skills column. Am I correct in thinking this is just the pre-calculated INT characteristic DM that would be used when the brain made INT based skill checks, and it's there for informational purposes rather than being some other kind of modifier or limitation?

3. The chassis rules say "The Attack Roll DM indicates the difficulty of hitting the robot based on its Size. This also corresponds to the robot’s Large (+1 or more) or Small (-1 or less) trait." (p13). Is the intention that the Attack Roll DM also applies to melee attacks against the robot, or is it just for ranged attacks as the description for the Large/Small traits states (p8)?

4. The Active Camouflage slot option (p41) says it effectively gives Stealth 4, is that the Stealth trait (p8) or the Stealth skill (p74)? Also, am I correct in my thinking that the Stealth slot option (p54) gives the Stealth trait and not the skill.

5. Can a Fire Control System be used for a weapon being held by a robot's manipulator? The description for the Fire Control Systems (p60) says it provides targetting assistance for integrally mounted weapons and I wouldn't normally think of something that could be picked up and put down as integrally mounted, however later in the same section it mentions weapons being held by the robot but the context that is in is a little unclear. As a follow-up question, if Fire Control Systems can be used with weapons held by a robot, can they be linked in the same way as mounted weapons can?

6. Can you tell me if my interpretation of the Manipulator Athletics Skill Requirements section (p26) is correct? My understanding is, if the robot has the Athletics skill at any level _and_ it has a manipulator where the DEX and/or STR characteristic DM is greater than zero, then it effectively gets "free" Athletics (dexterity) and/or Athletics (strength) specialisations at a level equal to the corresponding manipulator characteristic DM. The trade-off being, if the robot does gain the specialisations in this manner, then it doesn't also get the DEX/STR characteristic DM that you would expect to apply when dealing with other skill checks. If the robot has manipulators with different STR/DEX values, then the value of the robot's Athletics dexterity/strength skill for a given task will depend on the DEX/STR of the manipulator(s) being used to perform the athletic feat and referee discretion.
If my interpretation is correct, then I think it means the rules in that section don't make a difference to the outcome of a roll when making an Athletics dexterity/strength check compared to if Athletics was just treated in the same way as other skills with the DEX/STR characteristic DM being applied. For example, if the robot's manipulator had a DEX of 12 the player would still have a net +2 to whatever they roll, it's just now the +2 is coming from the Athletics (dexterity) skill level rather than the DEX characteristic DM.
If everything I've said so far is correct, then I'm not sure what game mechanic the rules in that section are trying to convey. It's possible the piece in the puzzle I'm missing relates to the cases that the section doesn't seem to cover. What happens in the case where the player also takes levels in Athletics dexterity/strength as part of the Athletics skill package? And also what happens in the case where the DEX/STR characteristic DM for the manipulator is negative?

If anyone is looking for other clarifications around robot combat modifiers and the Fire Control System, check out some of the posts on this thread

Robot: TL 8 Sentry Gun

Wiki: Sentry Gun TL 8 Sentry Gun Disclaimer: A more complex test of the robot construction rules. I guess some form of a Sentry Gun has already been published in other publications, so this might be redundant. Just gathering up some ideas. Cost Cost should be kept as low as possible as a...

forum.mongoosepublishing.com

 

[Geir]

As I've mentioned in a couple of other threads, I'm currently in the process of adding support for robot construction to Auto-Jimmy. It's still a fair bit off being released, but I'm now at the point where the vast majority of the rules are implemented, with just a few cases remaining where the wording in the book is a little unclear (or more likely I'm just misunderstanding something). I've messaged @Geir (author of the Robot Handbook) and he's kindly agreed to try and clarify things where he can. Hopefully some of the info might be of use to others.

In no particular order other than saving the longer ones for the end, the things I was hoping to get clarified were:

1. What is the base Speed Band for Aeroplane and Thruster locomotion? The Vehicle Speed Locomotion table (p23) doesn't specify them.

That's annoying. Need to update my errata notes... Aeroplane should be medium, Thruster I have down as hypersonic (which is only true in a vacuum, I presume)

2. The Robot Brains table (p66) has a Skills column. Am I correct in thinking this is just the pre-calculated INT characteristic DM that would be used when the brain made INT based skill checks, and it's there for informational purposes rather than being some other kind of modifier or limitation?

Yes, restating the INT DM, but not a limitation. But the INT DM is built into to the final skill level for simplicity (and to make all the preexisting robots make sense) so the skill listed on the sheet includes this DM - as stated in the last sentence of the Base INT and skills paragraph.

3. The chassis rules say "The Attack Roll DM indicates the difficulty of hitting the robot based on its Size. This also corresponds to the robot’s Large (+1 or more) or Small (-1 or less) trait." (p13). Is the intention that the Attack Roll DM also applies to melee attacks against the robot, or is it just for ranged attacks as the description for the Large/Small traits states (p8)?

Well... the traits do say 'all ranged attacks' that so I suppose it must be the intent. Matches the Core book language. (Though personally I could go either way on it... easier to hit a barn door with a club than to hit a cockroach, but best to stick with the Core rules. Ranged.)

4. The Active Camouflage slot option (p41) says it effectively gives Stealth 4, is that the Stealth trait (p8) or the Stealth skill (p74)? Also, am I correct in my thinking that the Stealth slot option (p54) gives the Stealth trait and not the skill.

It is a trait, but... since it applies to both sensors and visual (Recon) detection, it is also effectively Stealth 4 in a Stealth vs. Recon contest. That means if the robot also had Stealth as a software-delivered skill, they would stack.
(Not perfect: it's only perfectly analogous to the skill if Active Camouflage also deadness the noise of footsteps or other locomotion noises and masks that fresh robot smell, but we'll roll with it.)

5. Can a Fire Control System be used for a weapon being held by a robot's manipulator? The description for the Fire Control Systems (p60) says it provides targetting assistance for integrally mounted weapons and I wouldn't normally think of something that could be picked up and put down as integrally mounted, however later in the same section it mentions weapons being held by the robot but the context that is in is a little unclear. As a follow-up question, if Fire Control Systems can be used with weapons held by a robot, can they be linked in the same way as mounted weapons can?

That's a tough one. I think I answered that earlier with the answer: Yes, but pick one: Skill or Fire Control can apply as a DM, but not both. As for linking, then yes, but only if Fire Control is the controlling DM.

6. Can you tell me if my interpretation of the Manipulator Athletics Skill Requirements section (p26) is correct? My understanding is, if the robot has the Athletics skill at any level _and_ it has a manipulator where the DEX and/or STR characteristic DM is greater than zero, then it effectively gets "free" Athletics (dexterity) and/or Athletics (strength) specialisations at a level equal to the corresponding manipulator characteristic DM. The trade-off being, if the robot does gain the specialisations in this manner, then it doesn't also get the DEX/STR characteristic DM that you would expect to apply when dealing with other skill checks. If the robot has manipulators with different STR/DEX values, then the value of the robot's Athletics dexterity/strength skill for a given task will depend on the DEX/STR of the manipulator(s) being used to perform the athletic feat and referee discretion.
If my interpretation is correct, then I think it means the rules in that section don't make a difference to the outcome of a roll when making an Athletics dexterity/strength check compared to if Athletics was just treated in the same way as other skills with the DEX/STR characteristic DM being applied. For example, if the robot's manipulator had a DEX of 12 the player would still have a net +2 to whatever they roll, it's just now the +2 is coming from the Athletics (dexterity) skill level rather than the DEX characteristic DM.

Yes, but you wouldn't get a negative DM for not having Athletics - so I guess it essentially means that robots get Athletics 0 for free.

If everything I've said so far is correct, then I'm not sure what game mechanic the rules in that section are trying to convey. It's possible the piece in the puzzle I'm missing relates to the cases that the section doesn't seem to cover. What happens in the case where the player also takes levels in Athletics dexterity/strength as part of the Athletics skill package? And also what happens in the case where the DEX/STR characteristic DM for the manipulator is negative?

Sort of like the Active Camouflage answer: If there is a skill and a DM based on the a trait of the body, then it would stack.
(Yes, I just became aware that this logic is potentially inconsistent with the comment on Fire Control versus Skill... but I can still justify that one by saying that the Fire Control system is not optimized for manipulator-held weapons whereas an Athletics skill would be optimized to the body in which it was installed)

If anyone is looking for other clarifications around robot combat modifiers and the Fire Control System, check out some of the posts on this thread

Robot: TL 8 Sentry Gun

Wiki: Sentry Gun TL 8 Sentry Gun Disclaimer: A more complex test of the robot construction rules. I guess some form of a Sentry Gun has already been published in other publications, so this might be redundant. Just gathering up some ideas. Cost Cost should be kept as low as possible as a...

forum.mongoosepublishing.com

I hope that helps. If not, then ask more questions... I'll make up more answers which will hopefully be more helpful.

 

[CthulhuStig]

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions, that really helps a lot.

It is a trait, but... since it applies to both sensors and visual (Recon) detection, it is also effectively Stealth 4 in a Stealth vs. Recon contest. That means if the robot also had Stealth as a software-delivered skill, they would stack.
(Not perfect: it's only perfectly analogous to the skill if Active Camouflage also deadness the noise of footsteps or other locomotion noises and masks that fresh robot smell, but we'll roll with it.)

Does that mean the Reacon and Navigation skills given by the Recon Sensor (p58) and Navigation System (p53) also stack with their equivilant software skills?

Sort of like the Active Camouflage answer: If there is a skill and a DM based on the a trait of the body, then it would stack.

I hadn't considered that the skills would stack, that makes things a lot clearer. Would that mean the Athletics (endurance) skill given by adding extra power packs (p19) also stacks with software Athletics (endurance) skill?

 

[Geir]

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions, that really helps a lot.


Does that mean the Reacon and Navigation skills given by the Recon Sensor (p58) and Navigation System (p53) also stack with their equivilant software skills?

Recon yes, sort of like the +1 that Aslan or Vargr get for abilities - the better to use the 'sensor". Navigation, not so sure - that seems more 'built-in' so I would lean towards 'pick-the-highest. Seems any revisions should be explicit about stackability, since I'm sort of making this up on the fly.

I hadn't considered that the skills would stack, that makes things a lot clearer. Would that mean the Athletics (endurance) skill given by adding extra power packs (p19) also stacks with software Athletics (endurance) skill?

Yes, I suppose it should - better optimization of energy, perhaps, but that would be a waste of bandwidth, since how often do you have to make an Athletics (endurance) check - and once the batteries run out, you're still out of juice... or maybe it should add to endurance like a battery modifier - like software to optimize power usage?? I'll right that one down...

 

[CthulhuStig]

Thanks, that has all been a great help.

Seems any revisions should be explicit about stackability, since I'm sort of making this up on the fly.

It's possible there is a general understanding from other rule books that things stack unless stated otherwise and I've just not picked up on it. That said, things being explict would always get my vote. Especially for things like this where it can makes a big difference to how powerful something is.

 

[CthulhuStig]

@Geir, if you've got time could you answer a few more questions?

That's a tough one. I think I answered that earlier with the answer: Yes, but pick one: Skill or Fire Control can apply as a DM, but not both. As for linking, then yes, but only if Fire Control is the controlling DM.

What you said in response to my question about weapons held by manipulators being linked got me thinking. Is the intention that all linked groups of weapons _must_ use a Fire Control System? The description from the book says "Linked mounts make only one attack roll and require only one fire control system." (p61). I had taken that to mean, if you choose to have the linked group controlled by a Fire Control System, then you only need to purchase one. However, it could be taken to mean that a Fire Control System is manditory for linking weapons. I guess the question is really, can a software weapon skill be used to control a linked group of weapons?

If you were to link weapons mounted to or held by manipulators with different STR/DEX values, would I be correct in thinking that the single attack for the group would get the STR/DEX characteristic DM for the manipulator with the lowest value? or is it more funamental than that and the intention is manipulators must have the same STR and DEX values to be linked in the first place?

Also, if you were to link a weapon mounted to a manipulator and a servo mounted weapon on the torso, would the single attack for the group get the STR/DEX characteristic DM that an attack with a normal manipulator weapon would get?

 

[Geir]

@Geir, if you've got time could you answer a few more questions?

What you said in response to my question about weapons held by manipulators being linked got me thinking. Is the intention that all linked groups of weapons _must_ use a Fire Control System? The description from the book says "Linked mounts make only one attack roll and require only one fire control system." (p61). I had taken that to mean, if you choose to have the linked group controlled by a Fire Control System, then you only need to purchase one. However, it could be taken to mean that a Fire Control System is manditory for linking weapons. I guess the question is really, can a software weapon skill be used to control a linked group of weapons?

I would suggest a Fire Control System (FCS for brevity) would be required for linked weapons and the more I think about it, I'm a little dubious about being able to hold linked weapons in manipulators. The concept comes from the Vehicle Handbook and requires the weapons be on the same mount. So each manipulator could be the equivalent of a mount, but let's assume with a FCS and identical weapons, the robot could 'slave' the limbs to the FCS.

If you were to link weapons mounted to or held by manipulators with different STR/DEX values, would I be correct in thinking that the single attack for the group would get the STR/DEX characteristic DM for the manipulator with the lowest value? or is it more funamental than that and the intention is manipulators must have the same STR and DEX values to be linked in the first place?

Still have to go with FCS to get linking, and the worst manipulator with control and STR/DEX DMs.

Also, if you were to link a weapon mounted to a manipulator and a servo mounted weapon on the torso, would the single attack for the group get the STR/DEX characteristic DM that an attack with a normal manipulator weapon would get?

So... that's an odd scenario. It would have to be the same weapon both carried and mounted. I wouldn't let it use the DEX for the limb in this case, going with the concept of 'slaving' it would default to the lowest, which would be the torso mount.

 

[CthulhuStig]

Ah, I've not really read much of the Vehicle Handbook so didn't realise its mounts worked like that. If that was the way robot mounts were intended to work, would it make sense to forget some of our previous discussion and say that's the way it should work?

If it was using that logic, then I think most of my odd scenarios would go away. To be linked, all weapons would have to be using the same physical mount, be that a servo mount on the torso or all mounted to a single manipulator. It would mean players don't need to worry about odd scenarios like linking manipulators with different DEX/STR or linking a manipulator with a torso mount, as it just doesn't work that way. Different manipulators could still have their own groups of linked weapons (possibly even multiple linked groups if the robot was big enough) but you couldn't link across manipulators and each linked group would have to be fired independently.

I agree that with this logic it would mean multi-linking weapons held by a manipulator wouldn't make much sense as, for it to be done in an equivalent manner, it would require a single manipulator to hold and fire all the weapons simultaneously which seems kind of ridiculous. That might actually be a little more balanced as I suspect linking weapons held by manipulators might be a bit OP as you would get all the benefits of linking weapons mounted to a manipulator but without any slot or credit costs to balance it out.

With this approach the cost in slots/credits of a linked weapon setup would just be the same base slot/credit values as it would be for mounting the same number/type of non-linked weapons, just with the addition of the cost for a mandatory FCS. Conceptually, you'd be installing a single bigger mount holding all weapons rather than multiple smaller mounts holding a weapon each, but that wouldn't make a difference from a rules point of view. The cost of having to purchase the mandatory FCS would be balanced by the benefits you get from linking weapons, you can fire them all in a single action without negative modifiers and damage is increased over a single weapon if you hit.

Which way sounds best to you?

 

[Geir]

The thing that makes the most sense and is most consistent would be to require a FCS and a single mount for linked weapons, which would pretty much limit them to a mounting on the robot's body or all on a single big manipulator - like a couple of gauss rifles mounted to the side of a large manipulator (well, so if 2 slots for a medium mount needs a Size 5 manipulator, a twin medium mounting would require a Size 6, for instance and use 4 slots - but you'd never get to the Size where you could mount dual heavy weapon mounts on a manipulator).

Still, it's a niche edge case sort of thing - you'd have to almost sketch it out and see if it looks plausible for the robot and weapon you have in mind.

 

[CthulhuStig]

Requiring an FCS and a single mount for linking weapons would get my vote. It's the simplest to explain and also easiest for people to deal with when going through robot construction. Consistency with the Vehicle Handbook also makes a lot of sense. And, as an added bonus, it's probably a bit more balanced/realistic. We can just forget I ever mentioned linking weapons held by manipulators and other linking corner cases


Thanks again for all your help.