 November 4, 2008 - 6:41pm | What are your opinions about robots and the power, strenth in the Star Frontiers game. What parts are apt to wear out first? What are their weak spots? How often do you use robots in settings? Is their STA a little to high for a game that bases death/knockout on STA? Is their to-hit a little low? 30% + 10 x levelOther thoughts? |
 November 4, 2008 - 7:05pm | What are your opinions about robots and the power, strenth in the Star Frontiers game. What parts are apt to wear out first? What are their weak spots? How often do you use robots in settings? Is their STA a little to high for a game that bases death/knockout on STA? Is their to-hit a little low? 30% + 10 x levelOther thoughts? Power, strength, etc., pretty much consistent with both the state of the art in robotics then and now. Mechanical parts—limbs and such—are more likely to wear out than the robot's electronic hardware, given normal usage...but the real weak point in a robot's construction is its software...one glitch, and all hell breaks loose... Robots are part of the background in my SFU, and definitely in the forefront...and, in the case of one PC, too much so, the poor sod having a veritable army of combat and warbots, before he accidentally was brutally murdered by a gang of Yazirian thugs with heavy lasers one dark and stormy night in Port Loren....<WEG> 100 STA for standard, cy- and anthro bots(and bot brains) is only 30 more than a PC with max STA of 70, which isn't too bad, while a 500 STA for heavy-duty and warbots(which are the size of a ground car...call it about 6-10 feet across or standing up, depending)is about right. A Level 4 bot(minimum for Attack/Defense and Search and Destroy programs, without which a bot cannot use weapons)has a base 70% chance to hit, while a Level 6 bot has a 90% chance to hit, so no, their to-hit chances aren't too low. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
 November 5, 2008 - 1:56pm | I have thought a lot about this over the years. The good news is, as a ref, if you think that your robots are too strong, you can always water them down. Who says you can't have a smaller (and cheaper) robot with only an 80 STA or something? As Will said, I too use a great deal of robots in my campaigns. I always liked the Star Wars angle with droids walking around all over the place doing various things - that was one of the best parts of the movies. Here is my big beef, however - what EXACTLY, is the procedure for getting to that access panel to disable and then re-program a robot??? How is it done in combat? Can it be done in combat? There is nothing in the rules on that and it is annoying! |
November 5, 2008 - 3:18pm | Depending on the type of robot the accessibility of the access panel would be a easy to difficult task. Access would be the first item covered for a Level 1 robotics tech. I'm under the impression that it's common to re-program a robot during combat. IM, why don't you create us some rules! (and d100 tables, we love them) |
 November 5, 2008 - 3:29pm | Go for the seige bots and let'em think about why you are so angry at them. |
 November 5, 2008 - 9:31pm | Go for the seige bots and let'em think about why you are so angry at them. That access panel would be guarded by its very own blasters. Some smaller bots could be wrestled and restrained by a group and then held down so the tech could tear into it. Time flies when your having rum. Im a government employee, I dont goof-off. I constructively abuse my time. |
November 5, 2008 - 10:37pm | It probably should require some amount of disabling of the robot. I can't imagine a Combat or Security robot that could just be "popped open" during a melee or other fight. Maybe after some blasting? On the other hand, there MUST be an access panel for repairs and upgrades... |
November 6, 2008 - 5:51am | On the other hand, there MUST be an access panel for repairs and upgrades... definately agree with that. I think that is one the "flavors" of SF, for me. Robots have some way to acces the internals. Too many games out there dont even come close to thinking on that level. It probably should require some amount of disabling of the robot. I can't imagine a Combat or Security robot that could just be "popped open" during a melee or other fight. Maybe after some blasting? Not too mention that the security lock has to be disabled to just open the panel. I like your idea about about blasting the bot a bit befor you can try to access it. I have wanted to incorperate some kind of damage or malfunction results table to help out with combat can post combat salvage. When I first started running SF, my group wanted to wrestle the cleaning bot in the caves in Crash on Volturnos. The plan was to use some tanglers, and then 2 of them held it down, while the tech got into the access panel. It was a good idea, but the dice didnt like it. 2 tangler grenades got the the robot (barely) and 2 party members entanlged, but the bot broke out and started cleaning the cave with the tech. Time flies when your having rum. Im a government employee, I dont goof-off. I constructively abuse my time. |
November 6, 2008 - 6:38am | When I first started running SF, my group wanted to wrestle the cleaning bot in the caves in Crash on Volturnos. The plan was to use some tanglers, and then 2 of them held it down, while the tech got into the access panel. It was a good idea, but the dice didnt like it. 2 tangler grenades got the the robot (barely) and 2 party members entanlged, but the bot broke out and started cleaning the cave with the tech. This made made me laugh!  |
November 23, 2008 - 7:48pm | My issue isn't really with trying to get at that access panel, it's why you can't alter missions/functions remotely with a Robot Management program? Honestly, the only time one physically reprograms a bot these days is if something's seriously wrong with the bot; otherwise, it's done remotely, via software. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
November 23, 2008 - 8:11pm | My issue isn't really with trying to get at that access panel, it's why you can't alter missions/functions remotely with a Robot Management program? Honestly, the only time one physically reprograms a bot these days is if something's seriously wrong with the bot; otherwise, it's done remotely, via software. How come I need a robotic skill level 1 to turn of a robot? Everyone in the Frontier should have that skill. |
 November 23, 2008 - 11:59pm | I don't think they're underpowered or overpowered. The balance of them should be consistent with the power of the player's characters. If you have a group of very well-equipped combat-skilled characters, even a group of three Heavy Duty warbots can be handled with some thought. However, a starting level group of characters walking around with that proverbial nightstick and autopistol isn't going to have much luck against even a single security bot without taking a casualty or two. It's all the Referee's job to balance it all. I use bots a lot in the game. They make for easy fun mayhem/violence. I play normally with my kids, and if I want them to have some action, I can always have them encounter critters when in the wilderness. When not in the wilderness, though, I seldom have them fighting normal sentients. I guess it's the dad in me not wanting to have them killing humans or whatever, but bots make good fodder. The main villain in a story is usually aprehended or killed only in self defense. But if I were playing with adults, I'd probably have less of a focus on 'bots because they're so expensive. Look at companies today: they'd rather outsource to some other country where labor is cheap than invest in heavy automation. 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
November 24, 2008 - 11:31am | But if I were playing with adults, I'd probably have less of a focus on 'bots because they're so expensive. Look at companies today: they'd rather outsource to some other country where labor is cheap than invest in heavy automation. True dat, but I think the technology has become cheap enough to integrate robots into everyday life. I prefer to look at them as an adjunct or add-on, assisting in whatever task rather than doing the whole thing. They are also very useful as plot devices (no pun intended). |
 November 30, 2008 - 7:18am | Robots can be expensive, yes, but it's also expensive and more time consuming to train, with inconsistent results that change from indivisual to individual, humans to do combat related work. Robots, on the other hand, act consistently and have no training period needed. You build a trusted model, it works as it's supposed to do. |
November 30, 2008 - 3:11pm | Bill's right, of course, concerning foreign labor vs. automation, tho' that's not the only reason we outsource to and hire (in country) from a readily available source of what is basically slave labor. But, that's a discussion for another site. Back on topic: It will always be cheaper to train people than program robots. ('Sides, it's also easier and cheaper to breed humans than it is to build robots....) However, even in our society now, robots are pretty much like furniture(especially at my job), and will continue being so, as we become more automated. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
November 30, 2008 - 4:25pm | However, even in our society now, robots are pretty much like furniture(especially at my job), and will continue being so, as we become more automated. LOL. The next time I see a robot I'm gonna sit on it.  |
November 30, 2008 - 4:40pm | Watch out. That sofa you're sitting on could be a nanocolony. Ask it to make you a drink. :-D "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
 November 30, 2008 - 8:44pm | Back on topic: It will always be cheaper to train people than program robots. ('Sides, it's also easier and cheaper to breed humans than it is to build robots....) However, even in our society now, robots are pretty much like furniture(especially at my job), and will continue being so, as we become more automated. It's already cheaper to program robots than train humans for manufactury jobs. Especially when you need to expand production... you duplicate your existing robots, and use the same programs on parallel hardware. If it were cheaper to train people, Michigan wouldn't have made it very difficult to legally roboticize the production plants. |
 December 3, 2008 - 4:19am | In my current campaign I ran a cybot whose human memories and personality had re-emerged as an NPC in my prequel to Volturnus adventures and he was a power house that out performed the starting players. Even though he was in the cargo areas with the teams vehicles on the Serena Dawn and is not currently with the party he still remains a popular NPC with the players. I figured I'd write him out till the assault on the pirate city in SF-1 or the Battle for Volturnus in SF-2 it will depend on the condition of the party when he comes back. I'm also thinking about giving him his pre organic death skills plus his pre organic death INT/LOG & PER/LDR scores as well; while his physical attributes get tested off his lvl 5 cybot body. He also has a compulsion to tinker with his parts so when the party has crucial need for him they have to wait while he's putting his leg back together or something like that. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
December 3, 2008 - 6:48am | He also has a compulsion to tinker with his parts so when the party has crucial need for him they have to wait while he's putting his leg back together or something like that.  Great idea! Sounds like a lot of fun. |
December 4, 2008 - 10:12am | Great idea! Sounds like a lot of fun. I thought so too and I miss not having him with the PCs right now but he was too powerful at the start so when he turns up he'll be riding a beat up hover cycle on its last leg and be a little worse for wear himself. i'll have him wearing an overcoat and boots plus a turban/scarf so that they dont know its him. A sentry from the native army they assemble for teh big battle will call them to a hill top to see this dust covered biker coming toward them like something out of the apocolypse and he'll ride right up to them and dismount and just stare at them till the try to say something then slowly he'll unwrap his turban/scarf say something like, "You all going to war and you didn't invite me?" It should be one of the moments that the players end up talking about later on. His back story will be that being stored in the cargo module with the drop building and the teams vehicles he got down to the planet surface when the pirates detached the cargo module and brought it down by shuttle. He ended up skirmishing with some pirates and managed to escape with a cycle and some equipment and has been wandering Volturnus ever since trying to locate the team and trying to keep an eye on the pirates. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
