Hello everyone,
I've been working on the rules for my models and I've been wondering, has anyone ever written rules for dogs in Inquisitor? Otherwise I will have to write some of my own.
What about using the rules for cyber-mastiffs and give the dog one or perhaps zero points of armour?
At first I was thinking about using those but concluded that those rules wouldn't do to represent a living creature.
I do have some considerations about a possible dog for one of my characters - I didn't get that far with it, but here's the loose ideas I have so far. Starting, roughly, with the concepts behind the cyber-mastiff stuff...
Dogs are more independent - in both good and bad ways.
They wouldn't necessarily have to be given a command in order to do it, so would be able to overrule their given commands in some circumstances. However, I can assure you that dogs are not completely reliable.
So, add some commands and then a changed statline.
S, T & I more like 60 (weaker, but more independent) as well as WP and Sg stats of about 30, a heavily dropped Nv (dogs do actually know fear, unlike servitor/cogitator machines) and a Ld of 80 or 90 (depending on how well it's trained).
Upped move rates are probably valid too. I'd suggest +2 yards to both of Run and Sprint. (Yeah, dogs can be much faster than this, but too fast and they'd be a bit too much.)
Commands will include:
- Fetch: Rather than the normal cyber-mastiff version, this would actually involve fetching something.
- Heel: The dog will move to and remain close to its master.
- Guard: The dog will stay where directed, and attack any enemy character (GM's discretion as to what counts as an enemy and if the dog can be fooled) that approaches within charge range.
- Attack: The dog will attack the closest enemy character.
- Find: The dog will search for a person/object (provided, of course, there's some way the dog would know what to look for - this might take a torn piece of the person's clothing, their blood, directing the dog at part of a known scent trail)
There will probably be gesture rules for pointing and saying "Attack him!" or "Fetch that!". Of course though, pointing is vague, so there's no assurance they'd get the right him or that if there's ambiguity.
For a dog to be given a command, it must pass a Ld test (which, in this case, represents the quality of its training). If it passes, it acts as commanded. However, it must retake this test at the end of each turn, otherwise the GM gets to decide what it will do instead.
However, the player may elect to take an Sg test for the dog at any point (modified at the GMs discretion). If passed, the player may immediately change the dog's order without the controlling character having to give the order.
This might represent the dog seeing its owner being attacked and charging in to help, snatching up the artefact their master just lost their grip on... in theory, this could extend beyond normal orders, provided the specifics are conceivable and can be justified to the GM.
~~~~~
It's not much yet, but I'll probably have more to add in the near future now it's back in my head.
Thank you for those ideas. I was thinking along the same lines, only with far lower sagicity, mostly because I think that the average dog wouldn't have a sagicity so close to the human average. Of course there are more intelligent dogs but those would be the exception.
I like Marco's ideas, but would probably just go with AOH rules to speed the game up unless the dog is going to be an important character.
WS: 5
BS: 0
Str: 0
Speed: 3
Has a weak close combat weapon.
If you're not using AOH rules, give it fairly good SG, to represent its training. Yes, SG allows for people to pick locks and suchlike, but without the benefits of opposable thumbs, the dog cannot do nearly as much as a human (the doorknob conundrum continues to be a problem). Similarly, a dog might have cracked the incredibly complex code protecting the data-slate, but is unable to communicate this due to the misunderstanding of the owner. This SG would be used to see if it goes after the right thing. Also, a WP test to see if it takes the bone being offered by the nice man it was told to attack/chases that interesting-smelling small alien mammal instead of obeying commands.
The dog should probably react to the death of it's owner in a similar manner as monstrous mounts in WHFB (using the same table would make this easy).
I would probably just use the AOH rules and a few basic commands so as not to disrupt the flow of the game.
Quote from: Dolnikan on December 14, 2011, 02:46:18 PMThank you for those ideas. I was thinking along the same lines, only with far lower sagicity, mostly because I think that the average dog wouldn't have a sagicity so close to the human average.
Entirely true, but it was chosen as a figure to give a reasonable chance that a dog might make its own decision or figure something out, rather than being relative to humans.
The stat won't see most of its normal uses (no GM would allow a dog to decode a cogitator core, for example), and in the rare cases it would still matter, it seems like a fair figure. (Actually, in some cases, an underestimation. I know my dog doesn't fall for it 70% of the time when I pretend to drop dead. No, what usually happens is I get my ears licked instead.)
Without its human context the sagicity makes more sense, for well-trained dogs this could be a bit higher and for an exceptionally stupid one it would of course be lower. I was thinking about a special skill for expert dog handlers which would give a modifier to sagicity and willpower tests the dog takes in his or her presence.
I think I'd keep training and intelligence separate - the training/loyalty as the dog's Ld and the intelligence as their Sg. It's perfectly possible have an intelligent dog that is not particularly well trained and vice versa - as my family's last dog proved. Phenomenally intelligent (to the point you wouldn't believe half the stories), wasn't ever taught to fetch.
Of course, loyalty and training aren't necessarily the same thing either, but you have to tolerate a few cases where stats represent several concepts.
QuoteI was thinking about a special skill for expert dog handlers which would give a modifier to sagicity and willpower tests the dog takes in his or her presence.
I'd suggest it could have an effect on all mental stats - dogs are naturally going to be more confident around a good trainer and they're going to be more focused on their commands with the perceived Alpha breathing down their necks.
~~~~~
It occurs to me that I should really visit the Walter Rothschild museum again - they've got stuffed specimens of breeds a hundred years ago, and there's been really quite a big difference in appearance over a mere century, so it does lead me to wonder how another 39,000 years of selective breeding would make dogs look.
Given that the domestication of dogs only started about 15,000 years ago (although some theories do have it earlier) and they're already a good way distant from their grey wolf ancestors, the end results could be really quite remarkable. Far more so than the results in humans are likely to be, of course.
I would think that the descendants of modern dogs would range from the very small(even smaller than a chihuahua) to absolutely huge(towering over humans). Especially with the pseudoscience employed in the forty-first milennium they would be capable of reaching sizes that their structure on earth would not be able to work with.
The question is not the limits of the technology but the limits of need.
What do you need a mouse sized dog for? what do you need an elephant sized dog for?
Many of the familiar breeds of dog today (without taking into account the eugenics and in-breeding factors) were originally bred to undertake specific tasks. Terriers as ratting dogs for example, hounds to hunt and Huskies to pull sledges.
I can see the potential value of a dog around the four foot (at the shoulder) mark for warfare but much larger than that and they lose one of their implicit advantages. They're no longer small, fast-moving targets which drag their prey down but trying to face much more strategically aware humans (and aliens) on their own terms.
Even if the larger dog is valuable then it seems more efficient to install a dog brain into a mechanical body (creating a cyber mastiff) which offers much more flexibility in body shape than the dogs (already drastically depleted) genome.
Well, mouse sized dogs could make for nice earrings...
Really exceptionally sized dogs would mostly arise as status symbols, and a really huge dog would also be a weapon of terror.
Today's lapdogs aren't far off mouse sized. Like many pets, they're lacking in utilitarian function, but a trainable one could be quite useful for a noble under certain circumstances (a highly venomous bite, for example, concealed within a harmless status symbol). Huge dogs I guess just to intimidate intruders, maybe to hunt elephants with (ambull terrier?).
As others have said, you either give the SG a relatively high value, bearing in mind it is a dog, or you give it a bonus to most tests, which seems more cumbersome - Marco covers this angle pretty well. The other thing I'd mention is to try to keep it simple - it can be a real drag trying to remember how your supporting pets work mid game.
I would need an elephant sized dog so that the "sit", "sneeze" and "roll over" commands can be used in an offensive capability. Also, you could have bull terriers that lived up to their names. When copmbined with the wealth of cybernetics and, more importantly, pain suppressants, available to a person in the 41st millenuim, I see some truly scary concepts.
It would also be cool because you could ride on it.
I think the best dog for an inquisitor would be about wolf-sized: big enough to do serious damage and take a fair bit in return, but small enough to still restrain it on a leash.
A small lap-dog would be far more useful if it was a cyber-familiar, such as one with an inbuilt digi-weapon or maybe a chainblade instead of teeth. I can see them being used as defences for noblemen where other weapons might be forbidden. I also strongly support the earrings usage.
It seems that what we're discussing here is more of a thing for a rogue trader. Seems like the sort of thing they'd have, rather than an inquisitor.
Finally, is it so hard to believe that they've brought a pet along for moral support?
I have written a roigh draft of the first part for the rules for dogs, plese comment because very much help will still be needed.
Dogs in Inquisitor
When mankind first took to the stars they brought with them many of the animals that inhabited ancient Terra. Some of them proved highly successful at colonizing new habitats, the foremost of these was the rat. There hardly is a planet without any of these vermin present. Another species that has spread across the stars in the wake of humanity is the dog. These animals were taken by humans to serve a variety of roles, some were to be used as guards, some for war and many simply for moral support.
Dogs occur in a variety of shapes and sizes. Many have been bred for millennia to serve a specific role, others have been genetically altered more directly. Even this variety is not enough to describe it all because some have also had mechanical changes wrought upon their bodies.
This description of the rules for dogs in Inquisitor is divided into several parts. First the basic rules for their behavior will be described. In the second section the physical characteristics of dogs will be discussed, this will be followed by addressing some of the various additional modifications made to these animals and finally special skills for dog handlers will be mentioned.
Dog Behaviour
Dog behavior can be divided into two classes, autonomous and commanded. Autonomous behavior is the norm which can be overruled by commanded behavior.
It is hard to give rules for the autonomous behavior of an animal because there are infinitely many circumstances under which they must be useable. Therefore the behavior of dogs while not being commanded to do anything depends on the player's and GM's judgment about what the animal would do in its present circumstances.
Overruling the instinctive behavior can be done by any character who is nominated at the start of the game to be a handler of the specific animal. Given commands must be simple, sample commands are given below. To obey a command a dog must pass a leadership test to be well-trained enough to obey. In some cases, mostly with the more complicated commands a dog will also need to pass a sagacity test to understand what is desired of it. Many commands will also have modifiers for the tests taken as some are more simple to train into an animal than others.
Sample Commands
Heel: The dog returns to the character who gave the command as quickly as possible. It will from then on try to stay within 4 yards of the character. The leadership test taken is at +20 leadership under normal conditions.
Kill: The dog attacks the nearest character it thinks of as an enemy. On occasion this will lead to difficulties because many unknown characters can be seen as enemies and in the case of treason it might not understand who to attack. This depends on the GM's discretion. There is normally no modifier to the leadership test under normal conditions.
Guard: The dog stays at a specific site and will attack any non-ally who comes within 6 yards. There is no modifier to the leadership test.
Fetch: The dog is ordered to retrieve a specific item the handler must indicate. To follow this command both a leadership and a sagacity test must be passed with modifiers as decided by the GM. When both tests are passed the dog will move as quickly as possible to the object it is to retrieve, takes it in its mouth and returns to the handler. However, when only the leadership test is passed it goes after the wrong object and takes that to its master.
Physical properties of dogs
To represent the fact that dogs are bred in a wide variety of sizes they are divided into several size classes, each with its own specific rules and perks. There are five classes as detailed in table 1. These classes will not be sufficient to cover the most extremely sized examples one could find in the Imperium but those creatures are beyond the scope of these rules. The very largest dogs will be the size of a tank and have no place in Inquisitor, the smallest lack the size to have any effect in the game. Table 2 lists the average stats of the dogs of the different size classes. Do note that many of these stats also vary with training, breeding and modifications. Some breeds are known for intelligence while others are horribly stupid.
Table 1
Class Size Example To hit modifier
1 Miniscule Chihuahua -30%
2 Small Jack Russell -20%
3 Average Border Collie -
4 Large Greyhound -
5 Huge Fenrisian Wolf +10%
Table 2
Class Ws Bs S T I Wp Sg Nv Ld
1 25 0 20 20 50 30 40 30 50
2 35 0 40 35 50 30 40 40 50
3 45 0 50 45 50 30 40 50 50
4 50 0 70 60 50 30 40 60 50
5 50 0 120 90 50 30 40 70 50
Dogs can attack in two different ways. They can bite and they can jump at enemies. Jumping as an attack is only useful by the larger breeds as smaller dogs lack the mass required to bring someone down. The effectiveness of each kind of attack does however depend mostly on its size, the bite of a huge dog would take off a limb while a miniscule dog would hardly be capable of breaching the skin. When a dog bites this attack can be parried as normal however when it is successfully parried an automatic hit is inflicted on the head location. The damage done by a dog's bite is shown in table 3.
Table 3
Class Bite damage
1 D3
2 D6
3 3D3
4 2D6
5 3D6
When a dog attempt to jump on someone it will use its mass to bring its prey to the ground. Parrying such an attack will not be very effective at blocking it, however a successful parry will count as a hit on a random location. When a dog successfully jumps at a target it will inflict damage as detailed in table 4 and must pass a strength test to knock prone its target. Returning from this prone position can only be done by shifting the dog's weight from the body. This can only be done by throwing it off which requires a strength test modified as detailed in table 4. While having a dog on top of him or her a character may only attack it in close combat or attempt to throw it off, the character will be too occupied to think about much else.
Table 4
Class Damage Throwoff modifier
1 - +20
2 D3 -
3 D6 -10
4 3D3 -30
5 2D6 -50
When attacked in close combat dogs can only dodge as they lack weapons to use for parrying.
When a dog is hit the normal distribution of hit locations is not used instead a special table(5) is used instead.
Table 5
Roll Location
96-00 Head
81-95 Chest
61-80 Front left leg
41-60 Front Right Leg
31-40 Abdomen
16-30 Rear left leg
01-15 Rear right leg
The difficulties with bull-sized terriers and elephant dogs (despite the sneeze command) are manifold...
Watching an elephant roll for example suggests that it's not going to be a worthwhile combat tactic against aware and mobile hostiles - or those with a strong enough pointy stick...
A bull's strength comes primarily from the piledriver effect of a tonne or so of beef impacting the target...
In both cases the advantages of dogs are lost. (Assuming a more or less human sized target - Ambuldogs are another matter).
A dog the size of a bull would be attacking more or less at head level. It has only one weapon, its jaws, and its one very vulnerable to a counterstrike. It can use its mass to attempt to knock the target to the ground but its claws are not designed for gripping the target to allow a more effective attack.
By contrast a dog perhaps three or four feet at the shoulder attacks from a position normally in the periferal vision of its target, from a direction it is more difficult to defend and is able to hang its (not insignificant) mass from its target in such a way as to impair its movement, to drag it down.
Dogs are evolved to a certain method of hunting after all and tend to work best when they are not so much the weapon but when they can harry their prey to near exhaustion.
Of course such huge dogs aren't very efficient at what they do, but they have one thing going for them, they are very impressive. Added to that they willbe very useful for crowd control, someone might know that he could kill it, but would he risk his life for that?
And there of course are plenty of planets where there will be quite larger prey, such as ogryns or huge animals.
I'm not very keen on those pouncing rules. That gives a Chihuahua a 20% chance of knocking over a Space Marine Terminator!
It'd be better for it to work from the knockback rules - roll X dice based on dog size (almost certainly not the same as the damage, although it might be four times the damage or something), then comparing it to the character's knockback value as normal.
After all, it seems a bit daft that my characters (even excluding the Marines) range from a petite 42 kilos up to 135 kilo masses of muscle and metal, but they could be knocked down just as easily as each other - the game already includes rules for this, so it's worth using them.
I was thinking about counting double damage for knockback but instead of knocking back the character he will instead be prone with the dog on top of him.
A dog would really be more for intimidation value. After all, a slavering brute which can easily outrun a human would make almost anyone think twice about trying to take on the character who was on the other end of the leash.
I would still just go with the AOH rules to keep it simple, but maybe have a strength bonus to bigger dogs, but make them easier to hit. Add some basic commands, and you'd have an easy way to use a dog in =][=.