neo-human race

[flatline]

The Simpler conclusion is that TA's just can't be MB.
Why? Because it sets to rest any arguments with munchkins about whether or not MB is a PCC or a RCC before they happen.

I have never known a Munchkin to be even remotely interested in Mind Bleeders once they read the power descriptions, so it seems a little strange to make a ruling in order to prevent an argument that will never happen.

And besides, there is no slippery slope here that says if you allow True Atlantean Mind Bleeders that you must allow True Atlantean Neo-Humans (or whatever). Every Race/Class combination can be independently allowed or rejected by the GM.

--flatline

[Alrik Vas]

*slightly* related, and I had this guy who would never give up the ship on me letting him play one.

Is there really anything about a True Atlantean Temporal Wizard that would be that big a deal really?

Not really that big of a deal, it's just that Atlanteans are immune to Insanity.

[flatline]

*slightly* related, and I had this guy who would never give up the ship on me letting him play one.

Is there really anything about a True Atlantean Temporal Wizard that would be that big a deal really?

Not really that big of a deal, it's just that Atlanteans are immune to Insanity.

I'm aware that TA are immune to transformations, but I don't think insanity counts as a transformation.

--flatline

[flatline]

*slightly* related, and I had this guy who would never give up the ship on me letting him play one.

Is there really anything about a True Atlantean Temporal Wizard that would be that big a deal really?

tra language skills, but that's not really a big deal.

When WB2 was published, True Atlanteans were a decent step up from humans or the palladium fantasy races if you wanted to play a magic user because of their increased PPE regeneration and improved stats, but now they're nothing special.

--flatline

[Tor]

I also rule that if a PCC takes on an OCC then it forgoes all their Psionic upgrades for level advancement because now said mind melter would be advancing as a new class (such as Pilot or ranger or something else. (Gave up that option to go in other directions)

For example:

A mindmelter reaches level 3 (for the psisword)
He then decides he wants to be a pilot (and decides to stop using his occupational skill set due to spending years in school due to lack of time and strict studdy)
He retains his psionics that has already been learned, but the next time he advances levels he is now a robot pilot and advances in that direction insted of becoming a level 4 mindmelter

Player is like: "WHAT???"
I say: You are a pilot now not a mind melter, you studied for years and shelved your other abilities, so your mind melter is frozen at 3 like usual. (always see that word "frozen" which is why i never pick a second OCC till atleast level 10 (so rarely)

This is exactly how Palladium's multiple OCC (including PCC) rules work, previous class is frozen unless you freeze your new one and go back to it later. You can't simultaneously level 2 classes, or at least I'm not aware of any means of doing that.

The Simpler conclusion is that TA's just can't be MB.

Not exactly. In fact, there's a major barrier to doing that.

When was the first printing of Rifts Africa which introduced the stats for the Bleeder? If Atlantis was ever re-printed after that date, Kevin could've gone back and amended the list of Atlantean OCCs to remove the Bleeder and re-appropriate the percentages initially allocated to them. He also could have released errata in the Rifter or on the web site, or in later books that address Atlanteans (such as South America, when that Monster Shaper or whatev OCC and new tat type came out, or Splynn Dimensional Market).

If he did not make such an easy correction, I see no reason to negate it. Atlanteans being Bleeders is hardly that much more powerful than Amaki Stone-men or those Anvil guys being able to. Heck, screw Atlanteans, they can't even transform, they're so rigid.

Why? Because it sets to rest any arguments with munchkins about whether or not MB is a PCC or a RCC before they happen.

I don't agree with the implication that any who would argue about the classification of Bleeders is munchkin.

Also since this is Rifts could we just say 'race' or 'psychic class'? Save for the main book RCCs that became OCCs, the majority of psychic classes in Rifts are still OCCs unless RUE also changed that part. Which it might've, I could've missed it. The example is certainly set to I suppose.

Otherwise you are going to start to get a munchkin that wants to play an elf neo-human.

I don't see how any judgement calls for Mind Bleeders would extend to judgments for Neo-Humans. Other races don't have any mention of being able to be Neo-Humans. Plus there's little benefit one would get from being an elf over a human, and elves aren't in any way linked to the neo-human's background.

Neo-Elves wouldn't really be that impressive, IMO. What would they be, a little prettier than Neo-Humans? They wouldn't even naturally be MDC like Asgardian or Star Elves.

I have never known a Munchkin to be even remotely interested in Mind Bleeders once they read the power descriptions, so it seems a little strange to make a ruling in order to prevent an argument that will never happen.

I dunno, my munchkin side is certainly interested in Mind Bleeder abilities, they'd be a great asset against psychic opponents. Those guys are dangerous, what with their mind control and mind wiping and all that.

Personally I would allow a seeronian neo human, but not a true atlantean..if only because of the genetics involved.

The Neo-Human species has purely South American origins, involving the splicing of DNA from other species and stuff like that. While some of the NHs have gone travelling (perhaps even to other dimension) I'm not sure if any could make it to Seeron and if they did, whether or not they could even breed with the local populace. Neo-Humans may be too far altered from humans to be able to breed with them. Unlike Ogres, Sea Titans and Amazons, I'm not sure if it's been specified if they are still capable of reproducing with their mother species.

I think I recall some vague coverage of Atlanteans and Psi-Stalkers being able to breed with humans although I don't recall specifically where since references to them are more spread out than Amazon/Ogre/Titan stuff.

Anyway I suppose if a pair of Neo-Humans moved to Seeron and gave birth to a baby there, it MIGHT be possible for the kid to catch the Tarlok's plague and gane superabilities like the other humans (and variants) who live there. Not entirely sure. Failing that, I think pretty much anyone can be experimented on and turned into a Bio-Freak. They certainly lack that pesky Atlantean resistance to transformation...

and speaking of which, doesn't that sorta shoot in the foot implications that the human species on Seeron were descended from Atlanteans? Or maybe they did some kind of Seljuk screwup and became normal again.

[madmarvin]

I take a look over the RCC. The book usually specifies what types of OCC's you can have at character creation level, if nothing is listed and the RCC comes with a list of skills of it's own, then i would rule that the RCC would have to gain atleast 1 level in it's current Skillset before taking an OCC, I also rule that if a PCC takes on an OCC then it forgoes all their Psionic upgrades for level advancement because now said mind melter would be advancing as a new class (such as Pilot or ranger or something else. (Gave up that option to go in other directions)

For example:

A mindmelter reaches level 3 (for the psisword)
He then decides he wants to be a pilot (and decides to stop using his occupational skill set due to spending years in school due to lack of time and strict studdy)
He retains his psionics that has already been learned, but the next time he advances levels he is now a robot pilot and advances in that direction insted of becoming a level 4 mindmelter

Player is like: "WHAT???"
I say: You are a pilot now not a mind melter, you studied for years and shelved your other abilities, so your mind melter is frozen at 3 like usual. (always see that word "frozen" which is why i never pick a second OCC till atleast level 10 (so rarely)

problem is the character wants to be a neo-human who channeled his powers toward psi-tech. so the real question is what psionic powers would he have

[madmarvin]

he can get all the powers from psi tech, the bonuses the OCC has are now given to all telemechanics with the higher versions of powers.

umm can you be more specific cause that's about as clear as mud lol.

[eliakon]

I take a look over the RCC. The book usually specifies what types of OCC's you can have at character creation level, if nothing is listed and the RCC comes with a list of skills of it's own, then i would rule that the RCC would have to gain atleast 1 level in it's current Skillset before taking an OCC, I also rule that if a PCC takes on an OCC then it forgoes all their Psionic upgrades for level advancement because now said mind melter would be advancing as a new class (such as Pilot or ranger or something else. (Gave up that option to go in other directions)

For example:

A mindmelter reaches level 3 (for the psisword)
He then decides he wants to be a pilot (and decides to stop using his occupational skill set due to spending years in school due to lack of time and strict studdy)
He retains his psionics that has already been learned, but the next time he advances levels he is now a robot pilot and advances in that direction insted of becoming a level 4 mindmelter

Player is like: "WHAT???"
I say: You are a pilot now not a mind melter, you studied for years and shelved your other abilities, so your mind melter is frozen at 3 like usual. (always see that word "frozen" which is why i never pick a second OCC till atleast level 10 (so rarely)

problem is the character wants to be a neo-human who channeled his powers toward psi-tech. so the real question is what psionic powers would he have

How about using that GM power and saying "you can be the following" (what is or is not canon, as you can see is up for debate....but what is legal in YOUR game isn't, its what you say is legal. If you want them to be a Psi-Mechanic, or a Gizoid, or anything else....its your game, go for it.)

[Chronicle]

The rcc occ pcc thing always made me angry. Can someone up top clarify so these arguments cease ?

As of right now I treat psychic rcc's as an occ due to the life time of developing the powers. These are subject to occ change rules.

In response to Marvin then it would be a tough call. Maybe I would meet in the middle, all occ abilities but limit ISP and psionics to the psi tech listings if level one. Otherwise it might end up being a swap sacrifice for psionics as a swap out, or the psionics will be mandatory for the psi tech and left over gets to choose as normal

[Nightmask]

The rcc occ pcc thing always made me angry. Can someone up top clarify so these arguments cease ?

There's no way to clarify things to end such arguments because Palladium's use of them has been confusing and concept-wise contradictory or with little to no sense, so you get some who think what they are is one way, some who think another way, and some who rigidly go 'well the book calls it an X so even though it ought to be able to do Y I say it can't because it's X'. So clashes over the definitions and how strict or loose they are can't really be avoided.

As a race the Neo-Human is highly psionic, such that they all manifest psychic powers (there is nothing in the book regarding them that suggests that it's possible for one to not have psychic powers) and have a vested interest in focusing on developing them since the vaster their stores of psychic energy the longer they can live. So you end up with the question is their genetic structure so specialized that they can't manifest a different psychic class and can only manifest the one we're given for them or is it more flexible and able to manifest other psychic classes with suitable motivation?

Given they're an engineered race it's reasonable to believe that they can't manifest those variant psychic classes, but also as they're an engineered race using human DNA and still subject to mutation (nothing says that they aren't so one must assume that they are) then it could be possible that the occasional child could be born a mutant with a different psychic class. So it ends up which does the GM feel like accepting, since having a variant psychic OCC isn't going to make the character somehow more powerful than a normal member of its race, just different in focus.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The rcc occ pcc thing always made me angry. Can someone up top clarify so these arguments cease ?

As of right now I treat psychic rcc's as an occ due to the life time of developing the powers. These are subject to occ change rules.

In response to Marvin then it would be a tough call. Maybe I would meet in the middle, all occ abilities but limit ISP and psionics to the psi tech listings if level one. Otherwise it might end up being a swap sacrifice for psionics as a swap out, or the psionics will be mandatory for the psi tech and left over gets to choose as normal

The reason things are so confusing is because the labels have not been used for the terms they mean.

In Rifts the term RCC has been used for races, PCC's, and racial classes. When if only used for what it means, it would only be used for Racial Classes.
( Psi RCC's should be treated as if they were PCC's, because of all the time needed to develop the powers and skill of that class.)

Again in Rifts, because of the style filters that are "Suppose" to make things easier, PCC's are mislabeled as RCC's Pre-RUE, and as POCC's Post RUE. The supposition that 'not calling something what it is makes things easier to understand' is frankly stupid.

KS could of avoided all of this stupidness was to just use the labels for the correct class type when making new editions or settings. Like he did with the PFRPG 2nd ed,..... to start of with.

So the only "Cheap" way I can think of for things for this to get corrected is for KS to "Publish" a list of ALL the classes with their correct class type/label.

I tried something like this in a topic in the GM forum.....but most of the comments I got were negative in there direction.

Yes, I did split things up more then just three labels, but the comments trend towards saying about the poster... "I did not read the OP fully so I'm going to spout off the labels not matching the books even though I was told by what I didn't read that what was being posted would not match the labels in the books but what the classes are according to the class text."

[Chronicle]

I agree with dk on this for the soul reason that clarification is a prudent step to alleviate the back and forth chatter.

In the end it is up to the GM to make the call before character creation , and the players to respect their GM ruling for their campaign

In my group we take turns and each GM has a different take on rulings such as this. Problem solved

[eliakon]

The rcc occ pcc thing always made me angry. Can someone up top clarify so these arguments cease ?

As of right now I treat psychic rcc's as an occ due to the life time of developing the powers. These are subject to occ change rules.

In response to Marvin then it would be a tough call. Maybe I would meet in the middle, all occ abilities but limit ISP and psionics to the psi tech listings if level one. Otherwise it might end up being a swap sacrifice for psionics as a swap out, or the psionics will be mandatory for the psi tech and left over gets to choose as normal

The reason things are so confusing is because the labels have not been used for the terms they mean.

In Rifts the term RCC has been used for races, PCC's, and racial classes. When if only used for what it means, it would only be used for Racial Classes.
( Psi RCC's should be treated as if they were PCC's, because of all the time needed to develop the powers and skill of that class.)

Again in Rifts, because of the style filters that are "Suppose" to make things easier, PCC's are mislabeled as RCC's Pre-RUE, and as POCC's Post RUE. The supposition that 'not calling something what it is makes things easier to understand' is frankly stupid.

KS could of avoided all of this stupidness was to just use the labels for the correct class type when making new editions or settings. Like he did with the PFRPG 2nd ed,..... to start of with.

So the only "Cheap" way I can think of for things for this to get corrected is for KS to "Publish" a list of ALL the classes with their correct class type/label.

I tried something like this in a topic in the GM forum.....but most of the comments I got were negative in there direction.

Yes, I did split things up more then just three labels, but the comments trend towards saying about the poster... "I did not read the OP fully so I'm going to spout off the labels not matching the books even though I was told by what I didn't read that what was being posted would not match the labels in the books but what the classes are according to the class text."

which is a really long way of saying "The labels have meant different things at different times and been inconsistently used for decades, resulting in much confusion and disagreement."

[Nightmask]

I agree with dk on this for the soul reason that clarification is a prudent step to alleviate the back and forth chatter.

In the end it is up to the GM to make the call before character creation , and the players to respect their GM ruling for their campaign

In my group we take turns and each GM has a different take on rulings such as this. Problem solved

Except you can't get a clarification on it, since the terms have been used so poorly you can't effectively say 'this is what term X means' because that term has been used for things that aren't X but are Y or Z instead. It would require going through every book or publishing several volumes of books just compiling all the races and classes introduced and being consistent in labeling so that when someone says 'well X is an RCC' it's consistent with 'Well Y is also an RCC' instead of 'but it was just listed as a race here' or the opposite. Plus one of the classes was removed because it wasn't a proper justification for a class leaving just OCC and RCC.

[drewkitty ~..~]

I agree with dk on this for the soul reason that clarification is a prudent step to alleviate the back and forth chatter.

In the end it is up to the GM to make the call before character creation , and the players to respect their GM ruling for their campaign

In my group we take turns and each GM has a different take on rulings such as this. Problem solved

Except you can't get a clarification on it, since the terms have been used so poorly you can't effectively say 'this is what term X means' because that term has been used for things that aren't X but are Y or Z instead. It would require going through every book or publishing several volumes of books just compiling all the races and classes introduced and being consistent in labeling so that when someone says 'well X is an RCC' it's consistent with 'Well Y is also an RCC' instead of 'but it was just listed as a race here' or the opposite. Plus one of the classes was removed because it wasn't a proper justification for a class leaving just OCC and RCC.

Like I did Here?

[eliakon]

I agree with dk on this for the soul reason that clarification is a prudent step to alleviate the back and forth chatter.

In the end it is up to the GM to make the call before character creation , and the players to respect their GM ruling for their campaign

In my group we take turns and each GM has a different take on rulings such as this. Problem solved

Except you can't get a clarification on it, since the terms have been used so poorly you can't effectively say 'this is what term X means' because that term has been used for things that aren't X but are Y or Z instead. It would require going through every book or publishing several volumes of books just compiling all the races and classes introduced and being consistent in labeling so that when someone says 'well X is an RCC' it's consistent with 'Well Y is also an RCC' instead of 'but it was just listed as a race here' or the opposite. Plus one of the classes was removed because it wasn't a proper justification for a class leaving just OCC and RCC.

Like I did Here?

sort of. Only instead of it being done by a fan using their own personal interpretation of the rules, we would need an official one, done by the staff....and we would need for every follow on book to follow the proper conventions. (And that STILL doesn't solve the whole HU mess, where everything is a 'power category'...and some categories can take other categories and....)

[drewkitty ~..~]

sort of. Only instead of it being done by a fan using their own personal interpretation of the rules, we would need an official one, done by the staff....and we would need for every follow on book to follow the proper conventions. (And that STILL doesn't solve the whole HU mess, where everything is a 'power category'...and some categories can take other categories and....)

Should this not read "...reading of class texts to find out what the individual class type really is..."?
Since that is what I did.
(Ignoring the plethora of types of labels that were made up to have a nuanced labeling instead of Job/Psi/Racial generalities.)

[eliakon]

sort of. Only instead of it being done by a fan using their own personal interpretation of the rules, we would need an official one, done by the staff....and we would need for every follow on book to follow the proper conventions. (And that STILL doesn't solve the whole HU mess, where everything is a 'power category'...and some categories can take other categories and....)

Should this not read "...reading of class texts to find out what the individual class type really is..."?
Since that is what I did.
(Ignoring the plethora of types of labels that were made up to have a nuanced labeling instead of Job/Psi/Racial generalities.)

no, because your still using YOUR interpretation of what is right or wrong, what is something 'really is', and of course you had to make up lots of non-canon subclasses. *shrugs* Its a really good job don't get me wrong. But it doesn't come close to being canonical, and thus it is still Fannon/House-Rules.

[Nightmask]

sort of. Only instead of it being done by a fan using their own personal interpretation of the rules, we would need an official one, done by the staff....and we would need for every follow on book to follow the proper conventions. (And that STILL doesn't solve the whole HU mess, where everything is a 'power category'...and some categories can take other categories and....)

Should this not read "...reading of class texts to find out what the individual class type really is..."?
Since that is what I did.
(Ignoring the plethora of types of labels that were made up to have a nuanced labeling instead of Job/Psi/Racial generalities.)

no, because your still using YOUR interpretation of what is right or wrong, what is something 'really is', and of course you had to make up lots of non-canon subclasses. *shrugs* Its a really good job don't get me wrong. But it doesn't come close to being canonical, and thus it is still Fannon/House-Rules.

And Palladium currently just hasn't got the incentive to do the difficult task of compiling all those classes and races and providing a coherent classification of each. People do enough house-ruling to deal with it that they simply couldn't profit from producing and trying to sell an 'Updated and Cohesive explanation of all classes and where each race and class currently published goes'.

[Giant2005]

I agree with dk on this for the soul reason that clarification is a prudent step to alleviate the back and forth chatter.

In the end it is up to the GM to make the call before character creation , and the players to respect their GM ruling for their campaign

In my group we take turns and each GM has a different take on rulings such as this. Problem solved

I don't really think it is a big deal at all - A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
It doesn't matter if they call them O.C.C.s, R.C.C.s, P.C.C.s, Races or any random combination of letters to make an imaginary word or Acronym, simply reading the text or applying a little logic will point out exactly what you are dealing with.
The only thing it would really effect is trying to separate an R.C.C. from the race so you can apply a different O.C.C. but changing or clarifying the name doesn't help in that endeavor at all. It really is such a pointless thing to be concerned with.

[drewkitty ~..~]

sort of. Only instead of it being done by a fan using their own personal interpretation of the rules, we would need an official one, done by the staff....and we would need for every follow on book to follow the proper conventions. (And that STILL doesn't solve the whole HU mess, where everything is a 'power category'...and some categories can take other categories and....)

Should this not read "...reading of class texts to find out what the individual class type really is..."?
Since that is what I did.
(Ignoring the plethora of types of labels that were made up to have a nuanced labeling instead of Job/Psi/Racial generalities.)

no, because your still using YOUR interpretation of what is right or wrong, what is something 'really is', and of course you had to make up lots of non-canon subclasses. *shrugs* Its a really good job don't get me wrong. But it doesn't come close to being canonical, and thus it is still Fannon/House-Rules.

The thing is, I was not "interpreting the rules", since I was not interpreting "rules". Which was the whole my point in my response.
Its a critical reading thing.

BTW TY for the praise.

[drewkitty ~..~]

[
I don't really think it is a big deal at all - A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
It doesn't matter if they call them O.C.C.s, R.C.C.s, P.C.C.s, Races or any random combination of letters to make an imaginary word or Acronym, simply reading the text or applying a little logic will point out exactly what you are dealing with.
The only thing it would really effect is trying to separate an R.C.C. from the race so you can apply a different O.C.C. but changing or clarifying the name doesn't help in that endeavor at all. It really is such a pointless thing to be concerned with.

If you do not have (relatively) static meaning for words then there is no mean to any language and we would all be grunting out things no one could learn anything from.

This would be alright if they used a random set of letters as class designator so long as they only used the sets of letter consistently and only for the class types they represent.
But since the acronyms OCC, PCC, and RCC actually have things called 'Words" behind them. It is those "words" that define what the acronym means/stands for. My only thing is for the writers to be adult enough that those meanings be used in correctly and consistently in the books...*shrugs*....in the new books.

However, the worst arguments are over whether of not a class is really a RCC, restricted to the race it is presented with or a PCC Rifts style filter mislabeled as a RCC and then just stuck too near Real RCC's mistakenly. And each side refusing to accept the other's evidence/logic of why their way of seeing it is right. (Yes, talking about the stupid/broken (Psi) Gizmoteer class in SA2.)