Cormal versus Dominator's Boiaw-powered Star Fortresses

[eliakon]

The thing though is that the plasma missiles do NO damage, even though there is presumably some 'explosion' involved, and the kinetic impact of the missile....
Basically Palladium simplifies things a lot if its more or less an energy attack its energy. If its more or less kinetic its kinetic (ignoring the whole 'kinetic energy is energy bit'). This is especially important for stuff like particle beams (which are more or less streams of really fast and really tiny bullets....but still get stopped by ItE....) and since particle beams get stopped.....why shouldn't anti-particle beams?

The source of the Plasma missiles damage IS not from the explosion itself though, but as a secondary effect.

I agree Palladium has simplified things in terms of energy.

Anti-matter (beam/bomb) should bypass ItoE because it is hardly conventional energy weapon (there is precedent for exotic/extreme instances bypassing invulnerability). Nor does ItoE stop physical reactions from occurring (chemical energy fuelled explosions, kinetic impacts).

In My Humble Opinion what ItoE (and similar) spell (/power) does is alter energy point(s) (like melting) of the material in question (be in organic or inorganic), and conventional energy weapons do damage by exploiting known energy points (like melting) of materials to do damage, but MAMA reaction destroys the matter it comes into contact with and doesn't require an energy point to be reached to cause harm (plus the energy might be so intense it can bypass it).

So your basically saying that even though it is listed as an energy weapon in every supplement it is in, because particle beams bypasses half the protection of a specific super power (note that even in HU it they never say anything about any other form of energy resistance just the one specific power called out by name.) that particle beams are not really energy and thus ignore the "impervious to all forms of energy" in the spell.
I am going to have to disagree here. I think that it is exactly what it purports to be. An energy weapon/beam. The reasoning is that if one of the major forms of energy weapon in the game was able to bypass one of the major forms of protection in the game that there would be a note about it someplace other than an obscure rule in HU that if extrapolated to include entire classes of things might give half damage.....(to me this is like saying that since one attack does something to all mortals...and half effect to fire dragons dragons, that we can thus assume that all creatures of magic are mortals......)

[Tor]

The release of energy though is post impact and the result of the interaction between matter and anti-matter. So you have lost matter (ie MDC) from the reaction. ItoE doesn't stop the reaction from occurring, which is the source of at least some of the damage.

Maybe a good compromise would be that the main target still takes damage if ItE but anyone in the blast radius takes no damage?

Don't plasma missiles also do damage by explosion? I figured ItFire/Energy protected against those. I think that's also why you can't roll with impact to reduce plasma damage.

No they are also described as being covered by ItoE/F due to other characteristics (they are heat/fire based).

They seem to serve as an example that being an 'explosion' alone doesn't mean you're non-energy, is all I mean. Same as fire bomb grenades.

The thing though is that the plasma missiles do NO damage, even though there is presumably some 'explosion' involved, and the kinetic impact of the missile....

Getting hit by an MDC projectile going 1200mph isn't THAT big a deal.

*shines his rail gun*

[eliakon]

The thing though is that the plasma missiles do NO damage, even though there is presumably some 'explosion' involved, and the kinetic impact of the missile....

Getting hit by an MDC projectile going 1200mph isn't THAT big a deal.

*shines his rail gun*

Sort of my point.....
ItE blocks all damage from the missile, even though logically part of the damage is kinetic. The game just simplifies damage into either "all energy" or "all kinetic" with very little grey. Which sort of makes the claim that 'its a special snowflake grey area' seem to be a bit weak to me.

[drewkitty ~..~]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

[eliakon]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

Probably because they would have the impact of the missile do more damage than the missile itself....which is rather problematical when the warhead on a missile turns into an afterthought......

[ShadowLogan]

So your basically saying that even though it is listed as an energy weapon in every supplement it is in, because particle beams bypasses half the protection of a specific super power (note that even in HU it they never say anything about any other form of energy resistance just the one specific power called out by name.) that particle beams are not really energy and thus ignore the "impervious to all forms of energy" in the spell.

No. I am saying the MAMA reaction can by pass it because it is an extreme case.

A particle/ion/laser/plasma beam weapon (even physical attacks) is about transfering energy from the weapon to the beam/projectile to the target to result in damage.

MAMA weapon is about transfering mass from the weapon to the beam/projectile and converting mass on the other end into energy, it is that conversion process that results in the damage.

ItoE is about stopping the transfer of energy, not mass. And we don't know why physical attacks in general are allowed to by-pass, even though they constitute energy transfer in a technical sense. Is it the amount of mass involved? Is it the "slowness"? Is it because the impact doesn't depend on heat to damage, meaning that ItoE/F merely increase the melting points of the enchanted materials, Etc.

While I have heard of the HU aspect with regard to Particle Beams and such. I am not referencing that. I am looking specifically at HU2E when it talks about the Invulnerability Super Power and the note that "Certain extreme situations like ground zero at a nuclear explosion or Super Nova, and fiery reentry into an atmsophere from space, might hurt or even kill the character (G.M.s call). However, most crashes, explosion, collisons with vehicles, and free falls from 30,000 feet (9144m) will not harm the character." (pg278) If a Super Power like invulnerability can't protect you from a nuclear explosion or super nova, then the higher energy MAMA reaction whouldn't be blocked also. It also establishes precedent that there are limits to what "Invulnerability" and its sister powers can handle (even Invulnerability spell has limits).

They seem to serve as an example that being an 'explosion' alone doesn't mean you're non-energy, is all I mean. Same as fire bomb grenades.

Not quite. Plasma is put into terms of having characteristics that are covered by it being "energy", the text on Annihilate Spell doesn't give us more than "explosion" as far as characterizing anti-matter/matter reaction so we don't know if its a physical explosion (ie HE/Frag/AP) or energy explosion (ie Plasma due to it depending on heat) from a game mechanic characterization (which is simplified and terribly inaccurate in places).

[drewkitty ~..~]

So in what is being said is the in a full nuclear blast the effects of Imp. to Energy will protect the affected from both the Promt Radiation damage (this is what directly causes radiation sickness) and the Flash Burn damage (and the E.M.P. is cast on electronics), but not the actual explosion's Kinetic Blast (the shockwave) nor (if in atmo.)nor the Dynamic Pressure damages.

[Tor]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

I like where you're going with this. Although I don't well recall where those rules were... I want to say possible vehicle-ramming rules?

We should totally make a new thread on this...

Course we need to compile some data on how much missiles way. I've made notes based on the differences in weight of loaded/unloaded launchers.

They seem to serve as an example that being an 'explosion' alone doesn't mean you're non-energy, is all I mean. Same as fire bomb grenades.

Not quite. Plasma is put into terms of having characteristics that are covered by it being "energy", the text on Annihilate Spell doesn't give us more than "explosion" as far as characterizing anti-matter/matter reaction so we don't know if its a physical explosion (ie HE/Frag/AP) or energy explosion (ie Plasma due to it depending on heat) from a game mechanic characterization (which is simplified and terribly inaccurate in places).

We don't seem to be disagreeing about anything, far as I can tell. We both think Annihilate is ambiguous. I am only pointing out that plasma/fire-bomb nades dispute the notion that 'explosion' only means physical, not to argue that this means Annihilate is energy.

not the actual explosion's Kinetic Blast (the shockwave) nor (if in atmo.)nor the Dynamic Pressure damages.

I am glad that Palladium helpfully breaks down nuclear blasts into components like this

[drewkitty ~..~]

not the actual explosion's Kinetic Blast (the shockwave) nor (if in atmo.)nor the Dynamic Pressure damages.

I am glad that Palladium helpfully breaks down nuclear blasts into components like this

They only did it once in CS Navy, and only for full nuclear warheads.
However they only did it for a few megaton ranges.

[glitterboy2098]

honestly, cut down the ranges of the secondary effects by a bunch and you can apply them to the LRM nukes as well.

[Nekira Sudacne]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

Arn't most combat missiles proximity-fused?

[glitterboy2098]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

Arn't most combat missiles proximity-fused?

depends on the missile IRL>

air to air missiles are proximity fused, but are also fragmentation or or pure HE warheads (which in rifts wouldn't do much against armor)
Anti-tank missiles are shaped charge warheads and require direct impact to trigger their warhead. (these are basically what rifts Armor Piercing warheads would be.)

we don't have a IRL equivalent to Plasma, but according to PB's write ups, plasma is comparable to Napalm.. and those tend to depends on the weapon. most do not even have fuses, instead being designed to shatter on impact and tumble to spread the combustible gel across the widest area. (phosphorus in the gelled gasoline makes it autoignite in air so no igniter is required. combined with the addition of oxidizing agents the resulting fire burns hotter and to a degree even in the presence of water and extinguisher agents.)
some though are proximity fused with a small bursting charge designed to spread the gel around.

[Tor]

Could there be something about the low-radius tactical nukes we see in MRM/LRM which prevent these secondary effects?

[eliakon]

Could there be something about the low-radius tactical nukes we see in MRM/LRM which prevent these secondary effects?

Sure. They are probably not even the same sort of nuclear detonations.
Their damage is so low and the blast so small that its probably more of some sort of micro fusion explosion. The blast isn't big enough to generate the different effects (or they would be nearly impossible to separate out) just like technically a conventional explosion has a shock wave, and a fire cloud....but they are not easily separated with out high speed cameras and the like because the blast is so small.

Over a range of miles and a blast of seconds you can notice the different stages.....over a range of dozens of feet and a blast of milliseconds it all blurs into one *boom*

[drewkitty ~..~]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

Arn't most combat missiles proximity-fused?

That would mean that individuals could not dodge missiles.

That is the real world assumption that is assumed but are not in the text. The fact is I would make the same while in a game and not pondering what the text actually says.

[glitterboy2098]

the proximity fuse is usually set to within a few feet. close enough that it might as well be direct impact. (for a HE or Frag warhead, that distance is ideal for causing the most damage)

PB just abstracts a lot.

[Nekira Sudacne]

the proximity fuse is usually set to within a few feet. close enough that it might as well be direct impact. (for a HE or Frag warhead, that distance is ideal for causing the most damage)

PB just abstracts a lot.

I agree, but my point is that someone suggested adding in the actual impact damage of a 5 pound rocket hitting you at 500 MPH with the mass/impact tables in the rulebook, on top of the warheads explosive damage. my point is if it's proximity fused, even at 3 feet away, that would negate the impact damage.

[Nekira Sudacne]

There is already both speed and weight (mass) impact damages within the rules. It's just that not everyone takes it to mind to add them in to the warhead's damage.

Arn't most combat missiles proximity-fused?

That would mean that individuals could not dodge missiles.

That is the real world assumption that is assumed but are not in the text. The fact is I would make the same while in a game and not pondering what the text actually says.

You can dodge grenades, which don't have to physically hit the target anyway, so I wouldn't see why missiles would be treated differently.

Of course, that leads to a house rule my groups have long used: you can only dodge an AoE effect if you are capable of clearing the blast radius in one action*. Suddenly the ability of juicers and crazies to get that huge 20 foot leap is important. throw a fragmentation greande with a 12' blast radius at a juicer, he could clear it--but throw it at unenhanced humans, and they usually can't.

* provided you were the target/center. if you are barely in the edge of the blast radius, say, it was targeted at someone else but you are only 11 feet away from the center, then a simple dive jump can let you dodge.

[drewkitty ~..~]

I can't agree with those house rules one bit. except that I would plow in a perception roll to start the process off with for missiles and artillery shells fired from outside the immediate zone of combat.

Missiles: They are traveling faster then the speed of sound, and are coming from somewhere the individual is not expecting.
Art. Shells: they are not making sound and coming from somewhere the individuals are not expecting.

Rockets (Point and Shoot & Zero Guidance) fired at short range...sort of like when a SAMAS fires a mini-missile at the opponent it is in Melee Combat with. It is more like dodging a firearm then a missile.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I can't agree with those house rules one bit. except that I would plow in a perception roll to start the process off with for missiles and artillery shells fired from outside the immediate zone of combat.

Missiles: They are traveling faster then the speed of sound, and are coming from somewhere the individual is not expecting.
Art. Shells: they are not making sound and coming from somewhere the individuals are not expecting.

Rockets (Point and Shoot & Zero Guidance) fired at short range...sort of like when a SAMAS fires a mini-missile at the opponent it is in Melee Combat with. It is more like dodging a firearm then a missile.

So Uh, are you saying that people shouldn't be allowed to dodge missiles at all? because by the rules they can, that's not a houserule. as long as it's less than 4 in the volley?

and the houserule wasn't for missiles, it was for any AoE attack. and still dosn't apply for 4+ missiles.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Defining: When I say "individual' I mean a human like someone on the ground. If you note I am restricting my comments about shooting at an individual.
----------------------------
What I suggested would make things more realistic. Yes, what I wrote was a bit chunky. (Idea&resoning...then another idea) Most of it boils down to You have Know! about an attack before you can dodge it.

Melee combat sightings require less Attention then trying to see that plane over there 10-30 miles away shooting a missile at the individual.

If anything I would make sure to use with individuals is the dodging modern weapons rule already in the the RAW with RUE. (Or a modified version of it.)
----------------------------------------
That text talking about not being able to dodge four of more missiles is more tuned to [i]flying things[/] dodging missiles.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Defining: When I say "individual' I mean a human like someone on the ground. If you note I am restricting my comments about shooting at an individual.
----------------------------
What I suggested would make things more realistic. Yes, what I wrote was a bit chunky. (Idea&resoning...then another idea) Most of it boils down to You have Know! about an attack before you can dodge it.

Melee combat sightings require less Attention then trying to see that plane over there 10-30 miles away shooting a missile at the individual.

If anything I would make sure to use with individuals is the dodging modern weapons rule already in the the RAW with RUE. (Or a modified version of it.)
----------------------------------------
That text talking about not being able to dodge four of more missiles is more tuned to flying things dodging missiles.

Oh, I agree. but it is what it is.

This is also why I think the Radar cybernetic is one of the best one to get for any tech-based character. only 2000 credits for a 68% chance to detect when long-range attacks are incoming? That's a terrific bargin.

[Tor]

someone suggested adding in the actual impact damage of a 5 pound rocket hitting you at 500 MPH with the mass/impact tables in the rulebook, on top of the warheads explosive damage.

if it's proximity fused, even at 3 feet away, that would negate the impact damage.

Would raise some questions about what would happen if a SAMAS launched some AP mini missiles in HtH combat against a foe though.

Since minis are slower, and tend not to be guided, I would rule they're too low-tech to be proximity-based, but say that the 'true' missiles (short/medium/long) could have that feature.

You can dodge grenades, which don't have to physically hit the target anyway, so I wouldn't see why missiles would be treated differently.

Anyone recall anything about being able to or unable to parry grenades?

Am envisioning someone stepping into the grenade and swatting it aside, which could be possible if it was time-delay explosion instead of contact-explosion.

[Alrik Vas]

There are very few types of impact explosive grenades, if any, in modem use. Most of them are anti-armor as a vehicle's hard surfaces make a good threshold for triggering the explosive. The rest are problematic in sensitivity are rarely used.

As to rockets, missiles and how they detonate, there are several different ways. As previously discussed, most air-air missiles explode before impact to damage more of a plane's useable flight surfaces. Air-ground tend to impact before detonation to pierce armor. Dumb rockets haven't been in proper, wide use in modern armies for a few decades. Precisely guided ordinance is more effective, even modern rockets can be laser guided.

Mini-missiles are fired from a variety of platforms as well. In short, if you're getting weapon system or power armor bonuses to hit, it's because the combat systems are assisting the pilot, which means you've got more going for you than an RPG-7...think more like a Stinger.

[Nekira Sudacne]

someone suggested adding in the actual impact damage of a 5 pound rocket hitting you at 500 MPH with the mass/impact tables in the rulebook, on top of the warheads explosive damage.

if it's proximity fused, even at 3 feet away, that would negate the impact damage.

Would raise some questions about what would happen if a SAMAS launched some AP mini missiles in HtH combat against a foe though.

Since minis are slower, and tend not to be guided, I would rule they're too low-tech to be proximity-based, but say that the 'true' missiles (short/medium/long) could have that feature.

You can dodge grenades, which don't have to physically hit the target anyway, so I wouldn't see why missiles would be treated differently.

Anyone recall anything about being able to or unable to parry grenades?

Am envisioning someone stepping into the grenade and swatting it aside, which could be possible if it was time-delay explosion instead of contact-explosion.

Parrying thrown objects and arrows requires a shield, or a class power or other ability that says you can. and shields are -3 to do so plus take full damage from the explosion if they do so (likely destroying it)

Also, it's not true that no one can make advanced mini-missiles. Armatech explictly manufactures smart, thermal-guided mini-missiles not available anywhere else. (Of course, they operate only in Japan and sell them only to the Republic of Japan Self-Defense Force). They also have designed a way to cram a short-range AP missile warhead onto a mini-missile chassis, and have Concussive missiles with effects equal to the Triax Slammer missiles for all missile types--including mini.

[Tor]

Parrying thrown objects and arrows requires a shield, or a class power or other ability that says you can.

Source? N&SS let pretty much anyone attempt to grab a thrown object or arrow after successfully parrying it, didn't seem like there was any need for a class ability from a certain art to do so. Closest thing would be a kata that lets you automatically parry projectiles (no rolling required, I assume even overwhelming natural 20s) but I never saw that as the sole means of doing so. Does Rifts or other games speak differently? I remember nasty penalties against some fast incoming stuff but nothing about absolutely needing a shield or power to make the attempt. Seems like shields or class powers just helped reduce penalties.

[say652]

Rune weapons do parry at -6, yes several powers allow dodge and parry of bullet and Energy.

But, any one can attempt it.

[Tor]

Although it'd be easier to swat aside a grenade than a bullet, I get the impression with a bullet you're doing more of a 'block' if you manage to get a weapon in the way, like with an energy blast (can only see energy actually getting deflected if you're using an energy weapon or something)

If you merely 'blocked' with a grenade, then it'd explode on you, so having to deflect it could prove more difficult for the GM to apply some penalties.

It's like if a baseball was coming and instead of ramming it head-on, trying to hit it from the side to reduce impact so that it just goes 90 degrees to your left or right or even behind you but to the side. Seems harder.

[eliakon]

Although it'd be easier to swat aside a grenade than a bullet, I get the impression with a bullet you're doing more of a 'block' if you manage to get a weapon in the way, like with an energy blast (can only see energy actually getting deflected if you're using an energy weapon or something)

If you merely 'blocked' with a grenade, then it'd explode on you, so having to deflect it could prove more difficult for the GM to apply some penalties.

It's like if a baseball was coming and instead of ramming it head-on, trying to hit it from the side to reduce impact so that it just goes 90 degrees to your left or right or even behind you but to the side. Seems harder.

That is a spiffy house rule to add......
.....but RAW that's not how the system works

[Tor]

Since you like to bring up RAW, perhaps you could point out where it explicitly says that you can not or can parry grenades?

The whole reason I'm thought-experimenting this is because I'm not aware of anything. But since you brought up RAW, I figure you know where parrying grenades is talked about.

[eliakon]

Since you like to bring up RAW, perhaps you could point out where it explicitly says that you can not or can parry grenades?

The whole reason I'm thought-experimenting this is because I'm not aware of anything. But since you brought up RAW, I figure you know where parrying grenades is talked about.

1) The RAW does not say that parried grenades explode and
2) The RAW says that projectiles can be parried.
3) Grenades are a projectile
Ergo by the RAW grenades can be parried and do not explode when parried.
Making grenades explode when parried would thus be a house rule.

[Tor]

If they are timed grenades then they've got to go off sometime, and if it was a touch-sensitive grenade then a parry would be a touch. Probably the issue is we don't know a lot of the specifics about individual grenades and how they work.

Another thing about grenades is the AoE: if you parry them, how far away would they fall, and would you still be in the blast radius? Would having a higher PS mean a parried grenade could be deflected further away?

Fertile grounds for house rules or Palladium to drop some errata on us.

[eliakon]

If they are timed grenades then they've got to go off sometime, and if it was a touch-sensitive grenade then a parry would be a touch. Probably the issue is we don't know a lot of the specifics about individual grenades and how they work.

Another thing about grenades is the AoE: if you parry them, how far away would they fall, and would you still be in the blast radius? Would having a higher PS mean a parried grenade could be deflected further away?

Fertile grounds for house rules or Palladium to drop some errata on us.

If someone makes a touch sensitive grenade then sure it would go off when touched. But, as written, grenades are not impact detonated. A GM could make a house rule on it but as it stands right now there is nothing in any book to suggest that they are actually impact detonated, and as I pointed out, the rules do allow them to be parried....which means that if they had a special mechanism that makes it so they can NOT be parried that needs to be spelled out explicitly and not just inferred as a 'well it doesn't say they don't'


How far away they land is going to be totally up to the GM and since it is so situational I cant really see any rules actually being written for it.

[Tor]

Considering the threat grenades pose (particularly if you're like me and take a strong principled stance of unflinching 'everything' in blast radius rules) and the preference most have of auto-parrying over normal-dodging when possible, it seems like an important thing to address.

Even if you didn't have a weapon, you could be in theory auto-parrying grenades bare-handed and not taking any damage at all if they went far enough away.

[eliakon]

Considering the threat grenades pose (particularly if you're like me and take a strong principled stance of unflinching 'everything' in blast radius rules) and the preference most have of auto-parrying over normal-dodging when possible, it seems like an important thing to address.

Even if you didn't have a weapon, you could be in theory auto-parrying grenades bare-handed and not taking any damage at all if they went far enough away.

The very fact that it isn't addressed though suggests that it is not a special snowflake exception, so it can be parried.
As to how far away....that is going to depend on so many details (angle of the throw, strength of the person making the parry? What sort of parry? Was it barehanded or a weapon? If a weapon what kind? Are their walls? How many second delay is on the grenade? How many seconds was it 'cooked off'?....) that its going to simply be up to the GM to decide what sounds fair...
As I have said many times this game is a cinematic fast and loose game it is not a detailed reality simulator

[Tor]

Kind of want WP Lacross Stick, I bet that'd be great for making sure you deflected grenades far enough away and cushioning any impact-sensitivity. I don't know if standard WP Net would have holes small enough to stop a grenade or not since they seem intended to stop people.

[eliakon]

Kind of want WP Lacross Stick, I bet that'd be great for making sure you deflected grenades far enough away and cushioning any impact-sensitivity. I don't know if standard WP Net would have holes small enough to stop a grenade or not since they seem intended to stop people.

Then get with your GM and make one......
If your really motivated post what you end up with on the We Got Skills thread or someplace.....

[ShadowLogan]

Since you like to bring up RAW, perhaps you could point out where it explicitly says that you can not or can parry grenades?

The whole reason I'm thought-experimenting this is because I'm not aware of anything. But since you brought up RAW, I figure you know where parrying grenades is talked about.

1) The RAW does not say that parried grenades explode and
2) The RAW says that projectiles can be parried.
3) Grenades are a projectile
Ergo by the RAW grenades can be parried and do not explode when parried.
Making grenades explode when parried would thus be a house rule.

Grenades IMHO are functionally missiles for rule purposes (AOE, Ranged). That means that you have several RAW options:
-Dodge (which means you are out of the blast radius)
-you can block by putting something in the way (a parry roll)
-shoot it down (strike roll)