Can Dog Boyd sense nightbane?

[Unfortunate Son]

I remember reading this but I can't remember where.

[Shark_Force]

in morphus form yes. in facade they shouldn't be able to sense them as a supernatural being. they may be able to sense them for other reasons (particularly if they're a spellcaster and cast a spell, for example).

[drewkitty ~..~]

In their Facade Nightbane do not have a Supernatural Aura.

So......
No, Psi-Hounds can not sense a NB as being SN while they are in their facade.

[eliakon]

Yes.
Most Nightbane tend to have rather large reserves of PPE, and as such if the reserve is 80+ then a Dog Boy can sense that regardless of other factors.

Second, the 'flavors' of the scents are distinct. Thus a Dog Boy who has encountered Nightbane would get a roll on their Recognize Psychic Scent skill to identify the scent as being that of a Nightbane (A GM could make a house rule that this does not apply in their game, but as written I am not aware of any canon text that states that a Nightbane 'scans' as a human to supernatural senses)

Third there is the See Aura ability, which will reveal that the 'bane is not human

Forth and most obvious of course... the ability "Sense Supernatural Beings" can be used. This is because the ability can recognize even such things as a mage simply by their 'scent' and PPE... and Nightbane have large reserves of PPE and more to the point they are supernatural beings.

As far as the canon is concerned I am not aware of any rule stating anywhere that an awakened Nightbane does not detect as such. There is no such text in the racial write up, nor in the psionic section nor magic section of the Nightbane RPG. (There could be some that I am forgetting of course...)

Thus, a Nightbane would be quite easialy found out by a Dog Boy. And in fact it is just this sort of 'supernatural creature in human clothing' that Dog Boys were designed specifically to ferret out.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Nuance.....

1: This is a maybe depending on which canon core ideas for the two races (NB's & PH's) you give weight to take precedence. NB core concept: When changing to their facade it hides the NB's supernatural side.
However, this is something that is arguable ether way. More likely to fall to which setting the game is in then any specific hard rule.
Thou if PH's can sense the amount of PPE this would only lead the PH to believe they are sensing a magic user.

2: The psychic scent that Psi-Hound perceive is only given off when the being uses their powers/magic, and that what SN beings give off all the time. All a NB would have to do to avoid being detected like this is not use their talents while in their facade. Or if a mage not cast their magic ether.

3. Yes, NB in their facade would read as not human to see/sense aura. But this power is not always 'on'.

4. While the Psi-Hounds would be able to track a NB while the NB is in his/her morphus as easy as other SN (psi-hound power #3). Once they change to their facade the NB does not give off a SN psychic scent. So the Psi-Hound's ability to follow a SN being' psychic scent ends with the end of the scent.
Hounds (50%+5%) and Hunters (40%+5%) have a better ability to follow a psychic sense then Psi-Hounds (35%+5%). And they, Hunters and Hounds, can't follow the psychic scent of a NB in their facade.
(Psi-Stalkers only have a 40%+5% for their track via psychic scents.)

So the only thing that might attract a Psi-Hound's attention just using their 'always on' senses might be the sensing of their level of PPE.

[eliakon]

Nuance.....

1: This is a maybe depending on which canon core ideas for the two races (NB's & PH's) you give weight to take precedence. NB core concept: When changing to their facade it hides the NB's supernatural side.
However, this is something that is arguable ether way. More likely to fall to which setting the game is in then any specific hard rule.
Thou if PH's can sense the amount of PPE this would only lead the PH to believe they are sensing a magic user.

Where is this concept found? Besides in peoples headcanon? I can find NOTHING in the book that says anything about such hiding is why I ask.
Though, yes. This power will simply find the PPE pool.

2: The psychic scent that Psi-Hound perceive is only given off when the being uses their powers/magic, and that what SN beings give off all the time. All a NB would have to do to avoid being detected like this is not use their talents while in their facade. Or if a mage not cast their magic ether.

That is not what the book says though.
The book clearly states that the scent that is perceived is the scent, among other things that of the 80+ PPE pool. Therefore simply having 80+ PPE means you are giving off the scent.

3. Yes, NB in their facade would read as not human to see/sense aura. But this power is not always 'on'.

Again, can you point me to where this is stated in the text?
I am aware that this is bandied about fairly often as a "well known fact"... but it appears to me to be a fanon/headcanon fact and not an actual game fact. I may be mistaken of course, which is why I am asking for the source. But I can't find any support for the claim is why I am asking. With out such support then no, they do NOT read as human.

4. While the Psi-Hounds would be able to track a NB while the NB is in his/her morphus as easy as other SN (psi-hound power #3). Once they change to their facade the NB does not give off a SN psychic scent. So the Psi-Hound's ability to follow a SN being' psychic scent ends with the end of the scent.
Hounds (50%+5%) and Hunters (40%+5%) have a better ability to follow a psychic sense then Psi-Hounds (35%+5%). And they, Hunters and Hounds, can't follow the psychic scent of a NB in their facade.
(Psi-Stalkers only have a 40%+5% for their track via psychic scents.)

The same question applies here.
I can not find the statement that the façade does not detect as supernatural. I find that the Nitghtbane does not have access to its supernatural STATS in this form... but they still have their talents, PPE, they still have their supernatural abilities et multiple cetera.
With out an explicit statement that they do not detect as supernatural... then they detect as supernatural.

So the only thing that might attract a Psi-Hound's attention just using their 'always on' senses might be the sensing of their level of PPE.

I am trying to find out what the canon answer is here. House rules can be worked out after that is solved.
And as far as I can tell there is no canon support for the claim that nightbane have this "supernatural stealth power" making that a house rule not a canon rule.

[drewkitty ~..~]

1: You, eliakon, had already stated the core concept of psi-hounds "'...supernatural creature in human clothing' that Dog Boys were designed specifically to ferret out." and did complain about it.
I didn't turn off my intelligence when reading the NB mainbook and used it to see the core concept behind the race in the game. Your insulting accusations are not helpful to any discussion.

2: the RUE text for psi-hound's power #2 says nothing about their target only needing to have 80+ PPE to be able to recognize the psychic scent. That is your house rule.
It DOES SAY that the target has to use their powers for the scent to be cast out to be sensed.


3: See Aura... erp I goofed. I said things slightly incorrectly......IF.... the PH has the psi power see aura; as per RUE, See Aura is not a part of the standard set of psi power the PHs get; then they could use it to look at the aura.

4: Yes, you are looking in the wrong places. Places like the NBSG where it talks about only having to get out of sight to change back to their facade and disappear into the crowd, or maybe rifter 48 page 23 in the official Q&A where it directly says that the main book indicated that the facade is not supernatural. Or on page 25, it says that only their morphus is SN and that their facade is human...mostly.
Go ahead, sleep in the bed you made for yourself.
I'm right in my statements about this item.

[eliakon]

1: You, eliakon, had already stated the core concept of psi-hounds "'...supernatural creature in human clothing' that Dog Boys were designed specifically to ferret out." and did complain about it.
I didn't turn off my intelligence when reading the NB mainbook and used it to see the core concept behind the race in the game. Your insulting accusations are not helpful to any discussion.

I am not asking about people's house rules or what their opinion on the game is.
What is at stake here is the RAW.
Thus... the question is if there is an actual rule mechanic that provides for Nightbane to have some sort of immunity to detection abilities. Because otherwise it is a house rule to add in such a mechanic.

2: the RUE text for psi-hound's power #2 says nothing about their target only needing to have 80+ PPE to be able to recognize the psychic scent. That is your house rule.
It DOES SAY that the target has to use their powers for the scent to be cast out to be sensed.

My mistake. It should be power #3 not #2 My Bad.

4: Yes, you are looking in the wrong places. Places like the NBSG where it talks about only having to get out of sight to change back to their facade and disappear into the crowd, or maybe rifter 48 page 23 in the official Q&A where it directly says that the main book indicated that the facade is not supernatural. Or on page 25, it says that only their morphus is SN and that their facade is human...mostly.
Go ahead, sleep in the bed you made for yourself.
I'm right in my statements about this item.

Okay.
Let me try this again.
The facade is not supernatural. However the main book simpy states that it does not have supernatural stats.
As the CREATURE is still a supernatural being in both forms, the fact that one body is not supernatural does not change the fact that the being ITSELF is a supernatural one.
The 'bane is still a supurnatural being in both forms. Thus an evil bane will radiate evil when scaned even in Facade. A bane will show as supernatural when scanned with an aura, et multiple cetera.
More to the point there is nothing in the text that states that the 'bane has any sort of immunity to detection, and infact we know that they CAN be detected as there is at least one spell that can do so as well as the natural racial ability of Nightbane and Athanos.
Which goes back to my original question
Is there a specific statement in the books that Nightbane are immune to detection abilities in their facade form?
We know that their Facade form does not have supernatural statistics and is SDC (except when it is MDC...)
But they still possess supernatural abilities and are still supernatural creatures. That does not change, even if their body does change.

[Shark_Force]

ugh. now i'm gonna have to go digging through 5 books to find the reference for the facade not detecting as supernatural.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Lets try this again.
1) To start off with the I gave the simple canonical answer to the question posed in the OP.
After that I was free to give my opinion as an opinion. As I did. I even agreed with you that they could sense the NB's level of PPE. Yes, did state the nuance that goes along with it that they PH would 1st think that they were seeing a human magic user. This is because NB are not supernatural in their facade.
-------------
3) the 80+ is a part of their power #1. Yes, I read power #3. And I understand it.
NB are not supernatural in their facade trumps any argument you may bring up.
-------------
4) Nightbane are not supernatural in their facade. ergo/therefor/as a result....senses that detect the Supernatural do not sense the nightbane while they are in their facade. In other words....they are perceived as humans in all aspects till something else changes the preconceptions.

That you are stretching to grasp strands that do not meet up and trying to make them meet up is readily apparent to me.
Evil NBs....
Yes, while in their morphus they would be detected by the psi power 'detect (SN) evil' psi power. (yes, I habitually add the '(SN)' to that power's name because it is a defining part of that psi power.)
However, because they are not SN in their facade, they would't be detected by that same said power while they are in their facade.
This is the cognitive connection you are missing when the published canon text says that NB are not SN in their facade.
This is why nb can mingle within a crowd of humans and not be detected by those that can sense the SN and can track a SN's psychic trail.

This subject has only a binary solution set. There is no 'but this...' or 'what about that...'.
NB are not supernatural in their facade.
---------
And as to trying to make their ability to see in the dark to make them readable as SN...Elves have the ability to see in the dark too and they do not read as SN.
---------
#1 #3 connection: That NB have more then 80+ PPE only means that they are detected in their facade as humans with more then normal PPE.
It is only when they are in their morphus that they 'are'/'read as' supernatural.
---------
This subject of NB not being supernatural in their facade has been argued several times of the years since it was published in 1995. Every one of those discussions ended up with a consensus that NB were not SN in their facade and that meant that powers that sensed the supernatural does not sense them. Most of these discussions were before you time on the boards eliakon (based off your join date). It was a relief that R48 finally made that the NB's facade is not SN explicitly clear. (at least as far as PB writing standards can make it.) That should of put this stupid argument behind everyone.

[Axelmania]

I'm trying to recall everything which can detect NB in Facade. Nothing comes to mind except other Nightbane and I think Athanatos?

the Psi-Hound can detect the presence of psychic energy; specifically

fellow psychics (I.S.P.)
and
magic energy (P.P.E used

in spellcasting,
in magic devices
and
the large energy reserves in

practitioners
and
creatures
of magic;
80 or more points

)

I think the indenting might help people understand how these ideas come together in grouping.

"80 or more" is defining what "large" is in respect to "energy reserves".

These reserves only apply to 2 things: practitioners of magic and creatures of magic.

Anything with 80+ PPE who is neither would not be sensed.

This also means that dog boys cannot sense practitioners/creatures with 79 or less PPE.

RUE 153 does not limit Psi-Stalkers to the same minimum. Instead it is a vague "magic and the supernatural (both with high PPE)" which is more flexible, so GM could define what 'high' is for these purposes as something less than the 'large' of 80.

[dreicunan]

I'm trying to recall everything which can detect NB in Facade. Nothing comes to mind except other Nightbane and I think Athanatos?

the Psi-Hound can detect the presence of psychic energy; specifically

fellow psychics (I.S.P.)
and
magic energy (P.P.E used

in spellcasting,
in magic devices
and
the large energy reserves in

practitioners
and
creatures
of magic;
80 or more points

)

I think the indenting might help people understand how these ideas come together in grouping.

"80 or more" is defining what "large" is in respect to "energy reserves".

These reserves only apply to 2 things: practitioners of magic and creatures of magic.

Anything with 80+ PPE who is neither would not be sensed.

This also means that dog boys cannot sense practitioners/creatures with 79 or less PPE.

RUE 153 does not limit Psi-Stalkers to the same minimum. Instead it is a vague "magic and the supernatural (both with high PPE)" which is more flexible, so GM could define what 'high' is for these purposes as something less than the 'large' of 80.

That wording can just as easily be read as descriptive of who would have those large reserves. Reading through the later entry on sense supernatural, where it talks about tracking other inhuman beings powerful with magic, and I'd say that the 80 points is a threshhold for any being, regardless of type. (That said, how often does a creature who is not a practitioner of magic or some other kind of supernatural being have that much PPE anyways?)

[Axelmania]

Sensing supernatural beings is an entirely different power.

How often's irrelevant.

[dreicunan]

Sensing supernatural beings is an entirely different power.

How often's irrelevant.

An entirely different power "identical in basic function and principal." Also rather illuminating for this discussion, because the ability to sense supernatural beings includes the ability to "recognize practioners and creatures of magic by the large amount of PPE they possess, regardless of how they may disguise themselves."

So an ability that is ostensibly titled "sense supernatural beings" clearly includes the ability to sense non-supernatural beings. This extends to the point that the ability to "Sense Supernatural Beings" allows them to detect wizards or creatures of magic who are invisible!

So, whether or not Nightbane are supernatural in their facade, since the text of power #3 indicates that, despite the title, it applies to non-supernatural being as well, I'd say that would make them subject to detection.

[drewkitty ~..~]

snip
So, whether or not Nightbane are supernatural in their facade, since the text of power #3 indicates that, despite the title, it applies to non-supernatural being as well, I'd say that would make them subject to detection.

Yes, As someone with large amount of PPE (if not depleated), like I said earlyer. The basic inference will be a magic user of some sort because they can't psychicly smell/sense any supernatrualness coming off them.

Yes, the text of the #3 PH ability got twisted in core concept between the Name and the descriptive text.
⁍So if you go with the Name, the PH does not detect the NB in her Facade because she is not SN in her facade.
⁍Or you go by the text and the PH only detectes the amount of PPE the char has & then Psi-Hounds can only make inferances about why the char has the amount of PPE they have. And are not detected as a SN from any psychic scent. Because NB are not SN in their facade.


Again, this is what I said earlier.
Yes, she can be detected as having large amounts of PPE by Psi-Hounds while in her facade (presuming she has alot of unspent PPE), but not detected directly as SN while in her facade.

If (a+b)c= 0. And if r times c equals 0. The result is the same.

Spoiler:

Yes, I know there are GMs out there that have made a ruling for their games that 'sense PPE' powers sense what beings could hold and not the PPE itself.
This is not what the publish canon text says. It says the amount of PPE the being has is detected. Not, "could hold".

[eliakon]

Yes, I know there are GMs out there that have made a ruling for their games that 'sense PPE' powers sense what beings could hold and not the PPE itself.
This is not what the publish canon text says. It says the amount of PPE the being has is detected. Not, "could hold".

Can you provide the source for that text?
I have not actually seen such a ruling myself and I am most curious. Especially in light of the fact that base PPE is also refered to as simply PPE as well.
Knowing where this is stated in canon that all references to PPE are the temporary PPE and not the base PPE would simplify a lot of things for me.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The canon Text in RUE, psi-hound #1 power. It says it detects the mystic energy "in" psions and magic users. And #3 in saying they detects the mystic energy they "possess".

With both of the descriptive words used there is a pressence of 'something' within the being.

So the detecting the PPE is like detecting the water in a balloon, not sensing the size of the balloon.
Using the same anallagy to describe the rest of the #1 power, the Psi-Hound can't smell the water till the water is used.
With #3 this analagy breaks down for sense a psychic smell of the SN due to it is still talking about sensing the PPE within the beings, and now in objects too.

When taken as a whole the Psi-hounds senses point sources mysic energy. Opposed to the Hound's and Hunters' ability to follow a 'trail' of psychic scent.

Another analogy I would make, is that the different sensing of the psychic sense. A psi-hound's is more like how you feel an ant walking in the hairs of your arm. And a Hunter's sensing the ant is more like how the ant smells the pheramon trail each ant lays down as it walks.

[dreicunan]

So then my question is, per canon, at what range can a psi-hound detect an invisible wizard?

[eliakon]

The canon Text in RUE, psi-hound #1 power. It says it detects the mystic energy "in" psions and magic users. And #3 in saying they detects the mystic energy they "possess".

With both of the descriptive words used there is a pressence of 'something' within the being.

And yet my question still stands.
Is it the PPE base that they possess or the PPE points that they possess.
I understand your personal house rule on the issue, but if your stating that it is flat canon then we need more than a statement that is open to interpretation.

After all, they are both mystic forces, they are both in side the person, and they can both be expended for magic. Even if you are at zero 'tally' PPE you still have all your 'base' PPE.

[eliakon]

So then my question is, per canon, at what range can a psi-hound detect an invisible wizard?

The answer there is fuzzy, and depends on how the particular GM interprets the text and what sort of invisibility is in use, and what the PPE of said wizard is (current or base again depending on how the GM reads the text)

If the Mage has 80 current PPE, and is using lesser invisibility then they are just hosed as the Dog Boy will smell the large PPE pool regardless of how the text is read.
Beyond that it gets complicated.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The canon Text in RUE, psi-hound #1 power. It says it detects the mystic energy "in" psions and magic users. And #3 in saying they detects the mystic energy they "possess".

With both of the descriptive words used there is a pressence of 'something' within the being.

And yet my question still stands.
Is it the PPE base that they possess or the PPE points that they possess.
I understand your personal house rule on the issue, but if your stating that it is flat canon then we need more than a statement that is open to interpretation.

After all, they are both mystic forces, they are both in side the person, and they can both be expended for magic. Even if you are at zero 'tally' PPE you still have all your 'base' PPE.

Which side are you misunderstanding is my house rule? The contaner or the contained is sensed?
I ask because I don't have a house rule about this.

Besides that you are misrepresenting what canon says what a 'Base PPE' is.
What canon says it is, and I am paraphrasing for clarity, is the amount of PPE a character can hold onto indefinitly.
This makes it when the char has used up the PPE they have on spells or otherwise, they have no PPE.

It was nice of you to give us your house rule on this. But maybe next time you should state that it is your house rule instread of misrepresenting it as if it was canon.

[drewkitty ~..~]

So then my question is, per canon, at what range can a psi-hound detect an invisible wizard?

Yes, if he/she has more them 80 PPE.
▶︎ If the mage is using magic to be invisible, then this triggers the PsiHound's sense active magic ability.
▶︎ If the mage is using a super power or natural power, if the 80 PPE thresshold is met, it does not matter if the the mage is invisible or not. I would look at the "Blind Seer" PCC (RC2) for possible penilties for sensing the mystic w/o them being visible.

[dreicunan]

So then my question is, per canon, at what range can a psi-hound detect an invisible wizard?

Yes, if he/she has more them 80 PPE.
▶︎ If the mage is using magic to be invisible, then this triggers the PsiHound's sense active magic ability.
▶︎ If the mage is using a super power or natural power, if the 80 PPE thresshold is met, it does not matter if the the mage is invisible or not. I would look at the "Blind Seer" PCC (RC2) for possible penilties for sensing the mystic w/o them being visible.

You must have misread my question, as it didn't ask if they could be sensed. It asked at what range they could be sensed.

The 80 PPE threshold is not mentioned in relation to sensing the location of invisible wizards or creatures of magic, so RAW the amount of PPE possessed would be irrelevant to their ability to sense their location.

[drewkitty ~..~]

So then my question is, per canon, at what range can a psi-hound detect an invisible wizard?

Yes, if he/she has more them 80 PPE.
▶︎ If the mage is using magic to be invisible, then this triggers the PsiHound's sense active magic ability.
▶︎ If the mage is using a super power or natural power, if the 80 PPE thresshold is met, it does not matter if the the mage is invisible or not. I would look at the "Blind Seer" PCC (RC2) for possible penilties for sensing the mystic w/o them being visible.

You must have misread my question, as it didn't ask if they could be sensed. It asked at what range they could be sensed.

The 80 PPE threshold is not mentioned in relation to sensing the location of invisible wizards or creatures of magic, so RAW the amount of PPE possessed would be irrelevant to their ability to sense their location.

Pardon me, you are correct, I misread.
The same ranges detailed in the #1 psi-Hound power. They are the last thing mentioned in the text.

[eliakon]

The canon Text in RUE, psi-hound #1 power. It says it detects the mystic energy "in" psions and magic users. And #3 in saying they detects the mystic energy they "possess".

With both of the descriptive words used there is a pressence of 'something' within the being.

And yet my question still stands.
Is it the PPE base that they possess or the PPE points that they possess.
I understand your personal house rule on the issue, but if your stating that it is flat canon then we need more than a statement that is open to interpretation.

After all, they are both mystic forces, they are both in side the person, and they can both be expended for magic. Even if you are at zero 'tally' PPE you still have all your 'base' PPE.

Which side are you misunderstanding is my house rule? The contaner or the contained is sensed?
I ask because I don't have a house rule about this.

Besides that you are misrepresenting what canon says what a 'Base PPE' is.
What canon says it is, and I am paraphrasing for clarity, is the amount of PPE a character can hold onto indefinitly.
This makes it when the char has used up the PPE they have on spells or otherwise, they have no PPE.

It was nice of you to give us your house rule on this. But maybe next time you should state that it is your house rule instread of misrepresenting it as if it was canon.

I am asking where the book says that the 80 PPE is the 'tally'
There is no such term as "base PPE" in canon. BOTH of them are simply called P.P.E. As such I am asking where the statement that the PPE in this usage is the "Temporary" PPE and not the "Base"

I understand that you feel that your interpretation is canon however as far as I can tell it is simply a house rule unless there is a specific canon statement somewhere that clarifies the issue in favor of that particular interpretation. Absent that there is no clear canon on the issue either way and as such any ruling on it whatsoever is a house rule.

Also I do not appreciate the condescending attitude. It is perfectly possible to discuss an issue with out condescending or making the presumption that any interpretation of a rule counter to yours is inherently flawed and only worthy of ridicule.
I am simply trying to find out where exactly you found book support, and what that support is, for a stance that you have claimed is canon. As with out said support it is not canon. Only Kevin Sembidea can set canon, as such only those things that he has aproved for printing in his books can be construed as canon, just because a premise has a potential logical chain of support does not make it canon, it simply means that there is some support for the particular view being expressed.

[Nightmartree]

There is no such term as "base PPE" in canon. BOTH of them are simply called P.P.E. As such I am asking where the statement that the PPE in this usage is the "Temporary" PPE and not the "Base"

I believe you've answered this already before you started talking about "base" and "temporary" and what call it PPE, which i may be mistaken but i believe you brought up the "Base" PPE as a thing before he did. (Edit: I mean as in you have the answer to your question in your statement, there is no base ppe in canon)

If there is only PPE, and PPE is used to perform an action, then you have less PPE after that action correct? If that is so then once you use PPE until you are below 80 then you now have less than 80 PPE correct?

If you have less than 80 PPE you are not noticable to dog boys has been established as a fact already in this thread. So as long as you cast spells till your below 80 PPE your not noticable. Thats if there is no such things as base or temporary PPE (which would probably be better written as max PPE and current PPE)

[eliakon]

There is no such term as "base PPE" in canon. BOTH of them are simply called P.P.E. As such I am asking where the statement that the PPE in this usage is the "Temporary" PPE and not the "Base"

I believe you've answered this already before you started talking about "base" and "temporary" and what call it PPE, which i may be mistaken but i believe you brought up the "Base" PPE as a thing before he did. (Edit: I mean as in you have the answer to your question in your statement, there is no base ppe in canon)

If there is only PPE, and PPE is used to perform an action, then you have less PPE after that action correct? If that is so then once you use PPE until you are below 80 then you now have less than 80 PPE correct?

If you have less than 80 PPE you are not noticable to dog boys has been established as a fact already in this thread. So as long as you cast spells till your below 80 PPE your not noticable. Thats if there is no such things as base or temporary PPE (which would probably be better written as max PPE and current PPE)

No my PPE stat has not changed.
If my PPE score (the so called 'base') is 136 then I can spend all 136 PPE points and still have 136 PPE. They are just empty.
Thus I still have 136 PPE even if I can currently spend 0 PPE points. The first PPE is the amount of energy points' I can contain at any one time and does not change (this is why a mage does not have to use up their PPE 'base' every time they cast a spell) the second PPE is the current 'tally' of those 'energy points' which fluctuates all the time.

So since it only says PPE... the question remains. Is that the PPE that doesn't change or the PPE that does change? As both of them are internal energy, both are PPE, and both can be detected.

[Nightmartree]

No my PPE stat has not changed.
If my PPE score (the so called 'base') is 136 then I can spend all 136 PPE points and still have 136 PPE. They are just empty.
Thus I still have 136 PPE even if I can currently spend 0 PPE points. The first PPE is the amount of energy points' I can contain at any one time and does not change (this is why a mage does not have to use up their PPE 'base' every time they cast a spell) the second PPE is the current 'tally' of those 'energy points' which fluctuates all the time.

So since it only says PPE... the question remains. Is that the PPE that doesn't change or the PPE that does change? As both of them are internal energy, both are PPE, and both can be detected.

See, this isn't what you'd said, you said there is no differential between PPE. Meaning we have one number that changes between a maximum and minimal value but only the number exists in canon, you went to a lot of trouble to say things and make an argument that you have yet again changed to suit your needs. By this point your arguing doesn't matter because you've changed it from "Theres is no base PPE" to "There is a base PPE but its just not named that so your wrong" and back again. Your arguing by manipulating grammar instead of using a set of facts or hypothoses to determine a potential outcome.

PPE is one value,the amount of energy you may use. If you expend it you have less, you can regain more over time to a cap. Since the cap is NOT PPE then that means that your PPE is a non set value that may vary, potentially bringing it below the threshold for a dog boy to detect.

[Axelmania]

An entirely different power "identical in basic function and principal."

That is a fake quote. RUE 145 does not have a period after "principle", it continues on to an eventual "except" which means it is NOT identical in basic function or basic principal, since there is an exception: what it targets. It is a higher sensitivity to supernatural targets.

Also rather illuminating for this discussion, because the ability to sense supernatural beings includes the ability to "recognize practioners and creatures of magic by the large amount of PPE they possess, regardless of how they may disguise themselves."

RMB 105 was more concise, it would be good to review that to understand what the power does before getting distracted by Ultimate prose.

The power's title clearly specifies "supernatural". Some supernatural beings can also be practitioners/creatures of magic, like dragons.

So an ability that is ostensibly titled "sense supernatural beings" clearly includes the ability to sense non-supernatural beings. This extends to the point that the ability to "Sense Supernatural Beings" allows them to detect wizards or creatures of magic who are invisible!

It doesn't say the wizards could be non-supernatural.

the text of power #3 indicates that, despite the title, it applies to non-supernatural being as well

Nope. Doesn't say "all" practitioners of magic. It's easier to sense supernatural beings who are also practicing magic, thus the +1000ft to range.

[eliakon]

No my PPE stat has not changed.
If my PPE score (the so called 'base') is 136 then I can spend all 136 PPE points and still have 136 PPE. They are just empty.
Thus I still have 136 PPE even if I can currently spend 0 PPE points. The first PPE is the amount of energy points' I can contain at any one time and does not change (this is why a mage does not have to use up their PPE 'base' every time they cast a spell) the second PPE is the current 'tally' of those 'energy points' which fluctuates all the time.

So since it only says PPE... the question remains. Is that the PPE that doesn't change or the PPE that does change? As both of them are internal energy, both are PPE, and both can be detected.

See, this isn't what you'd said, you said there is no differential between PPE. Meaning we have one number that changes between a maximum and minimal value but only the number exists in canon, you went to a lot of trouble to say things and make an argument that you have yet again changed to suit your needs. By this point your arguing doesn't matter because you've changed it from "Theres is no base PPE" to "There is a base PPE but its just not named that so your wrong" and back again. Your arguing by manipulating grammar instead of using a set of facts or hypothoses to determine a potential outcome.

PPE is one value,the amount of energy you may use. If you expend it you have less, you can regain more over time to a cap. Since the cap is NOT PPE then that means that your PPE is a non set value that may vary, potentially bringing it below the threshold for a dog boy to detect.

*Sigh*
Let me try again
When we see in a book someone who is tapped out they will have something like PPE 85, but only 22 available.
Their PPE never changed just their PPE...
Basically there are TWO different things that have the same name.
Your PPE score never changes. Just like your HP or SDC don't change when you take wounds.
You lose the 'use' of them... but you still have that many HP or SDC or what have you as a stat.
The STAT doesnt change just how much of the 'pool within' the stat changes.

[dreicunan]

An entirely different power "identical in basic function and principal."

That is a fake quote. RUE 145 does not have a period after "principle", it continues on to an eventual "except" which means it is NOT identical in basic function or basic principal, since there is an exception: what it targets. It is a higher sensitivity to supernatural targets.

Please feel free go and look up how punctuation works in quotations so that you can understand why that was not a fake quote (I did mispell "principle," however, so my thanks for pointing that out).

Also rather illuminating for this discussion, because the ability to sense supernatural beings includes the ability to "recognize practioners and creatures of magic by the large amount of PPE they possess, regardless of how they may disguise themselves."

RMB 105 was more concise, it would be good to review that to understand what the power does before getting distracted by Ultimate prose.

The power's title clearly specifies "supernatural". Some supernatural beings can also be practitioners/creatures of magic, like dragons.

Why would I go check out of date rules to see what the current rules mean?

You should review what supernatural creatures are, since in Palladium dragons are creatures of magic, not supernatural creatures.

So an ability that is ostensibly titled "sense supernatural beings" clearly includes the ability to sense non-supernatural beings. This extends to the point that the ability to "Sense Supernatural Beings" allows them to detect wizards or creatures of magic who are invisible!

It doesn't say the wizards could be non-supernatural.

It doesn't need to. The only reason to mention anyone else here would be if they weren't supernatural. Otherwise they'd already be covered by the whole "sense supernatural" thing. Hence why it mentions wizards and creatures of magic here.

the text of power #3 indicates that, despite the title, it applies to non-supernatural being as well

Nope. Doesn't say "all" practitioners of magic. It's easier to sense supernatural beings who are also practicing magic, thus the +1000ft to range.

The fact that it mentions "creatures of magic" alone makes my point for me.

[Axelmania]

When we see in a book someone who is tapped out they will have something like PPE 85, but only 22 available.
Their PPE never changed just their PPE...
Basically there are TWO different things that have the same name.
Your PPE score never changes. Just like your HP or SDC don't change when you take wounds.
You lose the 'use' of them... but you still have that many HP or SDC or what have you as a stat.
The STAT doesnt change just how much of the 'pool within' the stat changes.

We have current PPE and maximum PPE. The problem is that it's not necessarily clear whether some things refer to cPPE or mPPE.

You should review what supernatural creatures are, since in Palladium dragons are creatures of magic, not supernatural creatures.

Dragons are both. RUE 146

"when a supernatural being is using psionic powers or magic, and when the being is a Demon Lord, Alien Intelligence, god or dragon"

Here "being" is clearly a shortening of "supernatural beings" and dragons are included in the list of supernatural beings.

So an ability that is ostensibly titled "sense supernatural beings" clearly includes the ability to sense non-supernatural beings. This extends to the point that the ability to "Sense Supernatural Beings" allows them to detect wizards or creatures of magic who are invisible!

It doesn't say the wizards could be non-supernatural.

It doesn't need to. The only reason to mention anyone else here would be if they weren't supernatural. Otherwise they'd already be covered by the whole "sense supernatural" thing. Hence why it mentions wizards and creatures of magic here.

I already explained the reason for this: supernatural beings of lesser power are normally sensed at 100ft/level and 35%+5%/level.

Using magic or psionics makes them as easy to detect as more powerful creatures, +1000 feet to range and a superior 70%+3%/level.

That is why supernatural beings also being practitioners of magic is relevant, because practicing magic will make them easier to detect, even if they aren't that powerful.

The fact that it mentions "creatures of magic" alone makes my point for me.

No it doesn't. SB/CoM are not mutually exclusive.

I realize you're probably going to point to RUE 276's definition of CoM and RUE 277's definition of SB.

The problem is that RUE 277's definition of Supernatural Being is completely inconsistent with Palladium's general usage of the term.

If you believe RUE 277 then ALL supernatural beings are immortal. RUE 146 specifies Brodkil and Gargoyle though.

Dark Conversions 86 doesn't say anything about that. You see "immortal, until destroyed" for things like the Goqua, but not for Gargoyles.

DB10p35 has the same information, yet page 34 says:

This relegates them to the category of "Sub-Demons" - minor supernatural beings less powerful than Lesser Demons

DB10 was printed in 2007, after RUE, so it over-rides anything in it.

Thus DB10 has decanonized RUE 277's definition of supernatural beings. It no longer applies.

[dreicunan]

You should review what supernatural creatures are, since in Palladium dragons are creatures of magic, not supernatural creatures.

Dragons are both. RUE 146

"when a supernatural being is using psionic powers or magic, and when the being is a Demon Lord, Alien Intelligence, god or dragon"

Here "being" is clearly a shortening of "supernatural beings" and dragons are included in the list of supernatural beings.

No, being is clearly not a shortening, because the beings include dragons, whom we know are creatures of magic and not supernatural beings.

So an ability that is ostensibly titled "sense supernatural beings" clearly includes the ability to sense non-supernatural beings. This extends to the point that the ability to "Sense Supernatural Beings" allows them to detect wizards or creatures of magic who are invisible!

It doesn't say the wizards could be non-supernatural.

It doesn't need to. The only reason to mention anyone else here would be if they weren't supernatural. Otherwise they'd already be covered by the whole "sense supernatural" thing. Hence why it mentions wizards and creatures of magic here.

I already explained the reason for this: supernatural beings of lesser power are normally sensed at 100ft/level and 35%+5%/level.

Using magic or psionics makes them as easy to detect as more powerful creatures, +1000 feet to range and a superior 70%+3%/level.

That is why supernatural beings also being practitioners of magic is relevant, because practicing magic will make them easier to detect, even if they aren't that powerful.

Being a wizard is is not a prerequisite for being detected for using a magical ability. Also, you are utterly ignoring the context and structure of the entire entry if you think think that a sentence about detecting invisible wizards and creatures of magic is in there to let you know that the later sentence about detecting active magic use actually means what the sentence already clearly says.

The fact that it mentions "creatures of magic" alone makes my point for me.

No it doesn't. SB/CoM are not mutually exclusive.

Palladium disagrees with you.

I realize you're probably going to point to RUE 276's definition of CoM and RUE 277's definition of SB.

The problem is that RUE 277's definition of Supernatural Being is completely inconsistent with Palladium's general usage of the term.

If you believe RUE 277 then ALL supernatural beings are immortal. RUE 146 specifies Brodkil and Gargoyle though.

Dark Conversions 86 doesn't say anything about that. You see "immortal, until destroyed" for things like the Goqua, but not for Gargoyles.

DB10p35 has the same information, yet page 34 says:

This relegates them to the category of "Sub-Demons" - minor supernatural beings less powerful than Lesser Demons

DB10 was printed in 2007, after RUE, so it over-rides anything in it.

Thus DB10 has decanonized RUE 277's definition of supernatural beings. It no longer applies.

Go read the last paragraph in the entry on creatures of magic again in RUE. You are clearly still one of the many on whom the distinction between creatures of magic and supernatural creatures is lost. Also, Palladium choosing to expand the definition of Supernatural Beings to include non-immortal sub-demons does not mean that the definition of creatures of magic has changed. That makes aboutbas much sense as claiming that if the definition of lizard is expanded to include serpents, then hamburgers are a vegetable. In other words, it doesn't follow at all.

[Warwolf]

Ahem... a little clarification from, well, the guy who writes this stuff these days:

First of all, Nightbane are NOT supernatural in Facade form. In fact, even their aura appears almost identical to a normal human aura. There are only very minute differences that would not likely be noticed without intense scrutiny (nigh-on impossible to tell in a crowd, at a distance, or by a brief glance).

In regards to Psi-Hounds, while they could theoretically detect the high level of "psychic energy" a 'Bane might have that wouldn't be enough to automatically single them out as an enemy. After all, it is never stated that a Psi-Hound can distinguish between the two. That means that a Nightbane in Facade might be taken for a human psychic. Now, if that same Nightbane were to use a Talent while in Facade form, it could certainly be detected (and then possibly scrutinized by psychic scent).

Oh, and even with these clarifications it should go without saying that G.M.s are free to reach a different conclusion if it fits their game better. I know I would be reluctant to let a Nightbane into my Rifts game just given how powerful they can be in M.D. environs.

Hope that helps.

[Axelmania]

DB10p35 has the same information, yet page 34 says:

This relegates them to the category of "Sub-Demons" - minor supernatural beings less powerful than Lesser Demons

DB10 was printed in 2007, after RUE, so it over-rides anything in it.

Thus DB10 has decanonized RUE 277's definition of supernatural beings. It no longer applies.

Go read the last paragraph in the entry on creatures of magic again in RUE. You are clearly still one of the many on whom the distinction between creatures of magic and supernatural creatures is lost. Also, Palladium choosing to expand the definition of Supernatural Beings to include non-immortal sub-demons does not mean that the definition of creatures of magic has changed. That makes aboutbas much sense as claiming that if the definition of lizard is expanded to include serpents, then hamburgers are a vegetable. In other words, it doesn't follow at all.

What RUE 277 said is now irrelevant, Hades35 was published after it and overrides it.

277 is no longer canon, 35 shows that supernatural creatures are no longer necessarily immortal.

This means that dragons can be supernatural creatures. Specifics override generalizations.

[dreicunan]

DB10p35 has the same information, yet page 34 says:

This relegates them to the category of "Sub-Demons" - minor supernatural beings less powerful than Lesser Demons

DB10 was printed in 2007, after RUE, so it over-rides anything in it.

Thus DB10 has decanonized RUE 277's definition of supernatural beings. It no longer applies.

Go read the last paragraph in the entry on creatures of magic again in RUE. You are clearly still one of the many on whom the distinction between creatures of magic and supernatural creatures is lost. Also, Palladium choosing to expand the definition of Supernatural Beings to include non-immortal sub-demons does not mean that the definition of creatures of magic has changed. That makes aboutbas much sense as claiming that if the definition of lizard is expanded to include serpents, then hamburgers are a vegetable. In other words, it doesn't follow at all.

What RUE 277 said is now irrelevant, Hades35 was published after it and overrides it.

277 is no longer canon, 35 shows that supernatural creatures are no longer necessarily immortal.

This means that dragons can be supernatural creatures. Specifics override generalizations.

See my previous post pointing out how ludicrous it is to argue that because the definition of Supernatural creatures has been expanded the definition of creature of magic has been changed. Dragons are not supernatural creatures, as is made abundantly clear by Palladium.

[eliakon]

Ahem... a little clarification from, well, the guy who writes this stuff these days:

First of all, Nightbane are NOT supernatural in Facade form. In fact, even their aura appears almost identical to a normal human aura. There are only very minute differences that would not likely be noticed without intense scrutiny (nigh-on impossible to tell in a crowd, at a distance, or by a brief glance).

In regards to Psi-Hounds, while they could theoretically detect the high level of "psychic energy" a 'Bane might have that wouldn't be enough to automatically single them out as an enemy. After all, it is never stated that a Psi-Hound can distinguish between the two. That means that a Nightbane in Facade might be taken for a human psychic. Now, if that same Nightbane were to use a Talent while in Facade form, it could certainly be detected (and then possibly scrutinized by psychic scent).

Oh, and even with these clarifications it should go without saying that G.M.s are free to reach a different conclusion if it fits their game better. I know I would be reluctant to let a Nightbane into my Rifts game just given how powerful they can be in M.D. environs.

Hope that helps.

Can you get this put in an offical FAQ someplace then please?
This is a rather significant ability as it means they are immune to several spells and powers, and it is something that should be explicitly spelled out as being possesed instead of just being assumed.
When you make this FAQ. Please adress the specific issues of:
-the fact that being a nightbane means that their PPE can not be detected by PPE sensing abilities
-the fact that Dark Conversions is being retconned and they are NOT supernatural creatures in their facade form.
-anything else that is not obvious.
-And if you are canonizing the statement that PPE and ISP can not be told apart by sensing powers... well that needs to be put in a FAQ as well. Since right now PPE is classed as magic and ISP is classed as psyichic. So making a canon ruling that they are both indistinguishable psychic powers is pretty major.


While it may be obvious to you as the author... powers that are not spelled out in the book but just 'assumed to be there obviously'... well they dont work because they are not actually in the game. Thus debates like this one.

[Axelmania]

Dragons are not supernatural creatures, as is made abundantly clear by Palladium.

You mean like how they make it clear elementals aren't supernatural? All depends on where you look.

[dreicunan]

Dragons are not supernatural creatures, as is made abundantly clear by Palladium.

You mean like how they make it clear elementals aren't supernatural? All depends on where you look.

I'm not talking about elementals here, am I. I'm talking about the creature used as the poster child for creatures of magic, dragons, the ones who would tell you that they have more in common with humans than with supernatural beings and would snarl at the suggestion of anything else (RUE p. 276).

[Warwolf]

Can you get this put in an offical FAQ someplace then please?
This is a rather significant ability as it means they are immune to several spells and powers, and it is something that should be explicitly spelled out as being possesed instead of just being assumed.
When you make this FAQ. Please adress the specific issues of:
-the fact that being a nightbane means that their PPE can not be detected by PPE sensing abilities
-the fact that Dark Conversions is being retconned and they are NOT supernatural creatures in their facade form.
-anything else that is not obvious.
-And if you are canonizing the statement that PPE and ISP can not be told apart by sensing powers... well that needs to be put in a FAQ as well. Since right now PPE is classed as magic and ISP is classed as psyichic. So making a canon ruling that they are both indistinguishable psychic powers is pretty major.


While it may be obvious to you as the author... powers that are not spelled out in the book but just 'assumed to be there obviously'... well they dont work because they are not actually in the game. Thus debates like this one.

First, I had nothing to do with writing the description of the Dog Boys' sensing abilities. I read it and interpreted it as spelled out above. That ability doesn't say "P.P.E." it says "psychic energy." Therefore, never did I say that Nightbanes' P.P.E. cannot be sensed.

Point of fact: Since I didn't write any of the material that I drew my reasoning from, this answer has nothing to do with me being "the author" other than my interpretation of said material obviously informs any new material that is written (and apparently carries a certain weight with the fans/players).

Second, by my reading of Nightbane Main Book, Nightbane cannot POSSIBLY be supernatural in Facade form. If they were, Hounds would be able to sense them, ferret them out, and slaughter them (take a look at the description of the Hound if you don't believe me). Even going back through Dark Conversions I see nothing stating that they are considered supernatural in their Facade. In Morphus form, of course, but not Facade.

With that said, no worries, I'll make sure to try and spell out very explicitly in the near future that Nightbane are only supernatural in Morphus form, but that high levels of P.P.E. can be detected (either as "psychic energy" or "P.P.E." depending on the wording of the ability) as a clue to them potentially being Nightbane... or a mage... or some other kind of anomaly.

[The Beast]

Dragons are not supernatural creatures, as is made abundantly clear by Palladium.

You mean like how they make it clear elementals aren't supernatural? All depends on where you look.

Then by all means show us where it states dragons are supernatural beings. Every time I've looked at them PB always made a point to say they're Creatures of Magic.

[Axelmania]

Rifts:

102 "the mutant dog is much more sensitive to the very distinctive psychic scent of the supernatural" .. "includes demons, vampires, and dragons."

Vampire Kingdoms:

pg 20 "most supernatural or magic creatures, like dragons"
pg 37 "Dragons are supernatural beings and creatures of magic"

Atlantis

pg 13 "At first, only a small number of supernatural beings, including dragons, were attracted to Earth by its high degree of mystic energy"
pg 33 "Most scholars in the arts of magic will agree that dragons, like the Splugorth, are supernatural beings who are masters of magic and dimensional travel."
pg 68 "Individual dragons, godlings, elementals, demon lords, greater demons, and other supernatural beings sometimes ally themselves with/or serve the Splugorth for a variety of reasons;"
pg 127 "Greater supernatural beings, including gods, godlings, ancient dragons, spirits of light, greater elementals, greater demons and demon lords are needed to create the most powerful rune weapons."
pg 132 "The weapon requires a greater supernatural being like an ancient dragon, god, greater elemental, demon lord, etc., and is the most powerful but least common of all the rune statues."

Africa pg 135:

"This army is considered to be an elite force and consists entirely of supernatural beings"
"High Ranking officers and commanders are raksashas, baalrogs, mindolars, goquas, sowkis, nightowls, dragons , or experienced gargoyle lords or mages

Phase World:

pg 99 "The only exceptions are supernatural creatures like dragons, demons and the promethean race"

I can't recall if this continued past WB4/DB2, it seems to have fallen out of favor with a gravitation towards "creatures of magic", but it did happen.

[dreicunan]

Rifts:

102 "the mutant dog is much more sensitive to the very distinctive psychic scent of the supernatural" .. "includes demons, vampires, and dragons."

Vampire Kingdoms:

pg 20 "most supernatural or magic creatures, like dragons"
pg 37 "Dragons are supernatural beings and creatures of magic"

Atlantis

pg 13 "At first, only a small number of supernatural beings, including dragons, were attracted to Earth by its high degree of mystic energy"
pg 33 "Most scholars in the arts of magic will agree that dragons, like the Splugorth, are supernatural beings who are masters of magic and dimensional travel."
pg 68 "Individual dragons, godlings, elementals, demon lords, greater demons, and other supernatural beings sometimes ally themselves with/or serve the Splugorth for a variety of reasons;"
pg 127 "Greater supernatural beings, including gods, godlings, ancient dragons, spirits of light, greater elementals, greater demons and demon lords are needed to create the most powerful rune weapons."
pg 132 "The weapon requires a greater supernatural being like an ancient dragon, god, greater elemental, demon lord, etc., and is the most powerful but least common of all the rune statues."

Africa pg 135:

"This army is considered to be an elite force and consists entirely of supernatural beings"
"High Ranking officers and commanders are raksashas, baalrogs, mindolars, goquas, sowkis, nightowls, dragons , or experienced gargoyle lords or mages

Phase World:

pg 99 "The only exceptions are supernatural creatures like dragons, demons and the promethean race"

I can't recall if this continued past WB4/DB2, it seems to have fallen out of favor with a gravitation towards "creatures of magic", but it did happen.

Yep, and was then retconned. Hence why dragons are listed as creatures of magic in Vampire Kingdoms Revised.

[Axelmania]

Omission isn't negation There probably is some kind of 'dragons are not supernatural' in one of the newer books, can't recall where through.

This is probably based on the whole 'supernatural creatures are immortals and don't reproduce' type thinking which seems to be leaking in, which causes a slew of problems like how to classify gurgoyles.

[dreicunan]

Omission isn't negation There probably is some kind of 'dragons are not supernatural' in one of the newer books, can't recall where through.

This is probably based on the whole 'supernatural creatures are immortals and don't reproduce' type thinking which seems to be leaking in, which causes a slew of problems like how to classify gurgoyles.

Yep, there sure is. Rue p. 276. I cited it earlier in the thread.

[Axelmania]

I've cited it before too, and pointed out that it's no longer canon since Dimension Book 10 and World Book 31 both negate it by still classifying gargoyles as supernatural beings and they still have limited lifespans and eggs.

This means that supernatural creatures can die of old age and lay eggs, so that is no longer a basis for disqualifying dragons.

[dreicunan]

I've cited it before too, and pointed out that it's no longer canon since Dimension Book 10 and World Book 31 both negate it by still classifying gargoyles as supernatural beings and they still have limited lifespans and eggs.

This means that supernatural creatures can die of old age and lay eggs, so that is no longer a basis for disqualifying dragons.

And you are still 100% wrong on that argument, as I've pointed out to you in the past. Expanding the definition of Supernatural beings to include sub-demons does not mean that dragons are suddenly supernatural beings. Dragons are not sub-demons.

[Axelmania]

August 2005, RUE "Notable Game & Rifts Terms" pg 277 "Demons, Gods and Supernatural Beings":

All supernatural beings, be they gods or demons, are inhuman and immortal. They are not creatures of our Earth or reality, but the denizens of an alien reality. As such, they are not even part of our plane of existence and must somehow link themselves to our human dimension. Thus, when they are slain on Rifts Earth or any mortal world, they disintegrate or vanish like a ghost as if they never existed.

April 2010 World Book 31 (Triax 2):

pg 15 "After all, Gargoyles (and Brodkil) are lesser supernatural beings"
pg 24 "three Gargoyles survived long enough to get to the President inside his armored hover limousine speeding away to safety. One grabbed the limo and tore it open like it was made out of aluminum foil. Gunfire and mini-missiles from the cyborg defenders inside the vehicle blew the head of the monster off its shoulders as another snatched the limo from the dead creature's hands."

NG&RT is no longer canon, per Triax 2. Dead creatures who vanish like a ghost do not have hands.

Can someone remind me where there is a place which explicitly says dragons are not supernatural beings? I would like to know when that was published.

August 1998, Dragons and Gods pg 14, btw:

This also means that the claws, punches, kicks and bites of a dragon will do full damage to other supernatural beings, including other dragons, dyvals, demons, elementals, and the undead.

Or more recently, DB10 (August 2007) pg 195

Others are ruled by powerful supernatural creatures such as a dragon, or even a Gargoyle Lord or Mage

Pg 196 "Other Supernatural Creatures" is also interesting:

While Gurgoyles and their kin certainly dominate the forest, they are not the only supernatural creatures to call the Forest of Stone home.
Thousands of other creatures roam the forest, each trying to carve out their own little niche.
Thousands of evil Faerie Folk live within the confines of the Forest of Stone.
..
even a few dragons live in the forest
..
If another rumor is true, a small cabal of Lizard Mages are the leaders of a rogue Gurgoyle clan

Based on this, it isn't just dragons who are simultaneously both creatures of magic AND supernatural beings. This also applies to Faerie Folk and Lizard Mages.

Any word after that?

[dreicunan]

August 2005, RUE "Notable Game & Rifts Terms" pg 277 "Demons, Gods and Supernatural Beings":

All supernatural beings, be they gods or demons, are inhuman and immortal. They are not creatures of our Earth or reality, but the denizens of an alien reality. As such, they are not even part of our plane of existence and must somehow link themselves to our human dimension. Thus, when they are slain on Rifts Earth or any mortal world, they disintegrate or vanish like a ghost as if they never existed.

April 2010 World Book 31 (Triax 2):

pg 15 "After all, Gargoyles (and Brodkil) are lesser supernatural beings"
pg 24 "three Gargoyles survived long enough to get to the President inside his armored hover limousine speeding away to safety. One grabbed the limo and tore it open like it was made out of aluminum foil. Gunfire and mini-missiles from the cyborg defenders inside the vehicle blew the head of the monster off its shoulders as another snatched the limo from the dead creature's hands."

NG&RT is no longer canon, per Triax 2. Dead creatures who vanish like a ghost do not have hands.

Can someone remind me where there is a place which explicitly says dragons are not supernatural beings? I would like to know when that was published.

August 1998, Dragons and Gods pg 14, btw:

This also means that the claws, punches, kicks and bites of a dragon will do full damage to other supernatural beings, including other dragons, dyvals, demons, elementals, and the undead.

Or more recently, DB10 (August 2007) pg 195

Others are ruled by powerful supernatural creatures such as a dragon, or even a Gargoyle Lord or Mage

Pg 196 "Other Supernatural Creatures" is also interesting:

While Gurgoyles and their kin certainly dominate the forest, they are not the only supernatural creatures to call the Forest of Stone home.
Thousands of other creatures roam the forest, each trying to carve out their own little niche.
Thousands of evil Faerie Folk live within the confines of the Forest of Stone.
..
even a few dragons live in the forest
..
If another rumor is true, a small cabal of Lizard Mages are the leaders of a rogue Gurgoyle clan

Based on this, it isn't just dragons who are simultaneously both creatures of magic AND supernatural beings. This also applies to Faerie Folk and Lizard Mages.

Any word after that?

Yeah, I can direct you to a statement that unequivocally states that Dragons are not supernatural beings: RUE p. 276. You continue to demonstrate that you are one of the many people on whom the distinction is lost.

All of the evidence that you cite for the definition of Supernatural Being having had the definition expanded to include lesser supernatural beings that aren't immortal does nothing to prove that the definition of a creature of magic has changed. It hasn't. Dragons are creatures of magic, not supernatural beings.

No beings are simultaneously supernatural beings and creatures of magic. The phrase "supernatural creature" is not the technical term "supernatural being," so those latter quotes don't affect anything.

[Axelmania]

I can direct you to a statement that unequivocally states that Dragons are not supernatural beings:
RUE p. 276.
You continue to demonstrate that you are one of the many people on whom the distinction is lost.

"The distinction between creatures of magic and the supernatural is lost on many people" does not state that dragons are not supernatural, and it does not mean that creatures of magic cannot also be supernatural.

I can write "the distinction between apples and fruits is lost on many people" or "the distinction between insects and winged creatures is lost on many people" but does does not prevent overlap between the 2 things.

Pay attention to this:

"The main difference is that creatures of magic are mortals"

The "main difference" no longer exists. Gargoyles are also mortals, and they are supernatural beings. The 2 definitions you rely on from RUE 276-277 were decanonized by WB31/DB10

All of the evidence that you cite for the definition of Supernatural Being having had the definition expanded to include lesser supernatural beings that aren't immortal does nothing to prove that the definition of a creature of magic has changed. It hasn't. Dragons are creatures of magic, not supernatural beings.

The point is that the definition of supernatural being has changed, not that the definition of CoM has changed.

No beings are simultaneously supernatural beings and creatures of magic.

Source? How do we deal with published races who are explicitly both such as dragons, phantasms, phoenixi?

The phrase "supernatural creature" is not the technical term "supernatural being," so those latter quotes don't affect anything.

You're going to need more ammo if you want to argue that "creatures" are not "beings". If you think there is a meaningful difference, this would be worth its own thread.