Forums of the Megaverse®

Emperor Ryu wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:Not discussing Fantasy character generation over the Rifts character generation.

I'm pretty I remember you pointing out references from Fantasy settings for your arguments.

Well, I hope you understand that it is quite unproductive to argue about an RPG rule, that I am pretty sure of, most understood since day one, and didn't conceive any notions of it being broken.

dragonfett wrote:Actually, I have been trying to take that into account, but it honestly felt like to me that is what you were doing. As far as I can tell, the OP was wanting canonical rules on how to go about this, which no one has answered because you're not supposed to let an RCC take any OCC's. However, because of the way different authors took certain liberties with the term RCC, that is the most likely reason Kevin had to make that clarification in the RUE (the first logical opportunity to do so, really). But I do have to agree with you somewhat with how the rules have changed. The only rule that I can really think of of the top of my head that I do like that was introduced in the RUE was the fact that all spells of level 5 and lower only take one action to cast, so a LLW can't get interrupted while casting a simple Armor of Ithan or even a Globe of Daylight, but that is off topic.

When I first posted here, I merely explained what I understood to the original poster. And then, some members jumped on my explanation, like it was some sort of thing from beyond the grave, when it's actually how the RPG started, and still is so in my opinion. I pointed out where someone could possibly misinterpret them, and nobody didn't want to have it, and continued. So I stuck with my argument.

dragonfett wrote:The only thing that I can see as far as the op is concerned is that Conversion Book 1 (unrevised) implies that the only OCC's (note that it says OCC's and not OCC skills, meaning that the RCC get's all of their special abilities and the special abilities of the OCC, except where it is specifically noted in the OCC description, like the Psycho Stalker) that an RCC can take are noted in their description. I would have to dig out and take a look at how the Revised version states it before I call it definitive. I personally don't like how that's worded, but as far as anything canon goes, that is the best that I have found so far.

In each character generation, there is a primary and secondary skill set that applies to the O.C.C. for the R.C.C. to know, in addition to the skills naturally known for it. Having only the natural skill set doesn't tell you what new skills, or even how many new skills you can learn, when you level up as an R.C.C. R.C.C.s can choose an O.C.C. skill set. If the R.C.C. states that it can become a Ley Line Walker O.C.C., that means the abilities are the same for both the R.C.C. and the O.C.C. This doesn't mean an R.C.C. turns itself into an O.C.C. The R.C.C. is an R.C.C. The R.C.C. is primary. The R.C.C. will not become human. The O.C.C. is for the skill sets with the compatible abilities, as stated in the R.C.C.

keir451 wrote:Hey Ryu. All this fuss over nuthin' . First off; Heck Yeah the Palladium system is broken, that's partly why Kevin came out w/RUE.
But anyway, in this instance RCC is refering to a specific class that can only be held/obtained by a certain race because of that races abilities or some other racial reason. Case in point; the Omaguan Cats (yes it's old, but true). Only an Omaguan Cat can have one of their RCCs. Why? Because they're specific to the mutant cats from Omagua and their special abilities, no other mutant cat can be/have their RCCs.
Drewkitty is right tho' race (i.e.; Dwarf, Elf, Human, etc.) does not equal RCC.
As for multi classing; the only reference comes from Palladium Fantasy (no shock there, nearly half the game material is drawn from PF), and even that reference isn't all it's cracked up to be. Dragonfett is also correct, as far as the actual rules state, and the fact that it's a murky rule as well.

The Mutant Cats in World Book 6: South America, have different variations of R.C.C., based on their abilities. You look back at the different variations of canines in the Dog Boy R.C.C., and you have a list of different bonuses that are available. The Canine R.C.C. states that it can take up the skill sets of the Dog Boy R.C.C. The Mutant Cats R.C.C. cannot, because it doesn't state that they could change their abilities amongst themselves. Hence, why the Mutant Cats R.C.C. are in multiple types within the general species category of the feline. Which sort of makes since that dogs and cats are different from one another, in the first place.

In part, I don't think Palladium is a broken system, though I do admit, there are a few typos here and there. But it doesn't hinder the game play, nor cause any problems to figure out. It will always come down to interpretation, before starting a game.

keir451 wrote:Hey Ryu. All this fuss over nuthin' . First off; Heck Yeah the Palladium system is broken, that's partly why Kevin came out w/RUE.
But anyway, in this instance RCC is referring to a specific class that can only be held/obtained by a certain race because of that races abilities or some other racial reason. Case in point; the Omaguan Cats (yes it's old, but true). Only an Omaguan Cat can have one of their RCCs. Why? Because they're specific to the mutant cats from Omagua and their special abilities, no other mutant cat can be/have their RCCs.
..snip.

Emperor Ryu wrote

The Mutant Cats in World Book 6: South America, have different variations of R.C.C., based on their abilities. You look back at the different variations of canines in the Dog Boy R.C.C., and you have a list of different bonuses that are available. The Canine R.C.C. states that it can take up the skill sets of the Dog Boy R.C.C. The Mutant Cats R.C.C. cannot, because it doesn't state that they could change their abilities amongst themselves. Hence, why the Mutant Cats R.C.C. are in multiple types within the general species category of the feline. Which sort of makes since that dogs and cats are different from one another, in the first place.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:could you give me a link to that one so I can practice some necromancy on it....

Emperor Ryu wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:because the rules you cite are no longer valid.

They are still valid. And I do not consider Fantasy character generation over Rifts character generation, in the Rifts settings as stated in the books.

The length of time you have been playing does have merit as does length of time on the boards but it does not mean that you are infallible when comes to rules interpretation.

You have me confused with some one else if you think I am arguing for combining RCC and OCC. I was pointing out where the flaw was in the original post. (by being facetious in my post.)

keir451 wrote:Hey Ryu. All this fuss over nuthin' . First off; Heck Yeah the Palladium system is broken, that's partly why Kevin came out w/RUE.

Emperor Ryu wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:No the RMB is no longer readily available. The RUE is new Main Book Its rules are the ones that all new players will most likely be using; therefore the RMB is no longer current. To insist other wise is only wishful thinking.

Plus you have a Quote from the RUE made by the creator and publisher defining exactly what an RCC is and what it is not.

Yes, . . . the Rifts Original Book is still, and will always be available for purchase. Either, paperback, hardcover, and now, PDF format.
you are going to have a hard time proving that... they are no longer in print.

As far as I am concern, until I get myself the Ultimate Edition Book, and see for myself. My argument still stands. You can disagree with the Rifts settings if you like. And go with the Fantasy settings. It's your game, and most definitely not mine.
in that case your argument is wrong and will continue to be until that day. Canon rules are the and always will be the most recent published set. accept this or dont but suffice it to say that any thing else you post will refuted as House Rules only until you accept the most recent rules set.
Oh, and that quote from the Ultimate Edition, is quite very similar to how it is stated in the original book too. nope not even close. nice try though... I have every book palladium has ever published, just re-read the description.

Damian Magecraft wrote:Elf, Dwarf, etc.. are given as races available for play in Rifts: conversion book one. Your argument that they are not valid Rifts races is spurious. If you continue to insist that the Denizens of these boards know less than you

I didn't say those R.C.C.s were being rejected. Where did you get that idea from? And why are you assuming I know more than everybody else on this board? This is getting even more weirder now.

Emperor Ryu wrote:And I do not consider Fantasy character generation over Rifts character generation, in the Rifts settings as stated in the books.

Emperor Ryu wrote:You can disagree with the Rifts settings if you like. And go with the Fantasy settings.It's your game, and most definitely not mine.

Ninjabunny wrote:The original Rifts main book is no longer the cannon rule set for rifts, it's R;UE. Plain and simple like it or not, you can state otherwise but you are flat out wrong and that's that. And I am done . DM is correct by the way.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Emperor Ryu wrote:You can disagree with the Rifts settings if you like. And go with the Fantasy settings.It's your game, and most definitely not mine.

you have already hit several ignore lists, keep making statements like these and soon no one will want to interact with you. (nor will they consider what you have to say as being accurate ever.)

According from the quote from the Ultimate Edition, there is no change from the original book on this subject.

Inhuman

in·hu·man   
[in-hyoo-muhn or, often, -yoo-] Show IPA
–adjective
1. lacking qualities of sympathy, pity, warmth, compassion, or the like; cruel; brutal: an inhuman master.
2. not suited for human beings.
3. not human.

Monster
mon·ster   
[mon-ster] Show IPA
–noun
1. a legendary animal combining features of animal and human form or having the forms of various animals in combination, as a centaur, griffin, or sphinx.
2. any creature so ugly or monstrous as to frighten people.
3. any animal or human grotesquely deviating from the normal shape, behavior, or character.
4. a person who excites horror by wickedness, cruelty, etc.
5. any animal or thing huge in size.
6. Biology .
a. an animal or plant of abnormal form or structure, as from marked malformation or the absence of certain parts or organs.
b. a grossly anomalous fetus or infant, esp. one that is not viable.
7. anything unnatural or monstrous.

–adjective
8. huge; enormous; monstrous: a monster tree.

Humanoid
hu·man·oid   
[hyoo-muh-noid or, often, yoo-] Show IPA
–adjective
1. having human characteristics or form; resembling human beings.
–noun
2. a humanoid being: to search for humanoids in outer space.

Emperor Ryu wrote:

dragonfett wrote:Emperor Ryu, suffice it to say that we agree to disagree on this topic, so let's just leave it at that. I have been playing since about 2001, so I got to learn everyone else's rules interpretations and house rules that they have been using for years at that time. That and the fact that I started off playing D&D first which no doubt influenced my interpretations of terminology. While you and your group started off with that definition of RCC that you keep quoting, I started playing Rifts being told that RCC means something else and that has been ingrained in my brain ever since.

Indeed. I just wish this fiasco of "You're wrong.", and "I'm right." child's play would end. Neither of us is going to be correct, because it's just simply a tangible RPG to begin with. We both can agree that we are all passionate with our game plays and understanding. As long as we remain civil and respectful, we can still get along just fine.

Damian Magecraft wrote:you are going to have a hard time proving that... they are no longer in print.

That doesn't mean it's not available to get.

Damian Magecraft wrote:in that case your argument is wrong and will continue to be until that day.

Not from what it states in the books.

Damian Magecraft wrote:nope not even close. nice try though... I have every book palladium has ever published, just re-read the description.

Perhaps if you just focused on the Rifts section, you won't be so confused when you mix other settings outside of the main Rifts settings.

Damian Magecraft wrote:we are not assuming that. You are. By the very way you post.

Ahhh, no. Are you trying to put words in my mouth now?

Damian Magecraft wrote:from here.

Perhaps you could look back on the thread again?

Ninjabunny wrote:The original Rifts main book is no longer the cannon rule set for rifts, it's R;UE. Plain and simple like it or not, you can state otherwise but you are flat out wrong and that's that. And I am done . DM is correct by the way.

According from the quote from the Ultimate Edition, there is no change from the original book on this subject.

Ninjabunny wrote:I just added him to the foe's list I'm just tired of him. Sad only two people ever and it's for the simple thing of ignoring rules books and scream they are right.

Emperor Ryu wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:Ok I have scolded others for doing this...Do not quote me out of context. You have done so repeatedly. Doing so proves you are unwilling to debate me intellectually. And Besides it is the lowest form of flame baiting.

You do understand that I can easily scroll up and make reference to my mind, while still keeping within the context of the discussion, without having to quote the same thing, over and over and over again, and keep it on a civil level in my postings, right?

Shark_Force wrote:at some point, when a particular individual demonstrates an inability to actually have a discussion with any sort of intellectual honesty (that is, they simply disregard anything anyone else says and declare that they themselves are the only ones who can be truly right, based on the logic that they must be right because they said so), it is time to stop wasting your own time attempting to have a discussion with them. you may not accomplish anything particularly great by, say, watching paint dry instead, but it is most probable that you will find it to be a less frustrating experience, because after all.... sooner or later, the paint will dry, but the person you're attempting to have a discussion with is not likely to ever acknowledge your points beyond dismissing them from the possibility of being valid on the basis that you aren't kneeling on the ground worshipping that person.

or, to put it another way: don't feed the troll.

(and yes, whether the person intends to be a troll or not, they're being a troll)

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:at some point, when a particular individual demonstrates an inability to actually have a discussion with any sort of intellectual honesty (that is, they simply disregard anything anyone else says and declare that they themselves are the only ones who can be truly right, based on the logic that they must be right because they said so), it is time to stop wasting your own time attempting to have a discussion with them. you may not accomplish anything particularly great by, say, watching paint dry instead, but it is most probable that you will find it to be a less frustrating experience, because after all.... sooner or later, the paint will dry, but the person you're attempting to have a discussion with is not likely to ever acknowledge your points beyond dismissing them from the possibility of being valid on the basis that you aren't kneeling on the ground worshipping that person.

or, to put it another way: don't feed the troll.

(and yes, whether the person intends to be a troll or not, they're being a troll)

well said.

Jorel wrote:I have to say, if that many differing opinions all agree on this one subject, and no one is on your side, then you probably aren't right. That is unless you are making the rules in your own home. I suggest anyone confused about the change in RCC status get themselves a copy of Rifts: Ultimate Edition and read up on the newest clarified set of rules.

Emperor Ryu wrote:

Jorel wrote:I suggest anyone confused about the change in RCC status get themselves a copy of Rifts: Ultimate Edition and read up on the newest clarified set of rules.

Besides, there really isn't much change in the rules from the Original Book anyways.

dragonfett wrote:Jorel, he knows some of the specific terms because I have quoted them, verbatim, from the RUE, and all he did was twist it around to fit his own views. I was hoping to at least get him to acknowledge that other views (and more popular views, if this thread is any indication) are just as valid, but he won't even do that.

dragonfett wrote:Jorel, he knows some of the specific terms because I have quoted them, verbatim, from the RUE, and all he did was twist it around to fit his own views. I was hoping to at least get him to acknowledge that other views (and more popular views, if this thread is any indication) are just as valid, but he won't even do that.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

dragonfett wrote:Jorel, he knows some of the specific terms because I have quoted them, verbatim, from the RUE, and all he did was twist it around to fit his own views. I was hoping to at least get him to acknowledge that other views (and more popular views, if this thread is any indication) are just as valid, but he won't even do that.

is he still going on about that?

ok for those of you who are not Ryu.
RUE is the source of the definition of an RCC.
An RCC is a being whose powers and skills are so ingrained as to make the being a class unto itself. Dragons are the only example that exist in the RUE.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

dragonfett wrote:Jorel, he knows some of the specific terms because I have quoted them, verbatim, from the RUE, and all he did was twist it around to fit his own views. I was hoping to at least get him to acknowledge that other views (and more popular views, if this thread is any indication) are just as valid, but he won't even do that.

is he still going on about that?

ok for those of you who are not Ryu.
RUE is the source of the definition of an RCC.
An RCC is a being whose powers and skills are so ingrained as to make the being a class unto itself. Dragons are the only example that exist in the RUE.

So now it is skills specifically an not just a power set or skill selection that is only available to a single species? So are there any others that would classify anymore?

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

dragonfett wrote:Jorel, he knows some of the specific terms because I have quoted them, verbatim, from the RUE, and all he did was twist it around to fit his own views. I was hoping to at least get him to acknowledge that other views (and more popular views, if this thread is any indication) are just as valid, but he won't even do that.

is he still going on about that?

ok for those of you who are not Ryu.
RUE is the source of the definition of an RCC.
An RCC is a being whose powers and skills are so ingrained as to make the being a class unto itself. Dragons are the only example that exist in the RUE.

So now it is skills specifically an not just a power set or skill selection that is only available to a single species? So are there any others that would classify anymore?

Abub wrote:Well, I think SDC should be able to.... that 1 to 100 still makes the attempt pretty pointless.

Shinitenshi wrote:

Emperor Ryu wrote:

Jorel wrote:I understand your choice to remain blind in the face of obvious truth, after all ignorance is bliss.

Are you implying that the quotes provided from the Ultimate Edition, in this thread, is false?

I am sitting here looking at both books, side by side and they are not the same. I don't understand how you can say two things are the same if you don't own one of them.

LostOne wrote:Wow, this debate with Emperor Ryu's stubborness ceased to gain any new ground and stopped being interesting pages ago. I'm unsubscribing, I suggest everyone else do too.

Jorel wrote:I still say he is a fool, and ignorant for ignoring what is clearly the most recent rules clarification. If you don't understand that Damian, then I'm sorry for you also.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Jorel wrote:I still say he is a fool, and ignorant for ignoring what is clearly the most recent rules clarification. If you don't understand that Damian, then I'm sorry for you also.

ok if I did not know better I would think you are under the impression that I am on ryu's side...
But surely you have been reading the same posts I have?

Jorel wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Jorel wrote:I still say he is a fool, and ignorant for ignoring what is clearly the most recent rules clarification. If you don't understand that Damian, then I'm sorry for you also.

ok if I did not know better I would think you are under the impression that I am on ryu's side...
But surely you have been reading the same posts I have?

Dude, if you can't read sarcasm without an emoticon, you might not be that far off your mark.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Jorel wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Jorel wrote:I still say he is a fool, and ignorant for ignoring what is clearly the most recent rules clarification. If you don't understand that Damian, then I'm sorry for you also.

ok if I did not know better I would think you are under the impression that I am on ryu's side...
But surely you have been reading the same posts I have?

Dude, if you can't read sarcasm without an emoticon, you might not be that far off your mark.

the printed word does not convey tone or inflection well... Hence the creation of emotes... Yeah I suspected as much, but old geek reflexes are hard to break...

Emperor Ryu wrote:In regards to this topic, my answer still is, . . . an R.C.C. is for species who are not 100% human in the RPG.

Shark_Force wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

dragonfett wrote:Jorel, he knows some of the specific terms because I have quoted them, verbatim, from the RUE, and all he did was twist it around to fit his own views. I was hoping to at least get him to acknowledge that other views (and more popular views, if this thread is any indication) are just as valid, but he won't even do that.

is he still going on about that?

ok for those of you who are not Ryu.
RUE is the source of the definition of an RCC.
An RCC is a being whose powers and skills are so ingrained as to make the being a class unto itself. Dragons are the only example that exist in the RUE.

So now it is skills specifically an not just a power set or skill selection that is only available to a single species? So are there any others that would classify anymore?

there are actually a fair number. most of them are supernatural beings, though. there's probably a few others (i think there's a few sentient insect races that would qualify as well?)

but for example, i would say that most were-creatures are probably appropriate as an RCC. they don't learn their magic and/or psionics, they just know them inherently.

Abub wrote:Well, I think SDC should be able to.... that 1 to 100 still makes the attempt pretty pointless.