Forums of the Megaverse®

Nightmask wrote:Yes you are, aren't you? Since 'play it my way' isn't an idea, telling your GM to always give you advance warning so you can plan for everything. 'It's not broken you're just playing it wrong' isn't a useful idea either, that's just you telling people the only way to play is your way.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Nightmask wrote:Yes you are, aren't you? Since 'play it my way' isn't an idea, telling your GM to always give you advance warning so you can plan for everything. 'It's not broken you're just playing it wrong' isn't a useful idea either, that's just you telling people the only way to play is your way.

people who do great with Magic are the ones who can think quickly, act quicker and knows the spells, My ex-wife #2 was great about that, she upset a few older players with the way she used it, like she played magic for years. then you get the opposite the ones who try and fail every time and cry about the system.

Nightmask wrote:

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Nightmask wrote:Yes you are, aren't you? Since 'play it my way' isn't an idea, telling your GM to always give you advance warning so you can plan for everything. 'It's not broken you're just playing it wrong' isn't a useful idea either, that's just you telling people the only way to play is your way.

people who do great with Magic are the ones who can think quickly, act quicker and knows the spells, My ex-wife #2 was great about that, she upset a few older players with the way she used it, like she played magic for years. then you get the opposite the ones who try and fail every time and cry about the system.

And there are those who have legitimate concerns that get dismissed out of hand by those who are just fine with things. See, there are more options than just 'you're great and adaptable' and 'you're just pitiful and you blame the system for your badness', just because someone has issues doesn't mean that it's because they're just bad at it and blaming the system. That's just an unsupported opinion of yours dismissing their concerns.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Nightmask wrote:Yes you are, aren't you? Since 'play it my way' isn't an idea, telling your GM to always give you advance warning so you can plan for everything. 'It's not broken you're just playing it wrong' isn't a useful idea either, that's just you telling people the only way to play is your way.

people who do great with Magic are the ones who can think quickly, act quicker and knows the spells, My ex-wife #2 was great about that, she upset a few older players with the way she used it, like she played magic for years. then you get the opposite the ones who try and fail every time and cry about the system.

And there are those who have legitimate concerns that get dismissed out of hand by those who are just fine with things. See, there are more options than just 'you're great and adaptable' and 'you're just pitiful and you blame the system for your badness', just because someone has issues doesn't mean that it's because they're just bad at it and blaming the system. That's just an unsupported opinion of yours dismissing their concerns.

Not I notice this in over thirty years of role playing games and thru different gaming stsyems, its normally the player , who gets or doesnt

Nightmask wrote:
Or could be the GM doing a poor job and criticizing the player for his failure to present things in an understandable fashion. GM's are as likely to be the problem as a player in such a case, and they too often let 'I'm always right' go to their head because they aren't.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Nightmask wrote:
Or could be the GM doing a poor job and criticizing the player for his failure to present things in an understandable fashion. GM's are as likely to be the problem as a player in such a case, and they too often let 'I'm always right' go to their head because they aren't.

or a person not able see the fault in themselves but rather blame the system is broken because they cant ever think maybe the problem is with themselves, but hey we dont game togethor so ,

Nightmask wrote:

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Nightmask wrote:
Or could be the GM doing a poor job and criticizing the player for his failure to present things in an understandable fashion. GM's are as likely to be the problem as a player in such a case, and they too often let 'I'm always right' go to their head because they aren't.

or a person not able see the fault in themselves but rather blame the system is broken because they cant ever think maybe the problem is with themselves, but hey we dont game togethor so ,

Yes that would be tedious, as you seem to feel everyone else is at fault and wrong from a need to defend the system because you exploit it well enough for yourself. Much like you think I've said the system was broken and must just be a bad player of a mage when neither is the case, I've simply noted that some disagree with the assertion that the system is perfect (it isn't, nothing is ) and ways of making it more workable for them. In disagreeing with you you automatically labeled me a disgruntled player because you don't consider any criticisms of the magic system as valid while never having seen me play. Really need to not be doing that, because while you're tossing those labels around you're racking up plenty of your own I'm sure you would consider to be quite unwarranted and unflattering. I don't know though, you might welcome all those labels for some odd reason and not mind them while slapping unwarranted and unflattering labels onto others.

Subjugator wrote:How do you fix any element of any RPG? You change it so it works for your group. *shrug* I learned about how effective a Magellan can be from a German guy at the Open House. I had been in the 'it needs to be fixed' camp for years until I saw this guy. Now I realize that it's not that the events must be packaged to allow planning. It's that the mage must package himself to be well situated for most of what comes up.

I still can't play images well in this system, but I can say that they can be played well. Carpet of adhesion is flat out broken. Magic net is malignant. Time slip? Evil. The list goes on and on.

The problem with asking for more damage, et al, is that it ignores that images have access to virtually everything that mercantile and grunts have access to, plus a weapon that doesn't run out of bullets, lets them turn invisible, and dozens of other things besides.

There are things I would like to see, among them would be a removal of the armor restrictions, PPE channelling, and the ability to accelerate casting of high level spells for a PPE penalty.

Hey_I_Can_Chan wrote:Further, the most powerful of the three--tech--is incompatible with the other two in that getting the tech inside your body cripples your ability to use psionics and magic. Now, I'm not sure what difference it makes if I carry around a plasma ejector or have one implanted in my forearm, but apparently, if I have psionics or magic, carrying the ability to do large amounts of tech damage at range is okay but attaching it to my arm isn't. Whatever.

Under the current rules, it would hurt absolutely nothing to give everyone the ability to cast magic spells and a reasonable amount of P.P.E. (say, 1d4x10+10), make everyone a major psionic (most can be already... randomly!), and let everyone bionic out. And, if you did that, almost everyone would still wear M.D.C. armor and carry the biggest rifle he could get his hands on because tech is just straight-up better.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:I can see adding more PPE to cut the cast time or the duration time, and decreasing the cast time for low level spells for higher level mages , but that non armor restrictions screams to me magic cant protect me, which by theory should destroy the mages ability and faith in magic

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:Ok i heard the complaints about it ,so how would you fix it

Hey_I_Can_Chan wrote:

I don't know how limited resources is a campaign-based drawback that can be ignored, whereas the ability of a magic-user to apply built-in resources such as time slip or various protective spells to prevent interruption is somehow a campaign-based drawback that can't be ignored, mind you.

By limited resources, I mean game-mechanical limited resources: P.P.E., I.S.P., Chi, whatever... anything that's part of your character's class that you have to expend to make Cool Stuff stuff happen.

Don't think of limited resources in this context as money or access. There is no way to anticipate cash flow or gear rarity until you're in the campaign. Rifts isn't D&D 3.X with wealth-by-level guidelines. Money and access is solely on the GM. Hence discussing it is pointless as any discussion devolves into, "My GM does this," and, "My GM does that." That doesn't further the conversation.

I don't have the time slip spell, but I figured out it's level 6. That means it takes 2 attacks to cast, you're probably wearing LBA to avoid penalties, and it costs you P.P.E. That's indisputable. Those are the restrictions the rules place on it.

There is no tech weapon to immobilize a target... There is no technology that makes you immune to energy damage. There is no technology that removes your need to breathe entirely... There is no technology that lets you just mind-control a person without preparation. There is no technology to make a wall that is literally completely impervious to harm. There is no technology capable of (literally) bringing people back from the dead...

We can't have that conversation, no matter how much you want to. We could go back and forth about what tech can do vs. what psionics can do vs. what magic can do. But that's uninteresting. If a new book comes out next week that lets psionics and technology do everything you listed, magic will still have the exact same limitations on it. It really will.

That's a problem.

Hey_I_Can_Chan wrote:

And if a new magic book comes out next week with tons of level 5 and lower spells with low cost such that you can easily cast dozens of them from the power of a single nazcan canteen thingamajig, that would remove some of the limitations of magic quite easily.

But it would only provide a host of level 1 through 5 spells. None of those level 1-5 spells will be as awesome as the levels 6-15 spells unless the writer doesn't follow the paradigm presented in the RUE--and if he doesn't follow them this discussion is useless.

However, if you want to argue that level 1-5 magic as presented is a force to be reckoned with on par with technology and psionics, and that level 6-15 spells are pointless, that could be a discussion worth having and does eliminate a restriction on magic.

I'd suggest starting a new topic though.

Tech doesn't have those things now, it generally speaking doesn't have anything close to those things now, and we have no reason to expect it to have those things any time soon.

First, why not? You listed several things that are at least hinted at, if not quantified yet. Then: Not the point. A unique effect is just unique. There are unique effects in each batch of Cool Stuff. There's seriously no reason to enumerate them. That's a nonargument.

... MDC... replace it... takes time... ammo... SAMAS... clear limitations... energy rifle has e-clip... techno-wizardry devices... energy sphere... store... PPE... methods of PPE recovery exist around the world... talismans and scrolls...

The GM controls cash and access. You control your character. During the campaign, the GM tells you how much money you get and what stuff is available. But your character sheet will always say that casting takes this much time, limits your armor, and costs P.P.E. You can't control the GM, so there's no reason to discuss those limits--in fact, there aren't any limits on technology until your GM starts the campaign. But before the campaign even begins, you've limits on your magicking that are distinct and separate and independent from the campaign because you chose to write Ley Line Walker on your character sheet rather than Full Conversion Borg or Mind Melter.

Does that make sense?
__________________________________________________
This is not a magic vs. tech debate. It's a Cool Stuff vs. Cool Stuff debate (or, at least, I'm trying to make it one). If you wanted to change the Cool Stuff to mystic herbology, tattoo magic, and super powers, we could do that. It doesn't matter. What matters is the restrictions that are placed on the Cool Stuff, and that Cool Stuff is reasonably balanced against other Cool Stuff. If it's not, then there's a design problem.

Shark_Force wrote:there is no technology that removes your need to breathe entirely (not just an air supply, but literally not needing to breathe).

Proseksword wrote:Perhaps the easiest fix to magic in RIFTs would simply be to delete the paragraphs in the books where Mr. Siembieda says Ley Line Walkers are arrogantly proud of their magic and consider technology a crutch beneath them. While there's no legitimate reason why a Ley Line Walker can't use whatever tech equipment is handy, and the O.C.C. even gives them a starting energy weapon, the fluff text is so insistent that they disdain using them that players feel like every time they pull the trigger of a laser rifle they're playing the character wrong. The whole setting building up to a big "Magic vs. Technology" conflict doesn't help matters. If you make technology the enemy magic fights, it simply feels weird for them to be using things like ion pistols and fusion blocks.

Shark_Force wrote:offense for mages is plentiful and powerful. it just isn't the "your head asplode" kind of offense. those same defense and escape (and mobility) techniques that allow a mage to defend and escape, allow them to get within range of the fight. most fights, unless they're on a wide open plain (with no tall grass) or up in the air are not going to be at 1,200 feet or 2,000 feet distance; they'll take place at a few hundred feet, where you can see your opponent through all the obstacles in between you. heck, even at damage they're not so bad (how about 5d6 direct to HP, bypassing armor, for example?), and even range can be overcome if they have the right spells (though those usually take longer to cast) or, if they simply close the distance using other spells, or if they use techno-wizardry (which most OCC entries indicate is a popular option for magic-users).

Proseksword wrote:Perhaps the easiest fix to magic in RIFTs would simply be to delete the paragraphs in the books where Mr. Siembieda says Ley Line Walkers are arrogantly proud of their magic and consider technology a crutch beneath them. While there's no legitimate reason why a Ley Line Walker can't use whatever tech equipment is handy, and the O.C.C. even gives them a starting energy weapon, the fluff text is so insistent that they disdain using them that players feel like every time they pull the trigger of a laser rifle they're playing the character wrong. The whole setting building up to a big "Magic vs. Technology" conflict doesn't help matters. If you make technology the enemy magic fights, it simply feels weird for them to be using things like ion pistols and fusion blocks.

Hey_I_Can_Chan wrote:

so are you saying that the GM controls the max payload of your weapons?

The GM tells you what Cool Stuff is in the tech pile. Sounds like payload control to me.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:I will admit the damage should be increased as a mage gains levels if every single creature crawls out of a rift becomes a MDC creature because it's magically rich then a mage's damage should be increased to reflect that.

A glitterboy shouldnt be laughing at a Line ley Walker, in front of him, he should atleast be worried, if not scared

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:I will admit the damage should be increased as a mage gains levels if every single creature crawls out of a rift becomes a MDC creature because it's magically rich then a mage's damage should be increased to reflect that.

A glitterboy shouldnt be laughing at a Line ley Walker, in front of him, he should atleast be worried, if not scared

mastermojoking wrote:2. The spells do not scale that well as you increase in levels. Some spells you get that do 1D6 per level and cost are reasonable. Than you get up in lvls and can get the annihilate spell that does massive damage. I think that spells should scale a lot better. They should gradually go up in damage until they come close to the annihilate spell. Yes I do believe the cost to cast those spells should be higher to reflect the damage. I do not like this cheesy spell system that starts out really small and goes up by 1D6 per level. I would rather see something like 1D6 +10 per lvl or whatever.

Too many spells even of different levels have almost the same damage. I think the higher lvl the spell the more it should do.

mastermojoking wrote:1. I do not think that P.E. should give any bonus to save vs. magic at all. I think it is kinda silly that just because you have a good strong body you can resist any sort of magic.

mastermojoking wrote:I see two things that I do not like about the magic system.

1. I do not think that P.E. should give any bonus to save vs. magic at all. I think it is kinda silly that just because you have a good strong body you can resist any sort of magic.

Killer Cyborg wrote:But it's too easy to get insanely high saving throws with things how they are now.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The general idea of physical endurance providing resistance to magic goes back a long way.
Conan was a prime example.

In Palladium, PE is tied directly into magic- it's what determines your PPE levels.

I can see why they have it that way.

But it's too easy to get insanely high saving throws with things how they are now.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
There are too many "All or Nothing" spells.

agreed

Mages should, as a general rule, need to use both gestures and words in order to cast spells.
There should be a skill that allows mages to cast without gestures (perhaps this skill should kick in automatically at high level).
There should be a skill that allows mages to cast without words.
And there should be an explanation as to why, in each case.

A lot more skills involving the arcane arts in general, imo.


5. Magic should not be able to beat tech at its own game.
A magically-created particle beam should NOT be more powerful than the tech version.

What happened to sub-particle acceleration? did it not get included in rue?

6. There need to be rules for disrupting ANY action that takes more than 2 attacks to complete. There should be a set of specific criteria that are met in order for there to be a threat of disrupting the action, and there should be a way for mages to attempt to keep from being disrupted (even if a specific skill is required to be taken).

Damian Magecraft wrote:From all I read of the Conan Novels and shorts I got the impression it was his sheer force of will that allowed him to shake of many spells...

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:only problem i see with magic is spell strength bonuses are too little +1 every three level, when its should be +1 every two levels and +2 at level 15
so a +4 (+8 on a ley line) vs +9 (+18 on a ley line
this would reflect the power of magic

Silver Fox wrote:Having read a huge number of Conan novels, especially all the original stories by Robert E. Howard, yeah... a lot of Conan being able to shrug off spells is his strong will... in terms of Palladium... M.E., not just because he's so physically strong either.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Silver Fox wrote:Having read a huge number of Conan novels, especially all the original stories by Robert E. Howard, yeah... a lot of Conan being able to shrug off spells is his strong will... in terms of Palladium... M.E., not just because he's so physically strong either.

Yes, a lot of it was his strong will.
But not all of it.

At least, that's not how it's been interpreted a lot of the time.
It goes back to D&D.
Look at how saves were originally done there. IIRC, fighters had good saves against magic.
When Barbarians (i.e., Conan) were introduced, they had even better saves/resistance against magic.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Really, I think they might be better off doing away with saving throws entirely, at least as they are now.
Take the active defense that is the basis of the combat system already, and extend it to magic (and other areas) as well.

If a spell has a physical attack (fire ball, lightning, etc), then it can be dodged or, in some cases, parried.
If the spell is a mental attack, then the defender should be able to make a mental defense roll to counter it.
If the spell is an intangible attack on the body (like Death Word), then the defender should be able to make a physical defense roll against it.

The net effect would be similar to saves, but more dynamic, more in line with the rest of the system, and more realistic.

Shark_Force wrote:again, the solution is *not* nuking. nuking is (and should be) the primary domain of technology, because that (and really really fast flight) is about all it has going for it, and it has the drawback of limited resources (i don't know how limited resources is a campaign-based drawback that can be ignored, whereas the ability of a magic-user to apply built-in resources such as time slip or various protective spells to prevent interruption is somehow a campaign-based drawback that can't be ignored, mind you).

the power of magic (including in combat) is in the spells that do things that technology cannot duplicate. there is no tech weapon to immobilize a target, guaranteed, for 2d6 melees (and quite possibly a lot longer). there is no technology that makes you immune to energy damage. there is no technology that removes your need to breathe entirely (not just an air supply, but literally not needing to breathe). there probably is technology, somewhere, that will let you control the weather to some extent, but i'm not aware of it being listed anywhere (it's most likely going to be just a mcguffin). there is no technology that lets you just mind-control a person without preparation. there is no technology to make a wall that is literally completely impervious to harm. there might be technology to teleport (the megaversal legion comes to mind), but it isn't generally speaking available. there is no technology capable of (literally) bringing people back from the dead (although i believe the implication is that the ML has technology that will allow your memories to be uploaded into a new clone, that's not entirely clear nor is it quite the same thing).

technology does a tiny handful of things well, and the rest it's pretty "meh" about. in order to compensate for the fact that it is only really good in a handful of areas, it needs to be really really good in those areas.

2_Gun_Sally wrote:

sybert1138 wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Really, I think they might be better off doing away with saving throws entirely, at least as they are now.
Take the active defense that is the basis of the combat system already, and extend it to magic (and other areas) as well.

If a spell has a physical attack (fire ball, lightning, etc), then it can be dodged or, in some cases, parried.
If the spell is a mental attack, then the defender should be able to make a mental defense roll to counter it.
If the spell is an intangible attack on the body (like Death Word), then the defender should be able to make a physical defense roll against it.

The net effect would be similar to saves, but more dynamic, more in line with the rest of the system, and more realistic.

I really like that idea. Instead of casters increasing spell strength they'd just earn a bonus to the "attack" with said spell. That's a mighty fine idea!

I don't think all things have been taken into consideration. The more you try to unify rules, the more you take away from uniqueness of different classes and combat styles. Other rpg's have tried to 'moderize' their rules in later editions only to often complete destroy the essence the game once had (*cough* D&D 4th edition *gag*).

The issue is the magic becomes too weak compared against defenses. This can be addressed with adding more spell strength and changing magic to become exactly like gun fighting doesn't truly fix the issue.

It likely creates far more issues. What makes it different at that point?

Why does it still have far more restrictions and costs yet should follow the exact same rules as regular combat?

How would revamps of normal combat then effect magic?

I certainly don't want magic thrown into yet another house rule ridden mechanic. Frankly our compaigns magic tweaks are far simpler than our tweaks on normal combat.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The question is, does the current system of saves actually provide anything to the feel of the game when it comes to magic?
Is there something important about casting a spell, then hoping that the person rolls low enough that the spell works?

For me, that doesn't provide anything. It's a passive defense, like Armor Class, only for some reason the person acting isn't the person making the die roll.

The issue is the magic becomes too weak compared against defenses. This can be addressed with adding more spell strength and changing magic to become exactly like gun fighting doesn't truly fix the issue.

It wouldn't be exactly like gun fighting.
I'm not talking about making aimed shots.
I'm not talking about firing wild.
I'm not talking about bursts or sprays (though I have in the past).
I'm not talking about making called shots.
I'm not talking about the -10 rule.

All I'm talking about is an active attack roll, and an active defense roll.
The "active" part is kind of important, because it's what would make me feel that my character was doing something to resist the magic, instead of the spell just fizzling for no particular reason.

KillerCyborg wrote:

Why does it still have far more restrictions and costs yet should follow the exact same rules as regular combat?

It doesn't.
Though I wouldn't mind seeing some of the other restrictions loosened up.
I've always thought that if the damage of a spell is jacked-up 100x, the range and duration should see some kind of increase as well.

KillerCyborg wrote:

I certainly don't want magic thrown into yet another house rule ridden mechanic. Frankly our compaigns magic tweaks are far simpler than our tweaks on normal combat.

Magic got screwed over by the Two Attacks For Living. This was fixed in RUE (not well but...)
It got screwed over by the Mage Armor rule. I liked the old 1e PF rules as well...
It got screwed over by the -10 rule. an overcomplicated fix to a minor problem... it needs ditched
It got screwed over by the increase in races/classes with high PE bonuses. agreed
It got screwed over by spells taking more than one attack. I do not see it that way but that is just me
It got screwed over by spells being able to be interrupted. one reason I insist that multi-action melee attacks should be able to be interrupted as well.

It's always been a house-rule-ridden mechanic.
You might not have had to tweak it much, but most others have. The rules in RUE came about because so many people were using house-rules (PPE Channeling, for example) to streamline and speed up combat.

Kikkoman wrote:

I kept asking the DM, "How do I __________?"
And he'd say, "Roll a d20."

and you were complaining before about '4e makes everything feel the same!'

RIFTS could do with the kind of clear editing and terminology that 4e has, while still keeping PPE, ISP and Melee Attack actions as the different ways of spending resources.

2_Gun_Sally wrote:I'd answer your many many scatter points Killer Cyborg but you tend to answer with questions and statements without explanation or consideration of alternative interpretation.

Most of what I said here covers many points anyway.

People also seen to be hung up on magic needing to shoot out like a projectile and wanting it to share it's mechanics when it is often entirely different.