Forums of the Megaverse®

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Daeglan wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Daeglan wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:No it does not... but; re-organizing and clarifying the rules for ease of introduction is not something that can be done in just a few days time.
And that brings us to Palladiums current conundrum.
Do they stop producing for the year or two it will take to do this? (they are going to have to dedicate their full attention to just this project to get it done with any modicum of speed)
Or do they continue as they have producing new product?
One ensures a revenue of some sort the other is a huge gamble with no guarantee of success and a high probability of failure.

How many books do they currently have in production? Why couldn't they have one of those books be a Revised and clarified Core rules?

Because correcting the system is going to take time...
More time than the company can afford to expend. (at this time).

Again HOW MANY books are in production right now? Why can't one of those books be a revision?

Because re-inventing the wheel is more difficult than making more wheels.

Daeglan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because re-inventing the wheel is more difficult than making more wheels.

It is not reinventing the wheel. It is fixing the 4 flat tires the current system has. those 4 flat tires are keeping the system from going anywhere. Adding more cars to the engine with out fixing the thing pulling the train means the system does not go anywhere.

Daeglan wrote:Damian how much stuff have you found that needs fixing in your compilation?

Daeglan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Daeglan wrote:Again HOW MANY books are in production right now? Why can't one of those books be a revision?

Because re-inventing the wheel is more difficult than making more wheels.

It is not reinventing the wheel. It is fixing the 4 flat tires the current system has. those 4 flat tires are keeping the system from going anywhere. Adding more cars to the engine with out fixing the thing pulling the train means the system does not go anywhere.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:I have yet to see what is broken all I seen is character creation( which now sounds like a broken record), which yes if you make a RCC you are going to go thru a different way then the regular way, so any other problems?

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Jay05 wrote:I never once have ever tried to say that the rules work as written. It simply doesn't matter because I enjoy the setting enough to work around it and did when I was a new player. So the arguement that the rules are so off putting as to turn people off tells me they must not have been that interested in the first place. Which has been the bottom line of my point this whole thread. Is that clear enough

The key to a successful business is to make it easier for people to use your product than to go somewhere else.
You don't just want to get the people who are REALLY interested in the product, enough to fight their way past multiple obstacles; you want to get everybody, ideally.
Or at least everybody not actively opposed to the idea.
You want to sell to the indifferent, not just the engrossed.

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Jay05 wrote:I never once have ever tried to say that the rules work as written. It simply doesn't matter because I enjoy the setting enough to work around it and did when I was a new player. So the arguement that the rules are so off putting as to turn people off tells me they must not have been that interested in the first place. Which has been the bottom line of my point this whole thread. Is that clear enough

Good, yes. But perhaps your experience with the character creation is not shared by everyone else. There certainly is some reason that Palladium is dying and can't seem to attract new players. I'm pretty sure the learning curve on the system is a likely culprit. So either A) everyone who tries the game is so incapable of basic intelligent thought that they would rather find a simpler system or B) players who try don't feel like putting in the effort of "figuring it out" and would rather find a game that doesn't immediately present the player with a error.

Jay05 wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Jay05 wrote:I never once have ever tried to say that the rules work as written. It simply doesn't matter because I enjoy the setting enough to work around it and did when I was a new player. So the arguement that the rules are so off putting as to turn people off tells me they must not have been that interested in the first place. Which has been the bottom line of my point this whole thread. Is that clear enough

Good, yes. But perhaps your experience with the character creation is not shared by everyone else. There certainly is some reason that Palladium is dying and can't seem to attract new players. I'm pretty sure the learning curve on the system is a likely culprit. So either A) everyone who tries the game is so incapable of basic intelligent thought that they would rather find a simpler system or B) players who try don't feel like putting in the effort of "figuring it out" and would rather find a game that doesn't immediately present the player with a error.

Which means they are either A) too stupid to get it. Or B) Too lazy. I don't have much sympathy for either trait. Just highlighting your inferance here. By the way, this circular BS has become a waste of my time. I'm done with this thread.

Jay05 wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Jay05 wrote:I never once have ever tried to say that the rules work as written. It simply doesn't matter because I enjoy the setting enough to work around it and did when I was a new player. So the arguement that the rules are so off putting as to turn people off tells me they must not have been that interested in the first place. Which has been the bottom line of my point this whole thread. Is that clear enough

Good, yes. But perhaps your experience with the character creation is not shared by everyone else. There certainly is some reason that Palladium is dying and can't seem to attract new players. I'm pretty sure the learning curve on the system is a likely culprit. So either A) everyone who tries the game is so incapable of basic intelligent thought that they would rather find a simpler system or B) players who try don't feel like putting in the effort of "figuring it out" and would rather find a game that doesn't immediately present the player with a error.

Which means they are either A) too stupid to get it. Or B) Too lazy. I don't have much sympathy for either trait. Just highlighting your inferance here. By the way, this circular BS has become a waste of my time. I'm done with this thread.

Damian Magecraft wrote:And that brings us to Palladiums current conundrum.
Do they stop producing for the year or two it will take to do this? (they are going to have to dedicate their full attention to just this project to get it done with any modicum of speed)
Or do they continue as they have producing new product?
One ensures a revenue of some sort the other is a huge gamble with no guarantee of success and a high probability of failure.

Sureshot wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:And that brings us to Palladiums current conundrum.
Do they stop producing for the year or two it will take to do this? (they are going to have to dedicate their full attention to just this project to get it done with any modicum of speed)
Or do they continue as they have producing new product?
One ensures a revenue of some sort the other is a huge gamble with no guarantee of success and a high probability of failure.

They are going to have to something imo to stop the downward spiral. Not right away yet imo they can't take forever like they did with the feedback threads. It took what almost two decades to acknowledge that they might need to clarify certain elements of the game. As I said would love to see a new edition. Yet understand that will not happen. The system needs to be streamlined, clarified and just plain spruced up to read better and easier. Stil I think they waited too damn long as a company to even attempt a streamlining. Stuck in a catch 22 of their own making. As well as some other outside factors. And keeping the system as is while insuring some sort of revenue it's also a slow steady loss of income. I'm not sure what can be done.

Damian Magecraft wrote:well one thing that can be done is...
We as fans with the best interests of the company at heart could take it upon ourselves to help by collecting the rules together and setting them in a logical format and then presenting it to Kevin and Co.
Instead of just endlessly complaining about whats happening and waiting for them to do it. (if enough of us do this I think we might get the project completed in less than 2 years.)
Heck for all we know they may very well be trying to do just that at this moment but also trying to maintain a revenue stream as well. (the problem with that theory though is that means it may well be another 5 to 10 years before we see the new system.)

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Sureshot wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:And that brings us to Palladiums current conundrum.
Do they stop producing for the year or two it will take to do this? (they are going to have to dedicate their full attention to just this project to get it done with any modicum of speed)
Or do they continue as they have producing new product?
One ensures a revenue of some sort the other is a huge gamble with no guarantee of success and a high probability of failure.

They are going to have to something imo to stop the downward spiral. Not right away yet imo they can't take forever like they did with the feedback threads. It took what almost two decades to acknowledge that they might need to clarify certain elements of the game. As I said would love to see a new edition. Yet understand that will not happen. The system needs to be streamlined, clarified and just plain spruced up to read better and easier. Stil I think they waited too damn long as a company to even attempt a streamlining. Stuck in a catch 22 of their own making. As well as some other outside factors. And keeping the system as is while insuring some sort of revenue it's also a slow steady loss of income. I'm not sure what can be done.

well one thing that can be done is...
We as fans with the best interests of the company at heart could take it upon ourselves to help by collecting the rules together and setting them in a logical format and then presenting it to Kevin and Co.
Instead of just endlessly complaining about whats happening and waiting for them to do it. (if enough of us do this I think we might get the project completed in less than 2 years.)
Heck for all we know they may very well be trying to do just that at this moment but also trying to maintain a revenue stream as well. (the problem with that theory though is that means it may well be another 5 to 10 years before we see the new system.)

Sureshot wrote:Can we please stop with the whole "dumbing down" comment about rules in rpgs and the industry as a whole. Nothing wrong with making a system simpler and easier to use. When I'm either running or playing a rpg I want it to be fun not a chore. It's alos quite insulting. To me and others who like simpler easier systems. And while I was not refered to it's still a very uneeded blanket system. That does nothing to change the perception that the fanbase.

Sureshot wrote:Can we please stop with the whole "dumbing down" comment about rules in rpgs and the industry as a whole. Nothing wrong with making a system simpler and easier to use. When I'm either running or playing a rpg I want it to be fun not a chore. It's alos quite insulting. To me and others who like simpler easier systems. And while I was not refered to it's still a very uneeded blanket system. That does nothing to change the perception that the fanbase.

wyrmraker wrote:I think that we can all agree that the system as it is written has it's serious problems. But the anyone writing up a full, clarifying revision will take time, and it would take forever just to get released, if at all. After all, just how long have we been waiting for the two new Chaos Earth books? Or Mechanoids Space? The on-staff writers are fully involved in other projects, and some of the freelance writers are still waiting for their FINISHED books to hit print (Chaos Earth comes to mind again).

The fans could step up and repair the system, no problem. But fitting that in as Official Material gets problematic, as suddenly all of the previous books' core rules are rendered moot. And that causes problems both in the long and short term, both logically and monetarily.

Sadly, Palladium has delayed their promised books far too often to be reliable to book vendors, so most of the average vendors (Barnes & Noble, etc) just won't carry them on the shelves, partly due to lessened sales, and partly due to serious delays. Psyscape was delayed by a little over a year, as I recall.

While I love the setting, the system as it's written only truly works for the setting it was designed for: Palladium Fantasy. Everywhere else gets clunky, overcomplicated, and full of exploitation, as the system isn't properly designed to handle modern, futuristic, and super-powered roleplay styles.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I think that we can all agree that the system as it is written has it's serious problems. But the anyone writing up a full, clarifying revision will take time, and it would take forever just to get released, if at all. After all, just how long have we been waiting for the two new Chaos Earth books? Or Mechanoids Space? The on-staff writers are fully involved in other projects, and some of the freelance writers are still waiting for their FINISHED books to hit print (Chaos Earth comes to mind again).

The fans could step up and repair the system, no problem. But fitting that in as Official Material gets problematic, as suddenly all of the previous books' core rules are rendered moot. And that causes problems both in the long and short term, both logically and monetarily.

Sadly, Palladium has delayed their promised books far too often to be reliable to book vendors, so most of the average vendors (Barnes & Noble, etc) just won't carry them on the shelves, partly due to lessened sales, and partly due to serious delays. Psyscape was delayed by a little over a year, as I recall.

While I love the setting, the system as it's written only truly works for the setting it was designed for: Palladium Fantasy. Everywhere else gets clunky, overcomplicated, and full of exploitation, as the system isn't properly designed to handle modern, futuristic, and super-powered roleplay styles.

and just why would a clarified set of mechanics render the current books moot?
the system that is in place functions (if you can find it).
the objective would be to present that existing system in a manner that is easily followed by anyone.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I think that we can all agree that the system as it is written has it's serious problems. But the anyone writing up a full, clarifying revision will take time, and it would take forever just to get released, if at all. After all, just how long have we been waiting for the two new Chaos Earth books? Or Mechanoids Space? The on-staff writers are fully involved in other projects, and some of the freelance writers are still waiting for their FINISHED books to hit print (Chaos Earth comes to mind again).

The fans could step up and repair the system, no problem. But fitting that in as Official Material gets problematic, as suddenly all of the previous books' core rules are rendered moot. And that causes problems both in the long and short term, both logically and monetarily.

Sadly, Palladium has delayed their promised books far too often to be reliable to book vendors, so most of the average vendors (Barnes & Noble, etc) just won't carry them on the shelves, partly due to lessened sales, and partly due to serious delays. Psyscape was delayed by a little over a year, as I recall.

While I love the setting, the system as it's written only truly works for the setting it was designed for: Palladium Fantasy. Everywhere else gets clunky, overcomplicated, and full of exploitation, as the system isn't properly designed to handle modern, futuristic, and super-powered roleplay styles.

and just why would a clarified set of mechanics render the current books moot?
the system that is in place functions (if you can find it).
the objective would be to present that existing system in a manner that is easily followed by anyone.

wyrmraker wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I think that we can all agree that the system as it is written has it's serious problems. But the anyone writing up a full, clarifying revision will take time, and it would take forever just to get released, if at all. After all, just how long have we been waiting for the two new Chaos Earth books? Or Mechanoids Space? The on-staff writers are fully involved in other projects, and some of the freelance writers are still waiting for their FINISHED books to hit print (Chaos Earth comes to mind again).

The fans could step up and repair the system, no problem. But fitting that in as Official Material gets problematic, as suddenly all of the previous books' core rules are rendered moot. And that causes problems both in the long and short term, both logically and monetarily.

Sadly, Palladium has delayed their promised books far too often to be reliable to book vendors, so most of the average vendors (Barnes & Noble, etc) just won't carry them on the shelves, partly due to lessened sales, and partly due to serious delays. Psyscape was delayed by a little over a year, as I recall.

While I love the setting, the system as it's written only truly works for the setting it was designed for: Palladium Fantasy. Everywhere else gets clunky, overcomplicated, and full of exploitation, as the system isn't properly designed to handle modern, futuristic, and super-powered roleplay styles.

and just why would a clarified set of mechanics render the current books moot?
the system that is in place functions (if you can find it).
the objective would be to present that existing system in a manner that is easily followed by anyone.

I do see your point, and it is an excellent one. But as I see the system, the refit required would force a complete rewrite of the base rules for the system, based on the setting (Rifts would have a different adjustment for rules than Heroes Unlimited). Not only would the rewrite be required, but also a conversion setup from the current rules to the new ones. I remember when GURPS went from 3rd Ed Rev to 4th Ed. There was a conversion FAQ for free download. More effort and paperwork, but not impossible, merely difficult. Plus getting that many fans to agree on one setup for the rewrite would be like getting Congress to agree on a controversial bill.

And PB would *still* have to meet their deadlines just to keep up with their competitors. That would actually be far more vital to the success of PB in general than a system rewrite.

Jedrious wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I think that we can all agree that the system as it is written has it's serious problems. But the anyone writing up a full, clarifying revision will take time, and it would take forever just to get released, if at all. After all, just how long have we been waiting for the two new Chaos Earth books? Or Mechanoids Space? The on-staff writers are fully involved in other projects, and some of the freelance writers are still waiting for their FINISHED books to hit print (Chaos Earth comes to mind again).

The fans could step up and repair the system, no problem. But fitting that in as Official Material gets problematic, as suddenly all of the previous books' core rules are rendered moot. And that causes problems both in the long and short term, both logically and monetarily.

Sadly, Palladium has delayed their promised books far too often to be reliable to book vendors, so most of the average vendors (Barnes & Noble, etc) just won't carry them on the shelves, partly due to lessened sales, and partly due to serious delays. Psyscape was delayed by a little over a year, as I recall.

While I love the setting, the system as it's written only truly works for the setting it was designed for: Palladium Fantasy. Everywhere else gets clunky, overcomplicated, and full of exploitation, as the system isn't properly designed to handle modern, futuristic, and super-powered roleplay styles.

and just why would a clarified set of mechanics render the current books moot?
the system that is in place functions (if you can find it).
the objective would be to present that existing system in a manner that is easily followed by anyone.

I do see your point, and it is an excellent one. But as I see the system, the refit required would force a complete rewrite of the base rules for the system, based on the setting (Rifts would have a different adjustment for rules than Heroes Unlimited). Not only would the rewrite be required, but also a conversion setup from the current rules to the new ones. I remember when GURPS went from 3rd Ed Rev to 4th Ed. There was a conversion FAQ for free download. More effort and paperwork, but not impossible, merely difficult. Plus getting that many fans to agree on one setup for the rewrite would be like getting Congress to agree on a controversial bill.

And PB would *still* have to meet their deadlines just to keep up with their competitors. That would actually be far more vital to the success of PB in general than a system rewrite.

Your point only makes sense if you assume that the entire system needs an overhaul, when what it really needs is a database with a well designed report structure.

wyrmraker wrote:

Jedrious wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I think that we can all agree that the system as it is written has it's serious problems. But the anyone writing up a full, clarifying revision will take time, and it would take forever just to get released, if at all. After all, just how long have we been waiting for the two new Chaos Earth books? Or Mechanoids Space? The on-staff writers are fully involved in other projects, and some of the freelance writers are still waiting for their FINISHED books to hit print (Chaos Earth comes to mind again).

The fans could step up and repair the system, no problem. But fitting that in as Official Material gets problematic, as suddenly all of the previous books' core rules are rendered moot. And that causes problems both in the long and short term, both logically and monetarily.

Sadly, Palladium has delayed their promised books far too often to be reliable to book vendors, so most of the average vendors (Barnes & Noble, etc) just won't carry them on the shelves, partly due to lessened sales, and partly due to serious delays. Psyscape was delayed by a little over a year, as I recall.

While I love the setting, the system as it's written only truly works for the setting it was designed for: Palladium Fantasy. Everywhere else gets clunky, overcomplicated, and full of exploitation, as the system isn't properly designed to handle modern, futuristic, and super-powered roleplay styles.

and just why would a clarified set of mechanics render the current books moot?
the system that is in place functions (if you can find it).
the objective would be to present that existing system in a manner that is easily followed by anyone.

I do see your point, and it is an excellent one. But as I see the system, the refit required would force a complete rewrite of the base rules for the system, based on the setting (Rifts would have a different adjustment for rules than Heroes Unlimited). Not only would the rewrite be required, but also a conversion setup from the current rules to the new ones. I remember when GURPS went from 3rd Ed Rev to 4th Ed. There was a conversion FAQ for free download. More effort and paperwork, but not impossible, merely difficult. Plus getting that many fans to agree on one setup for the rewrite would be like getting Congress to agree on a controversial bill.

And PB would *still* have to meet their deadlines just to keep up with their competitors. That would actually be far more vital to the success of PB in general than a system rewrite.

Your point only makes sense if you assume that the entire system needs an overhaul, when what it really needs is a database with a well designed report structure.

I do indeed assert that the entire system needs a massive overhaul. And yes, a database with report structure would be immensely helpful. But I believe that my points still stand as stated.

wyrmraker wrote:100% accurate assessment. Getting enough of us together to agree on all the problems, AS WELL AS the solutions...
Problematic doesn't begin to describe it. Nearly impossible is a better phrase.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:100% accurate assessment. Getting enough of us together to agree on all the problems, AS WELL AS the solutions...
Problematic doesn't begin to describe it. Nearly impossible is a better phrase.

I've tried to get people to try to focus on findin out what we can all agree needs to be changed, but too many seem too caught up in the "I am Palladium's only possible salvation" mentality to really listen or discuss, much less compromise.

eliakon wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I do indeed assert that the entire system needs a massive overhaul. And yes, a database with report structure would be immensely helpful. But I believe that my points still stand as stated.

This is what I was talking about, everyone has their own ideas of what it would take to 'fix' the game. THAT is probably the biggest reason that it isnt happening. Some people think it just needs a few tweaks, others it just needs to be better organized, still others think some speicfic part like magic, or ranged combat, or damage scaling needs to be changed. Untill a unified agreement on WHAT will constitute an acceptable 'fix' is reached any argument is fruitless since you don't have a common ground to discuss FROM.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I agree that "dumbing down" is insulting and unnecessary--implying those who perfer simpler systems cannot understand a more complex one.

The problem is, I strongly disagree that all games should be simple to use. I agree that in the modern enviroment being very complex regulates one to niche status, the thing is, there is a niche market to appeal to, players who specifically want that kind of complexity in games. So it's equally fallicious to imply that simpler is objectivly better.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

eliakon wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I do indeed assert that the entire system needs a massive overhaul. And yes, a database with report structure would be immensely helpful. But I believe that my points still stand as stated.

This is what I was talking about, everyone has their own ideas of what it would take to 'fix' the game. THAT is probably the biggest reason that it isnt happening. Some people think it just needs a few tweaks, others it just needs to be better organized, still others think some speicfic part like magic, or ranged combat, or damage scaling needs to be changed. Untill a unified agreement on WHAT will constitute an acceptable 'fix' is reached any argument is fruitless since you don't have a common ground to discuss FROM.

And here in lies why the polls that were ran by the company a while back produced no action from the company. No one was willing to agree on what was wrong.
I said it before 90% of the "broken" crowd are just upset that rule XYZ is not what they want.
Just because something does not work the way you think it should does not mean it is broke.

That is why this project of mine is taking me so long... I have to refrain from inserting my own biases into the system.

eliakon wrote:
This is what I was talking about, everyone has their own ideas of what it would take to 'fix' the game. THAT is probably the biggest reason that it isnt happening. Some people think it just needs a few tweaks, others it just needs to be better organized, still others think some speicfic part like magic, or ranged combat, or damage scaling needs to be changed. Untill a unified agreement on WHAT will constitute an acceptable 'fix' is reached any argument is fruitless since you don't have a common ground to discuss FROM.

wyrmraker wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

eliakon wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I do indeed assert that the entire system needs a massive overhaul. And yes, a database with report structure would be immensely helpful. But I believe that my points still stand as stated.

This is what I was talking about, everyone has their own ideas of what it would take to 'fix' the game. THAT is probably the biggest reason that it isnt happening. Some people think it just needs a few tweaks, others it just needs to be better organized, still others think some speicfic part like magic, or ranged combat, or damage scaling needs to be changed. Untill a unified agreement on WHAT will constitute an acceptable 'fix' is reached any argument is fruitless since you don't have a common ground to discuss FROM.

And here in lies why the polls that were ran by the company a while back produced no action from the company. No one was willing to agree on what was wrong.
I said it before 90% of the "broken" crowd are just upset that rule XYZ is not what they want.
Just because something does not work the way you think it should does not mean it is broke.

That is why this project of mine is taking me so long... I have to refrain from inserting my own biases into the system.

Bias is going to happen no matter what. The reason that Techno-Wizards tend to be like pulp aviator pilots is because of how KS originally envisioned them. So don't let your bias stop you. Examine why the bias exists, and then determine if it would improve the system overall.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

eliakon wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:I do indeed assert that the entire system needs a massive overhaul. And yes, a database with report structure would be immensely helpful. But I believe that my points still stand as stated.

This is what I was talking about, everyone has their own ideas of what it would take to 'fix' the game. THAT is probably the biggest reason that it isnt happening. Some people think it just needs a few tweaks, others it just needs to be better organized, still others think some speicfic part like magic, or ranged combat, or damage scaling needs to be changed. Untill a unified agreement on WHAT will constitute an acceptable 'fix' is reached any argument is fruitless since you don't have a common ground to discuss FROM.

And here in lies why the polls that were ran by the company a while back produced no action from the company. No one was willing to agree on what was wrong.
I said it before 90% of the "broken" crowd are just upset that rule XYZ is not what they want.
Just because something does not work the way you think it should does not mean it is broke.

That is why this project of mine is taking me so long... I have to refrain from inserting my own biases into the system.

Bias is going to happen no matter what. The reason that Techno-Wizards tend to be like pulp aviator pilots is because of how KS originally envisioned them. So don't let your bias stop you. Examine why the bias exists, and then determine if it would improve the system overall.

And if I was creating my own game engine (based off Palladiums) then I would allow my bias to show.
But I am not doing that. I am trying to compile; organize; and consolidate the rules that already exist into a cohesive easily followed whole.

Johnnycat93 wrote:Lets suppose that we get a community compiled rule revision rolling on the assumption of only a rule clarification at first. What would we do for aspects of the system that are completely absent from the rules?

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:I think what Damian's doing, we wouldnt add those things, or even necessarily change things that are nonsensical (like shields taking damage when you use them to parry - as a re-enactor.. yeah, no. If you're using it right, there's only a few weapons that would hurt a well made shield and they were specifically made to deal with shields), because we're not changing things, just trying to get what is currently there in working order.

I can see that, but when we clarify all these would we just copy and past what has already been written?

Killer Cyborg wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:100% accurate assessment. Getting enough of us together to agree on all the problems, AS WELL AS the solutions...
Problematic doesn't begin to describe it. Nearly impossible is a better phrase.

I've tried to get people to try to focus on findin out what we can all agree needs to be changed, but too many seem too caught up in the "I am Palladium's only possible salvation" mentality to really listen or discuss, much less compromise.

Nightmask wrote:Too bad they don't have 'boxed sets' like come out on occasion for AD&D, a simple stripped-down version of the game to introduce people to the game and draw in new players looking to get caught up in the full game.

Johnnycat93 wrote:Alright cool
So this thread was drifting there anyways,
How many people would be willing to entertain the idea of some kind of communal rehash of the current rifts system mechanics?

Hotrod wrote:1. The system is broken because damage values belie common sense. A martial arts roundhouse kick should not do as much damage (3d6 SDC) as a claymore, unless your name is Chuck Norris! Nor should an infantry rifle do as much damage as a gigantic robot gun, when they're both made by the same manufacturer.this is based on opinion there are many other systems that have the exact same damage distribution and they are not considered broken for it.

2. The system is broken because scaling is ludicrously uneven. A 50-foot robot should be somewhere around 800 times as tough and powerful and tough as a walking person. again based on personal bias; this is not the only system with this so called scaling issue and they are not considered broken.

3. The system is broken because it is not truly megaversal. Each game's rule sets are similar, but they are not interchangeable. A longbowman from Palladium Fantasy is used to fighting people who are -10 to dodge her arrows. In Rifts, everyone dodges those arrows without penalty. Each setting gets its tweaks to better emulate the genre of choice. That is a feature not a bug.

4. The system is broken because too many bonuses are situation-specific, and tracking all the specifics is a nightmare. One minor example: A lightning rod (England, Herbology section) makes you lightning proof, but only if it's touching the ground... how do you determine when it's touching, exactly? wait its broken because of situational modifiers, GM calls and bookkeeping? you want something other than a RPG altogether...

5. The system is broken because there are about 5 different rules on how to handle bursts. These variations are in books that are currently published and sold. and are for different genres see above

6. The system is broken because virtually no-one creates a character as described in the books. Rolling up stats and then picking an attribute-restricted class based on the randomized results is far to restricting. People will play the class they want to play.no one does it that way in any other random char gen system either are they broken as well?

7. The system is broken because it has no mechanics for retreating, surrender, or all kinds of other things that can happen in combat. It's also broken because there are alternate attack/melee round actions such as shooting arrows and casting spells that don't fit well into the melee round model.No argument there... missing or incomplete rules are things we are looking to find and fix.

8. The system is broken because technology-based classes are unsustainable away from a major military support facility. Ammunition, repairs, and e-clip replacement/recharging is far more expensive than what most players can hope to get in your average adventure.this is a play style issue not a system one.

9. The system is broken because you shouldn't need seven separate books to run through a one-theme campaign.you do not NEED 7 books just 1 maybe 2 (if you count core as 1 of the 2) but more is helpful.

10. The system is broken because skill percentages and their interpretations often seem to be arbitrarily assigned to where a highly-trained specialist would often fail a basic skill check. Even for someone with a high skill, there seem to be many ways in the published material to penalize a skill check, but almost no ways to help it out.You do not roll for the basics just the high pressure/complexity situations... But that does need to be more clearly addressed in the skills section.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Hotrod wrote:1. The system is broken because damage values belie common sense. A martial arts roundhouse kick should not do as much damage (3d6 SDC) as a claymore, unless your name is Chuck Norris! Nor should an infantry rifle do as much damage as a gigantic robot gun, when they're both made by the same manufacturer.this is based on opinion there are many other systems that have the exact same damage distribution and they are not considered broken for it.

2. The system is broken because scaling is ludicrously uneven. A 50-foot robot should be somewhere around 800 times as tough and powerful and tough as a walking person. again based on personal bias; this is not the only system with this so called scaling issue and they are not considered broken.

3. The system is broken because it is not truly megaversal. Each game's rule sets are similar, but they are not interchangeable. A longbowman from Palladium Fantasy is used to fighting people who are -10 to dodge her arrows. In Rifts, everyone dodges those arrows without penalty. Each setting gets its tweaks to better emulate the genre of choice. That is a feature not a bug.

4. The system is broken because too many bonuses are situation-specific, and tracking all the specifics is a nightmare. One minor example: A lightning rod (England, Herbology section) makes you lightning proof, but only if it's touching the ground... how do you determine when it's touching, exactly? wait its broken because of situational modifiers, GM calls and bookkeeping? you want something other than a RPG altogether...

5. The system is broken because there are about 5 different rules on how to handle bursts. These variations are in books that are currently published and sold. and are for different genres see above

6. The system is broken because virtually no-one creates a character as described in the books. Rolling up stats and then picking an attribute-restricted class based on the randomized results is far to restricting. People will play the class they want to play.no one does it that way in any other random char gen system either are they broken as well?

7. The system is broken because it has no mechanics for retreating, surrender, or all kinds of other things that can happen in combat. It's also broken because there are alternate attack/melee round actions such as shooting arrows and casting spells that don't fit well into the melee round model.No argument there... missing or incomplete rules are things we are looking to find and fix.

8. The system is broken because technology-based classes are unsustainable away from a major military support facility. Ammunition, repairs, and e-clip replacement/recharging is far more expensive than what most players can hope to get in your average adventure.this is a play style issue not a system one.

9. The system is broken because you shouldn't need seven separate books to run through a one-theme campaign.you do not NEED 7 books just 1 maybe 2 (if you count core as 1 of the 2) but more is helpful.

10. The system is broken because skill percentages and their interpretations often seem to be arbitrarily assigned to where a highly-trained specialist would often fail a basic skill check. Even for someone with a high skill, there seem to be many ways in the published material to penalize a skill check, but almost no ways to help it out.You do not roll for the basics just the high pressure/complexity situations... But that does need to be more clearly addressed in the skills section.

so out of 10 reasons why its broken you really only produced 2 actual issues that are not steeped in personal bias.
read the threads that Alex M started a while back... you will see the exact same thing.... tons of posts all based in personal biases of what poster XYZ thinks the system "should" be. but barely any on what is actually really wrong with the system.
now can you see the reason why the Company has done nothing?