Forums of the Megaverse®

eliakon wrote:How do we know that's not the typical mage?

Because Kingston is not the entirety of North America.

I mean a large portion of the classes start with H2H: Basic as an OCC or OCCr skill.
Seems like that implies that a large number of them likely DID serve in Militias or local militaries and the like.

Wrong. Taking classes at the YMCA is more likely.

Skills don't just "happen" they have to be learned.
And you don't just pick up professional combat skills by falling out of a tree... you have to be trained. Seems that a military experience is as good a source as any.
Granted this falls in the realm of "PC background" but its utterly untouched by the books.

Or I guess we can take a non-rule essay in the BOM as gospel truth and decide that all mages are suicidal idiots that escaped from 1st edition D&D and cower with their darts behind the fighters.

Or we can decise that even the most combat oriented mages are spell casters first and fighters second.

Axelmania wrote:How about when we talk about 'combat' we go with the standard Palladium Books usage of the term?

Go with whatever definition you like, but I wasn't going with that particular definition when I made the original statement.

If we want to go with a different definition, then--as I've said--sure, mages (and most everybody else) could count as "combat trained," depending on the definition.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Agreed. But that's not the typical mage. Also, they'd apparently still not be "good at combat."

Point me to where it says most mages have no HtH whatsoever and I'll agree. Otherwise, that's up in the air.

The thread is whether they're trained for combat, not whether they're trained WELL for combat, no goalpost-shifting KC.

I'm not shifting any goalposts; I'm just pointing out that if we want to go RAW for some reason, then mages are both "combat trained" and "not good at combat."

Mercenary Adventures Page 6 only requires Hand to Hand Basic to be a "combat" mage. Worth noting if anyone is arguing you need BETTER than basic to be "combat" trained.

Also "the Combat Mage is not the master of the martial combat, self-awareness or weapons that are hallmarks of the Battle Magus" establishes Battle Magi (HTH Expert if I recall) are "masters" of (martial) combat.

Killer Cyborg wrote:if we want to go RAW for some reason, then mages are both "combat trained" and "not good at combat."

WHICH mages are not good at combat? Could you establish what this is a quote from?

eliakon wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Axelmania wrote:

eliakon wrote:A leyline walker who served in a military is most certainly going to be combat trained. It is also likely where they picked up their H2H and WP...
...which btw is the SAME H2H as many military OCCs so the claim that they are not 'skilled enough' is bunk

A good example would be the Mage Militia of Kingston, I believe they have HTH Basic.

Agreed.
But that's not the typical mage.

Also, they'd apparently still not be "good at combat."

How do we know that's not the typical mage?

Because we have no reason to believe it to be so, and it is never mentioned anywhere.

I mean a large portion of the classes start with H2H: Basic as an OCC or OCCr skill.
Seems like that implies that a large number of them likely DID serve in Militias or local militaries and the like

lol
Circular logic.
"Mages must have learned their skills as part of a militia, because they have skills that militias would provide them."

Except that no, they have HTH basic and a WP. That could be learned at the Y.

Skills don't just "happen" they have to be learned.
And you don't just pick up professional combat skills by falling out of a tree... you have to be trained. Seems that a military experience is as good a source as any.

By that logic, every Vagabond went to a culinary arts school.
And probably drove a taxi.
Oh, and was a professional translator.

Or I guess we can take a non-rule essay in the BOM as gospel truth and decide that all mages are suicidal idiots that escaped from 1st edition D&D and cower with their darts behind the fighters.

Congrats!

That's about the falsest dichotomy that I've ever seen.

One day, when you're bored, feel free to share with the rest of the class why you keep thinking that all mages are suicidal idiots (etc.).

eliakon wrote:

Ed wrote:

eliakon wrote:Again irrelavent.
If the people end up with PROFESSIONAL QUALITY skills, then they are... wait for it... just as skilled as a professional

LOL it takes more than LINE to make a Marine.

Again you are making the fallacy of trying to coflate "being combat trained" with "being a marine"

See the above statements. That was your arguement, not mine. I am very cetain "PROFESSIONAL QUALITY" skills in LINE does not equal being a Marine.

Speaking as someone who has been in combat. Not as fine as you would seem to believe.

You are not the only military veteran here.

And. I am a combat veteran. A decorated one even. What are your qualifications in this area?

Be that as it may, the ability to fight a war is not the only definition of combat.
Especially in a game where the ability to fight a war is not an option and the entire system is set up around small, individual scale combat.

It is an excellent differentiator between being skilled at fighting and being combat trained.

Insulting people does not prove anything.
you have made a flat claim that 98% of mages have no combat skill.
When ask how you dismiss the 98% of mages you say "because they don't have combat skill"
That is proof by assertion.
I sort of want proof by proof.

Misquoting me won't change anything. I have said the vast, overwhelming majority of mages have no combat training, regardless of their Hand to Hand fighting skills or Weapon Proficiencies.
You have asserted, and failed to prove, that an ability to throw a punch and shoot a laser makes any spell caster the equilivent of a trained soldier as long as said ability was obtained through "professional quality" instruction. Patently and uterly false.

Axelmania wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:if we want to go RAW for some reason, then mages are both "combat trained" and "not good at combat."

WHICH mages are not good at combat? Could you establish what this is a quote from?

BoM 10
If a player is looking for a character who is good at combat and shooting things, a practitioner of magic is NOT the character for him.

Axelmania wrote:Mercenary Adventures Page 6 only requires Hand to Hand Basic to be a "combat" mage. Worth noting if anyone is arguing you need BETTER than basic to be "combat" trained.

Also "the Combat Mage is not the master of the martial combat, self-awareness or weapons that are hallmarks of the Battle Magus" establishes Battle Magi (HTH Expert if I recall) are "masters" of (martial) combat.

Killer Cyborg wrote:if we want to go RAW for some reason, then mages are both "combat trained" and "not good at combat."

WHICH mages are not good at combat? Could you establish what this is a quote from?

Battle Magi being part of the small (<2%) subset of mages that would be combat trained.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because we have no reason to believe it to be so, and it is never mentioned anywhere.

This would be like arguing "most operators don't know first aid" or something.

Unless you can show otherwise, we have no indication as to what % of an OCC choose whatever skill for Related/Secondary slots.

All we know is that OCC skills are the bare minimum which ALL of them know.

Killer Cyborg wrote:BoM 10
If a player is looking for a character who is good at combat and shooting things, a practitioner of magic is NOT the character for him.

This doesn't say anything useful. Battle magi are magic practitioners and are masters of martial combat and can get sharpshooting.

It is also possible to buy shooting skills for most OCCs.

Ed wrote:I have said the vast, overwhelming majority of mages have no combat training, regardless of their Hand to Hand fighting skills or Weapon Proficiencies.

In Rifts, Hand to Hand skills ARE combat training.

RUE 316 they are "Combat Skills" and training is something done to acquire skills.

RUE 347 "Hand to Hand Combat Skills" with Basic being "an elementary form of hand to hand combat training". It is "basic combat training".

"More of a sport than a combat skill" is mentioned under Wrestling, for comparison.

Basic or better is combat training. The question of this thread is: do we have any indication of how many mages have this?

We know that combat training is not a mandatory OCC skill for several OCCs (including Scholars and Adventurers) but I don't think we know what fraction opt to buy it with a related skill.

Ed wrote:Battle Magi being part of the small (<2%) subset of mages that would be combat trained.

Please stop posting this made-up statistic. The only place FoM 128 mentions "less than 2%" is when saying how many magicians on Rifts Earth are BELIEVED to practice Temporal Magic.

This is completely unrelated to Hand to Hand skills.

Axelmania wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because we have no reason to believe it to be so, and it is never mentioned anywhere.

This would be like arguing "most operators don't know first aid" or something.

Nah.
It's like arguing "most characters don't have a military background, unless it's standard for their OCC."

Killer Cyborg wrote:BoM 10
If a player is looking for a character who is good at combat and shooting things, a practitioner of magic is NOT the character for him.

This doesn't say anything useful. Battle magi are magic practitioners and are masters of martial combat and can get sharpshooting.

It is also possible to buy shooting skills for most OCCs.

But RAW, mages still aren't good at it.

Here's another.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/combat

combat
noun (ˈkɒmbæt ; -bət ; ˈkʌm-)
1. a fight, conflict, or struggle

2. an action fought between two military forces
(as modifier): a combat jacket

3. single combat, a fight between two individuals; duel

The secondary/tertiary definitions do not matter here. The way the books use 'combat' takes priority. Palladium clearly uses the primary (fight/conflict/struggle) broad definition.

Killer Cyborg wrote:It's like arguing "most characters don't have a military background, unless it's standard for their OCC."

That would make sense if this thread was titled "Mages Aren't Trained in Militaries".

Combat training doesn't mean 'military background' in Rifts.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAW, mages still aren't good at it.

Those are general guidelines on occupational categories, they aren't phrased in any rule-like way.

I could say "if you want a character good at fixing things, a warrior is not the character for you" but that wouldn't mean warriors can't learn to fix things.

At best I could take this to mean most mages don't have better than basic (good at combat) or sharpshooting (good at shooting) simultaneously.

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:@Eliakon: Yes, I haven't denied any of that. As I already pointed out, I am saying that it is ludicrous. The entire conceit that secondary skills will never match the quality of a "trained" individual is disproven by the fact that there are self-taught people throughout history who have beaten the "professionals." Remember that based on Palladium's logic, Bill Gates has computer programming and business and finance as secondary skills, because he never finished professional training.

a few problems here
1) this is not the real world
2) you can take a secondary skill twice to raise it to professional level
3) you are wrongly conflating "collage" with "OCC" His OCC is not "Collage Graduate" it is more similar to something like the Analytical Hardware in HU...which does not go to collage either.
4) you are also mistaken on what OCCr skills are. Those skills of Bill Gates that he learned "on the job" as he went? Yeah, OCCr


And yes, there will be a rare individual that bucks the system... Hmmm Lone Star and its talents anyone? But the one in a million outliers don't disprove the general rules.

1) yet Palladium has used logic based on the real world to defend its decisions.
2) after rechecking RUE, only for Domestic and Technical skills, although apparently technical skills don't get a +10% boost when you take them a second time. Therefore self-taught programmers can never be as good as those who were instructed by others according to Palladium.
3) and 4) No, I'm not. I'm correctly thinking that "learning through experience," the provenance of secondary skills, means what it says, and that since learning through experience is informal, then the formal education must involve "training." "Training" is the word that you forgot in your quote "on the job." According to Palladium, if you learned something through experience and personal observation, it is a secondary skill. That includes if you start up a company at 16 and learn things as you go.

I had never realized how truly ill-conceived the skill system was until looking at it in light of this thread.

Axelmania wrote:The secondary/tertiary definitions do not matter here. The way the books use 'combat' takes priority. Palladium clearly uses the primary (fight/conflict/struggle) broad definition.

Killer Cyborg wrote:It's like arguing "most characters don't have a military background, unless it's standard for their OCC."

That would make sense if this thread was titled "Mages Aren't Trained in Militaries".

I'm not talking about the thread title, nor about how Palladium uses the definition.
I'm talking about the context of the original statement I made.

Combat training doesn't mean 'military background' in Rifts.

It did in the context of my original statement, which is what I've been discussing.
Again, anybody who wants to discuss it in any other context, feel free. We just won't be in the same conversation.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAW, mages still aren't good at it.

Those are general guidelines on occupational categories, they aren't phrased in any rule-like way.

Your house-opinion is noted, but is not canon.

The context of the original statement was not what is being debated but weather mages are combat trained in general. By the book nearly every mage has some form of combat training, so the statement as written is untrue. The statement was not that they are not combat experts but that they are in general not trained for combat.

(The original context was that mages can not focus in combat as they normally do because as a rule they are not combat trained. That means if we are debating the original context accuracy it or not it is about determining if mages have any combat training, not the level of combat training. Making it about the level of training makes it about disproving what the original context was to used to support/prove thus creating a circular defense. -They have trouble focusing because they are not trained for combat but to be considered trained for combat they have to be proven to have no trouble focusing. As basically using B to prove A then requiring A to be disproved for B to be false. When logically weather or not B can be disproved is separate from weather or not A is true.)

Blue_Lion wrote:By the book nearly every mage has some form of combat training,

The top 4 mage classes (LLW/Warlock/TW/Mystic) do not start with a hand to hand skill, I would say that disqualifies 'nearly every'.

Blue_Lion wrote:as a rule they are not combat trained

What rule? KC's BoMp10 "If a player is looking for a character who is good at combat and shooting things, a practitioner of magic is NOT the character for him." statement doesn't say mages aren't combat trained.

You can be combat-trained and still not "good at combat and shooting things". We don't know what the criteria is for "good at".

For all we know it refers to the strike bonus the Reaver Assassin gets, so you have to be one of those.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:RAW, mages still aren't good at it.

Those are general guidelines on occupational categories, they aren't phrased in any rule-like way.

Your house-opinion is noted, but is not canon.

Shouldn't you be saying "aren't good at them" since "good at combat" and "good at shooting things" are 2 separate statements?

Given that "good at" has no statistical definition, what would the value in the statement be?

If a mage has an equal/higher bonus to strike with shooting things, and equal/higher bonuses in every single maneuver than a given warrior class, then what is the intangible "good at" definition we're discussing here?

Unless you know, I'll just assume it's "be good looking during these things".

Men at Arms, for example, are good at combat because they look good during combat. They are good at shooting because they look good while they shoot.

Mages can perform identically, but they don't look good. It's just not pretty. They hit the same targets, they do the same damage, but it's just not aesthetically pleasing.

Any alternate theories?

You might want to check the books before you make false claims axleman. (not sure why you think warlocks are one of the top mages the most common mages are the ones in the core book.)

The most common mage is a ley line walker-page 116 RUE under OCC skills list "Hand to hand as basic-".
While the TW lacks a standard hand to hand he has a standard WP and a WP is also a form of combat training as it covers combat with a weapon(by the book).
By the book the only magic user in RUE that lacks combat training are the mystics but I am not convinced they are suppose to be overly common. (What I find interesting is that while LLW, shifters and TW are called mages in the book, it does not apear the mystic is called a mage. They are also said to be born as much as trained.
(Not home with my most my books to check if warlocks have a default level of hand to hand but in the first post they where quoted as having basic so I will say your claim has been proven to be false.)

As a rule as it was used in this case in not a literal rule but means in general.(Context that you seam to love striping from post you attack explains this, heck Killer cyborg even stated as much.)
In general most mages have some form of combat training.
Being good at something is subjective, having any level of training for something means you have training for it.

Blue_Lion wrote:The context of the original statement was not what is being debated but weather mages are combat trained in general.

Well, part of what's going on here is that different people are trying to debate different things.

By the book nearly every mage has some form of combat training, so the statement as written is untrue. The statement was not that they are not combat experts but that they are in general not trained for combat.

Agreed--the statement devoid of its original context is untrue, like many or most statements.

(The original context was that mages can not focus in combat as they normally do because as a rule they are not combat trained. That means if we are debating the original context accuracy it or not it is about determining if mages have any combat training, not the level of combat training. Making it about the level of training makes it about disproving what the original context was to used to support/prove thus creating a circular defense. -They have trouble focusing because they are not trained for combat but to be considered trained for combat they have to be proven to have no trouble focusing. As basically using B to prove A then requiring A to be disproved for B to be false. When logically weather or not B can be disproved is separate from weather or not A is true.)

Another part of what's going on is that "combat training" means different things to different people, so discussing whether or not somebody has it is going to be a conversation of opinions for the most part.
That's why level of training comes up--because somebody with WP Pillow Fight might be technically "combat trained" by some some people's view, but not by other people's view.
That's one reason why I bring up the little girl with a HTH skill and a WP; it's something that technically fits some people's definition of "combat training," but that doesn't seem to fit with most people's internal view of the term.
And it illustrates how essentially meaningless some definitions are, since they could apply to pretty much anybody, even a child with no military/militia experience.

Blue_Lion wrote:You might want to check the books before you make false claims axleman. (not sure why you think warlocks are one of the top mages the most common mages are the ones in the core book.)

The most common mage is a ley line walker-page 116 RUE under OCC skills list "Hand to hand as basic-".
While the TW lacks a standard hand to hand he has a standard WP and a WP is also a form of combat training as it covers combat with a weapon(by the book).

Agreed.
The books repeatedly use LLWs as the Typical Mage, so that's the one that we should look to when examining the capabilities of the "typical mage."

By the book the only magic user in RUE that lacks combat training are the mystics but I am not convinced they are suppose to be overly common. (What I find interesting is that while LLW, shifters and TW are called mages in the book, it does not apear the mystic is called a mage. They are also said to be born as much as trained.
(Not home with my most my books to check if warlocks have a default level of hand to hand but in the first post they where quoted as having basic so I will say your claim has been proven to be false.)

Mystics could be argued to be psychic characters who know some magic, more than magic characters that have some psionics.
They are listed as a Men of Magic OCC, though.

As a rule as it was used in this case in not a literal rule but means in general.(Context that you seam to love striping from post you attack explains this, heck Killer cyborg even stated as much.)

Yup.

In general most mages have some form of combat training.
Being good at something is subjective, having any level of training for something means you have training for it.

Right there, by adding the underlined bit, I think you're making a statement that fewer people would disagree with.
"Most mages have some form of combat training" is something that people could agree to, even if they would not agree with the claim "most mages are combat trained."

Killer Cyborg wrote:BoM 10
If a player is looking for a character who is good at combat and shooting things, a practitioner of magic is NOT the character for him.

But how are we defining "good at combat and shooting things"

Skill/bonus wise a Ley Line Walker and a CS Grunt who both have HTH: Basic and WP: E-Rifle and WP: Knife aren't going to be (game) mechanically any different in how good they are assuming the same level (and attribute scores), or even near the same level (but not far enough apart that one gets a bonus for being higher level). Most character classes (in general) don't give bonuses for using weapons IIRC.

IT probably is more accurate to state that magic isn't as "good at combat and shooting things" as using technology. Most offensive spells are outclassed by technology in terms of range, rate of fire, payload, damage/power-output, and applicable bonuses not that magic doesn't have exceptions (ex: Lightblade spell) or situations where it is more potent (ex Ley Lines/Nexsus Points).

ShadowLogan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:BoM 10
If a player is looking for a character who is good at combat and shooting things, a practitioner of magic is NOT the character for him.

But how are we defining "good at combat and shooting things"

Skill/bonus wise a Ley Line Walker and a CS Grunt who both have HTH: Basic and WP: E-Rifle and WP: Knife aren't going to be (game) mechanically any different in how good they are assuming the same level (and attribute scores), or even near the same level (but not far enough apart that one gets a bonus for being higher level). Most character classes (in general) don't give bonuses for using weapons IIRC.

I guess it's in the same way that two skills could be identical, only one is "professional" and the other isn't.
The effects are the same, only one's professional.
Or, in this case, one "isn't good."

IT probably is more accurate to state that magic isn't as "good at combat and shooting things" as using technology. Most offensive spells are outclassed by technology in terms of range, rate of fire, payload, damage/power-output, and applicable bonuses not that magic doesn't have exceptions (ex: Lightblade spell) or situations where it is more potent (ex Ley Lines/Nexsus Points).

Sure, that'd make some sense.
But that's looking at intent, not at what is written; RAI, not RAW.
And in this conversation, people are fixated on RAW for some reason, so that's what I'm pointing out.

Post I made Earlier that from what im reading no one read...

Ok so looking through the books lets talk about the mages that are guaranteed combat trained

-Combat trained:

Elemental fusionist- 3 WP basic HtoH and initial spell lists consisting of offensive and defensive spells

Techno- Wizard- 2 WP Initial spells consist of offensive and defensive spells . From looking at the books its pretty save to assume they have some sort of TW weapon to defend themselves and the WP to use it.
Also Ninja Techno-Wizard with more WP and HtoH expert

Battle Magus: everyone can agree combat trained

Controller- subset of battle magus 3 WP and expert HtoH similar to CS Grunt Pilots Automatons designed for combat

Lord Magus- 2 WP HtoH basic can pilot automatons get combat bonuses as a class. Guaranteed to have combat spells.

High Magus- 2 WP HtoH basic can pilot automatons get combat bonuses as a class. Guaranteed to have combat spells.

Conjurer - 3 WP HtoH basic can conjure weapons. supernatural physical strength in initial spell knowledge.

The Corrupt- still a mage states instinctive fighters... though might be considered a monster

Mystic knight- Much like the Battle Magus no argument here

Tattooed Man- still a mystic warrior comparable to the battle magus and mystic knight only casting in a different way 2 WP HtoH expert considered a warrior.
T-Monster Men- grouped with Tattooed Men
Maxi- Man also grouped.

Undead Slayers- Tattoo magic 5 WP HtoH martial arts

Stone masters- 2 WP HtoH basic stone magic can be offensive plus spells from Gems

The Filidh- 4 WP HtoH martial arts herb magic to "combat supernatural beings"

The Dryad- 2 WP HtoH basic herb magic has access to combat spells

The scathach Druid- 5 WP HtoH martial arts herb magic boxing weapon creation


Temporal Warrior- 6 WP and HtoH martial arts

Demon Queller- 4 WP HtoH kendo Body hardening and offensive and defensive spells

Born Mystic-2 WP HtoH basic magic and psionic abilities.

Russian Fire Sorcerer- 2 WP HtoH basic combat fire spells

Mysic Kuznya- 5 WP HtoH Expert supernatural PS high MDC powerfult weapons and spells to make melee fighting stronger

The old Believer- 2 WP HtoH basic learns random spells from leylines .

Gypsy wizard thief- 1 WP HtoH basic

-Nature Magic users typically in nature having to be trained to defend themselves

The Herbalist- 2 WP HtoH Baisc

The millenium Druid- WP blunt millennium tree gifts more of a support mage

-Summoning Magic users though they might not have HtoH or WP themselves they have the ability to summon things to fight for them

Shifter- HtoH basic Connection to Gods and supernatural intial combat spells Summoning and controlling demons undead and the such to fight for them or to protect them while they cast spells.

Russian Necromancer- 2 WP Augmentation for bonuses summon the dead access to combat spells.

Warlock-2 Wp HtoH Basic access to combat spells summon elementals any high level warlock 7 or 8 has access to some of the most powerful spells in the game.

Not necessarily combat Trained but has access to combat spells

ley line walker- HtoH basic access to invocations and all the spells that come with standard equipment has weapons.

Mystic- no HtoH or WP has access to them and combat spells.

We could probably guarantee any mage above 5th level has some sort of combat magic most have WP, HtoH of some kind of initial combat spells.

-So if we talk about whether or not mages are combat trained

Lets look at a CS Grunt- 3 WP and HtoH expert
OK, so what makes a CS grunt combat trained? they can use a Gun follow orders and fight in HtoH. the strength comes from working as a team having military precision But lets take that soldier out of the squad put him by himself he is a guy who can fight with Hands and shoot a gun.

A mage with a WP and HtoH can do the same but now also have access to magic that can give him an instant win in some cases escape take on multiple foes better the odds for himself.

if we are talking combat trained strip both the CS grunt and Mage of your choice naked no weapons who has the advantage? HtoH expert vs an assortment of spells plus HtoH basic in most cases.

So combat trained is the same as being capable of combat level 1 Grunt hasn't seen actual combat or he would not be level one he can trained and is combat capable just like any mage can be combat capable but with the added benefit to turn the tides of a fight with mystical powers.

only thing is as the mage increases in level the power level of the mage far surpasses any single soldier. As for range any mage with WPs can shoot a laser just as far as a soldier and mages are not ignorant to the limitations of magic and their PPE levels and will prepare themselves to fight in situations like that.

You comparing real world militias to professional armies yes the professional army wins but that is because they are fighting with the same weapons mages fight with magic not even comparable.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:You might want to check the books before you make false claims axleman. (not sure why you think warlocks are one of the top mages the most common mages are the ones in the core book.)

The most common mage is a ley line walker-page 116 RUE under OCC skills list "Hand to hand as basic-".
While the TW lacks a standard hand to hand he has a standard WP and a WP is also a form of combat training as it covers combat with a weapon(by the book).

Agreed.
The books repeatedly use LLWs as the Typical Mage, so that's the one that we should look to when examining the capabilities of the "typical mage."

By the book the only magic user in RUE that lacks combat training are the mystics but I am not convinced they are suppose to be overly common. (What I find interesting is that while LLW, shifters and TW are called mages in the book, it does not apear the mystic is called a mage. They are also said to be born as much as trained.
(Not home with my most my books to check if warlocks have a default level of hand to hand but in the first post they where quoted as having basic so I will say your claim has been proven to be false.)

Mystics could be argued to be psychic characters who know some magic, more than magic characters that have some psionics.
They are listed as a Men of Magic OCC, though.

As a rule as it was used in this case in not a literal rule but means in general.(Context that you seam to love striping from post you attack explains this, heck Killer cyborg even stated as much.)

Yup.

In general most mages have some form of combat training.
Being good at something is subjective, having any level of training for something means you have training for it.

Right there, by adding the underlined bit, I think you're making a statement that fewer people would disagree with.
"Most mages have some form of combat training" is something that people could agree to, even if they would not agree with the claim "most mages are combat trained."

Hmm are all men of magic/magic users classified as mages? But that could be a whole different debate, perhaps in its own topic.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

In general most mages have some form of combat training.
Being good at something is subjective, having any level of training for something means you have training for it.

Right there, by adding the underlined bit, I think you're making a statement that fewer people would disagree with.
"Most mages have some form of combat training" is something that people could agree to, even if they would not agree with the claim "most mages are combat trained."

That seems to be the problem of the "Anti" crowd
They are arguing that the negative (Mages are not trained for combat) is valid, and that "some mages are" is false.
The only thing we can truthfully say is that "some mages are not trained for combat"

Because the books pretty clearly say that the vast majority of mages have some combat training... and that if you have SOME combat training then I am sorry, you are combat trained.
No one is arguing that every mage is a SEAL or a Marine Ranger...
...but no one seriously argues that every grunt is a SEAL either so I don't see why the mages should be held up to some absurd standard that is vastly higher than anyone else.

eliakon wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

In general most mages have some form of combat training.
Being good at something is subjective, having any level of training for something means you have training for it.

Right there, by adding the underlined bit, I think you're making a statement that fewer people would disagree with.
"Most mages have some form of combat training" is something that people could agree to, even if they would not agree with the claim "most mages are combat trained."

That seems to be the problem of the "Anti" crowd
They are arguing that the negative (Mages are not trained for combat) is valid, and that "some mages are" is false.
The only thing we can truthfully say is that "some mages are not trained for combat"

Because the books pretty clearly say that the vast majority of mages have some combat training... and that if you have SOME combat training then I am sorry, you are combat trained.
No one is arguing that every mage is a SEAL or a Marine Ranger...
...but no one seriously argues that every grunt is a SEAL either so I don't see why the mages should be held up to some absurd standard that is vastly higher than anyone else.

Just the leftover AD&D/Fantasy idea that mages aren't supposed to be seen as warriors so combat-training means warrior (even though those higher level mages can engage in devastating battles that would terrify all but the most hardened warrior), so the ridiculously high standard to enforce that idea that mages aren't supposed to be good at combat.

Ok people back when I last comment on this I said you had to agree on a definition of Combat trained first before you can discuss if makes are or are not generally combat trained. Pages later you still haven't agreed on a definition.

The Raw is clear ambiguous on this otherwise you get further than you got. There seems to be a couple definitionsteps to work with.

Combat trained is military training, this would based on occ only not any format of skills. Thus limiting to military occur of various factions and headhunter. This would exclude a number of combat based occur however like gunfighter and gunslinger for example

Combat trained means any hand to hand skill including basic. This includes a huge number of occ all most all if you allow occ related skills

Combat trained means hand to hand: expert or better. Of course several military OCC start with Basic which seem problematic.

Some combination of hand to hand and wp (I like 4 myself)

Each has some issues related to the game. However the biggest issue is RIFTS is a game that is built on a world that nearly all adventurers will be combat trained.

Ok, so from the US army website under basic combat training reads the following

Basic Combat Training 10 week course

"BASIC COMBAT TRAINING
THE TEN-WEEK JOURNEY FROM CIVILIAN TO SOLDIER
Basic Combat Training (BCT) is a training course that transforms civilians into Soldiers. Over the course of ten weeks, recruits will learn basic tactical and survival skills along with how to shoot, rappel, and march. They will also learn the basics of Army life and military customs, including the Seven Core Army Values."

So based on this they learn a little tactical and survival skills and how to shoot along with military etiquette.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now a course on basic tactical (8 week combat specific course) course description:

"Advanced Combat Marksmanship, Close Quarters Combat (CQC), and Progressive Breaching."

Advanced Combat Marksmanship = WP
Close Quarters Combat = HtoH
Progressive Breaching (so use of grenades and breaching doorways) Not a major factor in stating whether you are combat trained considering it is very specific to offensive in buildings therefore urban.

Military Training is the training to use weapons and fight within a group to generate a tactical advantage. However in rifts combat is usually more of a one on one conflict therefore military training does not increase your efficiency.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is based on a 10 week basic combat training course as well as a 8 week Basic Tactical Operations Course total of 18 weeks.
Also some say mages sit and read books there would be countless books of military tactics history information about the Tolkien wars mages can also learn military tactics like this through study of past wars and battles much like an officer today would.

A soldier on its own is a person with some hand to hand skills and the ability to use his firearm as a character or NPC levels they learn more as they receive combat experience. The world of rifts is a dangerous place lawlessness, war, monsters, vampires you name it its dangerous so when lazlo and the city of brass for instance have militias containing all sorts of magic users who are just living there we can assume most villages around the world would have similar ways to defend themselves and if a mage lives there they have most likely experienced some form of conflict.

Now if we define basic combat trained as this and bring it to rifts it seems like:

- wilderness/survival skills
- HtoH less than 8 weeks of hand to hand training.
- WP
- Rappelling (climbing)


80% of mages start with these specific skills on top of their magic ability most starting with combat specific spells both offensive and Defensive. As they level they grow even more powerful as well as have time for exposure to combat. So in summary I would say mages are definitely combat trained as well as the majority actually having some combat experience.

eliakon wrote:That seems to be the problem of the "Anti" crowd
They are arguing that the negative (Mages are not trained for combat) is valid, and that "some mages are" is false.
The only thing we can truthfully say is that "some mages are not trained for combat"

Because the books pretty clearly say that the vast majority of mages have some combat training... and that if you have SOME combat training then I am sorry, you are combat trained.
No one is arguing that every mage is a SEAL or a Marine Ranger...
...but no one seriously argues that every grunt is a SEAL either so I don't see why the mages should be held up to some absurd standard that is vastly higher than anyone else.

bull.

we've never argued that no mages are combat trained. we've argued that many or even most are not combat trained, and that is probably true in the grand scheme of things: yes, a mage CAN be combat trained. and so can a baker or a lawyer or a scientist. that doesn't mean most *are* trained. heck, the argument we see a few posts up that most mages will be combat trained by 5th level has absolutely no factual evidence to support it. now, most mages *could* be combat-trained, IF they choose to be. but they don't need to, and there is relatively little incentive for many mages to do so. there are plenty of non-combat spells (or spells which could easily see as much or more use in non-combat situations as combat situations) even in the rulebooks, which are frankly very combat-centric... we have probably 20-30 weapons listed in the core book, several suits of armour, and almost nothing about what kinds of clothing people wear, how much a regular SDC car or motorcycle or even a bicycle or horse suitable for traveling around a city would cost, what kinds of music are popular or how much it might cost to go to a bar and buy yourself a beer. should we presume that people are mostly walking around naked except for the few OCCs that specifically mention clothing? or that nobody uses vehicles except for exploring the wilderness in MDC models? or that bars no longer exists, and the only kind of music is the kind you play for yourself?

simply put, there is little to no reason to presume that the majority of mages are combat or adventuring mages. a mage has a skill set that provides very little incentive to travel around as a homeless wanderer, and has very little incentive to sign themselves up for military duty instead of living a comfortable life thanks to their spells. we're frankly seeing some pretty crazy assumptions here (like the notion that because combat training is an option for mages, most of them will be combat trained by 5th level... and yet, no mention of that same tendency for every single other person in the game world, who all have access to hand to hand and WP skills as secondary skills). heck, we've got the notion that the techno-wizard (which is basically an inventor) must be combat trained because their spells have combat uses, and yet the briefest examination would reveal that a large number of those "combat" spells are used to provide a power source for techno-wizardry devices, and the class itself doesn't even have any hand to hand skill by default (and yes, they can choose it... but so can a vagabond. or anyone in the entire setting, for that matter).

there is no real incentive for a person who can do the things a mage can do to devote their lives to anything so dangerous that it would warrant spending their time learning how to handle themselves in a fight rather than learning how to handle themselves in the social structure of a guild, or how to run a shop, or how to translate ancient texts written in another language, or any number of other things.

Thought: Given the number of times Kevin Siembadia has had "head cannon" that is part of the Rifts background but not shared with anyone for year/decades, has anyone considered that perhaps the most common "mage" is an actual non-adventuring "mage" class that far outnumbers the adventuring classes?

No canon support for it, of course, but it would nicely resolve the issue of how the majority of magic OCCs have HtH and WPs yet the majority of mages aren't combat trained.

Federation of Magic p.33

"As with most cities of sorcerers and monster races, virtually half or more of the city’s inhabitants posses some measure of magic power and make formidable opponents."

A formidable opponent is almost by definition a worthy one. Therefore a Formidable opponent to the CS would have to be combat trained with what I have stated before Combat Trained needs

- wilderness/survival skills
- HtoH less than 8 weeks of hand to hand training.
- WP
- Rappelling (climbing)

Based on what the US considers combat training 90% of mages have the requirement of a HtoH and a WP in their starting skill list. And are formidable opponents quoted directly form the federation of magic book.

The Dweomer Military: p.18

"When necessary, a battalion (640 troops) or brigade (1920) can come to the defense of Dweomer in a matter of 2D4 minutes, and an army of 10000+ defenders can he mobilized in less than 20 minutes!"

"These academies house, train and maintain the kingdom’s “official” Army - one division of 5760 troops. Over 60% of these Defenders possess magical powers; roughly 25% are Battle Magi, 20% Controller
Battle Magi, 5% Ley Line Walkers, 5% Techno-Wizards, 10% other practitioners of magic, 5% supernatural beings and creatures of magic (demons, hatchling dragons, etc.) and the remainder,
conventional military troops (if a soldier clad in magical armor and wielding TW and other types of magic weapons can be considered “conventional”)."

City of brass population 18900 if half or more of the population have some measure of magic power and make formidable opponents mean at least 9450 people are formidable opponents and possess magic. 50% of the population are humans and D-Bees trained/Practicing magic. Therefore 100% of mages in the city of brass have some measure of magic powers and make formidable opponents.

Lazlo has a population of 2 million according to RUE p.21 its is a city of sorcerers and monster races therefore 1 million inhabitants that posses magic power and are formidable opponents its also states that the city defenses are a citizen militia of Dragons, Mages, Psycics and men at arms. Therefore the citizens of these cities know they must be combat trained to defend themselves.

World book 28 p.35
Now looking at Arzno states that 90% of the population over the age of 12 have one ancient WP and one modern WP. States Ley Line Walkers and Techno-Wizards are extremely common with (8-10%) employed with Arzno Mercenary Corp. It states that Parishioners of magic other than techno wizards are healers, fortune tellers advisors military support, special operatives, spies, assassins, heavy (magical) artillery and as vampire hunters and demon slayers.

This shows that all over North America mages are formidable as well as combat trained 90% of all OCCs start with a HtoH Vagabonds even have HtoH basic and 2 WP to start Rogue Scientist has WP to start 90% of the population of Arzno have a WP operators have 2 WP and HtoH basic. Therefore most people in rifts are by definition Combat Trained not just magic users. Military Trained and Combat Trained are two entirely different things but does not make one necessarily better than the other considering i based combat training on actual combat training in the US military. As I stated before Rifts is dangerous people are equipped to defend themselves and their families both magic users and ordinary people. So until the people who are stating that mages are not combat trained get some actual numbers and information in the books that support their case I don't see any evidence that supports their ideas.

Shark_Force wrote:

eliakon wrote:That seems to be the problem of the "Anti" crowd
They are arguing that the negative (Mages are not trained for combat) is valid, and that "some mages are" is false.
The only thing we can truthfully say is that "some mages are not trained for combat"

Because the books pretty clearly say that the vast majority of mages have some combat training... and that if you have SOME combat training then I am sorry, you are combat trained.
No one is arguing that every mage is a SEAL or a Marine Ranger...
...but no one seriously argues that every grunt is a SEAL either so I don't see why the mages should be held up to some absurd standard that is vastly higher than anyone else.

bull.

we've never argued that no mages are combat trained. we've argued that many or even most are not combat trained, and that is probably true in the grand scheme of things: yes, a mage CAN be combat trained. and so can a baker or a lawyer or a scientist. that doesn't mean most *are* trained. heck, the argument we see a few posts up that most mages will be combat trained by 5th level has absolutely no factual evidence to support it. now, most mages *could* be combat-trained, IF they choose to be. but they don't need to, and there is relatively little incentive for many mages to do so. there are plenty of non-combat spells (or spells which could easily see as much or more use in non-combat situations as combat situations) even in the rulebooks, which are frankly very combat-centric... we have probably 20-30 weapons listed in the core book, several suits of armour, and almost nothing about what kinds of clothing people wear, how much a regular SDC car or motorcycle or even a bicycle or horse suitable for traveling around a city would cost, what kinds of music are popular or how much it might cost to go to a bar and buy yourself a beer. should we presume that people are mostly walking around naked except for the few OCCs that specifically mention clothing? or that nobody uses vehicles except for exploring the wilderness in MDC models? or that bars no longer exists, and the only kind of music is the kind you play for yourself?

simply put, there is little to no reason to presume that the majority of mages are combat or adventuring mages. a mage has a skill set that provides very little incentive to travel around as a homeless wanderer, and has very little incentive to sign themselves up for military duty instead of living a comfortable life thanks to their spells. we're frankly seeing some pretty crazy assumptions here (like the notion that because combat training is an option for mages, most of them will be combat trained by 5th level... and yet, no mention of that same tendency for every single other person in the game world, who all have access to hand to hand and WP skills as secondary skills). heck, we've got the notion that the techno-wizard (which is basically an inventor) must be combat trained because their spells have combat uses, and yet the briefest examination would reveal that a large number of those "combat" spells are used to provide a power source for techno-wizardry devices, and the class itself doesn't even have any hand to hand skill by default (and yes, they can choose it... but so can a vagabond. or anyone in the entire setting, for that matter).

there is no real incentive for a person who can do the things a mage can do to devote their lives to anything so dangerous that it would warrant spending their time learning how to handle themselves in a fight rather than learning how to handle themselves in the social structure of a guild, or how to run a shop, or how to translate ancient texts written in another language, or any number of other things.

That is a nice theory...
...but it doesn't fit the actual facts on the ground.
The claim that some how the majority of mages are really complacent civilians doesn't mesh with the skill sets of those classes.
If they were 'bakers or accountants' then they would not be required to learn combat skills (OCC mandated selections of H2H and /or WPs)
Its a nice head canon that some how the vast majority of mages are really just scholarly ascetics who have no idea what they are doing when out of their ivory towers...
...but it would appear that we don't have the write ups for the OCCs that those people have, because the OCCs that we do have are anything but.
it is also pretty disingenuous to try and argue that PCs and the like should be considered the same as those civilians in their NPC classes...
...even though, for example no one tries to argue that since the vast majority of people on earth are civilians that everyone is really a civilian and that soldiers don't exist... when you are playing a PC, with a PC OCC then you are, generally, assumed to actually be a member of that OCC not really some banker who just happens to moonlight as your PC class.

Also it would appear in fact that the vast number of mages consider learning how to handle themselves in a fight to be of such importance that they make learning how to do just that a core part of their training (OCC skill i.e. you are required to take the training to have the OCC).

No one is arguing that all mages are full on professional soldiers.
But what we ARE arguing is that they are not all civilians who have no training or experience at all until they start adventuring.
That may be an interesting campaign for a GM to run... but that is not the RAW for how mages are written up.
The RAW is that the world of Rifts is an incredibly dangerous place where a huge portion of the population actively trains for combat... against gangs, bandits, invaders, demons and what have you.

eliakon wrote:That is a nice theory...
...but it doesn't fit the actual facts on the ground.
The claim that some how the majority of mages are really complacent civilians doesn't mesh with the skill sets of those classes.
If they were 'bakers or accountants' then they would not be required to learn combat skills (OCC mandated selections of H2H and /or WPs)
Its a nice head canon that some how the vast majority of mages are really just scholarly ascetics who have no idea what they are doing when out of their ivory towers...
...but it would appear that we don't have the write ups for the OCCs that those people have, because the OCCs that we do have are anything but.
it is also pretty disingenuous to try and argue that PCs and the like should be considered the same as those civilians in their NPC classes...
...even though, for example no one tries to argue that since the vast majority of people on earth are civilians that everyone is really a civilian and that soldiers don't exist... when you are playing a PC, with a PC OCC then you are, generally, assumed to actually be a member of that OCC not really some banker who just happens to moonlight as your PC class.

Also it would appear in fact that the vast number of mages consider learning how to handle themselves in a fight to be of such importance that they make learning how to do just that a core part of their training (OCC skill i.e. you are required to take the training to have the OCC).

No one is arguing that all mages are full on professional soldiers.
But what we ARE arguing is that they are not all civilians who have no training or experience at all until they start adventuring.
That may be an interesting campaign for a GM to run... but that is not the RAW for how mages are written up.
The RAW is that the world of Rifts is an incredibly dangerous place where a huge portion of the population actively trains for combat... against gangs, bandits, invaders, demons and what have you.

the most common kinds of mages *aren't* all given hand to hand skills and WPs by default.

some of them have one or the other. none of them must have both.

but yes, of course the majority of the mage OCCs we find in later books have combat skills. it's a roleplaying game where the rules revolve almost entirely around combat. most of the mages we're shown have combat skills for the same reason that most of the OCCs in general have combat skills. once we had some basic generic classes (which don't all have combat skills) to provide a basic framework for random NPCs, unless there was a specific need for an explicitly non-combat class, it was pretty much guaranteed that any new OCC was going to be a combat specialist... because for adventurers (ie the type of character most games revolve around) combat skills are indeed going to be an extremely good idea.

as to mages needing to be combat trained to be formidable opponents, again, not true.

first of all, there's more than one way to be a formidable opponent. if there's a shifter who summons half a dozen gargoyles, hands them talismans with immunity to energy, and sends them off to fight a typical CS patrol, does the hand to hand, WP, or wilderness skills of that shifter matter?

if a techno-wizard outfits an entire squad of regular militia with TW net guns and armour of ithan on their body armour, which skills are doing more to make the TW a formidable opponent... the one used to craft those TW devices, or the techno-wizard's personal ability to use a laser?

if an air warlock drops a tornado on you from 4000 feet away, are you going to think "oh man, that would have been so much more devastating if he knew where to look for edible berries and could use a sword"?

a mage with literally zero WPs, no hand to hand, etc can be a formidable opponent. they can even be an extremely useful part of a military force, simply by providing massive amounts of utility outside of combat, buffs pre-combat, and even using their limited actions in combat to hinder the enemy. obviously, they'd be even more of a threat if they had HtH (and possibly WP skills), but they are not even remotely a requirement for them to be a formidable opponent. several magic nets per round is obviously more devastating than one, but for the people stuck in that one net, it is equally bad news (and frankly, considering how quickly you'd go through PPE if you were spamming 4+ magic nets per round, even someone who *is* combat trained would probably limit themselves).

(and please, stop pretending that just because someone is in a militia, that means they must be a fully trained combat expert. they may not even be required or expected to do any regular training. nor does the fact that someone is willing to defend their home mean they are combat trained).

Shark_Force wrote:

eliakon wrote:That is a nice theory...
...but it doesn't fit the actual facts on the ground.
The claim that some how the majority of mages are really complacent civilians doesn't mesh with the skill sets of those classes.
If they were 'bakers or accountants' then they would not be required to learn combat skills (OCC mandated selections of H2H and /or WPs)
Its a nice head canon that some how the vast majority of mages are really just scholarly ascetics who have no idea what they are doing when out of their ivory towers...
...but it would appear that we don't have the write ups for the OCCs that those people have, because the OCCs that we do have are anything but.
it is also pretty disingenuous to try and argue that PCs and the like should be considered the same as those civilians in their NPC classes...
...even though, for example no one tries to argue that since the vast majority of people on earth are civilians that everyone is really a civilian and that soldiers don't exist... when you are playing a PC, with a PC OCC then you are, generally, assumed to actually be a member of that OCC not really some banker who just happens to moonlight as your PC class.

Also it would appear in fact that the vast number of mages consider learning how to handle themselves in a fight to be of such importance that they make learning how to do just that a core part of their training (OCC skill i.e. you are required to take the training to have the OCC).

No one is arguing that all mages are full on professional soldiers.
But what we ARE arguing is that they are not all civilians who have no training or experience at all until they start adventuring.
That may be an interesting campaign for a GM to run... but that is not the RAW for how mages are written up.
The RAW is that the world of Rifts is an incredibly dangerous place where a huge portion of the population actively trains for combat... against gangs, bandits, invaders, demons and what have you.

the most common kinds of mages *aren't* all given hand to hand skills and WPs by default.

some of them have one or the other. none of them must have both.

but yes, of course the majority of the mage OCCs we find in later books have combat skills. it's a roleplaying game where the rules revolve almost entirely around combat. most of the mages we're shown have combat skills for the same reason that most of the OCCs in general have combat skills. once we had some basic generic classes (which don't all have combat skills) to provide a basic framework for random NPCs, unless there was a specific need for an explicitly non-combat class, it was pretty much guaranteed that any new OCC was going to be a combat specialist... because for adventurers (ie the type of character most games revolve around) combat skills are indeed going to be an extremely good idea.

as to mages needing to be combat trained to be formidable opponents, again, not true.

first of all, there's more than one way to be a formidable opponent. if there's a shifter who summons half a dozen gargoyles, hands them talismans with immunity to energy, and sends them off to fight a typical CS patrol, does the hand to hand, WP, or wilderness skills of that shifter matter?

if a techno-wizard outfits an entire squad of regular militia with TW net guns and armour of ithan on their body armour, which skills are doing more to make the TW a formidable opponent... the one used to craft those TW devices, or the techno-wizard's personal ability to use a laser?

if an air warlock drops a tornado on you from 4000 feet away, are you going to think "oh man, that would have been so much more devastating if he knew where to look for edible berries and could use a sword"?

a mage with literally zero WPs, no hand to hand, etc can be a formidable opponent. they can even be an extremely useful part of a military force, simply by providing massive amounts of utility outside of combat, buffs pre-combat, and even using their limited actions in combat to hinder the enemy. obviously, they'd be even more of a threat if they had HtH (and possibly WP skills), but they are not even remotely a requirement for them to be a formidable opponent. several magic nets per round is obviously more devastating than one, but for the people stuck in that one net, it is equally bad news (and frankly, considering how quickly you'd go through PPE if you were spamming 4+ magic nets per round, even someone who *is* combat trained would probably limit themselves).

(and please, stop pretending that just because someone is in a militia, that means they must be a fully trained combat expert. they may not even be required or expected to do any regular training. nor does the fact that someone is willing to defend their home mean they are combat trained).

So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Shark_Force wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Are you serious? This is a rifts forum it has everything to do with rifts...

RubberBoot wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Are you serious? This is a rifts forum it has everything to do with rifts...

i am serious.

are you serious about thinking that the rulebooks are actually comprehensive enough to include everything that could ever possibly come up in rifts, and that information outside of the books is completely useless and pointless?

if so, please provide some supporting evidence by, oh, i dunno... explaining how the rulebooks tell you to resolve a conversation between a PC and an NPC (without using any information drawn from outside the rulebooks... so for example, you can only use a definition of "imagination" if it is actually defined in the books, since you appear to be arguing that no definition from a dictionary outside of the rifts books has any meaning)

I defined combat trained based on courses for basic combat training in the United States military. To develop a definition that I then translated into skills based on rifts (because this is a rifts forum) Based on your definition " it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment." But in the RUE in the description of the Ley Line Walker page 113 "The Ley Line Walker spends years learning to focus his thoughts and build his will in order to direct and mold mystic energy" So someone who has the will to control mystic energy has less control over his emotions than a level one CS grunt? based on your definition I would say that the Ley Line Walker is more combat trained.

Oh and for your dictionary definition..

Willpower
control exerted to do something or restrain impulses.

Thank you for clearing up that mages are in fact combat trained

RubberBoot wrote:I defined combat trained based on courses for basic combat training in the United States military. To develop a definition that I then translated into skills based on rifts (because this is a rifts forum) Based on your definition " it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment."

It sounds like you can't think of any other parts of military training that would help one keep calm in the face of discord, that would help one maintain discipline, other than being taught to climb, shoot, and so forth.

But in the RUE in the description of the Ley Line Walker page 113 "The Ley Line Walker spends years learning to focus his thoughts and build his will in order to direct and mold mystic energy" So someone who has the will to control mystic energy has less control over his emotions than a level one CS grunt? based on your definition I would say that the Ley Line Walker is more combat trained.

Oh and for your dictionary definition..

Willpower
control exerted to do something or restrain impulses.

Thank you for clearing up that mages are in fact combat trained

It's not about concentration in general. It's about concentration under certain circumstances.
Being trained for concentration is not the same as being trained for combat.
Buddhist monks and yogis don't always do well in modern wars.

Killer Cyborg wrote:I guess it's in the same way that two skills could be identical, only one is "professional" and the other isn't.
The effects are the same, only one's professional.
Or, in this case, one "isn't good."

But such distinctions AFAIK when it comes to skill selection only apply to non-Domestic Skills** from a Secondary vs CC*-Other/Related Skill categorization. In fact that is what pg300 of RUE states when discussing Secondary Skills...

pg300 RUE under Secondary Skills section wrote:...For Example: If a character took the Art Skill as an O.C.C. Related Skill, he would have the ability of a professional artist. If that same character takes Art as a Secondary Skill, however, his ability is that of a talented amateur. [..] That is the essential difference between O.C.C. Related Skills and Secondary Skills, other than the fact that not all skills are available as Secondary Skills (i.e. the average person cannot self-teach Espionage or Military skills).

Note: per the list on pg300 you can apparently learn 2 specific Military category skills via the RUE Secondary Skill list (RMB-era each class's secondary skills where based on the Related listing).

So if we are looking at skills from a professional and amateur perspective via the Secondary Skill list... Any Mage with the following Skills would be considered professionally combat trained because they automatically are at "professional level":
-Espionage Category Skills (Detect Ambush/Concealment, Intelligence, Sniper, Tracking seem to apply)
-Military Category Skills (Any w/exception of Camouflage and Recognize Weapon Quality)
-Hand to Hand skills considered above Basic
-Force March Physical Skill (per description, not available as Secondary Skill)
-WP (Ancient): Paired, Siege Weapons
-WP (Modern): Submachine gun, Flamethrowers, Heavy Military Weapons, Heavy MD Weapons (probably some more from pre-RUE)

It also means that if a mage has skills on the Secondary Skill list but taken as Related Skills selection OR from their CC they would be considered combat trained which includes:
-Military Category exceptions noted above
-Hand to Hand Basic
-Any WP Ancient or Modern

Last time I checked most magic using classes start with a HTH skill, HTH skills are upgraded with Related Skills (NOT Secondary Skills) in RUE (pg104, 116, 119, 126, 129, IINM in other book to) they can select WPs as Related (and some even start). Access to Military Category Skills are a bit more hit-miss (unlike true Men-at-arms), but access to that Category doesn't seem to be a deciding factor in this discussion (AFAIK). The Magic using classes w/o starting HTH Skills (at least in RUE pg119, 129) have to specifically pay for it with a Related Skill just to receive Basic per their OCC skill list (though I admit that might be to allow it to be upgraded, but comes across IMHO as the way the class "pays for" HTH: Basic).

*CC refers the various Character Classes to OCC, RCC, PCC.

**Since most/all Domestic Skills can be upgraded to professional status, regardless of where it was selected or paid for (pg307 in RUE's note just notes that at this point it is of superior quality, but makes no distinction about how the skill upgrade is paid for)

RubberBoot wrote:Now if we define basic combat trained as this and bring it to rifts it seems like:

- wilderness/survival skills
- HtoH less than 8 weeks of hand to hand training.
- WP
- Rappelling (climbing)


80% of mages start with these specific skills on top of their magic ability most starting with combat specific spells both offensive and Defensive. As they level they grow even more powerful as well as have time for exposure to combat. So in summary I would say mages are definitely combat trained as well as the majority actually having some combat experience.

I don't think Wilderness/survival or Reppelling are required to be combat trained, just because it in Basic doesn't mean it required I mean Drill is in Basic too, but i don't think that is a requirement either.

Further it only matters if all people agree to your definition, since several in this thread have been proposed and none have been accepted by the majority. Indeed I summeries most in my above post but everyone was to busy to argue around me.

At the end of the day the people making Rifts are Game Designers not miltary historians [Trust me, I re-reading Rifts® World Book 11: Coalition War Campaign™ and having fits about rank and metals to the point where I feel I should revise the whole mess.] that means they build a fun game that will play fast and loose with the reality of the real world in the name of fun.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:I defined combat trained based on courses for basic combat training in the United States military. To develop a definition that I then translated into skills based on rifts (because this is a rifts forum) Based on your definition " it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment."

It sounds like you can't think of any other parts of military training that would help one keep calm in the face of discord, that would help one maintain discipline, other than being taught to climb, shoot, and so forth.

But in the RUE in the description of the Ley Line Walker page 113 "The Ley Line Walker spends years learning to focus his thoughts and build his will in order to direct and mold mystic energy" So someone who has the will to control mystic energy has less control over his emotions than a level one CS grunt? based on your definition I would say that the Ley Line Walker is more combat trained.

Oh and for your dictionary definition..

Willpower
control exerted to do something or restrain impulses.

Thank you for clearing up that mages are in fact combat trained

It's not about concentration in general. It's about concentration under certain circumstances.
Being trained for concentration is not the same as being trained for combat.
Buddhist monks and yogis don't always do well in modern wars.

Hate to break it to you, but there is no special training to concentrate under combat conditions. However people that learn to concentrate in general tend to do better than those that do not. That is why much of basic is about building general mental discipline (concentration) and not mental discipline for combat. Basic mental discipline can be trained combat specific discipline can not regardless of how well trained a soldier is you do not know how he will perform in combat until he is in combat.

The closes basic gets to combat is playing laser tag in the woods.

Shark_Force wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Lets see a comment about mages ability to focus in MD combat in rifts, lets see would that have anything to do with Rifts?
Oh wait it would.

[quote="Saitou Hajime"][quote="RubberBoot"]
[b]Now if we define basic combat trained as this and bring it to rifts it seems like:

- wilderness/survival skills
- HtoH less than 8 weeks of hand to hand training.
- WP
- Rappelling (climbing)
[/b]

80% of mages start with these specific skills on top of their magic ability most starting with combat specific spells both offensive and Defensive. As they level they grow even more powerful as well as have time for exposure to combat. So in summary I would say mages are definitely combat trained as well as the majority actually having some combat experience.[/quote]

I don't think Wilderness/survival or Reppelling are required to be combat trained, just because it in Basic doesn't mean it required I mean Drill is in Basic too, but i don't think that is a requirement either.


Further it only matters if all people agree to your definition, since several in this thread have been proposed and none have been accepted by the majority. Indeed I summeries most in my above post but everyone was to busy to argue around me.

At the end of the day the people making Rifts are Game Designers not miltary historians [Trust me, I re-reading Rifts® World Book 11: Coalition War Campaign™ and having fits about rank and metals to the point where I feel I should revise the whole mess.] that means they build a fun game that will play fast and loose with the reality of the real world in the name of fun.[/quote]

Basic training does not teach wildereness/survival skills(all you do is go camping, it does not teach you to find food fresh water or build a shelter survival is taught at SEARS not basic), and not all basic have a repelling tower that is specific to just one or two basics.
Skills that are taught in basic.
First Aid(only the basics)
General athletics
camuoflage
Drink water
Drill and cermony
Drink water
Cleaning
Land navigation
How to protect yourself in CBRN/NBC attacks
Don't rape some one(one of the reasons they extended basic was to add in prevention of sexual harassment)
Drink Water
WP thrown
WP rifle
HTH basic
(Typically only the most rudimentary part of any skill is taught of the skills in basic.)

Why do I have drink water on there 3 times, because the place that you think builds combat focus has to hold your hand and reminding you dozens of times a day that you need to drink water in the summer at places like- Oklahoma, and Georgia where it hot as all heck to not die.

Not only did I go through basic and a former DS but I am currently in an instructor position for the military, and spent 8 months in 2014 at fort Leninwood to assist with initial entry training(basic). Now a days you are not allowed to say anything that might hurt their fillings and have a very narrow list of what you can call them.

I stated Wilderness/ survival skills and rappelling because I was saying what that basic combat training course would have consisted of in rifts skills.

So of the actually combat related skills you would need HtoH and a WP to be considered combat trained.

As for concentration and calmness in battle that does not come with combat training that comes with combat experience which at level 1 no class has otherwise they would not be level 1.

When it states what the average lower end mage that would go out and fight with the militias are levels 3-5. With the increased experience and combat (experience).

When comparing a level 1 CS soldier to a level 1 mage of any kind they both are not combat experienced.

You become combat trained then with develop actual combat experience when you are in combat.

One thing I would like to point out though, to the people stating mages sit in their ivory tower:

Elemental fusionist
Ley Line Walker
Mystic

with the exception of
Shifter
Techno-wizard

do NOT start with a literacy therefore they are not reading anything.

And we are talking about if these mages would be able to keep calm in a battle situation they would have the same focus as any other person considering Shifters for instance are masters of the rift they are travelling to other dimensions having to summon and control Demons which to me would mean they need to keep their cool in stressful situations.

Like I stated before if the majority of mages make formidable opponents then they must be able to control there mental state in the heat of combat that with the majority of mages starting with a HtoH and WP should prove they are in fact trained enough for combat and will react the same as any level 1 CS soldier in their first combat.

Just for added note in game terms ME is what this "keep calm" thing would be based on. a character with an very low ME might not be able to control themselves in combat but if we look at class requirements for the RUE mages


Elemental Fusionist ME 12
Ley Line Walker High ME suggested
Mystic ME 9
Shifter ME 12
Techno-Wizard ME 12

I would say if you wanted to create a list of basic training skills for rifts look at the two basic soldier OCCs in RUE merc soldier and CS grunt any skills both poses would likely be some what of a standard basic training skills.
Likely what you would get is hand to hand basic, running, climbing and radio basic
Survival is not a basic soldier skill but a skill used in elite units such as SF that are expected to be away from supply lines.

Blue_Lion wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Lets see a comment about mages ability to focus in MD combat in rifts, lets see would that have anything to do with Rifts?
Oh wait it would.

it sure would. but a statement about how someone learns to focus their will in general is not about MD combat in particular. on the other hand, RUE page 189-190 (which i believe killer cyborg already quoted) has an entire section about magic combat.

now, let's see, what can we find there? hmmm...

"... usually lacks initiative and is the last to attack/respond..."
"... is not the best at one on one combat..."
and the use of high level spells is difficult because they "... require more time, concentration and focus..."

it has a bolded sentence that reads "Vulnerable to pressed attack" as a heading for one of the paragraphs, and goes in to immediately state that "With the arguable exception of the shifter, practitioners of magic are not experts in hand to hand combat" (presumably, other explicit combat mages are ignored because they're not found in the RUE... personally i'd assume that actual combat-oriented mages are a cut above shifters, as shifters are mostly used to conflicts between themselves and a single summoned minion). it also says "... they aren't warriors, they just aren't".

then it goes on to say that "magic has the disadvantage of requiring concentration and speaking, two things you can't do while under attack". it describes various things that can disrupt casting... like not stopping to take a break after parrying, dodging, or striking back at an enemy. getting punched or kicked, knocked down, or even just blinded is enough to break a spellcaster's concentration on casting a high level spell. no damage is even required... "... if the mage is hit, it breaks his spellcasting, especially if he or his armor takes any damage..." (note that especially simply means even more so than usual... as in, generally speaking a hit does not deal damage is sufficient to break their concentration).

it literally takes the mage stopping and doing *nothing* for 1-2 attacks after doing any sort of remotely combat-oriented action for a mage to be able to use higher level spells.

now, i don't know about you, but this does not make it sound like the conditions under which a typical mage is trained includes anything to prepare them for combat at all (even non-damaging hits are expected to disrupt a typical spellcaster by default), let alone combat where the majority of the participants are using weapons that can cut down sections of forest almost instantly, destroy small buildings, cause explosions, and leave craters everywhere they hit.

a spellcaster is literally assumed to be completely incapable of casting anything but the most rudimentary of spells in combat situations. that does not sound like someone who has firm control of themselves in a combat situation to me.

Shark_Force wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Lets see a comment about mages ability to focus in MD combat in rifts, lets see would that have anything to do with Rifts?
Oh wait it would.

it sure would. but a statement about how someone learns to focus their will in general is not about MD combat in particular. on the other hand, RUE page 189-190 (which i believe killer cyborg already quoted) has an entire section about magic combat.

now, let's see, what can we find there? hmmm...

"... usually lacks initiative and is the last to attack/respond..."
"... is not the best at one on one combat..."
and the use of high level spells is difficult because they "... require more time, concentration and focus..."

it has a bolded sentence that reads "Vulnerable to pressed attack" as a heading for one of the paragraphs, and goes in to immediately state that "With the arguable exception of the shifter, practitioners of magic are not experts in hand to hand combat" (presumably, other explicit combat mages are ignored because they're not found in the RUE... personally i'd assume that actual combat-oriented mages are a cut above shifters, as shifters are mostly used to conflicts between themselves and a single summoned minion). it also says "... they aren't warriors, they just aren't".

then it goes on to say that "magic has the disadvantage of requiring concentration and speaking, two things you can't do while under attack". it describes various things that can disrupt casting... like not stopping to take a break after parrying, dodging, or striking back at an enemy. getting punched or kicked, knocked down, or even just blinded is enough to break a spellcaster's concentration on casting a high level spell. no damage is even required... "... if the mage is hit, it breaks his spellcasting, especially if he or his armor takes any damage..." (note that especially simply means even more so than usual... as in, generally speaking a hit does not deal damage is sufficient to break their concentration).

it literally takes the mage stopping and doing *nothing* for 1-2 attacks after doing any sort of remotely combat-oriented action for a mage to be able to use higher level spells.

now, i don't know about you, but this does not make it sound like the conditions under which a typical mage is trained includes anything to prepare them for combat at all (even non-damaging hits are expected to disrupt a typical spellcaster by default), let alone combat where the majority of the participants are using weapons that can cut down sections of forest almost instantly, destroy small buildings, cause explosions, and leave craters everywhere they hit.

a spellcaster is literally assumed to be completely incapable of casting anything but the most rudimentary of spells in combat situations. that does not sound like someone who has firm control of themselves in a combat situation to me.

You are going to effectivally build your statement around flavour text rather than something a liitle more solid. Further High level in Rifts is like 8th. I am much more a fan of find a Defintion that base on something more solid than flavour text like OCC or Skills. The Chances of those passages being a cut and past from the original RIFTS rule book and all so being heavily influance for PFRPG and other Fantasy games traditional mindset about mages is high. RIFTS is an evolving world something that the RUE didn't always catch.

Saitou Hajime wrote:You are going to effectivally build your statement around flavour text rather than something a liitle more solid. Further High level in Rifts is like 8th. I am much more a fan of find a Defintion that base on something more solid than flavour text like OCC or Skills. The Chances of those passages being a cut and past from the original RIFTS rule book and all so being heavily influance for PFRPG and other Fantasy games traditional mindset about mages is high. RIFTS is an evolving world something that the RUE didn't always catch.

well, first off, unless you think that the people who wrote the game were sitting around thinking "gee, what if a random internet discussion starts up about what counts as combat training in rifts", then we are ALL talking about flavour text.

secondly, this whole discussion is basically a discussion of something that is not defined by any rules: how likely is someone to lose their cool enough to not be fully under control of their voice in the middle of combat? feel free to point out any rule about that specific situation, but i find myself just a *bit* doubtful that you're going to find anything on the subject, because it's quite trivial and i don't think the authors have ever felt the need to define something that is already so nebulous.

thirdly, that isn't all flavour text. it's rules text describing how casting spells interact with regular combat. including explicit discussion about how many melee actions need to be used for certain things. i'm not entirely clear on what exactly you think melee actions are if not crunch. and not just any crunch, but crunch (and also some fluff) that is directly related to the subject at hand. it is, as i ALREADY told you, from the magic section of the rule book. and it is on the subject of using magic in combat.

it is also blindingly obvious that it isn't a copy/paste from RMB, because it discusses a way of handling magic that didn't even exist until RUE.

and yes, the rules are influenced by magic as it is found in fantasy settings. but if you think basing it off of real life magic would be better, go right ahead. but so far as i'm aware, most real life magic as practiced by those who believe it works tends to involve rituals that last for several minutes at a minimum. of course, if you think these (typically precise procedures lasting several minutes and requiring that you set up an entire area with various trappings of ritual magic like candles, drawings on the ground, etc).

alternately, considering that rifts is based on the combination of science fiction and fantasy... we could just use the setting material for fantasy settings. which, again, were the inspiration for magic in the rifts setting in the first place (to the extent that those fantasy settings actually exist in the same overal setting as rifts, and which specifically use the same rules as a specifically declared feature).

Shark_Force wrote:

Saitou Hajime wrote:You are going to effectivally build your statement around flavour text rather than something a liitle more solid. Further High level in Rifts is like 8th. I am much more a fan of find a Defintion that base on something more solid than flavour text like OCC or Skills. The Chances of those passages being a cut and past from the original RIFTS rule book and all so being heavily influance for PFRPG and other Fantasy games traditional mindset about mages is high. RIFTS is an evolving world something that the RUE didn't always catch.

well, first off, unless you think that the people who wrote the game were sitting around thinking "gee, what if a random internet discussion starts up about what counts as combat training in rifts", then we are ALL talking about flavour text.

secondly, this whole discussion is basically a discussion of something that is not defined by any rules: how likely is someone to lose their cool enough to not be fully under control of their voice in the middle of combat? feel free to point out any rule about that specific situation, but i find myself just a *bit* doubtful that you're going to find anything on the subject, because it's quite trivial and i don't think the authors have ever felt the need to define something that is already so nebulous.

thirdly, that isn't all flavour text. it's rules text describing how casting spells interact with regular combat. including explicit discussion about how many melee actions need to be used for certain things. i'm not entirely clear on what exactly you think melee actions are if not crunch. and not just any crunch, but crunch (and also some fluff) that is directly related to the subject at hand. it is, as i ALREADY told you, from the magic section of the rule book. and it is on the subject of using magic in combat.

it is also blindingly obvious that it isn't a copy/paste from RMB, because it discusses a way of handling magic that didn't even exist until RUE.

and yes, the rules are influenced by magic as it is found in fantasy settings. but if you think basing it off of real life magic would be better, go right ahead. but so far as i'm aware, most real life magic as practiced by those who believe it works tends to involve rituals that last for several minutes at a minimum. of course, if you think these (typically precise procedures lasting several minutes and requiring that you set up an entire area with various trappings of ritual magic like candles, drawings on the ground, etc).

alternately, considering that rifts is based on the combination of science fiction and fantasy... we could just use the setting material for fantasy settings. which, again, were the inspiration for magic in the rifts setting in the first place (to the extent that those fantasy settings actually exist in the same overal setting as rifts, and which specifically use the same rules as a specifically declared feature).

Several people have already gone and length about tying combat training to OCC or Skill which is why I highlight those In my post above. Rifts has always had a maxium of spell able to cast before RUE, it was two per Melee, hense why in Africa it was a Big Deal that Thoth could cast three. I fully admit it been a while since I read RUE, so how much it changed magic is not something I comment to, however if anything it likely is influance on the work before it. You are not in what is quoted talking about Melee actions in anyway, I guessing it in what Killer Cyborg quoted, but since I was talking about what you quoted, it doesn't matter.]

Shark_Force wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

RubberBoot wrote:So what exactly is your idea of combat trained give me your specific definition based on rifts otherwise your argument means nothing.

funny. the other side of the discussions seems to have absolutely no problem whatsoever using whatever definition they feel like when it's convenient for them. why am i limited to only definitions based on rifts again? looking back at the original source of the statement we're all discussing, does it have *any* clear indication at all that the comment was made intending to refer exclusively to a definition based on rifts? does it even have any vague or implied indication that the comment was intended to refer exclusively to a rifts-based definition?

edit: i *will* say that i wouldn't use a definition where any random skill that might be vaguely related to combat in any form automatically counts as fully combat trained, particularly in the context of the original statement. the original context has almost nothing to do with the ability to use a laser rifle, throw a punch, or minimize damage from an explosion. it has a lot more to do with how much control over your emotions you have in the middle of the chaos of combat situations, and your ability to act in a calm, rational manner in those situations in spite of the environment.

Lets see a comment about mages ability to focus in MD combat in rifts, lets see would that have anything to do with Rifts?
Oh wait it would.

it sure would. but a statement about how someone learns to focus their will in general is not about MD combat in particular. on the other hand, RUE page 189-190 (which i believe killer cyborg already quoted) has an entire section about magic combat.

now, let's see, what can we find there? hmmm...

"... usually lacks initiative and is the last to attack/respond..."
"... is not the best at one on one combat..."
and the use of high level spells is difficult because they "... require more time, concentration and focus..."

it has a bolded sentence that reads "Vulnerable to pressed attack" as a heading for one of the paragraphs, and goes in to immediately state that "With the arguable exception of the shifter, practitioners of magic are not experts in hand to hand combat" (presumably, other explicit combat mages are ignored because they're not found in the RUE... personally i'd assume that actual combat-oriented mages are a cut above shifters, as shifters are mostly used to conflicts between themselves and a single summoned minion). it also says "... they aren't warriors, they just aren't".

then it goes on to say that "magic has the disadvantage of requiring concentration and speaking, two things you can't do while under attack". it describes various things that can disrupt casting... like not stopping to take a break after parrying, dodging, or striking back at an enemy. getting punched or kicked, knocked down, or even just blinded is enough to break a spellcaster's concentration on casting a high level spell. no damage is even required... "... if the mage is hit, it breaks his spellcasting, especially if he or his armor takes any damage..." (note that especially simply means even more so than usual... as in, generally speaking a hit does not deal damage is sufficient to break their concentration).

it literally takes the mage stopping and doing *nothing* for 1-2 attacks after doing any sort of remotely combat-oriented action for a mage to be able to use higher level spells.

now, i don't know about you, but this does not make it sound like the conditions under which a typical mage is trained includes anything to prepare them for combat at all (even non-damaging hits are expected to disrupt a typical spellcaster by default), let alone combat where the majority of the participants are using weapons that can cut down sections of forest almost instantly, destroy small buildings, cause explosions, and leave craters everywhere they hit.

a spellcaster is literally assumed to be completely incapable of casting anything but the most rudimentary of spells in combat situations. that does not sound like someone who has firm control of themselves in a combat situation to me.

WOW
where to begins
1) "not a warrior" =/= not trained for combat
2) not being an expert =/= not trained for combat
3) the mechanics of what is required to cast a spell has zero to do with if a person is trained in combat or not.

The idea that to be trained in combat you must be an expert warrior is ludicrous on its face.
That would rule out the vast majority of military classes (I am sorry a grunt is NOT an 'expert warrior', its just not)
And how a specific skill interacts with battle is likewise irrelevant.
No really it is. Do we say that snipers are not combat trained because they have to take time, aim shots, their extended aiming action gets interrupted if they are hit.... No? Wait so why does that standard apply to mages but no one else.

And then of course there is the fact that um YES if you can't use your magic in combat situations...
...and you know it (and it is not something that can be 'trained' but simply a Law Of Physics because your not showing that most mages are not trained... you are showing how the laws of magic work. Since even a war deity like Rurga would have the same issues with their spell casting...)
then I would think that is a pretty darn good reason to learn how to handle yourself in those situations.

Maybe some people figure that mages just say "Oh well, I can't use my magic here so I guess if I ever get attacked I'll just curl up and die"
But most people I know would say "Hmmm, guess I better learn how to defend myself in the situations I can't use my magic"

(And of course we are totally ignoring the fact that if this is the sum total be all and end all of the discussion then apparently Combat Mages, Battle Magi, Temporal Warriors, Sky Knights, Demon Knights, and all the rest of them are even worse at fighting than Shifters....)

eliakon wrote:Maybe some people figure that mages just say "Oh well, I can't use my magic here so I guess if I ever get attacked I'll just curl up and die"

What makes you think that?