Forums of the Megaverse®

Daeglan wrote:Another skill item. What is the penalty for using a skill completely untrained in it? What if you have a related skill? We could probably do with a skill tree of sorts as many skills seem to be more specializations of a more basic skill.

Daeglan wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I do agree with his scaling issue. Scaling could use some work. Just because other systems suffer from this flaw does not mean it is not a flaw. It just means it is a tough nut to handle correctly. yes it is a sticky issue but as I pointed out other systems have this problem too and are not considered broken for it. I am pointing out its a double standard. could it use work? yes. broken? not by industry standards.

That a Claymore should not do the same damage as a kick. But then I think Most of the missiles and explosives are very under powered. A kick certainly should do less damage than a claymore. Or more accurately a claymore should do more. Claymores make lumpy spaghetti sauce. Kicks might break bones and might kill if lucky or repeated enough. Not in the same realm damage wise. still a personal bias... I feel the damages are reflective especially when you look at older descriptions of said kick he referencing "a karate style kick that does 3d6"

One that might be good mook type class of some sort. This would help address some of the combat grind. D&D had a good mechanic for it. helpful yes but a break? questionable.

On the skill issue. Skills ought to advance above 100% While a die roll of 99-00 should always be a failure. This will make it so those with high skills get effected by modifiers less while still having the potential to fail. It would also be good to have a degree of success mechanic of some sort. So when I succeed and the other guy succeeds who actually won? Perception should properly be fit into the skill system. the current method seems like a poorly implemented add on and does not take related skills or level into account.again I agree that the skill system does need expansion. I disagree that perception does not take into account skill level. Bonuses are applied at a rate of +1 per 10% of skill so as a skill climbs in ability its bonuses to perception also increase. (its not pretty or elegant but it does function.)

The modifier system could use some streamlining. It is good to have them. It is better if they are easy to apply on the fly. (not sure how much easier it could get but that may just be my own personal bias interfering.

I agree many actions in combat are not handled well. I also do not see a method for handling hit locations. Are they random or considered to only hit the center of mass? are there modifiers for targeting specifics. This makes hitting a vampire in the heart annoying as the rules are not clear. Hit locations are optional according to the rules... all strikes are considered to hit main body. By the book hitting a vamps heart is a called shot and follows those rules.

The Technology classes could do with some clarification. Namely on the issues he refers to as some game guidelines will help the play style issues. Formal rules on adding e-clip chargers to things like vehicles would fix a lot of this. The E-clip thread is a fine example of some solid guidelines would save a lot of headaches. not wanting to drag that argument in here... but... most of that argument centers around the "science" of a fictional item and not the rules... If anything one side wants us to ignore the rules that are given in favor of their "opinion" That is hardly proof of a break.

I agree you don't need 7 books. You can play with 1. 2 is helpful for the region you are in. As you travel others might become relevant.

Hotrod wrote:
2. The '7 books to run a single-theme campaign' refers to the Siege on Tolkeen. Although this is an exception, it's the single most-influential event of the setting.

Hotrod wrote:Damian: You're right that my post is steeped in personal bias. The topic and original post invites us to post our opinion, and I did. We seem to have different views on what constitutes 'broken'. Here's mine:

1. If a player or GM applies the rules as written and the outcome routinely defies common sense.

2. If a rule is contradicted in published works (There are multiple rules for bursts in Rifts titles alone, by the way)

3. If it is too difficult for players and GMs to apply the rules and modifiers in the course of their games.

These are my measuring sticks of 'broken'. They do reflect my opinions... heck, they ARE my opinions. What's your criteria? You seem quick to dismiss many shortcomings because many other systems have similar shortcomings. This is a reasonable approach. I have no expectation that Kevin will drop everything to fix these issues.

I also think that it's important to identify what these issues are, even if other systems share them. That's what I thought this thread was all about.

A few clarifications:

1. The roundhouse kick I referenced is in RUE and PF2E. A martial arts style kick... thanks for proving my point for me.

2. The '7 books to run a single-theme campaign' refers to the Siege on Tolkeen. Although this is an exception, it's the single most-influential event of the setting.

Akashic Soldier wrote:Am I the only one who is aware of the "point blank" rules? The ones that the roundhouse kick can never utilize because its a kick.

Or how about the close range dodge penalties (-5 or -10 dependent on range) or the fact that to pull of said kick you have to be a trained professional fighter where as anyone can point a firearm and pull a trigger.

People are too quick to forget that Palladium is the game of circumstance and situation.

So yes...

Yes, the Homosexual Kung-Fu Butler can kill a man by kicking them in the face!
Yes, the cowboy can survive a gunshot wound to the chest.
And yes, its unlikely that a homosexual Kung-Fu Butler exists and its unlikely that someone would survive a gunshot wound. Neither are impossible, maybe not likely, but not impossible... and more to the point... its a game. Its supposed to be dramatic, cinematic, and fun. Rules are there so there is some order, some balance, some common ground! Not to tell you how many breathes your character draws in 15 seconds so you can measure his oxygen intake to see how long he could "realistically" hold his breath. Sure you CAN but to me that is a waste of book space. I'd rather just see... "Characters can hold their breath X minutes +X per point of P.E." For me, that is enough.

Palladium's STRENGTH as a game system is that it is so expansive and situational. Try to take that away and you might as well be playing D&D. It has just enough rules to get you by and just enough flexibility to remain balanced if handled correctly by a mature and fair Game Master.

Complaints like "this kick does too much" are silly to me. I've been kicked in the side of the head once by a running jump kick and it K.O.ed me. But I've also had my leg broken, an arrow in my right arm, stabbed in the forehead with a pocket knife, and shot in the foot, OH! and partially set on fire (one time). Yet, only the kick to the face knocked me out. Is it counter intuitive? Sure! Heck, a few weeks back I was bitten by a dog and that almost knocked me out too. I got really dizzy and could barely stay conscious BUT when I was losing blood in my foot I was fine, it hurt like 10 ***** on a *****-boat, but I was fine.

I guess my point is (forgive me if I am rambling I am only half awake), that damage varies and the human body is freaking unpredictable! Or at least that's my experience.

Damian Magecraft wrote:All those rules you mention...
they are scattered throughout the book(s).
It is no wonder that they tend to be forgotten.
A purely mechanics only guide is desperately needed to sort out these breaks (both the perceived and actual) to the system.

Daeglan wrote:My point on the round house kick is that at best a round house kick could if one is very lucky is break some bones Even if done by an MMA fighter. A claymore turns people to lumpy spaghetti sauce. not the same realm of damage. of course explosives soule have blast radii as well.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Daeglan wrote:My point on the round house kick is that at best a round house kick could if one is very lucky is break some bones Even if done by an MMA fighter. A claymore turns people to lumpy spaghetti sauce. not the same realm of damage. of course explosives soule have blast radii as well.

and I have seen a mans neck snapped with "just" a kick. this is a hobby wide issue that no one has ever satisfactorily resolved. lets not try and re-invent the wheel here.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Daeglan wrote:My point on the round house kick is that at best a round house kick could if one is very lucky is break some bones Even if done by an MMA fighter. A claymore turns people to lumpy spaghetti sauce. not the same realm of damage. of course explosives soule have blast radii as well.

and I have seen a mans neck snapped with "just" a kick. this is a hobby wide issue that no one has ever satisfactorily resolved. lets not try and re-invent the wheel here.

The most deadly roundhouse kick in all of human history does NOT compare to the most deadly claymore strike in all of human history.
Not unless that roundhouse kick knocked the guy into a swinging claymore.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Daeglan wrote:My point on the round house kick is that at best a round house kick could if one is very lucky is break some bones Even if done by an MMA fighter. A claymore turns people to lumpy spaghetti sauce. not the same realm of damage. of course explosives soule have blast radii as well.

and I have seen a mans neck snapped with "just" a kick. this is a hobby wide issue that no one has ever satisfactorily resolved. lets not try and re-invent the wheel here.

The most deadly roundhouse kick in all of human history does NOT compare to the most deadly claymore strike in all of human history.
Not unless that roundhouse kick knocked the guy into a swinging claymore.

not arguing that point at all...
just pointing out that damage scaling is an industry wide problem and not one that is going to be fixed without requiring a graphing calculator at the table top. (and that is not conducive to convincing folks the system is easy to learn).

Akashic Soldier wrote:Complaints like "this kick does too much" are silly to me. I've been kicked in the side of the head once by a running jump kick and it K.O.ed me. But I've also had my leg broken, an arrow in my right arm, stabbed in the forehead with a pocket knife, and shot in the foot, OH! and partially set on fire (one time). Yet, only the kick to the face knocked me out. Is it counter intuitive? Sure! Heck, a few weeks back I was bitten by a dog and that almost knocked me out too. I got really dizzy and could barely stay conscious BUT when I was losing blood in my foot I was fine, it hurt like 10 ***** on a *****-boat, but I was fine.

I guess my point is (forgive me if I am rambling I am only half awake), that damage varies and the human body is freaking unpredictable! Or at least that's my experience.

I've been kicked in the side of the head once by a running jump kick and it K.O.ed me. But I've also had my leg broken, an arrow in my right arm, stabbed in the forehead with a pocket knife, and shot in the foot, OH! and partially set on fire (one time). Yet, only the kick to the face knocked me out.

Sureshot wrote:I think this needs to be brought up yet again. Houseruling is not a selling feature. Too many on this board forget that. A person getting into a rpg wants to use the RAW. Houseruling only if they need to house rule. Nor is the ability a rpg to be house ruled limited PB rpgs. Every rpg encourages it. PB rpgs are the only one where the devs instead of actually addressing certain issues of the system tell everyone else to do. Certain rules that are obscure, contradict each other, scattered all over the place need to be addressed by the devs. I want to play and run a rpg. Not spend my time house ruling.

Damian makes a good point about the need of a book that explain all the mechanics of the game in a clear concise manner. PB is lacking in that department. Every time I read RUE I always leave with the impression a book that had a workable system. Clunky in some parts. The overall book is imo just very badly designed. Stuff is all over the place. The missile table almost looks like it was left out and tossed into the book with a small font size at the very last minute. I want everything that I need for designing a character in one place. Same thing for combat. Laid out in a very professional and modern format. Not the jumble that is the average core book. With a table of contents and a index. Anything and everything to make my life easier. As it stands imo I can still do it just annoying as hell at least for me.

A big step for me would be a official rule altering damage values of vehicles, robots and anything larger than power armor. No way should a hand weapon out damage say a tank or a robot. Damage values were nerfed on purpose from the start to ensure player survivability. When it imo ruins the immersion of the setting. When a guy in a 50 mdc can survive a blast from a tank well suspension of belief can only get you so far imo.

Daeglan wrote:So I was thinking. Hand to hand fighting styles should not effect ranged combat. IE why does hand to hand martial arts give a person using a rifle more actions? shouldn't there be some sort of ranged fighting style that covers that? and hand to hand just handles hand to hand?

eliakon wrote:

Daeglan wrote:So I was thinking. Hand to hand fighting styles should not effect ranged combat. IE why does hand to hand martial arts give a person using a rifle more actions? shouldn't there be some sort of ranged fighting style that covers that? and hand to hand just handles hand to hand?

Because its all accretion. Originally wwwwaaaaaaayyyyyyy back in the day there was H2H, and Archery and Magic (and its wholly owned subisidary psionics) and each had its own rules. As things got added on more and more things got rolled into other things. The idea of 'each class has its own combat table' became 'a couple of hand to hand tables' then modern weapons, and robots, and.....yah.

Rolling Bear wrote:I've always found threads like this one humorous. Rifts is Rifts because of the Rifts system. If you change the system it's not longer Rifts. Seriously some of you guys probably buy a football video game then complain it isn't a hockey video game.

Rolling Bear wrote:I've always found threads like this one humorous. Rifts is Rifts because of the Rifts system. If you change the system it's not longer Rifts. Seriously some of you guys probably buy a football video game then complain it isn't a hockey video game.

Rolling Bear wrote:I've always found threads like this one humorous. Rifts is Rifts because of the Rifts system. If you change the system it's not longer Rifts. Seriously some of you guys probably buy a football video game then complain it isn't a hockey video game.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Daeglan wrote:My point on the round house kick is that at best a round house kick could if one is very lucky is break some bones Even if done by an MMA fighter. A claymore turns people to lumpy spaghetti sauce. not the same realm of damage. of course explosives soule have blast radii as well.

and I have seen a mans neck snapped with "just" a kick. this is a hobby wide issue that no one has ever satisfactorily resolved. lets not try and re-invent the wheel here.

The most deadly roundhouse kick in all of human history does NOT compare to the most deadly claymore strike in all of human history.
Not unless that roundhouse kick knocked the guy into a swinging claymore.

not arguing that point at all...
just pointing out that damage scaling is an industry wide problem and not one that is going to be fixed without requiring a graphing calculator at the table top. (and that is not conducive to convincing folks the system is easy to learn).

Other systems have other ways to deal with it.
In D&D 3.5, fists and feet inflict non-lethal damage as a rule, for example.
Palladium could do something similar for their rule system.

Simply having bladed/piercing attacks inflict straight-to-HP damage instead of normal SDC damage would solve a LOT of the issues.

GenThunderfist wrote:I see what you are saying, but then you get the same suspension of disbelief as you need now for a claymore and a round house kick. I mean, people have been killed because of a couple good unarmed strikes, and others have lived with their limbs hacked off. So you end up with people asking "Why can't I kill him by bludgeoning him to death and caving in his skull? It works in life..." and you have to respond "Well, it's the rules." It's similar to now asking why this sword and my kick don't match life correctly. It's a problem all around the board and once you fix it one way, you are usually wrong in another way.
However 3.5 did get it closer than others, but it's still requiring a good amount of suspended disbelief when I can't kill my enemy by punching him, but I can carve his heart out with a letter opener

Blue_Lion wrote:The scaling in rifts is to focus on the hereo player charter not giant mech battles. If a inftry class could not stand up if a robot that player X starts with was on the field every one whould play the robot pilot. So the damage may seam illgical but it is to put the focus on the party.

Rolling Bear wrote:My point is people seem or argue for a complete and utter revamp of a system. IE changing football rules to hockey. IMO I find it funny and annoying at the same time. That's it.

Sureshot wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:The scaling in rifts is to focus on the hereo player charter not giant mech battles. If a inftry class could not stand up if a robot that player X starts with was on the field every one whould play the robot pilot. So the damage may seam illgical but it is to put the focus on the party.

Still increasing damage values imo should not remove the focus from the party. It would add more realism without removing the focus.

Sureshot wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:The scaling in rifts is to focus on the hereo player charter not giant mech battles. If a inftry class could not stand up if a robot that player X starts with was on the field every one whould play the robot pilot. So the damage may seam illgical but it is to put the focus on the party.

Still increasing damage values imo should not remove the focus from the party. It would add more realism without removing the focus.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Dude, what hellhole do you live in?

Jefffar wrote:Hey gang, can we keep the discussion focused on Palladium's system. I moved the DnD 3.5 talk to the Other Games forum where it belongs.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Dude, what hellhole do you live in?

New South Wales Australia.
Clarence Valley, Hunter Region.

Nothing I've been through is particularly horrific. While in Scouts at Camp Eagle eye this guy from 5th Grafton was fire jumping a bon fire and got their pants leg hooked and fell in. Needless to say THAT was horrific.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Jefffar wrote:Hey gang, can we keep the discussion focused on Palladium's system. I moved the DnD 3.5 talk to the Other Games forum where it belongs.

Well, it was an example of the kind of thing that Palladium could do... only Palladium could do it better.
But okay.

Point is that SDC is a brilliant concept that is entirely under-utilized.

Jefffar wrote:Personally, I think SDC should be bypassed by weapons and other potentially 'lethal' attacks.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Okay. I was figuring either you were in a very hunter-heavy area or Somalia.

Tor wrote:Now presumably your skull stopped the knife somehow.

Jefffar wrote:Personally, I think SDC should be bypassed by weapons and other potentially 'lethal' attacks.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Jefffar wrote:Personally, I think SDC should be bypassed by weapons and other potentially 'lethal' attacks.

Agreed.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Jefffar wrote:Personally, I think SDC should be bypassed by weapons and other potentially 'lethal' attacks.

Agreed.

would that not lead to the opposite problem? of rendering SDC meaningless?

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Jefffar wrote:Personally, I think SDC should be bypassed by weapons and other potentially 'lethal' attacks.

Agreed.

would that not lead to the opposite problem? of rendering SDC meaningless?

Jefffar wrote:Depends what else you do with it.

Tying it into getting knocked unconscious and the defects of stun type weapons would give heroes the option of knocking out bad guys with their fists instead of killing them . . . which doesn't matter as much most of the time in Rifts, but is far more important in Ninjas and Superspies or Heroes Unlimited for example.