simultaneous attack

[Killer Cyborg]

Simultaneous attacks really make aoe attacks like Grenades or Missiles a bad idea.
If you throw a Grenade and there are too many people in the target area, you need to roll up a new character.

Just another example of how it's a broken mechanic.

--flatline

Well, hilarious. And makes the whole dodge/parry thing moot, so reducing combat to a bash a thon.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.
And who only ever use their actions to shoot/stab.
Otherwise it's not something that you should do every attack.

Back when we still allowed simultaneous attacks, we had a super powered character with Energy Absorption and APS:Liquid who would just stand there and simo anyone who attacked him. We were already unhappy with the idea of simultaneous attacks, but it wasn't really until that character was made (to prove a point, no doubt), that we house ruled them away.

--flatline

YEah, allowing essentially invulnerable characters can mess a game up all kinds of ways.

I have to ask, though, what exactly happened?

[flatline]

Well, hilarious. And makes the whole dodge/parry thing moot, so reducing combat to a bash a thon.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.
And who only ever use their actions to shoot/stab.
Otherwise it's not something that you should do every attack.

Back when we still allowed simultaneous attacks, we had a super powered character with Energy Absorption and APS:Liquid who would just stand there and simo anyone who attacked him. We were already unhappy with the idea of simultaneous attacks, but it wasn't really until that character was made (to prove a point, no doubt), that we house ruled them away.

--flatline

YEah, allowing essentially invulnerable characters can mess a game up all kinds of ways.

I have to ask, though, what exactly happened?

We got bored, so we modified the game so that it was interesting again.

--flatline

[say652]

yea lets take out stuff that was designed for the game. lol. invulnerable characters are supposed to be hand to hand combat monsters, but i see like nobody allows this power(gm weakness of mind maybe?) or in a hellacious world like rifts earth nobody allows superpowers(again for no really good reason,i cant kill your pc fast enough if its a superhero so NO.) over all the game is great with a great system the problem appears to be the GM's.

[Killer Cyborg]

Well, hilarious. And makes the whole dodge/parry thing moot, so reducing combat to a bash a thon.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.
And who only ever use their actions to shoot/stab.
Otherwise it's not something that you should do every attack.

Back when we still allowed simultaneous attacks, we had a super powered character with Energy Absorption and APS:Liquid who would just stand there and simo anyone who attacked him. We were already unhappy with the idea of simultaneous attacks, but it wasn't really until that character was made (to prove a point, no doubt), that we house ruled them away.

--flatline

YEah, allowing essentially invulnerable characters can mess a game up all kinds of ways.

I have to ask, though, what exactly happened?

We got bored, so we modified the game so that it was interesting again.

--flatline

I was trying to figure out what simultaneous attacks had to do with an over-powered uber-character making the game boring for you.
But if you're not interested in elaborating, then nevermind.

[Talavar]

My 2 cents: simultaneous attacks are a bad mechanic because it absolutely prioritizes toughness over accuracy, agility or other combat bonuses. For example: in-game sources talk about Glitter-boys being bad in melee, but as long as they simu-attack, they can beat almost any one. And there's almost no point trying to fight something with buckets of MD, like an adult dragon - they can just simu-attack a party to death, which might have been a challenging fight without said mechanic.

[Noon]

Simultaneous attacks really make aoe attacks like Grenades or Missiles a bad idea.
If you throw a Grenade and there are too many people in the target area, you need to roll up a new character.

Just another example of how it's a broken mechanic.

--flatline

Well, hilarious. And makes the whole dodge/parry thing moot, so reducing combat to a bash a thon.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.
And who only ever use their actions to shoot/stab.
Otherwise it's not something that you should do every attack.

I've no idea why you bring up 'like' in regard to getting shot or stabbed? If the game had some morale points that dropped down from damage and made you less effective, I'd understand. As is it seems to be adding a concern that is missplaced - this isn't a death spiral system.

I think you're argument comes from people who avoid/overlook optimising their system use to adhere to some particular fictional values of their own. That works if everyone at the table does that.

[Killer Cyborg]

in-game sources talk about Glitter-boys being bad in melee

Which ones?

And there's almost no point trying to fight something with buckets of MD, like an adult dragon - they can just simu-attack a party to death, which might have been a challenging fight without said mechanic.

See, I tend to think that it adds a layer of challenge, and prompts people to think things through more.
In this case, PCs Vs. an Adult Dragon, if the dragon is using simo-attacks, then one of two things is probably happening:
1. You're in melee range, in which case I have to ask, "You're getting into melee with an ADULT FRICKIN' DRAGON!? Why the heck!?"
2. You're in breath range, in which case I have to ask, "Why isn't the party using the advantage that modern weapons provide them, but moving out to 1d4x1000' range, instead of staying up close?

I know; your point was that when you're up against something that has a lot of MDC in general, Simo-Attack provides them with an advantage.
You were just using adult dragons as an example.

Either way, the point is that I don't see simo-attacks as making that much difference.
If you're all standing around shooting/biting each other, then that big dragon is still only going to get the same number of attacks in that he would get normally.
He'll just potentially just get them faster, if he's willing to take the hit.
Then again...
-If you have paired weapons and he doesn't, then you can (iirc) parry his simo-attack while still landing your own hit.
-If you're behind cover, he'll have to make a Called Shot, which doesn't work with simo-attack (unless he's already spent one attack Calling)
-If you don't attack him, he can't simo-attack.

And if one is in a combat where one's only chance of winning/surviving relies heavily on parrying or dodging, then I'd say that it's a good time to re-evaluate one's decision-making paradigm.
Simo-attack adds another dimension to combat, but that's all it does. I've never had a problem with it, and I've used it since 1991.

[Killer Cyborg]

Simultaneous attacks really make aoe attacks like Grenades or Missiles a bad idea.
If you throw a Grenade and there are too many people in the target area, you need to roll up a new character.

Just another example of how it's a broken mechanic.

--flatline

Well, hilarious. And makes the whole dodge/parry thing moot, so reducing combat to a bash a thon.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.
And who only ever use their actions to shoot/stab.
Otherwise it's not something that you should do every attack.

I've no idea why you bring up 'like' in regard to getting shot or stabbed?

It was the only reason that sprang to mind for simo-attacking as a default instead of parrying or dodging.
Did you have another reason in mind?

If the game had some morale points that dropped down from damage and made you less effective, I'd understand. As is it seems to be adding a concern that is missplaced - this isn't a death spiral system.

It's a role-playing game.
And most characters are going to prefer to avoid pain instead of leap into it, as a rule.
Also, it's a game where armor damage costs thousands or tens of thousands of credits to repair.
While I'm not sure what you mean by "death spiral system," I'm guessing that you think that there's no incentive in the game to avoid getting shot/stabbed, and I'd say that you're wrong.
For one thing, you could die.

I think you're argument comes from people who avoid/overlook optimising their system use to adhere to some particular fictional values of their own. That works if everyone at the table does that.

No idea what you're trying to talk about there.

[Noon]

I think you're argument comes from people who avoid/overlook optimising their system use to adhere to some particular fictional values of their own. That works if everyone at the table does that.

No idea what you're trying to talk about there.

It's "It's a roleplaying game." when stated from a more objective, clinical viewpoint.

Suffice to say when there's a superior mechanical option, not all groups have player characters which act the same way as your groups player characters in regard to that option.

[say652]

in real life its common knowledge take a punch to get a better punch in. so on a game based so much in a realistic feel, why would real life fight mechanics apply? right. and yes i did kick my gm across the room proving you can dodge and simo kick easy like when someone tries to punch you in the face.

[Nekira Sudacne]

in-game sources talk about Glitter-boys being bad in melee

Which ones?

And there's almost no point trying to fight something with buckets of MD, like an adult dragon - they can just simu-attack a party to death, which might have been a challenging fight without said mechanic.

See, I tend to think that it adds a layer of challenge, and prompts people to think things through more.
In this case, PCs Vs. an Adult Dragon, if the dragon is using simo-attacks, then one of two things is probably happening:
1. You're in melee range, in which case I have to ask, "You're getting into melee with an ADULT FRICKIN' DRAGON!? Why the heck!?"
2. You're in breath range, in which case I have to ask, "Why isn't the party using the advantage that modern weapons provide them, but moving out to 1d4x1000' range, instead of staying up close?

I know; your point was that when you're up against something that has a lot of MDC in general, Simo-Attack provides them with an advantage.
You were just using adult dragons as an example.

Either way, the point is that I don't see simo-attacks as making that much difference.
If you're all standing around shooting/biting each other, then that big dragon is still only going to get the same number of attacks in that he would get normally.
He'll just potentially just get them faster, if he's willing to take the hit.
Then again...
-If you have paired weapons and he doesn't, then you can (iirc) parry his simo-attack while still landing your own hit.
-If you're behind cover, he'll have to make a Called Shot, which doesn't work with simo-attack (unless he's already spent one attack Calling)
-If you don't attack him, he can't simo-attack.

And if one is in a combat where one's only chance of winning/surviving relies heavily on parrying or dodging, then I'd say that it's a good time to re-evaluate one's decision-making paradigm.
Simo-attack adds another dimension to combat, but that's all it does. I've never had a problem with it, and I've used it since 1991.

A good post overall, but I have to remind you adult dragons have a native teleport at a very high precentage. In short, if you do attack from 3000 feet away, they'll be in melee range next turn, so you might as well plan on fighting at melee range.

[Killer Cyborg]

A good post overall, but I have to remind you adult dragons have a native teleport at a very high precentage. In short, if you do attack from 3000 feet away, they'll be in melee range next turn, so you might as well plan on fighting at melee range.

Or for retreating, then striking from range again.

Or spread out a bit, so that if/when the dragon is attacking ONE of your team, the other team members are a thousand+ feet away, and can strike at range.
In which case, the one guy fighting the dragon doesn't need to worry about simo-attacks, because he shouldn't be focused on offense anyway- he should be focused on staying alive and tying up the dragon while the others shoot at it.
And you should use rail guns and/or missiles, if possible, because the dragon probably knows Impervious to Energy.
Of course, he can still probably cast AoI and other spells to soak damage as well.
All of which goes to the point: if you're fighting an adult dragon, simo-attacks shouldn't be your biggest worry.

[Killer Cyborg]

I think you're argument comes from people who avoid/overlook optimising their system use to adhere to some particular fictional values of their own. That works if everyone at the table does that.

No idea what you're trying to talk about there.

It's "It's a roleplaying game." when stated from a more objective, clinical viewpoint.

Suffice to say when there's a superior mechanical option, not all groups have player characters which act the same way as your groups player characters in regard to that option.

That's their problem, not the game's problem.

[Talavar]

in-game sources talk about Glitter-boys being bad in melee

Which ones?

And there's almost no point trying to fight something with buckets of MD, like an adult dragon - they can just simu-attack a party to death, which might have been a challenging fight without said mechanic.

See, I tend to think that it adds a layer of challenge, and prompts people to think things through more.
In this case, PCs Vs. an Adult Dragon, if the dragon is using simo-attacks, then one of two things is probably happening:
1. You're in melee range, in which case I have to ask, "You're getting into melee with an ADULT FRICKIN' DRAGON!? Why the heck!?"
2. You're in breath range, in which case I have to ask, "Why isn't the party using the advantage that modern weapons provide them, but moving out to 1d4x1000' range, instead of staying up close?

I know; your point was that when you're up against something that has a lot of MDC in general, Simo-Attack provides them with an advantage.
You were just using adult dragons as an example.

Either way, the point is that I don't see simo-attacks as making that much difference.
If you're all standing around shooting/biting each other, then that big dragon is still only going to get the same number of attacks in that he would get normally.
He'll just potentially just get them faster, if he's willing to take the hit.
Then again...
-If you have paired weapons and he doesn't, then you can (iirc) parry his simo-attack while still landing your own hit.
-If you're behind cover, he'll have to make a Called Shot, which doesn't work with simo-attack (unless he's already spent one attack Calling)
-If you don't attack him, he can't simo-attack.

And if one is in a combat where one's only chance of winning/surviving relies heavily on parrying or dodging, then I'd say that it's a good time to re-evaluate one's decision-making paradigm.
Simo-attack adds another dimension to combat, but that's all it does. I've never had a problem with it, and I've used it since 1991.

Just want to second Nekira's comment - with a 5 mile range and a high percentage, you're always going to be in melee with an adult dragon, if that's what it wants.

Dragons aside though, my point was just that simultaneous attacks removes nimble attack avoidance as a method of damage mitigation. If a player is presented with a choice between getting more MDC, or getting better bonuses to dodge/parry, simu-attacks make more MDC always the better choice.

[flatline]

in real life its common knowledge take a punch to get a better punch in. so on a game based so much in a realistic feel, why would real life fight mechanics apply? right. and yes i did kick my gm across the room proving you can dodge and simo kick easy like when someone tries to punch you in the face.

Where there implied sarcasm tags here or were you being serious?

--flatline

[Noon]

I think you're argument comes from people who avoid/overlook optimising their system use to adhere to some particular fictional values of their own. That works if everyone at the table does that.

No idea what you're trying to talk about there.

It's "It's a roleplaying game." when stated from a more objective, clinical viewpoint.

Suffice to say when there's a superior mechanical option, not all groups have player characters which act the same way as your groups player characters in regard to that option.

That's their problem, not the game's problem.

In other words: It's their foots problem, not the shoes problem.

[Killer Cyborg]

I think you're argument comes from people who avoid/overlook optimising their system use to adhere to some particular fictional values of their own. That works if everyone at the table does that.

No idea what you're trying to talk about there.

It's "It's a roleplaying game." when stated from a more objective, clinical viewpoint.

Suffice to say when there's a superior mechanical option, not all groups have player characters which act the same way as your groups player characters in regard to that option.

That's their problem, not the game's problem.

In other words: It's their foots problem, not the shoes problem.

Pretty much.
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.
Don't complain that the shoe's broken, just because it's the wrong size or shape.
Especially when it fits other people just fine.

[Killer Cyborg]

Dragons aside though, my point was just that simultaneous attacks removes nimble attack avoidance as a method of damage mitigation. If a player is presented with a choice between getting more MDC, or getting better bonuses to dodge/parry, simu-attacks make more MDC always the better choice.

Simultaneous attacks removes nimble attack avoidance as a method of damage mitigation... in certain circumstances.
Just like nimble attack avoidance negates damage in certain circumstances.
Just like attacks inflict damage in certain circumstances.
Just like Ambushes negate dodge/parry in certain circumstances.
Just like Invisibility negates dodge/parry in certain circumstances.
Just like area of effect damage negate dodge/parry in certain circumstances.
Just like certain spells and psychic attacks negate dodge/parry in certain circumstances.

It's Rifts.
It's chock full of circumstances.
I don't know why simultaneous attack would stand out from the crowd.

As for more MDC always being the better choice, I don't agree. If your MDC is coming from armor, that means a higher repair bill, unless everybody you fight is a psycho who's out to get shot/stabbed repeatedly. It also often means reduced prowl, which can lead to entire combats that would otherwise be avoided.
More MDC is always good. More combat bonuses are always good.
Which is better depends on the character, and what the character is up against, and what the situation is.

[say652]

in real life its common knowledge take a punch to get a better punch in. so on a game based so much in a realistic feel, why would real life fight mechanics apply? right. and yes i did kick my gm across the room proving you can dodge and simo kick easy like when someone tries to punch you in the face.

Where there implied sarcasm tags here or were you being serious?

--flatline

true story well other than the game applying real fight mechanics even though it swears by realism. Fatigue happens much much faster in real life.

[Tor]

Bob's gun jamming is irrelevant: you can make the strike roll BEFORE rolling to see if the gun jams.

Sounds like house rules.

I'm assuming this is what you're referring to. I'm just making a guess here, but maybe the game's not clear one way or another whether we roll strike or chance of jamming first? I just figure "aim > fire" means you roll for your aim first and then to see if it fires.

Also we should probably give someone a chance to announce if they're dodging or not first. Don't want to wait until after a bad strike roll or gun jam for someone to choose whether or not they dodge.

the key is a successful strike roll. If you fire your gun and miss, then no simultaneous attack can be performed. Not according to the official rules.

I'll take another look. In multiple books, in case the wording has subtle differences.

Though one stupid thing about simultaneous attacks in this fashion (it's somewhat understandable in melee) is that only the defender being shot at (or aimed at, at least) can do it, and not other people, even though your guard is equally down and you're equally a sitting duck for all involved.

How's it any different here than with dodge, parry, etc?

I just figure it's harder to parry something aimed at someone else, or harder to 'dodge' in front of it (or to jump at a target and knock them out of the way). Palladium should make rules for that though, I don't think it'd be too hard, just add some light penalties or whatever. No idea why they haven't done this.

I mean heck they even list 'jump in front of a blast intended for another' as something you can do to win huge XP and then don't actually clearly present mechanics on how to do it. They might've mentioned how in Rifter somewhere, dunno.

Simultaneous attacks really make aoe attacks like Grenades or Missiles a bad idea. If you throw a Grenade and there are too many people in the target area, you need to roll up a new character.

I think you can only simultaneous attack if you are the single direct target of a missle or grenade (ie you take full damage). Those who are merely in the radius of an explosion are not the actual targets (they can't roll to dodge it, for example, only to roll with impact, hopefully) so I don't think they could, within the rules, get a simultaneous attack.

Although a mage using chain lightning or 'richochet' to attack a group is pretty screwed.

[say652]

when someone attacks in melee you can defend,when your being shot at by multiple people,you can tell who shot at you so you can simostrike?

[Killer Cyborg]

Bob's gun jamming is irrelevant: you can make the strike roll BEFORE rolling to see if the gun jams.

Sounds like house rules.

I'm assuming this is what you're referring to. I'm just making a guess here, but maybe the game's not clear one way or another whether we roll strike or chance of jamming first? I just figure "aim > fire" means you roll for your aim first and then to see if it fires.

When does the game discuss rolling for chance of jamming at all?

Though one stupid thing about simultaneous attacks in this fashion (it's somewhat understandable in melee) is that only the defender being shot at (or aimed at, at least) can do it, and not other people, even though your guard is equally down and you're equally a sitting duck for all involved.

How's it any different here than with dodge, parry, etc?

I just figure it's harder to parry something aimed at someone else, or harder to 'dodge' in front of it (or to jump at a target and knock them out of the way). Palladium should make rules for that though, I don't think it'd be too hard, just add some light penalties or whatever. No idea why they haven't done this.

They have, in the RGMG, pages 33-34.
You make a successful Strike roll to hurl yourself in the path.
It's essentially a Simultaneous Attack, not a dodge.

[say652]

my gm has a chance of weapons overheating when dumping clips in to stuff. i think it was his way of keeping us from killing the baddies to soon.

[Tor]

When does the game discuss rolling for chance of jamming at all?

Transdimensional TMNT has rules for black powder weapons jamming. It's a percentile you roll for each shot, and is modified by certain conditions (like if you used too much gunpowder while reloading, and I think you roll a skill percentile each time you reload the weapon)

Modern... er... um... guns more modern than black powder but less modern than laser pistols... like 20th century guns... are better made, have the gunpowder pre-rationed, don't need to be cleaned as often (ie after every shot), etc. which is probably why we don't have gun-jamming rules.

I won't say there aren't any out there because I don't always pay strong attention to the modern weapon sections, and wouldn't be surprised if something like this was squirreled away in either Superspies or Recon, but I admit outside of Transdimensional's black powder rules, I'm not aware of any.

These are important for Wormwood though since they are stated as using black powder weapons there, ala the musketeers, albeit often modified by TW which might remove jamming risks.

They have, in the RGMG, pages 33-34. You make a successful Strike roll to hurl yourself in the path. It's essentially a Simultaneous Attack, not a dodge.

[/quote]Cool, is that only for taking the blast and not knocking both you and the victim out of the way though?

I'd still like to be able to parry others' attacks though, like where you bring your sword up in front of a lady who's gonna get chopped by an evil guard or somethin.

the typical solution i've seen is to rule that you can't simultaneously attack someone unless you've got initiative on them. makes a fair bit of sense, i suppose.

This only makes sense to me if someone with initiative chose to forgo their melee action and hold it in reserve to do a simult or something. Kinda like how Cyan could choose to defend with Retort in FF6.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.

Something tells me that in a post-apocalyptic world where everyone and their uncle has massive bio-regenerative abilities, this would not be as uncommon as you might assume based on modern day attitudes.

I think we'd be seeing a lot of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fhjV0CO1kw

Especially amongst Mega-Juicers.

Odd how the guys who are best at auto-dodging might choose to forgo that reflex to get guaranteed unavoidable hits.

Then again, in ranged combot, it's so ridiculously hard to dodge gunfire that you don't really even need to simultaneous attack to get unavoidable hits, just make your strike roll.

I mean, with our ranged combat rules and the -10 no bonuses silliness, simultaneous attacks really only ruin things for the melee fighters who love their auto-parry, no?

Back when we still allowed simultaneous attacks, we had a super powered character with Energy Absorption and APS:Liquid who would just stand there and simo anyone who attacked him. We were already unhappy with the idea of simultaneous attacks, but it wasn't really until that character was made (to prove a point, no doubt), that we house ruled them away.

Instead of outruling it, why not just have people not attack the guy?

allowing essentially invulnerable characters can mess a game

I think the NPCs just weren't being creative enough. Any kind of explosion can put one of these APS liquid jokes out of commission for at least 2 minutes, and most combat won't last that long, making them useless for helping the rest of the group.

They can also still be damaged by cold, magic, psionics, none of which would be hampered by the energy absorbtion.

Mag/psi doing something means the physical psi or spell of Telekinesis can damage someone with APS Liquid, no? Normal punches and weapons don't hurt them, but massively displacing their water should. There's a difference between trying to poke holes in a water guy and physically moving his body into pieces.

That and: in a game with super powers, there's always the Negate Super Abilities or Borrow Super Ability bros to the rescue. The 'Negator' in VU comes to mind.

My 2 cents: simultaneous attacks are a bad mechanic because it absolutely prioritizes toughness over accuracy, agility or other combat bonuses.

I don't think the mechanic is without merit, just that the implementation is bad. The idea that forgoing your automatic defense and attacking when your opponent does... that it should give them penalties to defend, is a valid one.

The problem is that it's too powerful, that it automatically makes it impossible to defend. That shouldn't be the case.

Someone who is simultaneously attacked should still get their automatic defenses, such as auto-parry, perhaps auto-dodge. But they should get a penalty to do it, since it's harder to defend against someone who is going all-out against you and not defending themselves.

Perhaps what could be done is, if someone forgoes their defenses and tries to simultaneous attack, the bonus they might normally get (parry or dodge) could be used as a penalty against the other person's defensive roll? Or perhaps use the normal strike bonus as a penalty to their roll?

This would have a similar effect to doubling the strike bonus except by making it a penalty to their defense, it doesn't increase their accuracy/aim in landing a hit.

1. You're in melee range, in which case I have to ask, "You're getting into melee with an ADULT FRICKIN' DRAGON!? Why the heck!?"
2. You're in breath range, in which case I have to ask, "Why isn't the party using the advantage that modern weapons provide them, but moving out to 1d4x1000' range, instead of staying up close?

That's being a bit harsh bro. Keep in mind dragons like to hang in caves, meaning you usually don't have a thousand-foot expanse to fire at them from, if you're invading their lair. Not to mention their crazy teleport abilities, fast flight abilities (they could hide in the clouds before divenosing down in from your 12 oclock)

[say652]

off topic sort of, me and this girl were both puchin up some loud mouth and i was parrying the punches he aimed at her. see all types of people play rpgs even ghetto brawler types.lol

[Tor]

I guess one option is you could treat that as an entangle roll or some kind hold... even though I do agree that one can parry attacks aimed at others (perhaps with more difficulty) without actually grabbing them.

Also: why are you and GF beating up a guy just for talking? That's horrible. It's too bad you made him unable to defend himself.

[Killer Cyborg]

When does the game discuss rolling for chance of jamming at all?

Transdimensional TMNT has rules for black powder weapons jamming. It's a percentile you roll for each shot, and is modified by certain conditions (like if you used too much gunpowder while reloading, and I think you roll a skill percentile each time you reload the weapon)

Modern... er... um... guns more modern than black powder but less modern than laser pistols... like 20th century guns... are better made, have the gunpowder pre-rationed, don't need to be cleaned as often (ie after every shot), etc. which is probably why we don't have gun-jamming rules.

If you're using blackpowder weapons, you have more to worry about than simultaneous attack.

Looking up the rules (Transdimensional p. 68)...
You roll for misfire before you roll to strike.
So if you misfire, you can't roll to strike, so you can't make a successful strike, so the opponent can't dodge, which means the opponent can't simo-attack.
The exception would be stuff like Fizzle, where the bullet fires out, but at slow speed (no damage).

They have, in the RGMG, pages 33-34. You make a successful Strike roll to hurl yourself in the path. It's essentially a Simultaneous Attack, not a dodge.

Cool, is that only for taking the blast and not knocking both you and the victim out of the way though?

I'd still like to be able to parry others' attacks though, like where you bring your sword up in front of a lady who's gonna get chopped by an evil guard or somethin.[/quote]

Actually, that's addressed on the same page, since you brought it up.
You can't auto-parry, but you can parry if you're within range.
Which, technically could allow for simo-attacking when somebody else is the target, depending on GM interpretation of some key words and intentions.

Only for people who like getting shot/stabbed.

Something tells me that in a post-apocalyptic world where everyone and their uncle has massive bio-regenerative abilities, this would not be as uncommon as you might assume based on modern day attitudes.

Pain still hurts, and most people still avoid it.

Especially amongst Mega-Juicers.

Juicers and Crazies are typically impervious to pain until they're almost dead, so that would probably be an exception.

1. You're in melee range, in which case I have to ask, "You're getting into melee with an ADULT FRICKIN' DRAGON!? Why the heck!?"
2. You're in breath range, in which case I have to ask, "Why isn't the party using the advantage that modern weapons provide them, but moving out to 1d4x1000' range, instead of staying up close?

That's being a bit harsh bro. Keep in mind dragons like to hang in caves, meaning you usually don't have a thousand-foot expanse to fire at them from, if you're invading their lair. Not to mention their crazy teleport abilities, fast flight abilities (they could hide in the clouds before divenosing down in from your 12 oclock)

Good times to run, not to duke it out in melee, not unless you're up to the challenge.
And if you are, what're you worried about?

[flatline]

Back when we still allowed simultaneous attacks, we had a super powered character with Energy Absorption and APS:Liquid who would just stand there and simo anyone who attacked him. We were already unhappy with the idea of simultaneous attacks, but it wasn't really until that character was made (to prove a point, no doubt), that we house ruled them away.

Instead of outruling it, why not just have people not attack the guy?

We had already acknowledged that it was a really bad mechanic. That character just forced the issue.

And once the baddies figured out that their weapons were ineffective against him, they did choose more vulnerable targets, but recognizing that your weapons are ineffective takes a little time.

--flatline

[Killer Cyborg]

Back when we still allowed simultaneous attacks, we had a super powered character with Energy Absorption and APS:Liquid who would just stand there and simo anyone who attacked him. We were already unhappy with the idea of simultaneous attacks, but it wasn't really until that character was made (to prove a point, no doubt), that we house ruled them away.

Instead of outruling it, why not just have people not attack the guy?

We had already acknowledged that it was a really bad mechanic. That character just forced the issue.

And once the baddies figured out that their weapons were ineffective against him, they did choose more vulnerable targets, but recognizing that your weapons are ineffective takes a little time.

--flatline

Because they just assumed that the guy made of water would probably be vulnerable to light and bullets?

[popscythe]

Oh, these threads.

Mr. S. tells us time and time again how to handle these types of questions in the books:

"Use common sense."

And what sense is more common than "less arguing, more roleplaying"?

[Tor]

Because they just assumed that the guy made of water would probably be vulnerable to light and bullets?

This just randomly made me think: can you drink an APS liquid guy?

[Killer Cyborg]

Because they just assumed that the guy made of water would probably be vulnerable to light and bullets?

This just randomly made me think: can you drink an APS liquid guy?

You have to be very, very thirsty.

[Tor]

This is why we need Rifts Australia 2. We only got stats for Tiklik's babies. I want the big drinker himself.

[Noon]

That's their problem, not the game's problem.

In other words: It's their foots problem, not the shoes problem.

Pretty much.
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.
Don't complain that the shoe's broken, just because it's the wrong size or shape.
Especially when it fits other people just fine.

If the shoe in question listed in it's description it was only for certain special people, I'd pay that point.

[Killer Cyborg]

That's their problem, not the game's problem.

In other words: It's their foots problem, not the shoes problem.

Pretty much.
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.
Don't complain that the shoe's broken, just because it's the wrong size or shape.
Especially when it fits other people just fine.

If the shoe in question listed in it's description it was only for certain special people, I'd pay that point.

Like any other product, it's for everybody... who likes the product.
You shouldn't need special instructions that a given game isn't to everybody's tastes; it's a given.

[Tor]

Let's invent a magic spell that negates simultaneous attacks within its radius.