PC's are special in the multiverse, a little above the rest. Remember that PC's have two more actions per round than other people. Mage PC's are more likely to have basic combat training than Mage NPC's, giving them a fairly big advantage over them.
And Rifts Earth is not Palladium Fantasy. There wouldnt be as much social opposition to a mage training in combat. Just like Men At Arms would often be expected to read and write and maintain machinery or electronics.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:12 pm
by Killer Cyborg
Shorty Lickens wrote:PC's are special in the multiverse, a little above the rest. Remember that PC's have two more actions per round than other people.
No, they don't.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:23 pm
by Nekira Sudacne
Shorty Lickens wrote:PC's are special in the multiverse, a little above the rest. Remember that PC's have two more actions per round than other people.
They used to. RUE nixed that.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:35 pm
by say652
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:during a now-locked thread that i wasn't really following much, Killer Cyborg made the following comment that i think warrants it's own discussion:
2. Mages aren't even (as a rule) trained for combat.
I'm not sure what criteria he used to reach this conclusion, but to say i disagree is an understatement.
The criteria i would use is - do they have Combat training - in this case, represented by Palladium's "Hand to Hand Combat" skills.
So lets do a brief run-down. This does not reference every book (as i dont have them all) and i left out Dimension Books on purpose for now.
Ley Line Walker/Rifter - Basic Mystic - None, requires 1 Other skill for Basic )or a secondary skill Shifter - None, requires 1 Other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill) Techno Wizard - none, requires 1 Other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill) -- it is worth pointing out, however, that not one single NPC of these three classes is EVER seen without at least H2H Basic. Temporal Wizard - None, requires 1 Other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill) - No Temporal Wizard NPC is ever seen with out H2H Basic, however Temporal Warrior - MA or Assassin (choice) Herbalist - Basic The Three Woodland Druids - Martial Arts on 2, Basic on the other Necromancer - none, requires 1 Other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill); some Necromancer NPCs ARE seen without H2H basic. Stone Master - Basic Super Spy (Merc) - Basic African Witch - None, requires 1 Other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill) - no statted NPCs im aware of African Medicine Man and Rainmaker - H2H Basic Combat Mage (Merc Adventures) - Basic Rift Runner (BM) - Basic Gypsy Mage - Basic Biomancer - Basic Ocean Wizard - Basic Ninja Techno Wizard - Expert Lyn Syrial Cloud Weaver - None, requires 1 Other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill) - no NPCs that im aware of Native American Shamans (six) - all but one have Basic; healer requires 1 Other skill or secondary skill Battle Magus - MA Controller - Expert Lord Magus - Basic High Magus - Basic Conjuror - Basic Grey Seer - None, requires 1 other skill for Basic (or a secondary skill) Mystic Knight - Expert Warlock - Basic Witch - Basic Night Witch (Russia) - Basic Hidden Witch (R) - Basic Born Mystic (R) - Basic Fire Sorceror (R) - Basic Mystic Kuznya - Expert Old Believer - Basic Slayer - Expert Gypsy Wizard Thief - Basic Beguiler - Expert Lemurian Biowizard Genemage - Basic Vanguard Espionage Agent - Expert Vanguard Waylayer - Expert Vanguard Savant - Basic Vanguard Translocator - Basic Vanguard Mystic Spy - MA Vanguard Mystic Thief - Basic
So, that's a total of 54 spellcasting magic using classes. Out of that 54 classes, all but 9 have combat training by default. (so, 84%) For at least four of those, there are NO canon sources showing those classes without H2H skills. If we add those back in, we're at 91%.
ALL of the classes that DONT start with H2H skills can also be classes that, in the setting, may legitimately never see combat (healing shamans, grey seer, TW, Necromacner, Shifter) as they are either support classes like a TW or healer, or can use minions to do their work for them (Necromancer, Shifter).
Seems to me like the rule is that mages, particularly any mages who are likely to see combat at any point in the careers, are likely to be combat-trained. The exceptions are the ones that dont have to seek direct confrontation or could expect to live out their lives in a support role or without adventuring (a TW working for Arzno or the Baronies for example, who never gets out of his shop).
TL:DR Mages who aren't combat trained are the exception, not the rule.
You're missing two Key Elements in your combat training reportaIre Military skills and Espionage skills.
Any MMA fighter is superior in a Fist Fight to an average soldier, still they lack the knowledge of weapons, EOD, Vehicle piloting and Subterfuge to viewed as anything more than a minor threat.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:46 am
by Axelmania
Shark_Force wrote:most mages don't get starting WPs, they have to spend optional resources on them. in an MDC world, if you don't know how to use an MD-inflicting weapon, you are not combat trained.
I don't agree with that, mages don't necessarily need MD weapons since they can create their own MD attacks.
This is especialyl the case in ultimate with low level spells taking a single attack.
Traditionally you did not need a WP skill to reload guns. Now you need that... but I would figure that's intended for standard guns, not TW weapons.
Mages without WP can still fire and presumably reload TW weaponry. WP are helpful but not necessary.
The difference in accuracy at first level between someone with and without a WP isn't that big anymore. It used to be +0/+3 per action but now it is +0/+1 per attack. The +2 for aimed is only if you spend a second action.
eliakon wrote:Not according to RUE Page 300 "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. Even if a Secondary Skill artist had a higher chance of success than an O.C.C. Related Skill artist, the O.C.C. based artist's work always looks better. That is the essential difference between O.C.C. Related Skills and Secondary Skills."
This is flowery but ultimately useless text since the percentage is the only mechanic we're given to work with. Knowing secondary is inferior even if higher percentage doesn't help us much if we don't know how to incorporate that difference in quality into gameplay.
We may know that WP taken as a Related Skill LOOKS better than WP taken as a Secondary skill... but aside from the GM coming up with house rules to interpret that, we can't use it.
say652 wrote:Any MMA fighter is superior in a Fist Fight to an average soldier,
I'm going to politely disagree with that here. There isn't any sort of high standard on who can or can't be classified as a mixed martial artist to draw such conclusions from.
Maybe something more specific like "someone who has had at least 1 victory in UFC" could be a place to begin drawing comparisons to the average combat training of specific countries' grunts.
I mean, I can technically call myself a mixed martial artist because I took a couple months of TKD where the teacher had us do boxing jabs in sparring, but I am not under the impression I could beat the average soldier of any country in a fistfight.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:50 am
by say652
say652 wrote:Any MMA fighter is superior in a Fist Fight to an average soldier,
I'm going to politely disagree with that here. There isn't any sort of high standard on who can or can't be classified as a mixed martial artist to draw such conclusions from.
Maybe something more specific like "someone who has had at least 1 victory in UFC" could be a place to begin drawing comparisons to the average combat training of specific countries' grunts.
I mean, I can technically call myself a mixed martial artist because I took a couple months of TKD where the teacher had us do boxing jabs in sparring, but I am not under the impression I could beat the average soldier of any country in a fistfight.[/quote]
"Any Professional MMA fighter"
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:02 am
by eliakon
Axelmania][quote="eliakon wrote:Not according to RUE Page 300 "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. Even if a Secondary Skill artist had a higher chance of success than an O.C.C. Related Skill artist, the O.C.C. based artist's work always looks better. That is the essential difference between O.C.C. Related Skills and Secondary Skills."
This is flowery but ultimately useless text since the percentage is the only mechanic we're given to work with. Knowing secondary is inferior even if higher percentage doesn't help us much if we don't know how to incorporate that difference in quality into gameplay.
We may know that WP taken as a Related Skill LOOKS better than WP taken as a Secondary skill... but aside from the GM coming up with house rules to interpret that, we can't use it.[/quote] You don't get to discard the rules because you don't like them and then claim that the rules don't cover something. The rules make a clear distinction on what skills are professional and what are amateur. Thus if the standard is "Has professional level training in X" the rules do not care what their % is. That is not relevant.
When setting up a test and applying standards to it, the actual standards have to be used. If the test is professional vs non-professional then only game rules that differentiate between professional and non-professional matter.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:55 am
by Shark_Force
Axelmania wrote:
Shark_Force wrote:most mages don't get starting WPs, they have to spend optional resources on them. in an MDC world, if you don't know how to use an MD-inflicting weapon, you are not combat trained.
I don't agree with that, mages don't necessarily need MD weapons since they can create their own MD attacks.
This is especialyl the case in ultimate with low level spells taking a single attack.
Traditionally you did not need a WP skill to reload guns. Now you need that... but I would figure that's intended for standard guns, not TW weapons.
Mages without WP can still fire and presumably reload TW weaponry. WP are helpful but not necessary.
The difference in accuracy at first level between someone with and without a WP isn't that big anymore. It used to be +0/+3 per action but now it is +0/+1 per attack. The +2 for aimed is only if you spend a second action.
i can shoot a gun irl. i can probably even reload a gun irl (give me a bit of time to figure it out, i mean, i'm certainly not going to equal even the average amateur at a firing range let alone a professional). that doesn't mean i'm combat trained.
and no, a mage is not combat trained because one of the spells that they *could* choose *might* be for combat any more than i am combat trained because one of the many things i *could* learn how to do is something that *might* be for combat. a random person you meet while walking around could be combat trained. they could be a master of krav maga, trained in using a dozen different kind of weapons ranging from pistols and rifles to swords, knives, clubs, and who knows what else, trained as part of a military unit, been through multiple wars, etc...
this is not a justifiable reason to argue that random people you pass by while walking around are combat trained.
a wizard who expects to spend their entire life sitting in a town and never needing to fight has no reason to spend their time and energy learning how to use a laser rifle, or kill a man with nothing more than bare hands. just like most of the people on this forum probably don't need to know kung fu or how to use a gun or a knife, and many of most likely have little more than exposure to those skills, with almost none of us having anything like proper training in them, in spite of the fact that for many of us at least some degree of training *is* available. availability is not the question at hand. the question is how likely is it for an average mage to think to themselves "hey, i should pass up on learning a potentially highly lucrative spell that could help in my daily life so that i can instead learn how to do something that will give everyone i meet a reason to think i could kill them at any moment", or "i could learn a skill that i'll use regularly to make money and keep myself from starving to death, but instead i think i'll learn how to do something i plan to never actually use".
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:01 am
by eliakon
Shark_Force wrote:
Axelmania wrote:
Shark_Force wrote:most mages don't get starting WPs, they have to spend optional resources on them. in an MDC world, if you don't know how to use an MD-inflicting weapon, you are not combat trained.
I don't agree with that, mages don't necessarily need MD weapons since they can create their own MD attacks.
This is especialyl the case in ultimate with low level spells taking a single attack.
Traditionally you did not need a WP skill to reload guns. Now you need that... but I would figure that's intended for standard guns, not TW weapons.
Mages without WP can still fire and presumably reload TW weaponry. WP are helpful but not necessary.
The difference in accuracy at first level between someone with and without a WP isn't that big anymore. It used to be +0/+3 per action but now it is +0/+1 per attack. The +2 for aimed is only if you spend a second action.
i can shoot a gun irl. i can probably even reload a gun irl (give me a bit of time to figure it out, i mean, i'm certainly not going to equal even the average amateur at a firing range let alone a professional). that doesn't mean i'm combat trained.
and no, a mage is not combat trained because one of the spells that they *could* choose *might* be for combat any more than i am combat trained because one of the many things i *could* learn how to do is something that *might* be for combat. a random person you meet while walking around could be combat trained. they could be a master of krav maga, trained in using a dozen different kind of weapons ranging from pistols and rifles to swords, knives, clubs, and who knows what else, trained as part of a military unit, been through multiple wars, etc...
this is not a justifiable reason to argue that random people you pass by while walking around are combat trained.
a wizard who expects to spend their entire life sitting in a town and never needing to fight has no reason to spend their time and energy learning how to use a laser rifle, or kill a man with nothing more than bare hands. just like most of the people on this forum probably don't need to know kung fu or how to use a gun or a knife, and many of most likely have little more than exposure to those skills, with almost none of us having anything like proper training in them, in spite of the fact that for many of us at least some degree of training *is* available. availability is not the question at hand. the question is how likely is it for an average mage to think to themselves "hey, i should pass up on learning a potentially highly lucrative spell that could help in my daily life so that i can instead learn how to do something that will give everyone i meet a reason to think i could kill them at any moment", or "i could learn a skill that i'll use regularly to make money and keep myself from starving to death, but instead i think i'll learn how to do something i plan to never actually use".
But if that mage uses an OCC or OCCr skill to buy hand to hand training (especially if they also are picking combat related spells)... ...then that would seem to be a pretty good indicator that the mage in question IS combat trained. After all they just took a combat skill, at a professional level, as part of what they define their job to be...
It seems like there is no 'average' mage Anymore than there is an 'average' human
Which means that instead of hypotheticals where we one postulates what a person might or might not be... ...we should actually look at the person in question and then say "well THIS individual did X, so they are probably Y"
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:00 am
by Axelmania
eliakon wrote:You don't get to discard the rules because you don't like them and then claim that the rules don't cover something. The rules make a clear distinction on what skills are professional and what are amateur. Thus if the standard is "Has professional level training in X" the rules do not care what their % is. That is not relevant.
I don't consider it a rule if it has no actual mechanics though. It's more like a setting characteristic.
"Erin Tarn has several sisters" for example, is more of a characteristic than rule, because while it's a true statement, it doesn't really mechanically affect anything.
These are the types of things which actually do deserve phrases like 'flavor text'. Whether something is professional or unprofessional is pure roleplaying and not something I can dice out. Kind of like "Carlotta loves Raoul" is a setting characteristic but not a 'rule' because I can't do anything with it statistically.
Shark_Force wrote:i can shoot a gun irl. i can probably even reload a gun irl (give me a bit of time to figure it out, i mean, i'm certainly not going to equal even the average amateur at a firing range let alone a professional). that doesn't mean i'm combat trained.
Per RUE requiring a WP to reload a weapon, it does mean you have a WP skill.
Combat training is a spectrum. The ability to make any sort of attack IS combat training. Technically if I train someone to throw a rock at a wolf, that's combat training.
Recently the comment in the TV series shooter "You're a marksman, I'm a sniper" stands out as what I think you might be getting at. Bob Lee was talking about how there was a difference between shooting at targets and shooting on a battlefield against enemies who shot back at you.
I believe the latter is what people refer to when they think of combat training, but to me that's just GOOD combat training, EFFECTIVE combat training.
Doing just martial arts katas and not sparring, for example, is still combat training, but it's more effective combat training if you do some sparring too.
Shark_Force wrote:and no, a mage is not combat trained because one of the spells that they *could* choose *might* be for combat
They are if they have Hand to Hand Combat: Basic.
This was a response to the idea that you need a WP skill to be combat trained. This is untrue.
Vibro blades, for example, can be used without a WP, and someone with hand to hand basic and a vibro blade is still combat-trained, because they have a combat skill.
Shark_Force wrote:a wizard who expects to spend their entire life sitting in a town and never needing to fight has no reason to spend their time and energy learning how to use a laser rifle, or kill a man with nothing more than bare hands.
I don't agree. Some combat physical skills (boxing, wrestling) are beneficial for added PS/SDC which can help in being more self-sufficient or durable in the case of accidents. The bonus to roll with impact helps if you trip, too. Basic/Expert/MA all give roll with impact/punch/fall at first level, so recreationally studying this is useful for everyone in case they have a tumble.
A mage sitting in town could still benefit from an auto-parry if attacked by an angry crow.
Dodging also applies to stuff like if a heavy pot fell off your shelf.
You don't have to learn how to kill a man with nothing more than bare hands. Anyone can do this with an adequate amount of 1D4 punches. You can just learn how to get better at killing by getting damage bonuses, SDC-skipping death blows, more accurate hits, etc.
Shark_Force wrote:just like most of the people on this forum probably don't need to know kung fu or how to use a gun or a knife, and many of most likely have little more than exposure to those skills, with almost none of us having anything like proper training in them,
'Combat training' and 'proper combat training' are different issues. 'Proper' is pretty subjective too, I could declare basic isn't proper, only expert or higher is, for example.
I can self-teach myself knife-fighting 'combat training' simply by having played Double Dragon II and knowing "hey I can throw a knife!" it just won't necessarily be training on the level as reflecting a skill selection.
Shark_Force wrote:in spite of the fact that for many of us at least some degree of training *is* available. availability is not the question at hand. the question is how likely is it for an average mage to think to themselves "hey, i should pass up on learning a potentially highly lucrative spell that could help in my daily life so that i can instead learn how to do something that will give everyone i meet a reason to think i could kill them at any moment", or "i could learn a skill that i'll use regularly to make money and keep myself from starving to death, but instead i think i'll learn how to do something i plan to never actually use".
That would make sense if mages actually traded skill slots for spells, but that kind of tradeoff system doesn't exist with basic skill or spell assignment.
The only place I can see that dilemma occuring is when you use the months-of-schooling bonus skills in Heroes Unlimited, or the ability to get extra secondary skills via a Rogue Scholar. In which case you have a limited amount of time to study spells or skills.
Although... spells don't take very long to learn in Rifts. The limiting factor is generally going to be money and finding a teacher. I can't find the learning time on RUE 190 but I seem to remember something like 2 days per level, probably from Nightbane or wherever. It was much faster than the 1D4+1 per level months in places like HU.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 5:55 am
by eliakon
Axelmania wrote:
eliakon wrote:You don't get to discard the rules because you don't like them and then claim that the rules don't cover something. The rules make a clear distinction on what skills are professional and what are amateur. Thus if the standard is "Has professional level training in X" the rules do not care what their % is. That is not relevant.
I don't consider it a rule if it has no actual mechanics though. It's more like a setting characteristic.
"Erin Tarn has several sisters" for example, is more of a characteristic than rule, because while it's a true statement, it doesn't really mechanically affect anything.
These are the types of things which actually do deserve phrases like 'flavor text'. Whether something is professional or unprofessional is pure roleplaying and not something I can dice out. Kind of like "Carlotta loves Raoul" is a setting characteristic but not a 'rule' because I can't do anything with it statistically.
This is about as core rule and non "flavor text" as it gets. This tells us what is required for something to be professional. It is not a "pure roleplaying" thing. And you DO have to dice out. That is a HUGE factor. If you have a skill as an OCC skill or OCCr skill then the product of that skill is professional If the skill is a secondary skill. It is not professional. That is the rules. You may not LIKE those rules, and you may want to use your own rules... ...but RAW that is the rules, and it is pretty cut and dried.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:12 am
by Ed
Nekira Sudacne wrote:Tossing in my two cents:
I don't think the problem is even a matter of defining what "combat trained" is. I think a lot of the dispute is over defining what combat itself is. let me explain.
the differences between hand to hand skills comes up, how someone taking basic hand to hand cources in real life dosn't feel "combat trained", how boxing or a WP doesn't, how there's a difference between soldigers trained for actual combat MOS's and the air force desk jockies ect.
So I'll ask: how do we mean combat? Do we mean ANY form of conflict, or do we mean "This is war, Sonny"
It's an important distinction to make. if one defines Combat as "Any slap fight or barroom brawl where no one's expecting to get more than brused", then yea, HtH basic makes you "combat trained" sinse "Combat" here means "Any kind of fighting"
if you take "Combat trained" to mean "Fight as part of an organized unit" then HtH basic alone won't suffice. you'll also need a Weapon Proficency, specifically whatever W.P. your particular unit specalizes in. it could be hunting rifles for a group of village hunters-turned-militia, it could be a Spear and Shield if your fighting as part of an ancient Phalanx, or W.P. Energy Rifle if your fighting as part of a more high tech town militia force.
That said, this is still a lower bar. There's a reason that the US changed things so that the National Guard has to generally keep the same standards as reserve army (in general, not exactly), it was known even at the founding that untrained Militia performed poorly compared to professional Regulars--after all, Washington spent more time Running from the british army than he did actually fighting them--but if you had ENOUGH of them, and some other strategic or tactical advantage, they could still help you win. and in Rifts where it is often such trained Militia--brawlers with Guns--fighting against bandits--also brawlers with guns--or random supernatural predators, it's generally a more even fight and they're useful again.
So if you have a Hand to hand and W.P. Energy Rifle, you are qualified to serve in a city militia. more organized ones might even make you take Forced march or military equittique as secondary skills! you might even be called on to participate in a larger scale battle--but no commander could expect you to follow a complex stratagy or co-ordinate a multi-pronged tactic. you'd more or less be limited to being slapped behind cover and told to shoot any enemy that comes into range, and wait to be told if you're needed somewhere else or it's time to charge. You can serve in Combat--but are you combat trained, or just good enough to be a danger to the enemy as well as your own side?
Or do you define combat trained as: "Have a varaiety of weapon choices and can use them all well, are versed in multiple drills for offense and defense, can work with a squad and larger units in persuit of a varaity of arbitrary and sometimes suicidal goals, and have sufficent understanding of the complexities to adapt and improvise new solutions when given plans meet Murphey?"
if that's the case, pretty much only the various Military OCC's and a few of the higher teir mercenary ones qualify. I don't even think all Men of Arms like Crazies or Assassins count here. They are exceptionally dangerous Special Units and Force Multipliers--but not regular combat soldigers. you don't stick a crazy into a trench and count on him to hold ground, you shoot him at the enemy out of a canon and count on his unpredictability and superhuman reflexes to cause havoc and disrupt the enemy formation, giving them some kind of weakness you can exploit.
That's the catch. do you define combat as any old fight, or do you define combat as organized warfare?
The answer to this question depends on how you define it.
Incidentally: I now want there to be a city state that littearlly Catapults dozens of crazies at any attacker over their walls
That fits. Military combat training is mostly designed to instill a willingness to fight. Actual ability is, at best, a secondary consideration. Even is basic we had less than a week training in LINE. That was supposed to be one of the benefits, even jar heads could learn it fast. I know people who train for years in various martial arts before they begin to be competent.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:18 am
by Ed
say652 wrote:
say652 wrote:Any MMA fighter is superior in a Fist Fight to an average soldier,
I'm going to politely disagree with that here. There isn't any sort of high standard on who can or can't be classified as a mixed martial artist to draw such conclusions from.
Maybe something more specific like "someone who has had at least 1 victory in UFC" could be a place to begin drawing comparisons to the average combat training of specific countries' grunts.
I mean, I can technically call myself a mixed martial artist because I took a couple months of TKD where the teacher had us do boxing jabs in sparring, but I am not under the impression I could beat the average soldier of any country in a fistfight.
"Any Professional MMA fighter"[/quote]
No. The MMA fighter is superior in a MMA setting. Not all, or even most, fights are in an MMA setting.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 2:20 pm
by Shark_Force
eliakon wrote:But if that mage uses an OCC or OCCr skill to buy hand to hand training (especially if they also are picking combat related spells)... ...then that would seem to be a pretty good indicator that the mage in question IS combat trained. After all they just took a combat skill, at a professional level, as part of what they define their job to be...
It seems like there is no 'average' mage Anymore than there is an 'average' human
Which means that instead of hypotheticals where we one postulates what a person might or might not be... ...we should actually look at the person in question and then say "well THIS individual did X, so they are probably Y"
sure. any given mage *could* be combat trained (though again, i'm not sold on HtH alone qualifying... i'd need to see HtH and at least a few WPs or other supporting skills to really consider them combat trained, because even if a magic user can cast damaging spells, it's going to be awfully hard for them to not notice the dramatic superiority of guns at being... well... guns. and even ignoring that, many of the better damaging spells use WPs; WP sword and WP targeting are the most common, i think. men of magic typically start play with a few conventional weapons as well, and i tend to think that if we're going to describe them as being combat trained, they should probably actually be proficient with at least some of the weapons they have).
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:44 pm
by flatline
What does it mean to be "combat trained" and why does it matter?
Somehow I missed what the point of this discussion was.
--flatline
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:05 pm
by Nekira Sudacne
flatline wrote:What does it mean to be "combat trained"
That's what the argument is about. What DOES it mean to be combat trained.
and why does it matter?
Because someone on the internet is WRONG!
Somehow I missed what the point of this discussion was.
--flatline
You missed nothing
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:21 pm
by Nightmask
flatline wrote:What does it mean to be "combat trained" and why does it matter?
Somehow I missed what the point of this discussion was.
--flatline
I haven't quite seen the point of it either. My impression so far is that it might have to deal with who gets certain bonuses or penalties in combat or how well one can deal with a combat situation, but it seems to ignore that someone with actual combat experience is going to rate far better overall than someone who just has combat training, they've had to survive under actual combat situations and learn to deal with them so clearly a mage in a party who's fought qualifies as combat-experienced and certainly rates any kind of bonuses a combat-trained character would get because they have the best combat training of all, live combat.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:11 pm
by Killer Cyborg
Nightmask wrote:
flatline wrote:What does it mean to be "combat trained" and why does it matter?
Somehow I missed what the point of this discussion was.
--flatline
I haven't quite seen the point of it either. My impression so far is that it might have to deal with who gets certain bonuses or penalties in combat or how well one can deal with a combat situation, but it seems to ignore that someone with actual combat experience is going to rate far better overall than someone who just has combat training, they've had to survive under actual combat situations and learn to deal with them so clearly a mage in a party who's fought qualifies as combat-experienced and certainly rates any kind of bonuses a combat-trained character would get because they have the best combat training of all, live combat.
The original context was in the locked discussion about Attacks Per Melee or something, which slowly turned into an overly-lengthy and heated (hence the lock) discussion about whether typical mages on Rifts Earth tend to disguise themselves as non-mages when expecting combat, and once in combat disguise any spellcasting by saying the magic words in whispers while restricting any required hand gestures to minor movements of their finger tips while carrying guns and otherwise acting like non-mage soldiers and whatnot... OR whether mages generally tend to dress in the kind of traditional garb that they're described and depicted as wearing and possessing, wave their hands about in gestures that anybody looking right at them might have a good chance to notice, and tend to speak their magic words in at least a normal speaking volume that somebody else might have a reasonable chance to overhear.
During the course of this discussion, in the context of whether a first level mage might be expected at some point to raise his voice due to the pressures of being in a mega-damage firefight, the following exchange occurred:
me wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote: A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.
NOT so much. Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.
The bolded part was then (IIRC) discussed a bit in that original thread, then spun off into this new conversation.
So "combat trained" in this sense would be "familiar enough with mega-damage combat that they'd be unlikely to speak loudly during a heated battle."
OR, more succinctly, what Nekira said.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:23 pm
by flatline
Ah.
Well, I suppose mega-damage combat would be pretty loud. And if the mage is wearing EBA with face covering helmet, he could probably yell the spell at the top of his lungs and nobody would even notice, let alone recognize it as a spell.
But actually, I'm of the camp that believes that a mage is a highly skilled professional spell caster and I find it ridiculous to think that he needs to shout a mnemonic to help him focus his mind and energy into creating a well rehearsed magical effect. Almost as stupid as expecting an engineer to scream "soh cah toa" when doing trigonometry or a musician yelling "F-A-C-E" to identify what note a black dot on the sheet music means during a concert. People who seriously practice things quickly move past needing verbal mnemonic tools to help them remember the basics of their professions. I see spells the same way.
GURPS handles this sort of thing very nicely. When you barely know the spell well enough to get it to function, you need the words and gestures, but once you can cast the spell reliably, you can do away with the words and gestures and still cast the spell faster and for less energy cost. There's a serious difference between a novice and an expert in the GURPS magic system. Palladium's system does not really make that distinction at all.
--flatline
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:47 am
by Axelmania
eliakon wrote:
Axelmania wrote:
eliakon wrote:You don't get to discard the rules because you don't like them and then claim that the rules don't cover something. The rules make a clear distinction on what skills are professional and what are amateur. Thus if the standard is "Has professional level training in X" the rules do not care what their % is. That is not relevant.
I don't consider it a rule if it has no actual mechanics though. It's more like a setting characteristic.
"Erin Tarn has several sisters" for example, is more of a characteristic than rule, because while it's a true statement, it doesn't really mechanically affect anything.
These are the types of things which actually do deserve phrases like 'flavor text'. Whether something is professional or unprofessional is pure roleplaying and not something I can dice out. Kind of like "Carlotta loves Raoul" is a setting characteristic but not a 'rule' because I can't do anything with it statistically.
This is about as core rule and non "flavor text" as it gets. This tells us what is required for something to be professional. It is not a "pure roleplaying" thing. And you DO have to dice out. That is a HUGE factor. If you have a skill as an OCC skill or OCCr skill then the product of that skill is professional If the skill is a secondary skill. It is not professional. That is the rules. You may not LIKE those rules, and you may want to use your own rules... ...but RAW that is the rules, and it is pretty cut and dried.
The term professional has no calculatory ramifications. Statements which are descriptors that vaguely give an idea of quality don't function as rules without those mechanics.
We do not know if an amateur or pro meal or art aid one in charming or impressing or to what differing degrees. We don't know how much either sells for. Without knowing what it leads to, it is basically non functioning flavor.
Sort of like the difference between PB 10 and PB 14. We know the latter is prettier. Call it a rule but it is an intangible one..it influences how we ought to roleplay but not any other numbers.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:03 am
by glitterboy2098
here is the thing though. in palladium's games magic's need for speaking isn't mnemonics to help remember how to concentrate.. the words are like sonic keys used to unlock and warp reality to accomplish the spell. this is why casting without speaking carries so many penalties.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:51 am
by Axelmania
Be comforted in knowing that even if you cannot create sound that the Old Ones can hear you whisper their names in your mind and still stir to your service when you need them.
Another interesting thing... Mages can cast spells in the dream stream.
Damage you take doesn't carry over to the real world but what about spending PPE?
Yet another reason for magicians to forgo sleep entirely for meditation.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:18 am
by flatline
glitterboy2098 wrote:here is the thing though. in palladium's games magic's need for speaking isn't mnemonics to help remember how to concentrate.. the words are like sonic keys used to unlock and warp reality to accomplish the spell. this is why casting without speaking carries so many penalties.
It takes longer to cast (at least according to Underseas). Are there any other canon penalties that I am unaware of?
--flatline
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:33 am
by Killer Cyborg
flatline wrote:Ah.
Well, I suppose mega-damage combat would be pretty loud. And if the mage is wearing EBA with face covering helmet, he could probably yell the spell at the top of his lungs and nobody would even notice, let alone recognize it as a spell.
Yup. It all depends on circumstances.
But actually, I'm of the camp that believes that a mage is a highly skilled professional spell caster and I find it ridiculous to think that he needs to shout a mnemonic to help him focus his mind and energy into creating a well rehearsed magical effect.
As a general rule, I'd say that they don't shout. But in a dramatic moment? Sure. You see it in movies all the time.
Almost as stupid as expecting an engineer to scream "soh cah toa" when doing trigonometry or a musician yelling "F-A-C-E" to identify what note a black dot on the sheet music means during a concert. People who seriously practice things quickly move past needing verbal mnemonic tools to help them remember the basics of their professions. I see spells the same way.
Right... but those aren't actually magic words that force a person's will onto reality.
GURPS handles this sort of thing very nicely. When you barely know the spell well enough to get it to function, you need the words and gestures, but once you can cast the spell reliably, you can do away with the words and gestures and still cast the spell faster and for less energy cost. There's a serious difference between a novice and an expert in the GURPS magic system. Palladium's system does not really make that distinction at all.
--flatline
Yup. GURPS handles most things very well, writing clear and well thought-out rules that cover most situations. Palladium... not so much.
Weirdly, I have more fun playing Palladium.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:50 am
by J_cobbers
say652 wrote:
say652 wrote:Any MMA fighter is superior in a Fist Fight to an average soldier,
I'm going to politely disagree with that here. There isn't any sort of high standard on who can or can't be classified as a mixed martial artist to draw such conclusions from.
Maybe something more specific like "someone who has had at least 1 victory in UFC" could be a place to begin drawing comparisons to the average combat training of specific countries' grunts.
I mean, I can technically call myself a mixed martial artist because I took a couple months of TKD where the teacher had us do boxing jabs in sparring, but I am not under the impression I could beat the average soldier of any country in a fistfight.
"Any Professional MMA fighter"[/quote]
Having been an active duty Soldier, albeit one in a support MOS, not a Combat Arms MOS, I can say the average Soldier vs a Pro MMA fighter probably wouldn't do well in a fist fight, unless they've taken a few levels of Army Combatives, and made that part of their training. Other than basic and AIT only took the first level, which is a week or two to learn some basic Brazilian Jujitsu ground fighting, and how to close in and take someone to the ground while being punched at (with boxing glove on them). I had some tae kwon do in high school and college, and some Karate after that, but all together I'd say my hand to hand level in Rifts would be Basic. And I'm hella rusty without any real practice these days other than my 4 year old wanting to sword fight me with foam swords or try to punch and kick at me after watching an episode of Power Rangers or Transformers. Point is I would say my level of "combat training" was pretty 'average' for hand to hand, and any guy who makes his living in the octagon would probably whoop me even at my best. I would think however that my marksmanship with an M-16/M-4 would be good enough to take a MMA fighter within 100-200 yards with only a couple rounds, but that's a different kinda fight.
Now you take an Infantry man (Army, or Marine), whose whole job is to kill the enemy and been on a combat tour or two or three, you'll bet they've on average been to a few levels more of Combative, trained more frequently on the rifle range, maybe been through the Ranger course or Special Forces training, and those guys will do just fine against an MMA pro, though they'll probably shoot him before he gets anywhere near.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:58 am
by J_cobbers
Killer Cyborg wrote:Yup. GURPS handles most things very well, writing clear and well thought-out rules that cover most situations. Palladium... not so much.
Weirdly, I have more fun playing Palladium.
That's because what Palladium's RPGs lack for clear and well thought-out-rules, it makes up for in really cool settings and creative ideas. The whole reason I've stuck with the system since I was a tweenager it that the writing about the captured my imagination.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:41 pm
by flatline
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Almost as stupid as expecting an engineer to scream "soh cah toa" when doing trigonometry or a musician yelling "F-A-C-E" to identify what note a black dot on the sheet music means during a concert. People who seriously practice things quickly move past needing verbal mnemonic tools to help them remember the basics of their professions. I see spells the same way.
Right... but those aren't actually magic words that force a person's will onto reality.
If the words are actually shaping reality, then how is tacet casting possible at all?
--flatline
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 4:46 pm
by Killer Cyborg
flatline wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Almost as stupid as expecting an engineer to scream "soh cah toa" when doing trigonometry or a musician yelling "F-A-C-E" to identify what note a black dot on the sheet music means during a concert. People who seriously practice things quickly move past needing verbal mnemonic tools to help them remember the basics of their professions. I see spells the same way.
Right... but those aren't actually magic words that force a person's will onto reality.
If the words are actually shaping reality, then how is tacet casting possible at all?
--flatline
I'd assume by thinking the words really loudly, and/or replacing the words with additional/different hand gestures.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 6:55 pm
by eliakon
Killer Cyborg wrote:
flatline wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Almost as stupid as expecting an engineer to scream "soh cah toa" when doing trigonometry or a musician yelling "F-A-C-E" to identify what note a black dot on the sheet music means during a concert. People who seriously practice things quickly move past needing verbal mnemonic tools to help them remember the basics of their professions. I see spells the same way.
Right... but those aren't actually magic words that force a person's will onto reality.
If the words are actually shaping reality, then how is tacet casting possible at all?
--flatline
I'd assume by thinking the words really loudly, and/or replacing the words with additional/different hand gestures.
Since that is the way it is described (no hand gestures of course since they are not needed... which is good because some of the mages don't have hands...which is why metamorphosis says that you can't cast if your form is mute... but doesn't have a problem if you don't have hands. My guess is those hand gestures are basically 'training wheels' that don't HAVE to be there, just make it (non-mechanically) easier )
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:33 pm
by Nightmask
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Nightmask wrote:
flatline wrote:What does it mean to be "combat trained" and why does it matter?
Somehow I missed what the point of this discussion was.
--flatline
I haven't quite seen the point of it either. My impression so far is that it might have to deal with who gets certain bonuses or penalties in combat or how well one can deal with a combat situation, but it seems to ignore that someone with actual combat experience is going to rate far better overall than someone who just has combat training, they've had to survive under actual combat situations and learn to deal with them so clearly a mage in a party who's fought qualifies as combat-experienced and certainly rates any kind of bonuses a combat-trained character would get because they have the best combat training of all, live combat.
The original context was in the locked discussion about Attacks Per Melee or something, which slowly turned into an overly-lengthy and heated (hence the lock) discussion about whether typical mages on Rifts Earth tend to disguise themselves as non-mages when expecting combat, and once in combat disguise any spellcasting by saying the magic words in whispers while restricting any required hand gestures to minor movements of their finger tips while carrying guns and otherwise acting like non-mage soldiers and whatnot... OR whether mages generally tend to dress in the kind of traditional garb that they're described and depicted as wearing and possessing, wave their hands about in gestures that anybody looking right at them might have a good chance to notice, and tend to speak their magic words in at least a normal speaking volume that somebody else might have a reasonable chance to overhear.
During the course of this discussion, in the context of whether a first level mage might be expected at some point to raise his voice due to the pressures of being in a mega-damage firefight, the following exchange occurred:
me wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote: A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.
NOT so much. Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.
The bolded part was then (IIRC) discussed a bit in that original thread, then spun off into this new conversation.
So "combat trained" in this sense would be "familiar enough with mega-damage combat that they'd be unlikely to speak loudly during a heated battle."
OR, more succinctly, what Nekira said.
So what you actually mean is combat EXPERIENCED and NOT combat TRAINED (and really there's no reason to think that a mage not familiar with combat would feel a need to shout during combat), something that even if they had a problem with shouting and drawing attention to themselves initially any survivors (which one would expect the PC to be at a minimum) would quickly get over that problem.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 10:54 pm
by Killer Cyborg
I meant what I said: trained. Mages as a rule aren't combat trained. Experience would also be a factor, but it's generally not a factor that people who aren't even trained get a whole lot of.
If they did, then it could eventually make up for the lack of training, though.
As for shouting during combat, I'm pretty sure that lots of people do that. I don't know why people think that mages would be different. Also, I'm not sure why "shouting" is the bar, since the conversation was about simply speaking loudly enough to be heard from a decent distance.*
*Obviously, if there are explosions and stuff, they won't be heard over the noise even if they're shouting.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 2:11 pm
by Nekira Sudacne
flatline wrote:GURPS handles this sort of thing very nicely. When you barely know the spell well enough to get it to function, you need the words and gestures, but once you can cast the spell reliably, you can do away with the words and gestures and still cast the spell faster and for less energy cost. There's a serious difference between a novice and an expert in the GURPS magic system. Palladium's system does not really make that distinction at all.
--flatline
It's almost like they're completely different systems with different rules for magic or something
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 2:13 pm
by Prysus
Killer Cyborg wrote:
flatline wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Almost as stupid as expecting an engineer to scream "soh cah toa" when doing trigonometry or a musician yelling "F-A-C-E" to identify what note a black dot on the sheet music means during a concert. People who seriously practice things quickly move past needing verbal mnemonic tools to help them remember the basics of their professions. I see spells the same way.
Right... but those aren't actually magic words that force a person's will onto reality.
If the words are actually shaping reality, then how is tacet casting possible at all?
--flatline
I'd assume by thinking the words really loudly, and/or replacing the words with additional/different hand gestures.
Greetings and Salutations. Actually, whether tacet casting is possible (with the possible exception of Ocean Magic) is questionable at best. Casting silently is only found in Ocean Magic, that includes its location in the Book of Magic which discusses all magic (yet it's only found in one particular school). All other evidence suggests speech is required.
RUE says flat out: "To cast a spell requires verbalization" on page 189. This doesn't tell us optional, or hard to do without, but flat out "requires."
Expanding outside of Rifts, I'll turn to Palladium Fantasy on this one. While I know some people dislike PF being brought up in Rifts, I'm quoting from the Diabolist section which (as far as I'm aware) was never converted in a Rifts books but we have Diabolists in Rifts so ... well, yeah.
Palladium Fantasy Second Edition; page 117 wrote:Power Words are the basis behind all areas of magic study, whether they be weaved into a spoken incantation or used to activate a ward or circle. [snip] When a power word is spoken, there is an invisible ripple of magic energy that transcends both space and time, allowing the person invoking the power word to tap directly into mystic energies.
So that tells us that Power Words are the basis behind ALL areas of magic study, and that SPEAKING them summons the magic energy.
Then we have other abilities such as Metamorphosis that eliakon mentioned, where you can look at Metamorphosis: Insect and Metamorphosis: Mist which says you can't cast spells (no ability to speak, though if you could cast silently there should be nothing stopping you). The spell Escape tells us that "only gagging the mage will prevent the use."
Ocean Magic appears to be the odd (unexplained) exception, but does not indicate the rule.
*****
This conversation (and the one that spawned it) did give me a few ideas though. I decided to write-up some rules and see what others think. They apply to the conversation at hand, but they're entirely house rules. I'm also guessing that not everyone will enjoy these particular options, but I tried to be fair. The first is rules on casting volumes (with information taken from PF2 and RUE, blended together), and the second is about being shaken in combat situations (Save vs. Panic). I used spoiler tags to avoid taking up too much room for those not interested.
Spoiler:
Incantation and Spell Verbalization
Power Words are the basis behind all areas of magic study, whether they weave into a spoken incantation or used to activate a ward or circle. When a Power Word is spoken, there is an invisible ripple of magic energy that transcends both space and time, allowing the person to tap directly into mystic energies. The character must then reach out with force of will to grab the elusive energy by the tail and force it (no, massage and shape it like a sculptor working clay) to do what they want.
Only Creatures of Magic, Supernatural Beings, and gods may possess innate magic powers. Though even these forces often study in one or more mystic arts. Where the magic energy that permeates from ley lines and emanates from most living beings originates, or why the speaking of a mere word (combined with force of will) enables the speaker to draw upon and direct the energy, is a mystery to even the most powerful wizards and oldest gods.
Theoretically, anybody can learn magic; however, it is an extremely difficult process that proves to be impossible for most people. A young student of magic must learn to focus his thoughts and imagination to command the energy all around and within him. This requires a tremendous strength of will, and those without it are often dismissed as unsuitable apprentices. After all, a character who shouts their invocations is a fool who would only give up the secrets of magic to all.
It is the properly spoken repetition of words or series of words that invokes and ignites the spell into being. Though the spell is crafted through force of will, the proper spoken Power Words are like a skilled chef grabbing the proper ingredients in the right order and at the right time, then using skill and force of will to make something from those ingredients. These incantations are carefully guarded secrets, even among other Practitioners of Magic.
Thus, mages usually disguise the words of the incantation admist a string of meaningless gibberish, often mumbling the true key words. Furthermore, the best magic users often whisper the spell incantations so quietly that they are barely audible. Only the meaningless parts should ever be spoken clearly or shouted aloud, and then only for dramatic affect or showmanship. The chart below demonstrates the volume in which a spell caster must speak to properly invoke the Power Words and command them with force of will. For this reason, only characters with a high M.E. are usually trained in the mystic arts, but is not technically a requirement.
Of course, even trained Practitioners of Magic can become unnerved. Any time a mage becomes panicked (see the rules for Save vs. Panic), the character's focus wavers and the character must speak louder and with more authority than normal. Using the chart below, any magic user who fails his/her saving throw speaks at one volume higher than normal. So, for example, a character with a M.E. of 13 typically casts in a mumble. However, if he's panicked, he'll speak at a normal speaking volume as a result of nerves and loss of focus.
M.E. 7 or lower: The character must shout the words to invoke magic. Only through such a loud and overbearing voice can the character muster the strength of will to shape the mystic energies. M.E. 8-11: The character can cast spells in a normal speaking volume. M.E. 12-15: The character can cast spells by merely mumbling the words. Those nearby will likely be able to hear, but unable to make out the words. M.E. 16-24: The character can speak at a mere whisper and still weave magic. Even those standing next to the character are unlikely to hear it, and many may not even notice the character's lips moving. M.E. 24 or higher: This character's strength of will and conviction is so great they've transcended verbalization. The character can cast magic without ever opening their mouth or speaking a word! Simply by thinking of the Power Words and using their own inner energies they can summon the necessary powers. Silent invocations take twice as long to cast, but cannot be stopped even by gagging the character and completely undetectable by mundane means.
Spoiler:
Save vs. Panic (Optional)
Designer's Note: I know some Game Masters like to add a grittier feel to their games or to add more realism. This rule was designed with that in mind. If this doesn't suit your particular style of gaming, then feel free to ignore it. Also, keep in mind that some players may not like the idea of their character panicking, but only fools and crazy people don't know fear. Encourage them to view this as a chance to enhance role-playing. However, if they're truly uncomfortable with this mechanic or it bogs down the game, consider ditching it in favor of a smoother game for all involved.
War can be a scary thing, especially in a deadly environment such as Rifts Earth. Enemy shots zip passed your head, loud explosions raining dirt and debris on your head, and your friend's head just got turned into a red mist. Keeping calm and collected in such situations can be difficult, especially for someone seeing battle for the first time. Panic is different from Horror Factor. With Horror Factor it can be this unnatural and powerful aura or some hideous sight, but Panic is something more common. We see Panic all the time in movies. The rookie is cowering behind cover while under fire and he just freezes up or does something stupid, or the soldier who just can't stop thinking about how he might die and never see his wife and kids again. That is panic.
Player characters tend to be exceptional, a step above the average everyday citizen. However, that doesn't make them flawless. Even a hero whose trained his/her entire life for battle can panic the first time they see the real thing. Just because a character panics though doesn't mean they're running around screaming, crying, and/or unable to act. While that might at times be realistic, it's usually not as much fun to play. The characters are still heroes, and they can keep fighting with only a few penalties.
When encountering intense combat situations, characters should make a Save vs. Panic (12 or higher). Any bonuses from a high M.E. attribute (save vs. psionics table) apply, as do other various bonuses and penalties listed below. Characters who make a successful save can keep a cool and level-head. Anyone who fails however is considered panicked. A panicked character suffers -2 to all combat rolls (including Perception checks) and cannot take any actions that count as more than one attack per melee (such as Power Punch, Called Shots, or casting a spell 6th level or higher). Any character who fails can reroll at the start of the next melee round, and can continue making new rolls at the start of each melee round until they either succeed or combat ends.
What is considered an "intense combat situation" is also variable, and ultimately a G.M. call. For example, an ordinary high school student who has someone pull a knife on him might genuinely panic even if he's studied self-defense. Meanwhile, a trained marine who has been to war in that same situation with the knife is likely to remain in control. The G.M. will need to make that judgment call on a case by case basis, but should avoid rolling simply for every encounter. This is meant to enhance play, not bog down the game. Also, keep in mind that Panic works both ways. Player Characters can panic, but so can NPC.
Bonuses +1: At character levels 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15. +1: Men at Arms O.C.C. +1: Hand to Hand Basic +2: Hand to Hand Expert or Hand to Hand Assassin (Note: Assassins are better at attacking from the shadows, not in direct combat). +3: Hand to Hand Martial Arts +1: If you have the same W.P. being used against you (e.g. the enemy fires an energy pistol at you and you have W.P. Energy Pistol). +2: If you've encountered this type of situation (or worse) at least once before (e.g. this is your second time in a large scale battle, or the character has dealt with a gun before and now a knife isn't as big of a deal). After the second or third encounter, the G.M. should not require a roll on this type of situation in the future. +3: Characters with the Leadership skill and spend one full melee round (15 seconds) to give a rousing speech and boost morale of all allies who hear it.
Penalties -1: This is the first time you've encountered this type of situation (e.g. first time in a real battle, not just training). -1: The enemy are using weapons you're unfamiliar with (e.g. the enemy is firing energy rifles and heavy weapons while you only have W.P. Rifle, non-energy). -2: The enemy displays abilities or gear that neither you nor the rest of your group can match (e.g. the enemy can Mind Control your teammates and no one in your group has those abilities or can effectively counter them, or they're equipped with superior armor and weapons). -1: There's a reasonable fear of death (not just if you have bad dice rolls, but the enemy has the weapons and skills to provide a legitimate challenge). -2: A friend or ally just died in front of your eyes. -4: The enemy has the potential to kill you in a single hit (e.g. an S.D.C. character with no armor in a M.D. firefight). -2: The enemy's physical size is considerably larger than you (e.g. a human against a giant or a Gargoyle against a Devastator robot). -4: The enemy's physical size is massively larger than you (e.g. a human against a Devastator robot). -1 (+): If the enemy has more troops than you. The penalty starts at -1 for an extra combatant, and increases every time the enemy numbers double, triple, quadruple yours (e.g. -1 for an extra combatant, -2 if the enemy numbers double yours, -3 if the enemy has three times as many troops as you, etc.).
Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys for now.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 2:45 pm
by ShadowLogan
Prysus wrote:Greetings and Salutations. Actually, whether tacet casting is possible (with the possible exception of Ocean Magic) is questionable at best. Casting silently is only found in Ocean Magic, that includes its location in the Book of Magic which discusses all magic (yet it's only found in one particular school). All other evidence suggests speech is required.
However given Palladium's loose editing and the exact phrasing "Notes about Magic Underwater" for the heading in both WB7 Underseas and BoM it could be seen as applicable to all magic due to: -if was to apply only to Ocean Magic wouldn't a better phrasing like "Notes about Ocean Magic Underwater" make more sense than the more generic (space saving might have a case in BoM, but not the original appearance in WB7 where it is spread over two lines with lots of white space on each line) - Even Ocean magic is said to "require the spoken word or a series of sounds.", which can apparently be met by direct vocalization or via projection from a radio or loud speaker. But then if you can use radio and loudspeaker it would also be appropriate for general casters - The mental focus point states "saying the incantation in their mind", and that "spoken world is merely a focus and delivery". This to me ties in with the above point, that they might be verbalizing internally still qualifies as verbalization. (Don't some people "verabalize" what they read even without opening their mouths?) - When discussing use of surface magic they use spell examples not present on "additional spell magic or Ocean Wizards" (WB7 pg63, BoM pg208) that come from the generic Wizard list specifically "Sense magic" and "Fear". Which seems an odd thing to bring up as spell examples that they don't have access to them and they are appropriate for underwater use, then there is the list of spells not appropriate for underwater use the use as examples that comes before it.
That all to me suggests that the section applies to more than just Ocean Magic, even though it is found there.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:18 pm
by Prysus
ShadowLogan wrote:However given Palladium's loose editing ...
Greetings and Salutations. And therein lies the problem. With the wording, taken in a bubble, I'd agree with you about the intent. However, it's placement in not just Underseas, but repeated again in Book of Magic, could be an odd place for a rule, or could be rule specific. This is the reason why I said "questionable at best." I didn't state it was provably false. However, when compared to the stack of other evidence in multiple books (RUE and PF2 for starters, but the rule extends far beyond that) about vocalization being required, I'd personally say that "Palladium's loose editing" is why the wording sounds general when it's class specific. It's a choice between believing that the one section from Underseas is true and EVERY other Palladium book is wrong, or believing that the pages and pages and pages of references would be true and that the one section is either wrong or a class specific ability. I know which way I lean, but because of "Palladium's loose editing" I can't prove it either.
ShadowLogan wrote:- The mental focus point states "saying the incantation in their mind", and that "spoken world is merely a focus and delivery". This to me ties in with the above point, that they might be verbalizing internally still qualifies as verbalization. (Don't some people "verabalize" what they read even without opening their mouths?)
Depending on how you define "verbalize," possibly (the actual definition could allow it). However, "verbalize" is commonly used to refer to the spoken word in particular (such as a Verbal Agreement). RUE goes on to specify "spoken aloud and with authority." So in this case, no, "verbalize" cannot mean reading it in your mind, as you must speak it "aloud," per RUE. To define aloud ...
Which, if we are to actually take the full definitions, would prohibit mages from whispering or mumbling the words. However, I can also find sources that discuss mages whispering or mumbling the words, so this can be either viewed as a change or "Palladium's loose editing" to mean spoken and not simply thought.
As for the "spoken world is merely a focus and delivery" section, this contradicts basically everything else Palladium has written about spell casting, only a few of which I mentioned above. So until you can prove "requires" means "optional" and "aloud" means "not speaking and only thinking," there isn't much debate on this matter for me. If you can't prove things like that, then all you're really doing is trying to argue that one section overrides all other sections of all other books. You're welcome to that opinion. I can't even prove that opinion is wrong, but you can't prove it's right either. All that you truly accomplish is arguing for the sake of arguing, which I have little interest in. Farewell and safe journeys for now.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 4:46 pm
by The Beast
Prysus wrote:Expanding outside of Rifts, I'll turn to Palladium Fantasy on this one. While I know some people dislike PF being brought up in Rifts, I'm quoting from the Diabolist section which (as far as I'm aware) was never converted in a Rifts books but we have Diabolists in Rifts so ... well, yeah.
Palladium Fantasy Second Edition; page 117 wrote:Power Words are the basis behind all areas of magic study, whether they be weaved into a spoken incantation or used to activate a ward or circle. [snip] When a power word is spoken, there is an invisible ripple of magic energy that transcends both space and time, allowing the person invoking the power word to tap directly into mystic energies.
So that tells us that Power Words are the basis behind ALL areas of magic study, and that SPEAKING them summons the magic energy.
The Diabolist is in CB1 and CB3 (which to me is odd since I don't consider that mystic art to be dark), however there's only enough there to convert a pre-existing character.
Petty tyrants thrive when they have authority backed by vague regulations.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:26 pm
by Axelmania
Prysus wrote:Casting silently is only found in Ocean Magic, that includes its location in the Book of Magic which discusses all magic (yet it's only found in one particular school). All other evidence suggests speech is required.
RUE says flat out: "To cast a spell requires verbalization" on page 189. This doesn't tell us optional, or hard to do without, but flat out "requires."
Silent casters still verbalize, they just do it in their heads.
Silent casting isn't just for Ocean Magic. The "Notes about Magic Underwater" is under the "Ocean Magic" heading on page 63, sure, but you can clearly see in the first bullet "Ocean magic does require the spoken word" that they will distinctly specify notes about 'ocean' magic. The 2nd-last bullet is clearly about non-ocean spells, it talks about fire/air spells for example. The last bullet talks about Warlock magic. It's a general discussion about all magic, not just ocean.
Prysus wrote:Then we have other abilities such as Metamorphosis that eliakon mentioned, where you can look at Metamorphosis: Insect and Metamorphosis: Mist which says you can't cast spells (no ability to speak, though if you could cast silently there should be nothing stopping you). The spell Escape tells us that "only gagging the mage will prevent the use."
Ocean Magic appears to be the odd (unexplained) exception, but does not indicate the rule.
Notes about Magic Underwater is not exclusively about ocean magic, it applies to all magic. That's why other forms of magic like Warlock and Fire/Air are mentioned in the same section.
"The spoken word is merely a means of focus and delivery, the magic energy is present in the spell caster no matter what the environment may be."
It's talking about PPE, nothing unique to ocean magic.
The thing is: just because it's possible to cast this way doesn't mean every mage is actually aware of the possibility of doing this. It may be that only a few know how to do it via experimentation.
Prysus wrote:RUE goes on to specify "spoken aloud and with authority." So in this case, no, "verbalize" cannot mean reading it in your mind, as you must speak it "aloud," per RUE. To define aloud ...
I don't even think we need to define it, since NAMU (Notes About Magic Underwater) says "Characters who cannot speak aloud can..."
So clearly the "aloud" rules are for RUE's enhanced casting speeds while the non-aloud NAMU rules are for the "1 spell per melee, costs 3 attacks" rule.
I figure that's intended for low-level spells, I think it would make sense to house rule that moderate / high levels increase comparatively to aloud-casting, so costs 6 attacks (one per 2 melees) for 6-10 and costs 9 attacks (one per 3 melees) for 11-15/legend.
Otherwise, silent-casting wouldn't actually slow down the casting of high level spells, unless you had 6 or more attacks in which case the 1 per melee would be a slight limiter.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:28 pm
by Ed
J_cobbers wrote:
say652 wrote:
say652 wrote:Any MMA fighter is superior in a Fist Fight to an average soldier,
I'm going to politely disagree with that here. There isn't any sort of high standard on who can or can't be classified as a mixed martial artist to draw such conclusions from.
Maybe something more specific like "someone who has had at least 1 victory in UFC" could be a place to begin drawing comparisons to the average combat training of specific countries' grunts.
I mean, I can technically call myself a mixed martial artist because I took a couple months of TKD where the teacher had us do boxing jabs in sparring, but I am not under the impression I could beat the average soldier of any country in a fistfight.
"Any Professional MMA fighter"
Having been an active duty Soldier, albeit one in a support MOS, not a Combat Arms MOS, I can say the average Soldier vs a Pro MMA fighter probably wouldn't do well in a fist fight, unless they've taken a few levels of Army Combatives, and made that part of their training. Other than basic and AIT only took the first level, which is a week or two to learn some basic Brazilian Jujitsu ground fighting, and how to close in and take someone to the ground while being punched at (with boxing glove on them). I had some tae kwon do in high school and college, and some Karate after that, but all together I'd say my hand to hand level in Rifts would be Basic. And I'm hella rusty without any real practice these days other than my 4 year old wanting to sword fight me with foam swords or try to punch and kick at me after watching an episode of Power Rangers or Transformers. Point is I would say my level of "combat training" was pretty 'average' for hand to hand, and any guy who makes his living in the octagon would probably whoop me even at my best. I would think however that my marksmanship with an M-16/M-4 would be good enough to take a MMA fighter within 100-200 yards with only a couple rounds, but that's a different kinda fight.
Now you take an Infantry man (Army, or Marine), whose whole job is to kill the enemy and been on a combat tour or two or three, you'll bet they've on average been to a few levels more of Combative, trained more frequently on the rifle range, maybe been through the Ranger course or Special Forces training, and those guys will do just fine against an MMA pro, though they'll probably shoot him before he gets anywhere near.[/quote]
You are getting to the difference between sport fighting and war fighting. Two very different things. In Rifts very, very few spell casters are trained in war fighting, despite the numbers who can train in HTH combat or martial arts.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:26 am
by eliakon
Axelmania wrote:
Prysus wrote:Casting silently is only found in Ocean Magic, that includes its location in the Book of Magic which discusses all magic (yet it's only found in one particular school). All other evidence suggests speech is required.
RUE says flat out: "To cast a spell requires verbalization" on page 189. This doesn't tell us optional, or hard to do without, but flat out "requires."
Silent casters still verbalize, they just do it in their heads.
Silent casting isn't just for Ocean Magic. The "Notes about Magic Underwater" is under the "Ocean Magic" heading on page 63, sure, but you can clearly see in the first bullet "Ocean magic does require the spoken word" that they will distinctly specify notes about 'ocean' magic. The 2nd-last bullet is clearly about non-ocean spells, it talks about fire/air spells for example. The last bullet talks about Warlock magic. It's a general discussion about all magic, not just ocean.
Prysus wrote:Then we have other abilities such as Metamorphosis that eliakon mentioned, where you can look at Metamorphosis: Insect and Metamorphosis: Mist which says you can't cast spells (no ability to speak, though if you could cast silently there should be nothing stopping you). The spell Escape tells us that "only gagging the mage will prevent the use."
Ocean Magic appears to be the odd (unexplained) exception, but does not indicate the rule.
Notes about Magic Underwater is not exclusively about ocean magic, it applies to all magic. That's why other forms of magic like Warlock and Fire/Air are mentioned in the same section.
"The spoken word is merely a means of focus and delivery, the magic energy is present in the spell caster no matter what the environment may be."
It's talking about PPE, nothing unique to ocean magic.
The thing is: just because it's possible to cast this way doesn't mean every mage is actually aware of the possibility of doing this. It may be that only a few know how to do it via experimentation.
Prysus wrote:RUE goes on to specify "spoken aloud and with authority." So in this case, no, "verbalize" cannot mean reading it in your mind, as you must speak it "aloud," per RUE. To define aloud ...
I don't even think we need to define it, since NAMU (Notes About Magic Underwater) says "Characters who cannot speak aloud can..."
So clearly the "aloud" rules are for RUE's enhanced casting speeds while the non-aloud NAMU rules are for the "1 spell per melee, costs 3 attacks" rule.
I figure that's intended for low-level spells, I think it would make sense to house rule that moderate / high levels increase comparatively to aloud-casting, so costs 6 attacks (one per 2 melees) for 6-10 and costs 9 attacks (one per 3 melees) for 11-15/legend.
Otherwise, silent-casting wouldn't actually slow down the casting of high level spells, unless you had 6 or more attacks in which case the 1 per melee would be a slight limiter.
This is of course the broadest interpretation of this power possible yes. The one that takes a specific ability that is in a sub school for a handful of classes and use it to overturn all the other game books materials on magic yes.
If your GM takes that view then that is their prerogative of course.
But since Tacit casting gets no mention anywhere else but under Ocean magic one can't be blamed for thinking it is restricted to Ocean Magic cast by Ocean Mages...
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 7:41 am
by Blue_Lion
Is this about using a subjective determination of combat training to prove a statement or about what the book says is combat training to prove or disprove the original statement.
Using a subjective this is what it means to me is to much of a shifting goal post to be used to prove weather or not mages are combat training.
Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
So going by the book I would say the statement is untrue while a mage may not be a professional at combat the only mage in rue that has no form of default combat training is the mystic.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 9:06 am
by Killer Cyborg
Blue_Lion wrote:Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
If you are a mage who wants to be an adventurer or merc explore the world you would need to be combat trained so when you are learning to be a mage you would obviously not just be sitting in a room learning magic ignorant to the fact that you could find yourself without PPE and still have to defend yourself.
HtoH- basic or expert for an extra skill slot WP- Sword WP- Energy Rifle
Spells to start
1 Blinding Flash Thunderclap Cloud of smoke __________________________________ 2 Befuddle Fear Levitation ___________________________________ 3 Armour of Ithan Invisibility Paralysis Lesser or Magic Shield ___________________________________ 4-----------------------------------also maybe Chromatic Protection Carpet of Adhesion Energy Field Magic Net
Looks pretty combat trained to me using energy rifle or TW rifle to deal damage while using the spells the mage knows to give him/her an edge.
Tolkeen wars need I really need to say more.
Military Combat training is working with a group and tactically overcoming opponents real world soldiers have basic HtoH training cause guess what they fire a gun. CS grunt will have a HtoH and a WP and by them self they are not nearly as scary as a mage
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:08 pm
by eliakon
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it. What the game sets up as its standards is a lot different than the real world. We know this because if you look at the skill sets people have in the real world it doesn't match the game. For example... in the real world I highly doubt that you could just go out and grab 100 people off the street nunchucks, or scholars swords, or crossbows, or flails and expect them to use them safely... but in game you can. 100% of the time. Then of course there is the fact that the game does not separate art forms and combat forms which allows you to pretend that an art style that is training someone to achive a level of skill that the game gives EVERY PERSON FOR BREATHING is the same as a warrior skill.
So... strawman.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:17 pm
by Killer Cyborg
eliakon wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it.
Correct. The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:12 pm
by eliakon
Killer Cyborg wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it.
Correct. The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
You already know that I have said she isn't Because what is her OCC mmmm? Unless she has a full OCC, which she has an taken those combat skills as then no she isn't You can put words into my mouth to make a strawman to attack but that doesn't make it true
It just makes you look bad and demonstrates just how badly flawed the strawman that you are tossing out here is.
That girl doesn't matter in Rifts... because SHE ISNT AN OCC She might be WORKING ON ONE but she doesn't have one YET THAT is what I mean by "not simulating reality" and why your strawman is exactly that You are attempting to take something that is NOT part of the game, hold it up as what the game is simulating and then knock it down to "prove your point" That is not logic.
Now if you want to actually have a discussion where you don't use fallacies by all means. But that means that you have to actually discuss what the books are about, not pull up what they are NOT about and try and use that.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:18 pm
by Killer Cyborg
eliakon wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
Okay, let's just explore that. What argument exactly do you think that I'm addressing? What argument exactly do you think that I'm making up that isn't being presented?
Killer Cyborg wrote:
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it.
Correct. The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
You already know that I have said she isn't
Why not?
Because what is her OCC mmmm? Unless she has a full OCC, which she has an taken those combat skills as then no she isn't
You said previously that starting with 1 WP and 1 HTH skill meant that a person was "Combat Trained." Now you're moving the goalposts, claiming that one also needs an OCC?
That girl doesn't matter in Rifts... because SHE ISNT AN OCC
Okay... so now being an OCC is a necessary requirement for being "combat trained"...?
She might be WORKING ON ONE but she doesn't have one YET
Okay, let's just explore that. What argument exactly do you think that I'm addressing? What argument exactly do you think that I'm making up that isn't being presented?
You are making the false claim that 1 WP and 1 H2H, by anyone makes you combat trained. Additionally you are implying that she has both H2H and WP... ...when neither has to be true. You do not need a WP to use nunchucks, unlike in the Real World where lots of training is required Also in Game you have a basic level of combat training simply by being a person (H2H: none) which may or may not be simulated by her level of skill Additionally "combat trained" as presented in this thread (by me and others) has been 'professional level' Since otherwise there is literally no definition of it (unless your arguing that there IS no definition of the words and that the term is irelivent and that everyone should decide on a case by case basis if they are or are not trained) She is not professional and in game terms she can not be. Thus presenting her as an example of someone with professional level training to shoot down the idea that 'those with professional levels of training in fighting are combat trained' is a strawman at best, and out right intentional intellectual dishonesty at worst.
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it.
Correct. The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
You already know that I have said she isn't
Why not?
Because she does not fit the definition She does not have "professional level" training in her skills.
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Because what is her OCC mmmm? Unless she has a full OCC, which she has an taken those combat skills as then no she isn't
You said previously that starting with 1 WP and 1 HTH skill meant that a person was "Combat Trained." Now you're moving the goalposts, claiming that one also needs an OCC?
Since I said that the definition was "professional" then yes, she needs an OCC
Killer Cyborg wrote:
That girl doesn't matter in Rifts... because SHE ISNT AN OCC
Okay... so now being an OCC is a necessary requirement for being "combat trained"...?
Yes, because as I have said before you need to have some level of 'professional' training other wise your still a hobbyist
Killer Cyborg wrote:
She might be WORKING ON ONE but she doesn't have one YET
Source?
[/quote] Your source that she has one? And then if she DOES have one at her age... ...then it would make her an exception that proves that either she is fully qualified (making your argument invalid) OR it would suggest that you are attempting to use a fully combat trained person to discredit things by simply making it LOOK like they are not trained. Either way is dishonest.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:54 pm
by Killer Cyborg
eliakon wrote:
it is EXACTLY a straw man
Okay, let's just explore that. What argument exactly do you think that I'm addressing? What argument exactly do you think that I'm making up that isn't being presented?
You are making the false claim that 1 WP and 1 H2H, by anyone makes you combat trained. Additionally you are implying that she has both H2H and WP... ...when neither has to be true.
You do not need a WP to use nunchucks, unlike in the Real World where lots of training is required Also in Game you have a basic level of combat training simply by being a person (H2H: none) which may or may not be simulated by her level of skill Additionally "combat trained" as presented in this thread (by me and others) has been 'professional level' Since otherwise there is literally no definition of it (unless your arguing that there IS no definition of the words and that the term is irelivent and that everyone should decide on a case by case basis if they are or are not trained) She is not professional and in game terms she can not be. Thus presenting her as an example of someone with professional level training to shoot down the idea that 'those with professional levels of training in fighting are combat trained' is a strawman at best, and out right intentional intellectual dishonesty at worst.
Let's try this again:
1. What argument exactly do you think that I'm addressing? 2. What argument exactly do you think that I'm making up that isn't being presented?
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it.
Correct. The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
You already know that I have said she isn't
Why not?
Because she does not fit the definition She does not have "professional level" training in her skills.
a) Source? b) Professional level training was NOT (AFAIK) a listed criteria in your previous post(s).
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Because what is her OCC mmmm? Unless she has a full OCC, which she has an taken those combat skills as then no she isn't
You said previously that starting with 1 WP and 1 HTH skill meant that a person was "Combat Trained." Now you're moving the goalposts, claiming that one also needs an OCC?
Since I said that the definition was "professional" then yes, she needs an OCC
No. What you said was "if that mage starts with a H2H and a WP, then I am sorry, they are combat trained." That's a direct quote.
Killer Cyborg wrote:
That girl doesn't matter in Rifts... because SHE ISNT AN OCC
Okay... so now being an OCC is a necessary requirement for being "combat trained"...?
Yes, because as I have said before you need to have some level of 'professional' training other wise your still a hobbyist
Feel free to provide a direct quote and a link of where you listed "professional" training as a listed criteria.
Killer Cyborg wrote:
She might be WORKING ON ONE but she doesn't have one YET
Source?
Your source that she has one?[/quote]
I asked first. You made the claim that she doesn't have one yet, so please support that claim.
And then if she DOES have one at her age... ...then it would make her an exception that proves that either she is fully qualified (making your argument invalid)
How would having an OCC prove that she is fully qualifies?
OR it would suggest that you are attempting to use a fully combat trained person to discredit things by simply making it LOOK like they are not trained. Either way is dishonest.
You're using your premise (that a person with a WP and a HTH skill, and--currently--has an OCC) is "fully combat trained" to support your own conclusion that they are fully combat trained.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 7:52 am
by Blue_Lion
Killer Cyborg wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:Looking for what the rules say provides combat training I did find two book quotes that talk about combat training. RUE PG 326 under weapon proficiency- "Each WP provides combat training with a particular type of weapon." -that means any one with a default wp is combat trained even if just for that weapon, by default. RUE PG 347 under hand to hand basic "This is elementary form of hand to hand combat training."-that means any one with hand to hand has is also combat trained.
The Real world doesn't simulate the game at all and you know it.
Correct. The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
You ever hear the term child soldier. In the real world we do have have children that have been trained and sent off to combat.
You are presenting the idea that because some one is a child they can not be combat trained. However there is nothing stopping a child from being trained for combat other than the values of a society.
IF anything it is simply a false flag attack at what the book calls combat training.
Re: Mages Aren't Trained for Combat
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:50 am
by Killer Cyborg
Blue_Lion wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:The game attempts to simulate the real world. It's not perfect, but there's absolutely nothing in the game rules that would prevent a character exactly like that little girl--a child who has 1 WP and 1 HTH skill. Which by your standard, would be "combat trained."
You ever hear the term child soldier. In the real world we do have have children that have been trained and sent off to combat.
Correct. Do you believe that the girl in the picture has been "trained and sent off to combat" as a child soldier?
You are presenting the idea that because some one is a child they can not be combat trained.
Not at all. Eliakon is close to that claim, by including OCC as a necessary factor as well, and by claiming or implying that children cannot have an OCC. I've never made either claim.
The only claim I'm making here is: IF the only things necessary for a person to be "combat trained" are a WP and a HTH skill, then the girl in the photo would qualify as "combat trained."
IF anything it is simply a false flag attack at what the book calls combat training.
I'm not sure what you mean here, but if you have any citations from any Rifts books describing what "combat training" entails, let me know.
