Forums of the Megaverse®

Bloodspray wrote:No, it wasn't legitimate. The GB would have seen something on his sensors, or the mage would have seen or felt something. You're talking about 2 people wandering around blind-folded. They deserve to get blasted. Anything else is crappy GM'ing. It simply encourages munchkinism and roll playing. A good GM should be focusing on story, and trying to get his players OUT of the armor they try to wear 24/7 and stink to high hell in.

So, the GB is necessarily going to see someone behind a hill with a shoulder missile launcher? And the mage would have "felt something"? What? How? And they at least one of them always makes his perception checks?

I love you how default to "roll playing" as an excuse for why it's bad. What if this is introducing an enemy, and the PCs happened to be too close? Or is the attack of an enemy they knew they'd made, but had forgotten? Or they're going through hostile territory, and the wizard's armor spell went down as the psi-stalker fired on them.

No one, except in your straw man, has claimed they need to wear it 24/7. However, if they're moving through hostile territory (which any place between the cities needs to be considered since, regardless of density, the probability is real and present), they should be defending themselves adequately.

Bloodspray wrote:Actually, I echo KS and many many others. Most people don't have the kind of time I do to deal with people like you is all.

So far you've been PROVEN wrong, per canon; equated using a rifle to full on EBA; stressed combat as the predominant thing in your games; insisted that I view mages in a way I clearly don't, even just in this thread (meaning you also lack reading); you failed at using logic and compounded that failure with sarcasm; and generally ignored all facts pertaining to the object of discussion.

Yeah, I know a thing or 2 about your gameplay. And with your incredible reliance on armor and tech, I know a thing or 2 about how you play mages too (not to mention re-inforcing information about your games). I know you don't want to accept that either. I know that because of the religious fervor you've demonstrated thus far.

You claim me to have religious fervor when it is you who is making personal attacks, forgetting conveniently that this is just a game. Was there ever a time to make this personal? No, I think not. At worst, I claimed you believed mages to be hippies, but never attacked you in any way shape or form. I have no problem having a discussion about such things. I would have LIKED to continue. But I'm not going to do it with someone who fails to understand the very rules of the boards and begins making personal attacks.

I've countered everything you've thrown at me, and rather than retaliate, you go on some bing calling me a munchkin, calling me dense, questioning my gaming skills and my intellectual level.

Do you realize that you are "dealing" with someone you've never met, talked to in person, gamed with...over the internet over a fictious world? You make it sound as if we talk politics, and lord help us on how you would respond should we actually start discussing something that has real impact.

Hey look at this. There sure is a lot of armor (not) being used in combat!
http://i33.tinypic.com/14wuo9x.jpg

I can't very well re-print entire texts or reams of art, it would be a copyright violation, and just not cool. It would be so much easier if you would just occupy yourself with reading books and not pounding out bs on the keyboard.

As stated before, pictures are not "canon"

Bloodspray wrote:Never made a direct personal attack. Asked some questions, made some suggestions, but always left it open for you to take it how you like, and that's how you liked.

Calling someone dense is very much a personal attack. You have no idea of my play style and you comment on it being "munchkin" which is very much an insult, at least it is concidered "flame-bating".

No, you've been quite adamant about being insulting and condescending.

I have countered every argument you had, and you only respond with insults. You even do so to Mark, in which your comment about his cycle was uncalled for which was very childish.

I'm sorry to see you have decided to go this route, but...se la vi.

Bloodspray wrote:lol, you aren't the least bit sorry about anything. You feel you should be beyond reproach and don't like attitude given right back to you, so you get all **** hurt and cry about it.

If that weren't true, we wouldn't be on page 3, and you know it.

I am. No doubt, hopefully the moderators will delete all those posts, without locking the thread so we could continue this without such flame-bating tactics.

It's also not my fault you have displayed a clear handle facts here (maybe you normally can, but here you have NOT). You haven't countered anything, and even in terms of what has transpired or been said, you can't see the facts for what they are, you have a need to take them in the worst possible way (attitude and insults are not the same thing dear ). Says a lot about you, as do your posts, and the fact that you keep coming back. lol

As I said, you're alone here. You keep saying I should see...but when in fact it is you who is alone in making the argument. Perhaps with the few that are posting (and generally disagreeing with you) you might take a step back, and realize that maybe...just maybe you're wrong.

I do only agree partially. and there are plenty of alternatives to wearing EBA, The penalties (if a GM uses them) are way too much for any mage to ever consider wearing Full EBA ever.

Marcethus wrote:I do only agree partially. and there are plenty of alternatives to wearing EBA, The penalties (if a GM uses them) are way too much for any mage to ever consider wearing Full EBA ever.

Actually, if you look at the penalties, they are rather insignifigant, especially if you use low level spells

You have to use 20% more PPE (1 or 2 points of mana using low level spells), and there's a 20% chance your spells will have no ill effect. Continuing, you can lose up to 40% damage, range or duration. That's worse case senario.

At the level you can afford TW armor or FF, and start using higher level spells, you wont' need EBA any more.

Generally speaking the best way to handle it is to not use damaging spells, and instead use spells that are either sure-fire (such as magic net) or invisiblity simple.

Bloodspray wrote:You aren't. If you were, you a) would not have started it, and b) would have ceased long by now. What goes around comes around, as with all other facts you've ignored here, you are not the innocent you wish to claim. Your move.

I never did start it. It was you that came in with the insults at first. I never claimed to be innocent, but I will defend myself when I am attacked.

I'm stating what is said in the books. So now you are saying the books and KS are wrong. I love it! It just keeps getting better and better.

Heavens no. I'm merely saying your interpretation is wrong.

And as if that wasn't enough - a handful of players look at this forum, a handful of those read this sub forum, a handful of those read this thread, a handful of those read it during the day (ie, right now), and a few of those have posted. On top of that, they HAVEN'T refuted what I said. And you're claiming unanimous agreement on your stance. Good lord!

And yet, it's true.

Bloodspray wrote:

Mark Hall wrote:So, the GB is necessarily going to see someone behind a hill with a shoulder missile launcher? And the mage would have "felt something"? What? How? And they at least one of them always makes his perception checks?

I love you how default to "roll playing" as an excuse for why it's bad. What if this is introducing an enemy, and the PCs happened to be too close? Or is the attack of an enemy they knew they'd made, but had forgotten? Or they're going through hostile territory, and the wizard's armor spell went down as the psi-stalker fired on them.

No one, except in your straw man, has claimed they need to wear it 24/7. However, if they're moving through hostile territory (which any place between the cities needs to be considered since, regardless of density, the probability is real and present), they should be defending themselves adequately.

And there is necessarily going to be a conveniently placed hill and a perp with a motive and the means to do this? It goes both ways.

I don't know you or, if I do, I don't recall you under that name. I'll point out that my name is fairly clear, whereas you are claiming to know me while hiding behind a pseudonym and failing to actually identify yourself or our association. You are further making intimations about my mental state, without actually observing me. I find this distasteful, and am reporting you for trolling.

Ad res:
There does not have to be a sniper behind every tree for a wizard to be dead if unarmored. There has to be a sniper behind ONE tree. As such, a wise person takes precautions. Is there a gunman behind that tree? What about that hill? You cannot know, and if you make a habit of annoying people (as adventurers tend to), you prepare for the possibility that someone will try to shoot you.

To use a modern example, seatbelts. There's a huge number of things that can go wrong while driving... drunk drivers, careless drivers, ice patches, wet roads, equipment failure... any one of them could result in your serious death or injury. Now, frequently, these do not happen to me. I haven't been in a wreck in years, and I drive almost every day. But I wear my seatbelt, because they might happen. If they happen when I am wearing my seatbelt, I stand a better chance of survival. If I choose not to wear my seatbelt, I run the risk (small though it is) that an accident will happen that day, and that failing to wear my seatbelt will cost me my life.

I call this "due paranoia." The principle that something has a possibility of happening, and so reasonable precautions to save my life are warranted. When viewed from this point of view, the question becomes "Is armor a reasonable precaution for a wizard to take? Is EBA a reasonable precaution for them to take?"

1) Is it a reasonable precaution of a wizard to wear full, Mega-damage, armor? The pro is protection against a variety of threats, while the cons are a possible difficulty in using magic (the likelihood of which increases about on par with the protectiveness of the armor).

2) Is it a reasonable precaution of a wizard to wear EBA? The pro is protection against an even wider variety of threats, while the con is an almost certainty of difficulty in using magic.

Bloodspray wrote:

Marcethus wrote:I do only agree partially. and there are plenty of alternatives to wearing EBA, The penalties (if a GM uses them) are way too much for any mage to ever consider wearing Full EBA ever.

Exactly. There's a time and place for everything. Even wearing EBA as a mage. But 99.999999% of the time, it has A penalty, and as you understand (but he does not), ANY penalty is too much to consider it. There are FAR too many other options.


"mana" lol he really is a WoW player.

Was a wow player, and may be again, when I finish college.

Edit: BTW, thanks for agreeing with me again.

Bloodspray wrote:And as if that wasn't enough - a handful of players look at this forum, a handful of those read this sub forum, a handful of those read this thread, a handful of those read it during the day (ie, right now), and a few of those have posted. On top of that, they HAVEN'T refuted what I said. And you're claiming unanimous agreement on your stance. Good lord!

Maybe they don't feel like being personally attcked.

I personally ignore the spell-caster armour prohibitions in my games; I don't remember them being there in the first versions of Rifts, and they smack too much of D&D for my taste.

Also, non-environmental armour would be lethal when confronted with many MD attacks - plasma missiles, a lot of spells, breath-weapons - basically anything that has an area of effect, and would flow or travel into an armour's gaps, no matter how small. Dog boy armour (old style) sort of makes sense, because the CS doesn't care if they die, but old-style juicer armour and the new mage armours are a bad idea for this reason.

Naruni force fields are a good solution, but they aren't foolproof. Whatever handwavium that triggers the field activation can be beaten in melee by attacking with slow deliberation (in-game, -6 to strike).

Talavar wrote:I personally ignore the spell-caster armour prohibitions in my games; I don't remember them being there in the first versions of Rifts, and they smack too much of D&D for my taste.

Also, non-environmental armour would be lethal when confronted with many MD attacks - plasma missiles, a lot of spells, breath-weapons - basically anything that has an area of effect, and would flow or travel into an armour's gaps, no matter how small. Dog boy armour (old style) sort of makes sense, because the CS doesn't care if they die, but old-style juicer armour and the new mage armours are a bad idea for this reason.

Naruni force fields are a good solution, but they aren't foolproof. Whatever handwavium that triggers the field activation can be beaten in melee by attacking with slow deliberation (in-game, -6 to strike).

I personally ignore it as well. (though I do restrict mages to Light and Medium armors reasoning being they wouldn't have the training to move properly in heavy armor. (homebrew ruling not actually in the books.) The other reason being that they can augment their protection with spells.

Partial Non EBA armors and magical armors (they do abound in recent books thanks to the change in rules regarding mages and EBA are a decent solution. FF's work well for most attacks but Gas and other Area effect attacks that FF's don't react to can kill just as easily as the ones that FF's react to.

Rogue_Scientist wrote:This argument is lame. Many of you are lame. The rule against EBA is lame. Environmental protection being virtually required in an RPG is lame.

That being said, I think the EBA changes were made primarily to preserve the "flavor" of the different classes. It keeps mages from being fully armored, tech-ed up guys who just happened to be able to cast spells.

The problem, imo, is that they didn't fully think things through and adjust the magical spell protections accordingly. If you want solid protection from radiation, heat, cold, poison gas, acid, etc, then magic just isn't an efficient long term solution. Most armor/protection spells last, what, 3 minutes per level? And layering spells, or casting the better ones (like Invincible Armor) can be quite costly in terms of PPE. Nevermind that you don't always get a lot of heads-up before being subjected to these kinds of attacks.

What's the solution? Idk. I like the "flavor" aspect, and agree with their original intent. Imo, they could (and should) have dramatically increased the duration on the Armor spells years ago. Perhaps make a special provision for self-casts, while keeping spells placed on others relatively short-term.

Aside from the comment about this arguement being lame. I agree though saying that its hard to be a mage is all a matter of perception and how the GM runs when he has a Mage Player.

I do like the Flavor aspect as well. But I agree that there is no Official solution (unless they suddenly make massive changes to how they do things.) That being said I agree that the armor spells should have massively increased duration at least for self. (we won't get in to what I think on the short ranges for the attack spells that Mages have)

But working within the rules as they stand Partial armor (or magical armors) are what we are stuck with. (barring house rules.) and Partial armors should give the mage a long enough survival chance that they can cast their magical protections.

My $.02, for the $.00 it's worth.

I've had a huge problem over time with games such as the Worlds of Darkness, 7th Seas, L5R, Ars Magica, etc. The systems themselves can be great but they turn everything into Stereotype vs. Anti-Stereotype.

I see the huge debate/flame-war above coming from this kind of thinking.

You CANNOT wear EBA vs. you MUST wear EBA.

Where are all the shades of colour? Does everyone have to be A or Z? What about all the other letters, or even Alphabets (cyrillic, Greek anyone?)

You're going to have your traditionalist non EBA wearing mages. You're going to have your Deadboy heavy EBA armour wearing mages. So why not both in the same game? Why hasn't anyone mentioned MD armour that isn't environmental? Like MDC Leather, Fury Beetle armor,
even that stupid leaf armor from England or the Altara lol armor?

The R:UE simply states 'starts with light MDC armor. I would allow players to think about this and come up with 'something'. if they want some light EBA, sure. If they want a leaf, why not?
If they want a magic ring that has a 6th level Armour of Ithan spell in it that magically appears when the person is attacked, but only has 60-100 MDC, then the ring crumbles (60-100 does not regenerate).

There are a multitude of ways each mage can determine what is best for himself or herself. So why limit them to choosing only casting by spell or man-made armor?

And there might even be a time where wearing MDC will get you killed and not wearing it won't.
So many ifs and buts.

Rogue_Scientist wrote:What's the solution? Idk. I like the "flavor" aspect, and agree with their original intent. Imo, they could (and should) have dramatically increased the duration on the Armor spells years ago. Perhaps make a special provision for self-casts, while keeping spells placed on others relatively short-term.

I wouldn't have a problem with this if mages were not allowed to wear EBA at all.

I dislike them not being able to use it because of "flavor". There are just too many good reasons to wear it.

But, if it completely negated the use of magic while in EBA then it wouldn't be so bad.

Bloodspray wrote:

dark brandon wrote:

Rogue_Scientist wrote:What's the solution? Idk. I like the "flavor" aspect, and agree with their original intent. Imo, they could (and should) have dramatically increased the duration on the Armor spells years ago. Perhaps make a special provision for self-casts, while keeping spells placed on others relatively short-term.

I wouldn't have a problem with this if mages were not allowed to wear EBA at all.

I dislike them not being able to use it because of "flavor". There are just too many good reasons to wear it.

But, if it completely negated the use of magic while in EBA then it wouldn't be so bad.

And thus, we are back to a munchkin situation. Why take any risks at all? Why play a character class properly (no mage would dull his abilities at all. He would avoid the situation and find other ways around it)?

Rifts is NOT that dangerous. If you make it so, then as the lolcats would say "yer doin' it wrong".

This all started because SOMEone suggested that ALL mages SHOULD wear full synthetic MD EBA. The only reason for that is being in the way of combat. 2 things real mages (played well) would seldom ever do. Even the mages obsessed with combat (like the Battle Magus) don't do that. Even in the streets of Tolkeen in the heat of battle, the CS troops LEARNED to recognize mage types by the CLOTHES they wear (a magic streetwise, learned on the front lines - aka, the heat of battle, would make most people go "hmmmm").

It's less about technology than it is about dulling their abilities and behaving in ways they would generally not do.

Then came all the convoluted attempts to defend this non-canon stance, since it couldn't supported through canon afterall. And that gave us all these cherry picked, meticulously handcrafted scenarios that are a bunch of bunk.

Bottom line - avoid direct combat; have support; acquire spells, magic armor and other items (talismans and such) to help keep you safe; and finally - if travel is REALLY that dangerous in your game, find another way around the problem, get an armored transport or teleport to your destination (hard for a low level character, thus large mechanized transport).

Now, if CERTAIN people could have simply said "I disagree with that book rule and prefer to do it different in MY game", fine, but they didn't. They instead presented a hell of a lot of attitude and pomposity, and then cried when they got it back. Oh well.

Book rules are canon and what will be found at conventions and such. It DOES work in practice (I do know this). And anything else is a house ruling. Acknowledge it as such and move on. That is.... IF an argument really and truly isn't what you're after.

I really can't stress how much I disagree with you and your interpretation of the book. Being that we will not agree, how about we simply agree to disagree.

Mages can, and do and should wear EBA armor.

You even acknowledged that 0.0000001% of the time they will, for whatever reason. And I'll acknowledge they won't wear the EBA armor 30% of the time. The only difference in our opinions is how often one would wear EBA armor. You can claim it's munchkin, and that's fine, especially since I'm not breaking any rules or stretching any sort of imagination (I believe saying a mage should have a FF is much more munchkin that having EBA armor), but that is my opinion.

Bloodspray wrote:They SHOULD NOT. It is written. And it is further implied. And logic explains why. It's really simple. If YOU want to.l

Like I said, the only difference between your opinion and mine is how often one will wear EBA. You stated yourself they do. /discussion.

Think about this - .

I will think about why you continue to post, since you've already agreed with me and proven my point. But, some people like "the sound of their own voice" or in this case their own text. Bold face and caps do not make you right, nor does it change the fact you've already forfeited your argument.

I think the only thing missing from your posts is +1 post count.

I dunno...I can think of one magic profession where I'd want as much protection, mystical or technological, as possible...
Shifter...
Oh, you can rule that commanding dimensional energies and being in touch with powerful supernatural beings unhinges a guy, and makes him arrogant and maybe dumb, but if my trade is opening dimensional gateways through which ANYTHING might come...radiation, gust of poisonous air, a hungry tentacle, laser fire, or a hit squad sent by an irate Thraxus for rifting into his bedroom...I'd want as much protection as possible...and failing that, a ready getaway vehicle(jetpack, mystic steed, etc...)...so I could get to be an OLD and successful Shifter...

Don't the original magic users still start off with light MDC armor because heavy types reduce their mobility?

This argument has parallels in searching to Palladium technology and magic on-line...you look for fan material for either, you'll come up with ten websites with new technology fgor every one that has new magic spells...

That's a pretty apt mirror of what it's like to search for either on Rifts Earth...
Technology can be reverse-engineered and mass-produced...the right people get ahold of, say a CS Skullwalker, they can start reverse engineering it and working towards producing a knock-off copy, or adapt what they learn to other designs...
Magic is much harder to figure out...even to sensitives, magic doesn't leave much trace evidence to allow another mage to figure out how a spell works...and because magic is much more personal and cerebral than technology, mages tend to sit on their secrets and any new developments they make tighter than Coca-Cola sits on its recipes...The Obsidian spell-thief from PW is a start for the sort of specialized mage who can more readily acquire(and distribute) new magic, but for the rest of the magic users, just picking up and reverse-acquiring a spell they've seen in action is going to be a lot harder..
Finding a mage willing to teach more than basic spells, therefore, is going to take a lot of digging and patience...sort of like shifting through the 'net for new spells...whereas technology is a lot easier to get ahold of...

Thread Locked.
Warnings issued.