Forums of the Megaverse®

Anyone have a link to the Rue erata ?

Zerebus wrote:

Lenwen wrote:Anyone have a link to the Rue erata ?

Palladium does. Look at the Cutting Room Floor.

EDIT: It's stickied in the top portion of this forum.

I was thinking they moved it to the online stuff you had to pay for now and was curious how to get at it hehe my bad thanks man.

Ok the thing I am looking for is not in the errata on the website. Unless I can not find it.

Can anyone tell me where the errata which dictates that the "Blast" radius of a blast of any kind and which some one is caught in the blast not the direct hit but mearly the "Blast Radius" of the blast .

I am looking for the errata that dictates that "Blast Radius" damage ( which is half when not hit directly) is applied by the book to the main body of those in the blast radius and not to everything on them in the blast radius.

ok I think I just went cross eyed typeing that. To those that are willing to discuss this, If ya understand the question I would greatly appreciat any help.

Does the later editions include all the errata?

Zerebus wrote:Lenwen, do you mean the following example?

Glitterboy A is caught in the blast radius of a fragmentation missile. It receives 5D6 MD to its Main Body, 5D6 MD to each leg, 5D6 MD to each arm, 5D6 MD to its Boom Gun, etc etc etc?

If so.... don't do that except for plasma/napalm and then only to make the player character inside think his whole suit is melting.

Yes.

This is exactly what I am asking about, Where is the errata about rules on "Blast Radius" and its "Effect" on beings caught in the "Blast Radius" ?

In Rue it stats those caught in the Blast radius but that which are not the ones who were hit directly, take half damage. But no where in the book nor the Rue Errata does it state, that "Half" damage of the Blast radius rule is applied only to the main body of those caught in the blast radius, or weather its in fact half damage taken by everthing in the blast radius.

Unless I totally missed where it was in the online Errata?

It does not state which sections are struck. I believe you are meant to use common sense, all parts struck that are capable of being struck.

Like not hitting a part on the opposite side of the blast.

Lobo wrote: Lenwen I have linked this to you before. And you will not necessarily see it in a book maybe not ever. It took many years for Auto Dodge clarification to finally get printed. You're going to make me bonk you if you keep asking the same question.

It is not in the Rue errata at all. I am ordering another updated Rue, to see if this is inside of the new Rue's as well And where is it in that link that says who is answering the questions ? Is it actually KS himself ? Or is it some fans of the game's themselves offering up thier opinions ?

runebeo wrote:Does the later editions include all the errata?

Yes. My second edition contains all the eratta

Wyrmbear wrote:viewtopic.php?f=37&t=79257&p=1647201&hilit=blast+radius#p1647201

Appears at first to have been answered by Tinker Dragon, but we have no way of knowing if he was just copy/pasting the original thread, which has been removed, or if he was the one answering it and is / is not a PB staffer.

I can confirm that he copy/pasted it.

Wyrmbear wrote:Oh that's it, just be HELPFUL why don't you...what kind of forum is this, where the mods are helpful?! Thanks much.

Still don't know who actually answered the question and unfortunately, without that, the arguments will most likely continue.

Naa not for me if its found on any palladium FAQ's, thats good enough for me.

Even if I do not like the none logic of it. It just does not make sense, I am a stats guy when it comes to sports so stuff like this "Deliberatly" kept simple just takes away some of the number stuff an does not make it as fun to me. but it is what it is.

My only question now is why is it not in the stickied errata on the rifts page as well ?

Lenwen wrote:I am looking for the errata that dictates that "Blast Radius" damage ( which is half when not hit directly) is applied by the book to the main body of those in the blast radius and not to everything on them in the blast radius.

You don't need RUE eratta for that.

Rifts, p. 41

Any shot which is not called will strike what is identified as the main body

Rifts, p. 43
Has a sample combat between a UAR-1 Enforcer and some rogue SAMAS.
At one point, a SAMAS is hit by three missiles, inflicting 3d4x10 MD.
The result is that the SAMAS takes "a total of 90 mega-damage points."
A SAMAS has 11 different hit location, including the main body.
A minimum roll of 3d4x10 MD would result in 30 points of damage to the main body, and 15 MD to each of the other 10 locations, which would result in a total of 180 MD to the SAMAS- 2x more than the damage the SAMAS actually ends up taking.
This shows that the damage from explosive blast radiuses, like from the fragmentation missiles used, only applies to the main body.

SB1, p. 7

A called shot must be made to hit a specific target or area such as a hand, head, foot, weapon, antenna, etc.

RGMG, p. 31

What are the rules for using SDC weapons against opponents in "partial" MDC body armor?
There are two possible sets of rules that could be used in this case...

It goes on to describe possible rules for making called shots in order to hit a body part not covered by MDC armor, and for assigning the partial armor an Armor Rating.
These are the two possible ways of doing it, and neither includes explosives.
If explosives hit every hit location with their blast radius, then they would be an easy way to get around partial MDC armor. A CS Grunt or Dog Boy without a helmet would be easy prey for SDC grenades.
Perhaps one might argue that since the Hit Points for a human or Dog Boy's head is not actually statted out, that it would be an exception to the rule; however, SDC robots and borgs do have body parts statted out by location, and there is no mention of them being affected by explosives in this description of the two possible sets of rules for bypassing partial armor.

RUE, p. 356
Describes some optional instances where SDC beings in MDC armor might take damage. There is again no mention of beings in partial armor taking any damage from the blast radius of explosives.

Also, as I have pointed out to you before, the result of ruling that the damage from a blast radius applies to every hit location would provide an unfair advantage to creatures that are statted out with only one MDC/SDC/HP pool.
A CS Grunt standing next to a dragon when a plasma grenade goes off would take (by that rule) 5d6 Mega-Damage to the main body, and 2.5-15 MD to the other 5 different locations, for a total of 12-105 MD.
The dragon, on the other hand, would only take 5-30 MD.

If there were a Blind Warrior Woman standing in the radius as well, then she would only take 5-30 MD as well, because her AoI amulet only has one hit location, and even if she doesn't have it activated, her MDC swimsuit with only 30 MDC only has one hit location.
Since we know that blast radiuses are not a canon way to bypass partial MDC armor like she's wearing, that would mean that a grunt with light Deadboy armor would be more likely die or suffer serious injury from a grenade blast than a woman wearing only a MDC swimsuit.

Moreover, going with the theory that the blast radius only hits areas that are statted out, this would result in an odd and unrealistic situation where a CS grunt would be more likely to lose his arms from an explosion if he's wearing armor on them then if he runs around wearing only the chest plate, leaving his other body parts unarmored.

Lobo wrote:I believe those old FAQ's were answered by PB staff.

They weren't.
This is why the old system was replaced.

Both FAQ do sometimes include official answers from Palladium staff, but they're often the exception.
With the new FAQ, at least the answers are more often based on the actual text in the books.

Killer Cyborg wrote: Since we know that blast radiuses are not a canon way to bypass partial MDC armor like she's wearing, that would mean that a grunt with light Deadboy armor would be more likely die or suffer serious injury from a grenade blast than a woman wearing only a MDC swimsuit.

Moreover, going with the theory that the blast radius only hits areas that are statted out, this would result in an odd and unrealistic situation where a CS grunt would be more likely to lose his arms from an explosion if he's wearing armor on them then if he runs around wearing only the chest plate, leaving his other body parts unarmored.

100% agreed.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Lobo wrote:I believe those old FAQ's were answered by PB staff.

They weren't.
This is why the old system was replaced.

Exactly my point, The old system was not the PB guys who wrote the books. There for the old errata did not make it into the new Rifts, errata section that is posted on here the Rifts baord.

Lenwen wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Lobo wrote:I believe those old FAQ's were answered by PB staff.

They weren't.
This is why the old system was replaced.

Exactly my point, The old system was not the PB guys who wrote the books. There for the old errata did not make it into the new Rifts, errata section that is posted on here the Rifts baord.

The Robotech combat system is updated from last year and has way more detail than RUE, plus robot mechs that loses 60% of its M.D.C. gain penalties. I'm sure when they update Rifts again they will included most of theses new rules in.

The problem with trying to figure out what parts of a PA/Robot Vehicle suffers damage from blast radius is then you have to pick a spot on the body that is hit and then take a ruler to a illustration that shows all dimensions (height, width, and length) of said robot to plot out the distance from the hit spot.

Problem is...these drawings don't exist (gawd knows I wish they did) and it would take way too long to figure this crap out with the (most of the time) profile shots of PA/RVs all the while everyone at the table is being bored to tears.

guess what I'm saying is as much as I like stats and stuff...I understand why they've decided not to go through this (the blast radius affecting everything business) and keep it simple.

runebeo wrote:The Robotech combat system is updated from last year and has way more detail than RUE, plus robot mechs that loses 60% of its M.D.C. gain penalties.

That's also in CB1.

Tyciol wrote:Maybe you could do something like 'targets besides main body take 1/2 (or 1/3 or 1/4, etc) damage. Basically, you could look at the ratio of the main body's MDC to the smaller parts' and figure out what portion they should take?

You still have the problems I outlined.

gadrin wrote:

Lobo wrote:I can totally see why PB kept blast radius to main body only. Just makes for more fun play.

Cool.

You wouldn't happen to have a book & page # ?

>

Its not in the books anywhere, it is on a page with some FAQs from the old palladium site. But those answer's could be from anyone . Not just palladium staff.

So basically its not canon. Unless you want it to be canon. If it were canon they would have put the "Blast Radius" FAQ's into the current on the Rifts page Errata, and since they have not . Its clear to me that it is not canon.

Lenwen wrote:

gadrin wrote:

Lobo wrote:I can totally see why PB kept blast radius to main body only. Just makes for more fun play.

Cool.

You wouldn't happen to have a book & page # ?

>

Its not in the books anywhere, it is on a page with some FAQs from the old palladium site. But those answer's could be from anyone . Not just palladium staff.

So basically its not canon. Unless you want it to be canon. If it were canon they would have put the "Blast Radius" FAQ's into the current on the Rifts page Errata, and since they have not . Its clear to me that it is not canon.

It's a extrapolation of the rules -

1. All missile strikes ALWAYS hit the main body.

2. All damage (from any weapon) is done to the main body unless a Called Shot is used to target something specific.

Recall if you will in the early days of Rifts, body armor's only had ONE location to hit (the Main Body) - so there was only one place you could apply damage too if you had a explosion in the middle of a group of infantry.

Lobo wrote:
1) - Stop saying if it were canon it would be in a book, your belief has no basis in fact.

2) - KS/PB can use the electronic medium to produce canon as easily as the written page.

3) - Also if you don't know that it takes PB years to get stuff in books, and sometimes they never do, then you have been looking at a different PB than I have.

1) -If it were canon it would have found its way into the current Rue Errata. It has not there for it is not canon.

2) - Yes KS/PB can use the electronic medium to put out canon easily, the fact that it has yet to be put out in "Current" Rue "Errata" shows me it is not canon. ( this is something you refuse to belive, yet go find me where it is IN the current Rue Erreta )

3) - Yes it does take YEARS sometimes for PB as a whole to put out something they said they would years ago, but then again were not talking about that were talking about the "Electronic" medium and the current Rue "Errata" or lack there of for the poupose of "Blast Radius".

It has not made its way into the current Errata, anywhere .. there for it is for now not canon. And as I stated an which was proven more then just PB staff were answering thier old question styled format. There for just because its on the old styled format does not dictate that it is in fact "Canon". And for further proof of this as I stated previously .. Show me anywhere in current canon books and or any medium with "Current" errata .. where it says it is.

Lenwen wrote:

gadrin wrote:

Lobo wrote:I can totally see why PB kept blast radius to main body only. Just makes for more fun play.

Cool.

You wouldn't happen to have a book & page # ?

>

Its not in the books anywhere, it is on a page with some FAQs from the old palladium site. But those answer's could be from anyone . Not just palladium staff.

So basically its not canon. Unless you want it to be canon. If it were canon they would have put the "Blast Radius" FAQ's into the current on the Rifts page Errata, and since they have not . Its clear to me that it is not canon.

If only somebody posted the official book information somewehere....
viewtopic.php?p=2026181#p2026181

Lobo wrote:

Lenwen wrote:

Lobo wrote:
1) - Stop saying if it were canon it would be in a book, your belief has no basis in fact.

2) - KS/PB can use the electronic medium to produce canon as easily as the written page.

3) - Also if you don't know that it takes PB years to get stuff in books, and sometimes they never do, then you have been looking at a different PB than I have.

1) -If it were canon it would have found its way into the current Rue Errata. It has not there for it is not canon.

2) - Yes KS/PB can use the electronic medium to put out canon easily, the fact that it has yet to be put out in "Current" Rue "Errata" shows me it is not canon. ( this is something you refuse to belive, yet go find me where it is IN the current Rue Erreta )

3) - Yes it does take YEARS sometimes for PB as a whole to put out something they said they would years ago, but then again were not talking about that were talking about the "Electronic" medium and the current Rue "Errata" or lack there of for the poupose of "Blast Radius".

It has not made its way into the current Errata, anywhere .. there for it is for now not canon. And as I stated an which was proven more then just PB staff were answering thier old question styled format. There for just because its on the old styled format does not dictate that it is in fact "Canon". And for further proof of this as I stated previously .. Show me anywhere in current canon books and or any medium with "Current" errata .. where it says it is.

You are mistaking the RUE errata for a place where PB gives rules clarifications. It is not. An erratum or corrigendum (plurals: errata, corrigenda) is a correction of a book. The RUE errata is a free electronic edition of later book printings of the RUE that were published with changes and corrections. Simply put PB doesn't want to get sued or upset customers by making people buy new printings of the same book whenever they publish changes/corrections to the book. Therefor they provide free access to the changes/corrections they made via web download.

PB is not going to stick every little rule clarification in a book. It costs too much and takes up too much space. KS has often said he's had to cut material out of books due to space restrictions. It's a business decision. Personally I would like to see more printed rules clarifications but so far KS has limited it to just a few pages out of dozens of books, that tells me it's not anywhere near PB's top priority to answer questions and clarify rules in a book printed setting. PB is much more likely to do it in an electronic setting like their web site where it's inexpensive.

All of that and still you refuse to show me anything of any concrete proof that says what exactly happens with "Blast Radius" types of Area effect blasts .

Which IS .. well the topic..

Lobo wrote:I have linked it multiple times and other's have also provided rules pages and links as well. You're just refusing to believe those examples which is not the same as they were never given to you.

Not refusing mearly questioning the validity of said answer on your link. I know for a fact other people other then the PB staff at those times answered questions as well. Something another poster has even stated as well and something to which your not even attempting to debat.