Forums of the Megaverse®

The discussion on the "Optional O.C.C." thread got me thinking. When I started playing Palladium Fantasy/Rifts, I tended to gun for maximizing the P.P. stat, and there's a lot to be said for it. However, I've recently come to have some doubts about it being quite as clear and dry as I used to think, so I thought I'd try a side-by-side comparison of what I can do with a character with one of these stats at 30.

The P.P. bonuses are great for offense and defense. The across-the-board bonus of +8 to strike, parry, and dodge make your character equivalent to a high-level character in both offensive and defensive skill, and that's before you throw in hand-to-hand and weapon proficiency bonuses. Using Excel and the basic rules for combat (defender wins ties, natural 20 beats all but a natural 20) for someone with a +8 to strike or parry/dodge vs someone with no bonuses, I get the following results for 15,000 contested pairs of 20-sided dice rolls:

A character with a P.P. of 30 will successfully hit an otherwise identical character with no P.P. bonus about 78.7% of the time. On the flipside, successfully defending against a character with a +8 to strike advantage over your defensive bonuses is only successful about 21.3% of the time.
A character with a P.P. of 30 will successfully defend against an otherwise identical character with no P.P. bonus about 81.5% of the time. On the flipside, attacking a defending character who enjoys a +8 to defend above your own bonus to strike is only successful about 18.5% of the time.

At face value, this is a huge statistical advantage. However, it is not insurmountable. Simply by ignoring initiative and counterattacking with simultaneous attacks, a character can nullify the defensive bonus of a high-PP opponent. Thus, if you can reliably hit harder and take more damage than a high-PP opponent, it's statistically to your advantage to use simultaneous attacks. Paired weapons complicates this, but if both parties have paired weapons, it makes no difference (simultaneous dual-strikes).

One final note on the value of armor. Against a high-PP opponent, wearing anything with an AR of 8 or less does nothing, as all their attacks will bypass your armor. Even characters in full plate will see that full plate get bypassed 55% of the time by an attacker with a +8 to strike, whereas attacks with no bonuses only bypass armor about 15% of the time. Hand-to-hand and weapon proficiency bonuses will raise these chances by 5% per +1 to strike.

Thus, a max P.P. character is strong on offense and defense in conventional fights and particularly good against opponents with high ARs.

The value of a high P.S. is considerable and exclusively offensive. Consider that most hand-to-hand weapons have a damage between 1D6 and 3D6 as their base. The median damage is between 3.5 and 10.5 for a character with no damage bonuses. With this bonus, the median damage increases to 18.5 to 25.5. Thus, you're getting anywhere from 2.5x to 5x the damage for a maximum P.S. attack over a typical character.

Let's consider a max P.S. vs a max P.P. character. In normal combat, the hitting power of the max P.S. character might nullify the defensive advantage of the max P.P. character. That is, the max P.S. character won't hit so often, but the hits will be reliably powerful enough to make up for the lower hit rate. However, the max P.P. character will hit more often, which gives the max P.P. character effectively twice the edge in normal initiative-taking-turns combat over the max P.S. character.

However, if the max P.S. character opts to use simultaneous attacks against the max P.P. character, the defensive bonuses of the max P.P. character are nullified. Even a character with no bonuses to strike will hit 75% of the time against an un-defending opponent. Thus, when using simultaneous attacks, the max P.S. character is on par with the max P.P. character, and may in fact be better depending on the weapons they use and other factors. For example, W.P. Paired Weapons effectively doubles their damage advantage.

Additionally, characters with a P.S. of 30 have a monstrously powerful attack option: hurling heavy objects! See p17 of 2nd Edition. In this case, the max P.S. character can hurl 600 lbs 120 inches, or 10 feet. The damage is 1D6+1D6 per 20 pounds, or 31D6, or 3D6x10+3 damage, for a median damage of 108.5 per attack! This is equivalent to 10 hits with a claymore by an average person and will insta-win many fights in a single strike. Against a foe that can't defend (as in the simultaneous attack), this tactic puts the max P.S. character at a major advantage over the max P.P. character.

Thus, a max P.S. character is an offensive beast who is clearly superior to a max P.P. character in scenarios where damage output is more important than avoiding hits.

Finally, the value of a high P.E. is considerable and exclusively protective. Let's start with the obvious: the character will start with almost 3 times as many hit points as a typical character. An average character will need to get to level 6 to get to the starting hit points of a max P.E. character. This isn't as much of a proportional combat advantage as what you get with max P.S. or max P.P. stats, and in a straight-up fight, the max P.E. character is likely to lose to both the max P.S. and max P.P. characters. The character is also much more likely to survive losing a fight, staying alive at up to -30 hit points of damage. Surviving and winning aren't the same thing, but at least you won't have to roll up a new character quite as often.

Where the max P.E. character shines is in resisting magic (and poisons). Depending on how much magic effects come into your games, this can be a tremendous advantage, making your character useful against a wider variety of foes. Every magic saving throw requirement drops by 8. That means that, against a basic wizard, scroll, magic item, et cetera using spell magic, you only need to roll a 4 or better, and you'll save 85% of the time. Against the most powerful ritual magic, you'll only need to roll an 8 or better, and you'll save 65% of the time. A max P.E. character might not be quite as powerful in normal melee combat, but if magic effects or poisons are involved, this is the stat you want. For many magic users, this stat is arguably the single most-important, both for resisting nasty magic effects and for having larger P.P.E. base. Poisons tend to be a bit less common in the games I've seen and played in, but the same holds true.

Thus, while a high P.E. may not be as useful in physical combat, it's useful in a wider variety of situations.

Bottom line: I've re-evaluated my "P.P. is king" perspective, and I'm not convinced that any one stat is hands-down the best choice. In fact, I think that a well-played max P.S. character is likely to do better in most party fights than a well-played max P.P. character, especially when the party is fighting a single monster. A max P.E. character is likely to be more reliable against magic foes. I'm honestly not sure which stat I would choose to max out anymore. What do you think?

My vote is for P.E.

Whats the point in being able to hit something well, or hit it hard, if you get taken down by a house cat before your adventure begins?

That being said, your arguments have me thinking now . . .

I think it depends on what the situation demands. As you outlined well in your post each as advantages:
- 30 P.P. for Strike/Parry/Dodge
- 30 P.S. for damage and utility
- 30 P.E. for Hit Points, Magic Save Bonuses and starting P.P.E.

All three characters would fall to Mind Control easily since only M.E. offers bonus saves vs Psionics. Vote equality since superiority of any single stat is highly situational.

**edit**

Stepping out of just Palladium Fantasy. The Heroes Unlimited book has a O.C.C. called the Ancient Master. Instead of "super powers" at 1st Level they start with Martial Arts and several weapon skills at Level 15. Additionally P.P. is raised to a minimum of 18 after rolling stats. So:
strike +3 for P.P. +2 for Martial Arts and +3 for W.P. = +8
parry +3 for P.P. +5 for Martial Arts and +3 for W.P. = +11
That's before any additional bonuses for say, Boxing or Athletics.

Compare to adding say a super human with 30 P.P. and sonic speed
strike +9 for P.P. +1 for sonic speed = +10
parry +8 for P.P. +4 for sonic speed = +12

Yet both are still helpless if a Mutant Animal (regarded as one of the weakest in HU) uses Mind Trap on them. Saving throw is a 15 on a d20 and neither "super" has any bonuses for the Psionic save.

And simultaneous strike can be parried with a sword and board or 2 swords (and who doesn't take paired weapons as a fighter)
and its a lot easier to get damage bonuses for weapons than strike bonuses. (can you name a weapon with + 5 to strike, and it costs about 78k to add +15 damage to a weapon, or about 25k to add 3d6+4).
In specific situations the others can be better, but players mostly aren't in those situations, they are in a party with whom the monsters have much of a chance of hitting the hi pp characters they tend to be too tough for the lesser pp characters, From a dm'ing standpoint id prefer a character to have a ps of 30 than a pp of 30. (Swarms of weiners will still take down a 30ps and one hit will often kill them from a non ps 30 character, but generally don't against hi pp unless the hi pp character gets himself surrounded, and that's what I usually try to do.


Edit, not to mention that whenever the players get to choose where their stats go, pp is always the highest because it helps whether you are a priest, wizard, thief or paladin.


Did you want to run the following stats through your excel document, because this is generally the way the bonuses are in my games (strike much lower than parry)

A lvl 5 soldier with 30 pp is
+10 to strike with his unmodified sword
+16 to parry with his unmodified shield
+2 to damage
A lvl 5 soldier with 30 ps is
+2 strike with his unmodified sword
+6 to parry with his unmodified shield
and +17 to damage.


a level 15 soldier with 30 pp is
+14 to strike
+22 to parry
+6 to damage

a level 15 soldier with 30 ps is
+6 to strike
+14 to parry
+21 to damage

and generally at that level pc's are using weapons that will one hit each other on a crit.
a +3 to parry shield is about 520gp

This is all first ed stats but second ed is close enough in the fact it tends to skew this way as well. Massive Parry and damage, itty bitty strike.

and then everyone drinks a pot of fleet feet (Doubles PP/doubles + to strike parry, dodge [depending on how you interpret the spell], and uses a talisman of super strength/size of the behemoth/strength of utgard loki (give PS 30 and PE 24, doesn't double stats like fleet feet)
this then mostly negates the PE of 30 guys bonus for the combat, does negate the bonuses for the guy with 30 strength and the 60 PP guy now is fully insane.
I have also heard that Kevin didn't want PP to get over 30, there are couple of gods with 31-33 I think but there are a lot more things with 30+ PE and PS.

and this doesn't take armour into account either.

kiralon wrote:And simultaneous strike can be parried with a sword and board or 2 swords (and who doesn't take paired weapons as a fighter)

Totally true. However, consider how that goes down for a high P.S. vs high P.P. when both have Paired Weapons.

1. High P.P. character attacks first with one or two weapons. High P.S. character counter-attacks with dual strike. At this point, both roll to strike, and the advantage lies with the high P.S. character due to damage bonuses.

2. High P.S. character attacks first with a dual-strike. High P.P. character parries both (and probably succeeds). No auto-parries are allowed when you use a dual-parry, so the dual-parry uses up the high P.P. character's attack. The High P.P. character is essentially nullified and can only defend.

3. High P.S. character attacks first with dual-strike. High P.P. character uses an automatic parry, then responds with a strike. The High P.S. character responds with simultaneous attacks, and we're back to scenario 1.

kiralon wrote:and its a lot easier to get damage bonuses for weapons than strike bonuses. (can you name a weapon with + 5 to strike, and it costs about 78k to add +15 damage to a weapon, or about 25k to add 3d6+4).

100% agreed that increasing the damage is easier. I'm comparing the effectiveness of different bonuses, not comparing the difficulty in raising a particular bonus.

kiralon wrote:In specific situations the others can be better, but players mostly aren't in those situations, they are in a party with whom the monsters have much of a chance of hitting the hi pp characters they tend to be too tough for the lesser pp characters, From a dm'ing standpoint id prefer a character to have a ps of 30 than a pp of 30. (Swarms of weiners will still take down a 30ps and one hit will often kill them from a non ps 30 character, but generally don't against hi pp unless the hi pp character gets himself surrounded, and that's what I usually try to do.

Here, I disagree that players aren't often in those situations. In fact, I would say exactly the opposite. The best defense is a good offense, and a faster victory means fewer hits on party members. Let's look at some numbers.

If your strike bonus equals the parry bonus of an enemy, you'll hit about 47.5% of the time. With a +8 to strike, this increases to 78.7%. This means that for every hit the max P.S. character gets, the max P.P. character will hit about 1.75 times. Thus, as long as the max P.S. bonus of +15 is 65% of the median damage without the P.S. bonus, P.S. is the more-effective offensive attribute.

In order to get to the point where 30 P.P. is making the same difference as 30 P.S. in an otherwise-even fight, you need to be doing a median of 23 damage per hit, or 4D6+9 damage, or 5D6+6 damage, or 6D6+2 damage, or just shy of 1D4x10 damage. That's definitely doable with the right some elite dwarf/alchemist bonuses and some shrewd skill/equipment selections, but I wouldn't call it easy or trivial.

On the flipside, there are plenty of ways in which a character can raise the probability of hitting an opponent that are pretty cheap too, including non-lethal toxin effects, a weighted net, ganging up on an opponent, knockdown attacks, and crippling magic/psionic powers.

kiralon wrote:Edit, not to mention that whenever the players get to choose where their stats go, pp is always the highest because it helps whether you are a priest, wizard, thief or paladin.

That goes for all three of the core physical combat stats. I don't disagree with you that P.P. is the most-popular; as I said, it's been my choice stat to maximize when I've had that option in the past. However, I'm not so sure anymore that it should be as popular as it is, at least not in the Fantasy setting.

Hotrod wrote:That goes for all three of the core physical combat stats. I don't disagree with you that P.P. is the most-popular; as I said, it's been my choice stat to maximize when I've had that option in the past. However, I'm not so sure anymore that it should be as popular as it is, at least not in the Fantasy setting.

One thing that bothers me about these discussions is a number of assumptions are made and not everybody is on the same page.

1) the shortest path to victory in combat is not always swinging a sword....
- Automatic Parry can be used by Men-at-Arms to easily negate attacks, why use an Attack which can be Parried? Either:
a) Attacking at range means the defender must Dodge, which uses up a possible Attack which are finite.
b) Attack from behind. If your G.M. is willing to rule that your opponent does not see the Attack coming they are not allowed to Parry.
- Spells or Psionic Powers can often defeat an opponent with a single use if the Save is failed.
- if opponents outnumber you and are using ranged weapons you better even the odds fast or RUN AWAY because the rules are clear, you can't Dodge forever.

2) not all opponents have an A.R. or are capable of Parry
- from the lowly Animated Dead to a fearsome Grizzly...plenty of creatures do not use Parry.
- sure dragons, evil knights and demons have good A.R. But how many goblins have an A.R. or Parry bonus so high you would need a +8 to fight?

3) Not every fight is a 1v1
- best way to win an even fight is to concentrate attacks and take one opponent down quickly to gain a numerical advantage.
- if you have 3 men-at-arms VS. a "big baddie" the one with highest Parry/Dodge bonus should "tank" The other two should focus on Damage. Whether P.S. or P.P. setup is best depends on IF that opponent can parry, how high the bonuses are and what A.R. it possesses.

Hope you enjoy the food for thought.

It says you can do an attack, does that include dual strike ?
We have always played that a dual strike was like using a special ability, and you can't use 2 in the same action (unless the activation word is the same)

Otherwise since dual strike lets you hit 2 people, can you strike back and hit the guy you are fighting and the guy next to him, and simultaneous strike definitely says no parry or dodge so the second guy gets walloped too with no chance of parrying. (I have had this argument and said no myself, simultaneous strike and paired weapons are pretty ridiculous if you can use them together and I just stuck to the argument that simultaneous strike says attack, not dual strike.)

Could you do a spell or psionic attack instead or use a magic item or drink a potion (I use the potion in my left hand as a dual attack and attack splash the fluid into my mouth)?
or throw a weapon. They are all attacks.

kiralon wrote:It says you can do an attack, does that include dual strike ?
We have always played that a dual strike was like using a special ability, and you can't use 2 in the same action (unless the activation word is the same)

Otherwise since dual strike lets you hit 2 people, can you strike back and hit the guy you are fighting and the guy next to him, and simultaneous strike definitely says no parry or dodge so the second guy gets walloped too with no chance of parrying. (I have had this argument and said no myself, simultaneous strike and paired weapons are pretty ridiculous if you can use them together and I just stuck to the argument that simultaneous strike says attack, not dual strike.)

My interuptation of your situation is your character facing two enemies both within reach of your swords/axes/whatever?

1) #1 Attacks your Character. You may Parry, Dodge or Simutaneous Strike #1.
- If you are Dual Wielding you may use both weapons on Simultaneous Strike. But that action applies to #1 only, you may not use Simultaneous Strike to hit #2 because #2 did not Attack you yet.
- If your opponent is Dual Wielding and only attacked your character with one weapon, they are still allowed to Parry even a Simultaneous Strike since their second weapon is not being used in the initial attack.

2) It is your Attack/Attack (not a Simultaneous Strike so opponents do have Parry available to defend) you may use an Attack to
a) swing with your right hand weapon at #1 and your left hand at #2
b) as above but opposite hands
c) swing both weapons at either #1 or #2 (but not both weapons at both opponents)

kiralon wrote:Could you do a spell or psionic attack instead or use a magic item or drink a potion (I use the potion in my left hand as a dual attack and attack splash the fluid into my mouth)?
or throw a weapon. They are all attacks.

The terms "Attack" and "Action" are seperate in Palladium. Using an item or potion is an Action, not an Attack. See official F.A.Q. https://www.palladiumbooks.com/index.ph ... cle&id=215

Ok, so I revised my 15,000 contested-roll Excel simulator further, to where I can adjust bonuses more conveniently.

NERD ON!

I started by running Kiralon's four Soldiers against each other.

Level 5 (max P.S.) has +2 to strike. His odds of hitting vs
A max P.S. Level 5 with +6 to parry: 31%
A max P.P. Level 5 with +16 to parry: 7.4%
A max P.S. Level 15 with +14 to parry: 10%
A max P.P. Level 15 with +22 to parry: 4.75%

Level 5 (max P.P.) has +10 to strike. His odds of hitting vs
A max P.S. Level 5 with +6 to parry: 65%
A max P.P. Level 5 with +16 to parry: 24.3%
A max P.S. Level 15 with +14 to parry: 31%
A max P.P. Level 15 with +22 to parry: 10%

Level 15 (max P.S.) has +6 to strike. His odds of hitting vs
A max P.S. Level 5 with +6 to parry: 47.5%
A max P.P. Level 5 with +16 to parry: 13.5%
A max P.S. Level 15 with +14 to parry: 18.5%
A max P.P. Level 15 with +22 to parry: 5.5%

Level 15 (max P.P.) has +14 to strike. His odds of hitting vs
A max P.S. Level 5 with +6 to parry: 78.5%
A max P.P. Level 5 with +16 to parry: 39%
A max P.S. Level 15 with +14 to parry: 47.5%
A max P.P. Level 15 with +22 to parry: 18.5%

Switching from max P.S. to max P.P. helps your hit chances to varying degrees:
A Level 15 max P.P. attacking another Level 15 max P.P. will hit about 3.3 times as often as a Level 15 max P.S. attacking a Level 15 max P.P. This is a proportionate gain of 230% in hits.
A Level 15 max P.P. attacking a Level 5 max P.S. will hit about 1.5 times as often as a Level 15 Max P.S. attacking a Level 5 Max P.S. This is a proportionate gain of 50% in hits.

Not enough, sayeth my inner nerd!

For fun, I also ran a series of tests from the attacker vs defender starting from -19 and increasing to +19 bonus advantage over the defender where I looked at the hit percentage and the difference that came with each increase in strike:
-19: 4.75%
-18: 4.80% +0.05% (There may be no difference here at all, for that matter)
-17: 5.1% +0.3%
-16: 5.6% +0.5%
-15: 6.3% +0.7%
-14: 7.2% +0.9%
-13: 8.5% +1.3%
-12: 9.9% +1.4%
-11: 11.6% +1.7%
-10: 13.6% +2.0%
-9: 15.9% +2.3%
-8: 18.7% +2.8%
-7: 20.9% +2.2%
-6: 24.3% +3.4%
-5: 27.5% +3.2%
-4: 31.2% +3.7%
-3: 34.7% +3.5%
-2: 39.0% +4.3%
-1: 43.0% +4.0%
+0: 47.5% +4.5%
+1: 52.4% +4.9%
+2: 56.5% +4.1%
+3: 61.0% +4.5%
+4: 64.7% +3.7%
+5: 68.8% +4.1%
+6: 72.3% +3.5%
+7: 75.4% +3.1%
+8: 78.0% +2.6%
+9: 81.2% +2.2%
+10: 83.6% +2.4%
+11: 86.2% +2.6%
+12: 87.9% +2.7%
+13: 89.6% +1.7%
+14: 91.2% +1.6%
+15: 92.5% +1.3%
+16: 93.6% +1.1%
+17: 94.4% +0.8%
+18: 94.8% +0.4%
+19: 95.0% +0.2%

These are statistical snapshots of 15,000 randomized attack and defense rolls, so there's a little statistical wiggle at play.

The % difference per bonus shows a couple of interesting trends.

Strike and parry bonuses make the biggest difference in absolute terms when your opponent has similar bonuses. You will gain the most hits per strike bonus in absolute terms when your strike bonus is roughly equal to your opponent's parry bonus. If you already have a +10 advantage over your opponent, you'll be gaining about half as many hits per attack for each additional bonus as you will if you have no strike bonus advantage over your opponent's parry bonus.

In absolute terms, you'll gain the most hits for the 30 P.P. +8 to strike or parry if you're starting with a strike bonus deficiency of -4. The P.P. bonus of 8 will increase your hit chance from 31.2% to 64.7%, which is a 33.5% increase. Proportionately, this is an increase by a factor of 2.1, or 110%.

Proportionately, you increase your hits per additional +1 to strike the most when you have disadvantage of -1 to -16 against your opponent's parry bonus. The peak area is -13 to about -6, where you are proportionately gaining around 15% more hits for each +1 increase in strike bonus. Once your strike bonus is +6 higher than your opponent's parry bonus, you're proportionately gaining only 5% more hits for each +1 increase, and this drops as go go up. If you're enjoying a +14 strike bonus over your opponent, any further bonuses won't make enough difference in your hit frequency for you to notice.

Proportionately, you'll gain the most hits for the 30 P.P. +8 to strike or parry if you're starting with a strike bonus deficiency of -13. A P.P. bonus of 8 will proportionately increase your hits by a factor of 3.4, or 240%. You'll still miss most of the time, but you'll hit about 27.5% of the time vs 8.5%. In terms of hit frequency, this is a 19% increase.


tl;dr: The importance of strike and parry bonuses depends on what you're fighting. Huge strike bonuses help the most against foes with huge parry bonuses, and vice-versa. Going from a big advantage to a huge one doesn't help nearly as much as going from no advantage to a big advantage, or from a big disadvantage to no advantage.

And with that, I'm nerded out for the day.

That is an interesting list, I wonder how armour would change the % of the people getting hit, because armour is pretty useless when the players get high strike bonuses, because I found that if the blow wasn't parried, it was because the roll was high enough to defeat the armour too (because a character gets more parry bonuses than strike bonuses), so the armour was mostly undamaged and the person took most of the damage.

And the thing with autoparry, are you supposed to give stat bonuses to it, how about roll?, entangle?
As far as I know backflip and entangle and roll and so on don't get PP bonuses, because I read somewhere that autododge (I think) didn't.



The rules don't explain the extra combat moves well. Going by the book you can't parry or dodge a simultaneous strike, but you could entangle it, because it doesn't mention entangle because the special attacks/abilities aren't explained well enough. It doesn't make logical sense that entangle would work, but simultaneous dualstrike (well mostly simultaneous) doesn't make logical sense either. What happens if both opponents have the same initiative, they are going off at the same time so does that make it an automatic simultaneous strike unless one of them decides to parry?

You explained the difference between attacks and actions better than I could thank you, so does dual strike require an action, or an attack. We play that you need an action to do a special strike/parry, not an attack (all the special things seem to require an action - backflip, roll, entangle etc).

And the point about dual strike is the fact that it specifically says you can hit 2 separate targets, if simultaneous strike lets you use dual strike, then why would it stop you from dual striking as written or to put it clearer, why would simultaneous strike override dual strikes rules. There's nothing in the rules that I remember that mention one takes priority over the other, and one of the blows is hitting the target so it is fulfilling that requirement. If you can dual strike during a simultaneous strike then you can dual strike.

Personally, I prefer a higher PP, but your scenario assumes that if the one attribute is a perfect 30, the other two are below exceptional. PS is the easiest of the three to increase. So a character with a 30 PP will still likely have a PS in the 20 range at least.

kiralon wrote:That is an interesting list, I wonder how armour would change the % of the people getting hit, because armour is pretty useless when the players get high strike bonuses, because I found that if the blow wasn't parried, it was because the roll was high enough to defeat the armour too (because a character gets more parry bonuses than strike bonuses), so the armour was mostly undamaged and the person took most of the damage.

The list I did is relative: your strike bonus minus your opponent's parry (or dodge) bonus. Armor penetration % chances are either ridiculously easy or fairly tricky to compute, depending on how you do them. Incidentally, I think I could have done this without the Monte Carlo approach I took and achieved exact results just by setting up a 20x20 matrix of dice outcomes, applying bonuses where appropriate, and counting up the outcomes. Maybe I'll do that next time I get the nerd itch.

The easy way: If you're doing an un-contested strike, then you take the AR and subtract your strike bonus. If what's left is a positive number, multiply it by 5, and that's your chance to have the armor absorb your strike. If what's left is zero or a negative number (your strike bonus > their AR), then their armor doesn't matter; you'll bypass it every time.

The tricky way would be to iterate through all possible contested rolls, bonuses, penalties, and armor types. That's 20 sided possible results x 20 sided possible results x38 strike bonus possibilities x38 parry bonus possibilities x however many kinds of armor there are, and as I go, tally up the outcomes into usable statistics for the approximately 8.6 million possible outcomes. That's more than even my inner nerd cares to do.

While I said PP above, it also comes down to the character I'm making. Sometimes I'm looking for a nimble fighter, sometimes a brute strength fighter, and sometimes a person who is inexhaustible. And sometimes I'm even looking for a brainiac and will forgo physical stats altogether.

Whiskeyjack wrote:Personally, I prefer a higher PP, but your scenario assumes that if the one attribute is a perfect 30, the other two are below exceptional. PS is the easiest of the three to increase. So a character with a 30 PP will still likely have a PS in the 20 range at least.

I played a Lord DeSilca game with Kevin GMing about five years ago, and I had my rather strong character pick up the biggest gravestone he could carry and hurl/smash it on the big bad. It would up doing more damage than anything else the party was throwing, and it got me curious. Still, up until I started crunching the numbers on these a few days ago and considering how I might counter a max P.P. adversary, I never thought that a max P.S. approach would be remotely competitive with a max P.P. approach.

Now? If I were making a new melee fighter with one guaranteed maximum physical stat and going for maximum effectiveness (especially in a group), I'd go for P.S. first and P.P. second. I'd prioritize damage over defense. I'd dual-wield (x2) battle axes (4D6) and get them tricked out for maximum dwarf-make damage for 200 gold apiece (+4), doing 8D6+8+30, which would total a median of 66 damage per hit (and that's before I get into funky metals, special wood for the hafts, and enchantments). I'd also throw in as many special attacks/tricks to disable, knock down, weaken, and/or cripple opponents as I could put together in order to nullify opponents' defenses. I'd use poison to disable them with natural toxins, throw nets over them to keep them helpless, train or buy attack dogs to pounce/knock them down. I'd have a blacksmith make an ergonomic anvil-weight hunk of metal that I was just strong enough to pick up and hurl, and keep it accessible.

I've played super-high P.P. characters who do relatively normal damage. They make for long fights with lots of little hits, and frankly, it's boring. Pitter patter, pitter patter, roll, roll, roll, roll, small increments of damage, going through the motions, grinding through the fight. Forget that! Max P.S. and max-damage characters are so much more fun in combat. They make fights shorter and they make dice rolls more fun because the result is going to matter a lot more. The max P.S. character I just described could put King Blackrock, the Nimro King, in a coma in 3 average hits. Or I disable/net/knock him down, pick up my anvil-of-doom and smash him dead in 2 hits! Knowing I have that kind of physical power at my command would make me feel like a strong man-at-arms, not just a backup for the magic users who bring the heavy artillery.

Dang, I want to actually roll something like this guy up now.

I think you're forgetting that picking up and throwing the object are two separate actions. When you hands are full you're wide open to attacks. Called shot to an arm that can't be protected and now you can't throw anything.
As for carrying axweight that you just throw, now you're slow and tired when the battle starts since you have a low PE.
Personally, I've never tricked out a weapon. I prefer to use team work and tactics to take down adversaries, preferably in spectacular fashion.

Whiskeyjack wrote:I think you're forgetting that picking up and throwing the object are two separate actions. When you hands are full you're wide open to attacks. Called shot to an arm that can't be protected and now you can't throw anything.
As for carrying axweight that you just throw, now you're slow and tired when the battle starts since you have a low PE.
Personally, I've never tricked out a weapon. I prefer to use team work and tactics to take down adversaries, preferably in spectacular fashion.

You're absolutely right. A max P.S. character isn't invincible or all-defeating, and I'm not all that interested in making a "good at everything melee" character; a max P.S. character is going to be most effective with teammates who can set up uncontested high-damage attacks by distracting/disabling/crippling/weakening/knocking down opponents, being smart about equipment and tactics choices, and being opportunistic with hurling attacks.

The hurled object is a rather decent tactic with the rules. I think they're a bit broken though, similar to super TK.

Well, as Whiskey said, Strength can be more easily augmented so I'd prefer to ROLL a high PP as opposed to a high Strength. However, the question is just which is better. OCC can come into this a bit. If you allow PP bonuses to be added to bows, then classes like Ranger or Longbowman will prefer it. They still get all the bonuses to hit in melee combat, but their ranged attacks are blowing through armor. So, the ranged aspect might tip it in the PP's favor. Of course, this is a wash for thrown items since the PS has the boulder throw option, and even throwing a knife lets them add PS damage. Now arm strength for throwing something is different from lifting strength, but so is aiming and dodging. For simplicity sake these are all thrown in together so we only have the rules as written.

So, I'll give PP an edge because it might help with a bow.

-Vek
"Hotrod SMASH!"

Whiskeyjack wrote:The hurled object is a rather decent tactic with the rules. I think they're a bit broken though, similar to super TK.

Up until this discussion, I'd have said that super-high P.P. is broken. Now I suspect you may be on to something.

If I were to actually give this a go, I'd probably either travel with a horse that carries my 600-lb rock (who would hate me for it) for easy access, or I'd keep a pile of them in a dimensional pocket, or I'd just be opportunistic and grab the "biggest rock/log that's handy." With help from a teammate who can disable an opponent's defenses, we'd Cripple & Crush FTW!

Really, though, a move like that is almost as much for dramatic effect and fun as anything else. Dual-axe-strikes with 30 P.S. would average out to do about as much damage as heavy-object-hurling, since hurl attacks would require 2 actions (pick up and throw), and perhaps significantly more, since axe strikes would get W.P. strike bonuses (and maybe crafted strike bonuses to boot, if you trick them out). Then all I need is someone who can knock down opponents, and we'll Drop & Chop FTW.

Out of curiosity, am I the only one who doesn't limit exceptional roles to humans?
Personally, I allow the highest X number in a role to roll an additional die, where x equals the number of dice rolled.
So an elf who rolls 26 to 30 on PB would get to roll an additional die.
Likewise, an elf who rolls 11 or 12 on MA would also roll an additional die.

Whiskeyjack wrote:Out of curiosity, am I the only one who doesn't limit exceptional roles to humans?
Personally, I allow the highest X number in a role to roll an additional die, where x equals the number of dice rolled.
So an elf who rolls 26 to 30 on PB would get to roll an additional die.
Likewise, an elf who rolls 11 or 12 on MA would also roll an additional die.

Its not just humans, just what is rolled for the stat
1st and 2nd ed: If you get 12 on a 2d6 stat you get to roll an extra 1d6 and add it.
1st Ed: if you roll a 17-18 on a 3d6 stat you get to roll 1d6 and add it.
2nd ed: if you roll a 16-18 on a 3d6 stat you get to roll 1d6 and add it, then if you get 24 you get to roll another 1d6 and add it.

So 4d6,5d6 and 6d6 plus those that are 2d6 or 3d6 + something also don't get the reroll.

Remember you can throw a max weight item 4inches per PS, so a PS 30 guy throws about 3 metres.

But the biggest difference is the item that they all want is 106,000 - 120,000gp
Which in second ed is a Ring of Fleet feet, Superhuman strength and fly/invis/teleport all rolled into 1
Or each individual one from first ed.
Fleet feet is the spell that they go for first, and will help the wizard of the party get or buy pots of or magic items of.
1st ed doesn't have superhuman strength, but does have strength utgard loki which is similarish.
And pretty consistently the wizard always picks it when choosing a spell.
Fleet feet doubles PP (grrr)
Superhuman strength gives you a strength of 30 (and pe 24 for +5 to saves vs magic and poison)
So the person in the party with PP: 20 usually fights at PP: 40 and double attacks and speed, and A natural +13 to strike, parry and dodge makes them mostly unkillable, and if it can kill them, the rest of the party is a cakewalk for it.

This is what I mean about specific situation and general situation. Generally, when the hi PP players is fighting he is fleet feeted with superhuman or strength of utgard loki'd because he is with a party.

kiralon wrote:So the person in the party with PP: 20 usually fights at PP: 40 and double attacks and speed, and A natural +13 to strike, parry and dodge makes them mostly unkillable, and if it can kill them, the rest of the party is a cakewalk for it.

This is what I mean about specific situation and general situation. Generally, when the hi PP players is fighting he is fleet feeted with superhuman or strength of utgard loki'd because he is with a party.

If this is what you see too much, I'd throw in an N.P.C. foe made a la "Hotrod Smash!" Max P.S. approach (Thanks, Vek!): A high P.S. character who opts for simultaneous attacks in response to the party's high P.P. attacks. That essentially nullifies the defensive advantages, turning the fight into a slugfest where high damage and damage capacity wins.

The rest of the party may well have no problem handling such a foe, since it's still vulnerable to magic, psionics, missile weapons, et cetera.

I have done that a few times, (I love fire giants, they are too big to parry by my house rules unless you are using a tower shield hehe) but I do like a bit of logic with my attacks, why would a creature constantly simultaneous strike, when often they can be taken down with a couple of hits that way themselves.
But mostly I hate having to make monsters to specifically fight someone who got lucky at character creation. That should be a cool you rolled that, instead of a &*$*&%* it you rolled that and have now made life for the party much harder.
Never had to do that with the high ps characters (not even the one that had 50 PS, as the cannon fodder would protect the named bad guys, and had a decent chance at doing so, rather than not being able to parry the attacks). Level 1 characters shouldn't have the fighting skill of a level 7 soldier. I believe in pretty much getting anything you like really, if you train/pay for it. Starting with it at level 1 (looking at you anything that starts with more than 20ppe/isp as well) means that it's easy enough to get because a 15 year old can do it. So why doesn't everyone have it.

The PP bonuses should be spread out between strike, parry and dodge so 16 is +1 parry, 17 is +1 parry and dodge, 18 is +1 to strike parry dodge, 19 is +2 dodge +1 parry and +1 strike, 20 is +2 parry dodge +1 strike, 21 is +2 to strike parry dodge etc)
so 24 is +3 to strike parry dodge, +5 is too high.

Changing fleet feet to x2 speed and +1 atm has made a difference too.

My primary issue with this is that it reeks of meta-gaming rollplaying.

HP and SDC are game systems; they do not exist in your characters mind.

Your character does not know that a sword only does X or Y damage per attack, because those values do not exist in his head. He knows its a deadly weapon, and he's likely, either in his training or in his experience as a character, seen plenty of people run through with a sword and die. He didn't think "man, that guy ran out of HP". He just saw the guy get run through, and die.

Any character who never defends and just lets people stab him (and potentially kill him at any moment, because, again, the entire concept of HP & SDC is purely game mechanic and does not exist in-world) with lethal weapons in the hopes of getting a hit in, in anything other than a desperate situation, is outright insane.

Its -slightly- different in some of Palladium's other systems where you can be SURE your armor WILL take the hit (because there is no AR/the armor cannot be avoided/must be destroyed first/you're magically protected), but even then your character cant be sure the armor wont buckle, but its less insane, just because you're at least as credibly passively protected as you can be.

In-game, for all your character knows, the next time he "simulatenously attacks" a foe, that guy isn't just going to score a nick or glancing blow... he's gonna put it straight through his heart and kill him dead.

i like interesting rules exercises as much as the next guy, but that kind of play/behaviour would get you asked to leave almost every table ive ever played at, and would certainly get you warned/asked to leave the table if i was running the game. (To be clear, not building a high strength character or setting up ways to use that strength - like having an ally tangle someone up or distract them - thats perfectly fine; im being specific about the "well ill just simo attack all the time" as a response/rememdy to wanting to be able to strike all the time).

Just my tree-fiddy.

Now, a high-strength character that takes the time to play to his own advantages and use that strength.... great. Do that.

Though i'll again renew my "all this talk of absurdly high attributes is fine and all, but GL actually getting anything like that" objection.

The simultaneous attack chicanery isn't necessarily metagaming. In fact, it could be a plausible playing-in-character roleplaying choice. Here are some scenarios in which it would make sense:

1. You could have an NPC or group of NPCs who wear full plate and rely on their armor for defense, similar to real-life duelist societies of people who think that scars are cool.

2. You could have a ruthless leader train his troops to simply attack all the time, applying the logic of human wave attacks to the individual level.

3. You could have an NPC or group of NPCs who are ideological fanatics and don't care at all if they die or who willingly die in service to become martyrs to their cause. Perhaps their leader has some way of harvesting P.P.E. from servants and foes?

4. You could have an NPC who is in such a state of bezerker rage or drugged-out aggression that he or she doesn't care about defense at all.

I have used #3 and #4
and #5 goblin grenades, puny weak cannon fodder forced to the front line to explode, but with only enough explosive to hurt a bit, because if they carry too much, one dying tends to blow them all up in an amusing chain reaction, story wise mostly only works in the old kingdom where the giants force the goblins to do it.

I should also mention that I don't particularly mind having a player character frequently dominate N.P.C.'s, and I wouldn't throw suicide tactics at such players very often. There are plenty of ways in which you can challenge a high-P.P. character in combat: a ticking clock scenario (win or smash an object within XX rounds or you lose), magic/psionic opponents, a chase scenario, an evasion/cat-and-mouse scenario of sneak attacks, and other fights in which the circumstances make continuous back-and-forth fighting less appropriate.

Fighting in magical darkness is also a good one (Cobblers do this well as they can see in their magical darkness )

Don't forget that a character with a P.E. of 30 is also effectively immune to disease - a pretty important consideration in the world of PF, especially.

This is from the RUE rules, but it's a pretty reasonable extrapolation for PF as well, IMO.

One thing that is broken in my opinion is how effective the single attribute of P.P. is on combat. I think it effects too many combat bonuses.

I'd rather see something like one attribute effect only a single combat stat. Something like PS give Strike bonus, PP give Parry and SPD give Dodge bonus for example (obviously not perfect). I just hate the dump stats and the overly important few stats. That characters have in Palladium.

malaclypse wrote:Don't forget that a character with a P.E. of 30 is also effectively immune to disease - a pretty important consideration in the world of PF, especially.

This is from the RUE rules, but it's a pretty reasonable extrapolation for PF as well, IMO.

The importance of disease resistance in Fantasy has been the subject of a rigorous debate on these forums a while back in a discussion that was originally about in-game male dominance.

Lukterran wrote:One thing that is broken in my opinion is how effective the single attribute of P.P. is on combat. I think it effects too many combat bonuses.

I'd rather see something like one attribute effect only a single combat stat. Something like PS give Strike bonus, PP give Parry and SPD give Dodge bonus for example (obviously not perfect). I just hate the dump stats and the overly important few stats. That characters have in Palladium.

I think the effectiveness of P.P. vs P.S. and P.E. is somewhat debatable. P.P. definitely gives the most rounded benefits to both offense and defense, but these benefits are not conclusively better than those of the other two, and in many situations/playstyles, it's more effective to have high P.S. or P.E. than P.P.

Hotrod wrote:The importance of disease resistance in Fantasy has been the subject of a rigorous debate on these forums a while back in a discussion that was originally about in-game male dominance.

Ugh. I'm going to avoid that topic like the feminist plague it is.

malaclypse wrote:

Hotrod wrote:The importance of disease resistance in Fantasy has been the subject of a rigorous debate on these forums a while back in a discussion that was originally about in-game male dominance.

Ugh. I'm going to avoid that topic like the feminist plague it is.

Actually, it was a pretty far cry from what you'll find in gender studies classes. The OP was asking if there were any practical reasons why societies in Palladium Fantasy tend to be male-dominated in terms of their political leadership. Underlying biological imperatives became the central point of discussion/debate; in a world of elevated child mortality + childbirth risks to mothers, societies that protect women tend to thrive, and political leadership/adventuring involves a lot of risk.

The big question then became how much do psionics and magic drive down child and childbirth death rates? I found it to be an interesting discussion with no clear canon answer.

Hotrod wrote:

malaclypse wrote:

Hotrod wrote:The importance of disease resistance in Fantasy has been the subject of a rigorous debate on these forums a while back in a discussion that was originally about in-game male dominance.

Ugh. I'm going to avoid that topic like the feminist plague it is.

Actually, it was a pretty far cry from what you'll find in gender studies classes. The OP was asking if there were any practical reasons why societies in Palladium Fantasy tend to be male-dominated in terms of their political leadership. Underlying biological imperatives became the central point of discussion/debate; in a world of elevated child mortality + childbirth risks to mothers, societies that protect women tend to thrive, and political leadership/adventuring involves a lot of risk.

The big question then became how much do psionics and magic drive down child and childbirth death rates? I found it to be an interesting discussion with no clear canon answer.

Hmm, that sounds... better than one might expect, given the question asked.

Hotrod wrote:

malaclypse wrote:

Hotrod wrote:The importance of disease resistance in Fantasy has been the subject of a rigorous debate on these forums a while back in a discussion that was originally about in-game male dominance.

Ugh. I'm going to avoid that topic like the feminist plague it is.

Actually, it was a pretty far cry from what you'll find in gender studies classes. The OP was asking if there were any practical reasons why societies in Palladium Fantasy tend to be male-dominated in terms of their political leadership. Underlying biological imperatives became the central point of discussion/debate; in a world of elevated child mortality + childbirth risks to mothers, societies that protect women tend to thrive, and political leadership/adventuring involves a lot of risk.

The big question then became how much do psionics and magic drive down child and childbirth death rates? I found it to be an interesting discussion with no clear canon answer.

I'd also note one of my earlier points in the thread: physical power is less determinate in a society where equalizers exist. In the modern world, physical power can often be subverted by technology... you may be big and strong, but if my 5'1" grandmother co-worker has a .45 and knows how to use it, that matters a lot less*. In Palladium Fantasy, you also have equalizers in the form of magic, psionics, and priestcraft. How much does your 30 PS matter against a Carpet of Adhesion**? If your team is 10 buff guys, and we have 19 regular guys plus a priest with healing abilities and the occasional miracle, how much are you going to be able to do, long-term? Does your OHOK assassin matter as much when maybe 1 in 20 people can sense danger? Those are all abilities that are possessed by beginning characters, with zero experience. And when you consider the history of the world, such that powers were necessary for survival a few thousand years ago***, you have a world heavily biased, both in culture and technology****, towards egalitarianism, because the starting conditions which would predicate dominance based on physical strength are less influential.

*it's not immaterial, but it matters a whole let less
**the WORST spell; seriously, as written, it would be cheap at twice the level and five times the cost
*** IF magic was as high as it is on Rifts Earth THEN many monsters would be MDC THEREFORE you needed access to powers, either your own or someone else's not to get eaten
**** The various power types are, for all intents and purposes, a technolgy

Mark Hall wrote:I'd also note one of my earlier points in the thread: physical power is less determinate in a society where equalizers exist. In the modern world, physical power can often be subverted by technology... you may be big and strong, but if my 5'1" grandmother co-worker has a .45 and knows how to use it, that matters a lot less*. In Palladium Fantasy, you also have equalizers in the form of magic, psionics, and priestcraft. How much does your 30 PS matter against a Carpet of Adhesion**? If your team is 10 buff guys, and we have 19 regular guys plus a priest with healing abilities and the occasional miracle, how much are you going to be able to do, long-term? Does your OHOK assassin matter as much when maybe 1 in 20 people can sense danger? Those are all abilities that are possessed by beginning characters, with zero experience. And when you consider the history of the world, such that powers were necessary for survival a few thousand years ago***, you have a world heavily biased, both in culture and technology****, towards egalitarianism, because the starting conditions which would predicate dominance based on physical strength are less influential.

*it's not immaterial, but it matters a whole let less
**the WORST spell; seriously, as written, it would be cheap at twice the level and five times the cost
*** IF magic was as high as it is on Rifts Earth THEN many monsters would be MDC THEREFORE you needed access to powers, either your own or someone else's not to get eaten
**** The various power types are, for all intents and purposes, a technolgy

Excellent points for both that discussion and this one. In the context of magic or diseases/poisons/toxins being common, a high P.E. becomes far more important. If psionics are common, then a high M.E. becomes paramount. For physical combat, P.S. and P.P. are a toss-up for me. All things considered, that's a pretty decent spread of importance throughout four of the eight attributes. I could see potent characters built on any one of those being awesome.

I'm still not quite buying into the "Palladium Fantasy should be egalitarian" position for two reasons. First, pervasive violence around the world would drive infant/child mortality way up, requiring women to spend more of their childbearing years pregnant and nursing in order to keep up with the death rates. Second, males in every society tend to choose high-risk lifestyles more than women, and political power/leadership in feudal societies, the pursuit of magic, and adventuring tend to involve a lot of risk. But really, that's a separate issue, and while I'm happy to continue it, I'd rather do so on the "male dominance in Fantasy" thread, not this one.

Getting back to the question of physical attributes, speed remains my dump stat. If I have a choice of where to put my lowest roll, it always goes there. It's almost never used in the games I've played, and a low speed is easily fixed by taking Running as a secondary skill or riding a horse.

It's also not just about birth and death rates, but the female reproductive system.

Note that women in our modern world weren't able to join the workforce and really get out and do much until reproduction (and, to a lesser extent, the menstrual cycle) was more controlled. It had very little to do with "subjugation/domination" or that dreaded "patriarchy" word, and very much to do with natural roles in the world. Men didn't have to worry about getting pregnant, taking care of babies, having a period, etc. so they naturally were more suited for physical labor, going out and exploring, fighting, etc.

This is how it is in nearly every mammalian species, yet for some reason humans like to believe the natural world doesn't apply to them sometimes.

Well, the concept of a dump stat is interesting. We never did the "place stats where you want them" thing so there wasn't an option. But, I think IQ might be the best place to dump a stat. The bonus for a high IQ is a small, one time boost in skill % (although, a 30 IQ helps with that +18) and that's about it. It also comes with the burden of playing smart. That's rather difficult to do. It's much easier to play a lower IQ character. But back to game mechanics, it doesn't really help much and it is of no benefit in combat.

Of course, SPD doesn't help in combat either. There are no rules about being harder to hit while running faster or and no one I know of gets in to the nitty gritty of how far someone can move in a melee attack. And how often do people get into foot chases?

-Vek
"I played a character with a 42 Spd and he never really used it."

Our dump stat was always MA, and to let people have a chance at being whatever class they wanted humans could put their stats where they wanted, so if they really wanted to be a warlock, the best chance was to play a human (and it plays nicely into the storyline that humans a very adaptive). With IQ I give a bonus number of skills = to the plus from the pp chart (I.e IQ of 18 = 2 bonus skills, and these skills only go up as part of the first class).
Spd/5 is how many squares you can move in a combat round and still fight when using miniatures, and a high speed gives negatives to being hit with ranged weapons (and to hit with ranged weapons), and every 5 points of speed gives +1 damage to a charge, or to the wielder of a pike stopping said charge.

Dm'd a Danzi with a speed over 80 who used throwing axes. He mostly fought outside and didn't really get into hth combat as no one could catch him, until a seaweed covered thing (Kelpie) came up out of the water at a beach and he went a lot closer than he normally ever did and it caught him (He was investigating the deaths of 2 soldiers on the same beach)

malaclypse wrote:This is how it is in nearly every mammalian species, yet for some reason humans like to believe the natural world doesn't apply to them sometimes.

That's because by and large, the natural world doesn't apply to us. We change the environment to suit our needs, whether you're talking about the real world with dams, irrigation, farming, tending forests, managing wild game and central heating, or the fantasy world with magic being able to change the actual weather, increase agricultural yields, heal wounds, cure diseases or even regrow limbs.

There is a big difference in a fantasy woman who can give herself supernatural strength with a spell trying to protect her child from a raider, and a medieval woman with dysentery trying to protect her child from a raider. Magic and psionics are a massive game changer.

Whiskeyjack wrote:

malaclypse wrote:This is how it is in nearly every mammalian species, yet for some reason humans like to believe the natural world doesn't apply to them sometimes.

That's because by and large, the natural world doesn't apply to us. We change the environment to suit our needs, whether you're talking about the real world with dams, irrigation, farming, tending forests, managing wild game and central heating, or the fantasy world with magic being able to change the actual weather, increase agricultural yields, heal wounds, cure diseases or even regrow limbs.

There is a big difference in a fantasy woman who can give herself supernatural strength with a spell trying to protect her child from a raider, and a medieval woman with dysentery trying to protect her child from a raider. Magic and psionics are a massive game changer.

And statistics are where things start to drive changes; larger societies can better leverage statistical advantages.

Let's say you have the standard 25% of the population is psychic. With 100 people in your village, 25 people have psychic powers. With 1000 people, 250 people have psychic powers. With 10000 people, 2500 have psychic powers... to say nothing of priests, men of magic, and dedicated psychic PCCs.

I touch on this, a bit, in reference to Rifts, but if you've got a good number of people with Clairvoyance (my number in the link is about 1 in 240 people, assuming a fairly random distribution of the three categories, and random distribution of powers within the three categories; that's 240 people, not psychics), random dangerous occurrences become a lot less dangerous. If you have 500 people in town, odds are good you've got 2 "seers", who will see attacks, plagues, or whatever in dreams before they happen. If you have more people, and can leverage their information (maybe other psychics; about 1 in 100 people will have any given psychic healing power), then many other things become a lot more survivable. Things that would have decimated a peasant village in medieval Europe can be dealt with because even basic psychic powers provide the tools to deal with them.

And, you might say, "But wait! Those raiders have the same chance of having psychics, too!" Which is correct... but they are also a lot less likely to have the numbers to bring the statistical averages to bear. My village has 500 people, so 125 psychics. We might have all the psychic powers covered, in different proportions, between our population (again, assuming random distribution). There will be some overlap and such, but there's a lot of ability there, even assuming everyone is minor psychics, and no one developed their major abilities, or guided people to develop more useful powers ("Well, I have the psychic power to resist cold, but I live in the Baalgor Wastelands"). Those raiders? Even if they're a group of 100, they've got a lot fewer psychic individuals, and a smaller variety of psychic powers available.

When you start getting to towns and cities? Those numbers get bigger. If you assume people with natural talents often develop them (i.e. someone with Psychic Surgery is likely to learn more medical skills, since Psychic Surgery provides you such a great advantage), you're going to have a lot of ability to deal with things that medieval societies simply did not... you can absorb a lot of extra violence just because of natural psychic powers. And when you get into other aspects of medicine (i.e. birth control), things get even awesomer.

Assume a single Major Psychic, Peasant OCC. Nothing special, little special training. Their powers are Attack Disease, Healing Touch, Lust for Life, Psychic Surgery, Psychic Diagnosis and Clairvoyance; not a random distribution, but a useful one for a non-PCC psychic healer. Their three Other skills are First Aid, Brewing, and Holistic Medicine. Psychic Diagnosis + Psychic Surgery means flawless abortions, treatment for endometriosis, even excision of cancer. Healing Touch and Lust for Life means that many otherwise fatal injuries can be overcome. Attack Disease means that potential epidemics can be headed off. Clairvoyance means that they will see many things before they show up ("Well, Merle is gonna get himself hurt today; I better be in the field at midday"). And this is a single person; one of my 125 psychics in my town of 500. In this town, women can work longer, because they will be able to be pregnant when they want (add in Holistic Medicine, so you have natural birth control that can be leveraged). People are healthier. Babies die less. People live longer. Because ONE person can provide them with basic health care... and not including things like priests, wizards, warlocks, and the like. Just one Peasant with a useful selection of skills and psychic powers... the kind of thing they could teach an apprentice, so the advantage continues.

Folks talk about natural selection, but compare THIS village with a village of 500 gnomes (or trogs, or hobgoblins, etc.), who have no psychics. Or a town which persecutes psychics. Sure, they'll have witches and priests and the like, but they won't be able to leverage the natural psychic powers in nearly the same way. Which society has a competitive advantage? Which society is going to see a growth in population, all other things being equal?

I think the raiders would tend to have more combat psionicists as psionics can help survive so much more than the average because the ones without psionics are more likely to die first, and those that did survive would tend to have the ones that help you stay alive in combat (and there are ones indeed that would help), as that's how raiders live, fighting for food and survival.

As the villagers don't fight regularly to stay alive, a lot more of the non combat type psionicists or normals would survive due to villagers and locals helping each other out (a reason why religion flourishes, because those of the same religion tend to help each other survive the harsh times) so its easier for the normals to survive, so would tend to have the average.

Mark, the flipside is that psionic power also comes with abilities that often create more problems they solve. For a community to take full advantage of its psionic powers requires that community to trust its psionics and in turn requires the psionics to act in good faith, and I don't think that's a realistic expectation. You mention potential benefits of Clairvoyance, but the power is just as likely to clue people into other peoples' secrets and business. Ditto with Object Read, Astral Projection, Remote Viewing, See Aura, Telepathy, and other classic psychic powers. How likely are you to closely associate with someone who can read your thoughts, intentions, watch you in the privacy of your home without your knowledge/consent, et cetera? How likely are you to trust people who have these powers that manifest randomly in people regardless of the psionic's other qualities or qualifications?

People tend to fear the threats of powers they don't understand, and that fear tends to override the rational argument for taking advantage of that power's benefits. For great modern real-life examples, see the anti-nuclear/anti-GMO/anti-food-irradiation movements. Thus, I could make a pretty good argument for non-psionic gnome communities benefitting from lacking these powers.

I think people tend to take too much from movies and books that always make communities hotbeds of intrigue and lies. In reality, especially when faced with adversity, people tend to be decent and look out for one another. I think you'd find the same thing in a fantasy setting where magic and psionics are real and have existed since before most races came in to being. While there will definitely be places where abilities are considered unnatural, I think most would be rather accepting of them and realize the potential for good from such abilities.

Whiskeyjack wrote:I think people tend to take too much from movies and books that always make communities hotbeds of intrigue and lies. In reality, especially when faced with adversity, people tend to be decent and look out for one another. I think you'd find the same thing in a fantasy setting where magic and psionics are real and have existed since before most races came in to being. While there will definitely be places where abilities are considered unnatural, I think most would be rather accepting of them and realize the potential for good from such abilities.

Even in todays world people get dead by fearful groups of people who otherwise people could call decent (Kids by anti vaxxers for example), Facebook is a hotbed of intrigue and lies and damn lies and how many people use that. Religions would vilify them as they can take power away from the church. From what I have seen of people in the modern world, they would be hunted down/tested/used as weapons/burnt at the stake, and that would be modern mans take on it. Man from 500 years ago would just burn em at the stake and call em witches.

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. Mass media makes everything seem larger than it actually is. When actual disaster strikes, the vast majority of people in a community come together regardless of political, religious or racial differences. And remember, psychic powers and magic have never existed in our world, so the discovery of them would be world shattering. Palladium has had magic and psionics since before the world existed.
While you may find churches that might try and vilify psychic powers, it is different than the real world again. There are dozens of churches, all with gods that exist in the physical world. Unless they all band together against psychics, they are going to be going up against other churches that accept them. And seeing a church trying to attack little Timmy who just saved his friend from an ogre attack isn't going to sit too well with people in a world where so many people have psychic powers.
Just remember, the Walking Dead wouldn't be as enjoyable if every community the characters came across was super helpful and concerned with their welfare and making sure they were well provisioned before heading out again.

Palladium is based a lot on the real world, and yes when disaster strike people can pull together, but bad stuff happens then too, especially to those who are different. Mass media often just a tool for the powerful for propaganda, but I relate the rise of information/technology the same as magic. The church hasn't been a great proponent of technology and often quite against it because it disrupts the balance of power and psionics certainly would do that. The book even mentions how unliked psionicists are, and I would agree with them. Having DM'd mind mages i'm quite against them because of what they can do. Reading minds for example, my thoughts are my own, and anybody who reads my thoughts without my permission should be kicked in the nuts until his eyeballs explode, and if a certain % of the population had it I would be a happier person knowing they aren't around as I can say I wouldn't trust people not to misuse it, because they would.

But palladium is different enough that it has gods, and yet again the rules seem to be written by man, and I can guarantee the little boy who read the popes mind wouldn't be left alone to his devices, and showing that man has great power that doesn't come from the gods wouldn't be too healthy for you either. The church needs followers, so anything that threatens that is an enemy.
Too many people in power lie too often, and having someone who could call you out on your lies would be a threat.
Could you imagine what the real world would be like if those in charge couldn't tell lies.

So the church wouldn't attack little timmy directly, they would just say the only reason he managed to save his friend from the ogre was because he was possessed by something evil, and if you aren't careful it could happen to you, and little timmy would disappear off somewhere with the excuse of him being cleansed and either be killed or turned into a weapon for the church if he couldn't be controlled. This wouldn't be the village pastor doing this, this would come from the inquisitor types.

You keep overlooking several things here.
1) Fully 25% of the population has psychic abilities. That is a massive number. They are way too common to be completely discriminated against.
2) There isn't one religion. There are dozens. All populated with gods who have psychic abilities.
3) Where one church vilifies psychics, their opposing churches are going to naturally protect them, and likely groom them and their "gods given" gifts to spread the good word.
4) You're talking strictly about mind reading. The only ability available to the general psychic is Telepathy, and it is only good for surface thoughts, so only what the target is currently thinking, and only up to 60'. If little Timmy read the popes thoughts, it was probably "I can't wait for this service to end so I can go have a drink".
5) As the orange one has shown in our world, lying can be done with every word that comes out of your mouth and have absolutely no consequences on you.

Generally speaking in the real world, the larger the city, the more likely you'll see looting since people can move out of "their" community within the city. But you only have to look at the tsunami in Indonesia to see how people from all walks of life, many who didn't even speak the same language risked their own lives to save complete strangers during a catastrophe. I'm pretty sure when push comes to shove, most people are actually decent and do what's right when required, no matter what they say on line.

Population % isn't what stops discrimination, it's about those in power.
From the wiki.
Apartheid was a political and social system in South Africa during the era of White minority rule. It enforced racial discrimination against non-Whites, mainly focused on skin colour and facial features. This existed in the twentieth century, from 1948 until the early-1990s
Black people were severely discriminated against by a minority white group.
There are multiple religions in the real world too, and can you name a time when a discriminated against minority was protected by a religion when another one is trying to wipe them out.
But it comes down to psionics is a weapon that cannot be controlled, you cannot stop a person from getting isp back without killing them and Mind Mages are the most feared class in palladium, that's over witches, dark priests, assassins, and psionicists tend to be more self reliant and not needing religion as much because they have extra powers to help protect themselves.
Priests don't like like the threat of mind mages to themselves, and the following reason is a pretty common thing i came across as a dm.
PC's for example have done the following a few times while I was dm'ing them. The poor npc returns to awareness in a room, there is a dead guy with a hole in his chest that matches the npc's weapon, he is splattered with blood and the room has been looted because someone with psionics possessed a guy, used him to go into a house steal all the shiny, teleported said shinys into a chest in a wagon outside and then released the possessed guy, who comes around with no idea what happened, or worse he has a memory inserted that he did do it. Would you welcome those that could do that into your house/group.
Not to mention a fair few of the psionic powers are repeated by witchcraft
Or little timmy was in church and read the mind of the pope as he was having lustful thoughts about timmy's next door neighbors mum, or the fact that the pope was smuggling something in and is trying to think of a way around customs or was in a tavern and read the watch captains mind and finds out he is planning on betraying wagon travel details to a bandit and are talking about it right now. There would be innocuous times that mind reading would be used. If you want to know how painful it is you can test it yourself. Everytime a thought comes to your head say it out loud and see if you can include the embarrassing and the things you want to keep hidden when reminded about. People aren't generally good enough for their surface thoughts to not be private. That's not a bad thing, because there is a difference in thought and action, especially when emotions are high.

I can guarantee that the orange one would not allow someone who could read his mind to get anywhere near him. People in power tend to have secrets, and the more power the worse secrets, because power corrupts, and the more power you have the less consequences.
Think of what happened around the Epstein thing and the people in power who 'used' his services. Could you imagine them letting a mind reader anywhere near them.

In general people can be good, as that is a survival trait that religions tend to reinforce, but only tend to truly worry about a much smaller group if their good deeds can have negative consequences. Imagine how the tsunami rescue would have went if the rescuers knew that everyone they rescued could read their minds.

Check out the monkeysphere, it explains why we care when our mums die, and why we don't care when 1000 people on the otherside of the world die.
https://www.cracked.com/article_14990_w ... phere.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number


TL:DR
Allowing in a bunch of refugees in is a lot different to letting in a bunch of refugees who can read minds that you don't know or trust.
The church's congregation might sorta be ok with it, but those in power who make the decisions and have secrets wouldn't like it at all