Forums of the Megaverse®

I am sure everybody has their own opinion and I would like to hear it. My votes are for the Vagabond, Mystic and City Rat.

There's a bit of a race for most obliviously offensive, but I'd have to say the "Pygmy" R.C.C.s are the first to the bottom.

The (psi) Gizmoteer in SA2. Can you say broken? It really needs to be rewritten.
I have two psi builders I've written up. One for the HU game and the other for the PF game. The latter has been posted elsewhere here in the forums.
The downsides to each being, the HU one; written much in the manner of the TW magic object creation text in RUE; there is a lot of technical reading and math involved. And the PF one is fairly loosely written to fit the game, but because of that looseness it demands a whole bunch of GM involvement in item creation, and the GM should be familiar with the types of psi-mechanics (there are three of them) and the crystal mage text and the British psi-devices from the rifters.

As for poorly written or broken 'Races' in the Rifts game.... the octopus based race is fairly broken with its x8 ambidextrous attacks per APM.

As for most potentially annoying would be Floopers (VK..I think) and Phantoms (PW1)

Barmaid.

Glitter Boy

A completely redundant and reductive OCC presenting a greater overall problem with OCC bloat. As ironic as this may be coming from the "Free Quebec Guy," it would be one of the first OCCs I would rationalize. All it provides is another Power Armour Pilot OCC.

Other examples:

- Juicer Scout: You can make a Standard Juicer with more and better skill selections. The class itself adds nothing of note
- Tundra Ranger OCCs: For the most part are simply Wilderness Scouts.
- Half the New West Men-At-Arms OCCs are basically Headhunters or Merc Soldiers/Grunts with flavour text.

I don't have a problem with most of the OCCs mentioned.

Tundra Rangers and GBs aren't just wilderness scouts or power armor pilots they have cultural differences that can make them more interesting to play than the generic alternative. Likewise OCCs like mystics and vagabonds can seem underpowered but I have seen many players have a lot of fun with them.

Bad OCCs are the ones that are region dependent so they can't really travel at all which to me is the point to Rifts. Things like New West and England OCCs come to mind.

To me the worst OCCs are the repetitive ones. You mainly see this with Coalition OCCs which seem to have 500 different special farces branches.

Warshield73 wrote:
Tundra Rangers and GBs aren't just wilderness scouts or power armor pilots they have cultural differences that can make them more interesting to play than the generic alternative. Likewise OCCs like mystics and vagabonds can seem underpowered but I have seen many players have a lot of fun with them.

<snip>

To me the worst OCCs are the repetitive ones. You mainly see this with Coalition OCCs which seem to have 500 different special farces branches.

You actually made my point for me. The GB is nothing more than the Robot/PA OCC with access to a special PA suit; the Tundra Ranger is nothing but a Wilderness Scout with a very, very small discrepancy in what you could make from the Wilderness Scout OCC. In my case, the worst OCC is one that has near zero real game play difference from one of the baseline OCCs other than minute skill selection discrepancies. They could have saved themselves a lot of time and effort by making MOS sub-classes of the baseline OCC rather than all the various OCCs flavour text and OCC information.

I have zero umbrage with underpowered OCCs, in fact I prefer to play them either as a player or NPC. The aforementioned examples are simply derivative classes - in one case it fits within the purview of another class, in another it is simply a watered down version with a special patch on its armour.

desrocfc wrote:Glitter Boy

A completely redundant and reductive OCC presenting a greater overall problem with OCC bloat. As ironic as this may be coming from the "Free Quebec Guy," it would be one of the first OCCs I would rationalize. All it provides is another Power Armour Pilot OCC.

I have to agree with your reasoning here.
We have a Robot Pilot OCC; we don't need a specialized class for each type of armor/robot, especially with so little difference between classes.

If I were revamping the game, I'd heavily consider getting rid of the Glitter Boy OCC, and either just letting the Robot Pilot OCC fill the gap, or make a more versatile Robot Legacy Pilot OCC or something.

desrocfc wrote:You actually made my point for me. The GB is nothing more than the Robot/PA OCC with access to a special PA suit; the Tundra Ranger is nothing but a Wilderness Scout with a very, very small discrepancy in what you could make from the Wilderness Scout OCC. In my case, the worst OCC is one that has near zero real game play difference from one of the baseline OCCs other than minute skill selection discrepancies. They could have saved themselves a lot of time and effort by making MOS sub-classes of the baseline OCC rather than all the various OCCs flavour text and OCC information.

No, you had an opinion not a point and those are not really provable. I just disagree.

When I play a character I want something that stands out in the world and truthfully the generic ones are just not that interesting IMO. GBs have very different skills and a completely unique background that makes their place in the society of Rifts Earth completely unique from the PA pilot. Also in the original RMB there was no Robot/PA pilot for that you needed a CS OCC or maybe the original Head Hunter. There is no real cache to a generic PA or robot pilot and in most cases the OCC has a goal to replace starting vehicle with something new and more powerful as time goes on. The GB is unique and distinct to the point of piloting penalties for other using the GB or the GB pilot using standard PA.

desrocfc wrote:I have zero umbrage with underpowered OCCs, in fact I prefer to play them either as a player or NPC. The aforementioned examples are simply derivative classes - in one case it fits within the purview of another class, in another it is simply a watered down version with a special patch on its armour.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

desrocfc wrote:Glitter Boy

A completely redundant and reductive OCC presenting a greater overall problem with OCC bloat. As ironic as this may be coming from the "Free Quebec Guy," it would be one of the first OCCs I would rationalize. All it provides is another Power Armour Pilot OCC.

I have to agree with your reasoning here.
We have a Robot Pilot OCC; we don't need a specialized class for each type of armor/robot, especially with so little difference between classes.

If I were revamping the game, I'd heavily consider getting rid of the Glitter Boy OCC, and either just letting the Robot Pilot OCC fill the gap, or make a more versatile Robot Legacy Pilot OCC or something.

First we don't have special OCCs for every armor just a few and it's place in Rifts and pre-Rifts history make it kind of unique.

I don't understand this really. Does this mean no Cyber-Knight because Mind Melter? No Shifter because Ley Line Walker? Get rid of the Triax and CS military OCCs and just have a set of generic ones?

I get not liking the GB but reducing every OCC to a generic template with a few specialized choices is just boring. My problem with the CS special forces OCCs is that they are repetitive and that is a situation where you could have one or two OCCs and just plug in new MOSs and special ability changes. I can even see this with the Juicer, instead of all the varied OCCs just have one OCC and each variant has a few changes to powers and a different MOS. I just think a push to overly generic will detract from Rifts.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Barmaid.

Better that than a Saloon Bum. Your class-defining special ability is alcoholism. Not much better, I'll grant you, but at least a Barmaid involves paid work.

From a game design standpoint, I agree about the Glitter Boy Pilot. Better to have a pilot class with subclasses or MOS's:
1. A jack-of-all-trades, master of none who's good with any robot or power armor, but not truly elite at any
2. A specialist who focuses on robots or power armor
3. A super-specialist who focuses on a single type of robot or power armor (mostly Glitter Boys).

Overall, though, I don't mind the Glitter Boy. There are far worse offenders in RUE:
1. The Crazy. I've heard of it being played well, but I've only ever seen it used as a license to troll, derail, and/or ruin the game for others.
2. The Body Fixer. Unless you have a very accommodating GM, it's outclassed in its own specialty by any character with healing powers and the Cyber-Doc. It's a decent skill monkey, but there are better ones.
3. Elemental Fusionist. It's a basic book O.C.C., but you need the Book of Magic to play it properly. No thanks. Plus, as a late addition to Rifts, I don't see how it fits into the lore of the setting.

Outside RUE:
1. Anything with Wormwood Symbiotes. When you leave Wormwood, you lose all your powers, and your symbiotes die. No thanks.
2. Most Cultural/Historical stereotypes + MDC classes.
3. Most classes that are like another one, except better.

Hotrod wrote:3. Most classes that are like another one, except better.

This is what I absolutely hate and to me this is problem with KS not reeling in some freelancers or even his own tendency to want to go bigger and more amazing than the last.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

desrocfc wrote:Glitter Boy

A completely redundant and reductive OCC presenting a greater overall problem with OCC bloat. As ironic as this may be coming from the "Free Quebec Guy," it would be one of the first OCCs I would rationalize. All it provides is another Power Armour Pilot OCC.

I have to agree with your reasoning here.
We have a Robot Pilot OCC; we don't need a specialized class for each type of armor/robot, especially with so little difference between classes.

If I were revamping the game, I'd heavily consider getting rid of the Glitter Boy OCC, and either just letting the Robot Pilot OCC fill the gap, or make a more versatile Robot Legacy Pilot OCC or something.

While I would agree we have a Robot Pilot OCC as of RUE, but back with older the Rifts MB there wasn't a generic Robot/Power Armor Pilot OCC (aside from the GB and CS RPA).

I do agree that there is some bloat/redundancy in OCCs.

ShadowLogan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

desrocfc wrote:Glitter Boy

A completely redundant and reductive OCC presenting a greater overall problem with OCC bloat. As ironic as this may be coming from the "Free Quebec Guy," it would be one of the first OCCs I would rationalize. All it provides is another Power Armour Pilot OCC.

I have to agree with your reasoning here.
We have a Robot Pilot OCC; we don't need a specialized class for each type of armor/robot, especially with so little difference between classes.

If I were revamping the game, I'd heavily consider getting rid of the Glitter Boy OCC, and either just letting the Robot Pilot OCC fill the gap, or make a more versatile Robot Legacy Pilot OCC or something.

While I would agree we have a Robot Pilot OCC as of RUE, but back with older the Rifts MB there wasn't a generic Robot/Power Armor Pilot OCC (aside from the GB and CS RPA).

I do agree that there is some bloat/redundancy in OCCs.

Yeah, in the RMB it made more sense, although even back then I remember (or think I remember) wishing they had a generic Robot Pilot OCC for characters who aren't CS, or GBs, or Operators, or Headhunters, etc.

Killer Cyborg wrote:<snip>

Yeah, in the RMB it made more sense, although even back then I remember (or think I remember) wishing they had a generic Robot Pilot OCC for characters who aren't CS, or GBs, or Operators, or Headhunters, etc.

As it stands right now, doing a side-by-side comparison of the two OCCs, the GB Pilot one falls short in so many ways: number/selection of OCC skills and the bonuses, as well as selection and bonuses for Other Skills. The only thing the GB Pilot OCC has going for it is the oddly titled Racial Requirements, which amounts to the OCC Bonuses elsewhere, which more proves the oddity of the PA/Robot Pilot not having any. IMO this just reinforces the option space of making a third, specialized MOS just for GB Pilot, under the PA/Robot Pilot OCC. For this dynamic (nothing to do with the GB armour), that's why I say this is one of the worst OCCs.

desrocfc wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:<snip>

Yeah, in the RMB it made more sense, although even back then I remember (or think I remember) wishing they had a generic Robot Pilot OCC for characters who aren't CS, or GBs, or Operators, or Headhunters, etc.

As it stands right now, doing a side-by-side comparison of the two OCCs, the GB Pilot one falls short in so many ways: number/selection of OCC skills and the bonuses, as well as selection and bonuses for Other Skills. The only thing the GB Pilot OCC has going for it is the oddly titled Racial Requirements, which amounts to the OCC Bonuses elsewhere, which more proves the oddity of the PA/Robot Pilot not having any. IMO this just reinforces the option space of making a third, specialized MOS just for GB Pilot, under the PA/Robot Pilot OCC. For this dynamic (nothing to do with the GB armour), that's why I say this is one of the worst OCCs.

Again I do understand people not liking the GB pilot as an OCC but if you are going to have it what is the point of making it part of the PA OCC. The skills are not the same and by the time you add all the cultural text and the option for descended GB you aren't saving any page space and are probably just confusing the players with who gets what.

The GB is not strictly a pilot, the best description I have seen is a cross between a PA pilot and a cyber-knight. The GB is far more restricted in Military skills than the PA Pilot but has greater options in Rogue, Science and Espionage which fit the character background more. PA/Robot pilots are military pilots. They start with a bunch of both and can add even more.

I personally love the GB pilot but as I said I understand people that don't I just don't understand what is to be gained by mashing it into another OCC.

Warshield73 wrote:<snip>

I personally love the GB pilot but as I said I understand people that don't I just don't understand what is to be gained by mashing it into another OCC.

I don't argue your previous points; in fact I agree there is "character" to the baseline GB pilot. I am definitively not one of those "get rid of the GB" crowd, as most of those conflate the PA with the OCC. Heck, I've been an unofficial champion for them since the start, only more so since WB 22.

What I am suggesting is that the inclusion of the Robot/PA Pilot has made the space to lessen the OCC Bloat moving forward; this includes several CS OCCs as well. <shrug> I'll be posting more in-depth suggestions on OCCs in a few weeks, but as an example of OCC rationalization across the game writ-large, the GB Pilot is a strong contender for absorption into the Robot/PA Pilot OCC as a specific, discrete MOS.

The most distinctive trait of the GB for me is the descended pilot option. This is something I built on for my Glitter Boy O.C.C. Revisited article in the upcoming Rifter, the idea of having distinctive traits for characters depending on how they come to be Glitter Boy O.C.C. pilots. In retrospect, I rather wish I had built some more on this; it could be fun to have a wide range of pilot traditions unique to specific lineages and organizations, similar to the family backgrounds of knights and palladins in Palladium Fantasy. It makes sense to me that there would be more than one set of options for descended pilot bonuses.

Hotrod wrote:The most distinctive trait of the GB for me is the descended pilot option. This is something I built on for my Glitter Boy O.C.C. Revisited article in the upcoming Rifter, the idea of having distinctive traits for characters depending on how they come to be Glitter Boy O.C.C. pilots. In retrospect, I rather wish I had built some more on this; it could be fun to have a wide range of pilot traditions unique to specific lineages and organizations, similar to the family backgrounds of knights and palladins in Palladium Fantasy. It makes sense to me that there would be more than one set of options for descended pilot bonuses.

I am really looking forward to this. I think this is where I disagree with most of the people on this thread is that I don't want the OCCs to be more generic, I want them to more customizable. There should be big differences within a given OCC not just between them.

This is one of the things I love about all the revised Heroes Unlimited character classes that where in the Rifter. The wide variety of powers and skills made them more interesting not less.

The other aspect of the GB is the uniqueness of the suit itself. While there are some other war machines that have survived from the cataclysm, they are darn few in number, and most of the Glitter Boy’s contemporaries either no longer exist or exist only as comparatively shoddy knock-offs. The persistence of the Glitter Boy in its undistilled, original form should go a ways towards shaping the generations of pilots who live by it to a greater degree than any other suit.

Other RPA pilots see their suits as tools: means to achieve their ends. They use their suits to enrich their lives, and they have no expectations about their suits out-lasting them. They think of their suits like truckers think of their rigs. Glitter Boy pilots (especially descended ones) as stewards and custodians of a suit that defines their lives, and their family‘s lives too. The closest metaphor I can think of is a multi-generational family farm or business.

If I were to revise the Glitter Boy pilot without merging it into a single-suit specialization of a basic RPA class, this nuance would be a central theme that would shape the class’s mechanics, including the kinds of skills I would expect for pilots who expect and work to ensure that their suits will far outlast them.

Hotrod wrote:The other aspect of the GB is the uniqueness of the suit itself. While there are some other war machines that have survived from the cataclysm, they are darn few in number, and most of the Glitter Boy’s contemporaries either no longer exist or exist only as comparatively shoddy knock-offs. The persistence of the Glitter Boy in its undistilled, original form should go a ways towards shaping the generations of pilots who live by it to a greater degree than any other suit.

Other RPA pilots see their suits as tools: means to achieve their ends. They use their suits to enrich their lives, and they have no expectations about their suits out-lasting them. They think of their suits like truckers think of their rigs. Glitter Boy pilots (especially descended ones) as stewards and custodians of a suit that defines their lives, and their family‘s lives too. The closest metaphor I can think of is a multi-generational family farm or business.

If I were to revise the Glitter Boy pilot without merging it into a single-suit specialization of a basic RPA class, this nuance would be a central theme that would shape the class’s mechanics, including the kinds of skills I would expect for pilots who expect and work to ensure that their suits will far outlast them.

This is one part of the OCC that I do not like. I would give them a sort of Robot Mechanics Basic that allows them to do minor repairs and maintenance on their own because you are right if the armor is this important, they would know how to care for it. Much like their piloting skills I would even penalize them when working on modern suits.

Hotrod wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Barmaid.

Better that than a Saloon Bum. Your class-defining special ability is alcoholism. Not much better, I'll grant you, but at least a Barmaid involves paid work.

Agreed. Saloon Bum is... useless and not really fun

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:The (psi) Gizmoteer in SA2. Can you say broken? It really needs to be rewritten.
I have two psi builders I've written up. One for the HU game and the other for the PF game. The latter has been posted elsewhere here in the forums.
The downsides to each being, the HU one; written much in the manner of the TW magic object creation text in RUE; there is a lot of technical reading and math involved. And the PF one is fairly loosely written to fit the game, but because of that looseness it demands a whole bunch of GM involvement in item creation, and the GM should be familiar with the types of psi-mechanics (there are three of them) and the crystal mage text and the British psi-devices from the rifters.

For the sake of reference, could you list sourcebooks or for the (three) types of psi-mechanics and Rifter numbers for the crystal mage text & the British psi-devices?
I would really appreciate being able to get familiar with them to kitbash some ideas of my own.

SolCannibal wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:The (psi) Gizmoteer in SA2. Can you say broken? It really needs to be rewritten.
I have two psi builders I've written up. One for the HU game and the other for the PF game. The latter has been posted elsewhere here in the forums.
The downsides to each being, the HU one; written much in the manner of the TW magic object creation text in RUE; there is a lot of technical reading and math involved. And the PF one is fairly loosely written to fit the game, but because of that looseness it demands a whole bunch of GM involvement in item creation, and the GM should be familiar with the types of psi-mechanics (there are three of them) and the crystal mage text and the British psi-devices from the rifters.

For the sake of reference, could you list sourcebooks or for the (three) types of psi-mechanics and Rifter numbers for the crystal mage text & the British psi-devices?
I would really appreciate being able to get familiar with them to kitbash some ideas of my own.

In terms of Tech-oriented builders/hot-rodders who can use techno-wizardry, here's my list:
Psi-Operator (RUE p92, subclass of the Operator)
Psi-Tech (Psyscape, p74)
Techno-Wizard (RUE, p126)
Gizmoteer (South America 2, p157)

Note that the Psi-Operator and Psi-Tech aren't specifically given the power to make devices powered by psychic energy, but there's nothing saying that they couldn't make or modify devices; if you allow it, I'd do so in a limited way.

SolCannibal, there are Psi-Mechanics in Beyond the Supernatural and Nightbane: Between the Shadows. The Crystal Mage is in Rifts DB15: Secrets of the Atlanteans, and Palladium Fantasy 6: Island at the Edge of the World has a section unrelated to DB15, detailing psionic crystal magic items. Rifter 27 contains the "optional" Chaos Earth article concerning Britain.

Hotrod wrote:

SolCannibal wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:The (psi) Gizmoteer in SA2. Can you say broken? It really needs to be rewritten.
I have two psi builders I've written up. One for the HU game and the other for the PF game. The latter has been posted elsewhere here in the forums.
The downsides to each being, the HU one; written much in the manner of the TW magic object creation text in RUE; there is a lot of technical reading and math involved. And the PF one is fairly loosely written to fit the game, but because of that looseness it demands a whole bunch of GM involvement in item creation, and the GM should be familiar with the types of psi-mechanics (there are three of them) and the crystal mage text and the British psi-devices from the rifters.

For the sake of reference, could you list sourcebooks or for the (three) types of psi-mechanics and Rifter numbers for the crystal mage text & the British psi-devices?
I would really appreciate being able to get familiar with them to kitbash some ideas of my own.

In terms of Tech-oriented builders/hot-rodders who can use techno-wizardry, here's my list:
Psi-Operator (RUE p92, subclass of the Operator)
Psi-Tech (Psyscape, p74)
Techno-Wizard (RUE, p126)
Gizmoteer (South America 2, p157)

Note that the Psi-Operator and Psi-Tech aren't specifically given the power to make devices powered by psychic energy, but there's nothing saying that they couldn't make or modify devices; if you allow it, I'd do so in a limited way.

I don't think the Psi-Operator (subclass) is intended to be geared toward Psi-TW devices like the TW and Gizmoteer because there isn't anything to indicate the Psi-Operator uses their powers to interact with tech any different than a Mind Melter with the same powers, unlike the Psi-Tech IMHO. That said there are two blocks that invoke Psi-TW specifically but do not go into many details (the Vernulians in WB1o-pg171 not mentioned when they reappeared in WB30 and I don't know about WB1r, plus Psyscape's Academy WB12-pg31)

SolCannibal wrote:For the sake of reference, could you list sourcebooks or for the (three) types of psi-mechanics and Rifter numbers for the crystal mage text & the British psi-devices?
I would really appreciate being able to get familiar with them to kitbash some ideas of my own

British Psi-Devices can be found in WB3 (England), and some general psi-devices in WB12 (in the back).

Hotrod wrote:If I were to revise the Glitter Boy pilot without merging it into a single-suit specialization of a basic RPA class, this nuance would be a central theme that would shape the class’s mechanics, including the kinds of skills I would expect for pilots who expect and work to ensure that their suits will far outlast them.

I would also like to see something that better defines why I should take the Glitteroby Pilot OCC(s) vs just a regular RPA-class w/RCE:GB. The descended aspect doesn't work since not all GB OCCs are descended and it shouldn't be something easily duplicated in terms of selection.

SolCannibal wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:The (psi) Gizmoteer in SA2. Can you say broken? It really needs to be rewritten.
I have two psi builders I've written up. One for the HU game and the other for the PF game. The latter has been posted elsewhere here in the forums.
The downsides to each being, the HU one; written much in the manner of the TW magic object creation text in RUE; there is a lot of technical reading and math involved. And the PF one is fairly loosely written to fit the game, but because of that looseness it demands a whole bunch of GM involvement in item creation, and the GM should be familiar with the types of psi-mechanics (there are three of them) and the crystal mage text and the British psi-devices from the rifters.

For the sake of reference, could you list sourcebooks or for the (three) types of psi-mechanics and Rifter numbers for the crystal mage text & the British psi-devices?
I would really appreciate being able to get familiar with them to kitbash some ideas of my own.

The three different Psi Mechanic PCCs are in the BTS1 game core book, BTS2 game core book, and NB Worldbook 1 Between the Shadows.

The Crystal Mage text is in the PF1 would book Island at Edge of the World. It is a NPC 'class', like the alchemist NPC 'class', in that it is only described & not stat'ed out.

Britain in Chaos - - 16, R#27, This has psionic devices detailed in it. But no builder PCC in it.
Note, I like the techno-psychic devices described in the rifter article. they seam to actual fit the idea of mixing tech and psi powers.
...Unlike the magic items made out of tech parts that nearly all the published TW items in the PB gamebooks.

Hotrod wrote:In terms of Tech-oriented builders/hot-rodders who can use techno-wizardry, here's my list:
Psi-Operator (RUE p92, subclass of the Operator)
Psi-Tech (Psyscape, p74)
Techno-Wizard (RUE, p126)
Gizmoteer (South America 2, p157)

The operative word in the above statement is the word 'use'. In other words, they can use TW stuff.
Now the two that 'can make' TW stuff are the Techno-wizard OCC and the (psi) Gizmoteer RCC.

Hotrod wrote:Note that the Psi-Operator and Psi-Tech aren't specifically given the power to make devices powered by psychic energy, but there's nothing saying that they couldn't make or modify devices; if you allow it, I'd do so in a limited way.

And there are no rules for building psi-devices written for the Psi-Operator & Psi-Tech to use to make psi-devices. And you'd have to ether write up creation rules for them or modify other rules for them. But you also have to remember that the psi-item creation rules within the (psi) Gizmoteer RCC are broken to the point that everyone who examine them carefully. The main broken point within them is when "converting" a tech ranged weapon powered by psionics. And then there is that, unlike the multi-page rules for TW creations, the (psi) Gizmoteer RCC psi-item creation rules only take up about a page or two. Thus, they are more like an off the cuff board post, than a fully fleshed out text meant for publication.

There are the Psi-Mechanic PCC rules in the book I just mentioned earlier. But there are aspects in them that makes them somewhat difficult to be used in the same way as the TW OCC.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

SolCannibal wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:The (psi) Gizmoteer in SA2. Can you say broken? It really needs to be rewritten.
I have two psi builders I've written up. One for the HU game and the other for the PF game. The latter has been posted elsewhere here in the forums.
The downsides to each being, the HU one; written much in the manner of the TW magic object creation text in RUE; there is a lot of technical reading and math involved. And the PF one is fairly loosely written to fit the game, but because of that looseness it demands a whole bunch of GM involvement in item creation, and the GM should be familiar with the types of psi-mechanics (there are three of them) and the crystal mage text and the British psi-devices from the rifters.

For the sake of reference, could you list sourcebooks or for the (three) types of psi-mechanics and Rifter numbers for the crystal mage text & the British psi-devices?
I would really appreciate being able to get familiar with them to kitbash some ideas of my own.

The three different Psi Mechanic PCCs are in the BTS1 game core book, BTS2 game core book, and NB Worldbook 1 Between the Shadows.

The Crystal Mage text is in the PF1 would book Island at Edge of the World. It is a NPC 'class', like the alchemist NPC 'class', in that it is only described & not stat'ed out.

Britain in Chaos - - 16, R#27, This has psionic devices detailed in it. But no builder PCC in it.
Note, I like the techno-psychic devices described in the rifter article. they seam to actual fit the idea of mixing tech and psi powers.
...Unlike the magic items made out of tech parts that nearly all the published TW items in the PB gamebooks.

Thanks. Now i guess it's time to see what i can make out of yours and the others suggestions in giving the Gargs something of a peculiar uplift.

The paratrooper OCC in one of the merc groups.

I get that it was written with the airborn miliary mind set but lets face it most nations in rifts have no need of a paratroopers. (IE long distance quick response units.) The only nation in NA with a force projection distance to make use of them is CS, and the CS does not train them.

Their is allot of expense in setting up and maintaining a airborn unit. They are high risk, units that the main strength is quick long distance deployment. Flying PA would likely feel the role they are in with higher suitability and projection of force. Failing PA other smaller craft acting as air assault or jet pack troops would be used.

Heck even with 20 years of war the US has not done a combat jump since 2003. And as I understand it was treated like a training exercise in the execution and follow through. It was not done like a combat jump.

(most other airborne done are for inserting small SF teams. Not combat paratroopers. Rifts tech would make it obsolete. Stealth SF would be more likely to insert with jet packs then parachutes.)

Blue_Lion wrote:The paratrooper OCC in one of the merc groups.

I get that it was written with the airborn miliary mind set but lets face it most nations in rifts have no need of a paratroopers. (IE long distance quick response units.) The only nation in NA with a force projection distance to make use of them is CS, and the CS does not train them.

Their is allot of expense in setting up and maintaining a airborn unit. They are high risk, units that the main strength is quick long distance deployment. Flying PA would likely feel the role they are in with higher suitability and projection of force. Failing PA other smaller craft acting as air assault or jet pack troops would be used.

Heck even with 20 years of war the US has not done a combat jump since 2003. And as I understand it was treated like a training exercise in the execution and follow through. It was not done like a combat jump.

(most other airborne done are for inserting small SF teams. Not combat paratroopers. Rifts tech would make it obsolete. Stealth SF would be more likely to insert with jet packs then parachutes.)

100% agree. Plus the paratrooper falls in the “like _____ OCC, but better” category.

Hotrod wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:The paratrooper OCC in one of the merc groups.

<snip>

100% agree. Plus the paratrooper falls in the “like _____ OCC, but better” category.

I actually did a scrub down of the Rifts OCCs from *all* the World Books and Sourcebooks. I'll be posting a review of the Men-At-Arms (MaA) classes in the neat future. Basic preview: OCC bloat is a thing, over 200 MaA OCC line entries, over 60 classes up for deletion due to duplication ("like _____ OCC, but better (or same)."

desrocfc wrote:

Hotrod wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:The paratrooper OCC in one of the merc groups.

<snip>

100% agree. Plus the paratrooper falls in the “like _____ OCC, but better” category.

I actually did a scrub down of the Rifts OCCs from *all* the World Books and Sourcebooks. I'll be posting a review of the Men-At-Arms (MaA) classes in the neat future. Basic preview: OCC bloat is a thing, over 200 MaA OCC line entries, over 60 classes up for deletion due to duplication ("like _____ OCC, but better (or same)."

Wooh, that brings memories of me and the crew compacting Robotech's half dozen OCCs into just two back in the 80s to 90s. Crazy fun times of massive homebrewing with setting as much as the rules.

SolCannibal wrote:<snip>

Wooh, that brings memories of me and the crew compacting Robotech's half dozen OCCs into just two back in the 80s to 90s. Crazy fun times of massive homebrewing with setting as much as the rules.

Not so much home brew as a comparative analysis of all the MaA OCCs and demonstrating the absolute rampant repetition throughout the books. I was surprised at how much there was.

desrocfc wrote:

SolCannibal wrote:<snip>

Wooh, that brings memories of me and the crew compacting Robotech's half dozen OCCs into just two back in the 80s to 90s. Crazy fun times of massive homebrewing with setting as much as the rules.

Not so much home brew as a comparative analysis of all the MaA OCCs and demonstrating the absolute rampant repetition throughout the books. I was surprised at how much there was.

Well, we went from about 10 OCCs between half a dozen tables to just two and that was in Robotech, a older and much simpler precursor to Rifts.
So i can't really say the bloat is surprising in the least.

Honestly, trimming 30% from the Man at Arms OCC list is downright conservative. Of course, I'm of the inclination that Juicers and Crazies should be the same class, and there should be <10 customizable classes for characters without access to personal modifications, species-specific abilities, magic, psionics, or superpowers.

TBH, I kind of wish that more had been done with MOS-type modifications.

As others have mentioned, you could have your "Robot Pilot" OCC, then have backgrounds for "Glitter Boy", "Freelance", and "Coalition Flyboy". "Rogue Scholar" then have "Historian" and "Scientist" backgrounds. Doctor, the "Body Fixer" and "Cyber-doc" backgrounds.

Worst OCCs, though? Leaving aside the flat-out racist ones ("Hey, all [GRT] are thieves, except those who are fortune tellers!", pretty much all of Spirit West, and anything not a necromancer from Africa... the list can continue), I'd lean towards the RUE Crazy, which decided that all of them were Freakazoid with some extra hang-ups.

All OCCs are terrible because you end up with cookie-cutter characters with sprinkles on top.

The Beast wrote:All OCCs are terrible because you end up with cookie-cutter characters with sprinkles on top.

not entirely true, I mean yes every OCC/RCC is going to start out with the same set of "core skills"
its when you start getting into the "optional" occ related and secondary skills that you can start "customizing" characters
with that said there are definitely some skills that are clearly better than others to take.

I also agree with the people that say a lot of the OCC bloat could be cut down by creating a smaller list of "core" OCC's and then give them MOS or "Skill" packages that they get to choose.

kind of like today in the military you have army, navy, marine, airforce (in the US) and everyone that joins the army gets a set of basic skills (boot camp) and then based on their MOS gets additional training such as infantry, truck driver, Engineer, Tank crew, "motor pool (maintenance and repair)" etc. also you can apply for additional training like jump school, and if you get approved you get that additional training.

at least that's my understanding, as I understand it in addition some things can also change your experience, for instance if you go to a college /ROTC program you can (or have a better chance) of signing up as an Officer candidate rather than as enlisted also there are cases where a person that shows exceptional leadership (and other skills) might get sent to "officer" school /go "mustang" if they feel you would be better as an officer than staying enlisted, but again those are "special case" scenarios

Honestly given the number of OCCs it can be hard to come up with a totally untried OCC.

For example my home brewed military mages even though they use a team work mechanic, are basically ley line walkers, shifters and lord magis with more military skills and a bonus if they work together. (the idea was alone they are about as powerful as core mages but when the work together they are more effective, the draw back of course was their is no point in them unless several people are playing them.) So even with a gimic they are just ______ OCC with a gimmick. The special forces mages where could be seen as Mystic/leyline walker but better for combat.--Military TWs where just MOS for TW written as a variant with MOS. (for the most part you could build them as normal TWs.)

Blue_Lion wrote:The paratrooper OCC in one of the merc groups.

I get that it was written with the airborn miliary mind set but lets face it most nations in rifts have no need of a paratroopers. (IE long distance quick response units.) The only nation in NA with a force projection distance to make use of them is CS, and the CS does not train them.

Their is allot of expense in setting up and maintaining a airborn unit. They are high risk, units that the main strength is quick long distance deployment. Flying PA would likely feel the role they are in with higher suitability and projection of force. Failing PA other smaller craft acting as air assault or jet pack troops would be used.

Heck even with 20 years of war the US has not done a combat jump since 2003. And as I understand it was treated like a training exercise in the execution and follow through. It was not done like a combat jump.

(most other airborne done are for inserting small SF teams. Not combat paratroopers. Rifts tech would make it obsolete. Stealth SF would be more likely to insert with jet packs then parachutes.)

Except the Rifts OCC Paratrooper isn't a "82nd Airborne" type of paratrooper. The OCC could have just as easily been called 'Ranger' or 'Marine Raider' or 'SEAL' or some other such name. If anything, I think this OCC is more like the Marine Raider.

The name "paratrooper" in this sense isn't about them using the parachuting skill, it's more a badge of honor.

That said, I do think the OCC should have been given Pilot Jet Pack, although they can select it easy enough as a Related.



Anyway all that aside, I only use 12 OCC's, all inspired by Systems Failure, with a little Dead Reign, HU and Chaos Earth mixed in. Most have some sort of options to customize. In theory I'd probably use/allow something like the Summoner or Diabolist from Fantasy, but it's never came up.

1. Exterminator (Man-At-Arms type),
2. Marshall (Sheriff),
3. Survivalist (Ranger/Scout),
4. Grease Monkey (Operator/Mechanic)
5. Sentinel (Robot/PA pilot),
6. Splicer (augmented warriors),
7. Shepherd (also ideas from the 'Roscoe' from CE, but basically from Dead Reign)
8. Egghead (the Scientist/Nerd),
9. Shaman (Para-Arcane from CE/ and the CS's RCSG Scientist),
10. Inquisitor (Basic concept from Underseas - demon slayer),
11. Chosen (Basic concept from the Mystic Empowered in HU).

And the last is a direct conversion so I won't list it.

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:The paratrooper OCC in one of the merc groups.

I get that it was written with the airborn miliary mind set but lets face it most nations in rifts have no need of a paratroopers. (IE long distance quick response units.) The only nation in NA with a force projection distance to make use of them is CS, and the CS does not train them.

Their is allot of expense in setting up and maintaining a airborn unit. They are high risk, units that the main strength is quick long distance deployment. Flying PA would likely feel the role they are in with higher suitability and projection of force. Failing PA other smaller craft acting as air assault or jet pack troops would be used.

Heck even with 20 years of war the US has not done a combat jump since 2003. And as I understand it was treated like a training exercise in the execution and follow through. It was not done like a combat jump.

(most other airborne done are for inserting small SF teams. Not combat paratroopers. Rifts tech would make it obsolete. Stealth SF would be more likely to insert with jet packs then parachutes.)

Except the Rifts OCC Paratrooper isn't a "82nd Airborne" type of paratrooper. The OCC could have just as easily been called 'Ranger' or 'Marine Raider' or 'SEAL' or some other such name. If anything, I think this OCC is more like the Marine Raider.

The name "paratrooper" in this sense isn't about them using the parachuting skill, it's more a badge of honor.

You do realize you just contradicted the class write up in your defense of them.

Honestly the intro and write up is just dripping with the airborne brain wash reading. They are written up to try and set them selves up as what airborn sees themselves as the ultimate soldier. (the nerves of steel is because air born sees themselves.)
It literally calls them air born, and talks about them getting in with fast vehicles or parachutes.

If they where what you claim to be they would not go with some lame airborne name but some SF name. They are called paratrooper because they are airborne brain wash fluff, that no one would train.

Blue_Lion wrote:You do realize you just contradicted the class write up in your defense of them.

Honestly the intro and write up is just dripping with the airborne brain wash reading. They are written up to try and set them selves up as what airborn sees themselves as the ultimate soldier. (the nerves of steel is because air born sees themselves.)
It literally calls them air born, and talks about them getting in with fast vehicles or parachutes.

If they where what you claim to be they would not go with some lame airborne name but some SF name. They are called paratrooper because they are airborne brain wash fluff, that no one would train.

Except the part where the write up very specifically states "are the equivalent to the 20th century Airborne, Nave SEAL's, Army Rangers and Marines all rolled into one lethal package. Referred to as "Paratroopers" for simplicity's sake, these men and women are equally at home under the water (or riding on it), moving in fast attack vehicles, or parachuting in from the sky above."

So no I don't see a contradiction. Their skill set easily allows them to do far more than a simple 82nd Airborne soldier.

Pandering to some players' tendencies towards military fetishism often leads to a particularly goofy sort of tedious tribalist argument. "My branch's special operations forces can beat up those guys" has never lent verisimilitude to a setting, but it has dragged down a lot of games, which are already hard enough to make work in the best of circumstances.

I like that list, Dustin. I could see a spot for something like Dead Reign's Survivor. How easily can, for example, being a medical doctor slot into those classes? Are psionics folded into being Chosen? I'd be interested in hearing what the converted class is, which I'd argue doesn't violate forum policy since it's not like you're statting it out here, but whatever is cool.

Curbludgeon wrote:
I like that list, Dustin. I could see a spot for something like Dead Reign's Survivor. How easily can, for example, being a medical doctor slot into those classes? Are psionics folded into being Chosen? I'd be interested in hearing what the converted class is, which I'd argue doesn't violate forum policy since it's not like you're statting it out here, but whatever is cool.

I do have a "civilian" which I had made up before I had looked closely at the Survivor. I've just never revisited it to be honest. I gave the Egghead the option of selecting either a "field of study" where they can select either medical or the engineer field. If their stats are high enough there are some bonus skills that are added to each field, and if even higher could select both. They also get to select some special abilities from the Natural Genius category from HU's Power Unlimited 2.

The Chosen could be psi powered yes.

For the conversion, well let's just say "this is not the class you are looking for"

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:You do realize you just contradicted the class write up in your defense of them.

Honestly the intro and write up is just dripping with the airborne brain wash reading. They are written up to try and set them selves up as what airborn sees themselves as the ultimate soldier. (the nerves of steel is because air born sees themselves.)
It literally calls them air born, and talks about them getting in with fast vehicles or parachutes.

If they where what you claim to be they would not go with some lame airborne name but some SF name. They are called paratrooper because they are airborne brain wash fluff, that no one would train.

Except the part where the write up very specifically states "are the equivalent to the 20th century Airborne, Nave SEAL's, Army Rangers and Marines all rolled into one lethal package. Referred to as "Paratroopers" for simplicity's sake, these men and women are equally at home under the water (or riding on it), moving in fast attack vehicles, or parachuting in from the sky above."

So no I don't see a contradiction. Their skill set easily allows them to do far more than a simple 82nd Airborne soldier.

That kind of contradicts your own statement that they are not about parachutes.

Now then lets look at what that statement says, and why it is kind of redunded run on.

Airborn - large group troops jumping from a plane with parachutes. (You know the thing you said they are not all about.)
Navy seal's elete navy SF that able to every thing rangers and marine infentry do better accept attack with large groups. That are trained to jump from a plane with parachute.
Army ranger-specilaized infentry. Every thing they do a seal can do better accept attack in mass.
Marine - um that is a whole branch as they are not pilots and such i think they where referring to marine infentry. (other than maybe some specilized amphibious asault training it would simular to infentry in 82nd airborn. Rangers in 82 should be able to do it.

Basically navy seal makes every thing else in the cherry picked line redundant as they can do what every thing else does except large scale airborne missions.

The OCC says it specially says they specialize in use of Parachutes, cherry picking one line does not change it. So lets take a clooser look at the skills of the OCC and how far beyound the 82 they would be.
Basic math -standard for all people in our miltiary. So 82 airborn has it.
Climbing rapeling - basic training obiscals have this and I would expect 82 is capable of it.
native lang- same as basic math.
Land navigation-While all army trains in it typically only MOS like infentry are highly profecient at it so 82 airborn has it.
language 2 others. -it is not common to have people speaking 3 langues in our military even among SF.
pilot one other- I think almost every one in 82 has pilot automobile so same as 82.
parachuting- yea 82 has that. (the high % indicatess this is a specialty)
Radio basic- every one in 82 better be able to do this as it is a standard skill taught to all members of the army in basic.
Scuba -yea this one does not reflect 82nd normal missions.
Swiming- with drown proofing training I would expect every one in 82 to have that skill.
Wilderness survial - I would expect every one in 82 to have some level of sears training so I would expect this.
Wp heavy, rifle and pistol - I would expect all the infantry to have this skills so 82nd should have it.
WP 2 of choice- I would also expect 82 to have thrown (grenade) blunt/spear (bayonet training) so not beyound 82.
Hand to hand. Well it can be hard to convert but infantry practices modern army combatives which is based on Brazilain ju-jitsu. So a dirct statment about combatiably would be hard to game mechanics.

So the OCC requires 1 skill the 82nd air born infantry would not have. It also is missing several skills that would be standard in 82nd -first aid, camouflage literacy, general athletics, forced march.

Now then the write up does not say paratrooper is a badge of hone but simplicity.(so that is you assuming a different reason) Looking at the skills write up it is clear they are called paratroopers because they are all about parachutes.

As the OCC lacks prowl, it can not do navy seal, or army ranger missions. (note the 82nd air born includes rangers)

Operation wise description again mostly stuff that 82 can and has done in the past. They are a fast first strike OCC. The 82nd airborne is a first strike and rapid response force.

The only reason to call paratrooper a badge of honor over commando, or navy seal or ranger is a airborne brain wash mentality.
paratrooper is milary combat personal using a parachute- while navy seals fit the bill but they find being a navy seal a bigger badge of honor than paratrooper. after all airborne cooks, and mechanics are paratroopers but only navy seals are navy seals.

Blue_Lion wrote:Bunch of rambling.....

Dude you are the one that equated the Rifts Paratrooper to an "airborne" combat paratrooper and "airborne" mentality and all this other stuff in your first post about this. Clearly you are way to hung up over the name of the OCC, and trying to inject some preconceived 20th century notions into it. The description says they are far more which is exactly what I've been saying.

And yes it absolutely is a "badge of honor" name just as much as it is for simplicity sake as described in the OCC write up. Think really hard about that before replying, and try to understand it is not only for the sake of us the players but also from a lore perspective within the game.

I'm not even going to comment on your skill set "analysis"

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:Bunch of rambling.....

Dude you are the one that equated the Rifts Paratrooper to an "airborne" combat paratrooper and "airborne" mentality and all this other stuff in your first post about this. Clearly you are way to hung up over the name of the OCC, and trying to inject some preconceived 20th century notions into it. The description says they are far more which is exactly what I've been saying.

And yes it absolutely is a "badge of honor" name just as much as it is for simplicity sake as described in the OCC write up. Think really hard about that before replying, and try to understand it is not only for the sake of us the players but also from a lore perspective within the game.

I'm not even going to comment on your skill set "analysis"

You said they where called paratrooper as a badge of honer.

My what you call rambling I addressed the line you cherry picked, and analyzed the class skills.

Claiming that a class called paratrooper that says they are experts at parachutes, is not a airborne character even when called it in your quote seams to lack support.
Simply they are called paratroopers because it is what they are and the skills they have do not support them doing navy seals or ranger mission.
No where does it call being a paratrooper or called that a badge of honor, not sure where you got the idea that is why they are called paratroopers.. (I am not going to buy paratrooper is a more a badge of honor than Seal, Commando, or Ranger.)

The class skills do not support it doing ranger and navy seal missions.
The class skills support it doing airborne missions.
Cherry picking one line does not change what the class actually mechanically is. A airborne character.

I do not think we will agree but the diminishing and boarder line insult of calling my post ramblings indicates a attempt to make it a personal challenge, that will lead to flame war. (Given that you quoted me then changed what I said to ramblings indicates your goal may be to make it about the person and not the post. That as I understand it is against the forum rules. Try to address what I post and not make it about me.)

Honestly even your cherry picked line says they are trained to do airborne missions, so nothing really changes the fact that no one is going to be training forces for airborne missions. (lack of need and basically obsolete with rifts tech so class that specializes in it should not exist.)

Blue_Lion wrote:

Dustin Fireblade wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:Bunch of rambling.....

Dude you are the one that equated the Rifts Paratrooper to an "airborne" combat paratrooper and "airborne" mentality and all this other stuff in your first post about this. Clearly you are way to hung up over the name of the OCC, and trying to inject some preconceived 20th century notions into it. The description says they are far more which is exactly what I've been saying.

And yes it absolutely is a "badge of honor" name just as much as it is for simplicity sake as described in the OCC write up. Think really hard about that before replying, and try to understand it is not only for the sake of us the players but also from a lore perspective within the game.

I'm not even going to comment on your skill set "analysis"

You said they where called paratrooper as a badge of honer.

My what you call rambling I addressed the line you cherry picked, and analyzed the class skills.

Claiming that a class called paratrooper that says they are experts at parachutes, is not a airborne character even when called it in your quote seams to lack support.
Simply they are called paratroopers because it is what they are and the skills they have do not support them doing navy seals or ranger mission.
No where does it call being a paratrooper or called that a badge of honor, not sure where you got the idea that is why they are called paratroopers.. (I am not going to buy paratrooper is a more a badge of honor than Seal, Commando, or Ranger.)

The class skills do not support it doing ranger and navy seal missions.
The class skills support it doing airborne missions.
Cherry picking one line does not change what the class actually mechanically is. A airborne character.

I do not think we will agree but the diminishing and boarder line insult of calling my post ramblings indicates a attempt to make it a personal challenge, that will lead to flame war. (Given that you quoted me then changed what I said to ramblings indicates your goal may be to make it about the person and not the post. That as I understand it is against the forum rules. Try to address what I post and not make it about me.)

Honestly even your cherry picked line says they are trained to do airborne missions, so nothing really changes the fact that no one is going to be training forces for airborne missions. (lack of need and basically obsolete with rifts tech so class that specializes in it should not exist.)

You are correct my apologies. I hate long quote walls, especially the older I get.

At any rate, I wish you the best of luck in the apocalypse.