Aug 06, 09:00 1998
To: Lindharin
From: Froccer
Lindharin,
Standard response format.
>From: "Lindharin"
Yeah, the damage potential of the glitterboy would be totally
>And I think it is a big price, too, which will help keep it from
Yep. Good point. I think I am decided that I will prose this rule
>Ah, this is another point where our rules interpretations are a
Wowy! Thanks for the handy tip about where to find those rules
>> We are discussing this currently. So far the armour breakdown is as
Yep. I believe that this opens up a lot more options. Snipers are now
>That sounds good except for one thing. Since any natural die roll of
That's a pretty good thought. My initial problem with just base 12 was
I think that the added clause will be a good addition.
>> Projectile Weapons: Rail guns.
Sure. Items that might fit into the SN category would include
>> Energy Weapons: Particle accelerator weapons, and high powered
>Agreed about the heavy weapons. Should all particle accelerator
Uh, I think so. When I first thought of particle accelerators I
To conclude, all particle beam weapons do not need to be in the
>> Explosives: Anti-vehicle mines, anything bigger than a mini-missle
>Would it make mini-missiles too ineffective against tank-like
Now that I think about it, there could be two scenarios here. You
So a revision could be:
SN Explosives: conventional, normal, and high explosive grenades
ASN Explosives: nuclear, armour piercing, and plasma grenades and
Especially nuclear. Whoa bow! That is a reason in its self for
I think I would like the fact that plasma grenades would be ASN.
>> I am unsure about this section. I was kind of thinking that it
>I agree with this. Although we may want to play with the damage
I am going to interupt this email to say that I hate my Netscape.
I don't think that the damage modifier should be played with for
As you can guess, I like working with max. damage scenarios.
There is the possibility, though, that a character will even
>> I also think that maybe vehicle armor should offer better
>I'd want to be careful here. ASN armor definitely would take no
That depends. First, it depends on the gm. Is he always putting
You could take the cynical approach to the above argument and
It is still possible for characters to make short work of some
>I appreciate the brainstorming. :) I think there is a lot to
Doesn't the damage do with MD weapons also increase by a factor
>It already takes a lot of rifle fire to really harm them.
I think that is a really good idea. Six characters shooting at
It should be noted that the characters should have some access to
I have a really good story about my character regarding battle
Froccer
>To: "Froccer"
>Subject: RE: Feedback from the Game Masters Library website
>
>Unless you also allow the boom gun, something which normally is a
>single shot weapon, to do a short burst for x2 damage but x3 ammo.
>It is similar to a semi-automatic pistol, which only fires once per
>pull on the trigger, but you can fire three rounds in a short burst
>for x2 damage. Maybe the boom gun can do the same. Of course, that
>is just totally disgusting damage, but it is one possible consequence
>of the rules mods I'm making. Since I don't have any Glitter Boys
>either, I hadn't given it much thought.:(
disgusting. I think there are some weapons that are just single
shot weapons, period. This would include some weapons such as the
Boom Gun, the TX-5 Pump Pistol, and any type of conventional
shotguns. The reason for this being that either the recoil or the
reload time (in the case of the Boom Gun, I would say it is both)
is a limiting factor in considering how fast it can fire. A good
rule of thumb would be to check the rate of fire on the weapon.
If it says that you can only shoot it once per attack, then it is
a single shot weapon. If it says that its rate of fire is the
infamous "Standard" rate of fire, then it is probably capable of
at least short bursts (in the case of energy rifles that have
clips of 20 or more, it is probably capable of firing longer
bursts). In any case, the GM should use his discretion as to the
rate of fire on any weapon.
>being abused. If it takes forever (in combat terms) to reload the
>big guns, then you really need to think before trying the long
>bursts. And if you get unlucky and roll a 3 on your strike, you've
>just wasted 20% of your ammo.
change to my players.
>little different. Palladium has fluctuated back and forth from rule
>book to rule book about whether a first level character just gets 2
>attacks from their hand-to-hand training, or gets 2 attacks plus 2
>more from hand-to-hand training. Per the Palladium web site, under
>their Oops page, I'm using the later rule. So my first level
>characters have 4 actions plus any bonuses from boxing, etc. I
>decided to use 4 actions for a burst for the same reason you like 3
>actions - it means they have to spend the whole round doing it,
>unless they have enough training and/or experience to have extra
>actions.
clarifications. I have already notified my group about them. This
will definitely make an impact on our game. Now that I see that
people have a lot more attacks, I think I could agree on a 4
attack burst.
>> follows:
>>
>> Head: 1/3 to 1/4 MDC of the Main body
>> Arms: 1/4 to 1/5 MDC of the Main body
>> Legs: 1/3 to 1/4 MDC of the Main body
>> Hands/Feet: 1/10 MDC of the Main body
>
>And that MDC is all in addition to the main body MDC, right?
realistic (before, who would bother trying to take someone out
with one shot from an energy rifle?). With this armour breakdown,
you can also incapacitate someone (by shooting off their hand;
gruesome, I know, but the guy probably won't die,
and there is always bionic replacements).
>12+ will be enough to hit even after the -3 to -6 penalty, the
>natural die roll is the controlling factor. A 10th level guy with a
>rifle and laser scope still can't make the called shot any better
>than the 1st level guy with a pistol, since 11 times out of 20 they
>will both miss. The skill bonus of the experienced person can't
>help. Actually, that is not quite true, because the skill bonus from
>the 10th level guy will increase the final strike roll and make it
>harder to dodge, but if they are just firing at an unsuspecting
>target, say from an ambush, the 1st level guy is just as likely to
>succeed. You may want to add a clause that says in the heat and
>hectic movement of a combat, a natural 12 is needed and extra bonuses
>just make it harder to dodge, but if you are making a called shot in
>a static environment (target shooting, first shot of an ambush,
>assassination, etc) then the total just needs to be 12, not the
>natural die roll. Just a thought...
that people could get some good bonuses to strike. You
automatically get a +3 for an aimed shot. Some weapons (like some
Wilk's products I believe) give you another +1 to strike. Adding
on a laser sight gives you another +1 to strike. Having a
multi-optic eye gives you another +1 to strike. Character levels
gives you, etc ...
>
>Agreed. As an aside, would there be any SN projectile weapons?
>Normal guns are SH, if rail guns become ASN, is there a middle
>ground?
conventional artillery and tank shells, MD ammo that is shot out
of converted conventional weapons (such as RamJet rounds from
Rifts: Mercenaries I believe; I think there are other types of
rounds that make conventional weapons do MD, but I can't think of
any others off the top of my head), and possibly even other high
powered, high calibre conventional weapons (recoilless rifles,
20mm-40mm auto cannons, etc ...). There is a type of SMG in RIFTS
mercenaries that has a MD burst setting. It involves shooting a
lot of special rounds at once and does 1 MDC damage. This might
be a consideration for this category as well.
or heavy energy weapons (such as those found on tanks).
>weapons count as ASN? Are there any "small" particle accelerators?
>I'm not that familiar with the range of weapons in all the Rifts
>supplements.
immediately thought of the particle beam cannon and particle beam
mini-cannon from one of the RIFTS sourcebooks. I also thought
about the heavy particle beam weapons on the Naurauni's Carnivore
heavy tank. All of these are definitely really, really, really
big heavy weapons. Now that I think about it, though, there are a
lot of small arms that use particle acceleration technology.
Naurauni's main line of small arms are all particle beam weapons
(1d4 x 10 MDC, rate of fire "Standard"). Even northern gun has
its own particle beam rifle (I can't remember what it is called
though; its a burst fire weapon).
ASN category, but all heavy energy weapons should be.
>targets, though? Should SN be just hand grenade type weapons, and
>ASN could be mini-missiles and up?
could say that grenades are SN because they are primarily used
for personnel and any type of missle is ASN because they are
primarily used against vehicles. The are flaws in this, though.
One flaw is that there are high explosive missles that are more
useful against ground troops (because of their larger blast
radius). Other weapons have a lower blast radius, but do more
damage because it is meant to be done to only one target (a
vehicle). Another flaw is that the nature of the explosive itself
would not be considered (is it a convention
armour piercing? etc ...). I think the size of the explosive
(grenade, mini-missile, small missile, etc ...) is not as
important as its type (plasma, he, etc...). In other words, its
not the size that matters, but how you use it (Ouch! Sorry, had
to be done).
and missiles.
missiles
having ASN.
I am kind of cynical about grenades in general. They only do a
max. of 5d6 MDC. If someone threw a grenade at me, I wouldn't
worry. I would just take the damage and be thankful he didn't
shoot a burst from an energy weapon at me. With the ASN Explosive
it makes some of these weapons (particularily plasma) much more
useful.
>>would be like a modern type of armor against a SN source of damage.
>>LTE AR would mean that it would take the standard damage and x1/2 to
>>the wearer. GTE AR, well, adios amigo. It would be like the analogy
>>of going into a modern battle, and getting hit by a tank shell. Not
>>pretty.
>modifier. Considering that high-tech super weapons do have higher
>damage ratings already, and they can be bursted for even more damage,
>doing a x1/2 even when the strike roll is under AR may be too deadly
>in Rifts. I'm mostly gaming in the Heroes Unlimited setting at the
>moment, so I don't have a good feel for it. What do you think?
It crashed again when I was writting this section. Sorry if it
seems sort of choppy. This may result in me losing some of the
ideas I had previously written down.
a number of reasons. First, I think that ASN should remain
consistent with the other damage levels. Second, it is a sad fact
that big guns tend to kill people. Third, if a party member is
facing down a ASN source of damage they should a) run, or b)
hide. Fourth, what is a ASN weapon shooting at party members for?
Don't they have something better to shoot at.
Let's take one that involves one of the less gruesome weapons in
this category (1d6x10x2 SDC rail gun or small missle). If the
weapon does max. damage and rolls under the AR, that means the
character takes 60 SDC max. As you have mentioned before,
characters are tougher in general in your SDC system. It is
likely for a man of arms (who has 1d4 x 10 SDC to start) will
survive even a max. damage hit from one of these weapons. For one
of the more gruesome weapons, the character will (and should) die
a horrible death (I wouldn't want to see too many characters
walking away from a boom gun hit).
survive one of the more gruesome weapons. A boom gun that only
rolls a 6 on 3d6 for damage means that it will only do 60 SDC to the character
(6x10x2/2 = 60 SDC).
>>protection than body armour (the flip side of ASN). It would be
>>normal for this type of armour to take an ASN source of damage, but
>>against SN, it would only take x1/2 damage.
>damage from SH attacks. But if they take only 1/2 damage from SN
>attacks AND have lots more SDC, they may be too tough. Except
>against another tank of course. Now, that is probably realistic. But
>does it take away from the adventure of the game setting? Does it
>force the players to become an armored brigade in order to survive?
the characters in a position where they HAVE to battle tanks and big bots?
Second, it depends on the characters. Are they sufficiently
armed? Taking on something that has heavy weapons with pea
shooters won't get you very far. Do they use proper tactics?
Taking on a tank or bot head on should be discouraged. These
things are made for war, and can dish it out as well as take it.
The characters should find a way to defeat it, without using the
metaphorical "bayonette charge" approach to battle tactics.
Third, it depends on gm and character collaboration. Does the gm
provide ways to get out of the situation without direct
confrontation? Does the gm provide ways to defeat the threat that
doesn't involve depleating the targets main body of SDC? Do the
characters search for such options?
say, "No. None of those things apply." In this case, maybe ASN
should be more refined.
vehicles though. The UAR-1 Enforcer for example would have 700
SDC (I think; unsure about the exact number). If you had even six
characters in your party, you could conceivably take it out quite expediently.
Taking just normal infantry weapons (3d6x2 SDC), each character
could empty the clip and do some pretty good damage. 18 x 2 SDC
for a single shot x 7 for a full burst x 6 characters / 2 for ASN armour = 756 SDC.
This also depends on which set of rules you use (if you are using
x7 or x10; 4 attacks for a long burst; etc ...). I think that, in
general, the party would have better weapons than common
infantryman weapons, so they would do better damage.
>recommend adding a 5th category, but I'm a little concerned about it
>being balanced for game play if the tanks both have tons of SDC and
>also take just a fraction of the damage from hand weapons. Keep in
>mind that, as I've got it now, any MDC item is doubled when it is
>translated to SDC, so the big 'bots will already have an average of
>700 to 1000 SDC, and up to 1400 SDC for the Glitter Boy.
of two though? I realize that with ASN armour, the damage would
be automatically halved, but it would not be impossible to take
out one of these monstrosities.
>
>Actually, though, I just remembered something. I do have a rough
>draft of the AR rules for power armor and mecha type things, and that
>changes it around a lot. I mentioned it in the MDC replacement web
>page, but didn't go into details. The idea is that tank-like things
>would still have an AR, just like body armor. However, strike rolls
>exceeding the AR doesn't mean the attack does damage to the pilot, it
>means that some interior function of the vehicle got damaged. Maybe
>it slows down or stops a leg or arm from moving, or takes out a
>sensor, or ruptures the cable that provides power for a weapon, or
>damages the power core and slows / weakens the whole 'bot. If those
>rules are used, then it is not a problem to have ASN armor take only
>half damage from SN attacks, even if the tank has a 1000 SDC, because
>it SHOULD be difficult for a laser rifle to bodily destroy the mecha.
>However, a laser rifle could still, potentially, stop it without
>destroying it by getting in some good shots and taking out some of
>its internal workings. That would preserve some of the play balance
>and keep the game from just turning into giant robot wars. What do
>you think about that idea?
the tank will have better chances of damaging some internal
structure (you get six chances to roll above the AR). This will
give the characters a better fighting chance.
ASN weapons, even if just ASN mini-missles. This will allow them
to aim at some vulnerable portion, and disable part of the
bot/tank. They would then be able to exploit that weakness (if
they were smart).
tactics, but I don't want this email to be totally monsterous.
Maybe I will include it in another email (it is my favorite story
to tell).