This is exactly why the rules need an actual overhaul.

[Dog_O_War]

So yesterday me and Retired Juicer are sitting around talking about Rifts campaign development, as well as certain house-rules and rules changes we've made, when a thought jumped into my head. This particular thought was about something that the current rules-set doesn't cover, because if it did it wouldn't allow it to happen.

But under the current rules of the game, it does. The obvious "fix" is to house-rule it away, but that is just another glaring issue then with the rules as they are.


So here it is; you take a character, say - a robot pilot (though in thought I was picturing a Phaeton Juicer to further highlight the problem), and he has pilot robots and PA (obviously), with R:CE in a light(er) suit, like a Flying Titan (or if you allow it) a suit of Gladius Exo-Armour. He Also has R:CE in say, Hunter Mobile Gun or the Titan Combat Robot, and has both the PA and the Giant Robot.

What's to stop him from wearing the PA and piloting the robot and thus getting all the bonuses from both R:CEs? Discounting the previously mentioned "house-rule it out", there isn't anything that would forbid it. Some of you may be thinking "cockpit space in the robot wouldn't allow a suit of PA!" but that isn't neccesarily true. Take for example a larger robot, like the spider-skull walker; this is basically a walking block of metal with internal space equal to that of your bedroom; it is more than possible for one to fit inside the other.

Just a musing I had while sitting down and plugging away at the pages apon pages of rules-fixes I have.

[Grell]

The most relevant combat skill would prevail, the least relevant would not come into play. PA combat does nothing to enhance piloting ability, only fighting with the suit.

[johnkretzer]

It doesn't say that they will either....so it is not exactly a house ruling just a ruling by the GM. Though personaly I like Palladium because they assume a certain level of common sense. It doesn't say either that you can't use to different scopes at the same time but common sense says you can't...like your example above common sense would dicate you wqouldn't get those bonus.

[Hannibal]

Agree with previous poster... why would Palladium waste time addressing every "what if" scenario (impossible) when *hopefully* common sense should be a reliable guide?

[Nekira Sudacne]

More like: What makes you think that's a rules problem? It's a perfectly legitmate tactic, why do you think it needs to be "fixed"?

[glitterboy2098]

the bonuses for robots or PA reflect the computer and mechanical assists to the pilot. however, such assists would be limited to what the PA was programmed to do. a PA would help with aiming it's own weapons..but would be mostly useless helping to get a robot's targeting system to aim, since the two aren't linked. even if they are linked, why would their bonuses stack? PA's target partly based on bodily kinesthetics..and a robot targets via joysticks and keyboards. the two aren't going to be compatable.

if you wore a PA in the cockpit of a robot, even if you adjust for the extra bulk and strength, your really just wearing fancy body army as far as the bot's controlls are concerned.

in fact, one would expect the PA to actually make piloting harder, since you'd have lots of PA system inferface junk in your vision..leading ot information overload when combined with the robot's HUD's and the outside enviroment.

[DhAkael]

Oh gods..people actualy contemplate this???
Um... another thing. Juicer in power armour?!
Okay, so there are no hard-fast-canon rules on these attrocities... but COMMON SENSE people.
Use it.
Even if it's not all that common anymore.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Oh gods..people actualy contemplate this???
Um... another thing. Juicer in power armour?!
Okay, so there are no hard-fast-canon rules on these attrocities... but COMMON SENSE people.
Use it.
Even if it's not all that common anymore.

Actually, the Phaeton juicer is a variant designed ENTIREY around piloting power armor. it's the point of the class. They even get bonuses to do so on top of the power armor bonus's. In fact, they have a special ability that lets them pilot any vehicle of war whatsoever, even if it's a completely alien model never seen before in their lives.

[Lenwen]

The most relevant combat skill would prevail, the least relevant would not come into play. PA combat does nothing to enhance piloting ability, only fighting with the suit.

100% agreed.

Your not in combat with the PA, thus no bonas's apply to the combat threw the PA.

But all the bonas's apply threw the Robot combat due to you being in combat piloting the Robot.

[Jason Richards]

for the sake of discussion, I'm curious as to what the OP's houserule fix for this is.

[grandmaster z0b]

More like: What makes you think that's a rules problem? It's a perfectly legitmate tactic, why do you think it needs to be "fixed"?

The problem is that it's something that doesn't make any sense and would only be done in an attempt to stack player bonuses.

[Elthbert]

The most relevant combat skill would prevail, the least relevant would not come into play. PA combat does nothing to enhance piloting ability, only fighting with the suit.

100% agreed.

Your not in combat with the PA, thus no bonas's apply to the combat threw the PA.

But all the bonas's apply threw the Robot combat due to you being in combat piloting the Robot.

OH MY GOODNESS WE AGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lenwen]

The most relevant combat skill would prevail, the least relevant would not come into play. PA combat does nothing to enhance piloting ability, only fighting with the suit.

100% agreed.

Your not in combat with the PA, thus no bonas's apply to the combat threw the PA.

But all the bonas's apply threw the Robot combat due to you being in combat piloting the Robot.

OH MY GOODNESS WE AGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LMAO !!!

[Dog_O_War]

for the sake of discussion, I'm curious as to what the OP's houserule fix for this is.

The better bonus between the two superceeds any similar bonus.

For example; wearing a suit of Flying Titan and piloting a Titan Combat Robot, you're generally using all of the FT's combat bonuses, and none of the TCR's. But when you perform a full-speed ram, the TCR's percentage knock-down is better.

Another example that would further mix bonuses would be wearing a Mauler PA and Piloting a Spider Skull-Walker.
While most of the bonuses from the Mauler are better, the Spider Skull-Walker has a better parry bonus, and a better roll bonus.


For most of you other posters, I wasn't concerned so much with the bonuses provided as I was about basically doubling the attacks gained.

Take for example the following character;

A basic Gunfighter OCC has all the skills to best use rifles. He can also take the piloting skills needed to wear a suit of PA and pilot a giant robot. He can also tie-in his rifle to the nuclear power-supply of his giant robot, and there are plenty of rifles out there that more than rival heavy-MD weapons without having to get crazy-expensive on the ammo; you pretty much have to use missile-volleys to do damage that's significantly better than the typical rifle-burst. And that is without mentioning Naruni.

I'll go with a themed fighter; he'll wear a suit of NG-Red Hawk PA and he'll pilot a Hunter Mobile Gun. He'll also use an NG-P7 Particle Beam Rifle. I've chosen this equipment because it is widely and readily available given that everything is produced by Northern Gun.

He'll also start with HtH assassin, and because he has two RC:Es (as well as RC:B) that accounts for all of his initial "other" skills.

So at first level he's got 3 attacks from HtH: assassin, +1 from his OCC (all guns), +1 from Sharp-Shooting (while using the E-Rifle), +1 from RC:E for the suit of Red Hawk, and +1 from RC:E for piloting the Hunter.
That's a total of 7 attacks to start.
At level 2, this jumps to 10; +2 from HtH: assassin, and +1 from Boxing.
At level 3, this jumps to 12; +2 from his RC:Es.
At level 5, this jumps to 13; +1 from HtH: assassin.
At level 6, this jumps to 15; +2 from his RC:Es.

Now I'll note that this amounts to atleast one attack per second of any particular round; most OCCs, even a Juicer or SAMAS pilot don't achieve this even at 15th level. This character has gleaned in 1/3 the time what most never achieve.

Jumping ahead, the total amount of attacks is 20 with an E-Rifle. This could be 10 called (head) shots per round that aren't likely to miss, doing 1d4x10 per hit. against larger targets, the pilot is still in a giant robot, and still has atleast 19 attacks per round with non-energy rifles; this includes heavy weapons like missile-launchers and railguns.

Removing OCC bonuses, that's still 18 attacks per round with heavy weapons. This does not factor in bonuses from races, or bonuses from more powerful suits of PA and giant robots. Even using "lesser" hand-to-hand skills, the typical person is still capable of 17 attacks per round.

This also doesn't fully reflect the possibility of larger robots with gunners and the like.
My point was that this disrupts the status-quo; cheap, small suits of PA are now easily more powerful than flash-suits that couldn't otherwise fit into others. This also changes how powerful the cheaper giant robots become; you aren't buying them for their weapon-systems, armour, or even some typically unique feature - you're buying them because you can fit a suit of PA inside and then use a hand-held heavy weapon.

Similar to the arms-race you see in many weapons, this focuses on an exploit; see, on a giant robot you could modify a cheap weapon with a long range (like the JA-9 or the C30-R railgun) and use a half-dozen in conjuntion with each-other. I mention these weapons because they have long ranges, and aren't particularily heavy; atleast no heavy in the sense that a giant robot would be strained.
Or better yet, you could put a boomgun on one.



Finally, common sense; while it should be prevailant in a typical persons' game, you shouldn't be applying it to the rules of that game. Rules are supposed to govern the play of a game, and otherwise not be in-need of having common sense applied to them.

[glitterboy2098]

actually, it would be less munchkin to just assume that robot always trumps PA when looking at which bonuses to use. your not really using your PA's abilities when piloting a robot while wearing one, your basically just in fancy body armor. you'd be reliant on the robots systems, manuvering time, sensors, etc. so the robot bonuses should always trump the PA's in such a situation.

[Jason Richards]

I just really don't understand how you can rationalize that both bonuses could be applied, even attacks. The training represented by the PA/Robot Combat skills have an inherently limited range.

Put another way, what constitutes the additional attacks provided by the Robot/Power Armor Combat skills?

[Dog_O_War]

actually, it would be less munchkin to just assume that robot always trumps PA when looking at which bonuses to use. your not really using your PA's abilities when piloting a robot while wearing one, your basically just in fancy body armor. you'd be reliant on the robots systems, manuvering time, sensors, etc. so the robot bonuses should always trump the PA's in such a situation.

Well, Ill put it to you this way; I didn't post this because I thought that people would attempt munchkinism doing this.
I posted it because this is exactly why the rules need an actual overhaul. It is there - within them [the rules]. It requires house-ruling and arbitration to fix. My point has always been that the rules shouldn't require these two things to in order to funtion.

[Dog_O_War]

I just really don't understand how you can rationalize that both bonuses could be applied, even attacks. The training represented by the PA/Robot Combat skills have an inherently limited range.

Put another way, what constitutes the additional attacks provided by the Robot/Power Armor Combat skills?

If you're wearing a suit that makes you super-fast and reflexsive, that enhances your every move (not unlike Juicer-drugs) - and then you get into a robot that benefits from a skilled pilot.

My question to you is that, considering the above - why wouldn't you?

[Jason Richards]

DoW, I don't disagree with you that the games would benefit with a good scrubbing, but the sort of thing you are describing seems to come from looking for exploits, not actually playing. You can't hope to eliminate possible loopholes from any game. If you went into it trying to rule out the sorts of things you're talking about, it would make the actual rulebooks unreadable.

RPG rulebooks can't take the form of a series of if-then statements or they becomes too unweildy to play.

[TechnoGothic]

In some cases, I can see the bonuses stacking. But not in others.
If the PA enhanced PP then sure.
If the PA grants extra HtH attacks (non-weapon systems), then Sure.

Can it get munchkin...yes. Thats why the GM should have the courage to say "NO" sometimes.

[Nekira Sudacne]

More like: What makes you think that's a rules problem? It's a perfectly legitmate tactic, why do you think it needs to be "fixed"?

The problem is that it's something that doesn't make any sense and would only be done in an attempt to stack player bonuses.

Again, Where's the problem?

[Jason Richards]

I just really don't understand how you can rationalize that both bonuses could be applied, even attacks. The training represented by the PA/Robot Combat skills have an inherently limited range.

Put another way, what constitutes the additional attacks provided by the Robot/Power Armor Combat skills?

If you're wearing a suit that makes you super-fast and reflexsive, that enhances your every move (not unlike Juicer-drugs) - and then you get into a robot that benefits from a skilled pilot.

My question to you is that, considering the above - why wouldn't you?

Weird. My post earlier didn't send. I'll rewrite it, I guess.

In short, because to me, as a gamer and as a designer, I see the skill as the training and practice spent with a given suit of armor or robot vehicle. Some suits grant additional bonuses and attacks and such, so I guess you could say that those would translate over in terms of faster reaction times, reflexes, etc. However, the skill gives bonuses based on training and practice. Training and practice with a suit of power armor doesn't stack its results with training and practice with a type of robot vehicle, just as you can't stack the Prowl and Camouflage skills, or two different types of Demolitions skills, or Pilot Jet Aircraft and Pilot Fighter Jet, or First Aid and Paramedic.

Ultimately, I don't see how you arrive at this conclusion if you're not trying to be contrary. It's an interesting hypothetical discussion, but it clearly violates the spirit of the game, and definitely doesn't strike me as role-playing. The same goes for a Gunfighter loading up on robot-piloting skills, but that's just me.

Like I said before, it's impossible to write a RPG sourcebook in such a way as it eliminates every conflict or workaround possible. I can say for a fact that specifically forbidding a character to stack Power Armor and Robot Combat Elite skills has never once entered my mind.

[Dog_O_War]

DoW, I don't disagree with you that the games would benefit with a good scrubbing, but the sort of thing you are describing seems to come from looking for exploits, not actually playing. You can't hope to eliminate possible loopholes from any game. If you went into it trying to rule out the sorts of things you're talking about, it would make the actual rulebooks unreadable.

RPG rulebooks can't take the form of a series of if-then statements or they becomes too unweildy to play.

I agree that they can't take such a format; people would get bored too quickly. But I don't think they will become unwieldy; I've been working on an entire rules-rewrite for some time. They have otherwise proven easy to understand and fix many of the problems (and some of the negative draw-backs*) within the game.

They still require some fine-tuning on my part, but to put it into context - I have a particular friend who is notorious for not reading rules that seem complex (for example, I had to produce a chart for him to indicate how to roll a simple burst from an automatic rifle in the game of Deadlands; up until then he'd only ever make single shots), but he's gotten my re-writes without any difficulty.

As for people using exploits, I used to use simultaineous strike all the time. I wouldn't ever bother with initiative bonuses for some of my older characters, because I knew if someone was foolish enough to attack me I'd just simultaineous strike them (and thus go as quickly as they would). Multiple opponents, anything really. I also used to block-sacrifice all the time, and then just keep a stock-pile of new arms (cheaper than repairs).

It's the little things like the above that make all the difference; another problem to mention is the Ork SupaKustom MastaBlasta, I came apon the idea for doing this when I was playing a Head-Hunter Techno-Hound in a game. They have the kinds of skills that would allow you to tie all your weapons together, and the class gives you alot of weapons to start. Basically, you tie a bunch of guns onto one central firing grip and bam - you've got a super-gun.

It does eat up alot of ammo (to begin with), but as you gain cash it becomes a more refined weapon; far more than the sum of its parts. In the end you end up with a weapon that is far superior than anything printed within the books; it's lighter, more powerful, longer-ranged, and within the verisimilitude already presented. The books already allow for multiples of the same weapon to basically multiply your damage (quite a few vehicles do this); I've just used better weapons and a more efficient design to do so.

[Dog_O_War]

I just really don't understand how you can rationalize that both bonuses could be applied, even attacks. The training represented by the PA/Robot Combat skills have an inherently limited range.

Put another way, what constitutes the additional attacks provided by the Robot/Power Armor Combat skills?

If you're wearing a suit that makes you super-fast and reflexsive, that enhances your every move (not unlike Juicer-drugs) - and then you get into a robot that benefits from a skilled pilot.

My question to you is that, considering the above - why wouldn't you?

Weird. My post earlier didn't send. I'll rewrite it, I guess.

In short, because to me, as a gamer and as a designer, I see the skill as the training and practice spent with a given suit of armor or robot vehicle. Some suits grant additional bonuses and attacks and such, so I guess you could say that those would translate over in terms of faster reaction times, reflexes, etc. However, the skill gives bonuses based on training and practice. Training and practice with a suit of power armor doesn't stack its results with training and practice with a type of robot vehicle, just as you can't stack the Prowl and Camouflage skills, or two different types of Demolitions skills, or Pilot Jet Aircraft and Pilot Fighter Jet, or First Aid and Paramedic.

Some of your examples I agree with, but others are more clearly stackable.
Camouflage and prowl, for example. Camouflage allows you to make what amounts to a ghillie suit. Why wouldn't your prowl skill benefit from a piece of clothing produced with the camouflage skill benefit your ability to remain unseen? The books already allow for this type of bonus; the Naruni Stealth suit being the prime example.

As well, with the training and practice of PA and robots; because of the nature of powered armour and it being so very humanoid to the point that it's effectively a second skin for some suits, being then put into a robot that is controlled by hand controls and the pilot's reactions which are clearly enhanced and not in anyway penalized by the suit.
Or rather - consider this; if you were in a suit of PA, and you were riding a motorcycle and had the combat-driving skill, you'd allow the combat-driving to still remain in effect without second thought because that skill is affecting your bike-manuevering ability. Within the same realm of bonuses though, you're not going to deny the enhanced reactions the rider has while driving that bike.
Why then would you deny the same pilot the bonuses gleaned from having a seperate skill while piloting a robot? Is it due to the similarity of the skills? I mean, the books bothered to go into enough detail to illustrate that if you have spent the time to get robot combat elite in a flying PA, that the bonuses (and thus the skill) is effectively different than having robot combat elite in a ground-based PA. Or how a generic bonus to strike applies to all weapons within a given realm (melee, thrown, guns), and then you also get proficiency bonuses on top of that. My point here is that while rifle and pistol are both WPs, it does require different WPs to use them, and yet you can still fire both at the same time using the same attack-action.
This should then be true if you can fit a suit of PA into a robot, and pilot that robot as well. My point is that there is the glaring issue of attack-stacking that would otherwise upset the games' current status-quo.

Ultimately, I don't see how you arrive at this conclusion if you're not trying to be contrary. It's an interesting hypothetical discussion, but it clearly violates the spirit of the game, and definitely doesn't strike me as role-playing. The same goes for a Gunfighter loading up on robot-piloting skills, but that's just me.

It isn't contrary though, and it is entirely within the spirit of the game.
Even without bonus-stacking, a person wearing a suit of PA with RC:E and then piloting a giant robot is still clearly better at it than another operator who only has RC:B, as highlighted by the additional attacks he's making. Or better shots because he has additional actions that he can use to glean the aiming bonus or make called-shots.
As for the gunfighter wearing PA in new-west; why wouldn't they? There is PA available, and the area is full of borgs, vampires, and even scarier things like Wired gunslingers. It's not unreasonable to want an edge beyond being a good shot; that's kinda why people wear PA to begin with.
As far as role-playing goes; there is no corrolation between the power of a character and the skill or ability of how that character is played. You wouldn't consider a player a bad RPer if he was playing a Dragon-Hatchling, and another was playing a vagabond would you? These are definative differences between power, but represent that difference with racial choice instead of skill choice.

Like I said before, it's impossible to write a RPG sourcebook in such a way as it eliminates every conflict or workaround possible. I can say for a fact that specifically forbidding a character to stack Power Armor and Robot Combat Elite skills has never once entered my mind.

I'm not asking for the impossible here. I only ask that glaring errors and obvious game-flaws be fixed. I mean really; it's been a couple of decades since the game came out, and people have been bringing up the same old issues for years - I'm only pointing this one out because I only recently realized it myself. Usually I'm content with a rather mundane human merc; something easy for me to get into the skin of. But the nature of the hobby isn't exclusively acting; it does eventually call for the roll of a die or two when conflicts arise.

That and generally if I want to continue to play the same character for more than a session, I have to come up with unique and ingenius ways of keeping said merc alive.

[Jason Richards]

Agree to disagree, or this is just going to end up being us quoting each other perpetually, and I can't spend the time. I think that maybe you have stated my point for me, in any case, in your simo-attack example. That's something else that clearly isn't within the spirit of what was intended for the flow of the game. Even if technically correct, continuing to simultaneously attack because you find it to be the best "value" in terms of your character's actions, without regard for the idea that you, as the character, are being punched/shot/blasted/etc. is poor role-playing in most circumstances. It's a calculated decision based on min-maxing game mechanics and not based on the character's feelings/thoughts/training/etc.

Bottom line is, for all the problems that Palladium's mechanics have, and as much as I'd love to seem many of them cleaned up, I've never heard anyone before suggest that this is a problem. Most here in this thread don't see it as a problem either, so I think maybe you're overstating just a bit.

All that said, do whatever you want. The point is to have fun, not to obsess over loopholes and exploits. Unless that's fun, in which case, go for it.

[Dog_O_War]

Agree to disagree, or this is just going to end up being us quoting each other perpetually, and I can't spend the time. I think that maybe you have stated my point for me, in any case, in your simo-attack example. That's something else that clearly isn't within the spirit of what was intended for the flow of the game. Even if technically correct, continuing to simultaneously attack because you find it to be the best "value" in terms of your character's actions, without regard for the idea that you, as the character, are being punched/shot/blasted/etc. is poor role-playing in most circumstances. It's a calculated decision based on min-maxing game mechanics and not based on the character's feelings/thoughts/training/etc.

Agree to what exactly? What are you disagreeing on?

The point I made was that this, amoungst others is one of many issues bog the game down. Are you saying that you don't think these types of things slow or disrupt play?


As for your comments on simultaineous attacks; that's neither poor RP nor a calculated decision (in most cases). When you're being punched in melee, people tend to just parry; I choose this option unless I feel the attack might flat-out kill me; then I may go for a dodge (if the bonus is higher - as calculated as that is) even if I'm in no better a position when said opponent strikes me next. As for the rest of combat (shot/blasted/etc...) what other options are there? Bullets and lasers generally can't be parried, and for most people dodging them is a pipe-dream. That literally leaves the following two options; do nothing, or simultaineous attack. To me it is poor role-playing to bother to dodge such an attack because people don't fool themselves into believeing that it is otherwise possible. That's playing beyond the scope of verisimilitude; it is exploiting and calulating to think that you could dodge a bullet for anyone but the superhuman. And given that as per the rules - you can [dodge these attacks] I really don't see how choosing the only rational option given is an example of poor RP.

To summarize, you think that what I point out is both exploitive and not within the spirit of the game to otherwise "abuse" it in a world where the general array of NPC enemies does it (weapons-stacking), use simultaineous attacks (despite it being the only attractive and rational option in a gun-fight for 90% of the races and OCCs out there), to disallow one rule because it's bonus-stacking, even though you're allowing others because they otherwise aren't as disruptive (wearing a suit of PA to better pilot a robot, even though you're otherwise encouraged to ride/pilot other modes of transport while wearing PA).

Meanwhile, I'm pointing these things out - not for people to abuse, but rather for the company to fix them because they exist and are (as I've pointed out) within the spirit of the game, but are disruptive and can be abused.

Basically, I call shinnanigans on you - you're saying that nothing should be done except for players to not do what the game already does itself and encourages, even though these are clearly disruptive and easily abused elements of play. It makes zero sense to not fix the problem. I mean think about it; you guys are printing books all the time - how hard is it to include a single page right after table of contents that says "Rules-changes to the game" and then state that simultaineous attack is no longer a defensive option, wearing a suit of PA and then piloting a robot only grants you the most superior bonus for the situation, etc... (though the weapons-stacking problem is still one I'm working on myself).

As much as I rant and rave, bicker and argue, and seem absurd in my "adherance" to the RAW, I don't do it because I hate the game.

I do it because I want to see it get better.

[Dog_O_War]

I have to say, I find this entire thread pretty ridiculous. This is supposed to be a role-playing game, not a word-problem in math class.

You should probably learn the history of role-playing then before blurting out your invariably misinformed opinion.

If a person is has RC:E for Flying Power Armor, and RC:E for Heavy Ground Robots, then the person gets into a suit of power armor and climbs inside a robot and gets in a fight, then he is NOT fighting in power armor. Therefore, he doesn't get the bonuses that come with the power armor.

Really? You don't say. I hear-tell that a person performing gymnastics needn't be actually physically capable in any way (8's in physical attributes), because the real secret to being a good gymnast is to be born smart (high IQ).
And also, did you know that learning to box allows you to pull the trigger on a gun faster? Incredible, huh!
And another thing - wearing a suit that literally makes you look like your surroundings doesn't actually hide you any better than a person wearing a neon-pink t-shirt in an empty, well-lit warehouse recently painted completely white!

For example, RC:E for Flying Power Armor (from RUE) says that the pilot gets "+2 to strike in hand to hand combat." But the power armor isn't in hand-to-hand combat, is it? It's just sitting inside the Robot, flipping switches. Also, "+2 to strike with energy and long-range weapons." But the power armor isn't holding any energy weapons or long range weapons. The ROBOT is holding a long-range weapon, but the power armor is just pushing a button.

Okay, enough of this charade.
The skills state that all bonuses are in addition to the pilots' bonuses; normally taking stuff like athletics, gymnastics, and acrobatics shouldn't enhance your robot-piloting skills either - but they do. So why then would you descriminate between those and a suit that enhances your own physical abilities?

The RC:E skill description in RUE says (in part): "Each robot or power armor type has different weapon systems, hand to hand aptitude, and quirks that make each specific type unique. Because each handles differently, the "elite" pilot studies individual types of robot war machines to familiarize himself with every element of that specific type of robot."

That's why a pilot with RC:E in two different systems should (and does) obviously stack. You've taken the time to learn both the PAs and the robots' quirks, flaws, and reactions (taking the skill twice to represent this), why disallow the use of one piloting skill, when you're allowed to use it in-conjuntion with others?

What this means is that fighting in a SAMAS is very different from fighting in a Spider-Skull Walker. And wearing a SAMAS while fighting in a Spider-Skull Walker doesn't give you any kind of benefit, because you can't fight "Spider-Skull Walker" style with your SAMAS. You're not fighting SAMAS-style. Your SAMAS isn't fighting. Your SAMAS isn't flying around, or firing it's weapon, or targeting enemies. The Spider-Skull Walker is doing all of that.

This is the most reasonable "against" answer I've heard, though the situation is new.
It still does not change the fact that it clearly and generically enhances your own reactions (extra attacks), which was my only concern. Remember, using a WP, regardless of what you're in isn't playing to any particular "style" of combat, and yet - they all enhance it.

Just because the rules don't say "Oh, by the way, these bonuses don't stack" doesn't mean you should just assume that they do. That makes no sense whatsoever. You're jumping to a conclusion without any logical reasoning. Being in a SAMAS makes you stronger and faster, and it gives you the ability to breathe under water and to fly. Being in a SAMAS doesn't make you a better Giant Robot pilot.

The issue is larger than just this example.
My sarcasm earlier highlights a few of the prime ones.

[Lenwen]

I have to say, I find this entire thread pretty ridiculous. This is supposed to be a role-playing game, not a word-problem in math class.

You should probably learn the history of role-playing then before blurting out your invariably misinformed opinion.

If a person is has RC:E for Flying Power Armor, and RC:E for Heavy Ground Robots, then the person gets into a suit of power armor and climbs inside a robot and gets in a fight, then he is NOT fighting in power armor. Therefore, he doesn't get the bonuses that come with the power armor.

Really? You don't say. I hear-tell that a person performing gymnastics needn't be actually physically capable in any way (8's in physical attributes), because the real secret to being a good gymnast is to be born smart (high IQ).
And also, did you know that learning to box allows you to pull the trigger on a gun faster? Incredible, huh!
And another thing - wearing a suit that literally makes you look like your surroundings doesn't actually hide you any better than a person wearing a neon-pink t-shirt in an empty, well-lit warehouse recently painted completely white!

For example, RC:E for Flying Power Armor (from RUE) says that the pilot gets "+2 to strike in hand to hand combat." But the power armor isn't in hand-to-hand combat, is it? It's just sitting inside the Robot, flipping switches. Also, "+2 to strike with energy and long-range weapons." But the power armor isn't holding any energy weapons or long range weapons. The ROBOT is holding a long-range weapon, but the power armor is just pushing a button.

Okay, enough of this charade.
The skills state that all bonuses are in addition to the pilots' bonuses; normally taking stuff like athletics, gymnastics, and acrobatics shouldn't enhance your robot-piloting skills either - but they do. So why then would you descriminate between those and a suit that enhances your own physical abilities?

The RC:E skill description in RUE says (in part): "Each robot or power armor type has different weapon systems, hand to hand aptitude, and quirks that make each specific type unique. Because each handles differently, the "elite" pilot studies individual types of robot war machines to familiarize himself with every element of that specific type of robot."

That's why a pilot with RC:E in two different systems should (and does) obviously stack. You've taken the time to learn both the PAs and the robots' quirks, flaws, and reactions (taking the skill twice to represent this), why disallow the use of one piloting skill, when you're allowed to use it in-conjuntion with others?

What this means is that fighting in a SAMAS is very different from fighting in a Spider-Skull Walker. And wearing a SAMAS while fighting in a Spider-Skull Walker doesn't give you any kind of benefit, because you can't fight "Spider-Skull Walker" style with your SAMAS. You're not fighting SAMAS-style. Your SAMAS isn't fighting. Your SAMAS isn't flying around, or firing it's weapon, or targeting enemies. The Spider-Skull Walker is doing all of that.

This is the most reasonable "against" answer I've heard, though the situation is new.
It still does not change the fact that it clearly and generically enhances your own reactions (extra attacks), which was my only concern. Remember, using a WP, regardless of what you're in isn't playing to any particular "style" of combat, and yet - they all enhance it.

Just because the rules don't say "Oh, by the way, these bonuses don't stack" doesn't mean you should just assume that they do. That makes no sense whatsoever. You're jumping to a conclusion without any logical reasoning. Being in a SAMAS makes you stronger and faster, and it gives you the ability to breathe under water and to fly. Being in a SAMAS doesn't make you a better Giant Robot pilot.

The issue is larger than just this example.
My sarcasm earlier highlights a few of the prime ones.

Dog of war .. why do you bring something up only to invariably instigate an arguement with the people you want to discuss things with by berrating them ?

Does not make sense if you are seeking other's opinions .. to slam them for the very thing you are asking them about in the first place ..

I've also noticed that the mods continually allow you to do this to other posters .. which makes me question the relationship between you and the mods .. very suspect if you ask me ..

[Dog_O_War]

Dog of war .. why do you bring something up only to invariably instigate an arguement with the people you want to discuss things with by berrating them ?

Because like your response, it lacks thought. And you'll note that I didn't attempt to instigate anything; I only stated my opinion, and high-lighted a newly discovered exploit for people to be aware of. As for "berating people", know this; I don't punish the stupid, the ignorant, nor the misguided. I only berate those that harrass, condiscend, and belittle others for no reason (or possibly a personal dislike), those that choose to remain willfully ignorant, and those that propose outlandishly stacked scenarios in an attempt to have people agree with them.

Does not make sense if you are seeking other's opinions .. to slam them for the very thing you are asking them about in the first place ..

You point out to whom I did this, and you'll find your answer as to why listed above.

I've also noticed that the mods continually allow you to do this to other posters .. which makes me question the relationship between you and the mods .. very suspect if you ask me ..

This is hardly thread-appropriate, nor is it a reasonable sentiment coming from you.

But to answer your query; I don't break the rules. Plain and simple. I don't spam threads with smilies and "LMAO"s, and I only ask that people be reasonable to each-other, and to me. If someone considers both sides of the coin I give them the benefit of the doubt, and if they provide proof of their statements and are otherwise proactive in threads instead of reactive, they tend not to draw my ire; something which asserts itself in the form of sarcasm. Something I've become rather good at, given that alot of people draw my ire.

[Lenwen]

Dog of war .. why do you bring something up only to invariably instigate an arguement with the people you want to discuss things with by berrating them ?

Because like your response, it lacks thought. And you'll note that I didn't attempt to instigate anything; I only stated my opinion, and high-lighted a newly discovered exploit for people to be aware of. As for "berating people", know this; I don't punish the stupid, the ignorant, nor the misguided. I only berate those that harrass, condiscend, and belittle others for no reason (or possibly a personal dislike), those that choose to remain willfully ignorant, and those that propose outlandishly stacked scenarios in an attempt to have people agree with them.

Does not make sense if you are seeking other's opinions .. to slam them for the very thing you are asking them about in the first place ..

You point out to whom I did this, and you'll find your answer as to why listed above.

I've also noticed that the mods continually allow you to do this to other posters .. which makes me question the relationship between you and the mods .. very suspect if you ask me ..

This is hardly thread-appropriate, nor is it a reasonable sentiment coming from you.

But to answer your query; I don't break the rules. Plain and simple. I don't spam threads with smilies and "LMAO"s, and I only ask that people be reasonable to each-other, and to me. If someone considers both sides of the coin I give them the benefit of the doubt, and if they provide proof of their statements and are otherwise proactive in threads instead of reactive, they tend not to draw my ire; something which asserts itself in the form of sarcasm. Something I've become rather good at, given that alot of people draw my ire.

More power to you if you truly believe all that stuff ..

[Lenwen]

Dog of war .. why do you bring something up only to invariably instigate an arguement with the people you want to discuss things with by berrating them ?

I appreciate it, but I can stick up for myself.

understood, I just find it funny he creates a thread .. then instead of actually discussing the topic .. he berrates people for having the the very opinions he was curious about .


Its insanity I tells you ..

[Dog_O_War]

You should probably learn the history of role-playing then before blurting out your invariably misinformed opinion.

Ignorance is bliss, my friend.

Then why are you disrupting "my bliss" with your "facts"?

I'm sorry, I must have made a typo in there somewhere that made it look like I was saying "I completely agree with the logic behind every statistical rule in every book ever published by PB." I apologize. I didn't mean to say that at all.

Because the SAMAS doesn't actually enhance your own physical abilities. My arm doesn't get stronger when I'm in a SAMAS. My arm just moves the much stronger arm of the Power Armor. So, regardless of whether it's my regular old arm pulling a lever, or a much stronger SAMAS arm pulling a lever, I'm still just pulling a lever. My SAMAS isn't fighting, so my Robot Combat: Elite skill for SAMAS shouldn't apply.

Because, once again, you aren't piloting the SAMAS in combat. You're not using your SAMAS to fight. You're just using your SAMAS to pilot. The skill is "Robot Combat." Not "Piloting a Giant Robot while in Power Armor." Being in a SAMAS doesn't make me a better poker player. It doesn't make me a better mechanic. It doesn't make me a better singer. Neither does it make me a better pilot.

Once again (again), being in a SAMAS enhances my reactions IN COMBAT. It doesn't make me better at playing Goldeneye on a pre-Rifts N64 (which, like most video games, requires reaction time). Again, since the SAMAS is not doing combat against an enemy, but is instead doing piloting on a Giant Robot, the bonuses from the SAMAS Robot Combat skill should not apply.

The reason I've just lumped these all together, is because they all reinforce the same statement. Which, if you had done what your namesake implies, you would have realized the following.

Q:How many times can you activate the weapon-systems on your suit of PA?
A:Once per attack.
Q:Does PA give you extra attacks?
A:Yes.
Q:How many times can you activate the weapon systems in a tank?
A:Once per attack.
Q:What makes the PA's weapon systems different than the tanks?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is in a suit of PA.
Q:What makes the weapon systems inside a robot different than the ones inside a tank?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is inside a robot.
Q:Why then state that PA wouldn't enhance your ability to pilot a robot, when it otherwise does so for a tank?
A:No good reason.

The issue is larger than just this example.
My sarcasm earlier highlights a few of the prime ones.

Right then. I accept your challenge, despite the fact that, as I said above, I make no claim whatsoever that I actually believe every rule that exists is right.

-Having a higher IQ gives you a bonus on all skills because people who are smart learn things better. All things. This includes physical skills. Someone who can take instruction, or who can comprehend a teacher's explanation more clearly, understand it, internalize it, and THEN attempt to do it is going to do better than someone who can't quite figure out what the gymnastics instructor is trying to tell them about their form.

Having the Boxing skill makes one a trained fighter. Granted, most PCs are trained fighters, but the ones who have taken boxing have had even more training. Being a good boxer is ALL about reaction time (along with physical fitness). The very instant an opponent drops their hand, you have to be ready to strike. Also, you have to be able to do all your damage quickly. You've seen boxers hit the round bag that hangs down from a roof or flat surface, that bounces back lightning quick. Boxers work on that kind of dexterity and manual speed in order to land as many blows as possible in quick succession. It makes sense to me that someone who has the boxing skill would (in ANY combat situation, including one with guns) be more likely to act and react more quickly than those around him who do not have Boxing. They would be more aggressive, quicker to strike, and would be all-around better fighters.

This wasn't a challenge.
And beyond this, you're basically stating that a person with a 30 IQ and an 8 PS, PP, and PE is a better gymnast than someone with a 9-15 IQ, but 30+ in PS, PP, and PE; do you agree with this sentiment?

And this one...

And another thing - wearing a suit that literally makes you look like your surroundings doesn't actually hide you any better than a person wearing a neon-pink t-shirt in an empty, well-lit warehouse recently painted completely white!

Is just plain not true.

Well, the rules on page 308, 314, and 367-368 say otherwise, and so apparently does Jason Richards, a Palladium Books Freelance Writer.

The rules of the game allow for the GM to impose bonuses or penalties in certain unique situations. Also, I personally as a GM would rule that it is not possible for a person to "prowl" in that situation. There is nowhere to hide, and nothing to hide behind. It would be like someone trying to use their first-aid skill on someone who isn't hurt. Just because you have the skill doesn't mean you can always use it. I can't use my "Play Musical Instrument: Guitar" skill when I don't have a guitar to play, can I? Then why would I be allowed to hide when there's nowhere to hide? Makes no sense whatsoever.

This is where I FIREBALL! your sentiment. The game is full of numerous fantasy-elements; that and I did say that he was wearing a suit that allowed him to literally blend in with his surroundings. Like how this, this, and this picture illustrates.

[Dog_O_War]

understood, I just find it funny he creates a thread .. then instead of actually discussing the topic .. he berrates people for having the the very opinions he was curious about .


Its insanity I tells you ..

This is the inherent problem; very few of you can distinguish between my opinion, and the facts I've presented. So I end up arguing facts while my opinion is ignored.

It's all good. I'm pretty sure that what he really wanted to do was share his own opinion, not have people disagree with him.

This (as I've said to Lenwen) is the bloody problem.
You guys are arguing whether or not my facts are correct, thinking it's an opinion. It's not. The rules straight-up allow it; this has been established during the first few posts - people would simply just house-rule it away from happening.

So far, the only opinion I've laid out is that the rules are poorly written. I hope now you can see why I get frustrated

[johnkretzer]

I am not going to quote everything but this why I don't believe a bonus that you get for skill in a PA should apply to when you are piloting a robot vehicle while inside a PA...

1) Your bonus from a PA is due to sensors, weapon targeting systems, the training allow you to operate these systems well hence giving you the bonus...

So why does having a cross hair on a screen showing the target with cross hairs help you aim better? What would you arguement be?

2) The reason you get extra attacks in a PA is because of how the controls are set up...(some come example find in sci-fi with PAs...blow in a tube to fire the missile....move your hand in such a away to fire a gun...give a voice command etc.)

So how does being able to fire a weapon quickly because of how the controls are set up allows you to fire another weapon system unrelated to those weapon systems?

3) The initiative bonus that PA gives is due to your training with the system sensors.

So how does have a really good sensor read out of a pilots compartent give you the ability to react to things outside faster?

Now I do agree with you the rules should be rewritten to a certain extent I just this particular example is a bad one...(like the whole IQ bonus to every skill thing...)

Then again If GMs want to have this stack because it fits their style of gaming...then hey more power to them.

I will also add to Lenwen and Thoughtful1...Thoughtful1's first post was antagonistic worded with leading off with your post by saying "I have to say, I find this entire thread pretty ridiculous." Give Dog some slack...

[9voltkilowatt]

Why doesn't it work?

Because it's like claiming that you can pilot the cargo plane that's carrying a tank by using the tanks controls. No matter how badass that tanks control systems (and your ability to drive it) are they are not going to give you any extra edge while flying the plane.

[Dog_O_War]

Please, someone help me out here.


All bonuses from skills are due to the skill, and have very little to do with the PA/robot your piloting.

Why you people are arguing against this is beyond me. I mean really; look at the description of Pilot: Robots and Power Armor. It states the following;

"...characters with this skill are taught the fundamentals of manuevering light and medium robots and power armor suits... ...The training focuses on piloting, not combat, thus, robot combat is a seperate and distinct skill... ...Penalties: *stuff not relevant to the point*... penalties do not apply if the wearer has the weapon systems skill."

So if your training in a suit of PA gives you extra actions - the thing I've been focusing on; not bonuses from systems like a targeting enhancer - then you clearly have the ability to use your weapon systems skill a whole bunch of times. To finish off this example, I'll requote myself to show you where and why this matters;

Q:How many times can you activate the weapon-systems on your suit of PA?
A:Once per attack.
Q:Does PA give you extra attacks?
A:Yes.
Q:How many times can you activate the weapon systems in a tank?
A:Once per attack.
Q:What makes the PA's weapon systems different than the tanks?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is in a suit of PA.
Q:What makes the weapon systems inside a robot different than the ones inside a tank?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is inside a robot.
Q:Why then state that PA wouldn't enhance your ability to pilot a robot, when it otherwise does so for a tank?
A:No good reason.

[Dr. Doom III]

Q:How many times can you activate the weapon-systems on your suit of PA?
A:Once per attack.
Q:Does PA give you extra attacks?
A:Yes.
Q:How many times can you activate the weapon systems in a tank?
A:Once per attack.
Q:What makes the PA's weapon systems different than the tanks?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is in a suit of PA.
Q:What makes the weapon systems inside a robot different than the ones inside a tank?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is inside a robot.
Q:Why then state that PA wouldn't enhance your ability to pilot a robot, when it otherwise does so for a tank?

A. Who said it does?

[johnkretzer]

:frust:

Please, someone help me out here.


All bonuses from skills are due to the skill, and have very little to do with the PA/robot your piloting.

Why you people are arguing against this is beyond me. I mean really; look at the description of Pilot: Robots and Power Armor. It states the following;

"...characters with this skill are taught the fundamentals of manuevering light and medium robots and power armor suits... ...The training focuses on piloting, not combat, thus, robot combat is a seperate and distinct skill... ...Penalties: *stuff not relevant to the point*... penalties do not apply if the wearer has the weapon systems skill."

So if your training in a suit of PA gives you extra actions - the thing I've been focusing on; not bonuses from systems like a targeting enhancer - then you clearly have the ability to use your weapon systems skill a whole bunch of times. To finish off this example, I'll requote myself to show you where and why this matters;

Q:How many times can you activate the weapon-systems on your suit of PA?
A:Once per attack.
Q:Does PA give you extra attacks?
A:Yes.
Q:How many times can you activate the weapon systems in a tank?
A:Once per attack.
Q:What makes the PA's weapon systems different than the tanks?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is in a suit of PA.
Q:What makes the weapon systems inside a robot different than the ones inside a tank?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is inside a robot.
Q:Why then state that PA wouldn't enhance your ability to pilot a robot, when it otherwise does so for a tank?
A:No good reason.

You are SKILLED in operating the weapons systems....using two different weapon systems that are NOT linked does mean that your skill with one won't help you with another weapon system. Piloting is not a physical skill it is knowing how to control your particular vehicle.

The fact you are in your PA is meaningless. Because you are not using that particular weapon system while in the robot vehicle or tank or etc. You only get thos bonus for that particular PA....it does say that clearly.

[Dog_O_War]

Q:How many times can you activate the weapon-systems on your suit of PA?
A:Once per attack.
Q:Does PA give you extra attacks?
A:Yes.
Q:How many times can you activate the weapon systems in a tank?
A:Once per attack.
Q:What makes the PA's weapon systems different than the tanks?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is in a suit of PA.
Q:What makes the weapon systems inside a robot different than the ones inside a tank?
A:One is located inside a tank, the other is inside a robot.
Q:Why then state that PA wouldn't enhance your ability to pilot a robot, when it otherwise does so for a tank?

A. Who said it does?

Q:Does your answer hold up if you were to replace tank with jetpack?
N:Keep in-mind that being able to pilot a PA does not include the ability to pilot a jetpack, yet they're strapping these on to suits (like the Flying Titan). So while flying via the jetpack, and you have to dodge a bunch of attacks in a round, are the extra attacks provided from RC:E not otherwise giving you the ability to make more dodge-attempts than you otherwise would be able to when flying in a jetpack without a suit of PA?

[Dog_O_War]

You are SKILLED in operating the weapons systems....using two different weapon systems that are NOT linked does mean that your skill with one won't help you with another weapon system. Piloting is not a physical skill it is knowing how to control your particular vehicle.

The fact you are in your PA is meaningless. Because you are not using that particular weapon system while in the robot vehicle or tank or etc. You only get thos bonus for that particular PA....it does say that clearly.

Replace "tank" with "jetpack" and "weapon-systems" with "dodge-attempts".

[johnkretzer]

You are SKILLED in operating the weapons systems....using two different weapon systems that are NOT linked does mean that your skill with one won't help you with another weapon system. Piloting is not a physical skill it is knowing how to control your particular vehicle.

The fact you are in your PA is meaningless. Because you are not using that particular weapon system while in the robot vehicle or tank or etc. You only get thos bonus for that particular PA....it does say that clearly.

Replace "tank" with "jetpack" and "weapon-systems" with "dodge-attempts".

That is even easier....Jet Pack and Titan Flying PA( or any flying PA uses very different flight controls. Why would one apply to the other?

[Dog_O_War]

You are SKILLED in operating the weapons systems....using two different weapon systems that are NOT linked does mean that your skill with one won't help you with another weapon system. Piloting is not a physical skill it is knowing how to control your particular vehicle.

The fact you are in your PA is meaningless. Because you are not using that particular weapon system while in the robot vehicle or tank or etc. You only get thos bonus for that particular PA....it does say that clearly.

Replace "tank" with "jetpack" and "weapon-systems" with "dodge-attempts".

That is even easier....Jet Pack and Titan Flying PA( or any flying PA uses very different flight controls. Why would one apply to the other?

*facepalm*

[grandmaster z0b]

More like: What makes you think that's a rules problem? It's a perfectly legitmate tactic, why do you think it needs to be "fixed"?

The problem is that it's something that doesn't make any sense and would only be done in an attempt to stack player bonuses.

Again, Where's the problem?

Bolded for your convenience.

I personally don't like power gaming and stacking bonuses just for the sake of it, but I have no problem if that's what you prefer. However there's something wrong when things that make no sense are implemented purely for stacking purposes. Follow this line of logic and you end up with players doing stupid things like putting more than one laser scope on a gun to stack the bonuses. Of course you could not use more than one scope at a time.

[Gamer]

The references to weapon systems is pointless, they have nothing to do with number of actions per melee.
Instead of Flying titan lets use the T-21 Terain Hopper, it has no weapons.
The pilot could have R:CE T-21 and R:CE Combat Titan and could theoretically have the total number of actions stacked.

Power armor training gives you added number of actions you don't need to ever use weapons you could sit there swinging an axe all day but you still have all your number of actions, you could sit there doing nothing more than squeezing your trigger finger, yet you somehow get to do it more times (remember the T-21 has no weapons at all)
That only helps translate into that pilot having more actions coming to him when he pilots the robot vehicle while still wearing his T-21.
Sensors and weapons still mean nothing, this is only about the number of actions and always has been.

Is it feasible? yes, the moment the writers made a suit of power armor small enough to sit at the controls of a robot vehicle (or any other) that issue was up for grabs, small suits like the ATPA-85 Power spy will always be a big culprit for this.
It is no different than seeing somebody in power armor at the controls of a weapon system on a space ship in Phase world or the Robotech setting and I'm betting that happens all the time.

I don't really agree with allowing it to happen but I can clearly see DOWs point of view on it.
Common sense should be hitting people on the nose with a rolled up news paper saying "NO" but have noticed the sheer lack of common sense at most game boards so will not expect it anymore and understand why alot of game books are dummied up in their writing now, for the same reason warning labels like "warning do not operate hair drier in running shower" exist, the writers can no longer presume the readers are endowed with a healthy dose of common sense.

[Zer0 Kay]

More like: What makes you think that's a rules problem? It's a perfectly legitmate tactic, why do you think it needs to be "fixed"?

So says the munchkin queen so say we all

[johnkretzer]

You are SKILLED in operating the weapons systems....using two different weapon systems that are NOT linked does mean that your skill with one won't help you with another weapon system. Piloting is not a physical skill it is knowing how to control your particular vehicle.

The fact you are in your PA is meaningless. Because you are not using that particular weapon system while in the robot vehicle or tank or etc. You only get thos bonus for that particular PA....it does say that clearly.

Replace "tank" with "jetpack" and "weapon-systems" with "dodge-attempts".

That is even easier....Jet Pack and Titan Flying PA( or any flying PA uses very different flight controls. Why would one apply to the other?

*facepalm*

With a Jetpack on a armor you are using it though the interface of the power armor. That is why you are getting the bonus. Take away the PA you are flying directly using the jet pack. Again it states you DO NOT GAIN THESE BONUS OUTSIDE of the armor....why because the bonus are due to extensive training inside the armor.

It is like saying that just by using a flight stimulator I can go jump into a jet fighter and engage in a dogfight with experience opponents and win.

[Khanibal]

I understand what you're saying DoW, and I agree. I personally would like to see PB give a simple set of examples of PS. I.e. joe has a 37 supernatural PS, and he does x with a punch, y if he uses a vibrosword, and xy if he uses a TW Kisentite blade that allows him to add his punch damage to the weapon damage.

If you do 1D6*10MD on a punch, and you're wielding a Rune Sword (does not specifically allow adding of SN PS damage in it's description) that does 6D6MD, why pull the sword?

The rules could use some polishing, but to plug all the holes would probably produce a book 5" thick. Don't forget, GMs need training also. The first time joe talks the GM into allowing him to pilot his stolen Abolisher 'bot while inside his stolen Mauler suit, will probably be the last. Not to mention that with his machine enhanced strength, he's likely to trash the Abolisher's controls.

[johnkretzer]

I understand what you're saying DoW, and I agree. I personally would like to see PB give a simple set of examples of PS. I.e. joe has a 37 supernatural PS, and he does x with a punch, y if he uses a vibrosword, and xy if he uses a TW Kisentite blade that allows him to add his punch damage to the weapon damage.

If you do 1D6*10MD on a punch, and you're wielding a Rune Sword (does not specifically allow adding of SN PS damage in it's description) that does 6D6MD, why pull the sword?

The rules could use some polishing, but to plug all the holes would probably produce a book 5" thick. Don't forget, GMs need training also. The first time joe talks the GM into allowing him to pilot his stolen Abolisher 'bot while inside his stolen Mauler suit, will probably be the last. Not to mention that with his machine enhanced strength, he's likely to trash the Abolisher's controls.

Because you'll do 1D6 * 10 with the sword and can parry attacks with no penalty...
Pluys take fencing so you'll do 1D^*10 + 1D6

[Lenwen]

Why are you guys feeding this thread ?

[Khanibal]

Why are you guys feeding this thread ?