Rifts (or Palladium in general) Illogical?

[Thinyser]

From another thread:

basically: Rifts is all over the place logic-wise, so what you do is "test drive" something and if it doesn't stink up the place too much you run with it.

I'm not here to pick on Gadrin, only to point out what he said, which is repeated often.....

How is Rifts (or most other Palladium games) 'illogical' (or however one would state it)? I have played Palladium games since '87 and never once hit something that made me completely feel that 'it wasn't logical'. There may have been many initial reactions, but after re-reading and such, many things pan out and work.

I know many seem to feel lost when Rule X isn't explained somewhere, but it never stops the GM (or Players) from using something in the books close enough to handle the situation.

Please, I'd love to hear what causes people to think of Rifts as 'illogical'. If anyone wants to, PM me or start a thread somewhere and point me to it. I'd love to continue this.

I for one think that it has quite a bit of poor logic or inconsitancies or examples of things that simply don't make any practical sense.

One such example that irks me is that SN PS doesn't combine weapon and punch damage, and that the "bonus" that is added to both punches and weapon damage is SDC when the Punch damage itself is often MD.

Other examples of what you think is illogical or inconsitant, or why you disagree and think that its all logical, are welcome so please share.

[Qev]

Personally, I find that the Palladium games are varied, creative, flexible, and fun. A great deal of my most enjoyable roleplaying went on in games they've produced.

However, the mechanics of the game system are so hideously inconsistent and error-riddled, that Palladium seriously needs to sit down, scrap everything, and rebuild it from the ground up with a solid design document that the writers adhere to.

[Guest]

I should make a note here that just because something isn't logical, doesn't mean it isn't plausible. Take magic for instance, on the face of it, IRL, magic isn't very "logical", but is it plausible in a fictional setting? Certainly. But let's take a look at two spells which are plausible, but not logical.

Invisibility: Simple; As we all know aggressive action doesn't terminate either inivisibility spell according to this spell's description.
Invisibility: Superior; On the other hand, this states that the spell is broken if aggressive action is taken.

This isn't logical, even though the idea of invisibility in a fictional setting is plausible.

So folks, don't confuse the two.

[DhAkael]

without reading any other posts... YES!
Next silly question
But I still play the game anyways.

[cyber-yukongil v2.5]

I think Kuseru, gadrin and DhAkael pretty much sumed it up covering every base in this discussion

[Mech-Viper Prime]

i would say a big fat yes

from OCC to handweapons vs vechile weapons doing the same damage and many many more.

but then again I still love Rifts and as the saying goes "what does logic has to do with rifts"

[Killer Cyborg]

I for one think that it has quite a bit of poor logic or inconsitancies or examples of things that simply don't make any practical sense.

Agreed.

One such example that irks me is that SN PS doesn't combine weapon and punch damage, and that the "bonus" that is added to both punches and weapon damage is SDC when the Punch damage itself is often MD.

Other examples of what you think is illogical or inconsitant, or why you disagree and think that its all logical, are welcome so please share.

Supernatural Strength shouldn't do mega-damage AT ALL.
There's no reason for it; the amount of damage that they dish out is completely disproportional to the amount of actual strength they have (not their score; there is a correlation there. I'm talking about how much they can lift and carry.)

Generally people come out of the woodwork to say, "But it's supernatural!!!"
Which:
a) Is just another way of saying, "You're right; it makes no sense in relation to the laws of physics as we know them."
b) Is negated by the fact that so many non-supernatural creatures have supernatural strength. And, of course, the fact that Robotic PS also deals MD.

[The Galactus Kid]

There a Zombies here. Why does logic have to be brought into a game where super high tech countries fight hordes of gargoyle subdemons? A faction of human supremicists based in central illinois (illinois Nazis...I HATE illinois nazis) are engaged in an all out war in Minnesota? mexico is controlled by Vampire intellegences? I can understand haveing make sense within its own context, but seriously, it doesn't all have to make sense. It's a game...and there are zombies here.

[Greeter]

Suspension of disbelief is necessary for some of us. If the rules and setting are too illogical or inconsistent then it becomes a problem.

The rules and setting should help us to get into the game, not prevent us from doing so.

[Thinyser]

While I agree that its a game (as evidenced by the zombies) and that it can have fantasy stuff (like zombies) abound that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be internally consistant and have enough plausibility to suspend our disbelief. If its inconsistant or if there is too much unbelieveibility then there are constant reminders that you are playing a game (and a broken one at that) and thats not a good thing IMO.

[Thinyser]

Suspension of disbelief is necessary for some of us. If the rules and setting are too illogical or inconsistent then it becomes a problem.

The rules and setting should help us to get into the game, not prevent us from doing so.

yeah what he said

[Josh Sinsapaugh]

No more illogical than life in America or most of the people I know...

Which really ain't saying much, come to think of it...




~ Josh

[Nekira Sudacne]

There are many things about Palladium in general that often seem illogical to me. Just a few things that have bothered me:

Like normal armor in PF either letting all damage through, or stopping everything up to it's capacity. Had a game once where a paired battle axe strike hit the studded leather armor of a character and did exactly the amount of SDC it had (brand new). I just chuckle and shake my head at the visual of the full suit of armor basically evaporating but the player feeling nothing from the impact. Time to resort to flavor text and house rules since I believe armor usually lesses damage to the wearer and doesn't negate it. Armor in N&S also didn't help.

The updated power punch in Rifts for things like Juicers makes me wonder. Is it true they can do 2D4 MD now? So how do they suddenly go from being strong punchers (probably 20-30 SDC) to throwing 200-800 SDC hits if they put some extra effort in it? Not to mention they should break their hands if they hit that hard. If anything, they should have an equivalent of minor robotic strength, along with the Titan Juicer instead of the fallacy of giving one supernatual strength.

They have a brand new chart that works along the lines of Robotic and Supernatural PS, only generally lesser values. after a PS of 24, juicers can do a minimum of 1 MD on a power punch, and going up from there. after a PS of 40, they can do 1d4 MD on a NORMAL punch, more MD on a power punch.

[dark brandon]

Suspension of disbelief is necessary for some of us. If the rules and setting are too illogical or inconsistent then it becomes a problem.

The rules and setting should help us to get into the game, not prevent us from doing so.

Simply put...this isn't the fault of the game, but the player.

To each his own. Some can play a game where there is little need for "complete logic". Others have to find a game that tries to match Real world vs. Game world as close as possible.

Does rifts have a logic? Yes. Cool and fun > Reality or realistic.

SN strenght damage may not be logical on any stance, but then it's freaking awesome to think of a dragon ripping a tank apart with it's claws.

As I say, Palladium games are a 13 year old comic book geeks dream come true. Problem is that we are no longer 13 year olds, having grown up, and now want substance. It's slow but it's getting there. Many of the freelance writers, realize this and work to create world books/source books that arn't about blowing stuff up. they now put depth into a book rather than fire power.

As for rules: The rules, generally are OK, about as well put together as any other RPG book. RUE consolidated many of those rules so that we have one official source. Some may not make sense to us, but that doesn't mean they don't have a logic to them, such as the SN strenght + MDC weapon thing.

[Killer Cyborg]

There a Zombies here. Why does logic have to be brought into a game where super high tech countries fight hordes of gargoyle subdemons? A faction of human supremicists based in central illinois (illinois Nazis...I HATE illinois nazis) are engaged in an all out war in Minnesota? mexico is controlled by Vampire intellegences? I can understand haveing make sense within its own context, but seriously, it doesn't all have to make sense. It's a game...and there are zombies here.

You're not actually saying anything here.
If a game makes sense within its own context, then it is logical.
If it doesn't, then it's not.

Since you brought up zombies:
Romero's Night of The Living Dead is a logical movie. The dead start walking around eating people, and everything follows logically from there.

The Friday The 13th movies are NOT logical. A dead child comes back to life, fine. But from there he's effectively bulletproof (but not machete proof), he somehow picked up skills where he can throw a screwdriver 30+' on a dark night with enough force and accuracy to kill somebody. He walk slowly, but nobody can ever outrun him for long because he appears in front of them... the list goes on and on.

Romero's film is logical. It is also a great movie.
The Friday The 13th movies are NOT logical. They are NOT good movies.
This is not coincidence.

[Killer Cyborg]

Suspension of disbelief is necessary for some of us. If the rules and setting are too illogical or inconsistent then it becomes a problem.

The rules and setting should help us to get into the game, not prevent us from doing so.

Simply put...this isn't the fault of the game, but the player.

If you were to try out a game where shotguns inflict 1 point of damage to normal human beings, but knives inflict 1d4x1000, would you like that game?
Probably not, because it's too unrealistic to make any sense.

SN strenght damage may not be logical on any stance, but then it's freaking awesome to think of a dragon ripping a tank apart with it's claws.

I agree that a dragon ripping a tank apart with its claws is pretty cool... unless that same dragon isn't strong enough to accomplish that task.
It's like having some guy who can only lift 20 lbs punch through a brick wall simply because "it's cool", with no further thought or reason.

Now if they gave dragons the actual physical strength to back up that ability to shred a tank, THAT would be cool.
And it would even make sense.

[Cinos]

I do agree that there are many problems with the game, Supernatural Strength being a rather large issue (seems to be the thing everyones griping about too). I think that supernatural stength should be kept only for things that truely deserve it (which they have been making steps to do), such as dragons and demons and other supernatural beings, and never givin to anything else without extrame justication. Otherwise, use the robtic and augmented P.S. I also don't think it should be possable for a non-MD person to deal MD damage without a rather massive feed back (something to the tune of 10-25% of damage dealt off the top of my head). Supernaturals dealing more with punches then weapons is another issue I feel should be dealt with, simply because there is no reason not to, some thing that can punch though a brick wall can do much more with that power behind a weapon, adding all sorts of mechanical advantage.
I think one of the problems is lack of forsight, and lack of double checking, with a bit of unwillingness to redo things. I doubt that how many ever years ago (what is it, like 20 or 30 at least?) Kevin could of foresaw just how large Rifts is, and how many different applications a rule set needs to accomodate, and also make a call on what dosn't need to be put in due to space or the feeling that it will just overcomplicate things. I would like to see Palladium sit down and hash these out, but I can also understand why they don't (you want to rebuy most of your books?).

Cinos

[dark brandon]

If you were to try out a game where shotguns inflict 1 point of damage to normal human beings, but knives inflict 1d4x1000, would you like that game?
Probably not, because it's too unrealistic to make any sense.

It would simply depend on the reasoning between them. A shotgun could be said to do only 1 point of damage, but it's what makes it deadly is the shock rules that are incorperated into range weapons.

The problem many people are having is the reasoning in RIFTS. It has a flow and it's logic. But it's nothing deep nor profound.

I agree that a dragon ripping a tank apart with its claws is pretty cool... unless that same dragon isn't strong enough to accomplish that task.
It's like having some guy who can only lift 20 lbs punch through a brick wall simply because "it's cool", with no further thought or reason.

Now if they gave dragons the actual physical strength to back up that ability to shred a tank, THAT would be cool.
And it would even make sense.

The problem is that you're basically "thinking too much" on it. In this case, SN strenght is lifting and carring a great amount of weight, and damage. All that matters is that SN strenght is > Normal strenght and that's probably about as much thought that has been put into it. That doesn't make it illogical, not unless you think on it too much. But this once again is the proble with the player, not the game.

For example, I've NEVER heard anyone complain about SN strenght. The reasoning is that it held it's logic to the base minimum. SN strenght can lift more than normal and can do MD damage because of it's great strenght.

Another example is your dislike for F-13th movies. Instead of taking it for granted, you question more than the movie revield. Just for example. He drowned when he was a child, but returns as an adult. You take it as being illogical, I would see it as instead of "dieing" he actually continued to grow. He's bullet-proof but not machete proof in that you can't kill him (period) but you can chop him up to little bitty pieces. Being undead he can see very well in the night and he gets lucky shots (throwing the screwdriver). He is able to "out-run" is prey simply by knowing the woods so well he can use short-cuts to cut them off.

Here's an example of thinking too much on the movie. I love night of the living dead, but in this case I can show how it's illogical. When a person dies his muscles release all the calcium in the body, how is it able to animate the body into movieing the way they do? Normally, human jaws and teeth are not strong enough to bite through skin (at least now a days), and concidering that the dead, even being dead for a few days would cause the gums to shring and if you DID try to bite human flesh (Not even concidering through a regular shirt) your more likely to pull your teeth out than hurt them.

In this case, Jason is more "logical" in that his very being is based on some unknown hell-spawn thing. The dead on the other hand can be easily shown to be very illogical from their very core.

[Greeter]

Suspension of disbelief is necessary for some of us. If the rules and setting are too illogical or inconsistent then it becomes a problem.

The rules and setting should help us to get into the game, not prevent us from doing so.

Simply put...this isn't the fault of the game, but the player.

We will have to agree to disagree. I don't think the problem with every game system comes down to the player. Why have we seen all the changes made to the game if it doesn't matter?

To each his own. Some can play a game where there is little need for "complete logic". Others have to find a game that tries to match Real world vs. Game world as close as possible.

Does rifts have a logic? Yes. Cool and fun > Reality or realistic.

If that was actually the case then I don't think we would have ever seen the infamous "-10 to dodge" rule. We wouldn't have the difficulty to shoot down missiles now. We would still be able to parry energy blasts with sword. We wouldn't have a biology lesson about playing half breeds. We wouldn't get a philosophy lesson about playing neutral alignments.

As I say, Palladium games are a 13 year old comic book geeks dream come true. Problem is that we are no longer 13 year olds, having grown up, and now want substance. It's slow but it's getting there. Many of the freelance writers, realize this and work to create world books/source books that arn't about blowing stuff up. they now put depth into a book rather than fire power.

Where you see substance I see metaplot.

As for rules: The rules, generally are OK, about as well put together as any other RPG book. RUE consolidated many of those rules so that we have one official source.

RUE failed! Did you happen to catch the recent ruling about called shots in melee combat? We have rules that contradict each other (such as invisibility being cancelled or not in combat). We missed out completely about an important aspect of combat, namely the called shots in melee. We have people on the boards with different interpretations and didn't even realize it!

Here is a major part of the illogical part. There are those of us who have been playing for many years who see the changes. We went from being able to shoot down missiles, dodging energy blasts, parrying energy blasts, making called shots in combat, to doing none of the above.

We have gigantic weapons in Robotech that destroy everything in their path to gigantic weapons in Rifts (namely Triax & The NGR) book that might as well shoot giant chunks of cheese (they do so little damage).

The rules for movement have changed (now take speed for the melee and divide by the number of attacks).

We have holsters that give you a better chance at drawing a weapon and firing then someone who can shoot beam of energy out of their eyes.

We have the new wonderful "GI Joe Rule" that makes absolutely no sense.

After a while the player gets to the point where they are going to use a different system. It is better to fix the various problems then to simply tell people to go play something else.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you were to try out a game where shotguns inflict 1 point of damage to normal human beings, but knives inflict 1d4x1000, would you like that game?
Probably not, because it's too unrealistic to make any sense.

It would simply depend on the reasoning between them.

Nope, sorry. Try again.
If there were reasoning between them, then that would be logical.
We're talking about rules that are illogical and inconsistant, and your claim that such rules don't interfere with suspension of disbelief. That it's all up to the player.

I agree that a dragon ripping a tank apart with its claws is pretty cool... unless that same dragon isn't strong enough to accomplish that task.
It's like having some guy who can only lift 20 lbs punch through a brick wall simply because "it's cool", with no further thought or reason.

Now if they gave dragons the actual physical strength to back up that ability to shred a tank, THAT would be cool.
And it would even make sense.

The problem is that you're basically "thinking too much" on it. In this case, SN strenght is lifting and carring a great amount of weight, and damage. All that matters is that SN strenght is > Normal strenght and that's probably about as much thought that has been put into it. That doesn't make it illogical, not unless you think on it too much. But this once again is the proble with the player, not the game.

I'm sorry, but I play RPGs in order to think and to stimulate thoughts, not in order to put on blinders to things that blatantly don't make any sense.

For example, I've NEVER heard anyone complain about SN strenght.

Actually, I have.
Many times.

The reasoning is that it held it's logic to the base minimum. SN strenght can lift more than normal and can do MD damage because of it's great strenght.

Only it doesn't.
Supernatural Strength of 1-16 can lift and carry exactly as much as normal strength. The only difference is that it can inflict mega-damage with punches and kicks.
Are you seriously telling me that there's any reasoning behind that?

Another example is your dislike for F-13th movies. Instead of taking it for granted, you question more than the movie revield. Just for example. He drowned when he was a child, but returns as an adult. You take it as being illogical, I would see it as instead of "dieing" he actually continued to grow.

Meaning that if you work really hard at it, then you can try to fill in the obvious gaps and mistakes that the writers make.
That's great; but that's you going above and beyond the call of duty, trying to make up for flaws in the writing.
The fact that you can fix things, for yourself, when you watch the movies does NOT negate the fact that it's crap writing.

He's bullet-proof but not machete proof in that you can't kill him (period) but you can chop him up to little bitty pieces.

A machete can cut chunks off of him.
A shotgun cannot shoot chunks off of him, even with repeated shots at point blank range.
This makes sense to you?

Being undead he can see very well in the night and he gets lucky shots (throwing the screwdriver).

Yeah, he just rolls nat 20s a lot.

He is able to "out-run" is prey simply by knowing the woods so well he can use short-cuts to cut them off.

Only time and space don't bend that way.
If somebody is running in a straight line away from you, anything other than a straight line behind them is not a short-cut.

Here's an example of thinking too much on the movie. I love night of the living dead, but in this case I can show how it's illogical. When a person dies his muscles release all the calcium in the body, how is it able to animate the body into movieing the way they do? Normally, human jaws and teeth are not strong enough to bite through skin (at least now a days), and concidering that the dead, even being dead for a few days would cause the gums to shring and if you DID try to bite human flesh (Not even concidering through a regular shirt) your more likely to pull your teeth out than hurt them.

Actually, human teeth ARE plenty strong enough to bite through skin.
And I don't recall any corpses in Night of the Living Dead that were several days old.

In this case, Jason is more "logical" in that his very being is based on some unknown hell-spawn thing. The dead on the other hand can be easily shown to be very illogical from their very core.

Actually, Jason was just a dead kid who came back from the grave to avenge the death of his mother, who was killed for trying to aveng Jason's death by kiling innocent people.
(which once again is pretty darn stupid)
There was nothing demonic about him until later movies.

In any case, the fact that he's supposed to be supernatural doesn't mean that his powers, abilities, and his very nature should be so inconsistant or illogical.

Edit:
BTW, there never was a definite explanation for Night of the Living Dead. It could just as well have been supernatural as not.

[dark brandon]

Nope, sorry. Try again.
If there were reasoning between them, then that would be logical.
We're talking about rules that are illogical and inconsistant, and your claim that such rules don't interfere with suspension of disbelief. That it's all up to the player.

It is. I'm sure most of the rules have their "logic". They are inconsistant, I agree, but every rule has a logic behind it. Just because you may not see or understand it doesn't mean it's not there.

I'm sorry, but I play RPGs in order to think and to stimulate thoughts, not in order to put on blinders to things that blatantly don't make any sense.

Really? I play RPG's to have fun, and to a much lesser extent exersize my imagination. This is a difference in the players (you and me), which is our fault, not the games.

Actually, I have.
Many times.

Again, it's the players, not the game.

Only it doesn't.
Supernatural Strength of 1-16 can lift and carry exactly as much as normal strength. The only difference is that it can inflict mega-damage with punches and kicks.
Are you seriously telling me that there's any reasoning behind that?

Don't know. There may be. We dont' have the creator here to ask. I prefer to give them the benifit of the doubt, but that's the players perogitive.

Meaning that if you work really hard at it, then you can try to fill in the obvious gaps and mistakes that the writers make.
That's great; but that's you going above and beyond the call of duty, trying to make up for flaws in the writing.
The fact that you can fix things, for yourself, when you watch the movies does NOT negate the fact that it's crap writing.

Actually, that's only if you want to think it through. Most of the time, people simply don't care enough. All that matters is theres a guy killing kids in the woods. My explination is only for the responce of how it's illogical, and there could be a logic too it, if you want or need it. Most people don't. There's no reason because it's a movie.

A machete can cut chunks off of him.
A shotgun cannot shoot chunks off of him, even with repeated shots at point blank range.
This makes sense to you?

He was hit multiple times with a machete. IIRC he was only hit a few times with a shotgun. I could very well say if you could fire shotgun rounds in quick succession you could achieve the same effect.

Yeah, he just rolls nat 20s a lot.

About how often is he doing this? It's not as often as you think.

Only time and space don't bend that way.
If somebody is running in a straight line away from you, anything other than a straight line behind them is not a short-cut.

They failed their survival check, and ended up running in circles (c:

Actually, human teeth ARE plenty strong enough to bite through skin.
And I don't recall any corpses in Night of the Living Dead that were several days old.

It was "recently dead".

Actually, Jason was just a dead kid who came back from the grave to avenge the death of his mother, who was killed for trying to aveng Jason's death by kiling innocent people.
(which once again is pretty darn stupid)
There was nothing demonic about him until later movies.

Well, he never really was explained. You knew who he was, but you didn't know what he was. He wasn't really a "Zombie" nor was he a ghost. You did not know what he was. You made assumptions, but they didn't fit any one thing.

In any case, the fact that he's supposed to be supernatural doesn't mean that his powers, abilities, and his very nature should be so inconsistant or illogical.

What was inconsistant?

Edit:
BTW, there never was a definite explanation for Night of the Living Dead. It could just as well have been supernatural as not.

exactly. There never was an explanation.

[dark brandon]

We will have to agree to disagree.

That's pretty much what I'm getting at. Though, I think the problem with most systems isn't the system itself, only the players.

If that was actually the case then I don't think we would have ever seen the infamous "-10 to dodge" rule. We wouldn't have the difficulty to shoot down missiles now. We would still be able to parry energy blasts with sword. We wouldn't have a biology lesson about playing half breeds. We wouldn't get a philosophy lesson about playing neutral alignments.

And he dropped the -10 rule because dispite it being realistic, it wasn't fun. Shooting down missles I thought were unofficially hard to shoot down, and could very well be errated. (A good question, GK wrote the errata so he may be able to answer this). The biology thing I think helps the game. It separates itself from other games like D&D. Being different is also fun.

RUE failed! Did you happen to catch the recent ruling about called shots in melee combat? We have rules that contradict each other (such as invisibility being cancelled or not in combat). We missed out completely about an important aspect of combat, namely the called shots in melee. We have people on the boards with different interpretations and didn't even realize it!

Of course. I happen to disagree with the new called shot rule. It didn't fail. It simply wasn't perfect, and I never said it was.

Here is a major part of the illogical part. There are those of us who have been playing for many years who see the changes. We went from being able to shoot down missiles, dodging energy blasts, parrying energy blasts, making called shots in combat, to doing none of the above.

Just to note, I've been playing rifts since it first came out.

We have gigantic weapons in Robotech that destroy everything in their path to gigantic weapons in Rifts (namely Triax & The NGR) book that might as well shoot giant chunks of cheese (they do so little damage).

The rules for movement have changed (now take speed for the melee and divide by the number of attacks).

We have holsters that give you a better chance at drawing a weapon and firing then someone who can shoot beam of energy out of their eyes.

We have the new wonderful "GI Joe Rule" that makes absolutely no sense.

Weapons: Rifts and Robotech have different levels of technology. Triax devistator was a pretty formitable weapon when it was released. Not the greatest, but it was more powerful than a laser rifle thus it had it's logic. It was bigger and did more damage so that was it's logic. I guess some wanted the damage to be more, or perhaps wanted a mathematical equation showing the bell curve of damage or something.

I'm not quite sure how to address the holster vs. eye weapons, mainly because I don't see a problem with it.

The GI joe rule makes absolute perfect sense. No one wants to die and the GI joe rule gives players one last chance. I don't like it, but it's quite logical.

After a while the player gets to the point where they are going to use a different system. It is better to fix the various problems then to simply tell people to go play something else.

Who's saying go play something else?

[Killer Cyborg]

Nope, sorry. Try again.
If there were reasoning between them, then that would be logical.
We're talking about rules that are illogical and inconsistant, and your claim that such rules don't interfere with suspension of disbelief. That it's all up to the player.

It is. I'm sure most of the rules have their "logic". They are inconsistant, I agree, but every rule has a logic behind it. Just because you may not see or understand it doesn't mean it's not there.

Okay, what's the logic in having a human who can lift 100 lbs punch for 1d4 SDC damage, and a person with supernatural strength who can lift 100 lbs be able to punch for 4d6 SDC (1d4 MD on a power punch)?
There isn't any logic there.
If there IS, then it's the writers screw-up in not explaining how the heck this is supposed to make any sense at all.

And, once again, your claim was that rules don't need to have any logic or consistancy.

I'm sorry, but I play RPGs in order to think and to stimulate thoughts, not in order to put on blinders to things that blatantly don't make any sense.

Really? I play RPG's to have fun, and to a much lesser extent exersize my imagination. This is a difference in the players (you and me), which is our fault, not the games.

Games that teach people to think are a benefit to the players and to society as a whole.
Games that teach people NOT to think are holding back the entire human species.

Actually, I have.
Many times.

Again, it's the players, not the game.

Your answer doesn't make sense in context of the conversation.

Only it doesn't.
Supernatural Strength of 1-16 can lift and carry exactly as much as normal strength. The only difference is that it can inflict mega-damage with punches and kicks.
Are you seriously telling me that there's any reasoning behind that?

Don't know. There may be. We dont' have the creator here to ask. I prefer to give them the benifit of the doubt, but that's the players perogitive.

As I pointed out before, even if there's a reason, then they still screwed up by giving no indication what this reason might be.

Meaning that if you work really hard at it, then you can try to fill in the obvious gaps and mistakes that the writers make.
That's great; but that's you going above and beyond the call of duty, trying to make up for flaws in the writing.
The fact that you can fix things, for yourself, when you watch the movies does NOT negate the fact that it's crap writing.

Actually, that's only if you want to think it through.

It's a problem if you want to think about it at all.

Most of the time, people simply don't care enough.

That's a problem with the players, but it doesn't negate the problem the writers; they don't care enough either, and it makes them produce sloppy work.

[qutoe] All that matters is theres a guy killing kids in the woods. My explination is only for the responce of how it's illogical, and there could be a logic too it, if you want or need it. Most people don't. There's no reason because it's a movie.[/quote]

Just because it's a movie doesn't mean that it should be poorly done.
A crappy movie may just be a movie, but it's still crappy.

A machete can cut chunks off of him.
A shotgun cannot shoot chunks off of him, even with repeated shots at point blank range.
This makes sense to you?

He was hit multiple times with a machete. IIRC he was only hit a few times with a shotgun. I could very well say if you could fire shotgun rounds in quick succession you could achieve the same effect.

Part 6, IIRC.
A sheriff emptied his shotgun into Jason at point blank range (barrel touching chest the first time, I think).

Yeah, he just rolls nat 20s a lot.

About how often is he doing this? It's not as often as you think.

More than 5% of the time, that's for sure.
He died when he was 7 or 8, and he somehow has ninja-like skills in dealing death. It's not luck; it's bad writing.

Only time and space don't bend that way.
If somebody is running in a straight line away from you, anything other than a straight line behind them is not a short-cut.

They failed their survival check, and ended up running in circles (c:

Only they don't.

Actually, human teeth ARE plenty strong enough to bite through skin.
And I don't recall any corpses in Night of the Living Dead that were several days old.

It was "recently dead".

Exactly. Which could mean anything from hours to days old; they never say. The zombies who were biting people without losing teeth were likely fresher.

Actually, Jason was just a dead kid who came back from the grave to avenge the death of his mother, who was killed for trying to aveng Jason's death by kiling innocent people.
(which once again is pretty darn stupid)
There was nothing demonic about him until later movies.

Well, he never really was explained. You knew who he was, but you didn't know what he was. He wasn't really a "Zombie" nor was he a ghost. You did not know what he was. You made assumptions, but they didn't fit any one thing.

He was a revenant.

In any case, the fact that he's supposed to be supernatural doesn't mean that his powers, abilities, and his very nature should be so inconsistant or illogical.

What was inconsistant?

Sometimes he can stroll fast enough to magically get ahead of somebody who is running at full speed, sometime he can't. Sometimes he can withstand damage, sometimes not. Sometimes he can regenerate damage, sometimes not.

Edit:
BTW, there never was a definite explanation for Night of the Living Dead. It could just as well have been supernatural as not.

exactly. There never was an explanation.

???

[Killer Cyborg]

The GI joe rule makes absolute perfect sense. No one wants to die and the GI joe rule gives players one last chance. I don't like it, but it's quite logical.

Only from a "Let's try to cater to what the fanboys seem to want" perspective, not from a in-game perspective and not from a rules perspective.

[dark brandon]

Games that teach people to think are a benefit to the players and to society as a whole.
Games that teach people NOT to think are holding back the entire human species.

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously? I mean, even you can see the problems with the statment you just made, right? Just for example, does it really matter how SN strenght works, if the point of the game is to say...run a town, or use tactics to take down a super-powerful foe or to do research in of an area to run a better campaign? All this dispite having rules that are "illogical". Saying the rules are Secondary and thus unimportant does not mean i'm saying "stop thinking".

Dispite all that, i'd figure the person to be a better think is the one who can take the "illogical" things that rifts gives and give logical explinations to them (or at least attempt). That person I would think would have a vast imagination and a grasp of logic to make it work is definatly someone who is a "thinker".

Rifts gives you "X". Doesn't explain, doesn't justify. That's just the way it is. So, it's up to you to figure out why, and why it works IG.

Sometimes he can stroll fast enough to magically get ahead of somebody who is running at full speed, sometime he can't. Sometimes he can withstand damage, sometimes not. Sometimes he can regenerate damage, sometimes not.

He has Damage reduction 10/Slashing. Shotguns do piercing damage. He can also use dimention door 2x's per day, and he only regenerates when he's take the Rifts: Demon RCC which grants him bio-regeneration, otherwise, he has normal healing rate.

[dark brandon]

The GI joe rule makes absolute perfect sense. No one wants to die and the GI joe rule gives players one last chance. I don't like it, but it's quite logical.

Only from a "Let's try to cater to what the fanboys seem to want" perspective, not from a in-game perspective and not from a rules perspective.

Or from the "This is how I like it. I'm KS and I hate one hit kills, I want to have at least one more chance, and I'm willing to pass that along to players."

[Killer Cyborg]

The GI joe rule makes absolute perfect sense. No one wants to die and the GI joe rule gives players one last chance. I don't like it, but it's quite logical.

Only from a "Let's try to cater to what the fanboys seem to want" perspective, not from a in-game perspective and not from a rules perspective.

Or from the "This is how I like it. I'm KS and I hate one hit kills, I want to have at least one more chance, and I'm willing to pass that along to players."

From what he said to me, it seemed much more like a rule that he instituted because people complained about dying.
He has agreed with me entheusiastically several times when I say, "But Rifts is supposed to be deadly!"

[dark brandon]

From what he said to me, it seemed much more like a rule that he instituted because people complained about dying.
He has agreed with me entheusiastically several times when I say, "But Rifts is supposed to be deadly!"

Can't argue with that, but I've never heard anyone complain about death after armor is gone.

For the most part, I figured the rule was in there to help power-creep. With all the new weapons out there, it's easy to do in excess of 100 MD in a couple of hits, and so older armor is SOL when facing these weapons.

[Killer Cyborg]

Games that teach people to think are a benefit to the players and to society as a whole.
Games that teach people NOT to think are holding back the entire human species.

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously?

No.

I mean, even you can see the problems with the statment you just made, right? Just for example, does it really matter how SN strenght works, if the point of the game is to say...run a town, or use tactics to take down a super-powerful foe or to do research in of an area to run a better campaign? All this dispite having rules that are "illogical". Saying the rules are Secondary and thus unimportant does not mean i'm saying "stop thinking".

You're saying that thinking about the rules is a problem.
Which is, essentially, "thinking is bad".
RPGs are supposed to be, among other things, a simulation of reality (although not always a reality similar to our own), and most of the thinking that is involved is based on how the real world works.
Little things, like "People who are stronger can punch harder than people who are weaker than them".
The more often the game rules conflict with reality, the less realistic the game is and the less good our thinking does.
Coming up with a good plan doesn't do much good if the rules screw you out of the plan working by providing a poor simulation of reality.

Dispite all that, i'd figure the person to be a better think is the one who can take the "illogical" things that rifts gives and give logical explinations to them (or at least attempt). That person I would think would have a vast imagination and a grasp of logic to make it work is definatly someone who is a "thinker".

That's great, but it doesn't magically make Rifts NOT FLAWED.

Rifts gives you "X". Doesn't explain, doesn't justify. That's just the way it is. So, it's up to you to figure out why, and why it works IG.

The game of Rifts is not to come up with rules and background in order to make the game of Rifts make sense.
That's just the work that you have to put into it in order to make the game function.
Buying a broken car might help you learn to be a good mechanic, but that doesn't mean that the car wasn't broken when you got it.

Sometimes he can stroll fast enough to magically get ahead of somebody who is running at full speed, sometime he can't. Sometimes he can withstand damage, sometimes not. Sometimes he can regenerate damage, sometimes not.

He has Damage reduction 10/Slashing. Shotguns do piercing damage. He can also use dimention door 2x's per day, and he only regenerates when he's take the Rifts: Demon RCC which grants him bio-regeneration, otherwise, he has normal healing rate.

Riight.

[dark brandon]

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously?

No.

Actually, I'm gonna disagree with you on that. I think you are.

You're saying that thinking about the rules is a problem.
Which is, essentially, "thinking is bad".
RPGs are supposed to be, among other things, a simulation of reality (although not always a reality similar to our own), and most of the thinking that is involved is based on how the real world works.
Little things, like "People who are stronger can punch harder than people who are weaker than them".
The more often the game rules conflict with reality, the less realistic the game is and the less good our thinking does.
Coming up with a good plan doesn't do much good if the rules screw you out of the plan working by providing a poor simulation of reality.

I never said thinking is bad. Quite the opposite. I'm saying not to worry about them. If the rules are ruining your experience of the game, the setting then your dwelling too much on one part of a whole and it's not an important part. Coming up with a good plan is great because part of that plan is to use those rules and work within the frame you're given to achieve an ends you wish. The rules don't screw you, you screw yourself if you fail to take into account the rules.

That's great, but it doesn't magically make Rifts NOT FLAWED.

Flawed is to be expected. All games are flawed and fail to truely capture "reality". Which game system do you think closest matches Reality?

The game of Rifts is not to come up with rules and background in order to make the game of Rifts make sense.
That's just the work that you have to put into it in order to make the game function.
Buying a broken car might help you learn to be a good mechanic, but that doesn't mean that the car wasn't broken when you got it.

That's just the work you put into it in order for you to enjoy one aspect of it. Buying an ugly car might help you become a better detailer...but that doesn't mean you can't enjoy driving it late at night.

[Killer Cyborg]

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously?

No.

Actually, I'm gonna disagree with you on that. I think you are.

You're wrong.

You're saying that thinking about the rules is a problem.
Which is, essentially, "thinking is bad".
RPGs are supposed to be, among other things, a simulation of reality (although not always a reality similar to our own), and most of the thinking that is involved is based on how the real world works.
Little things, like "People who are stronger can punch harder than people who are weaker than them".
The more often the game rules conflict with reality, the less realistic the game is and the less good our thinking does.
Coming up with a good plan doesn't do much good if the rules screw you out of the plan working by providing a poor simulation of reality.

I never said thinking is bad. Quite the opposite. I'm saying not to worry about them. If the rules are ruining your experience of the game, the setting then your dwelling too much on one part of a whole and it's not an important part. Coming up with a good plan is great because part of that plan is to use those rules and work within the frame you're given to achieve an ends you wish. The rules don't screw you, you screw yourself if you fail to take into account the rules.

The rules are the physics of the gameworld. If the rules don't make sense, then the gameworld has screwy physics that don't make sense.

That's great, but it doesn't magically make Rifts NOT FLAWED.

Flawed is to be expected. All games are flawed and fail to truely capture "reality".

Some are better than others, though.
And some aspects of some games are better than certain aspects of other games.

Which game system do you think closest matches Reality?

The one I'm working on writing.

The game of Rifts is not to come up with rules and background in order to make the game of Rifts make sense.
That's just the work that you have to put into it in order to make the game function.
Buying a broken car might help you learn to be a good mechanic, but that doesn't mean that the car wasn't broken when you got it.

That's just the work you put into it in order for you to enjoy one aspect of it. Buying an ugly car might help you become a better detailer...but that doesn't mean you can't enjoy driving it late at night.

We both agree that Fahrvergnügen is important, then.
But I'm not saying that Rifts is ugly; it's not. It looks good, it just has the tendency to break down for no good reason when you take it out for a drive.

[dark brandon]

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously?

No.

Actually, I'm gonna disagree with you on that. I think you are.

You're wrong.

No...I fairly sure on this. Much too seriously. But it's ok, I forgive you.

We both agree that Fahrvergnügen is important, then.
But I'm not saying that Rifts is ugly; it's not. It looks good, it just has the tendency to break down for no good reason when you take it out for a drive.

Er...I don't speak german, but...yeah...ok.

I understand what your saying, and at times I have trouble with it too. But the game is alot more fun when I don't think about the problem with the rules, simply because I do not think the rules make the game. The rules, as long as they work both ways (for PC's and NPC's) can be used and inconsitancies can be explained or overlooked in favor of the game.

It's like Schrödinger's cat, as long as I don't look to see how the breaks work or the engine is running, the car will continue to move.

[Killer Cyborg]

We both agree that Fahrvergnügen is important, then.
But I'm not saying that Rifts is ugly; it's not. It looks good, it just has the tendency to break down for no good reason when you take it out for a drive.

Er...I don't speak german, but...yeah...ok.

I understand what your saying, and at times I have trouble with it too. But the game is alot more fun when I don't think about the problem with the rules, simply because I do not think the rules make the game. The rules, as long as they work both ways (for PC's and NPC's) can be used and inconsitancies can be explained or overlooked in favor of the game.

It's like Schrödinger's cat, as long as I don't look to see how the breaks work or the engine is running, the car will continue to move.

Life in general is more fun if you don't think about it.
That doesn't make it more worthwhile.

Personally, I can't not think about things.

[Greeter]

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously?

No.

Actually, I'm gonna disagree with you on that. I think you are.

You're wrong.

No...I fairly sure on this. Much too seriously. But it's ok, I forgive you.

From the Megaverse Board Rules:

To keep the issue simple, when responding to a post, always respond to the topic at hand, not the way someone posts, thinks, or lives.

I'd simply report the thread but last time I did the mods couldn't figure out why.

[Greeter]

Games that teach people to think are a benefit to the players and to society as a whole.
Games that teach people NOT to think are holding back the entire human species.

Arn't you taking this a little TOO seriously? I mean, even you can see the problems with the statment you just made, right? Just for example, does it really matter how SN strenght works, if the point of the game is to say...run a town, or use tactics to take down a super-powerful foe or to do research in of an area to run a better campaign? All this dispite having rules that are "illogical". Saying the rules are Secondary and thus unimportant does not mean i'm saying "stop thinking".

Dispite all that, i'd figure the person to be a better think is the one who can take the "illogical" things that rifts gives and give logical explinations to them (or at least attempt). That person I would think would have a vast imagination and a grasp of logic to make it work is definatly someone who is a "thinker".

Rifts gives you "X". Doesn't explain, doesn't justify. That's just the way it is. So, it's up to you to figure out why, and why it works IG.

Nice (no not really). Killer Cyborg is one of those people. I have seen him explain things very well, but there are some things that simply don't make any sense. I have yet to go to a hobby store or convention where gamers are not familiar with the problems in the Palladium system. Down here in the south it is a running joke.

My Rifts game (I run every Friday) came to a stop this past Friday because the group was trying to figure a way to stop the Xiticix and the metaplot from SoT got mentioned. Even I, an experienced GM, had trouble recovering from that one. I couldn't even begin to explain it. When the rules and metaplot start interfering with the game there is a problem. Now I admit, I encourage my players to think so that may be one of the problems. Killer Cyborg is the type of gamer I would love to have in my games (even though we don't always see eye to eye on various things). I am blessed with many players who do think (finn69 from here is one of them).

It is difficult to explain why the big bad tank does the same damage as the laser rifle I just grabbed. We are trying to bring new people into the hobby and especially into Rifts. It would be easier if the rules made some sense or at least were consistent. It is true all systems have their problems but Palladium has some big ones. The Palladium system is supposed to be a universal one but it doesn't behave that way. Have you ever noticed all the different rules for Chi?

Those of us who would love to see changes always get told the same line of how "all systems have problems", "the rules work fine for other people", "not everyone has a problem", but then we are absolutely amazed when new rules show up for no apparent reason like the "-10 to dodge", the GI Joe rule, etc. If the system is doing so well then where did these rules come from?

The big gun fires MD cheese because there is a quantum flux on Rifts Earth causing all major expenditures of energy to manifest as dairy products. Got it?

[Sureshot]

Very well said Greeter and pretty much agree on all points. You forgot to add "all rules are optional" in the last paragraph. While I think the game needs to be rebuilt from the ground up I do not see it happening, at the very least not under the current management.

[Thinyser]

We will have to agree to disagree.

That's pretty much what I'm getting at. Though, I think the problem with most systems isn't the system itself, only the players.

Then why do the vast majority of players say otherwise?

There is a similar situation in the higher education system. Have you ever been in a low level class (like biology 101) where more than 70% of the class is getting "C"s or below, and NOBODY has above a "B"? Do you think that the vast majority of people that are struggling are having problems because of something they are doing or is it safer to assume that since the problem is so widespread that its the instructor and how the material was presented and tested?

Yep usually its the insturctor or his/her presnetation/testing methods... thats why they grade on "a curve" to make up for these failings.

When the vast majority of players agree that a game system is flawed it is more likely that its the system flawed and less likely to be the individuals perception of it.

Sure I can watch a movie and enjoy it despite its flaws but that doesn't mean that the flaws arn't there for the people that overlook them, they just don't care.

Whether or not something is flawed is not subjective, your reaction to those flaws is.

So while you may overlook the fact that there is no logical reason for SN PS to do MD, or for hand weapons to do the same damages as vehicle mounted anti-vehicle weapons, and play as if everything is hunky dory, does not mean that its a problem with the players that choose to say "WTH? thats broken!".

The problem exsist in the system, some people just overlook it because they would rather not think about it.

[dark brandon]

From the Megaverse Board Rules:

To keep the issue simple, when responding to a post, always respond to the topic at hand, not the way someone posts, thinks, or lives.

I'd simply report the thread but last time I did the mods couldn't figure out why.

KC is a friend. We disagree. This thread hasn't degenerated into Flaming, nor have I disrespected him or his opinion.

[Greeter]

We are supposed to respond to the topic, not the poster.

[dark brandon]

Life in general is more fun if you don't think about it.
That doesn't make it more worthwhile.

Personally, I can't not think about things.

Define "things". There are many "things" out there, and maybe you spend your time thinking about everything. Personally, I love to think about "things", but about things that I think matter. Political, religious, had a thrilling discussion on Quantum mechanics on friday night or currently, how my RIFTS juicer assassin is gonna take out a Yama king without getting himself, his party or his family killed. Game rules/mechanics just don't rank high up in my "want to spend time thinking about" list.

Then why do the vast majority of players say otherwise?

Here's the problem I have. You claim Vast majority, but except on the boards, I haven't seen this problem all that often. Perhaps you and everyone else have had players who've had problems with the system and certain aspects that don't make sense. In the many years I've played rifts, I've not encountered those problems or those questions by me or other players. And I've played with quite a few people.

Now I admit, I encourage my players to think so that may be one of the problems.

Please clerify on what you mean by this statment, or why you felt a need to bring it to the table for discussion.

I am blessed with many players who do think (finn69 from here is one of them).

As am I. In fact two of my players wrote Madhaven, are currently working on Triax 2 and a couple of other things I can't mension. Please, pick up madhaven and view the imagination of these two players and what they can create when they think.

If the system is doing so well then where did these rules come from?

I'm curious as to where you got this statment from.

[Killer Cyborg]

From the Megaverse Board Rules:

To keep the issue simple, when responding to a post, always respond to the topic at hand, not the way someone posts, thinks, or lives.

I'd simply report the thread but last time I did the mods couldn't figure out why.

KC is a friend. We disagree. This thread hasn't degenerated into Flaming, nor have I disrespected him or his opinion.

Yeah, we was just playing.

[Killer Cyborg]

Life in general is more fun if you don't think about it.
That doesn't make it more worthwhile.

Personally, I can't not think about things.

Define "things". There are many "things" out there, and maybe you spend your time thinking about everything. Personally, I love to think about "things", but about things that I think matter. Political, religious, had a thrilling discussion on Quantum mechanics on friday night or currently, how my RIFTS juicer assassin is gonna take out a Yama king without getting himself, his party or his family killed. Game rules/mechanics just don't rank high up in my "want to spend time thinking about" list.

If you want to play a game, you have to think about the mechanics of the game. You have to think about the rules in order to abide by them.
At least, for most games you do.
If Rifts was such a complete system that the rules never conflicted, and the rules addressed every problem and situation that could come up in the game, the I could see saying that you don't think about the rules; but it's not. All of the unanswered questions in the game require the players to think about the rules.
And game masters should be thinking about the rules all the time. It's part of their job.

[Thinyser]

Here's the problem I have. You claim Vast majority, but except on the boards, I haven't seen this problem all that often. Perhaps you and everyone else have had players who've had problems with the system and certain aspects that don't make sense. In the many years I've played rifts, I've not encountered those problems or those questions by me or other players. And I've played with quite a few people.

In my experinece I have seen that the vast majority of those that play rifts/palladium know of its many flaws, and disapprove of them, though most still play the system for its strong points (setting and plethora of character choices).

Those that I have met that don't know of them were relative noobs and had experience only under one GM and did't have any of the books themselves.

These people only delt with the rules that GM laid out for them. If a GM did the work to patch the inconsistnacies, or as Gadrin said massage them into shape, then the person hasn't seen the problems yet... but that doesn't mean they aren't there. When said noob plays more (with other GMs) they will undoubtedly run into the problems. Hell I have even seen noobs go from ignorant bliss to saying "WTH these rules are so broken its sad" after making their first character. Then when they got to the game and the GM said "this is how I fix some of those issues" they were OK with it.

If they then choose to overlook said problems in the name of fun or had a GM that fixed things for them, so be it, but that doesn't mean that A: said problems don't actualy exsist, or B: that those people that choose not to overlook the problems are themselves the cause of the problems.

The writer's lack of forethought to either make sure there weren't problems in the first place, or that certain rules are eplained (rather than simply left as "this is the way it is even though it doesn't make sense") is the cause of the problems.

I don't expect perfection but there are lots of little problems in Palladium's products that add up to a lot of work finding them and fixing them, or a lot of "not thinking about it".

[Killer Cyborg]

A GAME DOES NOT HAVE TO MAKE PERFECT SENSE!!!!

Agreed.
But it should make SENSE.

[Greeter]

The illogical aspects, rules or metaplot, are like speed bumps. They don't keep us from playing, but they do interfere with the game, especially the suspension of disbelief. They also prevent us from bringing new blood into the game. The sad part is they are fixable, but apparently it isn't that important.

[Killer Cyborg]

A GAME DOES NOT HAVE TO MAKE PERFECT SENSE!!!!

Agreed.
But it should make SENSE.

*bows with respect* I know that Rifts has iilogical points and rules that confuse and even enrage poeple. But I still think its a well crafted game. It's bad parts are far out numbered by it's good points. Skills, Extra attacks, Good attribute system, and The fusion of high-tech and magic. All of these things are why I play rifts

Personally, I love Rifts. RUE has made it playable again for me, I believe, and the new books have brought life and sense back into the game again.
You can love something in spite of its flaws, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have flaws.

[Killer Cyborg]

A GAME DOES NOT HAVE TO MAKE PERFECT SENSE!!!!

Agreed.
But it should make SENSE.

*bows with respect* I know that Rifts has iilogical points and rules that confuse and even enrage poeple. But I still think its a well crafted game. It's bad parts are far out numbered by it's good points. Skills, Extra attacks, Good attribute system, and The fusion of high-tech and magic. All of these things are why I play rifts

Personally, I love Rifts. RUE has made it playable again for me, I believe, and the new books have brought life and sense back into the game again.
You can love something in spite of its flaws, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have flaws.

Killer you are very wise man all my ranting and raving is summed up by what you juat said. I know it has flaws I'm just trying to say that its still fun even with its flaws. Guess I should have just said that to start with

[Toc Rat]

I have always had less of a problem with the mechanics of Rifts or other Palladium games and more with the...how to put it, story/fmeta-plot elements?

Yes, I think that SN PS (Super-Natural PS) or for that matter Robotic PS lifts far too little. Anything that has enough strength to cause MEGA-DAMAGE should be able to lift your average sedan at the VERY least. Yes, I think that hand-held weapons do as much if not more then giant sized ones mounted on vehicles is a little silly and yes I think it rather funny that a 1st level magic user can cast See the Invisible and break right thru the Invisibility Superior spell of, oh Odin or Zues.

But really kills me is the plot holes, loops and dead ends. I've argues that before on my Continuity in Rifts thread. The mechanics can be changed fairly easyily. They can be ignored, added to or modified to fit any groups needs. Changing the plot though is a tad bit more difficult. As new books continue to come out for the game, they will obviously not follow any plot changes you have made but rather the meta-plot given to us from the writers. This is ok if the meta-plot is good and "makes sense" but when it does not...

[Mech-Viper Prime]

what the hell is with OCC that really make no sense

a wilderness scout is a wilderness scout even with a juicer harness
a coalition grunt is coalition grunt even with a juicer harness
the only "juicers" with a different occ should be maxi-killer and dragon juicers
the rest of the juicers would continue their original OCC, getting a juicer harness doesn't train you it just enhances you

Much like a marine is a marine, if that marine is a tanker, grunt, quartermaster or cook, they all have the same basic skills not different ones as basic skills.

Coalition, NGR FQ, ROJ Soviet and even headhunters would have the same basic models then mos skills and not a bunch of different occ instead of mos.

[RainOfSteel]

Well now. Yes indeed.

My statement is that Rifts is filled with illogical show-stopper inconsistencies.

It also has many cool and fun aspects that make reviewing the milieu fascinating and patching the mechanics and milieu worthwhile to one degree or another.

--------------------------------

I will jump in and state that I side with and support all of Killer Cyborg's statements made so far in the topic.

This includes the problems with supernatural strength, and with other rules mechanics, as well.

I would also like to state that my circle of players (none of whom ever go online or participate in forums, newsgroups, or mailing lists) have complained bitterly about an entire range of rules in PB' various systems. When the games get played, house rules abound.

--------------------------------

Major Problems:

• Credit/Cash Cards: No central banking services makes centrally cleared verification of transactions impossible.
• Contradictory milieu information. Japan goes from a quiet backwater of little islands to its pre-Rifts island layout and massively inhabited nations. Erin Tarn's descriptions of the Chi-Town 'Burbs are absurd (30% of a population of three million dies every year; baloney!).
• Super-Tech Nations: Every single tiny nation (the CS is a tiny nation, too, on this scale) seems to possess the complete industrial infrastructure to produce wide ranges of super-tech weapon systems in vast numbers that exceed the 2006 USA's technical capabilities by substantial amounts, even though the USA of 2006 has a far greater population pool to draw on and develop talent from, and also has a far larger industrial base (that still requires multiple international partnerships for any company to produce most of today's advanced weapons systems).
• Lost Factories: The world seems doted by lost fully intact factory system/facilities that can be seized and put into use with relative ease for massive industrial gain.
• Lost/Hidden/Reappearing Cities: Psyscape, Rifts Japan, etc. (Most of whom possess fully integrated industrial infrastructures allowing for the production of a complete range of super-tech gear.)
• Coalition War Machine: The numbers for troops and equipment given exceed anything the CS could have paid for given the size of their population and consequent economic capacity.
• Coalition's New Weapons Designs (CWC):
• Coalition's Skelebots: To deploy the given skelebot numbers, just these robots, would require trillions of credits.
• Siege on Tolkeen: The Jericho Holmes' Maneuver, in particular, but there are other severe problems.
• Siege on Tolkeen: Casualties: The numbers given vs. the size of the CS population make this a disaster of unbelievable proportions.
• Siege on Tolkeen: Burb Recruitment: The CS suddenly relaxes its rules for citizenship and promises Burb-towners that joining up with lead to it? Um, Erin Tarn states that the disease and starvation are killing off 30% of the 'Burb population each year. If that many actually die from these conditions, then the rest aren't going to be in good shape. The CS is recruiting from a population afflicted with such problems? Not to mention that d-bees live in the 'Burbs, and are a part of its population as well.
• Damage Scales: Rifles doing the same damage as weapons the size of city buses.
• Body Armor: Some body armor is depicted as having large gaps. This is effectively impossible given the nature of Mega-Damage.
• Armor, General: Many MDC values do not appear appropriately scaled based on the apparent size and stated technological level.
• Armor, Tanks: They can easily have far thicker armor than mecha/robots, but typically do not have the MDC values to reflect this.
• Weapons, Tanks: They can easily have far heavier weapons than mecha/robots, but their weapon load-outs typically do not have the MD values to reflect this.
• Prices: In many cases, only Black Market prices are given. In some cases, non-Black market prices are given. There is no rhyme or reason that I have been able to discover in regard to this. In any case, the price given should always be the market price, and a multiplier for the Black Market price should be included. If the normal market is a restricted one, then that restriction should be mentioned.
• Techno-Wizard Design Sequence: It was wonderful to include one, but including one that allows, as a matter of simple course, the creation of game-breaking items that are cheap and easy to create, makes me wonder why the given system was included.
• Magic System: In order to function without causing constant arguments with players, there must be a single fundamental set of concepts behind "how magic works" that are logical and consistent within the context of magic working at all (and yes, that statement itself is both logical and realistic, as anyone who has ever studied and worked on Fantasy milieu design well knows). Rifts and PB in general has no such set of concepts. Magic works one way in one set of circumstances, and works completely differently in the same set of circumstances on another occasion. This really needs to be replaced by something else.
• Ocean of OCCs: This is a massive problem in that they all have an even larger ocean of power variants and it is impossible for GMs to keep track of, understand, and successfully integrate them all into a campaign milieu in a balanced way without picking through them going, yes, no, yes, no, yes, no, and frustrating built-up player expectations via apparent GM arbitrary pickiness that is really the GM frantically working in advance on a haphazard attempt to create game balance.

And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head.