here it is...the MDC rule

[shadrak]

Straight out of the old FAQ on the main website.

My question deals with physical skills. I know that the SDC bonus only counts towards SDC beings, but what if the MDC being was trained in a place with MDC workout materials? What if a MDC being goes to Atlantis and trains in a MDC equivalent of a Bally's or something, would the SDC bonus count towards MDC beings as a MDC bonus then? I mean there has got to be places that MDC beings can workout too, most of Rifts Earth has MDC beings on it.
Answer: This would be an option for the individual GM. The standard rule though is that M.D.C. being do not gain M.D.C. bonuses from physical skills. They do though gain the other bonuses from physical skills

[shadrak]

Hence my rule:

Yes, for mortal MDC creatures, and case by case for Supernatural Creatures and Creatures of Magic

[Nekira Sudacne]

The Old FAQ is no more offical or final than the new faq.

You can just as easily cite everything I say in that manner

[shadrak]

Oh, but it is, it goes to the original intent of the authors...in fact, until there is an explicit change to the system in canon material, we can assume that they are still correct.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Oh, but it is, it goes to the original intent of the authors...in fact, until there is an explicit change to the system in canon material, we can assume that they are still correct.

Uh, no, it seems to be a sadly common misconception. The old faq was not written by palladium employees at all.

[Killer Cyborg]

Oh, but it is, it goes to the original intent of the authors...in fact, until there is an explicit change to the system in canon material, we can assume that they are still correct.

Uh, no, it seems to be a sadly common misconception. The old faq was not written by palladium employees at all.

It was written by a couple of volunteers, who were often wrong.

But it was also official.
Unless I see canon reason NOT to accept the old FAQ, I usually go with what it says.

[Dead Boy]

Oh, but it is, it goes to the original intent of the authors...in fact, until there is an explicit change to the system in canon material, we can assume that they are still correct.

Uh, no, it seems to be a sadly common misconception. The old faq was not written by palladium employees at all.

It was written by a couple of volunteers, who were often wrong.

But it was also official.
Unless I see canon reason NOT to accept the old FAQ, I usually go with what it says.

I have to go with KC on this one. The old FAQ was run mostly by Rodney Stott. And though he had the occasional odd or off answer, 85% of the time he was on it.

[Aramanthus]

Hmm Interesting line of thought going on here. I remember Rodney's old site. It's a shame it's gone.

[The Galactus Kid]

...as opposed to the Madhaven question and comment thread which IS IN FACT checked and replied to by the authors or those closely involved with the project (aka Dark Brandon)

[Subjugator]

if it was always wrong, why call it FAQ? WAQ would be more suitable.

FAQ-Frequently Asked Questions.

That says nothing about answered correctly

That would be FWA-Frequent Wrong Answers

Or it could've been Wrongly Answered Questions.

I wonder if Kev would appoint one of the MAs as an 'official' authority that could answer questions, which would be accepted as canon unless otherwise rejected by Palladium staff.

/Sub

[shadrak]

the fact that it is still on the main page of palladium's website, when they could erase the entire thing, or at least edit it, gives it implicit support from palladium.

[Nekira Sudacne]

the fact that it is still on the main page of palladium's website, when they could erase the entire thing, or at least edit it, gives it implicit support from palladium.

actually, it was said they're leaving it up as a reference as suggestions. It was never offical, so the fact it's still up cannot be interpreted as "continuing" officaldom.

[shadrak]

then they should post a disclaimer

[Nekira Sudacne]

then they should post a disclaimer

They SHOULD post one on the current one.

But Palladium dosn't seem to get most people just assme a FAQ is offical.

[Killer Cyborg]

actually, it was said they're leaving it up as a reference as suggestions. It was never offical, so the fact it's still up cannot be interpreted as "continuing" officaldom.

so i stole what nekira said but she said what i was thinking and did it so well. . . . i just wanted some recognition

IIRC, the original FAQ was official.

[shadrak]

actually, it was said they're leaving it up as a reference as suggestions. It was never offical, so the fact it's still up cannot be interpreted as "continuing" officaldom.

It was never specifically noted as unofficial...look at the rifter...each issue has a disclaimer..."these are optional rules".

Of course, the material from Dino Swamp and Arzno is annotated as official...

It's not that hard to put a disclaimer up.

[Nekira Sudacne]

actually, it was said they're leaving it up as a reference as suggestions. It was never offical, so the fact it's still up cannot be interpreted as "continuing" officaldom.

It was never specifically noted as unofficial...look at the rifter...each issue has a disclaimer..."these are optional rules".

Of course, the material from Dino Swamp and Arzno is annotated as official...

It's not that hard to put a disclaimer up.

So palladium's a bit on the lazy side, so?

[Nekira Sudacne]

actually, it was said they're leaving it up as a reference as suggestions. It was never offical, so the fact it's still up cannot be interpreted as "continuing" officaldom.

so i stole what nekira said but she said what i was thinking and did it so well. . . . i just wanted some recognition

IIRC, the original FAQ was official.

Then you do not RC

[Killer Cyborg]

actually, it was said they're leaving it up as a reference as suggestions. It was never offical, so the fact it's still up cannot be interpreted as "continuing" officaldom.

so i stole what nekira said but she said what i was thinking and did it so well. . . . i just wanted some recognition

IIRC, the original FAQ was official.

Then you do not RC

It's hard to prove one way or the other now, but I remember it being the topic of several discussions that the FAQ was "official", but usually wrong and not written by the writers of the books.

[grandmaster z0b]

When was the FAQ written?

[Greeter]

The old FAQ has almost been around since Palladium first went online.