Forums of the Megaverse®

How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

Uh... You do know most player characters are SDC right? Or are supposed to be.

First thing is that money is very easy to get. Did you kill a group of deadboys? Didja take the time to kill one or two with non-main body hits? Congrats, you've got two complete suits of CS MD armor.

Sell it, repurpose it, and you're all good.

They were carrying weapons? There were 4 of them? That's 4 rifles, 4 pistols, maybe some vibro blades, and probably 2-3 spare E-Clips.

You can make a lot of cash and pay for a lot of repairs.

HWalsh wrote:

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

Uh... You do know most player characters are SDC right? Or are supposed to be.

First thing is that money is very easy to get. Did you kill a group of deadboys? Didja take the time to kill one or two with non-main body hits? Congrats, you've got two complete suits of CS MD armor.

Sell it, repurpose it, and you're all good.

They were carrying weapons? There were 4 of them? That's 4 rifles, 4 pistols, maybe some vibro blades, and probably 2-3 spare E-Clips.

You can make a lot of cash and pay for a lot of repairs.

The problem with the CS Supply Store is it doesn't work in the games I played in.
We have a smart, tech-savvy CS that has sub-dermal implants required to operate all CS equipment. Without the biofeedback they provide, all you have is a cool looking paperweight or an expensive suit that barely moves under the wearers muscle-power let-alone enter combat.

Any thing you can do to NPCs the NPCs can do to you.

That however is a gm house ruled problem not really a game problem. May you should give us more of an explanation as to how your gm's world is, what is allowed and what isn't etc, before we answer since any answer that will typically be given will be based on the books which as you see is negated by how your gm has house ruled the world, in this case the CS.

Blackwater Sniper wrote:

HWalsh wrote:

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

Uh... You do know most player characters are SDC right? Or are supposed to be.

First thing is that money is very easy to get. Did you kill a group of deadboys? Didja take the time to kill one or two with non-main body hits? Congrats, you've got two complete suits of CS MD armor.

Sell it, repurpose it, and you're all good.

They were carrying weapons? There were 4 of them? That's 4 rifles, 4 pistols, maybe some vibro blades, and probably 2-3 spare E-Clips.

You can make a lot of cash and pay for a lot of repairs.

The problem with the CS Supply Store is it doesn't work in the games I played in.
We have a smart, tech-savvy CS that has sub-dermal implants required to operate all CS equipment. Without the biofeedback they provide, all you have is a cool looking paperweight or an expensive suit that barely moves under the wearers muscle-power let-alone enter combat.

Any thing you can do to NPCs the NPCs can do to you.

That is your GM inserting a house rule that doesn't exist in any incarnation of Rifts. On top of that, it wouldn't work. Literally. That wouldn't work at all because of EBA. You could, I suppose, have an implant that sends an RFID signal to the weapon, but then all you need is a signal jammer and none of the CS equipment works. Which would be easily done. If they made it so that there was a conductor directly tied from the implant to the gun (ouch) then you'd have an issue with any weapon that conducts electricity going right through and killing the target. Meaning suddenly every CS soldier goes down from a 1 MD electric shock.

Certainly anything you can do to NPCs they can do to you, they can totally kill you and loot your stuff.

But you can't blame the game for your GM inserting something that doesn't exist.

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

The armorer skill or in theory the leather working type skills are handy as well. Killing various types of dinos or MDC critters can be used to make hodgepoge MDC armors that while not great beat running around naked. But yes keeping yourself equipped is a bit challenge in rifts and why your characters are not always in the armor they really want but often just whatever they can scrounge up until they can get to some place that has what they want.

A lot of it is salvaging armor off opponents it is why people who are good sharpshooters are always handy to have. Hard on helmets but a good way to take a suit of armor basically intact.

HWalsh wrote:

Blackwater Sniper wrote:

HWalsh wrote:

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

Uh... You do know most player characters are SDC right? Or are supposed to be.

First thing is that money is very easy to get. Did you kill a group of deadboys? Didja take the time to kill one or two with non-main body hits? Congrats, you've got two complete suits of CS MD armor.

Sell it, repurpose it, and you're all good.

They were carrying weapons? There were 4 of them? That's 4 rifles, 4 pistols, maybe some vibro blades, and probably 2-3 spare E-Clips.

You can make a lot of cash and pay for a lot of repairs.

The problem with the CS Supply Store is it doesn't work in the games I played in.
We have a smart, tech-savvy CS that has sub-dermal implants required to operate all CS equipment. Without the biofeedback they provide, all you have is a cool looking paperweight or an expensive suit that barely moves under the wearers muscle-power let-alone enter combat.

Any thing you can do to NPCs the NPCs can do to you.

That is your GM inserting a house rule that doesn't exist in any incarnation of Rifts. On top of that, it wouldn't work. Literally. That wouldn't work at all because of EBA. You could, I suppose, have an implant that sends an RFID signal to the weapon, but then all you need is a signal jammer and none of the CS equipment works. Which would be easily done. If they made it so that there was a conductor directly tied from the implant to the gun (ouch) then you'd have an issue with any weapon that conducts electricity going right through and killing the target. Meaning suddenly every CS soldier goes down from a 1 MD electric shock.

Certainly anything you can do to NPCs they can do to you, they can totally kill you and loot your stuff.

But you can't blame the game for your GM inserting something that doesn't exist.

In theory an RFID on armor could keep you from using some of the computer/PDA functions their armor has but basic usability would be impossible to really limit. If you can wear the armor it is going to work like armor. It could work with weapons and power armor I always assume has some kind of anti theft functionality but that is what operators and city rats or other computer hacker type characters are for.

yeah, i can't imagine it would take long before someone started bypassing whatever security method you use. subdermal implants isn't even hard; all someone has to do is get their hands on some of those implants (used or otherwise) and now they can use CS gear again, and whatever method they have of obtaining the CS gear is likely to include at least some method of accessing the subdermal implants; either you just killed a bunch of soldiers (who have implants that you can take) or you can steal them the same way you steal the other stuff.

and that assumes that nobody can just open up the equipment and remove the parts that check for the presence of the subdermal implant.

such a system might make it hard to steal a CS weapon in the middle of combat and use it immediately (without preparation, that is... i mean, given the implants aren't that hard to get, people could just get those implants too), but is unlikely to make CS gear lose all value.

of course, not every fight is going to be as profitable as a fight with technological opponents. and if you are killing off large numbers of CS soldiers, i'd expect some unwelcome attention to come your way sooner or later. but if you defeat a group of CS soldiers (or other opponent that uses equipment), you're gonna get some money out of it.

regardless, there are some other important tricks to consider:

1) various methods can be used to provide temporary sources of protection other than your MDC armour; using cover, staying hidden, magic that makes you immune to various types of damage, magical, tech, or psionic forcefields, etc.
2) trying to not get into fights. seriously, before you try to kill something you encounter, ask if you even need to fight them. if you just randomly come across a CS patrol that has nothing to do with your mission, can you just talk your way out of a fight or use magic to become invisible to them and avoid the encounter entirely? if some MDC wild creature is threatening, can you just outrun it or fly up someplace it can't reach you? when you need to take out an opponent, can you force them to surrender before the fight starts by making it obvious that they will lose and likely die if they fight?
3) related to option 2, try to have a method in place of detecting enemies before you get into fights. this is potentially a GM issue as well... a lot of D&D DMs i've played with will simply have you get into fights no matter what. i strongly recommend *not* running rifts that way. provided the party has a reasonable capability of avoiding encounters, they should be able to avoid encounters.

Shark_Force wrote:yeah, i can't imagine it would take long before someone started bypassing whatever security method you use. subdermal implants isn't even hard; all someone has to do is get their hands on some of those implants (used or otherwise) and now they can use CS gear again, and whatever method they have of obtaining the CS gear is likely to include at least some method of accessing the subdermal implants; either you just killed a bunch of soldiers (who have implants that you can take) or you can steal them the same way you steal the other stuff.

and that assumes that nobody can just open up the equipment and remove the parts that check for the presence of the subdermal implant.

such a system might make it hard to steal a CS weapon in the middle of combat and use it immediately (without preparation, that is... i mean, given the implants aren't that hard to get, people could just get those implants too), but is unlikely to make CS gear lose all value.

of course, not every fight is going to be as profitable as a fight with technological opponents. and if you are killing off large numbers of CS soldiers, i'd expect some unwelcome attention to come your way sooner or later. but if you defeat a group of CS soldiers (or other opponent that uses equipment), you're gonna get some money out of it.

regardless, there are some other important tricks to consider:

1) various methods can be used to provide temporary sources of protection other than your MDC armour; using cover, staying hidden, magic that makes you immune to various types of damage, magical, tech, or psionic forcefields, etc.
2) trying to not get into fights. seriously, before you try to kill something you encounter, ask if you even need to fight them. if you just randomly come across a CS patrol that has nothing to do with your mission, can you just talk your way out of a fight or use magic to become invisible to them and avoid the encounter entirely? if some MDC wild creature is threatening, can you just outrun it or fly up someplace it can't reach you? when you need to take out an opponent, can you force them to surrender before the fight starts by making it obvious that they will lose and likely die if they fight?
3) related to option 2, try to have a method in place of detecting enemies before you get into fights. this is potentially a GM issue as well... a lot of D&D DMs i've played with will simply have you get into fights no matter what. i strongly recommend *not* running rifts that way. provided the party has a reasonable capability of avoiding encounters, they should be able to avoid encounters.

One of the tricks my Cyber-Knight uses with regards to the CS is to not carry contraband. No TW weapons, and nothing but NG equipment if in CS territory. That helps keep the CS off of you.

Plenty of ablative company between me and danger.
And the sort of indirect suppressive fire that should keep my opponents occupied with seeking cover or trying to find their limbs than in immediately attacking me.

The vulnerability of SDC characters dependent on MDC armor that is expensive and often difficult to repair in a world of, among many other things, MDC-inflicting faeries has always been a factor in Rifts. The cheesy way out of it is to play supernatural or super-powered MDC characters that can simply regenerate from injuries for free. A slightly less-cheesy way out of it is to use Naruni force fields. You can also work around it by playing a character who can make/repair armor such as an operator or a character with sufficient skills to make MDC leather. If you're willing to give up your independence, you can play as a member of a faction that offers free armor repair/replacement, but even CS soldiers may have to go long stretches on patrol between armor repairs.

Short of that, your best bet is to embrace the idea that your character lives in an age of shoddy: scavenging, scraping, pawning, and buying replacements to armor that gets damaged regularly and rarely gets repaired.

Naruni fields work nice if you happen to own a nuclear generator to power them indefinitely or have a Mystic Knight around to recharge your e-clips for free at ley lines.

There is a reason the mortality rates are what they are in rifts. If you are not in a big fortified city life can end very abruptly. Everybody has to poop sometime and you never know when some shadow monster/shape shifter/tectonic entity makes you regret life.

kaid wrote:There is a reason the mortality rates are what they are in rifts. If you are not in a big fortified city life can end very abruptly. Everybody has to poop sometime and you never know when some shadow monster/shape shifter/tectonic entity makes you regret life.

glitter boy power armour is designed to be worn for days at a time

(i can't recall if the body armour is designed to be worn inside the glitter boy or not, but if it is, then it also presumably has a built-in solution to the problem of needing to go to the bathroom some time )

alternately, have something built into a transport vehicle of some kind.

kaid wrote:Everybody has to poop sometime
..
tectonic entity makes you regret life.

Remember folks, "any available inanimate objects"

I always found it a lot more fun to play SDC characters. I never found it that challenging to play MD characters.

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

Running away is very good option.

Mack wrote:[

Running away is very good option.

Ah, the Rincewind School of Living Longer.

Except that you can get so proficient at running way from danger, you wind up running INTO it.

I have created high-SDC armor readily available through your local operator. Also, operators can easily produce a mlate carrier and can cut MDC materials to shape. Finally, your local operator or Wild Man can produce makeshift or leather armor. .


Creating MDC weapons are a bigger challenge...generally, MDC weapons are improvised explosives in my games

Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

Axelmania wrote:Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

That depends on the GM.

It depends if they count SD Armor as an SD structure. I'm personally inclined to say no.

Axelmania wrote:Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

RAW? Yes. RAW, it would take 251 shots from an MD weapon to shoot through a standard ream of paper and hit the person behind it. RAW, two sheets of plywood stop a boomgun. I doubt that many people run it that way, however.

Edited to place the word "ream" where I intended it to be.

dreicunan wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

RAW? Yes. RAW, it would take 251 shots from an MD weapon to shoot through a standard of paper and hit the person behind it. RAW, two sheets of plywood stop a boomgun. I doubt that many people run it that way, however.

Ummm no.
Just no.
The RAW is pretty clear that it says the last MD point does that.
If it's SDC stuff your using? Sucks to be you.
I mean you can house rule it however you like... but the rule is pretty explicit about it being MDC and not SDC.

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

RAW? Yes. RAW, it would take 251 shots from an MD weapon to shoot through a standard ream of paper and hit the person behind it. RAW, two sheets of plywood stop a boomgun. I doubt that many people run it that way, however.

Ummm no.
Just no.
The RAW is pretty clear that it says the last MD point does that.
If it's SDC stuff your using? Sucks to be you.
I mean you can house rule it however you like... but the rule is pretty explicit about it being MDC and not SDC.

I added the "ream" in where I had intended it in the quote.

RUE page 358 states:

"Note that most blasts and beams stop upon hitting their target, and if a beam goes all the way through an S.D.C. structure, it stops upon hitting whatever is behind the first target. The same is true of M.D. projectiles such as rail gun rounds."

Don't like the implications of that? House rule away! As I stated, I highly doubt that many people run it that way.

Shark_Force wrote:

kaid wrote:There is a reason the mortality rates are what they are in rifts. If you are not in a big fortified city life can end very abruptly. Everybody has to poop sometime and you never know when some shadow monster/shape shifter/tectonic entity makes you regret life.

glitter boy power armour is designed to be worn for days at a time

(i can't recall if the body armour is designed to be worn inside the glitter boy or not, but if it is, then it also presumably has a built-in solution to the problem of needing to go to the bathroom some time )

Somewhere KS mentioned there is a specific suit of mdc personal body armor for pilots to be worn inside the glitterboy, but that it wasn't included in the RMB.

RMB66 mentions "Glitter Boy personal armor or any light body armor" under Standard Equipment (the Glitter Boy Power Armor being listed as a Vehicle) was mentioned, I think they just forgot to stat its MDC.

Unfortunately "personal" and "power" begin with the same letter so there's no unique initialism to be had there...

but I figure page 220's "GLITTER BOY PILOT'S SUIT" was another term for it (that thing with the 28 on the chest by Kevin Long) so I figure we could call it the GBPS.

"Suit" seems like a better term for MDC protection worn under Power Armor, even if it is technically armor and even if it's GIANT robot-like Power Armor like the GB or Ulti-Max.

The "MDC armor under the PA" thing is a great idea, but causes conceptual problems when you get to the bulkier MDC armors and the not-so-bulky power armors, as to whether or not there's enough room to fit everything.

Using just RMB, it's kinda hard to imagine fitting a Flying Titan (pg 213) overtop a Plastic Man (pg 210) to give an example.

On the other hand, we do have some explicit examples, like DB5p59:

Lurgess wear super-heavy suits of environmental power armor, described below, over a light environmental contamination suit (5 MDC)

Wearing body armor while piloting robot vehicles is probably another underappreciated concept. CWC has an example on the cover of a gunner wearing a modified urban warrior suit.

WB5p93 mentions that Manned Gargoyle Bot pilots (20ft robots) wear T-11 enhanced armor (pg 35) or Super trooper power armor (pg 42, 7-8 ft tall). You could probably fit something like the Terrain Hopper (pg 40, 7ft) but maybe not a Glitter Boy (pg 45, 9ft) inside the bot.

Makes complete sense, in case you need to fight your way out of a pilot's compartment if a bot is ever downed.

Wear body armor... under your body armor!

NG Stalker suit... Even your underwear is MDC!

At some point you get to the issue of what armor interferes with magic. Some people/games are ok with a mage using non-environmental leather armor, others allow "light" EBA, others say yoga pants are synthetic, thus interfere with your magic usage.

In my games a light body suit(Stalker or similar) is wearable under standard EBA armor as extra protection, under non environmental armor as an environmental layer. Robot pilots can use upto "medium" armor without penalty, and PA pilots can use ""light" only. Mages can use EBA, if it is light, without penalty, as well as non-environmental armor made from natural sources, regardless of weight class. Metal Non-Environmental Armor tends to be a case by case basis. I tend to take say Mystic Knight using Non-Environmental Metal Armor that has enough plastic components to keep it from blocking magic.

This is basically my house interpretation.

dreicunan wrote:

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

RAW? Yes. RAW, it would take 251 shots from an MD weapon to shoot through a standard ream of paper and hit the person behind it. RAW, two sheets of plywood stop a boomgun. I doubt that many people run it that way, however.

Ummm no.
Just no.
The RAW is pretty clear that it says the last MD point does that.
If it's SDC stuff your using? Sucks to be you.
I mean you can house rule it however you like... but the rule is pretty explicit about it being MDC and not SDC.

I added the "ream" in where I had intended it in the quote.

RUE page 358 states:

"Note that most blasts and beams stop upon hitting their target, and if a beam goes all the way through an S.D.C. structure, it stops upon hitting whatever is behind the first target. The same is true of M.D. projectiles such as rail gun rounds."

Don't like the implications of that? House rule away! As I stated, I highly doubt that many people run it that way.

Your example though is simply one SDC structure.
You can't argue "well each sheet of paper is a separate item". We know canonically this isn't true because we are told, flat out, that armor is made up of layers and yet it only stops damage in the aggregate.
Same with a wall. it is not "paint, then wall board, then brick, then wall board, then paint so five layers" it is one aggregate object
Trying to rules lawyer something to violate the rules by trying to twist things isn't the RAW and is why no one runs it that way... because it is canonically not how it works.

Especially considering that most of your examples have 0 SDC and thus wouldn't count as a structure anymore than a leaf does... and since we know that each SDC leaf in a forest doesn't stop a MD weapon, from the canon explicit explanation of how the weapons work we can pretty safely state that your rules lawyering is not the actual rule.

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:

Axelmania wrote:Q: if I wear 2 layers of SDC protection (sweater and undershirt, for example) wouldn't that protect me against 1 MD blast?

RAW? Yes. RAW, it would take 251 shots from an MD weapon to shoot through a standard ream of paper and hit the person behind it. RAW, two sheets of plywood stop a boomgun. I doubt that many people run it that way, however.

Ummm no.
Just no.
The RAW is pretty clear that it says the last MD point does that.
If it's SDC stuff your using? Sucks to be you.
I mean you can house rule it however you like... but the rule is pretty explicit about it being MDC and not SDC.

I added the "ream" in where I had intended it in the quote.

RUE page 358 states:

"Note that most blasts and beams stop upon hitting their target, and if a beam goes all the way through an S.D.C. structure, it stops upon hitting whatever is behind the first target. The same is true of M.D. projectiles such as rail gun rounds."

Don't like the implications of that? House rule away! As I stated, I highly doubt that many people run it that way.

Your example though is simply one SDC structure.
You can't argue "well each sheet of paper is a separate item". We know canonically this isn't true because we are told, flat out, that armor is made up of layers and yet it only stops damage in the aggregate.
Same with a wall. it is not "paint, then wall board, then brick, then wall board, then paint so five layers" it is one aggregate object
Trying to rules lawyer something to violate the rules by trying to twist things isn't the RAW and is why no one runs it that way... because it is canonically not how it works.

Especially considering that most of your examples have 0 SDC and thus wouldn't count as a structure anymore than a leaf does... and since we know that each SDC leaf in a forest doesn't stop a MD weapon, from the canon explicit explanation of how the weapons work we can pretty safely state that your rules lawyering is not the actual rule.

Of course each sdc leaf doesn't stop an MD weapon. Two sdc leaves would however, per the rule. Yes, that may well contradict examples of how weapons work.

The walls and ream of paper counting as a single structure argument that you are making is a good counter-argument, I'll grant that. When this issue has come up before, people have argued that there may well be a distinction between two sheets with a bit of air between them and two sheets of paper in contact with each other. On the other hand, one can also argue that the rules lawyering is stating that things which are clearly distinct, like two sheets of paper, aren't.

I am unaware of any rule for "zero sdc" things existing. Feel free to cite it if it exists.

Please stop trying insane "extreme" rules lawyering. It's pedantic and against forum rules.

2 SDC structures touching each other become a single SDC structure. By the rules due to layered metals making a single structure with regards to armor.

Nice try at trying to "mock" the rule with the rules lawyering though.

eliakon wrote:Your example though is simply one SDC structure.
You can't argue "well each sheet of paper is a separate item".

He can and did argue that. The question is whether you find it convincing/logical

eliakon wrote:We know canonically this isn't true because we are told, flat out, that armor is made up of layers and yet it only stops damage in the aggregate.

I think the question is when to determine when multiple things (layers, parts of things, molecules) become a single thing and how to fairly assess that.

IE maybe it's as simple as "they're separate things if there's a 1 inch air gap between them", but probably not. I doubt we'll ever get a specific ruling, and I'm sure whatever ruling is made would still have some kind of exploit.

eliakon wrote:Same with a wall. it is not "paint, then wall board, then brick, then wall board, then paint so five layers" it is one aggregate object

Well, a wall is all those things, but somehow they become a collective thing in a single pool, the question is when we do that pool.

eliakon wrote:Trying to rules lawyer something to violate the rules by trying to twist things isn't the RAW and is why no one runs it that way... because it is canonically not how it works.

This is rules lawyering for sure, but I don't think the "hundred paper walls to stop fifty MD blasts" trick actually violates any rules. In fact the RAW are being used to create something which doesn't seem consistent with MD threats as we are used to envisioning them. It IS canonically how it works, unless we modify that text or better define how to collectively evaluate things as a greater whole.

eliakon wrote:most of your examples have 0 SDC and thus wouldn't count as a structure anymore than a leaf does

Not having a full 1 SDC wouldn't mean something has 0 SDC. We're never explicitly told you can't have fractional/decimal SDC (or PPE, for that matter).

I don't recall seeing anywhere that an object must have at least 1 SDC to be a structure.

eliakon wrote:we know that each SDC leaf in a forest doesn't stop a MD weapon, from the canon explicit explanation of how the weapons work

What explicit explanation are you referring to here?

HWalsh wrote:Please stop trying insane "extreme" rules lawyering. It's pedantic and against forum rules.

2 SDC structures touching each other become a single SDC structure. By the rules due to layered metals making a single structure with regards to armor.

Nice try at trying to "mock" the rule with the rules lawyering though.

I disagree with your accusation that dreicunan is being pedantic.

You seem to give the impression that rules lawyering is a bad thing, but I think a lot of us respect and try to apply the books' rules wherever possible.

I mean, it's technically rules lawyering to insist that only natural 20s can dodge/parry a natural 20 to strike, but all you're really doing is applying the RAW.

I'll make a comparison: even if you don't think it's realistic that some blind guy with -10 to strike rolling a natural 20 (which would otherwise be a modified 10) is somehow unavoidable to some guy with +30 to dodge who rolls a natural 19 (otherwise a modified 39), that's what the rules tell us, so whether or not it's being a "rules lawyer" to insist "nope, the dodge fails", I do not consider it pedantic to simply apply the rules.

That's what dreicunan is doing, I agree with him. If that explanation of how MD works against secondary targets wasn't important, it would not have been put there. If you don't like it, it's acceptable to ignore parts of RUE that don't make sense to you and seem to clash with how you think the universe ought to function in respect to how the world is constructed. Just revert back to RMB and ignore new text if you don't like it. Who's to say you can only play Rifts 1.0 or Rifts 2.0? Play Rifts 1.5 and take the best of both worlds.

Blackwater Sniper wrote:How do you keep your SDC characters alive in a MD world?

Armor will only take you so far and spending 10K+ for body armor and millions for suits of power armor repair/replacement each month isn't sustainable.

I have never had a real problem with it in most games I have been in/run actually.
Part of it was simply avoiding fights if we could because fighting was often so expensive that you came out in the red even if you won.
Part of it was that as a player we would snatch up any armor that we came across and regularly stockpiled up spare suits, and we tried our best to keep the suits we had repaired with magic (Mend the Broken is very expensive, but can be useful to 'touch up' light damage for instance)
Combined with things like magic, psionics, force fields and the rest it wasn't usually to much of a problem to keep the SDC characters alive and in body armor.
To be honest where our money went usually was missiles. Unlike body armor those suckers don't grow on trees and they tend to go 'boom' a lot and get fired a lot making them one of the less common forms of salvage and capture loot.

HWalsh wrote:Please stop trying insane "extreme" rules lawyering. It's pedantic and against forum rules.

2 SDC structures touching each other become a single SDC structure. By the rules due to layered metals making a single structure with regards to armor.

Nice try at trying to "mock" the rule with the rules lawyering though.

Axelmania refuted your spicier accusations rather nicely.

However, let's try a thought experiment. An MD weapon is shot at a couple SDC humans hugging in front of a tree. Are you arguing that the couple should be treated as a single structure?

What if one member of the couple is leaning against the tree? Is it your argument that the two humans and one tree are now a single structure?

You see, the difference between layered metals in armor and a ream of paper is that if I throw the armor up in the air, the layers don't fly all over the place. Take 500 sheets of paper and throw them up in the air, however, and you've got a bunch of sheets of paper flying around. Pointing this out isn't pedantry or "insane 'extreme' rules lawyering." It is recongizing that just because things are adjacent to each other does not mean that they are now part of a whole.

Besides, we know that sdc items being in contact with one another doesn't automatically make them count as a single structure because if it did, armor wouldn't work the way that it does. Yet sdc armor which is in direct contact with an SDC being is clearly treated as being a separate structure from the being.

dreicunan wrote:

HWalsh wrote:Please stop trying insane "extreme" rules lawyering. It's pedantic and against forum rules.

2 SDC structures touching each other become a single SDC structure. By the rules due to layered metals making a single structure with regards to armor.

Nice try at trying to "mock" the rule with the rules lawyering though.

Axelmania refuted your spicier accusations rather nicely.

However, let's try a thought experiment. An MD weapon is shot at a couple SDC humans hugging in front of a tree. Are you arguing that the couple should be treated as a single structure?

What if one member of the couple is leaning against the tree? Is it your argument that the two humans and one tree are now a single structure?

You see, the difference between layered metals in armor and a ream of paper is that if I throw the armor up in the air, the layers don't fly all over the place. Take 500 sheets of paper and throw them up in the air, however, and you've got a bunch of sheets of paper flying around. Pointing this out isn't pedantry or "insane 'extreme' rules lawyering." It is recongizing that just because things are adjacent to each other does not mean that they are now part of a whole.

Besides, we know that sdc items being in contact with one another doesn't automatically make them count as a single structure because if it did, armor wouldn't work the way that it does. Yet sdc armor which is in direct contact with an SDC being is clearly treated as being a separate structure from the being.

there are three things here that make this scenario problematic

1) we have the explicit statement in the description of how MD weapons work of how a MD weapon fired in a forest works.
And that includes explicitly blow through of MD attacks through SDC items.

2) while we have a rule about the last bit of MD protection preventing blow through... where is the GI Joe rule extended to SDC objects? With out such an extension then there is no GI Joe protection for SDC objects (see #1)

3) while a person and their armor are separate objects, a stack of identical objects is treated mechanically as one object (thus we have a brick wall, not the DC of each brick. We have a fence, not the DC of each board. We get the DC of a book, not of each page. Et multiple cetera). This goes back to the absurd claim that two leaves or two pieces of paper will stop a boom gun RAW.

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:

HWalsh wrote:Please stop trying insane "extreme" rules lawyering. It's pedantic and against forum rules.

2 SDC structures touching each other become a single SDC structure. By the rules due to layered metals making a single structure with regards to armor.

Nice try at trying to "mock" the rule with the rules lawyering though.

Axelmania refuted your spicier accusations rather nicely.

However, let's try a thought experiment. An MD weapon is shot at a couple SDC humans hugging in front of a tree. Are you arguing that the couple should be treated as a single structure?

What if one member of the couple is leaning against the tree? Is it your argument that the two humans and one tree are now a single structure?

You see, the difference between layered metals in armor and a ream of paper is that if I throw the armor up in the air, the layers don't fly all over the place. Take 500 sheets of paper and throw them up in the air, however, and you've got a bunch of sheets of paper flying around. Pointing this out isn't pedantry or "insane 'extreme' rules lawyering." It is recongizing that just because things are adjacent to each other does not mean that they are now part of a whole.

Besides, we know that sdc items being in contact with one another doesn't automatically make them count as a single structure because if it did, armor wouldn't work the way that it does. Yet sdc armor which is in direct contact with an SDC being is clearly treated as being a separate structure from the being.

there are three things here that make this scenario problematic

1) we have the explicit statement in the description of how MD weapons work of how a MD weapon fired in a forest works.
And that includes explicitly blow through of MD attacks through SDC items.

2) while we have a rule about the last bit of MD protection preventing blow through... where is the GI Joe rule extended to SDC objects? With out such an extension then there is no GI Joe protection for SDC objects (see #1)

3) while a person and their armor are separate objects, a stack of identical objects is treated mechanically as one object (thus we have a brick wall, not the DC of each brick. We have a fence, not the DC of each board. We get the DC of a book, not of each page. Et multiple cetera). This goes back to the absurd claim that two leaves or two pieces of paper will stop a boom gun RAW.

#1 We also have the explicit statement that MD weapons stop at the first thing they hit, or the second if they blow through an SDC structure.

#2 I'm not referring to the GI Joe rule, I'm referring to the explicit statement that an MD weapon that blows through an SDC structure stops at whatever it hits next.

#3 A fence or a wall is actually joined together in some way, not just stacked against each other. But as I noted, there is the perspective that the two things need space between them. So for the sake of argument let's say that this is correct. Following the rule that if you blast through an SDC structure the MD weapon stops at whatever you hit next, that means that RAW it stops at the next thing it hits! The only absurd thing to claim is that the rule says something other than what it says!

Now, that may seem silly, and I doubt many people run it that way, but there is no way to get around what the text says.

Also, you never answered my question about a couple hugging in front of a tree. If your answer is that they aren't identical things, then what about identical twins? Does the tree get hit?

dreicunan wrote:

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:

HWalsh wrote:Please stop trying insane "extreme" rules lawyering. It's pedantic and against forum rules.

2 SDC structures touching each other become a single SDC structure. By the rules due to layered metals making a single structure with regards to armor.

Nice try at trying to "mock" the rule with the rules lawyering though.

Axelmania refuted your spicier accusations rather nicely.

However, let's try a thought experiment. An MD weapon is shot at a couple SDC humans hugging in front of a tree. Are you arguing that the couple should be treated as a single structure?

What if one member of the couple is leaning against the tree? Is it your argument that the two humans and one tree are now a single structure?

You see, the difference between layered metals in armor and a ream of paper is that if I throw the armor up in the air, the layers don't fly all over the place. Take 500 sheets of paper and throw them up in the air, however, and you've got a bunch of sheets of paper flying around. Pointing this out isn't pedantry or "insane 'extreme' rules lawyering." It is recongizing that just because things are adjacent to each other does not mean that they are now part of a whole.

Besides, we know that sdc items being in contact with one another doesn't automatically make them count as a single structure because if it did, armor wouldn't work the way that it does. Yet sdc armor which is in direct contact with an SDC being is clearly treated as being a separate structure from the being.

there are three things here that make this scenario problematic

1) we have the explicit statement in the description of how MD weapons work of how a MD weapon fired in a forest works.
And that includes explicitly blow through of MD attacks through SDC items.

2) while we have a rule about the last bit of MD protection preventing blow through... where is the GI Joe rule extended to SDC objects? With out such an extension then there is no GI Joe protection for SDC objects (see #1)

3) while a person and their armor are separate objects, a stack of identical objects is treated mechanically as one object (thus we have a brick wall, not the DC of each brick. We have a fence, not the DC of each board. We get the DC of a book, not of each page. Et multiple cetera). This goes back to the absurd claim that two leaves or two pieces of paper will stop a boom gun RAW.

#1 We also have the explicit statement that MD weapons stop at the first thing they hit, or the second if they blow through an SDC structure.

#2 I'm not referring to the GI Joe rule, I'm referring to the explicit statement that an MD weapon that blows through an SDC structure stops at whatever it hits next.

#3 A fence or a wall is actually joined together in some way, not just stacked against each other. But as I noted, there is the perspective that the two things need space between them. So for the sake of argument let's say that this is correct. Following the rule that if you blast through an SDC structure the MD weapon stops at whatever you hit next, that means that RAW it stops at the next thing it hits! The only absurd thing to claim is that the rule says something other than what it says!

Now, that may seem silly, and I doubt many people run it that way, but there is no way to get around what the text says.

Also, you never answered my question about a couple hugging in front of a tree. If your answer is that they aren't identical things, then what about identical twins? Does the tree get hit?

Easy answer:

The rule doesn't say "SDC object" it says "Structure" a structure is defined as something constructed.

Living things? Not a structure. Trees? Debateable.

So two humans hugging the tree.

MD blast goes through the first human, hits the tree, the first structure then obliterates the second human, not a structure, then stops at the next tree it hits.

The argument of, "leaf!" Is silly. A leaf is not a structure.

The rule was clearly intended to stop people from shooting people through entire buildings and/or obliterating entire towns with a single missed shot.

Without this rule in place, if you shot an MD pistol in an SD town (which do exist in Rifts, most frontier towns actually) and missed you would vaporize every building in your line of effect.

As it is you'll hit the first wall, then blast inward (destroying the wall) then destroy the other wall and probably collapse the whole building.

MD weapons are no joke in an SD town. This rule also stops people from sniping people outside line of effect.
Ala "I'm on the other side of this building, total cover, full concealment as I'm behind a building. My infrared vision lets me see the target's outline. It is impossible to see me or dodge the effect. Zap.

As Elikon added putting a bunch of pages together creates a structure. What is that structure? A book.

This rule also allows for "miracle saves" so when the bad guy shoots the hero and the hero looks dead only for them to shoot the villain in the back because the round when through their jacket (one structure) but struck their lucky flask (a second structure).

Of course there will be what I call "bad faith" players who will try to game the system. It is up to the GM to smack such players down.

So, "I cover my body with phone books" at which point I, as the GM say, "Okay you have phone book armor. It has 5 SDC. It is one structure."

"Oh! I put another layer of phone book armor on, hey so it's now two structures."

"No. You made reinforced phone book armor. It has 10 sdc."

An important skill a GM must have in any game (esp. Older games) is what I call "the ability to discern player intention."

You can stop most munchkin attempts with a dose of discerning player intention.

Look for phrases like, "I'm technically telling the truth, so it's not deception."

Smack that down right then and there with: "You are omitting information with intention to mislead or force your target to come to an incorrect conclusion due to the specific wording you're using. It's deception."

It's the same thing here, "It's technically two structures because it's two leaves!"

A leaf is a structure in the same manner as hair is, meaning it's not. You can try to rules layer it, but the attempt is thinner than your lawyer of paper armor and as transparent as glass.

Anyone sane can RIP it apart and see right through it.

If you will remember the time James Rhodes took over for Tony Stark as Iron Man, he constantly got headaches because the armor was not set to his brainwaves. I know that's a comic book, but the same problems hold true in reality. Imagine wearing the wrong prescription glasses for a week or two. I got LASIK a few years ago so I no longer wear them, but I know what it's like: eyestrain, headaches, and muscle-aches from being tense all the time.

Any suits of armor in the future will not be mechanically moved by physical actuators, but instead work off of a fly-by-wire system customized to the wearer. Even in the military we had our own rifles and we zeroed them to our eyes and body. If I were to pick up someone else's rifle I wouldn't be able to hit much past 50m on an aimed shot. Customizing equipment is not new to a fighting force and shouldn't be looked at as such.

Built-in security systems could be as simple as fingerprint/iris scan/bio-metrics, password, brain-scan, or neuralink.

@HWalsh: A building can be a structure, but we can also talk about the structure of a cave system, or of a diamond., or indeed of a person. The most basic idea of a structure is the arrangement of parts of something complex. However, no "construction" is required to be a structure. You've conflated "structure" and "construct." A leaf is most definitely a structure.

An important skill for players to have in any game is to have what I call "the ability to discern GM intention." Look for things like the GM arbitrarily changing the definitions of things.

And I thank you for giving a perfect example of what it really means to be a "bad faith" GM when you declare that what you previously declared to be a structure, a book, ceases to be one when a player has their character do something entirely consistent with how physics clearly works in the game universe. A flask and armor get to count as two structures, but if I take a book, which you have declared to be a single structure, and put it behind another book as an attempt to stop a single MD blast, suddenly 1+1=1?

"Anyone sane" can spot the lack of consistency and integrity on the part of the GM such behavior demonstrates. My personal recommendation is to try and reason with them, but if them prove impervious to reason, wipe the dust from your shoes/boots/sandals and move along.

dreicunan wrote:@HWalsh: A building can be a structure, but we can also talk about the structure of a cave system, or of a diamond., or indeed of a person. The most basic idea of a structure is the arrangement of parts of something complex. However, no "construction" is required to be a structure. You've conflated "structure" and "construct." A leaf is most definitely a structure.

An important skill for players to have in any game is to have what I call "the ability to discern GM intention." Look for things like the GM arbitrarily changing the definitions of things.

And I thank you for giving a perfect example of what it really means to be a "bad faith" GM when you declare that what you previously declared to be a structure, a book, ceases to be one when a player has their character do something entirely consistent with how physics clearly works in the game universe. A flask and armor get to count as two structures, but if I take a book, which you have declared to be a single structure, and put it behind another book as an attempt to stop a single MD blast, suddenly 1+1=1?

"Anyone sane" can spot the lack of consistency and integrity on the part of the GM such behavior demonstrates. My personal recommendation is to try and reason with them, but if them prove impervious to reason, wipe the dust from your shoes/boots/sandals and move along.

Nice try, but that's not going to work. You're trying to regurgitate an argument to claim superiority. Nobody, least of all me, is going to buy it or take the bait.

You're arguing in bad faith, plain and simple, and everyone can see that. You just don't like the rule, you think it is dumb, and you want it gone by any means possible. So here you are.

You're not going to be able to win, it is more honorable for you to admit defeat with grace.

Edit to add:
If you don't like a GM stopping rules lawyering and trying to game the system, you are completely welcome to leave the table. Some players find that playstyle fun after all. I, as a GM and as a player, hate it and don't tolerate it.

HWalsh wrote:

dreicunan wrote:@HWalsh: A building can be a structure, but we can also talk about the structure of a cave system, or of a diamond., or indeed of a person. The most basic idea of a structure is the arrangement of parts of something complex. However, no "construction" is required to be a structure. You've conflated "structure" and "construct." A leaf is most definitely a structure.

An important skill for players to have in any game is to have what I call "the ability to discern GM intention." Look for things like the GM arbitrarily changing the definitions of things.

And I thank you for giving a perfect example of what it really means to be a "bad faith" GM when you declare that what you previously declared to be a structure, a book, ceases to be one when a player has their character do something entirely consistent with how physics clearly works in the game universe. A flask and armor get to count as two structures, but if I take a book, which you have declared to be a single structure, and put it behind another book as an attempt to stop a single MD blast, suddenly 1+1=1?

"Anyone sane" can spot the lack of consistency and integrity on the part of the GM such behavior demonstrates. My personal recommendation is to try and reason with them, but if them prove impervious to reason, wipe the dust from your shoes/boots/sandals and move along.

Nice try, but that's not going to work. You're trying to regurgitate an argument to claim superiority. Nobody, least of all me, is going to buy it or take the bait.

You're arguing in bad faith, plain and simple, and everyone can see that. You just don't like the rule, you think it is dumb, and you want it gone by any means possible. So here you are.

There's no bad faith on my end. The rule says that an MD weapon that blasts through an SDC structure stops at the next thing that it hits. My argument is that the rule means what it says, and not something else. That isn't some kind of stealth campaign to get the rule eliminated. That is just acknowledging that words mean things.

You're not going to be able to win, it is more honorable for you to admit defeat with grace.

Edit to add:
If you don't like a GM stopping rules lawyering and trying to game the system, you are completely welcome to leave the table. Some players find that playstyle fun after all. I, as a GM and as a player, hate it and don't tolerate it.

You make me laugh.

Logic, however, is on my side here. I'm not the one claiming that two structures become one because "that's just a player trying to game the system." You are the one claiming that 1+1=1 if you've decided that the player is improperly motivated. If the rules say that an MD weapon that blasts through an SDC structure stops at the second one, and you, as a GM, have told me that a book counts as a structure, then it isn't "rules-lawyering" to think "oh, then if an MD weapon shoots through a book, it will stop at a second one." That is just recognizing the logical consequences of the rules and the facts that you, as a GM, presented.

dreicunan wrote:

eliakon wrote:there are three things here that make this scenario problematic

1) we have the explicit statement in the description of how MD weapons work of how a MD weapon fired in a forest works.
And that includes explicitly blow through of MD attacks through SDC items.

2) while we have a rule about the last bit of MD protection preventing blow through... where is the GI Joe rule extended to SDC objects? With out such an extension then there is no GI Joe protection for SDC objects (see #1)

3) while a person and their armor are separate objects, a stack of identical objects is treated mechanically as one object (thus we have a brick wall, not the DC of each brick. We have a fence, not the DC of each board. We get the DC of a book, not of each page. Et multiple cetera). This goes back to the absurd claim that two leaves or two pieces of paper will stop a boom gun RAW.

#1 We also have the explicit statement that MD weapons stop at the first thing they hit, or the second if they blow through an SDC structure.

And again... where is this explicit statement found?

dreicunan wrote:#2 I'm not referring to the GI Joe rule, I'm referring to the explicit statement that an MD weapon that blows through an SDC structure stops at whatever it hits next.

you keep saying that there is such a rule... but won't tell me where to find it.
Where is this rule found?

dreicunan wrote:#3 A fence or a wall is actually joined together in some way, not just stacked against each other. But as I noted, there is the perspective that the two things need space between them. So for the sake of argument let's say that this is correct. Following the rule that if you blast through an SDC structure the MD weapon stops at whatever you hit next, that means that RAW it stops at the next thing it hits! The only absurd thing to claim is that the rule says something other than what it says!

Now, that may seem silly, and I doubt many people run it that way, but there is no way to get around what the text says.

Also, you never answered my question about a couple hugging in front of a tree. If your answer is that they aren't identical things, then what about identical twins? Does the tree get hit?

Well since you haven't provided the citation for the rule in question I can't really answer now can I?
Since I don't know what it actually says, just what your personal interpretation of the most absurd version of the rule is.

Is there some reason you won't provide the citation for this rule?

eliakon wrote:1) we have the explicit statement in the description of how MD weapons work of how a MD weapon fired in a forest works.
And that includes explicitly blow through of MD attacks through SDC items.

Like I asked earlier when you brought that up, do you recall the book/page for that? I might vaguely remember it but can't remember the context.

eliakon wrote:2) while we have a rule about the last bit of MD protection preventing blow through... where is the GI Joe rule extended to SDC objects? With out such an extension then there is no GI Joe protection for SDC objects (see #1)

There is no GI Joe rule for SDC objects: it's a completely different rule. It works like this:

destroyed MDC object stops all damage, thing behind it is fine
destroyed SDC object directs all damage to 2nd object behind it, but 3rd objects behind that object is fine

eliakon wrote:3) while a person and their armor are separate objects, a stack of identical objects is treated mechanically as one object (thus we have a brick wall, not the DC of each brick.

A brick wall is not necessarily guaranteed to have identical bricks.

Plus we have humans composed of stacks of non-identical molecules, so it's something other than identicality which matters.

eliakon wrote:We have a fence, not the DC of each board. We get the DC of a book, not of each page. Et multiple cetera). This goes back to the absurd claim that two leaves or two pieces of paper will stop a boom gun RAW.

The simple matter of fact is that 1SDC + 1SDC is better than 99SDC when it comes to stopping 1 MD, as absurd as it seems.

Whatever the barrier it is between 1 object and 2 distinct objects is an important one, however you determine it.

HWalsh wrote:The rule doesn't say "SDC object" it says "Structure" a structure is defined as something constructed.

Living things? Not a structure. Trees? Debateable.

Living things have SDC in Palladium. Your argument might've held some weight back in the 80s when in Palladium RPG living things only had HP, but it doesn't work now.

With the way Palladium uses the term "structural", it clearly includes living things, so "structure" would too.

HWalsh wrote:The argument of, "leaf!" Is silly. A leaf is not a structure.

I'm gonna quote Rifts South America which I think sheds some light here. Page 66:
This spell transfoms normal trees and plants into MDC structures. A blade of grass has one MDC point

I think if a blade of grass is a structure then so is a leaf.

HWalsh wrote:The rule was clearly intended to stop people from shooting people through entire buildings and/or obliterating entire towns with a single missed shot.

Even if a laser beam went forever it wouldn't obliterate a town because a laser beam isn't very wide and towns are very wide.

HWalsh wrote:Without this rule in place, if you shot an MD pistol in an SD town (which do exist in Rifts, most frontier towns actually) and missed you would vaporize every building in your line of effect.

Or just certain walls of those buildings, as being given a static amount of SDC for a building seems rare.

HWalsh wrote:You're arguing in bad faith, plain and simple, and everyone can see that.
You just don't like the rule, you think it is dumb, and you want it gone by any means possible.

Dreicunan is supporting an existing rule. It sounds like you are the one who doesn't like the rule and wants it gone?

eliakon wrote:

dreicunan wrote:#1 We also have the explicit statement that MD weapons stop at the first thing they hit, or the second if they blow through an SDC structure.

And again... where is this explicit statement found?

dreicunan wrote:#2 I'm not referring to the GI Joe rule, I'm referring to the explicit statement that an MD weapon that blows through an SDC structure stops at whatever it hits next.

you keep saying that there is such a rule... but won't tell me where to find it. Where is this rule found?

dreicunan wrote:#3 A fence or a wall is actually joined together in some way, not just stacked against each other. But as I noted, there is the perspective that the two things need space between them. So for the sake of argument let's say that this is correct. Following the rule that if you blast through an SDC structure the MD weapon stops at whatever you hit next, that means that RAW it stops at the next thing it hits! The only absurd thing to claim is that the rule says something other than what it says!

Now, that may seem silly, and I doubt many people run it that way, but there is no way to get around what the text says.

Also, you never answered my question about a couple hugging in front of a tree. If your answer is that they aren't identical things, then what about identical twins? Does the tree get hit?

Well since you haven't provided the citation for the rule in question I can't really answer now can I? Since I don't know what it actually says, just what your personal interpretation of the most absurd version of the rule is. Is there some reason you won't provide the citation for this rule?

Dreicunan quoted it earlier June 1st:

dreicunan wrote:RUE page 358 states:

"Note that most blasts and beams stop upon hitting their target, and if a beam goes all the way through an S.D.C. structure, it stops upon hitting whatever is behind the first target. The same is true of M.D. projectiles such as rail gun rounds."

Did you forget?

I can't think of anything "whatever is beyond" would not include. The only question is where to draw the boundary of "first target" and when multiple targets merge to become a single target.

@Eliakon: p. 358 of RUE, which as Axelmania just pointed out I had already cited and quoted, days ago. I'd also point out that you had quoted the post in which I cited it in one of your replies!

@Axelmania: Great find on how "structure" has been used in reference to plants and, specifically, a blade of grass!

I still want to find that "forest" text referred to earlier though, it sounds familiar...

I did notice one interesting distinction upon taking a fresh look at that...

This is in a section called "lasers, ions and particle beam weapons".
Although it says "most blasts and beams stop upon hitting"
The subsequent note only says "if a beam goes all the way through".

Only "beam" is reiterated, not "blast". So this rule may not apply to blasts.

"M.D. projectiles such as rail gun rounds" appear to function like beams (the "protected by two walls of rice paper" rule, or whatever you want to call it) but "blasts" are not explicitly covered under this.

This section opens with "a thin beam or a pulse of energy", so I believe "pulse of energy" would be what "blast" refers to.

We're also previously told "when the beam or pulse hits", establishing that dichotomy in the next sentence. Of course, it then gets confusing because when they list the 2 outcomes ("vaporizes part of the body" v "slices through a body") the order of mention makes it sound like beams vaporize and pulses slice, but "a beam goes all the way through" makes it sound like beams slice and pulses vaporize.

The subsequent sentences use the bolding:

"Ion beam" (presumably "slices" like a laser)
"Particle beam" explicitly "mists" (vaporizes rather than slices) though, so it seems to be a "beam" that functions like a "blast"
"Plasma blast"

As to what to name this rule... "Stops Upon Hitting Whatever Is Behind" forms the acronym SUHWIB... can we remember that.

SUHWIB doesn't seem like it would apply to plasma at all: because plasma, being a "blast", actually falls upon the first guideline, which is even more anti-MD than SUHWIB:

I would call the first case the SUHT rule ("Stops Upon Hitting Target", derived from "most blasts and beams stop upon hitting their target")

The only exception to the SUHT rule is the "Goes All The Way Through An SDC Structure" (or "GATWTASS") rule, which is only described in relation to Beams and MD projectiles such as railgun rounds.

Given that most blasts and beams follow the SUHT rule, presumably most railgun rounds follow the SUHT rule too. The only condition where SUHT (nothing behind target is hit, essentially the same as the GIjoe/BOAP rule for MDC armor) would not apply is when we can establish something "goes all the way through".

The question is: how do we establish that? Does depleting all SDC guarantee it? May it require even less?

For example: say you have a laser pistol doing 1 MD. That's not enough to destroy a wall with 300 SDC, but perhaps it might go through it anyway.

Conversely, what if you can destroy something (say, 1 MD laser vs a 50 SDC wall) without actually going "all the way" through it?

We're basically searching for some kind of "overpenetration" rules for cover.

Interpreting "All Way Through" (vs simply "through" which could include merely going "Partway Through") would probably work well if using RUE 359's Optional "Beat the Odds" rules, because the first table has a 1-in-5 (roll 61-80 on percentile) chance of getting a "shot clean through" result, which I think seems reasonably equivalent to "all the way". You're not "clean through" if something doesn't go "all the way" through, basically.

Meaning that if using that means of resolve, 80% of the time the SUHT rule makes SDC protection just as good as MDC, because just like the BOAP rule, they both give GI Joe-like effects.

20% of the time though, SDC is sub-par to MDC and if penetrated, will allow damage to whatever is behind the target.

That's the full stop though: there doesn't appear to be any case where a 3rd domino can take the hit.

Heroes Unlimited GM's Guide pg 57 wrote:If the damage inflicted equals or surpasses 25% of the barrier's S.D.C., the superbeing successfully punched right through.
A one-handed punch leaves a fist-sized hole!
Whether or not the punch struck anyone behind that barrier depends on whether or not someone was standing within two feet of it.
Such a punch does half damage to that individual

If we can't find any overpenetration guidelines in Rifts, I would say perhaps we should adopt these rules for "The Punch Through attack"

In that case: 1 MD equals 25% of the SDC of something with 400 SDC, so it would punch through, but it wouldn't punch through something with 401 SDC.

The halving of damage seems like a fair compromise to no damage at all. It actually makes MD a little deadlier because normally you'd want 1 MD to deplete the entire 400 SDC of the armor (4 shots) but here, it gets through and manages to inflict 50 SDC on whatever is behind it.

The original Sourcebook 1 does indeed have it. Revised, however, does not.

Baby-Go-Boom

Consisting of 100 1 MDC sheets interspersed with fusion blocks and sheaves of paper at a 2:1:1 ratio, the BGB has proven the favored armor of the Cube Foxes of the Ozarks (Kankoran Mega Juicer/Cold Blooded). They are best known for wearing such in otherwise pointless engagements, waddling into combat such that every attack upon them results in a 4d6x10 explosion over a 10' radius with the wearer as epicenter, whilst muttering the word "canon" throughout. While it is most often thought the phrase is a misinterpretation of the word cannon by the generally technologically averse kankoran, it is instead a commentary on acceptable activity during wartime, insofar as the repeated idiot-like sputtering of canon has been widely perceived as tediously insipid for literal decades.

Even if it does not over penetrate hunting SDC critters with an MDC weapon basically results in a pile of bloody mist and charred meat. The amount of usable stuff you would have remaining would be minimal. Also a lot of cities MDC weapons are straight banned but SDC weapons are okay because the cops are immune to it.