Rules Problems

[The ineffible GM]

What problems do you see in the Palladium rules system? This is NOT a thread to bash Palladium or rant about how much you might hate a particular facet of the system. I'm looking to create a critique of things that people would like to see changed.
Talk about something that, for some reason, is an inconsistency in the rules of something that needs cleaning up, or something that needs definition. PLEASE: Give your reasons. As I said, this isn't about flaming, this is a collective examination of the things we feel need to be addressed in the rules system that we use to run the games that we all love to play.

I, for instance, feel that the attributes need addressing. Why? Most importantly because an attribute of 9 is functionally the same as an attribute of 15. It's been said that the difference is something for you the player to role play, and it's an oppourtunity to form your character around. That's nice and all, but why not then simply list stats as being Exceptional and Non-Exceptional? I think that the numbers of the attributes should MEAN something within the mechanics of the game.

I have others, but I just want to start the ball rolling.
What do you feel is flawed?
Why?

Remember: This isn't about hate, this is about research.
What we need here is information, not boiling blood.

[Talavar]

I agree about the attributes - bonuses and penalties should start sooner, and then maybe we wouldn't need so many characters with stats that approach the boundaries of human ability.

One area I think needs some attention are the various types of strength and lifting weights. The advantages and equivalencies between supernatural, robotic, augmented & normal strength need to be hashed out in more detail and codified. We see with various armours that a character needs strength 30 let's say, or 18 of supernatural strength. This needs to be clarified so we can point to a book and say supernatural strength x = robotic strength y = augmented strength z.

[Ltlconf]

Hello folks,

As you said Talavar, and I would also like skills to be tied more directly to specific attributes. Pretty much every other skill system does it and it makes sense. I don't care HOW long a man with an IQ of 60 tries, he's never going to master advanced mathmatics, though somehow a character with the equivelent, ie around a '6' or so, can at least reach a pretty solid grasp! Heck, he'll reach mastery! The idea of a pilot with thw physical prowess score of '4' is pretty laughable, particularly a helicoptor pilot (which takes above average coordination from the get-go). A heart surgeon with a PP of 5 and a IQ of 7? Yeesh!
I've always thought this a bit dopey and at least the stats below normal should have negatives applied beyond a lower number of skills. Something anyway.
I house-rule the percentage point increase anyway and the original rules are quick and dirty as the rules intended (minimizes the paperwork). For houses rules I allow the players to boost one half their skills fully while the other half is divided: 1/2 left alone, and other by 1/2 the normal percentage boost rounded up. Not realistic, but simple and thus keeps in the spirit of the system.
For any IQ score below 10, I think at the very least a GM should make a call on what skills a player can choose or how far he can go at the least.
My two cents.

[Nekira Sudacne]

What problems do you see in the Palladium rules system? This is NOT a thread to bash Palladium or rant about how much you might hate a particular facet of the system. I'm looking to create a critique of things that people would like to see changed.
Talk about something that, for some reason, is an inconsistency in the rules of something that needs cleaning up, or something that needs definition. PLEASE: Give your reasons. As I said, this isn't about flaming, this is a collective examination of the things we feel need to be addressed in the rules system that we use to run the games that we all love to play.

I, for instance, feel that the attributes need addressing. Why? Most importantly because an attribute of 9 is functionally the same as an attribute of 15. It's been said that the difference is something for you the player to role play, and it's an oppourtunity to form your character around. That's nice and all, but why not then simply list stats as being Exceptional and Non-Exceptional? I think that the numbers of the attributes should MEAN something within the mechanics of the game.

I have others, but I just want to start the ball rolling.
What do you feel is flawed?
Why?

Remember: This isn't about hate, this is about research.
What we need here is information, not boiling blood.

My main complaint is that a lot of Men of Arms OCC's get all their good stuff right off the bat. I mean, a juicer gets a crapload of advantages over Joe Average right off the bat, but there's scarecly 1 or 2 points diffrence between a level 1 juicer and a level 4 one.

[cyber-yukongil v2.5]

if anyones interested, I've redone pretty much the whole system, addressing all the problems listed thusfar. Stats, skills, stats pumping skills, skills pumping stats, growing character classes, perception, combat, size differences in combat, initiative, attacks per melee, magic and psionics.

just PM me if anyones interested.

[The ineffible GM]

This is great guys, keep it coming. What is it in the system, the core rules that appear in all the main books, that seems mechanically flawed?

OCC Redundancy - enough with the OCCs that only differ by two or three skill selections.

OCCs & Required Skills - why on earth is the LLW illiterate? if it is essential to the OCC they must have the skill available to them. if an OCC can have a skill they must also be able to take its prerequisite skill.

Thank you for the long list Epic, but these particular OCC/RCC issues aren't so much what I'm looking for. OCCs tend to be setting specific. The core Megaversal system is what the thread is geared towards.

MDC - too much here is broken that i can't fit it all into one post. needless to say this is the first thing i would scrap if i could scrap only one thing.

I don't want to get into the MDC question here. For one, because it's setting specific rather than a part of the core rules, and two because I'm somewhat of the opinion that there is no real fix for it. MDC is a pain because it shatters everything we know about the laws of physics, but at the same time it's rather fundamental to the setting of Rifts for it's hyper-power-romping-adventure-cheesy-comicbookish tone.

Damage Scalling - this would be the second thing i would rewrite completely.

Please, elaborate. Does damage need to scale with character levels? Are you refering to the power creep that has been spoken of in Rifts? Is it something of a particular setting that you're against or is it something from the core rules, found in most every setting?

[Rallan]

Modern combat. Everyone who doesn't have autododge (ie everyone who isn't a juicer) gets penalized for dodging or taking any form of evasive action. It means that the game actively discourages you from making your character do anything in a shoot out except stand there, blaze away on full automatic, and hope that your enemy goes down in a pool of blood before you run out of hit points. If both combatants are within range of each other, pretty much everything is redundant except for how much damage they can inflict and how much damage they can withstand, because the moment you do anything other than shoot you're just wasting your actions.

[verdilak]

Modern combat. Everyone who doesn't have autododge (ie everyone who isn't a juicer) gets penalized for dodging or taking any form of evasive action. It means that the game actively discourages you from making your character do anything in a shoot out except stand there, blaze away on full automatic, and hope that your enemy goes down in a pool of blood before you run out of hit points. If both combatants are within range of each other, pretty much everything is redundant except for how much damage they can inflict and how much damage they can withstand, because the moment you do anything other than shoot you're just wasting your actions.

Umm... so deciding to zig-zag and stuff to get away or to a safer place to shoot from is redundant? It's much harder to shoot a moving target. Personally, I think that if player 1 shoots villian 2 who dodges, then when player 1 shoots again there should be a negative to the strike roll since its harder to shoot a moving person, even if they are within 100 feet of each other.

[demos606]

Hitting a moving target at 500 yds is marginally more difficult for a good shooter than a nonmoving target. Muzzle velocites of 3000+ fps on combat rifles make even a full sprint near meaningless in terms of difficulty to hit. This is one of the many reasons behind the (now revised) -10/5 to dodge bullets and lasers at close/medium range. Not being behind cover when guns start firing is supposed to be dangerous, that's why the rules are what they are. Firing a gun with any real accuracy while moving actually is difficult, once again, the rules are what they are for good reason.

[The ineffible GM]

A) Hitting a moving target = Zigzaging does make for a more difficult target, but ONLY really when the shooter is looking down on the target. It can help against snipers, but in a clearing or in a house, it won't do much good.

Now, the reality of the situation aside,

B) Palladium rules make the assumption that you cannot dodge bullets. Personally (and I believe there are many more who feel the same way) I think that while the velocity of bullets far outclasses human ability to move, if we can see someone aiming a gun at us we can presumably try to avoid the direction of the gun.

So, you can't dodge bullets. But you can avoid the aim of the gun-wielder. Is this best reflected as is, with a -10 penalty to dodging modern weapons? Is it better simply to say you can use your normal dodge but you have to be able to see the attacker? Even if it's pretty much impossible to dodge ranged attacks, everyone still suffers from the "If the natural roll before bonuses is 4 or less, you miss" rule, so everyone has a 20% chance of being missed, right?

I can't help but think that generally, in gunfights, the tactic is "find cover, shoot at them, and hope they don't hit you." I have never been in a gunfight, mind you. I'm a graphic designer who likes to write and game in my free time, I've fired a gun at only one time in my life, when I was twelve, in scouts, with a bolt action rifle on a firing range. Police officers, soldiers, all of you who have experienced an actual gun fight, please weigh in on this. I'd love to hear what you say.

Even if we can agree that the -10 makes for a more realistic game, does that make for a better game? Do we want more realistic or more cinematic gun fights? Do we want to have that choice for ourselves?

And please, keep it coming! Flaws in the mechanics of the system, let's hear them.

[SkyeFyre]

Dodging in a gunfight
I don't really see that much of a problem with this. I see it as it's easier to point the gun directly at you and just pull the trigger when you're just 20 feet away than it is to shoot at someone when they're 300 feet away. As far as using all your actions dodging, that's fine with me. I do however allow my players to dodge and shoot at the same time. However such shots count as wild and have a -6 to strike. This allows them to leap for cover while firing and if you have cover you're set because buddy is going to need to make a called shot to be able to hit you while you can just keep blasting away at him.

Damage Scaling
Something that does annoy me a bit is that Mr.Headhunter with like 50MDC can essentially run in and waste an Enforcer solo (Well probably not but it's just an example). I want my little guns to do little damage, and my big guns to do big damage. Big things take big damage, little things can only take little damage.

MDC
I love it. It's fine. The only problem with MDC in the settings is that they are supposed to be rare, yet everything we see is all MDC. I think if there was more book space devoted to SDC that it would put MDC where it should be. I keep the prices as they are (Super expensive) and I make the pay for my players fairly low (Relative to the situation) so they have to save up and plan. They can't just go "Bah, those bandits with uzis and no body armor are giving you guys problems? No problem, we'll just mist 'em" Because first of all, the pay will more than likely not cover the expenses they used to deal with the problem. (Here's your pay of 5000cr. Go spend it all recharging your e-clips) and secondly, if they really need their MDC equipment (Monster, robot...etc) They won't have it.

Illiterate Leyline Walkers
I don't see why they need to be able to read. Part of the whole gritty atmosphere of Rifts is lack of education. It even states that many mages cannot even read. No problem here.

Scattered rules or referrals
Nothing annoys me more than "Refer to this book for this". It seems that all of the rules are all spread out and you have to go find them. I'm glad for RUE but it still doesn't fix anything. I got Dinosaur Swamp for some dinosaurs. While an excellent book I hate the section saying "Hey! Thanks for buying this book, by the way if you want this list of dinosaurs go check out this other book" I am perfectly fine with reprinting information. Maybe I happen to not be interested or have no need for a West book.

Difference of level
I find that other than mages, most classes don't really seem to progress very much. You'll notice it with weapons but in straight up hand to hand there's not much difference between a level 1 and a level 15. Maybe a max of +3 or +4.

[DocS]

An RPG is roughly four things.

1) Setting
2) Character generation
3) Combat system
4) skill system

The Palladium settings are good to excellent. Their character generation is terribly unflexible. Their combat system is functional....

And then there is the skill system.... oooooh... the skill system. "I have Drive at 82%..." what does that exactly *mean*? And what does it mean if you're in a chase and you're chasing a guy with drive skill of 86%?

The skill system is non-functional, and any sort of opposition is terribly done, take the following example.

Burster #1 "I burst into flames!" (Uses 'burst into flames; power)
Burster #2 "Oh no you don't!" (uses 'extinguish flames power on burster #1).

In all of Palladium, there is simply no good mechanic ever given for a situation like this.

[demos606]

So, you can't dodge bullets. But you can avoid the aim of the gun-wielder. Is this best reflected as is, with a -10 penalty to dodging modern weapons? Is it better simply to say you can use your normal dodge but you have to be able to see the attacker? Even if it's pretty much impossible to dodge ranged attacks, everyone still suffers from the "If the natural roll before bonuses is 4 or less, you miss" rule, so everyone has a 20% chance of being missed, right?

In point of fact, only a natural 1 is a guaranteed miss. Anything else that modifies to 8+ (as of R:UE, Splicers, BtS2) hits for ranged combat. Anything else that modifies to 4+ hits in melee.

[Rallan]

Umm... so deciding to zig-zag and stuff to get away or to a safer place to shoot from is redundant? It's much harder to shoot a moving target. Personally, I think that if player 1 shoots villian 2 who dodges, then when player 1 shoots again there should be a negative to the strike roll since its harder to shoot a moving person, even if they are within 100 feet of each other.

Yes but we're talking about problems with the rules. The fact that you have to come up with a "Personally, I think..." fix is a good sign that the rule has a problem.

Especially when they decided "-10 to dodge energy weapons". That made sure that even folks who don't really think the rules through realised that combat was a standing around and firing bursts game

EDIT: and of course in the MDC settings, there's almost never such a thing as real cover, just concealment. And all it takes is one plasma mini-missile and there isn't any concealment any more either

[The ineffible GM]

We've covered a lot of ground, but is that it?
Have we uncovered all the inherent mechanical problems of the Palladium Megaversal system?

[asajosh]

Small gripe here.
I never like the Construction Cost for Tech Wiz items. A material cost based on PPE expended seems not too well thought out to me.
As a solution I usually figure construction cost twice. Once by the rules and once that reflects cost of materials and gems ONLY. Honestly, if your item consists of a pair of boots say and some gems and wire, why does it cost 100K credits to create (cost of prototypes and additional R&D aside)?

[The ineffible GM]

Small gripe here.
I never like the Construction Cost for Tech Wiz items. A material cost based on PPE expended seems not too well thought out to me.
As a solution I usually figure construction cost twice. Once by the rules and once that reflects cost of materials and gems ONLY. Honestly, if your item consists of a pair of boots say and some gems and wire, why does it cost 100K credits to create (cost of prototypes and additional R&D aside)?

A good point on the subject of techno-wizardry creation, but I'm not sure it's really what we're looking for here. Techno-wizardry is a setting specific occurence, not part of the rules systems that get carried between all of Palladium's games.

Do you think that there should be a universal system for calculating the building costs of new devices, be they mechanical, techno-wizardly or purely magical in nature? A system of universal R&D costs? Perhaps then added on to the end of the system a set of 'special' costs, that each would relate to a different creation method? techno-wizardry, mechanical, bio-wizardy, cybermancy?

[asajosh]

Small gripe here.
I never like the Construction Cost for Tech Wiz items. A material cost based on PPE expended seems not too well thought out to me.
As a solution I usually figure construction cost twice. Once by the rules and once that reflects cost of materials and gems ONLY. Honestly, if your item consists of a pair of boots say and some gems and wire, why does it cost 100K credits to create (cost of prototypes and additional R&D aside)?

A good point on the subject of techno-wizardry creation, but I'm not sure it's really what we're looking for here. Techno-wizardry is a setting specific occurence, not part of the rules systems that get carried between all of Palladium's games.

Do you think that there should be a universal system for calculating the building costs of new devices, be they mechanical, techno-wizardly or purely magical in nature? A system of universal R&D costs? Perhaps then added on to the end of the system a set of 'special' costs, that each would relate to a different creation method? techno-wizardry, mechanical, bio-wizardy, cybermancy?

My bad, I didnt't recognize the full scope of the topic.
But yes, I think a construction cost for any item based on an arbitrary figure (like PPE for TW items, or how much does it cost to make this new rifle based on the amount of ammo it can hold) seems overly-simplified to the point of being frustrating. Espescially so when building one of an item you've made 100 times before or something crafted from an incredibly detailed 3D CAD rendering with interactive voice activated instruction manual (in short, no experimenting required to build item X). Much better for the cost of creation to actually reflect "real" material cost, including gems, wires, etc.
If as GM one needs to restrict an overly "crafty" player, make a required component hard to come by. Thats how I usually house rule things with tech wizards, operators, etc.

[Ahulane]

i agree ... you may not be able to dodge a bullet but you should be able to dodge the shooters aim.

B) Palladium rules make the assumption that you cannot dodge bullets. Personally (and I believe there are many more who feel the same way) I think that while the velocity of bullets far outclasses human ability to move, if we can see someone aiming a gun at us we can presumably try to avoid the direction of the gun.

huh????!?! dodge the shooters aim? are you on crack? try that in real life...seriously...you'll die...a bullet from a 22 rifle moves at 600 mph (thats the speed of sound)...it doesn't ramp up to 600 mph..its click, bang, dead...hence the penalty of -10 to dodge in short and medium ranges (your lucky it isn't higher or that it requires training to dodge)...

The dumb part is the same penalty to dodge for energy weapons...a laser gun is a flashlight that kills basically...so get a mag-light and stand 50 feet away and try to dodge your friend who just has to point in your direction and click...dead...if that was a plasma beam then as long as he was within 3' of you you'd take burns from the heat which would vaporize you or melt you on the spot...

In real life there is no dodging bullets unless your extremely lucky and the shooter has some horrible accuracy...in game terms this is why the difficulty to hit was increased to 8 or higher and bonuses can contribute to the 8 or higher requirement...also...in real life you don't dodge bullets...the shooter misses you and depending on his skill may or may not miss you again...even if there is cover a 9mm FMJ can go through most furniture and its already proven via Mythbusters that cars are not sufficient protection from high caliber weapons even if your near the engine block...

A) Hitting a moving target = Zigzaging does make for a more difficult target, but ONLY really when the shooter is looking down on the target. It can help against snipers, but in a clearing or in a house, it won't do much good.

Tracking is only hard if your using a single shot weapon and looking through a scope...if I had an AK-47 and you were zig zagging on me and I had a downward view on you, you'd be cut to pieces if I just did a stitch shot in your general path...even if you were zig zagging in a 15 second time period I could empty an entire clip from an AK at you and I garuntee you'd be hit at least once (if I was the shooter). The shooter though still won't recieve a penalty to hit a moving target unless its far away and moving fast...running speed vs automatic or semi-auto weapon = lose when fighting someone who's trained.

the first time i even saw it was in Rifts Japan under the Samurai description and i.i.r.c. all it said was -10 to dodge normaly but samurai is only -3 or something like that. that had our group scratching our heads for a good long time. then it made its next appearance in PFRPG under the Longbowman but not in the combat rules?

Samurai are trained to PARRY arrows and can ATTEMPT to parry bullets and energy blasts @ -7 instead of -10. The arrow parry is lower I think.

Now thats with some hardcore training they can do that...if a juicer could do it you might be able to lower the penalty to -5 because of their heightened reflexes...but its still going to be hard because your not just rolling and trying to get a 10 or whatever...your trying to beat the roll of the attacker...and if its skilled marksman vs. skilled soldier running around dodging...the marksman is going to have a +5 or higher to strike easy...distance and the size of the target is the only thing that applies for penalties in rifts...

I find that other than mages, most classes don't really seem to progress very much. You'll notice it with weapons but in straight up hand to hand there's not much difference between a level 1 and a level 15. Maybe a max of +3 or +4.

Mages are basically book worms...hence the lack of HtH development...would you rather spend a few years learning a better HtH style...or more spells?

And then there is the skill system.... oooooh... the skill system. "I have Drive at 82%..." what does that exactly *mean*? And what does it mean if you're in a chase and you're chasing a guy with drive skill of 86%?

Personally I take the skill percentage as your attempt to "stunt" drive said vehicle...so if you pilot: automobile at 82% then you have a better chance to control your vehicle when taking corners to sharp or avoiding road obstacles in last second situations, etc...after a while your skill, if its performed regularly will just be a regular daily activity...also you have to consider how the skill is chosen....if its taken as an OCC skill...meaning if its apart of your initial skills the OCC provides you then that skill is used on a regular basis and you become a professional at it...if its related then its something that your job provides in addition to your regularly performed skills...meaning your an amateur and its used only on occasion...if its secondary its a hobby...

People who use skills as a primary part of their daily functions will be inherintly better at using said skills than someone who only uses the skill part of the time or only in certain situations...I think the rules in RUE state that as well...but basically it means the skill % is there for situations...your driving down the road and bam, you hit a large pot hole, roll to maintain vehicle control, your in an operating room and the patient suddenly starts to have a siezure during an operation, roll to stabalize and roll again to diagnose, etc...you don't need to roll every time to start up the car, that'd be silly...

Scattered rules or referrals
Nothing annoys me more than "Refer to this book for this". It seems that all of the rules are all spread out and you have to go find them. I'm glad for RUE but it still doesn't fix anything. I got Dinosaur Swamp for some dinosaurs. While an excellent book I hate the section saying "Hey! Thanks for buying this book, by the way if you want this list of dinosaurs go check out this other book" I am perfectly fine with reprinting information. Maybe I happen to not be interested or have no need for a West book.

I'll have to agree...having to dig through several books to clarify a simple question or just to look up something that you forgot does get kind of annoying...maybe they should just print a pure rule book...The GM's guide is basically the main book without the OCC's and some tips for helping run games...

They have an Adventure Guide...why not Rule Book 1...then all the rules broken down into categories for each setting...fantasy, rifts, CE, phase world, BTS, nightbane, etc...that way we don't have to go flipping through each of those books to find the 1 rule were looking for...maybe update the rules for those settings as well so we have more clarified information.

Their character generation is terribly unflexible

How is it unflexible? As far as character diversity, you can be anything you want, literally...there isn't anything you can't be for this game...the basic generation of a character...stats, skills, abilities, OCC/RCC/PCC, equipment...thats just like any other RPG...could you elaborate on how you think its not flexible?

Burster #1 "I burst into flames!" (Uses 'burst into flames; power)
Burster #2 "Oh no you don't!" (uses 'extinguish flames power on burster #1).

In all of Palladium, there is simply no good mechanic ever given for a situation like this.

In said situation...after buster 2 extinguishes burster 1...burster one curses at burster 2, draws his laser pistol and shoots him calling him an ass....

In that situation with a burster vs. a burster...it'll be a stalemate unless they slug it out or someone shoots someone else...

[Rallan]

Small gripe here.
I never like the Construction Cost for Tech Wiz items. A material cost based on PPE expended seems not too well thought out to me.
As a solution I usually figure construction cost twice. Once by the rules and once that reflects cost of materials and gems ONLY. Honestly, if your item consists of a pair of boots say and some gems and wire, why does it cost 100K credits to create (cost of prototypes and additional R&D aside)?

Plus the rules for making TW stuff from scratch were horribly vague and didn't really match up with the statted TW items in the game. Technowizardry (or Cybermagic if you're playing Nightbane, since it's in the same boat) really doesn't have much in the way of rules beyond a little bit of handwaving and a whole lot of "you're the GM, figure it out your damn self and quit bugging us"

[The ineffible GM]

huh????!?! dodge the shooters aim? are you on crack? try that in real life...seriously...you'll die...a bullet from a 22 rifle moves at 600 mph (thats the speed of sound)...it doesn't ramp up to 600 mph..its click, bang, dead...hence the penalty of -10 to dodge in short and medium ranges (your lucky it isn't higher or that it requires training to dodge)...

In real life there is no dodging bullets unless your extremely lucky and the shooter has some horrible accuracy...in game terms this is why the difficulty to hit was increased to 8 or higher and bonuses can contribute to the 8 or higher requirement...also...in real life you don't dodge bullets...the shooter misses you and depending on his skill may or may not miss you again...even if there is cover a 9mm FMJ can go through most furniture and its already proven via Mythbusters that cars are not sufficient protection from high caliber weapons even if your near the engine block...

First of all, yes, dodging the shooter's aim does make a difference in real life. Why do soldiers and police crouch and attempt to run fast and low when they are entering a situation where shooting is expected? Because it minimizes their chances of getting hit. Maybe not fitting the dictionary description of what 'dodging' might be, but it is an active attempt to avoid being shot. What I meant by 'dodging the shooter's aim' perhaps you'd better understand as 'attempting to throw off the shooter's aim'.

Also, in my personal opinion, the rule of 4 and 8 is rather flawed in and of itself, as it makes hitting a target somewhat easy for an inexperienced shooter and far too easy for an esperienced shooter.

The dumb part is the same penalty to dodge for energy weapons...a laser gun is a flashlight that kills basically...so get a mag-light and stand 50 feet away and try to dodge your friend who just has to point in your direction and click...dead...if that was a plasma beam then as long as he was within 3' of you you'd take burns from the heat which would vaporize you or melt you on the spot...

Not to mention the power form a single e-clip could run most cars for over a year, or that there's no way a human being's strength pulling on a charge cord could provide the power to generate MDC laser blasts like with the laser blow, or that the heat from the plasma would likely melt the barrel right off the weapon to begin with...
How about we just cut to the chase and say "This is fiction" and realize that it was never really intended to be realistic. MDC wouldn't exist if this were intended to be realistic.

But, I wonder if perhaps that is a matter more about the settings that actually include lasers and plasma weapons, while this thread is to look at core rules.

Tracking is only hard if your using a single shot weapon and looking through a scope...if I had an AK-47 and you were zig zagging on me and I had a downward view on you, you'd be cut to pieces if I just did a stitch shot in your general path...even if you were zig zagging in a 15 second time period I could empty an entire clip from an AK at you and I garuntee you'd be hit at least once (if I was the shooter). The shooter though still won't recieve a penalty to hit a moving target unless its far away and moving fast...running speed vs automatic or semi-auto weapon = lose when fighting someone who's trained.

This would be dealing with a whole other subset of rules within Palladium, the burst rules.
Yes, hitting someone with a burst of bullets increases your chance of hitting them, however 15 seconds is a long time, generally giving most characters 4-5 attacks to fire. However, the bucking of the weapon from repeated kickback on an automatic weapon reduces your ability to aim (hence why 'sprays' will saturate a small area with bullets rather than send them all in a straight stream). Also, again, the running will make it harder for the shooter to aim in the first place.
You have, however, hit upon a major factor in shooting combats that Palladium does not appear to address: Range.
The farther away a target is, the more difficult it is for the shooter to aim properly. Especially in the heat of battle.

How does everyone handle range in Palladium's games?

I find that other than mages, most classes don't really seem to progress very much. You'll notice it with weapons but in straight up hand to hand there's not much difference between a level 1 and a level 15. Maybe a max of +3 or +4.

Mages are basically book worms...hence the lack of HtH development...would you rather spend a few years learning a better HtH style...or more spells?

I think the point here was that the hand to hand skills, even the more difficult ones like Assassin and Martial Arts, do not appear to affect much as a character grows in experience. The bonuses gained seem to be fairly minimal. Mages generally have HtH Basic at least, which isn't all that much worse than martial arts. Yes, it is worse...but the difference between them does not seem like much when the wizard is also expanded their spell repetoire with every level and the warrior is stuck with only his/her hand to hand skill. Also, it doesn't seem like much when many mages can use some of their choices to gain martial arts too.
warrior characters gain very few bonuses from their ancient WPs as they go up in levels, and modern WPs provide no bonuses whatsoever with character advancement.

Personally I take the skill percentage as your attempt to "stunt" drive said vehicle...so if you pilot: automobile at 82% then you have a better chance to control your vehicle when taking corners to sharp or avoiding road obstacles in last second situations, etc...after a while your skill, if its performed regularly will just be a regular daily activity...also you have to consider how the skill is chosen....if its taken as an OCC skill...meaning if its apart of your initial skills the OCC provides you then that skill is used on a regular basis and you become a professional at it...if its related then its something that your job provides in addition to your regularly performed skills...meaning your an amateur and its used only on occasion...if its secondary its a hobby...

People who use skills as a primary part of their daily functions will be inherintly better at using said skills than someone who only uses the skill part of the time or only in certain situations...I think the rules in RUE state that as well...but basically it means the skill % is there for situations...your driving down the road and bam, you hit a large pot hole, roll to maintain vehicle control, your in an operating room and the patient suddenly starts to have a siezure during an operation, roll to stabalize and roll again to diagnose, etc...you don't need to roll every time to start up the car, that'd be silly...

You're right, it would be silly if you rolled everytime you start up the car. It'd be silly to have to roll to back out of the driveway, and then to make it to the corner, and then to turn left, and then to pull over, and then to park. Everyone would be totalling their car every time they went to pick up milk. BUT, the problem is, the books don't tell you how often you ARE supposed to roll...or even really give you an idea of how often...you yourself said that you 'take the skill percentage as your attempt to "stunt" drive', saying that you had to decide for yourself what the percentage meant. I run the skills much the same why you do, it makes sense, but the rules do not address this problem. And what about characters that can take the Lore: Monsters skill in Rifts, but don't take the Lore: D-bees skill? After leveling a while they have becomes experts on monsters, but one day they come accross a band of Simvan that they've not seen before...
"Hey George, what are those?"
"Hmm....I don't recognize them, so they must be D-bees. I mean, those monsters they're riding? I can tell you their shoe size and what strains of flu they're vulnerable to, if you'd like. But those funny blokes riding them? I dunno...they're vulnerable to fire...I guess? Maybe bullets will kill them? But we should use the silver rounds just in case."

If the skill system works fine for you, that's cool. Use what works.
Many of us here in this thread though, and many others out there I believe, are of the opinion that certain things do not work and need some changes made.

They have an Adventure Guide...why not Rule Book 1...then all the rules broken down into categories for each setting...fantasy, rifts, CE, phase world, BTS, nightbane, etc...that way we don't have to go flipping through each of those books to find the 1 rule were looking for...maybe update the rules for those settings as well so we have more clarified information.

Palladium has stated many times that they will not create a 'rules only' book. Why? I'm not entirely sure. I believe that they're of the opinion that it would not sell well because most people would find it redundant. It's true the Game Masters guide is basically a compiled rule book...except that it only deals with Rifts and the rules are not the same for all of Palladium's games. There are little changes from one to another, hence the necessity of a Conversion book. Or three. To convert things within their supposedly 'universal' system.

How is it unflexible? As far as character diversity, you can be anything you want, literally...there isn't anything you can't be for this game...the basic generation of a character...stats, skills, abilities, OCC/RCC/PCC, equipment...thats just like any other RPG...could you elaborate on how you think its not flexible?

Diversity is not the same thing as flexible.
Each individual OCC is fairly strict in what you can and cannot do with it.
You make five different Juicer characters in Rifts, without the Juicer Uprising book. Normal Juicers. You can have different back stories, different personalities, each trained in a different city by different people...and they're still basically the same on paper. Their attributes will be a little different from one another. Their skills might be a little bit different, but odds are they're all boxers and wrestlers and gymnasts and acrobats. And if they aren't, that's because the creator decided to specifically make a 'weaker' juicer.

Burster #1 "I burst into flames!" (Uses 'burst into flames; power)
Burster #2 "Oh no you don't!" (uses 'extinguish flames power on burster #1).
In all of Palladium, there is simply no good mechanic ever given for a situation like this.

In said situation...after buster 2 extinguishes burster 1...burster one curses at burster 2, draws his laser pistol and shoots him calling him an ass....
In that situation with a burster vs. a burster...it'll be a stalemate unless they slug it out or someone shoots someone else...

[/quote]
yes, you're right Ahulane. That's exactly what happens. It's a stalemate until someone gets fed up and pulls a gun instead of using the abilities that their entire character/class is based around.
However, many of us wish that there was a better way.
Because as it is, it seems kinda dumb.

[Killer Cyborg]

huh????!?! dodge the shooters aim? are you on crack? try that in real life...seriously...you'll die...a bullet from a 22 rifle moves at 600 mph (thats the speed of sound)...it doesn't ramp up to 600 mph..its click, bang, dead...hence the penalty of -10 to dodge in short and medium ranges (your lucky it isn't higher or that it requires training to dodge)...

In real life there is no dodging bullets unless your extremely lucky and the shooter has some horrible accuracy...in game terms this is why the difficulty to hit was increased to 8 or higher and bonuses can contribute to the 8 or higher requirement...also...in real life you don't dodge bullets...the shooter misses you and depending on his skill may or may not miss you again...even if there is cover a 9mm FMJ can go through most furniture and its already proven via Mythbusters that cars are not sufficient protection from high caliber weapons even if your near the engine block...

First of all, yes, dodging the shooter's aim does make a difference in real life. Why do soldiers and police crouch and attempt to run fast and low when they are entering a situation where shooting is expected? Because it minimizes their chances of getting hit. Maybe not fitting the dictionary description of what 'dodging' might be, but it is an active attempt to avoid being shot. What I meant by 'dodging the shooter's aim' perhaps you'd better understand as 'attempting to throw off the shooter's aim'.

I once was discussing the matter with a friend, a marine war veteran. I mentioned that there was some debate online on whether people could dodge attacks from guns.

"Yes," he said. "I've done it frequently."
Or words to that effect.

Also, in my personal opinion, the rule of 4 and 8 is rather flawed in and of itself, as it makes hitting a target somewhat easy for an inexperienced shooter and far too easy for an esperienced shooter.

Agreed.

[Ahulane]

First of all, yes, dodging the shooter's aim does make a difference in real life. Why do soldiers and police crouch and attempt to run fast and low when they are entering a situation where shooting is expected? Because it minimizes their chances of getting hit. Maybe not fitting the dictionary description of what 'dodging' might be, but it is an active attempt to avoid being shot. What I meant by 'dodging the shooter's aim' perhaps you'd better understand as 'attempting to throw off the shooter's aim'.

Of course it does, I don't see why "taking cover" wouldn't be useful...but thats not dodging...thats moving from cover to cover...lets use a small example of how your movements affect the snipers ability to track you and hit you while you zig zag...we'll use Saving Private Ryan as an example...and a newer movie that just came out, Shooter...

In SPR the part where they were holding off the germans in the end of the movie...the sniper was in the tower at an elevated position picking off soldiers left and right...now that sniper was very very good and even being a few hundred yards away looking through a scope which narrows his vision to a single spot and with his targets moving from side to side while still running forward...he missed a what...a whole 2 times?

In the movie Shooter the main character explains thuroughly how many variables there are in sniping from a mile away...and from pretty much any distance...the only thing throwing off the shooters aim are the factors he states...or if your close enough to toss something at him to distract him or what-have-you...

I think that while the velocity of bullets far outclasses human ability to move, if we can see someone aiming a gun at us we can presumably try to avoid the direction of the gun.

A person on average is about a foot and a 1/2 across maybe two feet...if your standing within 30 feet of someone with a gun pointed at you...we'll just say your average thug/mugger...so he's shooting from the hip, even with him aiming from the hip at you, at 30 feet away he's only going to need to make some minor adjustments in his "aim"...you however have to be able to predict the trajectory of his shot, so you in effect have to be able to aim his gun for him and then be able to move faster than it takes him to pull the trigger on his gun...so basically your going to hope that he can't hit the broad side of a barn at that range...and let me tell you, as someone who has taken and passed the entire armed security permit training and someone who practices with handguns and rifles on a regular basis...shooting from the hip and hitting a man sized target thats within 20 feet isn't all that difficult for not having ever done it before...

Now take that example and increase the skill level of your opponent from thug to a police officer or soldier/mercenary to professional assassin...

You may want to ask your local police officers what the chances of you being able to move out of the line of fire of a trained and untrained assailent with a gun is...its not going to be a good figure...

Not to mention the power form a single e-clip could run most cars for over a year, or that there's no way a human being's strength pulling on a charge cord could provide the power to generate MDC laser blasts like with the laser blow, or that the heat from the plasma would likely melt the barrel right off the weapon to begin with...
How about we just cut to the chase and say "This is fiction" and realize that it was never really intended to be realistic. MDC wouldn't exist if this were intended to be realistic.

But, I wonder if perhaps that is a matter more about the settings that actually include lasers and plasma weapons, while this thread is to look at core rules.

Well they do say that the weapons can have chances of mis-fire and through continuous fire they could overheat depending on the weapon type and the quality of its design...just like any other gun...

I already took into account that this is fiction...no need for sarcasm there, I was simply stating that energy weapons should have a greater penalty applied to them because they are moving faster than a conventional projectile weapon...modern weapons -10, rail guns -15, energy weapons -20 dodge...is more what I was thinking

However, the bucking of the weapon from repeated kickback on an automatic weapon reduces your ability to aim (hence why 'sprays' will saturate a small area with bullets rather than send them all in a straight stream). Also, again, the running will make it harder for the shooter to aim in the first place.

All I can say is play more Counter Strike and then play some painball or airsoft...recoil when fireing even for those guns don't really affect you all that much, but all you have to do is compensate for the kickback on a weapon...players in CS will run around with their AK aimed at your waist and when they do a 3 shot burst they stitch you from waist to head in 3 shots because they account for recoil, the same things can be taken into account when fireing a weapon in real life...then its also about your own skill and ability to control the weapon.

You have, however, hit upon a major factor in shooting combats that Palladium does not appear to address: Range.
The farther away a target is, the more difficult it is for the shooter to aim properly. Especially in the heat of battle.

How does everyone handle range in Palladium's games?

Range only applies to weapons that use projectiles like rail guns and modern weapons...Energy weapons are point and click with only a small amount of leading involved I'd imagine...personally I'd just raise the difficulty depending on the target and your weapon type compared to it.

I think the point here was that the hand to hand skills, even the more difficult ones like Assassin and Martial Arts, do not appear to affect much as a character grows in experience. The bonuses gained seem to be fairly minimal. Mages generally have HtH Basic at least, which isn't all that much worse than martial arts. Yes, it is worse...but the difference between them does not seem like much when the wizard is also expanded their spell repetoire with every level and the warrior is stuck with only his/her hand to hand skill. Also, it doesn't seem like much when many mages can use some of their choices to gain martial arts too.
warrior characters gain very few bonuses from their ancient WPs as they go up in levels, and modern WPs provide no bonuses whatsoever with character advancement.

I'll have to agree with you there, a little more "diversity" between HtH styles and their bonuses would be good to see...alot of them are the same with only minor variables and some different fighting techniques taught (not all that different from real life, but in real life those techniques can make all the difference, while in a game they don't really matter).

BUT, the problem is, the books don't tell you how often you ARE supposed to roll...or even really give you an idea of how often...you yourself said that you 'take the skill percentage as your attempt to "stunt" drive', saying that you had to decide for yourself what the percentage meant. I run the skills much the same why you do, it makes sense, but the rules do not address this problem. And what about characters that can take the Lore: Monsters skill in Rifts, but don't take the Lore: D-bees skill? After leveling a while they have becomes experts on monsters, but one day they come accross a band of Simvan that they've not seen before...
"Hey George, what are those?"
"Hmm....I don't recognize them, so they must be D-bees. I mean, those monsters they're riding? I can tell you their shoe size and what strains of flu they're vulnerable to, if you'd like. But those funny blokes riding them? I dunno...they're vulnerable to fire...I guess? Maybe bullets will kill them? But we should use the silver rounds just in case."

If the skill system works fine for you, that's cool. Use what works.
Many of us here in this thread though, and many others out there I believe, are of the opinion that certain things do not work and need some changes made.

I agree with you on that as well, thats just the way I do it personally...but it took me a while to just basically accept it and find my own way of doing it after looking through the books for some explination and not finding any.

Palladium has stated many times that they will not create a 'rules only' book. Why? I'm not entirely sure. I believe that they're of the opinion that it would not sell well because most people would find it redundant. It's true the Game Masters guide is basically a compiled rule book...except that it only deals with Rifts and the rules are not the same for all of Palladium's games. There are little changes from one to another, hence the necessity of a Conversion book. Or three. To convert things within their supposedly 'universal' system.

Thats a bummer...though...even with alot of the problems with their system...its still the best IMO.

Diversity is not the same thing as flexible.
Each individual OCC is fairly strict in what you can and cannot do with it.
You make five different Juicer characters in Rifts, without the Juicer Uprising book. Normal Juicers. You can have different back stories, different personalities, each trained in a different city by different people...and they're still basically the same on paper. Their attributes will be a little different from one another. Their skills might be a little bit different, but odds are they're all boxers and wrestlers and gymnasts and acrobats. And if they aren't, that's because the creator decided to specifically make a 'weaker' juicer.

From your explination it really isn't all that different from real life occupations then, take a look at a Mechanic profession or a the jobs available to people in the military...theres at least 3 or 4 maybe more jobs that all really involve the same thing or interact with each other...theres alot of "specialists" in real life, people who just change oil, people who only know how to smelt steel, people who can only work on diesel pickups, etc...its not that different though in game...

yes, you're right Ahulane. That's exactly what happens. It's a stalemate until someone gets fed up and pulls a gun instead of using the abilities that their entire character/class is based around.
However, many of us wish that there was a better way.
Because as it is, it seems kinda dumb.

All I can say is...well what do you expect when you and your opponent are wearing full suits of armor that are impervious to harm and neither of you have any weapons, you can't hurt each other nor can anything else hurt you unless they use 1 specific thing that neither of you currently possess...simple solution is to just not fight a burster if your one yourself and if you absolutely have to then carry the appropriate gear...its only dumb if you allow yourself to be put in such a situation...even then though...the bursters can just beat each other with their fists...

I once was discussing the matter with a friend, a marine war veteran. I mentioned that there was some debate online on whether people could dodge attacks from guns.

"Yes," he said. "I've done it frequently."
Or words to that effect.

I'm still sticking with the fact that you can't dodge someones aim...that implies you have the ability to see through their eyes and aim as if you were them, in effect, knowing where they were going to hit you...Yes you can run around and move from cover to cover and then on occasion get lucky and not get shot when running in the open when someone shoots at you...but your not dodging...they are missing and your getting lucky...

Again though...you can simulate how difficult it is for you to evade attacks made from firearms by having your friends shoot at you with a paintball or airsoft gun...those move a fraction of the speed a real bullet does...so then if your barely able to get out of the way of a paintball/airsoft gun...how hard would it be for a real weapon in the same situation...

Alot of times though if you actually play either game...people don't take the time to aim usually and just fire in your direction constantly until they hit you...its the ghostand ambush snipers in those games that you have to worry about since they have to be fairly close and still remain undetected while picking off your teammates...this coming from my point of a view as an ambush sniper.

Also, in my personal opinion, the rule of 4 and 8 is rather flawed in and of itself, as it makes hitting a target somewhat easy for an inexperienced shooter and far too easy for an esperienced shooter

Could you explain a bit more on this? Because IMO I think its about as good as you can get, honestly, its not all that hard to hit something with a gun...

[Ahulane]

sure, in real life dodging a bullet cannot technically be done. but dodging in this case is somewhat of a misnomer. as you are not dodging a bullet Keanu Reaves style, you are instead just trying to make yourself a harder target to hit, which should be covered by a standard dodge roll. i had always viewed 'dodging' projectiles in PB as being able to duck, weave and bob in and out of cover to make hitting you difficult. then the -10 dodge thing came into play and all sorts of silliness ensued.

The -10 to dodge I think is there to explain how difficult it is to actually "dodge" or "evade" a bullet or similer projectile, it makes perfect sense that you'd have a penalty.

-10 to dodge is stupid, especially when taking cover or going prone wasn't factored into the game in the first place thus leaving both of those options out. you're not even allowed to use shields as a method of defense against projectiles without taking a similar penalty. not to mention that someone neglected to give shields a flat parry bonus for even having one in the place, because apparently they do nothing but weigh allot and occasionally break.

If you take cover then your not typically going to be shot at since you can't be harmed typically when hiding behind objects...if your using modern weapons then objects like an MDC wall will effectivly make you invulnerable to harm...if your using MD weapons, the MDC of the object your hiding behind would need to be depleted before you become the target again...If you use an MDC shield to attempt to parry a bullet...well the same kind of penalty applies as dodging...its better to get a tower shield and use it like mobile cover and just march your ass down the field of fire until your shield gets burnt down and when that happens you better hope your not in the middle of the open or some cover is really close for you to hide behind...

if you add all of this up, the game degenerates into two people standing their blasting away at each other until one of them runs out of armour. then you have to deal with the ridiculous GI-Joe rule.

The game only ends up like that if you let it, there are plenty of options available to you in a fire fight...but in a typical fire fight like say in an alley in some section in the burbs wouldn't be really any more than peeking around the corner and fireing blind hoping to hit things since if you stick out there for too long your going to be hit...you just have to think is all...

[The ineffible GM]

Ahulane, I really don't know that there is any point in continuing this discussion about how the Palladium system deals with ranged combat. Everything that you have argued thusfar indicates that you believe that it is just as easy to shoot someone when they are standing still as it is when they are actively trying to get out of the way. You also seem to be of the opinion that range makes little difference to the difficulty of shooting someone. These are both things that I disagree with.

Use what works. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The rules that you are advocating, and those written out by Palladium in the books, do not work for me. They don't make sense.

If they make sense to you, go ahead and use them in your games. As I said, use what works. I do not understand how they make sense to you, but just as I cannot convince you that someone actively trying to stay out of the sights of a shooter will make for a more difficult shot, you cannot convince me that a stationary target is just as difficult to hit as a moving one.

The rules you are advocating do not work for me, neither do they work for many of the people posting in this thread. We are here to discuss the many things in Palladium's rules that do not work for us, and we are looking for things that WILL work for us.

[Shorty Lickens]

I pretty much agree with the big list posted by EPIC.

Especially about the band-aid fixes and lack of rules for many common things.
The system is pretty old and a lot of stuff should have standardized rules by now.
This is especially bad in Rifts, trying to figure out how to repair was a big pain for a long time. But the very first time I read the rules I thought it should have been made clear right away.

EDIT:
I also agree with the above posts about skills and skilled checks and unskilled checks and opposed checks.
I hate to be a little bastard but I have to say that the Shadowrun system seems to work better.
EVERYTHING is done with a number of d6's and you roll up a number of "successes". Once you get used to it, its pretty easy.
Some things require one success, some require many, sometimes you see who has more successes (guy A or guy B) and the winner is, well, the winner. But its all the same.
Easy.

And figuring out target numbers is a LOT easier, they include neat lists of all the modifiers you could possibly think of and some you couldnt think of.

Sorry, I know discussing Shadowrun really doesnt help us, but it can put the PB system into perspective by making comparisons.

[Killer Cyborg]

I once was discussing the matter with a friend, a marine war veteran. I mentioned that there was some debate online on whether people could dodge attacks from guns.

"Yes," he said. "I've done it frequently."
Or words to that effect.

I'm still sticking with the fact that you can't dodge someones aim...that implies you have the ability to see through their eyes and aim as if you were them, in effect, knowing where they were going to hit you...

Sure, and if you refer to it as "dodging bullets", then people think that implies that you see the bullet coming at you, THEN move out of the way.

Whatever you want to call it, people can and do move out of the way when getting shot at.
Sometimes they succeed sometimes not.

Again though...you can simulate how difficult it is for you to evade attacks made from firearms by having your friends shoot at you with a paintball or airsoft gun...those move a fraction of the speed a real bullet does...so then if your barely able to get out of the way of a paintball/airsoft gun...how hard would it be for a real weapon in the same situation...

I've dodged paintballs more times than I can count.