Revisiting Bursters and Lasers

[Killer Cyborg]

You know KC I have kind of tried to steer this back on topic a couple times now but you seem to want to stay off topic.

uh.. I was responding to your post, addressing things you said.
How's that any more off-topic than you are?
But if you want to keep the burster stuff out of this thread, feel free to respond in PMs in the future instead of the thread.

So why are bursters taking half damage from electricity?

Because the writers say so.
I'd guess that whatever psionic field the bursters have that protects them from heat also protects them from electricity.

Is it that electricity does partial heat damage?

Maybe. I didn't write the rule, so I can't say for certain.
But I can say for certain that nobody wrote the rule that says that bursters take less damage from laser beams. It's nowhere to be found.

[Killer Cyborg]

Maybe. I didn't write the rule, so I can't say for certain.
But I can say for certain that nobody wrote the rule that says that bursters take less damage from laser beams. It's nowhere to be found.

That's why he's here asking for opinions on a rule change/clarification.

This forum is not for rule changes.
It's for clarification.

And the clarification is that it's pretty clear that lasers don't do heat damage in Rifts.

[Anthar]

Maybe. I didn't write the rule, so I can't say for certain.
But I can say for certain that nobody wrote the rule that says that bursters take less damage from laser beams. It's nowhere to be found.

That's why he's here asking for opinions on a rule change/clarification.

This forum is not for rule changes.
It's for clarification.

And the clarification is that it's pretty clear that lasers don't do heat damage in Rifts.

Agreed, this thread has gone on too long when the answer is as clear as day.

[Anthar]

Maybe. I didn't write the rule, so I can't say for certain.
But I can say for certain that nobody wrote the rule that says that bursters take less damage from laser beams. It's nowhere to be found.

That's why he's here asking for opinions on a rule change/clarification.

This forum is not for rule changes.
It's for clarification.

And the clarification is that it's pretty clear that lasers don't do heat damage in Rifts.

Again because you say it's clear doesn't mean it is. Other people have stated they think it's heat or at least partially heat. The books are not clear either since they describe heat damage and RL science says it's heat damage. Seems to be a pretty even match of people for and against it which is definitely not clear or a clear majority either way. The poll has never worked right so it's not useful.

If you both think it's clear then cool, there's no real need to keep coming to this thread for either of you is there? It's not like anyone is making you...

There is a difference between the rules(which is clear on the subject) and what people "wish" it could be. It does not say that the Burster is vulnerable to laser and it also does not say that they can bench press 2 tons with their arse. Omission does not mean you can put anything in there.

[Anthar]

It is cut and dry, this is about what a Burster's abilities are. Not what the Burster could be if you disregard the written material.

[Anthar]

It is cut and dry, this is about what a Burster's abilities are. Not what the Burster could be if you disregard the written material.

Yep except other written material states lasers do heat damage. So the OP put it to a question. Personally this question has come up since Rifts was born and most of my groups have just agreed to make it half damage.

As a house rule, not official, which Bursters take full damage from lasers.

[Anthar]

It is cut and dry, this is about what a Burster's abilities are. Not what the Burster could be if you disregard the written material.

Yep except other written material states lasers do heat damage. So the OP put it to a question. Personally this question has come up since Rifts was born and most of my groups have just agreed to make it half damage.

fAs a house rule, not official, which Bursters take full damage from lasers.

Yes it is a house rule, it is our clarification of conflicting written material in Rifts where it says bursters are immune to heat and take half damage from electricity but doesn't mention the other energy weapons that it specifically states does heat damage. Half of Palladium's rules require house rules to clarify them. Hence his question.

Again you may think it's cut and dry but others disagree so you'll just have to get used to not everyone agreeing with you. Should stop trying to get his thread closed though. It deserves other opinions. If your opinion is that it's clearly stated as not including lasers then so noted...

The description of lasers, Rifts Ultimate edition pg. 358:

"Lasers burn and cauterize the flesh as they cut through S.D.C bodies. That's good if it sheers off a limb, becaus ther is no bleeding, however, the shock to the body is so great that a single MD point does massive damage and kills its victim 99 out of 100 times. Cauterization is bad, because it makes reataching a severed limb impossible(all the nerves and blood vesses are closed), and if the laser cuts into the body - the caterization literally leaves a hole through victim! This damages the internal organs and requires extensive surgery to cut away the burned flesh and remove the damaged organs. Internal organs will have to be replaced with artificial Bio-systems or cybernetic alternatives. Not, laser weapons have no kick and are silent. However, most humanoids are used to their weapons making noise and found silent laser weapons to be unnerving. As a result, manufactures have built sound generators into their laser weapons to produce a sound with every blast or pulse"

Where does it say that lasers do half heat damage in this description and please note that it has already been established that you can be burned without heat through chemicals, radiation(which is what lasers are) and even cold can burn flesh.

The Burster does not have the ability to be immune or half damage to lasers. It's my opinion and it is a fact of the game. Sure, people can have a different opinion and make house rules, but them's the breaks.

[Killer Cyborg]

It is cut and dry, this is about what a Burster's abilities are. Not what the Burster could be if you disregard the written material.

Yep except other written material states lasers do heat damage.

What the rules state is that lasers burn and cauterize the flesh.
This does not mean that lasers do heat damage as anything other than a side-effect.

And that one passage is ALL you have.

Which leaves me once again asking you why, if lasers inflict heat damage, it is never mentioned anywhere else in the books.
No spells that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No super powers that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No psionic powers that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No natural or supernatural creature abilities that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.

All of which indicates that while plasma is considered to be heat damage, lasers are not.

IF you come up with a plausible theory that explains this, then you might have a case.
If you can't, and you can't, then you've got nothing except fantasy and a piece of flavor text that would apply just as well for ion beams.

[Killer Cyborg]

Yep except other written material states lasers do heat damage. So the OP put it to a question. Personally this question has come up since Rifts was born and most of my groups have just agreed to make it half damage...

...Yes it is a house rule, it is our clarification of conflicting written material in Rifts where it says bursters are immune to heat and take half damage from electricity but doesn't mention the other energy weapons that it specifically states does heat damage. Half of Palladium's rules require house rules to clarify them. Hence his question.

No.
House rules do not clarify anything other than house rules.

Here's how you're supposed to answer questions in this forum:

How to form a proper answer.
There are two types of answers.

1. Directed rule in a book answer.
Answers with rules from the books need to have.
The Book Name
The Page Number
(General statement of where it's located on the page.)

2. Gamer or G.M. advice to questioner.
Or you can give your advice on how you handle that problem.
Please if possible: Post book titles and page numbers to reference any rules you use to answer the question.

Meaning that you can do 1 of 2 things legitimately here:
1. You can find an official passage that says that lasers count as heat weapons and/or bursters take less damage from lasers.
2. You can give your advices on how you handle things.

#2 means that it's perfectly fine to say, "Our house-rule is that lasers inflict half damage to bursters."
It is NOT perfectly fine to try to vote in new rules for other people, or to tell other people that they should use your house rules, or to act like your house rules are official.

[Anthar]

Yep except other written material states lasers do heat damage. So the OP put it to a question. Personally this question has come up since Rifts was born and most of my groups have just agreed to make it half damage...

...Yes it is a house rule, it is our clarification of conflicting written material in Rifts where it says bursters are immune to heat and take half damage from electricity but doesn't mention the other energy weapons that it specifically states does heat damage. Half of Palladium's rules require house rules to clarify them. Hence his question.

No.
House rules do not clarify anything other than house rules.

Here's how you're supposed to answer questions in this forum:

How to form a proper answer.
There are two types of answers.

1. Directed rule in a book answer.
Answers with rules from the books need to have.
The Book Name
The Page Number
(General statement of where it's located on the page.)

2. Gamer or G.M. advice to questioner.
Or you can give your advice on how you handle that problem.
Please if possible: Post book titles and page numbers to reference any rules you use to answer the question.

Meaning that you can do 1 of 2 things legitimately here:
1. You can find an official passage that says that lasers count as heat weapons and/or bursters take less damage from lasers.
2. You can give your advices on how you handle things.

#2 means that it's perfectly fine to say, "Our house-rule is that lasers inflict half damage to bursters."
It is NOT perfectly fine to try to vote in new rules for other people, or to tell other people that they should use your house rules, or to act like your house rules are official.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I could kiss you.

[Anthar]

#2 means that it's perfectly fine to say, "Our house-rule is that lasers inflict half damage to bursters."
It is NOT perfectly fine to try to vote in new rules for other people, or to tell other people that they should use your house rules, or to act like your house rules are official.

That's probably advice you should take as well.

I already said it's our house rule that lasers(and ion beams) do half damage to bursters and nowhere does that mean you have to use it. No one is twisting your arm to use any Q&A ruling(which are just glorified house rules since I see no Palladium officials stamping their approval on them)) that the OP gets out of this thread even if 99% of the posters came in here and said "lasers are heat damage and bursters should be immune". You also seem to be taking it personal whenever people disagree with you. And you seem to be trying to get this thread locked like you did in other threads that got locked when you kept getting heated, which is just rude. If you don't like the thread then just avoid it. I don't want to get in flame wars with you KC, you seem like a decent debater but then you also seem to get bent out of shape when people don't bend to your will and then you escalate it into flames. Just avoid the thread if it bothers you that others might want to debate this subject some more.

On a side note IMO no moderator should lock threads because someone comes in starting flame wars. They should warn that person to stop and suspend their account if they don't. It's a well known tactic to lock threads by starting trouble.

The only one who is talking about locking threads is you. And being rude doesn't equal breaking of the board's rules. The reason it gets under my skin is it takes about twelve posts to get people to admit that their interpretation is a house rule and the real rule is clear/official and written in black and white for all to see.

I was looking up a Q&A off the FAQ to satisfy a curiosity and came across this...

Question: Bursters are immune to damage from heat and fire, the damaging effect of lasers is imho based on heat, so are bursters immune to damage from laser-based attacks (same as plasma) ?
Answer: As far as in-game physics are concerned, lasers do not inflict heat damage. Bursters and other beings immune to heat/fire have no protection against lasers.

uh... lasers do not inflict heat damage? The book doesn't agree with that statement. "Lasers burn and cauterize the flesh as they cut through SDC bodies" (RUE 358) In order to "burn and cauterize", you need heat. No leap of logic there, that's a fact both in reality-land physics and in-game physics.

Consequently, I feel compelled to re-ask the question to see (A) if the previously given explanation can be reasonably rationalized by anyone, (B) to reopen this to discussion, and (C), barring a darn good reason to justify the notion of lasers not imparting heat to a target, to possibly overturn this very odd ruling.

So, QUESTION: Since the Burster's power of being Impervious to Fire & Heat makes them immune to Plasma, napalm, and head-based attacks in general, regardless if those attacks be MD or SDC in nature, or based in magic or science, would this mean that Bursters should be immune to damage from lasers as well?

The whole point of the original post was to try and get a consensus to get the rule changed on an incorrect assumption.

[Killer Cyborg]

#2 means that it's perfectly fine to say, "Our house-rule is that lasers inflict half damage to bursters."
It is NOT perfectly fine to try to vote in new rules for other people, or to tell other people that they should use your house rules, or to act like your house rules are official.

That's probably advice you should take as well.

I already do.

I already said it's our house rule that lasers(and ion beams) do half damage to bursters and nowhere does that mean you have to use it. No one is twisting your arm to use any Q&A ruling(which are just glorified house rules since I see no Palladium officials stamping their approval on them))

This forum is about official answers first, and house-rules second at best.

The answers in this Q&A aren't glorified house-rules; they're either official rules, or they're normal house rules posted due to a lack of anything official.

In this case, we have dozens of cases where lasers are specifically NOT mentioned as one of the things that bursters (or other heat resistant/impervious things) take less damage from.
The simple fact is that resistance/imperviousness to lasers is NOT anywhere in the books.
That means that officially, they are not resistant or impervious to lasers.
Period.

You also seem to be taking it personal whenever people disagree with you. And you seem to be trying to get this thread locked like you did in other threads that got locked when you kept getting heated, which is just rude.

I'm addressing the posts, not the poster, because I'm not trying to get this thread locked.
Your post here, on the other hand, breaks that rule of the forums by trying to turn me into the focus of the conversation.

[Anthar]

Cool so now we all agree. Lets not lock this thread and let it continue to be debated.

BTW Anthar I have always said my version was a house rule. So you didn't need 12 threads to get that out of me.

I agree there isn't very many examples where it says immune to lasers or half damage from lasers but there is also no text that says they are not energy weapons that cause heat damage so again there is contradictions which requires GM rulings.

The section only says that it burns and the clarification on if it's heat based is by the fact that all of those fire and heat immune classes/powers/creatures as mentioned take full damage from lasers.

[Killer Cyborg]

I agree there isn't very many examples where it says immune to lasers or half damage from lasers

Find one.
Or say "no examples," instead of "isn't very many."

but there is also no text that says they are not energy weapons that cause heat damage so again there is contradictions which requires GM rulings.

There doesn't need to be any text that says that.
The fact that they are never mentioned alongside plasma weapons in the impervious/resistant descriptions shows that they're not.

[Anthar]

Cool so now we all agree. Lets not lock this thread and let it continue to be debated.

BTW Anthar I have always said my version was a house rule. So you didn't need 12 threads to get that out of me.

I agree there isn't very many examples where it says immune to lasers or half damage from lasers but there is also no text that says they are not energy weapons that cause heat damage so again there is contradictions which requires GM rulings.

The section only says that it burns and the clarification on if it's heat based is by the fact that all of those fire and heat immune classes/powers/creatures as mentioned take full damage from lasers.

The text also seems to state that a laser slices through the body like a hot knife through butter. To me that says there's heat involved in the damage.

To you maybe, but a sword can cut through a person like a hot knife through butter. It's an expression to help visualize the ease at which lasers cut not an indication of it's physics, gaming or otherwise.

[Killer Cyborg]

The text also seems to state that a laser slices through the body like a hot knife through butter. To me that says there's heat involved in the damage.

That's a common metaphor for any number of non-heat-related events.


For example

[Anthar]

Cool so now we all agree. Lets not lock this thread and let it continue to be debated.

BTW Anthar I have always said my version was a house rule. So you didn't need 12 threads to get that out of me.

I agree there isn't very many examples where it says immune to lasers or half damage from lasers but there is also no text that says they are not energy weapons that cause heat damage so again there is contradictions which requires GM rulings.

The section only says that it burns and the clarification on if it's heat based is by the fact that all of those fire and heat immune classes/powers/creatures as mentioned take full damage from lasers.

The text also seems to state that a laser slices through the body like a hot knife through butter. To me that says there's heat involved in the damage.

To you maybe, but a sword can cut through a person like a hot knife through butter. It's an expression to help visualize the ease at which lasers cut not an indication of it's physics, gaming or otherwise.

I'd agree if it didn't also talk about vaporizing, cauterizing, burning and other expressions often associated with heat.

All of which does not have to be caused by heat. Like I said before chemicals, radiation and even cold can cause these effects too.

[Killer Cyborg]

I'd agree if it didn't also talk about vaporizing, cauterizing, burning and other expressions often associated with heat.

All of which does not have to be caused by heat. Like I said before chemicals, radiation and even cold can cause these effects too.

If "vaporizing" counts as an indication of heat, then I guess Particle Beams just joined lasers and ion beams as heat weapons.
As per the same page.

[Anthar]

I'd agree if it didn't also talk about vaporizing, cauterizing, burning and other expressions often associated with heat.

All of which does not have to be caused by heat. Like I said before chemicals, radiation and even cold can cause these effects too.

If "vaporizing" counts as an indication of heat, then I guess Particle Beams just joined lasers and ion beams as heat weapons.
As per the same page.

If particle beams use more than one word often associated with heat sure.

Then by your logic anything that may have a heat based equivalent like say they friction from physical objects can be interpreted as heat damage so a Burster will take half damage from physical attacks and the psychic effects cause neurons to fire off and make heat so he has immunity to psionics. Silly.

[Killer Cyborg]

I'd agree if it didn't also talk about vaporizing, cauterizing, burning and other expressions often associated with heat.

All of which does not have to be caused by heat. Like I said before chemicals, radiation and even cold can cause these effects too.

If "vaporizing" counts as an indication of heat, then I guess Particle Beams just joined lasers and ion beams as heat weapons.
As per the same page.

If particle beams use more than one word often associated with heat sure.

It has to be more than one now?
Why's that?

[Killer Cyborg]

If lasers just said cauterize one time and nothing else then the writer would not be emphasizing how hot lasers are but the writer uses other heat associated words that really puts the emphasis on heat. Just one word used one time doesn't emphasize anything but multiple words or one word used multiple times is placing an emphasis on something, in this case heat.

Alright, then that takes particle beams off the list, and it takes plasma beams off the list.
Lasers mention burning and cauterizing, but neither of those is necessarily heat related; both can be accomplished through chemicals or other agents.
Ion beams mention both "burn" and "cook," and even though burn might be iffy, the word "cook" does necessarily require heat.
So by the standard in your post, ion beams are definitely heat weapons, lasers might be, plasma beams aren't, and particle beams aren't.

[Anthar]

Nope that's not a logical debate. There is some heat damage from physical attacks like bullets but it's the kinetic energy transfer that does most of the damage. Now if a bullet was a phosphor round and did extra damage from that heat then the burster would be immune to that but would still take the impact damage IMO. Firing neurons may cause some tiny amounts of heat, they way most bodily functions do, but there is no damage involved, it's what the impulses of the neurons are transmitting that is causing the psionics to work. Unless the psionics are doing heat based physical effects like a fireball or electric jolt, they should work fine. Might not be able to Indian Burn a Burster however! (that's a joke BTWno need to start debating Indian Burns lol)

It's not logical to claim that Bursters have full or partial immunity to lasers either. Lasers are a very common weapon on Rifts Earth and I suspect that the whole premise of trying to get resistance for a Burster comes from bad munchkinism rather than any logical standpoint. There has been plenty of reasonable explanations put forward to reinforce the rules as written and not one acceptable reason to counter it. Of course Bursters are immune to Indian Burns... road burns, however are a different story.

[Killer Cyborg]

Alright, then that takes particle beams off the list, and it takes plasma beams off the list.
Lasers mention burning and cauterizing, but neither of those is necessarily heat related; both can be accomplished through chemicals or other agents.
Ion beams mention both "burn" and "cook," and even though burn might be iffy, the word "cook" does necessarily require heat.
So by the standard in your post, ion beams are definitely heat weapons, lasers might be, plasma beams aren't, and particle beams aren't.

Doesn't take plasma off the list IMO, it's has descriptive words mentioned more than once or has multiple words that can be associated with heat. [/quote]

RUE 358
Plasma Blasts are, in some ways, worse, consuming the lim cut off the body, liquifying the flesh and bone, and severely burning 25-35% of the rest of the victim's body (third degree burns).

They use the word "burning" then use "burn" to explain the level of burn.
You're really counting that as two uses?
So if Particle beams said, "completely vaporizing- third degree vaporization- the limb..." then it would be a heat weapon?

So if Zappers are munchkinism in your opinion then yes I guess bursters with resistance to energy would be as well.

They are.

[Killer Cyborg]

Doesn't take plasma off the list IMO, it's has descriptive words mentioned more than once or has multiple words that can be associated with heat.

RUE 358
Plasma Blasts are, in some ways, worse, consuming the lim cut off the body, liquifying the flesh and bone, and severely burning 25-35% of the rest of the victim's body (third degree burns).

They use the word "burning" then use "burn" to explain the level of burn.
You're really counting that as two uses?
So if Particle beams said, "completely vaporizing- third degree vaporization- the limb..." then it would be a heat weapon?

IMO since it said liquefying solids (which usually involves turning a solid into a liquid through melting via heating)

I guess all blenders are heat weapons too, because that's where I usually see the word "liquify."

[Killer Cyborg]

Doesn't take plasma off the list IMO, it's has descriptive words mentioned more than once or has multiple words that can be associated with heat.

RUE 358
Plasma Blasts are, in some ways, worse, consuming the lim cut off the body, liquifying the flesh and bone, and severely burning 25-35% of the rest of the victim's body (third degree burns).

They use the word "burning" then use "burn" to explain the level of burn.
You're really counting that as two uses?
So if Particle beams said, "completely vaporizing- third degree vaporization- the limb..." then it would be a heat weapon?

IMO since it said liquefying solids (which usually involves turning a solid into a liquid through melting via heating)

I guess all blenders are heat weapons too, because that's where I usually see the word "liquify."

I already anticipated and addressed your liquefy argument in my previous post. If you choose to think plasma missiles/weapons are lots of spinning blades then go for it.

Oh, I don't choose to believe that; I just don't think of "liquify" as a heat-related term.
Which, by the "two heat-related words in the description means it's a heat weapon" theory would mean that plasma weapons might not be heat weapons.
But that's your gauge, not mine.
Personally, I think that a decent gauge is whether or not creatures that are invulnerable to heat are affected by it, and with plasma weapons they're not affected.

[Killer Cyborg]

Oh, I don't choose to believe that; I just don't think of "liquify" as a heat-related term.
Which, by the "two heat-related words in the description means it's a heat weapon" theory would mean that plasma weapons might not be heat weapons.
But that's your gauge, not mine.
Personally, I think that a decent gauge is whether or not creatures that are invulnerable to heat are affected by it, and with plasma weapons they're not affected.

Even without liquefy it still meets my gauge as emphasizing heat because I also said one descriptive word used more than once is the writer's way of emphasizing something. In this case burns/burning.

Already addressed.

[Killer Cyborg]

Already addressed.

don't see it sorry

RUE 358
Plasma Blasts are, in some ways, worse, consuming the lim cut off the body, liquifying the flesh and bone, and severely burning 25-35% of the rest of the victim's body (third degree burns).

They use the word "burning" then use "burn" to explain the level of burn.
You're really counting that as two uses?
So if Particle beams said, "completely vaporizing- third degree vaporization- the limb..." then it would be a heat weapon?

[Killer Cyborg]

Already addressed.

don't see it sorry

RUE 358
Plasma Blasts are, in some ways, worse, consuming the lim cut off the body, liquifying the flesh and bone, and severely burning 25-35% of the rest of the victim's body (third degree burns).

They use the word "burning" then use "burn" to explain the level of burn.
You're really counting that as two uses?
So if Particle beams said, "completely vaporizing- third degree vaporization- the limb..." then it would be a heat weapon?

Yeah I thought I answered that already.

Actually, you did. We just came around to it again.
For me, it shouldn't count as a second mention (though I think the "2 mention" standard you've set is rather arbitrary) because it's addressing the first mention, not the beam itself.

Don't know what third degree vaporization is though lol.

Me either.

What it all comes down to is that yes, the books do mention heat-related terms, or terms that can be construed as such, in relation to lasers... but they also mention such terms in relation to other weapons.
It shows that the writers didn't put a heck of a lot of analysis into the terms they were using.
Yes, they use the term "liquify," but that doesn't mean that they associated the term with heat.
Yes, they use the term "vaporization," but that likewise doesn't mean that they associated the term with heat.
Yes, they use the term "burn," when describing the secondary damage effect of some of the weapons on SDC beings, but that doesn't mean that they recognize (or care) that the primary effects of lasers in the real world stem from heat.

What it comes down to is that the books NEVER, not ONCE, ever list lasers as a heat weapon in any of the very many situations where it would actually matter.
The most they do is acknowledge heat as a secondary effect in a mostly flavor-text section prefacing some optional rules for SDC beings surviving being hit by MD weapons, and that's not nearly as strong of an indicator as the many instances where lasers have specifically been left out of list of heat damage.
There's plenty of mentions of fire, magic fire, MD fire, and plasma scattered through the books in the various descriptions of heat resistance/immunity, but not one mention of lasers anywhere in there. Not ever.

Which is more likely?
a) The writers intend for lasers to be considered to be heat weapons, but never mentioned them as such anywhere that it would factor directly into gameplay, despite the dozens of opportunities where they list out various forms of heat damage (including very obvious ones like "fire")?
or
b) The writers, for whatever reason, think of lasers as "energy" weapons, but not as heat weapons, despite the fact that they actually are heat weapons in the real world. Maybe it's balance, maybe it's ignorance of science, maybe it's something else, but that's their decision and that's why they never once list lasers among the weapons that heat/fire resistant/immune beings/objects take reduced damage from?

Can you really, honestly read through the descriptions of those anti-heat powers, where they mention fire, and magic fire, and mega-damage fire, and plasma- but never lasers- and assume that those powers were intended to provide protection from lasers as well?

[Anthar]

You can also look at the heat that is supposedly generated by these weapons as a by product of the disintegration/vaporization of matter since the energy of the material/flesh has to go somewhere it is most likely released as "heat" energy which can cause burns that are really superficial to the actual damage caused by the energy weapon. So the "heat" is not caused by the energy beam but by disintegrated matter.

[Anthar]

You can also look at the heat that is supposedly generated by these weapons as a by product of the disintegration/vaporization of matter since the energy of the material/flesh has to go somewhere it is most likely released as "heat" energy which can cause burns that are really superficial to the actual damage caused by the energy weapon. So the "heat" is not caused by the energy beam but by disintegrated matter.

I could but knowing how lasers actually work I probably wouldn't.

I realize that the writers are probably making lasers 'energy or light or magical star dust' weapons for a reason or because they were originally ignorant of how lasers work or maybe because they are lazy. However they also keep using heat terms to describe lasers. Whatever their reasons they cause problems for GM's because I cannot think of one game where someone has played a burster and not brought this up just like the OP has, repeatedly heh. This usually stops the game as the GM and player debates it. And it just seems to be burster players too, I can't remember a dragon player ever complain when he/she gets hit by a laser and takes full damage.

If the writers' silly science, laziness and lack of clarification often ends up in a debate then maybe it's time they clarified, in writing, in an actual book what they think lasers are in terms of damage. It might not end the debates but at least it would shorten them to just a couple minutes.

Or just change the burster to half damage from energy and the debates would probably never even start. That's how I ended it, soon as they open their mouth about the laser damage I say "oh yeah my house rule is bursters take 1/2 damage from all energy attacks" then they go "COOL!" and we go right on playing haha. Every GM is different though and the hardcore by the book ones just cause an endless debate with the disgruntled burster players. I guess you can't really blame the burster players too much, if I had to play a character that was basically a 1 trick wonder I would be looking for something extra too. Especially after seeing the Zapper just shaft all Bursters with their cool focus on electricity and all their other cool abilities like TK super, TK force field, 1/2 damage from all energy, TK acceleration attack and 3 mind bleeder powers! Poor bursters are probably like W.T.F. throw me a freaking flaming bone haha.

According to the rules as written, you could very well see it that way. Please keep the language PG, there are young posters on these boards.

[Killer Cyborg]

You can also look at the heat that is supposedly generated by these weapons as a by product of the disintegration/vaporization of matter since the energy of the material/flesh has to go somewhere it is most likely released as "heat" energy which can cause burns that are really superficial to the actual damage caused by the energy weapon. So the "heat" is not caused by the energy beam but by disintegrated matter.

I could but knowing how lasers actually work I probably wouldn't.

Well, me either.
I'd personally count them as heat weapons, but I didn't write the books.

I realize that the writers are probably making lasers 'energy or light or magical star dust' weapons for a reason or because they were originally ignorant of how lasers work or maybe because they are lazy. However they also keep using heat terms to describe lasers.

Just in that one passage in one book, really.

Whatever their reasons they cause problems for GM's because I cannot think of one game where someone has played a burster and not brought this up just like the OP has, repeatedly heh. This usually stops the game as the GM and player debates it. And it just seems to be burster players too, I can't remember a dragon player ever complain when he/she gets hit by a laser and takes full damage.

I've run into the same issue.

If the writers' silly science, laziness and lack of clarification often ends up in a debate then maybe it's time they clarified, in writing, in an actual book what they think lasers are in terms of damage. It might not end the debates but at least it would shorten them to just a couple minutes.

Agreed.

Or just change the burster to half damage from energy and the debates would probably never even start. That's how I ended it, soon as they open their mouth about the laser damage I say "oh yeah my house rule is bursters take 1/2 damage from all energy attacks" then they go "COOL!" and we go right on playing haha. Every GM is different though and the hardcore by the book ones just cause an endless debate with the disgruntled burster players. I guess you can't really blame the burster players too much, if I had to play a character that was basically a 1 trick wonder I would be looking for something extra too. Especially after seeing the Zapper just shaft all Bursters with their cool focus on electricity and all their other cool abilities like TK super, TK force field, 1/2 damage from all energy, TK acceleration attack and 3 mind bleeder powers! Poor bursters are probably like W.T.F. throw me a freaking flaming bone haha.

Yeah, Zappers blow.

[Dead Boy]

OK, guys. I'm stepping in for a post because I'm tired of seeing Lobo being ganged up on by KC and Anthar.

Which leaves me once again asking you why, if lasers inflict heat damage, it is never mentioned anywhere else in the books.
No spells that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No super powers that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No psionic powers that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No natural or supernatural creature abilities that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.

All of which indicates that while plasma is considered to be heat damage, lasers are not.

IF you come up with a plausible theory that explains this, then you might have a case.
If you can't, and you can't, then you've got nothing except fantasy and a piece of flavor text that would apply just as well for ion beams.

A) On more than one occasion, Kevin has invoked "common sense" for explanations that seemed to come out of nowhere, unsupported by anything in the books, (for example, his definition of what constitutes "Supernatural" in regards to what a CS Neural Mace can and cannot affect). Lasers doing heat damage can very easily be along these lines. In fact, it's highly likely given the description of the laser's effects.

B) Plasma has to be included because far too many people don't know what the heck the stuff is, and that it would most likely do heat damage. Hell... we're STILL debating whether it's super-napalm, the 4th state of mater, or either depending on the weapon and circumstances. Be happy that Plasma got the definition of doing "head damage", since ion beams, particle beams, and yes, lasers, have yet to been blessed with firm official in-game definitions.

I'd agree if it didn't also talk about vaporizing, cauterizing, burning and other expressions often associated with heat.

All of which does not have to be caused by heat. Like I said before chemicals, radiation and even cold can cause these effects too.

Ok, here's a point that the discussion keeps coming back to time and time again. So Anthar, you claim that there are other elements/agents that can cause these effects. And I know that there are, too. So to move things along, other than a laser, can you name a SINGLE something that can cut, cauterize, burn, melt metal, AND vaporize, as a laser can due to its heat based effects? ("And" being the key term there.)

... I suspect that the whole premise of trying to get resistance for a Burster comes from bad munchkinism rather than any logical standpoint.

Personal attacks against my character are not progressive to the discussion, are uncalled for, and as this one happens to be in this case, is untrue. This is a debate, not politics... so please refrain from resorting to smear tactics to garner support for your argument. Thank you.

If I had actually spelled some bad language it would not be PG. As it is everything I wrote can appear on normal TV.

Yea... I tried that "Network TV Standard" of language with one of the mods once when told to watch my wording (I think it was in a stupid Princess Leia v Padme debate). I was told that even words and phrases OK for TV were subject to mod approval. But I digress...

[Killer Cyborg]

OK, guys. I'm stepping in for a post because I'm tired of seeing Lobo being ganged up on by KC and Anthar.

Which leaves me once again asking you why, if lasers inflict heat damage, it is never mentioned anywhere else in the books.
No spells that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No super powers that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No psionic powers that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.
No natural or supernatural creature abilities that provide resistance from heat ever mention lasers, though they do mention plasma.

All of which indicates that while plasma is considered to be heat damage, lasers are not.

IF you come up with a plausible theory that explains this, then you might have a case.
If you can't, and you can't, then you've got nothing except fantasy and a piece of flavor text that would apply just as well for ion beams.

A) On more than one occasion, Kevin has invoked "common sense" for explanations that seemed to come out of nowhere, unsupported by anything in the books, (for example, his definition of what constitutes "Supernatural" in regards to what a CS Neural Mace can and cannot affect). Lasers doing heat damage can very easily be along these lines. In fact, it's highly likely given the description of the laser's effects.

Nah, not easily. It stretches credibility because plasma weapons are "common sense," yet they're still mentioned.
The "common sense" factor comes in here with the powers that don't specifically state that they protect against MD attacks, and the "protection from fire" powers that don't specify that they protect against all heat attacks.
That's where Kev was assuming something was common sense, so didn't bother to elaborate.

With lasers, they're never mentioned, at all, even though other common sense heat weapons are. Repeatedly.

B) Plasma has to be included because far too many people don't know what the heck the stuff is, and that it would most likely do heat damage.

I'm skeptical.
There are only two kinds of plasma: one's hot, and the other runs through your veins.
It's a no-brainer which of those is being used.

Hell... we're STILL debating whether it's super-napalm, the 4th state of mater, or either depending on the weapon and circumstances.

None of those.
It's just a generic kind of heat-energy that exists only in the physics of the game of Rifts.

Be happy that Plasma got the definition of doing "head damage", since ion beams, particle beams, and yes, lasers, have yet to been blessed with firm official in-game definitions.

I am.

I'd agree if it didn't also talk about vaporizing, cauterizing, burning and other expressions often associated with heat.

All of which does not have to be caused by heat. Like I said before chemicals, radiation and even cold can cause these effects too.

Ok, here's a point that the discussion keeps coming back to time and time again. So Anthar, you claim that there are other elements/agents that can cause these effects. And I know that there are, too. So to move things along, other than a laser, can you name a SINGLE something that can cut, cauterize, burn, melt metal, AND vaporize, as a laser can due to its heat based effects? ("And" being the key term there.)

Ion beams.
Particle beams probably would too, except there's nothing left to cauterize.

[Anthar]

Hmm, it seems that according to varius web sites, including wiki the phenomena of lasers are explained using quantum physics and it seems that they affect atoms, breaking down the bonds of materials/cells instantly vaporizing, which creates a shockwave. Lasers uses are many and in fact they can manipulate atoms to freeze materials too. The heat is a byproduct of the manupulation of energy, not the energy itself.

[Dead Boy]

On more than one occasion, Kevin has invoked "common sense" for explanations that seemed to come out of nowhere, unsupported by anything in the books, (for example, his definition of what constitutes "Supernatural" in regards to what a CS Neural Mace can and cannot affect). Lasers doing heat damage can very easily be along these lines. In fact, it's highly likely given the description of the laser's effects.

Nah, not easily. It stretches credibility because plasma weapons are "common sense," yet they're still mentioned.
The "common sense" factor comes in here with the powers that don't specifically state that they protect against MD attacks, and the "protection from fire" powers that don't specify that they protect against all heat attacks.
That's where Kev was assuming something was common sense, so didn't bother to elaborate.

With lasers, they're never mentioned, at all, even though other common sense heat weapons are. Repeatedly.

We both know that what's "common sense" to Kev isn't always so with us. You yourself should know this better than most given that it was you who uncovered the true operating mechanics behind the C-12, even though its wording said the exact opposite and nothing to the effect of how it was supposed to work, repeatedly. And as I brought up earlier, there was the discovery of what Kev thought to be "common sense" for what constituted Supernatural creatures when it came to the effectiveness of Neural Maces and the like. And contrary to what EVERYONE thought it to be, that qualifying list turned out to be a hell of a lot shorter. In short, Kev's idea of "common sense" leads to a lot exclusions. Lasers being heat damage isn't a far fetched leap for being one of these never-elaborated-on exclusions supposedly covered by common sense.

Hell... we're STILL debating whether it's super-napalm, the 4th state of mater, or either depending on the weapon and circumstances.

None of those.
It's just a generic kind of heat-energy that exists only in the physics of the game of Rifts.

And THAT, sir, is a debate for another thread.

Ok, here's a point that the discussion keeps coming back to time and time again. So Anthar, you claim that there are other elements/agents that can cause these effects. And I know that there are, too. So to move things along, other than a laser, can you name a SINGLE something that can cut, cauterize, burn, melt metal, AND vaporize, as a laser can due to its heat based effects? ("And" being the key term there.)

Ion beams.
Particle beams probably would too, except there's nothing left to cauterize.

I generally take the stance that Ion Beams in Rifts are basically lightning guns (directed to the target with an ionizing laser), doing electrical damage. My opinion on that is based on there being both Ion Beams and Particle Beams in the game, when in reality the two are basically the same thing. Making Ion Beams electrical in basis gives them a firm differentiation from Particle Beams, which are basically sub-atomic particle shotguns.

Of course that's just my opinion there. When it comes to canon material, all we really have to define what Ion Beams are in game is RUE, pg. 358 (same as lasers) describing their effects. There it says, "An ion beam works similar to a laser, only it does more severe damage, burning and irradiating the entire severed limb, effectively turning it on a piece of cooked meat, as well as a porting of the body around the wound." Notice that in game, Ion Beams just cook and burn, where as lasers cut, vaporize, and cauterize. So no, Ion Beams don't cut the mustard when it comes to hitting all the points on that list of effects, only some of them. Try again.

Hmm, it seems that according to varius web sites, including wiki the phenomena of lasers are explained using quantum physics and it seems that they affect atoms, breaking down the bonds of materials/cells instantly vaporizing, which creates a shockwave. Lasers uses are many and in fact they can manipulate atoms to freeze materials too. The heat is a byproduct of the manupulation of energy, not the energy itself.

Interesting. But Lobo is right. Claims like that should be accompanied with supporting quotes to substantiate them and links so others can see the quotes' context in the body of the source material. Still, nice try, (better than KC's).

[Anthar]

Since weaponized lasers are usually pusle lasers, let's take a look at them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_lasers#Pulsed_operation

Pulsed operation
In the pulsed mode of operation, the output of a laser varies with respect to time, typically taking the form of alternating 'on' and 'off' periods. In many applications one aims to deposit as much energy as possible at a given place in as short time as possible. In laser ablation for example, a small volume of material at the surface of a work piece might evaporate if it gets the energy required to heat it up far enough in very short time. If, however, the same energy is spread over a longer time, the heat may have time to disperse into the bulk of the piece, and less material evaporates. There are a number of methods to achieve this.


Q-switching
Main article: Q-switching
In a Q-switched laser, the population inversion (usually produced in the same way as CW operation) is allowed to build up by making the cavity conditions (the 'Q') unfavorable for lasing. Then, when the pump energy stored in the laser medium is at the desired level, the 'Q' is adjusted (electro- or acousto-optically) to favourable conditions, releasing the pulse. This results in high peak powers as the average power of the laser (were it running in CW mode) is packed into a shorter time frame.


Modelocking
Main article: Modelocking
A modelocked laser emits extremely short pulses on the order of tens of picoseconds down to less than 10 femtoseconds. These pulses are typically separated by the time that a pulse takes to complete one round trip in the resonator cavity. Due to the Fourier limit (also known as energy-time uncertainty), a pulse of such short temporal length has a spectrum which contains a wide range of wavelengths. Because of this, the laser medium must have a broad enough gain profile to amplify them all. An example of a suitable material is titanium-doped, artificially grown sapphire (Ti:sapphire).

The modelocked laser is a most versatile tool for researching processes happening at extremely fast time scales also known as femtosecond physics, femtosecond chemistry and ultrafast science, for maximizing the effect of nonlinearity in optical materials (e.g. in second-harmonic generation, parametric down-conversion, optical parametric oscillators and the like), and in ablation applications. Again, because of the short timescales involved, these lasers can achieve extremely high powers.


Pulsed pumping
Another method of achieving pulsed laser operation is to pump the laser material with a source that is itself pulsed, either through electronic charging in the case of flashlamps, or another laser which is already pulsed. Pulsed pumping was historically used with dye lasers where the inverted population lifetime of a dye molecule was so short that a high energy, fast pump was needed. The way to overcome this problem was to charge up large capacitors which are then switched to discharge through flashlamps, producing a broad spectrum pump flash. Pulsed pumping is also required for lasers which disrupt the gain medium so much during the laser process that lasing has to cease for a short period. These lasers, such as the excimer laser and the copper vapour laser, can never be operated in CW mode.

Here it notes that the heat is caused by the reaction to the energy and if the energy is transfered quickly enough to heat the material it will evaporate. Otherwise it just turns to goop due to the breakdown of the cells/material.

[Killer Cyborg]

With lasers, they're never mentioned, at all, even though other common sense heat weapons are. Repeatedly.

We both know that what's "common sense" to Kev isn't always so with us.

Certainly.
But when they're spelling out common sense items like "fire" and "plasma," I see no reason why or how they'd leave out lasers IF they considered them heat weapons.
Somebody, somewhere would have mentioned it.

It is possible that I'm wrong?
Sure. But only in the most technical sense of the term, where almost anything's possible.
Yeah, there have been some weird thing happen before, where the rules were sideways, if not opposite, from how they were written, but those are the exceptions and not the way to bet.

, other than a laser, can you name a SINGLE something that can cut, cauterize, burn, melt metal, AND vaporize, as a laser can due to its heat based effects? ("And" being the key term there.)

Ion beams.
Particle beams probably would too, except there's nothing left to cauterize.

I generally take the stance that Ion Beams in Rifts are basically lightning guns (directed to the target with an ionizing laser), doing electrical damage. My opinion on that is based on there being both Ion Beams and Particle Beams in the game, when in reality the two are basically the same thing. Making Ion Beams electrical in basis gives them a firm differentiation from Particle Beams, which are basically sub-atomic particle shotguns.

Sounds about right.

Of course that's just my opinion there. When it comes to canon material, all we really have to define what Ion Beams are in game is RUE, pg. 358 (same as lasers) describing their effects. There it says, "An ion beam works similar to a laser, only it does more severe damage, burning and irradiating the entire severed limb, effectively turning it on a piece of cooked meat, as well as a porting of the body around the wound." Notice that in game, Ion Beams just cook and burn, where as lasers cut, vaporize, and cauterize. So no, Ion Beams don't cut the mustard when it comes to hitting all the points on that list of effects, only some of them.

Reread that.
"An Ion beam works similar to a laser, only...."
That means that they work the same way, except as noted.
And there is nothing in the notes saying "it does not cut," "It does not vaporize," or "it does not cauterize."

Try again.

You try again; I got it right the first time.

[Anthar]

It's intresting to note that Ion weapons are actually a type of laser called Electrolaser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser

An electrolaser is a type of electroshock weapon which is also a directed-energy weapon. It uses lasers to form an electrically conductive Laser-Induced Plasma Channel (LIPC). A fraction of a second later, a powerful electric current is sent down this plasma channel and delivered to the target, thus functioning overall as a large-scale, high energy, long-distance version of the Taser electroshock gun.

Alternating current is sent through a series of step-up transformers, increasing the voltage and decreasing the current. The final voltage may be between 108 and 109 volts.[citation needed] This current is fed into the plasma channel created by the laser beam.

[Anthar]

Since weaponized lasers are usually pusle lasers, let's take a look at them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_lasers#Pulsed_operation

Pulsed operation
In the pulsed mode of operation, the output of a laser varies with respect to time, typically taking the form of alternating 'on' and 'off' periods. In many applications one aims to deposit as much energy as possible at a given place in as short time as possible. In laser ablation for example, a small volume of material at the surface of a work piece might evaporate if it gets the energy required to heat it up far enough in very short time. If, however, the same energy is spread over a longer time, the heat may have time to disperse into the bulk of the piece, and less material evaporates. There are a number of methods to achieve this.


Q-switching
Main article: Q-switching
In a Q-switched laser, the population inversion (usually produced in the same way as CW operation) is allowed to build up by making the cavity conditions (the 'Q') unfavorable for lasing. Then, when the pump energy stored in the laser medium is at the desired level, the 'Q' is adjusted (electro- or acousto-optically) to favourable conditions, releasing the pulse. This results in high peak powers as the average power of the laser (were it running in CW mode) is packed into a shorter time frame.


Modelocking
Main article: Modelocking
A modelocked laser emits extremely short pulses on the order of tens of picoseconds down to less than 10 femtoseconds. These pulses are typically separated by the time that a pulse takes to complete one round trip in the resonator cavity. Due to the Fourier limit (also known as energy-time uncertainty), a pulse of such short temporal length has a spectrum which contains a wide range of wavelengths. Because of this, the laser medium must have a broad enough gain profile to amplify them all. An example of a suitable material is titanium-doped, artificially grown sapphire (Ti:sapphire).

The modelocked laser is a most versatile tool for researching processes happening at extremely fast time scales also known as femtosecond physics, femtosecond chemistry and ultrafast science, for maximizing the effect of nonlinearity in optical materials (e.g. in second-harmonic generation, parametric down-conversion, optical parametric oscillators and the like), and in ablation applications. Again, because of the short timescales involved, these lasers can achieve extremely high powers.


Pulsed pumping
Another method of achieving pulsed laser operation is to pump the laser material with a source that is itself pulsed, either through electronic charging in the case of flashlamps, or another laser which is already pulsed. Pulsed pumping was historically used with dye lasers where the inverted population lifetime of a dye molecule was so short that a high energy, fast pump was needed. The way to overcome this problem was to charge up large capacitors which are then switched to discharge through flashlamps, producing a broad spectrum pump flash. Pulsed pumping is also required for lasers which disrupt the gain medium so much during the laser process that lasing has to cease for a short period. These lasers, such as the excimer laser and the copper vapour laser, can never be operated in CW mode.

Here it notes that the heat is caused by the reaction to the energy and if the energy is transfered quickly enough to heat the material it will evaporate. Otherwise it just turns to goop due to the breakdown of the cells/material.

Anthar the relevant materials you should be quoting are Lasers as Weapons. Lasers can be used as lots of things but quoting sections about how a laser achieve different functions and results when used for different purposes isn't really that pertinent. For example the pulsed pumping you mentioned are most often used with dye lasers which are used in things like spectroscopy or medical applications like dermatology lasers which adjust skin tone, they are not really used for causing quick massive damage in a weaponized form that I know of.

These are from descriptions of lasers as weapons which linked to pulse lasers and your discrediting it based on one of the three types of pulse lasers quoted here without any citation or link to back it up.

[Anthar]

Yet the beam itself is not heat otherwise they would not be able to use lasers to break apart your gall bladder stones because it would cook you all the way through. Lasers cause a reaction which can generate heat because of the release of energy created by the manipulation of atoms. To explain it simply the atoms are manipulated by the laser which causes them to become more active which generates heat. The levels of heat caused by this is dependent upon the intensity of the laser, the ability of the materials to disipate the heat and the length of exposure.

[Anthar]

Please enlighten us as to which weaponized lasers that you are refering to and the principles of quantum physics that the "heat" is produced by the laser. Again, the laser is not "heat", the reaction to the radiation produced by the laser generates heat.

[Qev]

Please enlighten us as to which weaponized lasers that you are refering to and the principles of quantum physics that the "heat" is produced by the laser. Again, the laser is not "heat", the reaction to the radiation produced by the laser generates heat.

Heat is transferred by a laser. Heat is simply the transfer of thermal energy between regions of varying temperature via convection, conduction, or (in this specific case) radiation. As far as real-life weaponized lasers go, that transfer of thermal energy is what's doing damage to a target, either through melting or explosive vaporization.

Of course, lasers in Rifts have about as much relation to real-world lasers as turbolasers in Star Wars do.

[Anthar]

Please enlighten us as to which weaponized lasers that you are refering to and the principles of quantum physics that the "heat" is produced by the laser. Again, the laser is not "heat", the reaction to the radiation produced by the laser generates heat.

Heat is transferred by a laser. Heat is simply the transfer of thermal energy between regions of varying temperature via convection, conduction, or (in this specific case) radiation. As far as real-life weaponized lasers go, that transfer of thermal energy is what's doing damage to a target, either through melting or explosive vaporization.

Of course, lasers in Rifts have about as much relation to real-world lasers as turbolasers in Star Wars do.

According to wiki lasers are electomagnetic energy/radiation, not thermal energy.

[Anthar]

Please enlighten us as to which weaponized lasers that you are refering to and the principles of quantum physics that the "heat" is produced by the laser. Again, the laser is not "heat", the reaction to the radiation produced by the laser generates heat.

Heat is transferred by a laser. Heat is simply the transfer of thermal energy between regions of varying temperature via convection, conduction, or (in this specific case) radiation. As far as real-life weaponized lasers go, that transfer of thermal energy is what's doing damage to a target, either through melting or explosive vaporization.

Of course, lasers in Rifts have about as much relation to real-world lasers as turbolasers in Star Wars do.

According to wiki lasers are electomagnetic energy/radiation, not thermal energy.

Absorption/resistance of electromagnetic energy/radiation often creates heat which in turn damages the material that was absorbing/resisting the energy. That's how lasers melt, cut, evaporate and expand materials and that's how microwaves heat your food, it's also why electricity burns and many other examples.

EM radiation may also cause certain molecules to absorb energy and thus to heat up, thus causing thermal effects and sometimes burns; this is exploited in microwave ovens.

You just explained my point, it is the molecules that create the heat not the laser itself. The laser just starts the process.

[Qev]

You just explained my point, it is the molecules that create the heat not the laser itself. The laser just starts the process.

Still speaking in terms of real-world physics, "heat" is the manifestation of the energy transferred by the laser. It's also the means by which a laser would damage something. I'm not entirely sure what's being argued, here; heat can't be transferred without some mechanism to transfer it, whether by laser beam or convection current or direct physical conduction or phase change.

Obviously, the laser isn't made out of heat, because that would be physically nonsensical; nothing is made out of heat, because heat is just our term for the transfer of thermal energy. A laser does damage by heating its target.

Unless you're in Rifts universe, where it's apparently (and fairly explicitly) a 'light energy' weapon, doing 'energy damage' and not 'heat damage'. It doesn't have (or need) any sensible real-world explanation.

[Anthar]

You just explained my point, it is the molecules that create the heat not the laser itself. The laser just starts the process.

Still speaking in terms of real-world physics, "heat" is the manifestation of the energy transferred by the laser. It's also the means by which a laser would damage something. I'm not entirely sure what's being argued, here; heat can't be transferred without some mechanism to transfer it, whether by laser beam or convection current or direct physical conduction or phase change.

Obviously, the laser isn't made out of heat, because that would be physically nonsensical; nothing is made out of heat, because heat is just our term for the transfer of thermal energy. A laser does damage by heating its target.

Unless you're in Rifts universe, where it's apparently (and fairly explicitly) a 'light energy' weapon, doing 'energy damage' and not 'heat damage'. It doesn't have (or need) any sensible real-world explanation.

No you're right, in the Rifts universe that is the way it works. The debate turned to real world science when it was claimed that the laser was a "heat beam". I was just trying to get the point across that lasers are energy not heat and the acceleration of molecules in the target is what causes the heat. I admit that I am certainly no expert, but I can read and basically understand "science speak" which has led me to understand the transference of energy and its effects on molecules.

[Dead Boy]

Since weaponized lasers are usually pusle lasers, let's take a look at them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_lasers#Pulsed_operation

In laser ablation for example, a small volume of material at the surface of a work piece might evaporate if it gets the energy required to heat it up far enough in very short time.

Here it notes that the heat is caused by the reaction to the energy and if the energy is transfered quickly enough to heat the material it will evaporate. Otherwise it just turns to goop due to the breakdown of the cells/material.

It kind of says that, but not directly enough to decisively support your argument. Tell ya what, though. Find a good source that outright, directly says that lasers themselves are not "hot" in and of themselves, and that it is their stimulating bombardment of photons against mater that creates the heat, (as opposed to a thermal heat transfer as Qev suggested, what you'd get if lasers were "hot" thus doing heat damage), they you'll have a winner. And yes, it must expressly say "lasers are not hot" or words to that effect; (and please cite a different source than Wiki). I already Googled "Are lasers hot" just in case there was an overlooked simple answer to this end, and got little useful results. Good luck, and good hunting!

But be forewarned. I've come across hard, damning evidence in favor of the opposition camp's contention that, at least canonistically in-game, lasers are indeed "hot". That evidence being my recollection of the main laser cannons of the CAF capitol ships in the Phase World Source Book. Specifically that the lasers have an area effect damage that is not only due the the beam itself, but extra damage from heat radiating off the laser beam as well. I'd cite the page number, but I don't have access to the book just now.

When it comes to canon material, all we really have to define what Ion Beams are in game is RUE, pg. 358 (same as lasers) describing their effects. There it says, "An ion beam works similar to a laser, only it does more severe damage, burning and irradiating the entire severed limb, effectively turning it on a piece of cooked meat, as well as a porting of the body around the wound." Notice that in game, Ion Beams just cook and burn, where as lasers cut, vaporize, and cauterize. So no, Ion Beams don't cut the mustard when it comes to hitting all the points on that list of effects, only some of them.

Reread that.
"An Ion beam works similar to a laser, only...."
That means that they work the same way, except as noted.

Incorrect. It says Ion Beams work similarly to lasers in terms of how they effect their targets. Similar, not "exact" but similar. As in there are some similarities, but there are some notable differences. And since the text doesn't detail what it does and doesn't do to explore those differences, we have no solid evidence to call lasers "just energy" based solely off comparisons to somewhat vague descriptions of ion beams. So no prize for you.

[Killer Cyborg]

When it comes to canon material, all we really have to define what Ion Beams are in game is RUE, pg. 358 (same as lasers) describing their effects. There it says, "An ion beam works similar to a laser, only it does more severe damage, burning and irradiating the entire severed limb, effectively turning it on a piece of cooked meat, as well as a porting of the body around the wound." Notice that in game, Ion Beams just cook and burn, where as lasers cut, vaporize, and cauterize. So no, Ion Beams don't cut the mustard when it comes to hitting all the points on that list of effects, only some of them.

Reread that.
"An Ion beam works similar to a laser, only...."
That means that they work the same way, except as noted.

Incorrect. It says Ion Beams work similarly to lasers in terms of how they effect their targets. Similar, not "exact" but similar.

Correct.
And when a statement is made that two things are similar, "except" or "only" for some listed reasons, then those listed differences are the only significant differences.
This was my point.

As in there are some similarities, but there are some notable differences.

Yes: the differences that were noted.
And none of those differences were that ion beams don't cut or cauterize.

[Qev]

It kind of says that, but not directly enough to decisively support your argument. Tell ya what, though. Find a good source that outright, directly says that lasers themselves are not "hot" in and of themselves, and that it is their stimulating bombardment of photons against mater that creates the heat, (as opposed to a thermal heat transfer as Qev suggested, what you'd get if lasers were "hot" thus doing heat damage), they you'll have a winner. And yes, it must expressly say "lasers are not hot" or words to that effect; (and please cite a different source than Wiki). I already Googled "Are lasers hot" just in case there was an overlooked simple answer to this end, and got little useful results. Good luck, and good hunting!

Lasers themselves aren't 'hot', but they transfer thermal energy to the things they interact with. It isn't much different than the infrared radiation produced by a glowing iron: it will heat up the things it irradiates, but you can't really call the IR radiation itself 'hot'.

But be forewarned. I've come across hard, damning evidence in favor of the opposition camp's contention that, at least canonistically in-game, lasers are indeed "hot". That evidence being my recollection of the main laser cannons of the CAF capitol ships in the Phase World Source Book. Specifically that the lasers have an area effect damage that is not only due the the beam itself, but extra damage from heat radiating off the laser beam as well. I'd cite the page number, but I don't have access to the book just now.

It's explicitly described in the book as splash damage from the point of impact, not from the beam itself (PWSB pg. 93). If they fired the laser cannon past your ear in space, you'd need to change your spacesuit, but would otherwise be unharmed - assuming the beam collimation is good. Of course, an enormously high-energy laser beam fired in an atmosphere likely would heat the area surrounding the beam itself, since it's passing through - and interacting with - the air. It'd probably be very much like lightning in effect, minus all the usual electrostatic effects of course.

[Dead Boy]

Dead Boy the laser itself is not hot. It's how it interacts with materials that produces heat and destroys/damages that material.

Oooo... That's a dangerous concession there, my friend. Because being "hot" is fundamental to how the Burster's defensive power works.

Lasers themselves aren't 'hot', but they transfer thermal energy to the things they interact with. It isn't much different than the infrared radiation produced by a glowing iron: it will heat up the things it irradiates, but you can't really call the IR radiation itself 'hot'.

Oooo... A strike-two concession. Technically bullets transfer heat too, but we call them kinetic based attacks and not thermal or heat based.

I've come across hard, damning evidence in favor of the opposition camp's contention that, at least canonistically in-game, lasers are indeed "hot". That evidence being my recollection of the main laser cannons of the CAF capitol ships in the Phase World Source Book. Specifically that the lasers have an area effect damage that is not only due the the beam itself, but extra damage from heat radiating off the laser beam as well. I'd cite the page number, but I don't have access to the book just now.

It's explicitly described in the book as splash damage from the point of impact, not from the beam itself (PWSB pg. 93). If they fired the laser cannon past your ear in space, you'd need to change your spacesuit, but would otherwise be unharmed - assuming the beam collimation is good. Of course, an enormously high-energy laser beam fired in an atmosphere likely would heat the area surrounding the beam itself, since it's passing through - and interacting with - the air. It'd probably be very much like lightning in effect, minus all the usual electrostatic effects of course.

Like I said, recalled, but not re-read due to a lack of access to that particular book. Thanks for the clarification. Strike three.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That said, with the two major advocates (unintentionally?) conceding this crucial scientific point, that the laser itself is not "hot" but it's its interaction with mater that creates the heat, (not to mention the best canon evidence I could think of falling flat), I have to call it. The given FAQ answer stands: Lasers do indeed do full damage to Bursters, though I strongly suggest that the FAQ be edited to include this relevant information and explanation instead of essentially saying "it's that way because we said so". ... So without further adieu...

Answer Accepted