Rolplaying Games and the 1-shot Kill

[Blue_Lion]

KC, also from DS:

"A well placed head shot will kill just about anything, and if the weapon at hand wont pierce the hide or skull, or do much damage, the eye is a perfectly viable target."

Correct.
Notice how the first part is contingent on the weapon being able to penetrate the skull.
And notice that while the eye is a "viable target," ultimately the result of hitting it is the x2-x3 damage that I already quoted.

The gun, in the same book, that is mentioned as being able to one shot dinosaurs, does 1D6 MD.

I'm not near my books now.
Care to give an exact quote on that?

There is no MDC given for any eye of a dinosaur (or anything other than an alien intelligence). The result of taking out the eye, or a "joint" or anything else he talks about in that section would have to be determined by the GM.

Whether or not the eye is destroyed by the attack would indeed fall into the realm of GM's decision, but the outright damage would just go to a damage pool.
The standard for damage distribution in that case is that it goes to the closest damage pool.
If a human is shot in the head, the damage comes from his main SDC/HP damage pool, not from a new pool for his head specifically. That's why such shots do x2 damage; to represent that something vital was hit that doesn't have it's own pool.
Headshots against creatures that have damage pools specifically for their head take x1 damage to the head from head attacks. Creatures with no damage pool for their head take x2 damage from the main.
Likewise, a creature with a specific damage pool for the eye would take x1 damage to the eye, and a creature without that specific damage pool would take x2-x3 damage to the nearest applicable damage pool (the head, or the main damage pool depending).

Reading all of that section "hunting dinosaurs and other creatures" is enlightening. "In terms of straight statistics, it would take a few characters in power armor armed with MD rail guns to stand tow to toe with a T-Rex...", but "such weapons [rail guns, explosives, heavy weapons] don't leave much of the creature left to eat." ... "Even barbarians hunt dinosaurs. How do they manage it?"

He goes on to talk about tricks and traps, then gets to "high tech hunting methods." "Hunting is about the precision placement of a single killing, or at least disabling shot."

Right.
He does NOT talk about killing a dino with hundreds of MDC with a single shot to the head. If THAT was possible/likely, then the hunters wouldn't bother with the tricks, traps, knee-shots, and so forth.

The gun in question is on pg. 75. "The Provider single shot breach loading rifle." Mega Damage 1D6 (it is the only MD weapon in the line). In the description: "In the hands of a Dinosaur Hunter, the rifle has been known to bring down an adult dinosaur with a single shot to the head."

DS 13
Similar winged dinosaurs to the Leatherwing or pterodactyl typically have simnilar builds to the Leatherwing, but are not as big or tough. Take the stats for the Leatherwing and resuce the attributes, MDC, and damage rates by 1d4x10+30%.

Leatherwings have 100 MDC in their head/beak.
Reduce that by 70%, and you're left with 30 MDC.
An Eye Shot for x3 damage to the head, with a Critical HIt (Easier with the Provider), could inflict up to 24 MD, taking out 80% of the target's MDC in 1 shot. That's enough relative damage to arguably pierce the brain, going by the CB1 rules regarding "massive" damage and such.
24 MD against something with hundreds of MDC, though, would not be "massive."
Also, one of these creatures that had been wounded in a fight against another dino (or had simply fallen ill or something), and had taken 6+ MD and had not fully healed would be able to be dropped by a single shot by this rifle using damage alone.

DS 34
Spitfire Leapers have 25 MDC in their head. Again, 24 MD would be "massive" against such a target. Also, the target might have lost 1+ MDC at some point before it encountered the hunter, and not fully healed.

DS 13
All breeds of dinosaur, from the smallest to the gargantuan, make their homes in what once was Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas.
and
Presented below are dinosaurs common to Dinosaur Swamps...
...These listings are far from exhaustive, and there are many more creatures lurking in Dinosaur Swamp waiting to be discovered.

I think that it's safe to say that with dinosaurs listed in the DS book being almost able to be outright killed from a single shot by that weapon, that there are other dinosaurs that are weaker and easier to kill. There is nothing indicating that the dinos listed are the "smallest" in the swamps.
In fact, there is nothing eliminating the dinosaur stats from the RMB, and IIRC even the post-NW stats included some weaker dinos.

does the flavor text from the weapon by no means justifies a new one shot rule for such actions?

[Tor]

Brodkil is kinda basic. But lots of demon have lots of heads and eyes and whatever.

Even stuff with a single head where we'd assume the brain is there, I probably wouldn't. Amorphs are an example of this not necessarily being the case. Dragons might be also. There's probably some flavor text somewhere out there about scooping the brains out of dragon skulls but I would want to have it first before laying it in stone.

Regarding Brodkil: not sure if I would've originally said they had brain-in-head when presented in SB1/NGR but as of Mindwerks I think I would because at that poin they were getting MOM implants in their head and we know those need to be connected directly to the brain.

This is one of the reasons why I implement MDC by location on biological targets just like body armor, power armor, and robots are statted out.

Which makes you wonder 'which bot/PA' since some are more thoroughly stated out than others.

Am also reminded of the micro-allotment like in that YouTube campaign where the guy is called-shotting a full conversion borg's eye with the C-10 and surpassing 2 MDC to hit the brain or some weirdness.

A 2d6 damage rifle can obliterate a house, burn the air, send piles of molten dirt into the sky, but it can't even make an 8ft tall critter twitch. To some that's fine, and to a degree I follow it (demons...they don't have to make sense), but there's a limit to it.

Between the Shadows mentions that GMs have the option of changing MD ratio to 1:20 / 1:10 / 1:5 if they do not like 1:100 I think. Although this might've just been in the context of importing MD into Nightbane or converting it to SDC, but I think it works Megaversally, GM can house anything. This wouldn't help the laser kill the sub-demon but it would make the contrast less ridiculous since it wouldn't be wrecking the SDC house as badly.

Pass out Soul drinkers.

Simultaneous disarm attack, let your armor take the first hit while you have a high chance of taking away their prime weapon. Not recommended for armorless with low magic save.

does the flavor text from the weapon by no means justifies a new one shot rule for such actions?

Does it mention which species are supposed to be 1-shot killable? Does it mention which guns can do this?

[Blue_Lion]

It does not name a species but it is a quote from one particular gun.(was in the text I quoted above mine.)
Rifts main books small dinosaur have 3d6 MD so a 1d6MD weapon to the head of one would have a chance to kill one. That is a unspecified small dinosaur but not a specific one listed.

[Alrik Vas]

It actually does. KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

[Blue_Lion]

It actually does. KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

Are you replying to me?
I know it never did but people are putting it on the pedestal like it justifies killing a 400MD creature with a 1d6MD weapon. It is not justification for a new one shot rule as RAW can achieve the affect in flavor text.

[Killer Cyborg]

does the flavor text from the weapon by no means justifies a new one shot rule for such actions?

I don't know that it really matters, because I've shown that there are dinosaurs that can be one-shotted by the rifle in question, so the rules support the text and vice-versa.
Since the one-shot kill to a dinosaur can fit within the standard damage rules, no further rule need be hypothesized.

BUT if I hadn't been able to provide that kind of illustration that the flavor text is within the scope of the rules (so to speak), then I'd go with the rules over the flavor text. Rifts flavor text doesn't have a 100% solid history of fitting with the rules of the game.

[Killer Cyborg]

KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

Indeed; in cases where the damage exceeds the MDC of the target, or in cases where the CB1 (optional) rules are invoked and the damage relative to the target is "massive."
But that's not the same as a 1d6 or 2d6 MD weapon against a target with 400 MDC.

[Blue_Lion]

KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

Indeed; in cases where the damage exceeds the MDC of the target, or in cases where the CB1 (optional) rules are invoked and the damage relative to the target is "massive."
But that's not the same as a 1d6 or 2d6 MD weapon against a target with 400 MDC.

That is basically the point I was trying to make. The weapon does by no means justify a new kind of 1 shot rule against high MDC targets.

[Jorick]

Right.
He does NOT talk about killing a dino with hundreds of MDC with a single shot to the head. If THAT was possible/likely, then the hunters wouldn't bother with the tricks, traps, knee-shots, and so forth.

...

I think that it's safe to say that with dinosaurs listed in the DS book being almost able to be outright killed from a single shot by that weapon, that there are other dinosaurs that are weaker and easier to kill. There is nothing indicating that the dinos listed are the "smallest" in the swamps.
In fact, there is nothing eliminating the dinosaur stats from the RMB, and IIRC even the post-NW stats included some weaker dinos.

I quoted exactly where he said a "single shot" (you even quoted my quote). It's the second half of the section where he talks about modern tech. This is part of three paragraphs worth of discussion which includes lines like "a well placed head shot will kill just about anything."

He describes a fight earlier in the section between a T-Rex (not a small dino) and a bunch of power armor. The problem he's trying to overcome in this section is how to eat large dinosaurs. If the power armor whittles away all of the T-Rex's (or large sauropod's) MDC, there is nothing left to eat.

Inherently, the problem can only be overcome by not depleting the MDC. Thus hitting weak spots, hitting the brain, even bleeding the animal with a shot to the back.

The situation is killing large dinosaurs, to feed people for a long time, without depleting their MDC. The only rule he comes up with for it is x3 critical called shot to a weak spot (none of those spots he mentions are listed anywhere for anything's MDC). Such a shot should be able to kill the creature without significantly "harming" it's body. Even a barbarian trapping a creature would have to kill it once caught, without depleting its MDC. The trap just keeps it from fighting.

All this can be only if the issue he's trying to describe can be expressed at all in the game...and if it can't then why describe it at all, or make OCCs that supposedly can do it?

[Killer Cyborg]

KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

Indeed; in cases where the damage exceeds the MDC of the target, or in cases where the CB1 (optional) rules are invoked and the damage relative to the target is "massive."
But that's not the same as a 1d6 or 2d6 MD weapon against a target with 400 MDC.

That is basically the point I was trying to make. The weapon does by no means justify a new kind of 1 shot rule against high MDC targets.

Agreed.

[Alrik Vas]

KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

Indeed; in cases where the damage exceeds the MDC of the target, or in cases where the CB1 (optional) rules are invoked and the damage relative to the target is "massive."
But that's not the same as a 1d6 or 2d6 MD weapon against a target with 400 MDC.

That is basically the point I was trying to make. The weapon does by no means justify a new kind of 1 shot rule against high MDC targets.

Agreed.

Of course it doesn't. That's RAW.

That isn't at all what I've ever really been talking about. I only brought up the weapon in question because Blue Lion asked. I was being helpful and reminding him, not being argumentative. The game works how it works. I just do it differently.

[Blue_Lion]

Right.
He does NOT talk about killing a dino with hundreds of MDC with a single shot to the head. If THAT was possible/likely, then the hunters wouldn't bother with the tricks, traps, knee-shots, and so forth.

...

I think that it's safe to say that with dinosaurs listed in the DS book being almost able to be outright killed from a single shot by that weapon, that there are other dinosaurs that are weaker and easier to kill. There is nothing indicating that the dinos listed are the "smallest" in the swamps.
In fact, there is nothing eliminating the dinosaur stats from the RMB, and IIRC even the post-NW stats included some weaker dinos.

I quoted exactly where he said a "single shot" (you even quoted my quote). It's the second half of the section where he talks about modern tech. This is part of three paragraphs worth of discussion which includes lines like "a well placed head shot will kill just about anything."

He describes a fight earlier in the section between a T-Rex (not a small dino) and a bunch of power armor. The problem he's trying to overcome in this section is how to eat large dinosaurs. If the power armor whittles away all of the T-Rex's (or large sauropod's) MDC, there is nothing left to eat.

Inherently, the problem can only be overcome by not depleting the MDC. Thus hitting weak spots, hitting the brain, even bleeding the animal with a shot to the back.

The situation is killing large dinosaurs, to feed people for a long time, without depleting their MDC. The only rule he comes up with for it is x3 critical called shot to a weak spot (none of those spots he mentions are listed anywhere for anything's MDC). Such a shot should be able to kill the creature without significantly "harming" it's body. Even a barbarian trapping a creature would have to kill it once caught, without depleting its MDC. The trap just keeps it from fighting.

All this can be only if the issue he's trying to describe can be expressed at all in the game...and if it can't then why describe it at all, or make OCCs that supposedly can do it?

Does it provide a mechanic or rule for this or is it flavor text supporting the writers play style?
Does the text perhaps refer to a rule that got changed by Kevin and he missed the flavor text in editing?

Can a well placed head shot from a glitter boys boom gun kill just about anything? How about a well placed shot with a squirt gun?
A statement that a head shot kills anything is in direct conflict with RAW as we know heads have a pool of DC that must be depleted. Why bother with DC for heads if a head shot = death?
X3 from a 2d6 MD weapon can not kill the head of most 400 MD creatures. You are grasping at straws in that statement. As you are not providing a rule to support such an action.

[Blue_Lion]

KC pointed out a skill/gear/target combination that can, under certain circumstances allowable, kill a dinosaur with a single shot.

Indeed; in cases where the damage exceeds the MDC of the target, or in cases where the CB1 (optional) rules are invoked and the damage relative to the target is "massive."
But that's not the same as a 1d6 or 2d6 MD weapon against a target with 400 MDC.

That is basically the point I was trying to make. The weapon does by no means justify a new kind of 1 shot rule against high MDC targets.

Agreed.

Of course it doesn't. That's RAW.

That isn't at all what I've ever really been talking about. I only brought up the weapon in question because Blue Lion asked. I was being helpful and reminding him, not being argumentative. The game works how it works. I just do it differently.

But that is what me and KC have been talking about.
(When did I ask about a weapon?)

[Jorick]

Maybe answer two questions for me:

1. Is it possible for a person with a knife to kill an average human being with one well placed stab, and, if so, can this be expressed in the game where the knife does 1D6 SDC, and the average human has many more times that SDC and Hit points?

2. If Tod Yoho had written, in the section about hunting dinosaurs, this: "It is up to the GM to determine the MDC value of the [eye, joint, other weak area], and the hit modifier of hitting that spot" would that be considered a "rule" that should/could be followed to allow for such a thing to happen according to the RAW?

[Blue_Lion]

Maybe answer two questions for me:

1. Is it possible for a person with a knife to kill an average human being with one well placed stab, and, if so, can this be expressed in the game where the knife does 1D6 SDC, and the average human has many more times that SDC and Hit points?

2. If Tod Yoho had written, in the section about hunting dinosaurs, this: "It is up to the GM to determine the MDC value of the [eye, joint, other weak area], and the hit modifier of hitting that spot" would that be considered a "rule" that should/could be followed to allow for such a thing to happen according to the RAW?

1. A death blow with the listed X2 or X3 to a pseron with lets say 12 HP would kill him so yes it is reflected in RAW. (Think 12 is around average HP for a level 1 charter.)
2. No that would be like many other quotes justifying the use of house rules but not RAW as it is not a set rule.

Now that I answered your two questions you feel like answering the ones I asked first?

[Jorick]

Maybe answer two questions for me:

1. Is it possible for a person with a knife to kill an average human being with one well placed stab, and, if so, can this be expressed in the game where the knife does 1D6 SDC, and the average human has many more times that SDC and Hit points?

2. If Tod Yoho had written, in the section about hunting dinosaurs, this: "It is up to the GM to determine the MDC value of the [eye, joint, other weak area], and the hit modifier of hitting that spot" would that be considered a "rule" that should/could be followed to allow for such a thing to happen according to the RAW?

1. A death blow with the listed X2 or X3 to a pseron with lets say 12 HP would kill him so yes it is reflected in RAW. (Think 12 is around average HP for a level 1 charter.)
2. No that would be like many other quotes justifying the use of house rules but not RAW as it is not a set rule.

Now that I answered your two questions you feel like answering the ones I asked first?

Which ones?

EDIT: Oh I see. One sec.

[Alrik Vas]

But that is what me and KC have been talking about.

Actually it seems like you're talking about how the rules don't support special case instant death, when it generally does in description.

There's an example KS gives about throwing yourself on a grenade. It's not always about damage points vs health points.

Yet, by the most strict observation of the rules...apparatus...In Palladium, true, you cannot get a 1 hit kill on the majority of MDC opponents with a vibro-knife, even on surprise and critical.

Soooo...now I have a question. What exactly are you guys discussing, exactly?

[Killer Cyborg]

But that is what me and KC have been talking about.

Actually it seems like you're talking about how the rules don't support special case instant death, when it generally does in description.

There's an example KS gives about throwing yourself on a grenade. It's not always about damage points vs health points.

Yet, by the most strict observation of the rules...apparatus...In Palladium, true, you cannot get a 1 hit kill on the majority of MDC opponents with a vibro-knife, even on surprise and critical.

Soooo...now I have a question. What exactly are you guys discussing, exactly?

In that example with the grenade, it specifies that's not how things work for MDC critters as a rule. They can dive on a grenade and live.

[Jorick]

Does it provide a mechanic or rule for this or is it flavor text supporting the writers play style?
Does the text perhaps refer to a rule that got changed by Kevin and he missed the flavor text in editing?

Can a well placed head shot from a glitter boys boom gun kill just about anything? How about a well placed shot with a squirt gun?
A statement that a head shot kills anything is in direct conflict with RAW as we know heads have a pool of DC that must be depleted. Why bother with DC for heads if a head shot = death?
X3 from a 2d6 MD weapon can not kill the head of most 400 MD creatures. You are grasping at straws in that statement. As you are not providing a rule to support such an action.

1. There's half of a mechanic or rule. Including x3 critical on a called and then there's a thing about -70% movement speed for the dino once hit in the spine.

2. Answering this can only be complete conjecture. How is it more valid to assume the whole thing was an error rather than assuming it is supposed to be there? We can call the lack of an explicit complete rule an error too.

3. You need to rad the section please. He's not talking about boom guns.

4. Tod Yoho talks about the difference between a thick skull and an eye in the section. Indeed, a thick skull will prevent death. Shooting the eye is different. Shooting a joint or other weak spot creates some sort of effect. There is no value given for the MDC of these things.



And a Death Blow is a hand to hand strike. It is supposed to be a martial arts technique, hitting nerves or something like that (hence the chi MDC death blow in Japan). This was changed in RUE. But the question is not about a high level assassin. Someone who is not trained as a martial artist can still shove a knife through someone's eye socket. Perhaps we can use the death blow to help create ways to roll. Like it should take two attacks, etc. etc. But the death blow is not the knife stab. Is it still possible?

[Killer Cyborg]

Right.
He does NOT talk about killing a dino with hundreds of MDC with a single shot to the head. If THAT was possible/likely, then the hunters wouldn't bother with the tricks, traps, knee-shots, and so forth.

...

I think that it's safe to say that with dinosaurs listed in the DS book being almost able to be outright killed from a single shot by that weapon, that there are other dinosaurs that are weaker and easier to kill. There is nothing indicating that the dinos listed are the "smallest" in the swamps.
In fact, there is nothing eliminating the dinosaur stats from the RMB, and IIRC even the post-NW stats included some weaker dinos.

I quoted exactly where he said a "single shot" (you even quoted my quote).

And I addressed that (different section that I wasn't talking about right now).
Meanwhile, in the passages that we're discussing here, Yoho talks a lot about measures and tactics that wouldn't be necessary if 1d6 MD to the head could kill an average Dino.

[quoteIt's the second half of the section where he talks about modern tech. This is part of three paragraphs worth of discussion which includes lines like "a well placed head shot will kill just about anything."[/quote]

...and then goes on to clarify that only applies to situations where the weapon can pierce the skull, AS I ALREADY COVERED.

He describes a fight earlier in the section between a T-Rex (not a small dino) and a bunch of power armor. The problem he's trying to overcome in this section is how to eat large dinosaurs. If the power armor whittles away all of the T-Rex's (or large sauropod's) MDC, there is nothing left to eat.

Because of the number of rounds, and the sheer amount of destruction, not because of the MDC depletion.

[Jorick]

Right.
He does NOT talk about killing a dino with hundreds of MDC with a single shot to the head. If THAT was possible/likely, then the hunters wouldn't bother with the tricks, traps, knee-shots, and so forth.

...

I think that it's safe to say that with dinosaurs listed in the DS book being almost able to be outright killed from a single shot by that weapon, that there are other dinosaurs that are weaker and easier to kill. There is nothing indicating that the dinos listed are the "smallest" in the swamps.
In fact, there is nothing eliminating the dinosaur stats from the RMB, and IIRC even the post-NW stats included some weaker dinos.

I quoted exactly where he said a "single shot" (you even quoted my quote).

And I addressed that (different section that I wasn't talking about right now).
Meanwhile, in the passages that we're discussing here, Yoho talks a lot about measures and tactics that wouldn't be necessary if 1d6 MD to the head could kill an average Dino.

It's the second half of the section where he talks about modern tech. This is part of three paragraphs worth of discussion which includes lines like "a well placed head shot will kill just about anything."

...and then goes on to clarify that only applies to situations where the weapon can pierce the skull, AS I ALREADY COVERED.

He describes a fight earlier in the section between a T-Rex (not a small dino) and a bunch of power armor. The problem he's trying to overcome in this section is how to eat large dinosaurs. If the power armor whittles away all of the T-Rex's (or large sauropod's) MDC, there is nothing left to eat.

Because of the number of rounds, and the sheer amount of destruction, not because of the MDC depletion.

He says "the eye is a perfectly viable target" if the weapon wont pierce the skull or the hide. I see no eyes given MDC ratings. Yet he assumes either blindness or the possibility of piercing the brain (which is what would do the killing).

I don't understand the difference between "the number of rounds and the sheer amount of destruction" and "MDC depletion."

[Killer Cyborg]

He says "the eye is a perfectly viable target" if the weapon wont pierce the skull or the hide. I see no eyes given MDC ratings. Yet he assumes either blindness or the possibility of piercing the brain (which is what would do the killing).

viewtopic.php?p=2868638#p2868638

I don't understand the difference between "the number of rounds and the sheer amount of destruction" and "MDC depletion."

A stick of dynamite does 5d6 SDC.
A single bullet from an assault rifle inflicts 5d6 SDC.

The damage is the same... but if you're hunting deer with dynamite, you're going to have a lot less meat to eat than if you're hunting with a 5.56mm round.

Or, as Todd Yoho put it (DS 12):
The use of rail guns rips the body to shreds and leaves thousands of flechette rounds in the meat. Plasma burns and chars the flesh, making it as much as half inedible, particle beams and heavy energy weapons vaporize large portions, and explosives have obvious disadvantage unless carefully used to cripple the monster and then kill it with a precision shot to the head.

A single round from a Provider Rifle can inflict up to 24 MD by my calculations.
A burst from a C-40R can inflict up to 40 MD.
But if they each inflict 20 MD, that Provider will have inflicted its damage by hitting a specific vital area (like the brain), and the C-40R will have inflicted that damage by punching roughly 20 holes into the dinosaur's flesh, shredding the meat.

Or, to put it yet another way, if you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via strangulation, and you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via a shotgun blast, one way leaves the meat intact, and the other way leaves a bunch of blood and feathers in a messy heap.

[Alrik Vas]

See, you're applying common sense and that just opens up too many doors for cries of house rules here.

[Jorick]

He says "the eye is a perfectly viable target" if the weapon wont pierce the skull or the hide. I see no eyes given MDC ratings. Yet he assumes either blindness or the possibility of piercing the brain (which is what would do the killing).

viewtopic.php?p=2868638#p2868638

I don't understand the difference between "the number of rounds and the sheer amount of destruction" and "MDC depletion."

A stick of dynamite does 5d6 SDC.
A single bullet from an assault rifle inflicts 5d6 SDC.

The damage is the same... but if you're hunting deer with dynamite, you're going to have a lot less meat to eat than if you're hunting with a 5.56mm round.

Or, as Todd Yoho put it (DS 12):
[i]The use of rail guns rips the body to shreds and leaves thousands of flechette rounds in the meat. Plasma burns and chars the flesh, making it as much as half inedible, particle beams and heavy energy weapons vaporize large portions, and explosives have obvious disadvantage unless carefully used to cripple the monster and then kill it with a precision shot to the head.[/]

A single round from a Provider Rifle can inflict up to 24 MD by my calculations.
A burst from a C-40R can inflict up to 40 MD.
But if they each inflict 20 MD, that Provider will have inflicted its damage by hitting a specific vital area (like the brain), and the C-40R will have inflicted that damage by punching roughly 20 holes into the dinosaur's flesh, shredding the meat.

Or, to put it yet another way, if you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via strangulation, and you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via a shotgun blast, one way leaves the meat intact, and the other way leaves a bunch of blood and feathers in a messy heap.

Ok. So MDC is just a broad metaphor. Indicative of very little. We apparently agree. Tod also talks about dinos bleeding out. Is there a RAW for that? Can we agree that different actions have different effects and that the RAW doesn't cover those in any mechanical way (I guess "optional rules" have been eventually added to some extent in this regard)? But we are encouraged to deal with these differences?

And we do not know the MDC of the dino brain. We have to make it up. We have to make up what happens when 20 MD hits the brain. This is my entire point about the dino swamp stuff: it's asking us to come up with effects. One of those effects is death.

Also, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but isn't th rule at most x3, and therefore a 1D6 can d max 18 MDC?

[Blue_Lion]

Does it provide a mechanic or rule for this or is it flavor text supporting the writers play style?
Does the text perhaps refer to a rule that got changed by Kevin and he missed the flavor text in editing?

Can a well placed head shot from a glitter boys boom gun kill just about anything? How about a well placed shot with a squirt gun?
A statement that a head shot kills anything is in direct conflict with RAW as we know heads have a pool of DC that must be depleted. Why bother with DC for heads if a head shot = death?
X3 from a 2d6 MD weapon can not kill the head of most 400 MD creatures. You are grasping at straws in that statement. As you are not providing a rule to support such an action.

1. There's half of a mechanic or rule. Including x3 critical on a called and then there's a thing about -70% movement speed for the dino once hit in the spine.

2. Answering this can only be complete conjecture. How is it more valid to assume the whole thing was an error rather than assuming it is supposed to be there? We can call the lack of an explicit complete rule an error too.

3. You need to rad the section please. He's not talking about boom guns.

4. Tod Yoho talks about the difference between a thick skull and an eye in the section. Indeed, a thick skull will prevent death. Shooting the eye is different. Shooting a joint or other weak spot creates some sort of effect. There is no value given for the MDC of these things.



And a Death Blow is a hand to hand strike. It is supposed to be a martial arts technique, hitting nerves or something like that (hence the chi MDC death blow in Japan). This was changed in RUE. But the question is not about a high level assassin. Someone who is not trained as a martial artist can still shove a knife through someone's eye socket. Perhaps we can use the death blow to help create ways to roll. Like it should take two attacks, etc. etc. But the death blow is not the knife stab. Is it still possible?

1. So no mechanic for killing a 400 MDC creature with a 1d6 MD weapon. Just jumping on a straw justification.
2. My point is you can not say 100% that is not what happened so your whole stance is based on conjecture not RAW.

3. I do not need to read the section, You need to read the rules. I would not expect a 3d6 sdc rifle shot to the head to kill a broadkil, what you are suggesting is not supported by RAW. A well placed shot with an weapon the proper power should kill most things, but a weapon without the damage to kill it with a head shot will not kill it.

4. Again flavor text not rules or justification for changing RAW. Without hard rules to back it up we have to by default use the DC pools as normal with the X2-X3 bonus listed in the section you are quoting. As by your own words we can not say for sure that it is linked to some rule that was removed by PB editor.

-not numbered-by default all hand to hand combat moves can be done melee combat with weapons where to you think your auto parry comes from. You said give an example where a person (undefined) can do X I gave you a way by the rules as written that it can happen. you can also look at the point blank rules for other ways to do such listed in KC post or conversion book 1 for other ways.

[Blue_Lion]

He says "the eye is a perfectly viable target" if the weapon wont pierce the skull or the hide. I see no eyes given MDC ratings. Yet he assumes either blindness or the possibility of piercing the brain (which is what would do the killing).

viewtopic.php?p=2868638#p2868638

I don't understand the difference between "the number of rounds and the sheer amount of destruction" and "MDC depletion."

A stick of dynamite does 5d6 SDC.
A single bullet from an assault rifle inflicts 5d6 SDC.

The damage is the same... but if you're hunting deer with dynamite, you're going to have a lot less meat to eat than if you're hunting with a 5.56mm round.

Or, as Todd Yoho put it (DS 12):
[i]The use of rail guns rips the body to shreds and leaves thousands of flechette rounds in the meat. Plasma burns and chars the flesh, making it as much as half inedible, particle beams and heavy energy weapons vaporize large portions, and explosives have obvious disadvantage unless carefully used to cripple the monster and then kill it with a precision shot to the head.[/]

A single round from a Provider Rifle can inflict up to 24 MD by my calculations.
A burst from a C-40R can inflict up to 40 MD.
But if they each inflict 20 MD, that Provider will have inflicted its damage by hitting a specific vital area (like the brain), and the C-40R will have inflicted that damage by punching roughly 20 holes into the dinosaur's flesh, shredding the meat.

Or, to put it yet another way, if you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via strangulation, and you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via a shotgun blast, one way leaves the meat intact, and the other way leaves a bunch of blood and feathers in a messy heap.

Ok. So MDC is just a broad metaphor. Indicative of very little. We apparently agree. Tod also talks about dinos bleeding out. Is there a RAW for that? Can we agree that different actions have different effects and that the RAW doesn't cover those in any mechanical way (I guess "optional rules" have been eventually added to some extent in this regard)? But we are encouraged to deal with these differences?

And we do not know the MDC of the dino brain. We have to make it up. We have to make up what happens when 20 MD hits the brain. This is my entire point about the dino swamp stuff: it's asking us to come up with effects. One of those effects is death.

Also, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but isn't th rule at most x3, and therefore a 1D6 can d max 18 MDC?

MDC is a way to track overall combat survivability or damage soak but can be done in different ways the author Tod was addressing ways that affect amount of meat left.

UP to implies that is the top or max. 1d6X4 is 24, natural 20 plus the damage bonus X3 for the head shot. Did you not read his post where he did the math?

[Alrik Vas]

Actually, CK, part of the issue is strangulation inflicts "damage" and that a shotgun and a choke hold can be compared in Damage Capacity at all.

I mean, a human hand is less than a chicken. Do you lose your hand from 10 damage?

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?

It doesn't really work, so you make adjustments.

[Blue_Lion]

Actually, CK, part of the issue is strangulation inflicts "damage" and that a shotgun and a choke hold can be compared in Damage Capacity at all.

I mean, a human hand is less than a chicken. Do you lose your hand from 10 damage?

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?

It doesn't really work, so you make adjustments.

That is only a problem if you make it one.
A choke can kill, a shot gun can kill damage is just how we track survivability.

straw man defense hit points are not determined by size alone. I do believe there is a break down of dc by location some where in the books if your hand has less than 10 sdc it can be crippled by 10sdc but if it has 11sdc perhaps not.

If you are hitting a softer or less well protected area the damage would have a greater affect on the creature. That is the idea behind critical hit and also the damage multiplier rules in the section that people claim justify one shot a 400 mdc creature with a 2d6 MD weapon. It does not provide a 1 shot kill but a damage bonus.

[Killer Cyborg]

See, you're applying common sense and that just opens up too many doors for cries of house rules here.

[Killer Cyborg]

Actually, CK, part of the issue is strangulation inflicts "damage" and that a shotgun and a choke hold can be compared in Damage Capacity at all.

I mean, a human hand is less than a chicken.

Is it?

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?

Not really sure what you're asking.

[Alrik Vas]

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?[\quote]

Not really sure what you're asking.

Earlier in the discussion you brought up an optional rule that if something can massively deplete an MDC total then it could result in death. Then you pointed out specific circumstances in which it could take place.

I'm asking how that reconciles with surviving smothering a grenade.

If you are applying an explosive directly to the body, sense says it's all but a sure kill (but I realize this is rifts so different stuff sometimes). Yet in the game system, since you're MDC, if you have enough damage capacity, you survive and everything's just dandy. So, how do things suddenly change when making a called shot? How is it different than an explosion, which, while smothering it to protect everyone around you, will be a great deal more deadly because of the nature of an explosion?

To me it doesn't track. That's why I made changes to the system.

And Blue Lion: The above was my point, the Straw Men are back on standby now. Hope you get what I'm saying, even if you disagree.

[Blue_Lion]

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?[\quote]

Not really sure what you're asking.

Earlier in the discussion you brought up an optional rule that if something can massively deplete an MDC total then it could result in death. Then you pointed out specific circumstances in which it could take place.

I'm asking how that reconciles with surviving smothering a grenade.

If you are applying an explosive directly to the body, sense says it's all but a sure kill (but I realize this is rifts so different stuff sometimes). Yet in the game system, since you're MDC, if you have enough damage capacity, you survive and everything's just dandy. So, how do things suddenly change when making a called shot? How is it different than an explosion, which, while smothering it to protect everyone around you, will be a great deal more deadly because of the nature of an explosion?

To me it doesn't track. That's why I made changes to the system.

And Blue Lion: The above was my point, the Straw Men are back on standby now. Hope you get what I'm saying, even if you disagree.

So now you are asking how a called shots damage multiple is different from smothering and explosion?

Well remember that rifts is not a real life sim and wants to reward heroic actions, if you increased damage for smoldering a grenade then not encouraging heroes but punishing them for taking the hit for the team. While the rule for damage multipliers in called shots was created by a writer that wanted to give a way to be more effective with less powerful weapons.

Not sure how this relates to any debate about rules affecting 1 shot a 400 MD creature with a weak weapon by doing a head shot.
But remember Kevin S, rule of gaming is if something does not fit your groups enjoyment of the game do not use it.

[Killer Cyborg]

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?[\quote]

Not really sure what you're asking.

Earlier in the discussion you brought up an optional rule that if something can massively deplete an MDC total then it could result in death. Then you pointed out specific circumstances in which it could take place.

I'm asking how that reconciles with surviving smothering a grenade.

If you are applying an explosive directly to the body, sense says it's all but a sure kill (but I realize this is rifts so different stuff sometimes). Yet in the game system, since you're MDC, if you have enough damage capacity, you survive and everything's just dandy. So, how do things suddenly change when making a called shot? How is it different than an explosion, which, while smothering it to protect everyone around you, will be a great deal more deadly because of the nature of an explosion?

Explosions are lethal in part due to shock, which MDC characters are greatly less affected by.
Also, explosions hid broad surface areas instead of penetrating deeply. So an explosion that damages the chest is less likely to get past the flesh and rib age than a rail gun round that inflicts equal damage.

[Alrik Vas]

BLUE LION:I throw a lot out, yeah.

My question is, by these rules of increased damage for hitting soft spots, isn't it meant to be a representation of hitting a soft spot, making optional rules for damage locations on fleshy target's redundant? Or would you combine the two?

KC: if you smother a grenade, the explosion becomes directed--pretty much directly into you. While it isn't the same as a purpose built penetrator it would be significantly different than if it landed at the target's feet.

[eliakon]

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?[\quote]

Not really sure what you're asking.

Earlier in the discussion you brought up an optional rule that if something can massively deplete an MDC total then it could result in death. Then you pointed out specific circumstances in which it could take place.

I'm asking how that reconciles with surviving smothering a grenade.

If the grenade does 'massive MD' in relation to the victims MDC...
so if your grenade does 20 MD to a creature with only 30 or 40 MDC that might just kill it sure. But if the creature has 400 MDC its just going to hurt a bit.

[Alrik Vas]

But you realize that's still a slippery slope, it's still saying, "well, you don't have to kill it to kill it. You just need to mostly kill it."

If that's how it works so be it, I just don't see how that makes my method so questionable.

[eliakon]

But you realize that's still a slippery slope, it's still saying, "well, you don't have to kill it to kill it. You just need to mostly kill it."

If that's how it works so be it, I just don't see how that makes my method so questionable.

Being able to do 75% of something's total damage pool in a single massive attack, and doing 6% of its damage though are totally different. The first is enough to make you think 'okay is this attack big enough to possibly be fatal?' the second makes you go 'ho hum'
The reason its questionable is that its basically saying that attacks that are a tenth as powerful should be just as damaging. By this logic if I do ten SDC with an attack I should be able to destroy a MDC object, because its a tenth as powerful as the needed damage to harm it......

[Blue_Lion]

BLUE LION:I throw a lot out, yeah.

My question is, by these rules of increased damage for hitting soft spots, isn't it meant to be a representation of hitting a soft spot, making optional rules for damage locations on fleshy target's redundant? Or would you combine the two?

KC: if you smother a grenade, the explosion becomes directed--pretty much directly into you. While it isn't the same as a purpose built penetrator it would be significantly different than if it landed at the target's feet.

Optional rules means you do not have to use them. And I do not use hit locations damage pools when I run games. Does it matter if a optional rule is redundant, to me it does not mater as it is not always used.

By the way for the record smoothing a grenade can be said to double the damage according to rue only half damage for being in the aoe but if you smother a grenade you would take full damage as the main target.(well unless you where the original target.)And would likely prevent roll with impact.

[Killer Cyborg]

If MDC creatures can survive smothering a grenade, how is a much lower powered called shot, no matter how well directed, going to do anything but tick a few damage off the MDC total?[\quote]

Not really sure what you're asking.

Earlier in the discussion you brought up an optional rule that if something can massively deplete an MDC total then it could result in death. Then you pointed out specific circumstances in which it could take place.

I'm asking how that reconciles with surviving smothering a grenade.

If the grenade does 'massive MD' in relation to the victims MDC...
so if your grenade does 20 MD to a creature with only 30 or 40 MDC that might just kill it sure. But if the creature has 400 MDC its just going to hurt a bit.

Yup.

[Alrik Vas]

Massive damage to what? The total or the location?

Is the head 75% of the body's mdc on a humanoid?

[eliakon]

Massive damage to what? The total or the location?

Is the head 75% of the body's mdc on a humanoid?

If you do 75% of their total MDC to the head though I would be willing to talk about killing it out right.
But if you do 7.5% of their total MDC to the head I will be willing talk about breaking a tooth and blackening their eye.

[Alrik Vas]

That's fair for your purposes, I just like it more deadly, albeit more difficult to accomplish.

But I'm also looking for the RAW sources now. What book gives the target to damage multipliers, and which has the hit location MDC distribution?

[Killer Cyborg]

He says "the eye is a perfectly viable target" if the weapon wont pierce the skull or the hide. I see no eyes given MDC ratings. Yet he assumes either blindness or the possibility of piercing the brain (which is what would do the killing).

viewtopic.php?p=2868638#p2868638

I don't understand the difference between "the number of rounds and the sheer amount of destruction" and "MDC depletion."

A stick of dynamite does 5d6 SDC.
A single bullet from an assault rifle inflicts 5d6 SDC.

The damage is the same... but if you're hunting deer with dynamite, you're going to have a lot less meat to eat than if you're hunting with a 5.56mm round.

Or, as Todd Yoho put it (DS 12):
[i]The use of rail guns rips the body to shreds and leaves thousands of flechette rounds in the meat. Plasma burns and chars the flesh, making it as much as half inedible, particle beams and heavy energy weapons vaporize large portions, and explosives have obvious disadvantage unless carefully used to cripple the monster and then kill it with a precision shot to the head.[/]

A single round from a Provider Rifle can inflict up to 24 MD by my calculations.
A burst from a C-40R can inflict up to 40 MD.
But if they each inflict 20 MD, that Provider will have inflicted its damage by hitting a specific vital area (like the brain), and the C-40R will have inflicted that damage by punching roughly 20 holes into the dinosaur's flesh, shredding the meat.

Or, to put it yet another way, if you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via strangulation, and you inflict 10 points of damage to a chicken via a shotgun blast, one way leaves the meat intact, and the other way leaves a bunch of blood and feathers in a messy heap.

Ok. So MDC is just a broad metaphor. Indicative of very little.

It's indicative of the creature's ability to sustain damage.

Tod also talks about dinos bleeding out.

Good point. So if a headshot on a dinosaur leaves some MDC leftover, where the dinosaur initially survives, it might bleed to death anyway, thus fulfilling the description of being killed by a single headshot.

Is there a RAW for that?

There have been rules printed for bleeding out.

And we do not know the MDC of the dino brain. We have to make it up. We have to make up what happens when 20 MD hits the brain. This is my entire point about the dino swamp stuff: it's asking us to come up with effects. One of those effects is death.

While I included the optional rules for death by massive damage one or more of my examples, you should note that such inclusion wasn't necessary, because I also quoted the passages that show us that there are more dinos and smaller dinos than we have the stats for in the Dinosaur Swamps book, which would fulfill the Provider's description of one-shot kills without any optional rules.
The Dinosaur Swamps book makes it pretty clear that the net effect of headshots and such is to inflict x2-x3 damage.

[Blue_Lion]

That's fair for your purposes, I just like it more deadly, albeit more difficult to accomplish.

But I'm also looking for the RAW sources now. What book gives the target to damage multipliers, and which has the hit location MDC distribution?

Damage multipliers are in Dinosaur swamp. (The book people keep quoting to justify one shot kills even thou that is not the mechanic in the book.) Not sure what book started listing creatures with MDC by location or which one has the % breakdown. It existed by the time the new west was printed.

[Alrik Vas]

I think bleeding is governed in SDC and it's 1 point per minute.

[Killer Cyborg]

I think bleeding is governed in SDC and it's 1 point per minute.

Yup.
Just like the coma rules allow you to survive negative HIT POINTS equal to your PE.
Straight RAW, MDC creatures can't bleed to death, and the can't survive at -1 MDC.
But it think it's reasonable to assume that MDC can be treated as HP and vice-versa in these contexts.

[Spinachcat]

If you want shorter combats, use Morale rules.

Living creatures don't want to die. Few NPCs are so dedicated to a cause that they will sacrifice their lives. Those exist, but they are few. Most monsters (other than undead) have bestial intelligence and still have a fight or flight response, AKA they don't want to die either.

When they hit 50% MDC, living creatures may realize they are in deep trouble. I use a flat 50% chance to flee (11+ on D20), modified by the situation and the NPCs relevant stats and characteristics) and they roll each them they are hit as they get below 50% MDC. Of course, the PCs may not permit them to escape or even shoot them as they flee, but that's another story.

Here's an example: a squad of Deadboys with some Skelebot support are on patrol. The battle begins. The PCs blast a few of the Deadboys until they get scared that half their armor is gone, but their squad leader is still up and they outnumber the PCs. For them, I would make the chance to flee only 25%, but as soon as their squad leader vanishes in a puff of blood, those odds jump to 50% and maybe even 75%.

You don't need exact rules - eyeball the situation and put yourself into the mindset of the NPCs.


Also, you want more kills of mooks? Great, use Mook rules.

Here's what I do:

Major Named NPC (or Boss Monster) = 100% to 150% MDC (maybe even 200% to represent uber-status)
Major Encounter Monster or Minor Named NPC = 100% MDC
Minor Encounter Monster or Unnamed NPC = 50%
Mooks (just here to die) = 25% MDC

[Killer Cyborg]

I like the morale point.
Mook rules are unnecessary in Rifts; just use weaker enemies.

[Alrik Vas]

Ultimately, it isn't necesarily about just shorter combats. It's about characters (NPC or PC) in more common situations, not being able to rely completely on a buffer.

If the PC's come across weak, relatively unskilled enemies, it'll be over fast regardless of the ruleset.

if they come across big, tough but stupid enemies, it can take an unnecessarily long time to deal with the problem of combat. or you'll have a fight that doesn't end because one side keeps escaping due to magic/super powers or just better speed.

Let's be clear about this, I've never been looking for a fix to the way I'm running it, at all. I appreciate a lot of the commentary though, because I know my way is far from the only way. Skewing challenges is fine, I tend to go with using morale as well. Though in the end, i think it's pretty epic when a human pulls off something amazing in this setting. Even with the rules i've stated earlier, it isn't exactly common. Most people don't like taking huge penalties to their attack rolls for a chance at a faster kill when their weapon might be strong enough to do the job in 2 or three hits anyway.

In the end, I just feel it's best to have the option. I've never had any abuse of it, but then again I don't see a lot of things as abuse because it always works both ways. All about being smarter than the next guy.

[Jorick]

I think bleeding is governed in SDC and it's 1 point per minute.

Yup.
Just like the coma rules allow you to survive negative HIT POINTS equal to your PE.
Straight RAW, MDC creatures can't bleed to death, and the can't survive at -1 MDC.
But it think it's reasonable to assume that MDC can be treated as HP and vice-versa in these contexts.

First of all, I agree with Alrik's last point completely.

The quote above from KC makes me feel like we've been arguing over nothing. If we can reasonably use some rules to create other rules, then I think everything I've said is reasonable. If I combine the above statement with Blue Lion's earlier statement about death blows, then all of a sudden we have death blows against MDC monsters.

I'm not sure I would even take it that far. If it's reasonable to wound/kill an SDC creature certain ways, then, only after taking into account the magical/supernatural nature of other beings, it's reasonable to allow some of them to be killed in certain ways, given reasonable choices/strategies, in specific situations.

I think death blow, for instance, is something very specific, and not something that any human can use against another. I also think it's reasonable to allow one human to kill another in a very specific instance, without depleting all SDC (for instance, the target is strapped down unable to move, and the character, or NPC, shoots them point blank through the eye). Is that taking things too far? Is that more against the RAW than allowing SDC rules to be modified for MDC beings?

Are not such reasonable choices inherently part of the game?

If the answer to the above is "no?" then I agree to disagree. I just play the game differently. But to the extent, if any, that such choices should be made while playing the game, then I think one shot kills are viable, at least in some circumstances.