Rifts Ultimate Ed: No burst rules?

[ghost2020]

Does R:UE have any burst rules? Even the short burst rules? I didn't see any.

Not that it really matters much, it's a great book and I have a few house rules for bursting anyway.

Glad to see the bonuses for WP modern energy are statted out. I think a lot of people forgot that the regular WP gave a +1 every three levels (or so) to strike.

[J. Lionheart]

Check out the "Ranged Combat" section, pages 360 and 361.

[RainOfSteel]

Does R:UE have any burst rules? Even the short burst rules? I didn't see any.

Not that it really matters much, it's a great book and I have a few house rules for bursting anyway.

Glad to see the bonuses for WP modern energy are statted out. I think a lot of people forgot that the regular WP gave a +1 every three levels (or so) to strike.

I could not locate a single organized description such as exists in the RMB.

In the WP Skills section, p.328/329, several weapons have their descriptions integrated with the WP skills listed.

On p.361 there are some notes about the subject (modifiers).

Can anyone else locate anything?

[TechnoGothic]

The "Burst" rules are Found under the WP SKILLS under WP:RIFLEs Its for SDC weapons only.

MD Weapons do not fire Bursts unless the Weapon itself gives a burst damage rating now. Most MD weapons are Single Shot designed. For "Aimed or Wild" shooting only. Since "Aiming" takes 2 attacks now, alot of PCs will be using the "Wild" Shooting method by default.

I have no problem with this. All it means is Enemies will hit YOU less often in general.

MD Burst or Energy Pulse weapons get a bonus for their spraying at an enemy.

[Dustin Fireblade]

Does R:UE have any burst rules? Even the short burst rules? I didn't see any.

Not that it really matters much, it's a great book and I have a few house rules for bursting anyway.

Glad to see the bonuses for WP modern energy are statted out. I think a lot of people forgot that the regular WP gave a +1 every three levels (or so) to strike.

I could not locate a single organized description such as exists in the RMB.

In the WP Skills section, p.328/329, several weapons have their descriptions integrated with the WP skills listed.

On p.361 there are some notes about the subject (modifiers).

Can anyone else locate anything?

Page 362, under "Attacks per Melee"

[Dead Boy]

Does R:UE have any burst rules? Even the short burst rules? I didn't see any.

Not that it really matters much, it's a great book and I have a few house rules for bursting anyway.

Glad to see the bonuses for WP modern energy are statted out. I think a lot of people forgot that the regular WP gave a +1 every three levels (or so) to strike.

I could not locate a single organized description such as exists in the RMB.

In the WP Skills section, p.328/329, several weapons have their descriptions integrated with the WP skills listed.

On p.361 there are some notes about the subject (modifiers).

Can anyone else locate anything?

Page 362, under "Attacks per Melee"

That says nothing. How many rounds are fired per short or long burst? How many of those shots in the bust hit the mark now? What ROF allows burst-fire for what weapon and which doesn't? Though the SDC weapons are fairly well covered in the WP Skills section, it leaves MD weapons wide open and untouched.

[RainOfSteel]

I suppose the rules concerning this are all just distributed in several places.

I don't normally expect to find weapons stats in a skill description. Or to find burst fire rules under attacks per melee.

I'm not sure what I've read answers all my questions.

I am still thinking of burst fire rules in terms of RMB, rather than URMB.

My solution: House Rule.

[Josh Sinsapaugh]

If you are talking about bonuses, the bonuses of a burst with the new ranged rules is equal to half that of the normal shot. So if you have +2 then you burst at +1.

Unless otherwise stated.

[ghost2020]

So, the "double tap" rule from Game Master Guide is out the window?

Still, disapointed that the old weapons don't burst fire, officially.

They still do under house rules at my table.

Ok, so how long does it take to finish a combat with weapons that only do 4d6 per shot (probably forever)? I would imagine most people use 1dXx10 type of weapons.

[ghost2020]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

[TechnoGothic]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

my old books say MDC weapons are single shot unless otherwised stated...

Also consider this Boomguns are "THE" weapon. the Badass of the badass.
If a normal energy rifle used the normal SDC modern weapons rules, why would anyone want Boomguns ??

a MD rifle doing 4d6 MD is great...
a MD rifle doing 4d6x10 MD burst sucks ass...

Why have Railguns, Boomguns or heavy weapons period...

i have always used :
Wild Shot = one action shot
Aimed Shot = two action shot
Aimed-Called Shot = three action shot

[Dr. Doom III]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

Why?

Simple.
All the people complaining about how a laser rifle can do more damage then a tank main gun because they are firing a burst.

[Gomen_Nagai]

Course the rules were silly in the first, place, Tank weapons were kept low rediculously, and would be resolved by Jacking the damages to a normal level of reality

[Dead Boy]

So, the "double tap" rule from Game Master Guide is out the window?

Given the way how the whole issue of bursts is greatly avoided in RUE, for all intents and purposes the Double Tap may as well be considered to still be canon.

if u have a rail gun and u want to spary multiple targets, what are the RUE rules on it?

Where RUE says little about bursts, it says absolutely nothing about sprays.

my old books say MDC weapons are single shot unless otherwised stated...

Yea? Well my old original CB1 has an example of a guy BURSTING with a C-18 laser pistol... written by Kev himself!

All the people complaining about how a laser rifle can do more damage then a tank main gun because they are firing a burst.

You kind of missed the point on that one Doomie. That complaint wasn't about how overpowered smallarms were, but how underpowered vehicle weapons were. And if this really is Kev's actual solution to the complaint, and not a simple oversight, then he really messed things up by making some weapons toothless while keeping others on that level all in the same book.

[ghost2020]

Where in the old main book would it say that the mdc weapons are single shot?
Well, my main books are 1st and 2nd prints so that might be it.

[Killer Cyborg]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

Why?

Simple.
All the people complaining about how a laser rifle can do more damage then a tank main gun because they are firing a burst.

More likely people were complaining that it was too easy for characters to die.
When any CS Grunt you encounter can empty his C-10 at you for 2d6x10 MD (or even 2d6x7), you have to think things through a lot more and be careful... instead of portraying the CS Grunts like the stormtroopers in Star Wars.
A lot of people don't like that.

[Killer Cyborg]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

my old books say MDC weapons are single shot unless otherwised stated...

Also consider this Boomguns are "THE" weapon. the Badass of the badass.
If a normal energy rifle used the normal SDC modern weapons rules, why would anyone want Boomguns ??

a MD rifle doing 4d6 MD is great...
a MD rifle doing 4d6x10 MD burst sucks ass...

Why have Railguns, Boomguns or heavy weapons period...

i have always used :
Wild Shot = one action shot
Aimed Shot = two action shot
Aimed-Called Shot = three action shot

Dig up a copy of CB1 (unrevised) p. 7-11.
The rule of thumb was that energy pistols and rifles were assumed to use the burst/spray rules as per p. 34 of the main book, UNLESS the weapon listed a specific number of shots.
This is why the CS Grunt in the sample combat can fire a burst from his C-18 laser pistol.

[ghost2020]

Aaaaahhh back in the good ol' days!

[jedi078]

I always treated energy weapons to be single shot weapons unless stated they fire pulse bursts.

It is knda disapointing that the burst rules are not in the book, but it does make sense sense if the above is used, as SDC fire arms weapons are not intended to be used in great numbers in Rifts.

BTW One reason I bought Rifts: Ultimate Edition was the new rules (the latest set of rules I have is from a 1994 printing of the RMB) and the skills listing.

[ghost2020]

Oh hell yeah, the burst rules are easy to tweak to one's game style.

The Ultimate Edition is a damned fine piece of work and much needed. It doesn't knock about the previous books too bad which is very much appreciated!

[grandmaster z0b]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

my old books say MDC weapons are single shot unless otherwised stated...

Also consider this Boomguns are "THE" weapon. the Badass of the badass.
If a normal energy rifle used the normal SDC modern weapons rules, why would anyone want Boomguns ??

a MD rifle doing 4d6 MD is great...
a MD rifle doing 4d6x10 MD burst sucks ass...

Why have Railguns, Boomguns or heavy weapons period...

i have always used :
Wild Shot = one action shot
Aimed Shot = two action shot
Aimed-Called Shot = three action shot

A Rifle doing 4d6x10 burst is realistic if it takes all of the clip and all of the attacks for that round, so in the time an infantryman can do a max damage of 240 MDC, the average Glitterboy will do a max damage of 1080 MDC if not more (aprox. 6 attacks, each doing 3d6x10). The BoomGun is still the "badass".

I've always played these rules, and newbies often think this is a great tactic, but then they spend all their actions on a shot that may well miss. Also they have to spend the next action of that round changing clips and they tend to go through all their ammo in the first few rounds, especially if they are fighting demons and cannot use the enemies e-clips.

So even though it is possible to do massive damage, usually players and NPCs use short bursts and aimed shots anyway.

I agree that vehicle weapons were never balanced but I would rather up their damage or allow them to burst instead of nerfing the average rifle damage.

I find that these rules increase the amount of combat options a player has with an MD gun. I find the idea of only being able to do one shot rather boring and un-creative.

[Thinyser]

What I'd like to know and am very curious about...is why?
Why would there be no bursting energy weapons? (like the sdc type of burst firing- not just the triple pulse burst, or the x10 type of firing)


There was back in the main book and the conversion book 1. Why the reversal?

my old books say MDC weapons are single shot unless otherwised stated...

Also consider this Boomguns are "THE" weapon. the Badass of the badass.
If a normal energy rifle used the normal SDC modern weapons rules, why would anyone want Boomguns ??

a MD rifle doing 4d6 MD is great...
a MD rifle doing 4d6x10 MD burst sucks ass...

Why have Railguns, Boomguns or heavy weapons period...

i have always used :
Wild Shot = one action shot
Aimed Shot = two action shot
Aimed-Called Shot = three action shot

A Rifle doing 4d6x10 burst is realistic if it takes all of the clip and all of the attacks for that round, so in the time an infantryman can do a max damage of 240 MDC, the average Glitterboy will do a max damage of 1080 MDC if not more (aprox. 6 attacks, each doing 3d6x10). The BoomGun is still the "badass".

I've always played these rules, and newbies often think this is a great tactic, but then they spend all their actions on a shot that may well miss. Also they have to spend the next action of that round changing clips and they tend to go through all their ammo in the first few rounds, especially if they are fighting demons and cannot use the enemies e-clips.

So even though it is possible to do massive damage, usually players and NPCs use short bursts and aimed shots anyway.

I agree that vehicle weapons were never balanced but I would rather up their damage or allow them to burst instead of nerfing the average rifle damage.

I find that these rules increase the amount of combat options a player has with an MD gun. I find the idea of only being able to do one shot rather boring and un-creative.

Agreed on all of it...bursts use up ammo fast, the boomgun is still THE badass, and the better way to solve the proble is to up the tanks not nerf the rifles as the tanks are alredy nerfed...

[ghost2020]

Seems like a lot of us are on the same page.

We've done bursting for vehicle weapons, only makes sense.

Yes, there is that moment when a couple of large bursts end up missing the target and the PCs are going through eclips like crazy and the battle is still not turning their way....then it gets fun!

[Blue Eyes]

hi everyone

I have been a gm for quite some time now, and my copy of the Main rules book is from 1992. When i read the Ultimate edition i immediately stumble over things that make me wonder and scratch my head. As many of you have already pointed out KS and his gang seem to change a lot of the things that we all like about the game, things that work and do not need to be changed (including the rules on magic and psionics on/near leylines and nexus points). Some find it munchkin-like that an average CS grunt can take down a hatchling dragon in seconds with a full round burst inflicting 4d6*10MD. I simply disagree, all players learn fast what weapons are powerful and which ones arent and im not even gonna get into what is realistic and what not, cause i dont think it applies to roleplaying games. A coalition grunt can do a full round burst but he can also as a soldier save his ammo and fire aimed shots or 20% burst, this all depends on the circumstances.
These rules change nothing, all it means (if u use them) is that players will use the NG-P7 instead of the C-12 cause it does more damage now than the C-12. A never ending spiral
I guess what im trying to say is, i dont think there exist any such thing as OFFICIAL rules for rifts, just because they change some rules in a new released book does not mean u have to agree with them, do what the hell u like, KS himself is the biggest fan of this concept. I mean every gm has his own house rules, things were he or she found a glitch and fixed it. Some have many some have few - stick with it and just explain ur players how you run ur game.
I do wonder why they keep changing the rules though, i know that they are trying to improve the game and make it easier to play and understand, but in my opinion they really do not. They make people more confused than they already are, why else would we need these forums?
Should KS or any of his crew ever read this i just want to say: stop changing things that work and start fixing things that really need it, like giving background information on the Promethean race, coming up with new badguys instead of an alien intelligences in every state and on every continent, make descriptions of equipment that doesnt leave the reader with more questions than answers, seriously i could go on for 2 pages like this.
All in all i like being a gm and a player of the palladium system, have fun everyone

c ya

[Svartalf]

Am I getting bad impressions, or is that UE even worse edited than the average palladium product and full of more bugs than an System Failure enemy lair?

[Killer Cyborg]

Am I getting bad impressions, or is that UE even worse edited than the average palladium product and full of more bugs than an System Failure enemy lair?

I think you're getting bad impressions.
I haven't played with it yet, but it doesn't seem any buggier than most of their stuff.

[RainOfSteel]

hi everyone

[...]

c ya

Why are you posting exact duplicate text in multiple topics?

[Sureshot]

Am I getting bad impressions, or is that UE even worse edited than the average palladium product and full of more bugs than an System Failure enemy lair?

Others may disagree but I find that UE has too many mistakes imo. Which is why I will not purchase UE until they either add errata for the book to the site or a corrected second printing is released.

[Killer Cyborg]

I am glad they dropped the old burst rules. I think it balances the game much better.

I completely disagree.
Nothing balances the game like fully automatic laserfire.
Even Glitterboys had to think twice about who they ticked off.

[Scooter the Outlaw]

I am glad they dropped the old burst rules. I think it balances the game much better.

I completely disagree.
Nothing balances the game like fully automatic laserfire.
Even Glitterboys had to think twice about who they ticked off.

Definitely... firing single shots and pulses from energy weapons exclusively is lame. Not only does combat pretty much come down to who has a more powerful gun, but it takes a lot longer for some people to kill each other in-game. With the burst rules, you can always come out from behind your cover and surprise somebody by turning them to swiss cheese with a full-clip burst.

If anybody has seen them, I really recommend using the optional ranged combat rules from Rifter #11. They make playing long-range fights much more interesting and give characters some cool abilities.

[R Ditto]

I didn't like the idea of there being effective loopholes (IMO, that is) allowing burst rules for energy weapons that didn't have bursts listed.

It made no sense for "all' energy weapons to be able to fire "bursts", but then turn around and list some weapons as doing damage for a burst.
As I used to effectively complain "What's the point of having a weapon listed as "Aimed, Burst or Wild" if "Standard" means the same thing?"


For me, there was at least one of three things needed to indicate a weapon could fire bursts/pulses.
1: It listed "burst" under ROF. ("Standard" doesn't count. must mention "burst")
2: It lists something like "can fire bursts (or pulses)" or "is automatic capable" under the description.
3: It lists damage from bursts/pulses (fixed or otherwise) under the weapons damage.

If it said "Standard", to me, it meant "cannot fire bursts"... maybe because to me, most "standard" weapons are not automatic capable. I can see pulling the trigger like crazy to get a few shots off rapidly, but not simply laying down a wall of weapons fire.

And quite Ironically (to me), in the CWC book, some of those weapons listed as "Standard" ROF were changed to "Equal to the combined hand to hand attacks of its user", while the smaller/lighter weapons remained "Standard"... but a few still were listed as "Aimed, burst or wild".
To me, that meant it still could only fire actual bursts from a weapon that had it mentioned under ROF.
Sure, you may not be able to fire bursts from the nice big 4D6 MD laser rifle, but the 2D6 MD light laser rifle still has "burst" listed under ROF. Case of big precision high powered rifle vs. the lighter automatic capable automatic rifle.


Other things relating to burst capability not always making sense or otherwise not being good.

Relying on volume rather than precision.
Take Vietnam for example. Didn't they eventually remove the full auto mode from the M-16 because soldiers in Vietnam ended up firing hundreds of more shots for each kill because the soldiers were relying on laying down a ton of lead rather than actually "aiming" at their enemies?

If you're not a robot or in something with computer assisted aiming, or have a weapon with a very fast firing rate, then I doubt you would get many shots from a full clip or half clip burst to actually hit a target that is moving or taking any sort of evasive action. If the poor idiot stands still, then he deserves to turned into fried swiss cheese.


The down sides of automatic weapons fire.
Don't some automatic weapons have problems with barrels overheating and warping from to much use in to short of a time?
Wouldn't energy weapons have the chance of suffering equal problems related to heat?
At what point does a weapon resistant to its own heat put out enough radiant heat to start to burn someone who is wearing armor? At what point does a weapon have so much heat built up that its own performance suffers?

There is a LOT of power in an e-clip.
Energy weapons are powerful enough as it is.
If a laser can get 2D6 MD from a single shot, and has 20 shots from a standard e-clip, doesn't that mean that in a split second, it is putting out enough energy to light a 100 watt light bulb for 14 hours?
If you fire a burst from a laser rifle that does 2D6x10 MD to the target using a full clip burst, what kind of stress is the poor laser gun experiencing if it wasn't made to handle such things?
If that laser does 2D6 MD per shot and has a 20 shot clip, then where did the other 10 laser blasts go? How did 10 even hit the target?
Did the target just stand there with a bullseye on its chest?
Does rapid heating of the weapon cause minute shifts from material expansion causing laser focus to suffer or otherwise fire beams a little off center?


As for combat taking to long...
Is combat supposed to not take to long?
Combat can be long and complicated, probably why wars can last for years at a time. It's not like movies or FPS video games where the guy walks into the room, and leaves 15 seconds later after having wiped out 20 to one odds without barely a scratch. Take something like an FPS video game with some realistic combat tactics, like Halo 2 or the Call of Duty games, with enemies using cover, allies taking cover, things break down into a standoff of sorts as neither side gains much ground unless someone makes a mistake, has bad luck, or a well tossed grenade flushes someone from behind cover or otherwise injures, disables or kills an opponent.
Even with a whole lot of automatic weapons, modern combat can take a while.

[Killer Cyborg]

I didn't like the idea of there being effective loopholes (IMO, that is) allowing burst rules for energy weapons that didn't have bursts listed.

It made no sense for "all' energy weapons to be able to fire "bursts", but then turn around and list some weapons as doing damage for a burst.[/quote}

They didn't do that until much later books (Quebec, I think).
They had pulse rifles, but they work different from normal bursts.

As I used to effectively complain "What's the point of having a weapon listed as "Aimed, Burst or Wild" if "Standard" means the same thing?"

I always agreed with that.
Here are my two theories:
1. They decided to change the name of the ROF, but missed a few.
2. "Aimed, Burst, Wild" uses the machinegun burst/spray rules.

For me, there was at least one of three things needed to indicate a weapon could fire bursts/pulses.
1: It listed "burst" under ROF. ("Standard" doesn't count. must mention "burst")
2: It lists something like "can fire bursts (or pulses)" or "is automatic capable" under the description.
3: It lists damage from bursts/pulses (fixed or otherwise) under the weapons damage.

If it said "Standard", to me, it meant "cannot fire bursts"...

KS disagrees with you.

maybe because to me, most "standard" weapons are not automatic capable. I can see pulling the trigger like crazy to get a few shots off rapidly, but not simply laying down a wall of weapons fire.

The burst/spray rules applied to semi-automatic weapons as well.
Grab a semi-automatic weapon and see how fast you can empty the clip.
If it's under 15 seconds, then the original rules were fair.

And quite Ironically (to me), in the CWC book, some of those weapons listed as "Standard" ROF were changed to "Equal to the combined hand to hand attacks of its user", while the smaller/lighter weapons remained "Standard"... but a few still were listed as "Aimed, burst or wild".
To me, that meant it still could only fire actual bursts from a weapon that had it mentioned under ROF.

That was part of Palladium's attempt to move away from the original Burst/spray rules by nerfing certain weapons.

Other things relating to burst capability not always making sense or otherwise not being good.

Relying on volume rather than precision.
Take Vietnam for example. Didn't they eventually remove the full auto mode from the M-16 because soldiers in Vietnam ended up firing hundreds of more shots for each kill because the soldiers were relying on laying down a ton of lead rather than actually "aiming" at their enemies?

In the original rules, you'd get 10 hits for emptying a 30 shot clip.
Not too bad, since they didn't distinguish between unloading at a human target and unloading at a 30' tall bot or demon.

If you're not a robot or in something with computer assisted aiming, or have a weapon with a very fast firing rate, then I doubt you would get many shots from a full clip or half clip burst to actually hit a target that is moving or taking any sort of evasive action. If the poor idiot stands still, then he deserves to turned into fried swiss cheese.

Depends on the recoil that a laser gives.

The down sides of automatic weapons fire.
Don't some automatic weapons have problems with barrels overheating and warping from to much use in to short of a time?

Yes. The explosion from the powder and the friction of the bullet going down the barrel causes heat.

Wouldn't energy weapons have the chance of suffering equal problems related to heat?

No. No explosion, no friction.
(Well, plasma might have a problem... but it would be taken into account in the weapon's design. I've never heard of a flamethrower overheating...)

At what point does a weapon resistant to its own heat put out enough radiant heat to start to burn someone who is wearing armor? At what point does a weapon have so much heat built up that its own performance suffers?

When the heat build-up is capable of inflicting Mega-Damage.
Which likely wouldn't happen.

There is a LOT of power in an e-clip.
Energy weapons are powerful enough as it is.
If a laser can get 2D6 MD from a single shot, and has 20 shots from a standard e-clip, doesn't that mean that in a split second, it is putting out enough energy to light a 100 watt light bulb for 14 hours?

Maybe?

If you fire a burst from a laser rifle that does 2D6x10 MD to the target using a full clip burst, what kind of stress is the poor laser gun experiencing if it wasn't made to handle such things?

MDC weapons don't suffer much from stress.

If that laser does 2D6 MD per shot and has a 20 shot clip, then where did the other 10 laser blasts go?

Off into the background.
Hope there weren't any innocent bystanders.

How did 10 even hit the target?
Did the target just stand there with a bullseye on its chest?

When emptying a clip, you can follow the target as they move.

Does rapid heating of the weapon cause minute shifts from material expansion causing laser focus to suffer or otherwise fire beams a little off center?

Nope.

[Qev]

Palladium's whole take on burst fire is kind of silly and bass ackwards, anyway. Weapons don't fire bursts or full automatic to do more damage, they fire bursts or full automatic to be more likely to hit the target.

Ah, what do I know. I'm just a dog.

[Killer Cyborg]

Palladium's whole take on burst fire is kind of silly and bass ackwards, anyway. Weapons don't fire bursts or full automatic to do more damage, they fire bursts or full automatic to be more likely to hit the target.

Ah, what do I know. I'm just a dog.

I've had the same thought, but it's really a bit of both.
A tommy gun is more likely to hit somebody as you hose down the room, but it's also going to do a lot more damage.

I'm not sure how to work a better system for it, one that would allow for all the variables.

[Qev]

I've had the same thought, but it's really a bit of both.
A tommy gun is more likely to hit somebody as you hose down the room, but it's also going to do a lot more damage.

I'm not sure how to work a better system for it, one that would allow for all the variables.

True, getting hit with multiple bullets is definitely going to cramp one's style. But it's harder to hit someone with a gun (okay, the bullets fired from a gun, geez ) than most would think... especially if there's some distance between you and they. And most especially if they'd rather not hold still for you.

Realistically, they should reverse the bonuses. Auto-fire gets a bonus to hit, and aimed fire gets a bonus to damage. But I don't know if that would be more fun.

[vitae_drinker]

I kinda like the Chaosium BRP (CoC) rules, where each bullet fired in a 'burst' added a +5% to hit (so a +1) and you then got a 1dX roll (preferably you fire bursts in a dice size that you have available) where X is the number of shots you got.

Say you had a SMG skill at 40%... you fire a 10 round burst for +50% (up to double your skill) for 80% and if you hit, 1d10 bullets hit the target for individual damage (2d6+4 for a Tommygun, I believe). For a game with average hit points in the low teens for the life of a character, it was deadly.

You could also split the fire between multiple targets, but each extra target could only have a set number of shots assigned to it. So for two people, you assign 5 each for +25% (+5 to hit) to your 40% base skill for a 65% chance to hit each guy (two rolls) for 1d5 hits (1d10/2).

At least that's the way I remember the rule, and I think it works better than the Palladium combat rules.

Pretty elegant system, IMO.

[Jesterzzn]

Palladium's whole take on burst fire is kind of silly and bass ackwards, anyway. Weapons don't fire bursts or full automatic to do more damage, they fire bursts or full automatic to be more likely to hit the target.

Ah, what do I know. I'm just a dog.

I've had the same thought, but it's really a bit of both.
A tommy gun is more likely to hit somebody as you hose down the room, but it's also going to do a lot more damage.

I'm not sure how to work a better system for it, one that would allow for all the variables.

All variables can never be allowed for,


BUT (You knew that was coming)

I think that Friday Night Fire Fight did a pretty good job of capturing the essence of modern fire arms combat. I try and mold its rules around Rifts whenever I can, and if I am playing with players familiar with those rules, I just use them outright.

[Killer Cyborg]

Palladium's whole take on burst fire is kind of silly and bass ackwards, anyway. Weapons don't fire bursts or full automatic to do more damage, they fire bursts or full automatic to be more likely to hit the target.

Ah, what do I know. I'm just a dog.

I've had the same thought, but it's really a bit of both.
A tommy gun is more likely to hit somebody as you hose down the room, but it's also going to do a lot more damage.

I'm not sure how to work a better system for it, one that would allow for all the variables.

All variables can never be allowed for,


BUT (You knew that was coming)

I think that Friday Night Fire Fight did a pretty good job of capturing the essence of modern fire arms combat. I try and mold its rules around Rifts whenever I can, and if I am playing with players familiar with those rules, I just use them outright.

I don't remember the specifics, but I do remember being impressed by FNFF...

[Noon]

Ok, so how long does it take to finish a combat with weapons that only do 4d6 per shot (probably forever)? I would imagine most people use 1dXx10 type of weapons.

That's why I'm really interested in the paired weapons notation about shooting two guns at once, on page 327.

[R Ditto]

I'm back with muy opinions and views on the subject.

About my views of bursts
When I think "burst", I think of a weapon that can fire multiple rounds in rapid succession with a single pull of the trigger. I consider rapidly pulling the trigger to be 'rapid fire' (more of a personal preference), I wasn't saying that semi-automatic weapons couldn't fire rounds quickly.
Different term, same effect, IMO.

That and I thought "Standard" meant the one 'double tap' could be used, but no real automatic fire (or at least no 'long' bursts from "button mashing" the trigger)
About the closest I could see to get to a "burst" with a "Standard" ROF" weapon by simply pulling the trigger rapidly to get a sort of "short" burst, getting off maybe a max of 4-5 shots with a single action.


I agree that it is a little lame that the "burst" rules don't consider target size or speed... Wasn't it just damage x10, regardless of clip size? Just for a "full clip"?
Kind of pathetic if you use one of those weapons that has a 200 round belt of ammo, then you get 190 rounds that miss. Silly if you compare a 2ft wide target at 100ft compared to, oh say, the broadside of a 1,000ft long warship just 100ft away. The saying "Can't hit the broad side of a barn... from the inside" comes to mind...

About energy weapons and heat.
Heat does not have to do MD to injure someone in MDC Environmental Body Armor, IMO.
Just check the descriptions of EBA, their insulation is usually only good up to 300 degrees. Makes me wonder why a weapon that can vaporize hundreds or thousands of pounds of fresh meat isn't going to do anything to someone in EBA.

If a laser is slamming a target with enough effective thermal energy to red mist a good portion of a large herd animal, then there has to be some sort of heat generated by the weapon itself. Nothing is 100% efficient.
Even if the heat generated is only 1% of the effective thermal energy a target is hit with, it seems like it would still be a lot of heat, and if the weapon couldn't dissipate it fast enough, that it could build up a lot more heat than even EBA insulation could keep out if the weapon was fired to much in short order.
This being for weapons without "burst" capability, since weapons with "burst" capability would have to be designed by default to be able to deal with such heat, while ones that weren't designed to handle bursts would have heat problems from rapid firing.

About the lightbulb example I gave.
One of the latest estimates I did (thanks to one of the more "accurate" bits of info about e-clip power, via a 'super power conversion', IIRC, in the new Conversion Book) indicated that roughly 10 e-clips equal 1 gigawatt of energy. That comes down to around 27,777 watt hours of energy for a single e-clip. (I round up to 28,000 just for kicks).
That is a lot of energy.

I doubt any energy weapon is going to be able to handle that much energy without even a little waste heat generated.
At 20 shots per e-clip, some energy weapons are basically using up about 5 million watt seconds of energy in a split second. If I can burn my finger on a 100 watt light bulb, then I would hate to feel the effective heat an energy weapon would put out if it was fired rapidly.

About weapons being "nerfed" due to no longer being able to take out the average armored vehicle in a split second.
What nerfing? The only nerfing I see is that an effective 50mm 3.5 pounds going mach 5 gun does over twice as much damage as a 120mm 16 pounds going mach 5 gun.

Some weapons make more sense by not being able to fire bursts at all. They likely just use to much energy to safely fire quickly, while some weapons would probably turn into a shower of sparks and start turning red if fired to fast.

Like the one CS heavy plasma gun in the RMB. What's it using? About 14 megawatt seconds of energy per blast? I definitely see why that thing isn't allowed to fire bursts anymore. I doubt any hand held system could handle the power flow equal to a city power grid from more than a few seconds... then it will likely be starting to light up like said power grid.

Maybe that's why they haven't really gotten anything much bigger than long e-clips and e-canisters as far as energy weapon power storage.

[KLM]

Hi there!

Lets put it straith: at least two head shots needed to
put one target down. If we are shooting with a sniper
rifle doing 3d6 MD and the target wears a 50 MDC
helmet, then it is around 5 hits.
Aggravating this by the fact, that the target probably
will dodge half of your shots.
Yeah, right...

This means that a decent fight will take a whole
gaming session, and forget guerilla warfare, where
poorly (but not hopelessly) equipped side has a chance
to take out enemies who have superior equipment,
but walk into a trap.
Unless your snipers are equipped with mini-missile
launchers or anti-tank guns, that is.

Of course there is the possibility, when KS wanted
the Dead Boys vulnerable to charging primitive
hordes...

Adios
KLM

[jedi078]

Hi there!

Lets put it straith: at least two head shots needed to
put one target down. If we are shooting with a sniper
rifle doing 3d6 MD and the target wears a 50 MDC
helmet, then it is around 5 hits.
Aggravating this by the fact, that the target probably
will dodge half of your shots.
Yeah, right...

This means that a decent fight will take a whole
gaming session, and forget guerilla warfare, where
poorly (but not hopelessly) equipped side has a chance
to take out enemies who have superior equipment,
but walk into a trap.
Unless your snipers are equipped with mini-missile
launchers or anti-tank guns, that is.

Of course there is the possibility, when KS wanted
the Dead Boys vulnerable to charging primitive
hordes...

Adios
KLM

Let see if a helmet has five sides (top, front, back, left and right sides) it is not going to have 50 MDC per side but more like 10 MDC per side.

So a sniper rifle that does 3D6 MDC has a high possibility for a "one shot, one kill".
Playing it even further, the recipient of such an attack will also have some nasty burns on their face/head which means they are out of the fight for a bit.

My point: You will not have to use burst fire to take people in body armor and power armor out.

Eliminating burst fire also makes something like a Glitter Boy to be feared as it should be.

If you really want true “burst fire” weapons, turn some of the smaller rail guns into heavy machine (gauss) guns that fire either 14.5 or 12.7 mm rounds.

[Killer Cyborg]

I'm back with muy opinions and views on the subject.

About my views of bursts
When I think "burst", I think of a weapon that can fire multiple rounds in rapid succession with a single pull of the trigger. I consider rapidly pulling the trigger to be 'rapid fire' (more of a personal preference), I wasn't saying that semi-automatic weapons couldn't fire rounds quickly.
Different term, same effect, IMO.

Not as far as Kevin Siembieda is concerned.

That and I thought "Standard" meant the one 'double tap' could be used, but no real automatic fire (or at least no 'long' bursts from "button mashing" the trigger)
About the closest I could see to get to a "burst" with a "Standard" ROF" weapon by simply pulling the trigger rapidly to get a sort of "short" burst, getting off maybe a max of 4-5 shots with a single action.

Originally, ROF: Standard used the standard burst/spray rules listed on p. 34 of the main book.
In the RGMG, KS listed optional double-tap rules.
In RUE, there are no burst/spray or double-taps.

I agree that it is a little lame that the "burst" rules don't consider target size or speed... Wasn't it just damage x10, regardless of clip size? Just for a "full clip"?

Yes. This was actually the biggest flaw in the original burst/spray rules, as you demonstrate below.

Kind of pathetic if you use one of those weapons that has a 200 round belt of ammo, then you get 190 rounds that miss. Silly if you compare a 2ft wide target at 100ft compared to, oh say, the broadside of a 1,000ft long warship just 100ft away. The saying "Can't hit the broad side of a barn... from the inside" comes to mind...

My house rule for dealing with it is that since the burst/spray rules seem based on a theoretical 20-30 shot clip, that's how much ammo is used.
So a weapon that holds 200 rounds would be able to fire 10 "full-clip" bursts/spays, and a weapon that holds 10 rounds would be able to fire 1 "half-clip" burst at best, using all of its ammo.

About energy weapons and heat.
Heat does not have to do MD to injure someone in MDC Environmental Body Armor, IMO.
Just check the descriptions of EBA, their insulation is usually only good up to 300 degrees. Makes me wonder why a weapon that can vaporize hundreds or thousands of pounds of fresh meat isn't going to do anything to someone in EBA.

Logical, but not covered by the rules.
The best way to house-rule things would likely be to give heat attacks the same carryover damage that explosives get... something like 1 SDC per 10 MD of the blast.

If a laser is slamming a target with enough effective thermal energy to red mist a good portion of a large herd animal, then there has to be some sort of heat generated by the weapon itself. Nothing is 100% efficient.
Even if the heat generated is only 1% of the effective thermal energy a target is hit with, it seems like it would still be a lot of heat, and if the weapon couldn't dissipate it fast enough, that it could build up a lot more heat than even EBA insulation could keep out if the weapon was fired to much in short order.

Your logic is sound, but it doesn't make much difference.
1% of a 99 MD blast would still be less than one MD and would not hurt the weapon at all.

This being for weapons without "burst" capability, since weapons with "burst" capability would have to be designed by default to be able to deal with such heat, while ones that weren't designed to handle bursts would have heat problems from rapid firing.

All semi-automatic and automatic Rifts weapons were designed for rapid fire. The ones that weren't can't fire bursts anyway.

About the lightbulb example I gave.
One of the latest estimates I did (thanks to one of the more "accurate" bits of info about e-clip power, via a 'super power conversion', IIRC, in the new Conversion Book) indicated that roughly 10 e-clips equal 1 gigawatt of energy. That comes down to around 27,777 watt hours of energy for a single e-clip. (I round up to 28,000 just for kicks).
That is a lot of energy.

I doubt any energy weapon is going to be able to handle that much energy without even a little waste heat generated.
At 20 shots per e-clip, some energy weapons are basically using up about 5 million watt seconds of energy in a split second. If I can burn my finger on a 100 watt light bulb, then I would hate to feel the effective heat an energy weapon would put out if it was fired rapidly.

Depends on what sort of cooling or venting system they have.

About weapons being "nerfed" due to no longer being able to take out the average armored vehicle in a split second.
What nerfing? The only nerfing I see is that an effective 50mm 3.5 pounds going mach 5 gun does over twice as much damage as a 120mm 16 pounds going mach 5 gun.

"Nerfing" is taking weapons (or abilities, or whatever) that are of a certain power level and reducing that power level.
A JA-11 used to be able to fire a full-clip burst for 3d6x10 MD, now it cannot.
The weapon has been nerfed.

[quote]Some weapons make more sense by not being able to fire bursts at all. [quote]

Agreed.

[Killer Cyborg]

Hi there!

Lets put it straith: at least two head shots needed to
put one target down. If we are shooting with a sniper
rifle doing 3d6 MD and the target wears a 50 MDC
helmet, then it is around 5 hits.
Aggravating this by the fact, that the target probably
will dodge half of your shots.
Yeah, right...

This means that a decent fight will take a whole
gaming session, and forget guerilla warfare, where
poorly (but not hopelessly) equipped side has a chance
to take out enemies who have superior equipment,
but walk into a trap.
Unless your snipers are equipped with mini-missile
launchers or anti-tank guns, that is.

Of course there is the possibility, when KS wanted
the Dead Boys vulnerable to charging primitive
hordes...

Adios
KLM

Let see if a helmet has five sides (top, front, back, left and right sides) it is not going to have 50 MDC per side but more like 10 MDC per side.

Doesn't work that way according to the rules though.
Otherwise you could break the MDC down per square inch, and decide that an average laser beam would blow straight through any armor, since there would be less than 1 MDC worth of armor directly hit by the blast.

My point: You will not have to use burst fire to take people in body armor and power armor out.

True.
You can either plink them to death, or use heavy weapons like missiles.
Or you can use house rules to change the game.

[jedi078]

Hi there!

Lets put it straith: at least two head shots needed to
put one target down. If we are shooting with a sniper
rifle doing 3d6 MD and the target wears a 50 MDC
helmet, then it is around 5 hits.
Aggravating this by the fact, that the target probably
will dodge half of your shots.
Yeah, right...

This means that a decent fight will take a whole
gaming session, and forget guerilla warfare, where
poorly (but not hopelessly) equipped side has a chance
to take out enemies who have superior equipment,
but walk into a trap.
Unless your snipers are equipped with mini-missile
launchers or anti-tank guns, that is.

Of course there is the possibility, when KS wanted
the Dead Boys vulnerable to charging primitive
hordes...

Adios
KLM

Let see if a helmet has five sides (top, front, back, left and right sides) it is not going to have 50 MDC per side but more like 10 MDC per side.

Doesn't work that way according to the rules though.

Of course it's a house rule

Otherwise you could break the MDC down per square inch, and decide that an average laser beam would blow straight through any armor, since there would be less than 1 MDC worth of armor directly hit by the blast.

Yes that is the extreme but it will keep people from charging into a fire fight and saying "My EBA has 80 MDC, I'll be fine".

This is a lot like avoiding those characters with high SDC jumping on grenades and saying "Oh, its only 40 SDC" and get right back up.

My point: You will not have to use burst fire to take people in body armor and power armor out.

True.
You can either plink them to death, or use heavy weapons like missiles.
Or you can use house rules to change the game.

[KLM]

Hi there!

(...)
My point: You will not have to use burst fire to take people in body armor and power armor out.

Eliminating burst fire also makes something like a Glitter Boy to be feared as it should be.

If you really want true “burst fire” weapons, turn some of the smaller rail guns into heavy machine (gauss) guns that fire either 14.5 or 12.7 mm rounds.

My points:
1, yes, should be able to take out an average opponent, with an average
weapon, in one solid hit. But it is not the possible by the book.

2, Even with the old rules, the GB could not be taken
lightly... more than once per character, that is.
Still, compare the stats of the SAMAS railgun and the
Spider Skull Walker's guns... And tell me, why not throw out
those C-100R guns, and replace them with quad C-40R's, plus
adding some missile capacity even.

3, Translation : "Get a BIGGER gun". No thanx, I can get
into munchkin rage by myself too easily, already.

Adios
KLM

[Jaykkar]

It was my understanding that most characters can't dodge gunfire. period.

[Killer Cyborg]

It was my understanding that most characters can't dodge gunfire. period.

Your understanding is incorrect.

[Qev]

My points:
1, yes, should be able to take out an average opponent, with an average
weapon, in one solid hit. But it is not the possible by the book.

That really depends on the combat paradigm one is dealing with. In our modern world, yes, your average soldier can typically be taken out of commission with a single bullet. But there's nothing that says that this always has to be true. Rifts is a world full of fictional supertechnology, where materials science development seems to have outstripped that of weapons science.

Another game system where this is true would be Steve Jackson Games' "OGRE" series.

[KLM]

Hi there!

In the RMB, emptiing a magazine into a target
(supposing you hit) almost ensured a kill.

The attacker paid a price thought - he lost
several of his attacks, a great deal of his ammo,
and had to risk a miss.

A sniper also pays a price - the most important
of it is IMO the really high risk of missing (called
shot at -2 or even more for a heat shot). There
is even a chance that the target survives (rolling
low damage)

But none of these options are useable without
house rules.

This means, small arms are of limited use (
if a fire team of 6 or more fires on one
opponent seems the only viable usage), therefore
players (and opponents operating in small
units or alone) will pack up really heavy guns.
Given the nerfed nature of giant robots and
tanks... This basically means, that if you can take
out infantry, you can try on a tank, too...

I do not like the concept.

Adios
KLM