CS armament

[dreicunan]

My apologies, Natasha. I did misread the post of yours that I quoted. You actually are presenting yourself as believing that the game itself ("the nature of the game") is somehow supposed to enforce this rarity of MD by preventing you from giving it to Player Characters. That is even less sane than what I'd read before, so I wilk assume and hope that you are doing that for effect.

You feel that because player characters can get MD capacity, then MD is not rare in thr game world. KC has already quoted Kevin S on that issue anyways, but set that aside. The fact that Player Characters can get MD from the start has no bearing on the relative rarity of MD in the game world. The word "rare" has already had definitions in English posted. There doesn't need to be a game mechanic limiting how much MD is available PCs for MD to be rare in the setting, because PCs are not part of the setting! So if you want to prove that Kevin S is wrong about his game world, try to do so with an argument that actually can do so. "PCs can get it" doesn't prove that.

The argument has already been made.
The only argument for "MDC is Rare" is that there is an unsupported fluff text saying this is so"
The argument for "MDC is not rare" are:
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that large percentages of the population start with MD/MDC equipment
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population is MDC
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population has inherent MD/MDC capability
-the repeated demonstration that every single identified and detailed example of places and populations in every book includes MD/MDC
-The repeated demonstration that MDC equipment can be made from scrap and salvage
...
Basically the argument at this point is quite literally "Facts don't matter, there is this one statement that invalidates all facts to the contrary"
Its sort of tiresome actually because it is intellectually dishonest of people to argue that the "not rare" people have to make their claim, prove their claim, provide their evidence...
...and then when they do get to simply state "that doesn't count because we say it doesn't count, go find something better than mere facts"

Well, not one statement, but a whole little section of RUE on pages 356-357 addressing the issue, which maintains that MD weapons are still uncommon.

That said, I'd note that the claim about MD is actually not so broad as gas been presented, at least not in RUE. The claim is MD weapons are still uncommon, and techno-wizard weapons are specifically cited as only forming 1-2% of the market. Thus, attempts to claim that the statement is wrong really need to focus on that. This means, for example, that Colonel Tetsuya's work would need to be redone, as he included in his numbers beings that were considered MD capable due to reasons other than MD weapons. Now, at a glance I think his basic numbers probably won't be that far off, but they would be different.

Before I get accused of moving goal posts, I'm going to point out that I only just noticed this myself. Thus, my earlier comment about Sea Titans wouldn't be correct, as the existence of Sea Titans does nothing to affect the availability of MD weapons.

[guardiandashi]

My apologies, Natasha. I did misread the post of yours that I quoted. You actually are presenting yourself as believing that the game itself ("the nature of the game") is somehow supposed to enforce this rarity of MD by preventing you from giving it to Player Characters. That is even less sane than what I'd read before, so I wilk assume and hope that you are doing that for effect.

You feel that because player characters can get MD capacity, then MD is not rare in thr game world. KC has already quoted Kevin S on that issue anyways, but set that aside. The fact that Player Characters can get MD from the start has no bearing on the relative rarity of MD in the game world. The word "rare" has already had definitions in English posted. There doesn't need to be a game mechanic limiting how much MD is available PCs for MD to be rare in the setting, because PCs are not part of the setting! So if you want to prove that Kevin S is wrong about his game world, try to do so with an argument that actually can do so. "PCs can get it" doesn't prove that.

The argument has already been made.
The only argument for "MDC is Rare" is that there is an unsupported fluff text saying this is so"
The argument for "MDC is not rare" are:
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that large percentages of the population start with MD/MDC equipment
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population is MDC
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population has inherent MD/MDC capability
-the repeated demonstration that every single identified and detailed example of places and populations in every book includes MD/MDC
-The repeated demonstration that MDC equipment can be made from scrap and salvage
...
Basically the argument at this point is quite literally "Facts don't matter, there is this one statement that invalidates all facts to the contrary"
Its sort of tiresome actually because it is intellectually dishonest of people to argue that the "not rare" people have to make their claim, prove their claim, provide their evidence...
...and then when they do get to simply state "that doesn't count because we say it doesn't count, go find something better than mere facts"

Well, not one statement, but a while little section of RUE on pages 356-357 addressing the issue, which maintains that MD weapons are still uncommon.

That said, I'd note that the claim about MD is actually not so broad as gas been presented, at least not in RUE. The claim is MD weapons are still uncommon, and techno-wizard weapons are specifically cited as only forming 1-2% of the market. Thus, attempts to claim that the statement is wrong really need to focus on that. This means, for example, that Colonel Tetsuya's work would need to be redone, as he included in his numbers beings that were considered MD capable due to reasons other than MD weapons. Now, at a glance I think his basic numbers probably won't be that far off, but they would be different.

Before I get accused of moving goal posts, I'm going to point out that I only just noticed this myself. Thus, my earlier comment about Sea Titans wouldn't be correct, as the existence of Sea Titans does nothing to affect the availability of MD weapons.

if I am understanding the dispute (which really isn't directly linked to cs armament)
Natasha's position is based upon an interpretation of logic. I am going to attempt to simplify and summarize.
there is a statement that MDC is rare and uncommon in the rifts world, because of statement.
so MDC is rare...

on the other hand there are ~30 million sentients' in north America or more but for the sake of argument. and there are ~5 million coalition military troops, millions (literally ) of skelebots, various other militaries, roaming mercs etc etc that add up to at least another million that have some form of mdc equipment and weapons, etc.

so when you look at the breakdown of populations there is a rather significant disconnect depending on your definition of rare.

I am using:

rare adjective
us ​ /reər/    

rare adjective (NOT COMMON)
​
not common and therefore sometimes valuable:

rare species of birds

Success like that is extremely rare.

She’s usually positive, but on rare occasions disappointment shows through.

With rare exceptions, the families in this town have lived here for generations.
from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dic ... glish/rare

so if we analyze the stated distribution we get that ~1 in 5 - 6 or there about people has at least 1 piece of mdc gear and many (all coalition soldiers for example) have a lot more, armor, multiple weapons etc. makes the statement that mdc gear is "rare" rather dubious
I could totally accept if the "rare" gear was only available to 1 to 5 in 100 or 100 or 10,000 samples but not 1 in every 5 "people"

[Killer Cyborg]

We are told it's rare, yet we see it everywhere. That's not a guess. Is there a passage that says it's a guess based on the limited view of the world?

Re-touching on this.
Yes, we are told that it is rare.
Yes, we see it everywhere.
Seeing it everywhere does not conflict with it being rare.

Yes, there is a passage that states seeing it everywhere is because of a limited view of the world.

RUE 357
Mega-Damage weapons are still uncommon. It might not seem like it to the player characters, because getting and using such items and battling MDC opponents are all part of the job description. However, to the average person, Mega-Damage items are rare and valuable. The typical SDC town will be 90-98% SDC in its construction. Members of its militia, lawmen and/or some citizens may be the only ones who have one or two MD energy weapons and MDC armor each, plus one or two MDC combat vehicles or giant robots to the entire town; if that. Many communities hire mercs on an as-needed basis, or invite a band of mercenaries and adventurers with Mega-Damage capabilities to retire in their home town and serve as the community's champions and defenders. Some will even pay them for the service. This way the townspeople can go about the everyday necessities of living, and their champions can deal with Mega-Damage threats.

Also, from the RMB:
The average person is not likely to have psionics nor mega-damage weapons and armor. He is not a master of magic nor holder of great truths. He is one of the ordinary folk who live and struggle with the day to day hardships of life.

Not talking about player character guesses, of course.

How not?

"MDC is common" is NOT RAW; it is guesswork based on the limited view of of the world that the players are shown.

It's not that you should take official and bluntly-stated RAI and RAW over "everything else," but that you should take it over player guesswork about how things might be.

Which, by the way, isn't "quoting RAW written by Kevin".

Correct.
It's me talking about the official game, and how things work.
The way that things do NOT work is for individual players' guesses to affect the official game material more than the word of the author.
If you think you have a counter-argument...
well, actually, no, don't bother making it.

[quote It's telling me what I should do when I asked what I should do. [/quote]

What exactly did you ask?

And "M.D.C. is not rare" is readily proved by contradiction. Suppose the opposite is true, M.D.C. is rare. No rule actually prevents someone from getting M.D.C. equipment. This is a contradiction and proof is done.

Uh.. no.
Not unless you know of a rule stating that "rare" is a condition that means "PCs are prevented from acquiring it."
Which wouldn't make sense, since PCs are above-average people to begin with.

[quote\ So, yea, you need numbers.[/quote]

We don't have any meaningful numbers.
The only thing we have to go on is the multiple statements from the authors telling us that MDC is rare/uncommon, even though it might seem common to the players because because the writers don't bother filling the books with common stuff that's not good adventure-fodder.

In particular, you need a number that I can look to know when to stop issuing M.D.C. equipment to characters.

By that standard, NOTHING is rare/uncommon.

[Killer Cyborg]

My apologies, Natasha. I did misread the post of yours that I quoted. You actually are presenting yourself as believing that the game itself ("the nature of the game") is somehow supposed to enforce this rarity of MD by preventing you from giving it to Player Characters. That is even less sane than what I'd read before, so I wilk assume and hope that you are doing that for effect.

You feel that because player characters can get MD capacity, then MD is not rare in thr game world. KC has already quoted Kevin S on that issue anyways, but set that aside. The fact that Player Characters can get MD from the start has no bearing on the relative rarity of MD in the game world. The word "rare" has already had definitions in English posted. There doesn't need to be a game mechanic limiting how much MD is available PCs for MD to be rare in the setting, because PCs are not part of the setting! So if you want to prove that Kevin S is wrong about his game world, try to do so with an argument that actually can do so. "PCs can get it" doesn't prove that.

YEah, that's pretty much what I'm seeing too.

[Killer Cyborg]

My apologies, Natasha. I did misread the post of yours that I quoted. You actually are presenting yourself as believing that the game itself ("the nature of the game") is somehow supposed to enforce this rarity of MD by preventing you from giving it to Player Characters. That is even less sane than what I'd read before, so I wilk assume and hope that you are doing that for effect.

You feel that because player characters can get MD capacity, then MD is not rare in thr game world. KC has already quoted Kevin S on that issue anyways, but set that aside. The fact that Player Characters can get MD from the start has no bearing on the relative rarity of MD in the game world. The word "rare" has already had definitions in English posted. There doesn't need to be a game mechanic limiting how much MD is available PCs for MD to be rare in the setting, because PCs are not part of the setting! So if you want to prove that Kevin S is wrong about his game world, try to do so with an argument that actually can do so. "PCs can get it" doesn't prove that.

"nature of the game" was what Killer Cyborg told me would take care of things. Your guess is as good as mine.

Maybe don't guess then?
Try asking for clarification if you're confused. Don't just spiral out.

The nature of the game is such that nobody's game affects the official setting.
The nature of the game is that it is designed for players play above-average characters who have above-average access to cool (and rare/uncommon) stuff like mega-damage.

So, again, it doesn't matter how many characters you roll up. It won't affect the official setting.

If any of this confuses you, ask more questions for clarification.
Quote the passage that you're asking about, so that I have a better idea what you're asking about.
Be sure to write full and clear questions.

It's not that I think Kevin is wrong. I've said a few times I can easily agree with M.D.C. is rare. The problem is that there is an inescapable contradiction that falsifies "M.D.C. is rare" from a strictly RAW perspective.

What do you feel this "inescapable contradiction" IS...?

[qupteThere needs to be a game mechanic. It doesn't make sense to say something is blue and then go and paint it red and still call it blue. The red paint has to be removed or new blue paint has to be applied. And so a definition of rare does not quantify the amount of M.D.C. in the world.[/quote]

In the Heroes Unlimited setting, do you feel that super powers are common, or that they are rare/uncommon?
Do you feel that there is a mechanism in place that enforces their scarcity?
Do you feel that there needs to be?

[Killer Cyborg]

My apologies, Natasha. I did misread the post of yours that I quoted. You actually are presenting yourself as believing that the game itself ("the nature of the game") is somehow supposed to enforce this rarity of MD by preventing you from giving it to Player Characters. That is even less sane than what I'd read before, so I wilk assume and hope that you are doing that for effect.

You feel that because player characters can get MD capacity, then MD is not rare in thr game world. KC has already quoted Kevin S on that issue anyways, but set that aside. The fact that Player Characters can get MD from the start has no bearing on the relative rarity of MD in the game world. The word "rare" has already had definitions in English posted. There doesn't need to be a game mechanic limiting how much MD is available PCs for MD to be rare in the setting, because PCs are not part of the setting! So if you want to prove that Kevin S is wrong about his game world, try to do so with an argument that actually can do so. "PCs can get it" doesn't prove that.

The argument has already been made.
The only argument for "MDC is Rare" is that there is an unsupported fluff text saying this is so"

Multiple examples of text.
NOT sure how you're defining "fluff" text in a way that includes those passages, but not the population statistics.

The argument for "MDC is not rare" are:
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that large percentages of the population start with MD/MDC equipment

Sure, except:
-It hasn't been demonstrated to BE a large percentage of the overall population.
-It hasn't been demonstrated that they start with MD/MDC equipment.

-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population is MDC

Again, we'd need the entire population numbers, and we would need the Rifts population numbers to be reliable and accurate, in order for that to work.

-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population has inherent MD/MDC capability
-the repeated demonstration that every single identified and detailed example of places and populations in every book includes MD/MDC

You're just repeating yourself here.
So see above objections.

-The repeated demonstration that MDC equipment can be made from scrap and salvage

That doesn't say anything about scarcity.

Basically the argument at this point is quite literally "Facts don't matter, there is this one statement that invalidates all facts to the contrary"

No.
The argument at this point is that guesswork on the part of players does not over-rule direct statements from the authors.
In order to over-rule a direct statement from the author, you would need:
-a larger number of direct statements from the author directly and necessarily contradicting the statement that you want to over-rule.
or
-A massive amount of official evidence that directly and necessarily over-rules the direct statement by the author.

Neither of these things has been found yet.
It's all just people wanting their guesswork to over-rule direct statements by the author.

[Natasha]

if I am understanding the dispute (which really isn't directly linked to cs armament)
Natasha's position is based upon an interpretation of logic. I am going to attempt to simplify and summarize.

Basically what I've done is demonstrate how absurd the RAW or bust mentality is. It's as broken as RAW is. The gorgeous irony is that the same people who insist on RAW or bust also insist RAW is broken. They have metal rods shoved so far up their asses that if it came down to bend or die we'd be saying to them farewell.

Just to highlight a few things.

"M.D.C. is rare" is a false statement by RAW. If it's supposed to be true, then RAW lacks the establishment of truth.

"City Rats are Adventurers" leads immediately to a contradiction. Mystics are not practitioners of magic, cyber knights are not men at arms. And Perception isn't an element of Psychic Combat.

"Rifts is not the mundane" is contradicted by the fact that Rifts is designed to be played on multiple levels; in fact, at any level.

Finally, the RAW or bust mentality could not be more opposed to the intent of Rifts and Palladium Games in general. If Kevin has a motto it's "let your imagination burn brightly". The RAW or bust mentality only stifles creativity and imagination, which, from all I can tell, is the last thing Kevin would like for his work to be used for. We're all fans of the games, we should be more accepting of each other; diversity is beautiful. At least it is according to the fundamental principle of why Rifts exists at all.

[Killer Cyborg]

if I am understanding the dispute (which really isn't directly linked to cs armament)
Natasha's position is based upon an interpretation of logic. I am going to attempt to simplify and summarize.

Basically what I've done is demonstrate how absurd the RAW or bust mentality is. It's as broken as RAW is. The gorgeous irony is that the same people who insist on RAW or bust also insist RAW is broken.

Is that what you were going for...?

Who do you think has the "RAW or bust" mentality in this case...?

Just to highlight a few things.

"M.D.C. is rare" is a false statement by RAW.

How do you figure?

"City Rats are Adventurers" leads immediately to a contradiction.

How do you figure?

Mystics are not practitioners of magic

How do you figure?

cyber knights are not men at arms

How do you figure?

And Perception isn't an element of Psychic Combat.

Agreed.

"Rifts is not the mundane" is contradicted by the fact that Rifts is designed to be played on multiple levels; in fact, at any level.

How do you figure it's designed to be played "at any level?"

Finally, the RAW or bust mentality could not be more opposed to the intent of Rifts and Palladium Games in general. If Kevin has a motto it's "let your imagination burn brightly". The RAW or bust mentality only stifles creativity and imagination, which, from all I can tell, is the last thing Kevin would like for his work to be used for. We're all fans of the games, we should be more accepting of each other; diversity is beautiful. At least it is according to the fundamental principle of why Rifts exists at all.

Nobody here has argued that everybody needs to play by RAW, if that's what you're thinking.
If that's not what you're thinking, then I don't know what the above passage is talking about.

[Natasha]

See what I mean....

[Killer Cyborg]

See what I mean....

Not one bit.
Hence the questions.

[Natasha]

"M.D.C. is rare" is false by the proof by contradiction I presented. Several times.

a person actively engaged in an art, discipline, or profession, especially medicine.

A Mystic wields both magic and psionics, powers that both seem to be handed over by fate rather than serious study. ... The intutitive nature of the Mystic's power means he simply accepts sudden flashes of insight and knowledge. ... Magic is limited to the more simple and sensory oriented spells. [next page] 1. Initial Spell Knowledge. The mystic's spell knowledge, like everything else, comes from within the character himself, on an intuitive level. The character spends years pondering about life, his place in it, and how magic might help him find that place in the world. ... At the end of the sixth day, he somehow knowsl how to cast eight specific spells.

The magic disciplines presented in this book are the spell casting Ley Line Walker ..., the natural Mystic.

Learning Spells. Practitioners of magic, except for the Mystic, can learn and cast spells far above their actual experience level.

They're apart from practitioners of magic most everywhere we encounter them in actual content and intent of the class.

If one category leads to contradictions, then we can't cherrypick one and say that it doesn't.

In this case, two categories lead to contradictions.

a soldier, especially one heavily armed and mounted on horseback.

The Knights are not a formal organization, although they do sometimes work in pairs...

A soldier, by definition, is "a person who serves in an army." A cyber knight isn't a soldier.

What I'm talking about is

It's not that you should take official and bluntly-stated RAI and RAW over "everything else," but that you should take it over player guesswork about how things might be.

That stifles creativity and imagination by telling me I should do something utterly antithetical to the fundamental reason Rifts even exists.

[Killer Cyborg]

"M.D.C. is rare" is false by the proof by contradiction I presented. Several times.

You could say "Banana gargle x-ray pike" several times, but that wouldn't make it make any sense.
Repetition is neither explanation nor support.
If you want to claim a logical proof, you have to actually make that proof. Do the math. Show your work.

a person actively engaged in an art, discipline, or profession, especially medicine.

A Mystic wields both magic and psionics, powers that both seem to be handed over by fate rather than serious study. ... The intuititive nature of the Mystic's power means he simply accepts sudden flashes of insight and knowledge. ... Magic is limited to the more simple and sensory oriented spells. [next page] 1. Initial Spell Knowledge. The mystic's spell knowledge, like everything else, comes from within the character himself, on an intuitive level. The character spends years pondering about life, his place in it, and how magic might help him find that place in the world. ... At the end of the sixth day, he somehow knowsl how to cast eight specific spells.

The magic disciplines presented in this book are the spell casting Ley Line Walker ..., the natural Mystic.

Learning Spells. Practitioners of magic, except for the Mystic, can learn and cast spells far above their actual experience level.

They're apart from practitioners of magic most everywhere we encounter them in actual content and intent of the class.

You seem to be trying to claim that "x comes by y naturally" means "x does not practice y."

In this case, two categories lead to contradictions.

a soldier, especially one heavily armed and mounted on horseback.

The Knights are not a formal organization, although they do sometimes work in pairs...

A soldier, by definition, is "a person who serves in an army." A cyber knight isn't a soldier.

You're being overly-literal.
PFRPG 85
Knights, like soldiers, are given military discipline and trained in the arts of hand to hand combat and swordsmanship. Unlike the average soldier, knights are usually of royal or noble birth and begin their lessons in combat in early childhood. in addition to the arts of combat, knights of noble birth are also taught horsemanship (they are excellent horsemen), military strategy, and the use of a variety of weapons, as well as scholastic or noble pursuits such as dancing, singing, math, lore, and science. About 60% are literate in at least one language and speak at least three.
In many kingdoms, these educated and highly-trained soldiers are automatically considered officers (not lower in rank than lieutenant) and given a squad or platoon to lead.

Note that Palladium refers to knights as being "like soldiers," then once the analogy is made used the term "soldier" to describe them.
Knights aren't soldiers in the strictest sense, but the term isn't being used in the strictest sense, only in the more common, informal sense.
Same deal with cyberknights--they might not literally be soldiers in the strictest sense, but they still net out as Men At Arms.

Basically, you might as well argue that because not all CKs are male, they're not all MEN-at-arms, and therefore (whatever you were trying to get at).

What I'm talking about is

It's not that you should take official and bluntly-stated RAI and RAW over "everything else," but that you should take it over player guesswork about how things might be.

That stifles creativity and imagination by telling me I should do something utterly antithetical to the fundamental reason Rifts even exists.

Only in the context of understanding the official rules and setting, which is NOT antithetical to Rifts, else the rules and setting wouldn't be written.
Understanding the official and intended rules and setting doesn't stifle imagination, and is not anthithetical to the game.
Believe it or not, Kevin wants us to understand the rules and the setting, whether or not we then decide to depart from them.

Since I've already explained that I wasn't talking about how you should run your game, I'm not sure why you're trying to repeat this claim/complaint.
As I've said, it's got nothing to do with you.
Me explaining canon to you does not interfere with your fanfic, just as your fanfic does not change canon.

Meanwhile, you seem to have ignored quite a few of the questions I've asked recently, especially those about the relative scarcity of super powers in the HU setting.
Any particular reason for the avoidance?

[Natasha]

You could say "Banana gargle x-ray pike" several times, but that wouldn't make it make any sense.
Repetition is neither explanation nor support.
If you want to claim a logical proof, you have to actually make that proof. Do the math. Show your work.

Like I said, I presented the proof several times. And your response is I'm all I've done is repeat a claim. Which is garbage. It's like you're not even interested in paying attention or trying to see things from any other point of view. I don't have any explanation for how I can say "the proof by contradiction I presented" and you come back with "you didn't present the proof".

You seem to be trying to claim that "x comes by y naturally" means "x does not practice y."

It's handed to them by fate. They just accept it. They prefer philosophy. They are limited to what comes naturally to them. It's intuitive. At the end of the day they just somehow know how to do magic. These are attributes of someone who is not "actively engaged in a discipline". They are not occupied by the discipline of magic nor are they particularly interested in the discipline of magic. They are explicitly written as being exceptional from all other practitioners at least twice, include in the first line of the class's definition.

You're being overly-literal.

It's official and bluntly-stated RAW. If I am anything but literal, then I'm not proceeding from official and bluntly-stated RAW. Do you have a problem with people repeating official and bluntly-stated RAW or something? Isn't official and bluntly-stated RAW the only "that'd be worth looking at"?

A cyber knight is like a soldier does not mean a knight is a soldier. It would be false to say a cyber knight is a soldier. Just like it's false saying a city rat is an adventurer. An analogy is not equivalence, of course.

You interpret "M.D.C. is rare" to mean that any instance of it not being rare is exceptional, regardless of how many instances we come across. Why should I accept that to the exclusion of everything else?

Well, you shouldn't.
For example, if you find official canon flat-out stating that "MDC is very common," then that'd be worth looking at.
It's not that you should take official and bluntly-stated RAI and RAW over "everything else," but that you should take it over player guesswork about how things might be.
Because it is the writers--not the players--who create the official game world.

My question was explicitly about what I should accept. Not what I should understand. It has nothing to do with creating or trying to change the official game world. Or understanding it. Your answer is explicit that I should accept your interpretation over something else. And that is definitely antithetical to the stated intention of creating Rifts and the desire of the author to give us something limited only by our imaginations -- not limited by your opinion.

Knock the revisionism off.

Meanwhile, you seem to have ignored quite a few of the questions I've asked recently, especially those about the relative scarcity of super powers in the HU setting.
Any particular reason for the avoidance?

I didn't see them.

Even if I did, I'm not sure I would have tried. I am probably through here without being given a reason to continue. Honestly, I don't think it'd matter to you if I had responded. I don't think you care. I don't think you're interested. I don't think you're paying attention. I don't think you really want to have a conversation. And I'm certain you're going to blame me or explain how I just don't get it or how I'm not trying hard enough. *shrug*

[Killer Cyborg]

You could say "Banana gargle x-ray pike" several times, but that wouldn't make it make any sense.
Repetition is neither explanation nor support.
If you want to claim a logical proof, you have to actually make that proof. Do the math. Show your work.

Like I said, I presented the proof several times.

Not that I've noticed.

And your response is I'm all I've done is repeat a claim.

Which claim?
And what part of the claim do you need more support for?
As I've said, try asking questions when you're confused.

Which is garbage. It's like you're not even interested in paying attention or trying to see things from any other point of view.

Sure I am.
It's just that from my perspective, most of your post might have well been made by Auto-Suggest.

I don't have any explanation for how I can say "the proof by contradiction I presented" and you come back with "you didn't present the proof".

Because you didn't present the proof?
But if you feel that you did at some point, link to that post.

You seem to be trying to claim that "x comes by y naturally" means "x does not practice y."

It's handed to them by fate. They just accept it. They prefer philosophy. They are limited to what comes naturally to them. It's intuitive. At the end of the day they just somehow know how to do magic. These are attributes of someone who is not "actively engaged in a discipline".

They're professional mages.
That makes them engaged in the discipline.
Not sure why you're hung up on how they learn magic, instead of whether or not they practice it.

You're being overly-literal.

It's official and bluntly-stated RAW. If I am anything but literal, then I'm not proceeding from official and bluntly-stated RAW.

That's not how language works.
"Rules As Written" doesn't have to be 100% literal. In fact, focusing on an overly-literal translation interferes with actually understanding RAW, because it ignores the nature of informal speech and colloquialisms and such.

Do you have a problem with people repeating official and bluntly-stated RAW or something?

I guess that depends.
Generally repeating something once people have sufficiently addressed it doesn't gain much.

Isn't official and bluntly-stated RAW the only "that'd be worth looking at"?

Nope.

A cyber knight is like a soldier does not mean a knight is a soldier. It would be false to say a cyber knight is a soldier. Just like it's false saying a city rat is an adventurer. An analogy is not equivalence, of course.

You're confusing several things.
A CK being like a soldier does not mean a knight IS a soldier. But it doesn't have to. Palladium (in the passage I quoted to you) shows the similarities that are the basis for them using the term "soldier" when it comes to knights.
They're not literally soldiers in the strictest sense, but they're similar enough in nature for Palladium to apply the term.

City Rats, on the other hand, are adventurers by nature (as I've pointed out by quoting their description at length).
You seem to be trying to claim that because there could arguably be a deliberate exception to the rule, that the rule doesn't exist (or doesn't have any meaning), but that's not how things work.
The City Rat OCC was designed and built to be used for rolling up adventurers. It doesn't matter if somebody uses it for something different; it's still a class of adventurers.
A hammer is a tool with a heavy head mounted at right angles at the end of a handle, used for jobs such as breaking things and driving in nails. People can use hammers for other things, but they're still hammers, and the nature of hammers is not changed.

You interpret "M.D.C. is rare" to mean that any instance of it not being rare is exceptional, regardless of how many instances we come across. Why should I accept that to the exclusion of everything else?

Well, you shouldn't.
For example, if you find official canon flat-out stating that "MDC is very common," then that'd be worth looking at.
It's not that you should take official and bluntly-stated RAI and RAW over "everything else," but that you should take it over player guesswork about how things might be.
Because it is the writers--not the players--who create the official game world.

My question was explicitly about what I should accept.

Well, that's a vague enough question to easily lead to confusion and miscommunication.
Care to rephrase it more carefully?

It has nothing to do with creating or trying to change the official game world. Or understanding it.

Then I'm not sure why you thought it had a place in a conversation about the nature of the official game world, where people are trying to get each other to understand what exactly that nature is.
I took your question in that context.
If you were attempting to change the topic of conversation away from the topic at hand--the nature of the official game world--then you probably should have mentioned that at the time, in order to avoid confusion.

Meanwhile, you seem to have ignored quite a few of the questions I've asked recently, especially those about the relative scarcity of super powers in the HU setting.
Any particular reason for the avoidance?

I didn't see them.

I'll sum up and paraphrase:
Whatever standard of proof you are attempting to use to shoot down the idea that Mega-Damage is uncommon/rare in the official Rifts setting, what would the result be if you applied those same standards to the question of whether super powers are uncommon/rare in the official HU setting?

[eliakon]

My apologies, Natasha. I did misread the post of yours that I quoted. You actually are presenting yourself as believing that the game itself ("the nature of the game") is somehow supposed to enforce this rarity of MD by preventing you from giving it to Player Characters. That is even less sane than what I'd read before, so I wilk assume and hope that you are doing that for effect.

You feel that because player characters can get MD capacity, then MD is not rare in thr game world. KC has already quoted Kevin S on that issue anyways, but set that aside. The fact that Player Characters can get MD from the start has no bearing on the relative rarity of MD in the game world. The word "rare" has already had definitions in English posted. There doesn't need to be a game mechanic limiting how much MD is available PCs for MD to be rare in the setting, because PCs are not part of the setting! So if you want to prove that Kevin S is wrong about his game world, try to do so with an argument that actually can do so. "PCs can get it" doesn't prove that.

The argument has already been made.
The only argument for "MDC is Rare" is that there is an unsupported fluff text saying this is so"

Multiple examples of text.
NOT sure how you're defining "fluff" text in a way that includes those passages, but not the population statistics.

Because the population statistics say that well over 30% of the population has MD gear.
is not rare.

The argument for "MDC is not rare" are:
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that large percentages of the population start with MD/MDC equipment

Sure, except:
-It hasn't been demonstrated to BE a large percentage of the overall population.

1 in 6 is a large percentage I would think.
Claiming that the population numbers of every book are wrong simply because you want them to be wrong isn't proof.
And of course there is the 1:6 of the population is CS Solidiers issue...
Which means that we have to apply the percentages and such to the remaining 5/6th of the population.
That already means that just the CS army itself automatically means its not "rare"...

-It hasn't been demonstrated that they start with MD/MDC equipment.

They get the listed supplies. It takes a house rule to change what they get.
There is nothing in any book that says "something that is a City Rat doesn't really have the gear or skills of a City Rat".
If a person is a 5th level city rat they get the gear of a City Rat unless there is something printed somewhere that says they do not get it.

-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population is MDC

Again, we'd need the entire population numbers, and we would need the Rifts population numbers to be reliable and accurate, in order for that to work.

And again the problem with that argument is that every single examination of any and all population numbers we DO have turns up the exact same numbers, over and over again. Thus it seems rather implausible to claim that every single example, every single published town, city, village and organization is really the rare exception.

-the repeated demonstration of the fact that a significant portion of the population has inherent MD/MDC capability
-the repeated demonstration that every single identified and detailed example of places and populations in every book includes MD/MDC

You're just repeating yourself here.
So see above objections.

And again when something says X% are Y OCC if Y OCC has MD magic for instance, then Y OCC is MD
If the book says there is X population of MD beings in a city then by definition 100% of X is MD.
We can add up the listed numbers of known published numbers, compare them to the listed total populations and get the percentages of the total available population that we have the stats for already.

-The repeated demonstration that MDC equipment can be made from scrap and salvage

That doesn't say anything about scarcity.

Yes it does.
If something is so common that it can be made by simply scrounging around with no special sources needed, then it is not "rare"
If something is the automatic side effect of providing food then it is not "rare"
If something requires no special skills, no special sources then the claim that no one has it and no one uses it is the extraordinary claim not the presumption.

Basically the argument at this point is quite literally "Facts don't matter, there is this one statement that invalidates all facts to the contrary"

No.
The argument at this point is that guesswork on the part of players does not over-rule direct statements from the authors.
In order to over-rule a direct statement from the author, you would need:
-a larger number of direct statements from the author directly and necessarily contradicting the statement that you want to over-rule.
or
-A massive amount of official evidence that directly and necessarily over-rules the direct statement by the author.

You mean like the official population numbers that people keep citing that you don't want to accept?
You mean like the official equipment lists for OCCs of those populations that you don't want to accept
You mean stuff like that?
Its not guess work to say "Book A on Page B says that there are C people with D equipment." That is about as official as it gets.

Neither of these things has been found yet.

They have been found and shared repeatedly. You just seem to not be willing to accept any sources that contradict your preconceived belief. As you quite literally simply state that nothing anyone shares is valid and dismiss out of hand any and all cited material as wrong.

It's all just people wanting their guesswork to over-rule direct statements by the author.

No, its people wanting ALL of the published material to be considered the primary source and not just cherry pick out those parts that support a pre-selected result.

[Killer Cyborg]

Multiple examples of text.
NOT sure how you're defining "fluff" text in a way that includes those passages, but not the population statistics.

Because the population statistics say that well over 30% of the population has MD gear.
is not rare.

No.
Roughly 30% of (the places that Tetsuya added up) is not the same as 30% of (the entire population of North America).
Again, the authors state that they don't talk about average folks much, because they're "not the stuff of high adventure."
And they point out that MDC seems much more common than it is to PCs, because they're above-average.

If you're standing at The Oscars, and you notice that 1/3 of the crowd are big-name celebrities, that doesn't mean that big-name celebrities are common.
It means that you're looking at a sample that's not representative of the overall population.

Also, as Tetsuya has pointed out, KS's numbers are often unreliable.

The argument for "MDC is not rare" are:
-the repeated demonstration of the fact that large percentages of the population start with MD/MDC equipment

Sure, except:
-It hasn't been demonstrated to BE a large percentage of the overall population.

1 in 6 is a large percentage I would think.

Sure.
Except the 6 in this case isn't the overall population; it's various segments of the population that the writers have seen as being "the stuff of high adventure," as opposed to the unknown numbers of people that they don't talk about because they're "pretty grim and not particularly exotic."

Claiming that the population numbers of every book are wrong simply because you want them to be wrong isn't proof.

I'm not claiming that the population numbers are wrong.
I'm pointing out that they're incomplete.

Although KS's population numbers have always been a bit funky and unclear.
Like with the CS Population numbers in SB1, it's unclear if it's only measuring actual Citizens, or non-citizens, or a mix of both, and/or whether or not the military was part of the numbers, and to what extent.

-It hasn't been demonstrated that they start with MD/MDC equipment.

They get the listed supplies. It takes a house rule to change what they get.[/quote]

In order for that to require a house rule, we would have to have official rules for how to make an NPC.
Let me know what you can find on that end of things.
This could perhaps be a thread in its own right.

There is nothing in any book that says "something that is a City Rat doesn't really have the gear or skills of a City Rat".
If a person is a 5th level city rat they get the gear of a City Rat unless there is something printed somewhere that says they do not get it.

Generally NPC creation is up to the GM. Or, in the case of Official Setting Material, it's up to the writers.
While a writer or GM may create an NPC using the rules for Player Character creation, they don't have to, and they typically don't.
Otherwise all NPCs would be first level, unless a writer or GM leveled them up via play or something.
Also, look through the books at the NPCs.
How many of them can you find that have the listed equipment for their character class?

Thus it seems rather implausible to claim that every single example, every single published town, city, village and organization is really the rare exception.

Does it?
The writers have stated that they avoid writing about normal people and places.
They have also stated that they tend to write about exotic people and places that make for "the stuff of high adventure."
Why would it be implausible to assume that what they've written about are the exotic people and places that make for the stuff of high adventure, NOT the common people and places that the writers find too mundane to write about?

-The repeated demonstration that MDC equipment can be made from scrap and salvage

That doesn't say anything about scarcity.

Yes it does.
If something is so common that it can be made by simply scrounging around with no special sources needed, then it is not "rare"

Okay, maybe I'm missing something.
What specifically is this referring to?
Is there some automatic "can make mega-damage equipment from easily-found scrap material regardless of location" ability/power that I'm forgetting?

If something is the automatic side effect of providing food then it is not "rare"

Agreed.
Find me some evidence that mega-damage gear is a common automatic side-effect of providing food, and you'll be onto something.

If something requires no special skills, no special sources then the claim that no one has it and no one uses it is the extraordinary claim not the presumption.

Find me some proof that making MDC gear requires no special skills or sources, and you'll be onto something.

Basically the argument at this point is quite literally "Facts don't matter, there is this one statement that invalidates all facts to the contrary"

No.
The argument at this point is that guesswork on the part of players does not over-rule direct statements from the authors.
In order to over-rule a direct statement from the author, you would need:
-a larger number of direct statements from the author directly and necessarily contradicting the statement that you want to over-rule.
or
-A massive amount of official evidence that directly and necessarily over-rules the direct statement by the author.

You mean like the official population numbers that people keep citing that you don't want to accept?

Addressed above.

You mean like the official equipment lists for OCCs of those populations that you don't want to accept

Kind of.
What I'd need in that case is proof that NPCs necessarily have the same gear that PCs start with.

Its not guess work to say "Book A on Page B says that there are C people with D equipment." That is about as official as it gets.

But it is NOT official to take a population sample from "exotic stuff of high adventure that the authors have chosen to write about" and use it to determine the average for "mundane people and places that the authors have chosen NOT to write much about."
That's my objection there.

IF you wanted to prove, for example, the claim that "Mega-Damage is NOT uncommon in Lazlo," and you had a complete and reliable description of Lazlo's population, and that description included conclusive evidence regarding mega-damage gear/capability, THEN that could prove that Mega-Damage was NOT uncommon in Lazlo.
But it wouldn't say anything about how common Mega-Damage is in other places, particularly in places like "Podunk Nebraka, Population 155 Farmers, 10 dogs, and a rat."

[Natasha]

Not sure why you're hung up on how they learn magic, instead of whether or not they practice it.

I'm not even hung up on how they learn magic. I can't be. They don't learn magic, it's intuitive. I said nothing about learning, yet you come back with some garbage about me being hung up on the learning. None of the verbs presented in canon says they engage in the discipline of magic and are interested in other things. The word pracitioner, the word in the book, has a specific meaning that this class does not meet. They are not practitioners as a result. Nor do they practice magic. They don't have to. It comes to them naturally. It's quite clear from the definition of the class that they aren't serious about the discipline that practitioners of magic require.

You're not evening use the same words canon uses. The conclusion is you're not interested in a conversation.

And none of your garbage makes cyber knights be soldiers.

None of it makes city rats be adventurers.

If you were attempting to change the topic of conversation away from the topic at hand--the nature of the official game world--then you probably should have mentioned that at the time, in order to avoid confusion.

So blaming me.

Just like I figured you would.

Whatever standard of proof you are attempting to use to shoot down the idea that Mega-Damage is uncommon/rare in the official Rifts setting, what would the result be if you applied those same standards to the question of whether super powers are uncommon/rare in the official HU setting?

Not even paying attention.

Just like I figured you weren't.

I never tried to shoot down the idea that M.D.C. is rare in the official setting. I said that I could easily agree with it and that it's this ridiculous unbending mindset that leads to the false conclusion that I'm trying to shoot it down because it begins with a false premise about what I'm attempting to accomplish. I showed that by the rigid mindset that the statement is provably false, which means something must be done make it a true statement if we're unwilling to let go of this unproductive approach to the rules. I never once said that it's not canon. I never once said that it's canonically false. Your accusation is the result of a terribly flawed method of reading the rules and what I have said about them. I haven't seen anybody who says the official rules of character generate are broken be accused of trying to shoot down the idea that characters are generated. There's no reason to project otherwise on what I said unless you just don't care about having a conversation.

Here's what I said from the start:

The way I see it is that the problem is intractable.

Using fluff text as evidence for scarcity is like using the gospels as evidence for immaculate conception, and using RAW introduces one contradiction after another. If M.D.C. is rare, then algebra hardly exists. Most of the adventurer and scholar classes cannot solve x + 5 = 2 and the vagabonds and wilderness scouts cannot even tell you that -3 + 5 = 2 without the player burning 1-2 skill selections, but they all have M.D.C. without lifting a finger.

If M.D.C. is where you find people, is M.D.C. scarce? It seems possible to me to draw two opposing conclusions, both valid.

Which eventually gave rise to this

Which is exactly why it is incorrect to claim that Grunts cannot perform (or attempt to perform) Algebra.
There is no rule claiming that they cannot do so.

The narrow mindset brought you to the conclusion that I was somehow trying to create canon that grunts can't do algebra. Since you were convinced I was writing canon, it follows that you couldn't see I had moved on to the problem of resolving the question (notice I never denied it's rare) for ourselves in our own games. Because, you know, I'm encouraged to do such things by the author of the game.

Notice how I keep telling you how we can avoid these long drawn out things? After I've long moved on from discussing canon you keep telling me that I am anyway? That the points I make don't warrant the long discussion because days of posts of it is spent you telling me that I can't change canon and me telling you that I'm not trying to? I've straight up told again and you've barged on with the same old ****.

I'll answer your question, though. I don't have to apply the same standards to HU because I don't have a ridiculously narrow view of how to approach the rules. Nor do I have to agree that super powers are to HU what M.D.C. is to Rifts, logically or by any RAW. M.D.C. is manufactured from mined raw materials. M.D.C. weapons can instagib most people. And so on. In any case, what makes HU successful in making superpowers rare is that several occupations can't acquire them and those who can might not even get a major superpower. They might do little more than knowing what time it is without a watch.

More generally, why should I attribute infallibility to that which the author himself says I don't have to?

It's not that you should take official and bluntly-stated RAI and RAW over "everything else," but that you should take it over player guesswork about how things might be.

My question was careful from the start.
Nothing about understanding. Everything about what I should accept (recognise as correct). We are given permission to not recognise canon as correct; there is no concern that we understand it or not when given that permission but whatever. Not accepting canon is not changing it. It's not denying something exists in canon. It's just disagreement which is 100% permissible, explicitly so. To change canon would require that I say "M.D.C. is not rare is canon". Which I never did. I never said "M.D.C. is rare is not canon", "M.D.C. is rare is canonically incorrect", or anything in that vein. It's a false statement in canon. If M.D.C. is rare, then a small quantity of it exists. There must be a sequence of events that causes it to run out. No such sequence exists. Some pretty simple means to clear the contradiction exist. None of them, however, are clearly and bluntly stated. Seems ridiculous to focus so narrowly on clearly and bluntly written words to me; it's much ado about nothing, really. Think back how much time could have saved if there wasn't such view made ridiculously narrow by a death grip on bluntly-worded statements. At the same time, ideas could be enriched or other ideas on different topics discussed.

In light of the fact that all you're interested in is wasting my time, I can't guarantee I'll read anything you post on this topic.

[Killer Cyborg]

Not sure why you're hung up on how they learn magic, instead of whether or not they practice it.

I'm not even hung up on how they learn magic. I can't be. They don't learn magic, it's intuitive. I said nothing about learning, yet you come back with some garbage about me being hung up on the learning. None of the verbs presented in canon says they engage in the discipline of magic and are interested in other things. The word pracitioner, the word in the book, has a specific meaning that this class does not meet. They are not practitioners as a result. Nor do they practice magic. They don't have to. It comes to them naturally. It's quite clear from the definition of the class that they aren't serious about the discipline that practitioners of magic require.

Okay, we're being pedantic.
So, how do you figure that Mystics are not "actively engaged in magic?"

And none of your garbage makes cyber knights be soldiers.

Doesn't have to, as explained.
Let me know if you come up with a response that addresses my response.

None of it makes city rats be adventurers.

The fact that City Rats are adventurers makes them adventurers.
The burden is on you to prove that they are--in spite of their categorization--NOT adventurers.

If you were attempting to change the topic of conversation away from the topic at hand--the nature of the official game world--then you probably should have mentioned that at the time, in order to avoid confusion.

So blaming me.

Just like I figured you would.

You claim that you weren't talking about the official game setting.
The official game setting was the topic of conversation.
Ergo, you changed topics.
No?

Whatever standard of proof you are attempting to use to shoot down the idea that Mega-Damage is uncommon/rare in the official Rifts setting, what would the result be if you applied those same standards to the question of whether super powers are uncommon/rare in the official HU setting?

Not even paying attention.

Just like I figured you weren't.

I never tried to shoot down the idea that M.D.C. is rare in the official setting. I said that I could easily agree with it and that it's this ridiculous unbending mindset that leads to the false conclusion that I'm trying to shoot it down because it begins with a false premise about what I'm attempting to accomplish.

I did notice that in between trying to shoot down "MDC is rare/uncommon," that you also claimed a bizarre and illogical "but it might also be common, because blah, blah, blah nonsense" kind of stance.
But I focused on the more coherent of your stances, which is you arguing against me any time I pointed out that MDC is rare/uncommon.
That's my only angle in this conversation, pointing out that MDC is rare/uncommon by canon.
Any weird philosophical tangents you take that don't confirm or conflict with that claim are irrelevant to anything I've said.

I showed that by the rigid mindset that the statement is provably false,

Without actually proving anything.
Don't believe me?
Think I'm being biased?
Then find ONE person besides yourself that a) understands what you've been saying, and b) thinks that you've proved something.
I'll hear them out, if they can translate for me.

Which is exactly why it is incorrect to claim that Grunts cannot perform (or attempt to perform) Algebra.
There is no rule claiming that they cannot do so.

The narrow mindset brought you to the conclusion that I was somehow trying to create canon that grunts can't do algebra. Since you were convinced I was writing canon, it follows that you couldn't see I had moved on to the problem of resolving the question (notice I never denied it's rare) for ourselves in our own games. Because, you know, I'm encouraged to do such things by the author of the game.

All I'm hearing is "Yes, I claimed that Grunts cannot do algebra, but I am beyond canon, and logic, and none of that affects me."

Whatever your bizarre, esoteric philosophies, if you claim that an ant is an aardvark, I'll correct you, and if you claim that Grunts cannot perform algebra, I'll correct you.
It doesn't matter what kind of mental gymnastics you do; facts are facts.

I don't have to apply the same standards to HU because I don't have a ridiculously narrow view of how to approach the rules.

Agree to disagree on that.

What it comes down to is this:
-We know that RAW states that MDC is uncommon/rare.
-We know that RAI is that MDC is uncommon/rare.
-It doesn't matter what you want, nor how you play. In the official game world, MDC is rare/uncommon.

[dreicunan]

For the phrase, "practitioners of magic, except for the mystic," to even exist means that mystics are practitioners of magic. Otherwise, the mystic couldn't be the exception! Mystics are practitioners of magic.

[TeeAychEeMarchHare]

Oh FFS, will you take your argument that has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand to PM's please? Four pages of this topic, and about a page of it actually pertains to the subject.

[Killer Cyborg]

Oh FFS, will you take your argument that has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand to PM's please? Four pages of this topic, and about a page of it actually pertains to the subject.

That's something that happens when a topic dies out--people talk about other stuff that's peripherally related.

A 4-6 person conversation doesn't work in PMs, but some of these tangents could be split off into new threads.

[TeeAychEeMarchHare]

The topic died because people want to argue about silly **** like the positioning of a comma in a rule. Which seems to happen to a lot of topics on here.

[Killer Cyborg]

The topic died because people want to argue about silly **** like the positioning of a comma in a rule. Which seems to happen to a lot of topics on here.

I tried to get things back on topic several times, but everybody seems to be on the same page as far as CS armaments go.
Is there something more you'd like to discuss regarding "what CS soldier loadouts were the most iconic?"

[lather]

Then find ONE person besides yourself that a) understands what you've been saying, and b) thinks that you've proved something.

This long-time lurker fits that bill. But more importantly, I understand what goes wrong between you two. There is a distinct lack of deliberate attention to having a common ground between you. Quickly it becomes uncommon and you're talking past each other. I do not intend to go into the specifics in this thread because I don't think it would be productive. Going forward, if the ground is kept common between you, it will be smooth sailing for you and for all. Find out what each other is talking about and determine if that's a conversation you'd like to participate in, then have it or carry on without it.

[Killer Cyborg]

Then find ONE person besides yourself that a) understands what you've been saying, and b) thinks that you've proved something.

This long-time lurker fits that bill.

But more importantly, I understand what goes wrong between you two.

Here's hoping!

There is a distinct lack of deliberate attention to having a common ground between you. Quickly it becomes uncommon and you're talking past each other. I do not intend to go into the specifics in this thread because I don't think it would be productive. Going forward, if the ground is kept common between you, it will be smooth sailing for you and for all. Find out what each other is talking about and determine if that's a conversation you'd like to participate in, then have it or carry on without it.

Sounds plausible.