Forums of the Megaverse®

I've asked Kevin about this before, but it was during our first meeting and I seem to have forgotten his (seemingly understandable) justification of the Glitterboy ommission

The Galactus Kid wrote:I've asked Kevin about this before, but it was during our first meeting and I seem to have forgotten his (seemingly understandable) justification of the Glitterboy ommission

Well, while he's figuring it out, he needs to make an excuse for how the Coalition Grunt knows Robot Combat: Basic but doesn't have a Pilot Robot or Power Armor skill.

How can you justify not giving the Gliter Boy OCC no Pilot Robots skill? I mean they start out with a Glitter Boy suit. Piloting the GB suit is the whole purpose of the character. It's like giving the Rogue Scholar no scholarly skills. It's makes no real sense imo. As for the Coalition CS Grunt having Robot combat basic but no pilot robots skill I can understand the making a mistake on that one.

I just hope that next time Palladium takes on a project similiar to RUE they actually do more proof reading. I really came close to buying the first printing. I am glad I did not.

Any eta on the errata?

Hey maybe a mod can run through this and cut it down to an actual list? Or maybe a devoted fan...

Here's a list. For a lot of posts, I asked myself, "is this legitimate errata or subjective?" So, an observation here or there got dropped. For instance, I decided the 1000 rounds for Glitter Boys was a subjective thing rather than genuine eratta (despite my agreement that 1000 GB rounds is totally stupid and completely breaks that "common sense" which is always being talked about.). There might be a duplicate here or there too.



Cyborg OCC format = columns switched

Juicer PP +2d4 omitted. Minimum PP after bonuses also omitted.

On page 340, second paragraph under the heading M.D.C. Body Armor = "As always, a roll o 1-4 misses."

Pg: 270 = JA-11 Juicer Assassin's Energy Rifle, for SDC damage it is listed as SD6 S.d.C....possibly should be 5D6

In the Combat Borg section, within the small subsection listing the psionic and magic penalties for Bionic Conversion, the penalties for Partial Bionic Conversion are still listed (copy/paste error). Since Combat Borgs are always full conversion and the Partial Conversion Borg rules are under the Headhunter OCC, the Magic/Psionic penalty notes no longer need to be in the Full Conversion section.

Many OCCs mention they can get Cybernetics. The Headhunter OCC description makes it clear that Cybernetics are separate and distinct from Bionics. Old school Rifts fans will recognize the descriptions of Cybernetic components inside the Borg listing, but they are labeled as Bionic (only) components. This will probably confuse newbies because, technically speaking, there are no Cybernetics in the book.

Cybernetic Bio Systems seem to be listed here and there but not defined as to what they are (although I may have just missed this).

Page 329, the following W.P.'s, Energy Pistol, Energy Rifle, and Mega-Damage Weapons. There is not any W.P. Bonuses listed for these. (They are listed later in the RAnged Combat section, but not in the skills section like all other WPs)

Page 352. The PA: Elite skill is broken up into Flying PA and Ground based PA, (which I like BTW) But in the examples of Ground based PA they list the Terrain Hopper. The TH does have flight capabilities. it's only capable of 100 mph, but it can fly and leap. (boy can it leap!)

SDC: Page 287/Determining Physical SDC: "Each OCC should indicate how many SDC points a character gets." Maybe I'm missing it in the OCC descriptions but I'm not seeing this. There is usually a BONUS SDC listed. The section goes on to describe a starting SDC if there is not a starting SDC presented.

In the old edition of Rifts, a base of 2d6 PPE was assumed when not listed. This default amount of PPE is not present in Rifts Ultimate. Cyber Knights, Juicers, Glitter Boys, Merc Soldiers, Robot Pilots, Body Fixers, Cyber Docs, Operators, Rogue Scholars, Rogue Scientists, Vagabonds, Wilderness Scouts, do not list PPE. City Rats list a bonus to PPE and that it is reduced when they reach 22, but do not list a base.

The Glitter Boy OCC doesn't have the Pilot Power Armor skill.

Don't know what kind of error this is, but on page 289 under "determine Psionics." they list the wilderness scout among the OCCs that get minor Psi abilities as part of their package. The OCC lists no such Psi abilities.

RUE, p. 204 The Electric Arc spell: "This means a character with four attacks per melee round uses up two attacks to cast the spell, leaving him with two electrical attacks possible that melee round." Not anymore. Since Electric Arc is a 4th level spell, it should only take one action to cast.

Heheh...and the good ole Coalition C-27 Plasma Cannon still has the best range *ever* for a hand-held weapon... 488 km! URMB p.258 col.1: C-27 Heavy Plasma Cannon: "Effective Range: 1600 ft (488 km)."

Page 98, second paragraph, last sentence: ...and traverse the wilderness without leaving a leaving a trace that he was there.

Also, page 103, under the description of clattering trees: ...and other than a few leaves and TWigs, nothing breaks off.

p.102 col.1 para.5: Fire/Water Protective Field: "This is a natural, instinctive defense mechanism that clicks on at the first instance of potential danger." The phrase "First instance of potential danger" is not a combat term as far as I know, and exactly what is meant by it is unclear, and how it works in combat is open to many interpretations.

p.115 col.1 para.3 "Note; Ley Line Phasing [...]" A semi-colon was used where a colon should be.

p.131 col.2 para.4 under "10. P.P.E. Storage." mentions two spells, Energy Sphere and Talisman, that are not actually in RUE.

p.186 col.1 para.7: "different spell" should have been "different spells".

p.186 col.1 para.8: "Draining P.P.E from an unwilling subject is difficult." It says, "The unwilling participant must first be made aware of the mages intentions," This seems to say that if a participant is unaware of the mage's intentions, the participant is safe and PPE cannot be drawn out. Is that correct? There is no case where PPE can be drawn from those who are unaware of it?

p.186 col.1 para.10: "This is where human and animal sacrifices come into play." It says: "For reasons unknown, a living being's P.P.E. doubles at death." Then, further down, it says: "Only animals of a certain size have enough P.P.E. to make their sacrifice worthwhile." The second statement appears to contradict the first by restricting sacrifices for P.P.E. to "Only animals of a certain size [...]", and then has specific PPE amounts by animal size class without indicating whether the amounts are an animal's base PPE, or the doubled PPE amount retrieved by the sacrifice. Needs a slight re-wording to distinguish between the classes of being's being worked on, and whether the amounts listed for animals are base PPE before death or doubled PPE acquired during death.

p.186 col.2 para.3: "A matrix of Potential Psychic Energy [...]" PPE has been abbreviated many times before and after this on this page, but is fully spelled out here.

p.186 col.2 para.3: "[...] nexus points -- the energy is at its greatest. These P.P.E. intersections are where Rifts can be opened.." This appears, quite reasonably, to restrict rift formation to actual nexus points. Refer to p.193 col.1 para.4: A chance is given for a rift to open on a ley line. P.193 col2. para.7: A chance is given for a rift to open anywhere. The phrase on p.186 noted above needs an extension, "[...], in most circumstances (see p.193)."

p.2 para.9: "Fusionist" is listed. I'm guessing that should have been "Elemental Fusionist".

p.2 para.9: "Grey Man" is listed twice.

p.3, under "Additional Text and Ideas:" A serial comma appears after "Trent Ward". PB usually doesn't use the serial comma.

p.3, under "Special Thank to:", para.2: A serial comma appears after "Julius Rosenstein". PB usually doesn't use the serial comma.

Okay, a couple more things. First of all, NONE of the power armors have an MDC value listed for their arms, legs, hands, or feet. I found a few more discrepancies as follows:

Pg. 212-213, the description of the spell Invisibility Superior states: The magic is broken only if the character makes a hostile move, or engages in combat/attacks. However, this doesn't agree with the note on page 203 under Invisibility Simple: Aggressive action (including combat) will NOT terminate and Invisibility spell (either Simple or Superior). I think this is a case of errata being added and the original description not being fixed. However, a newbie will not be able to accurately discern which is right.

On page 259, there is no payload listed for the Neural Mace. The stats for Vibro-blades also do not state how long they can operate on a given power source. We also didn't get a ruling as to whether or not it works on supernatural creatures.

On page 236, the illustration labels the new Special Forces armor as "Old Style".

- The Cyber-Doc doesn't get Bioware Mechanics or Cybernetic Medicine... the OCC does get M.D in Cybernetics - a skill that does not appear to be in the book (and has obviously been replaced by Cybernetic Medicine).

p.282 col.2 under "Penalties For Low Attributes", and p.283 col.1: The stat-ranges for IQ are written in an upwards range, 7-8, 5-6. But for all the other stats that follow, the ranges are written in a downwards range, 7, 6, or 5; 6 or 5, etc.

p.283 col.1 para.2: "can only learn the simplest of skills". The available/restricted skills are not noted.

p.283 col.1 para.5: Interrogation is noted as having a -20% penalty for the MA 4-3 level, and immediately after is noted as having a -30% penalty, also on the MA 4-3 level. (It isn't possible to tell whether this is meant to be combined, or if one of the listings is in error.)

RUE p. 153. "Psi-Stalkers only need a roll of 6 or higher to save vs. psionic attack!" In Lone Star, this is clarified by saying that no other ME bonuses are applicable (curiously my Lone Star copy says 10 or higher with a +5 to save equals 6 or higher, another typo or subtracting error, I'll believe the 6 or higher since that's what I see in RUE). RUE does not say ME bonuses are not applicable to this "exception"al saving throw, as it did in Lone Star. Since Psi-Stalkers have a 3D6+5 ME now it is likely that they will have a high ME thus giving them further bonuses. We will need clarification as to whether ME bonuses are now acceptable for the Psi-stalker when saving vs. psionic attacks.

Another copy/paste error: In the description of both Hand to Hand: Basic and Expert the note at the bottom states that basic combat training allows the character to use certain basic moves. This note goes on to list Body Flip/Throw as one of those moves that characters with this training can use off the bat. However, if one reads on you find that both HTH skills obtain Body Flip/Throw at level 8 (the exact same maneuver they are supposed to start with). So which is it?

p.270 col.1 under "JA-11 Juicer Assassin's Rifle" para.1: "hand loaded 7.62mm round"
p.270 col.2 para.11: "7.65mm round"

p.270 col.2 para.3: "[...] both work on different light frequencies, too." Nothing is said about what this means (at least not on this page).

p.270 col.2 under "JA-9 Juicer Assassin Variable Laser Rifle" para.1: A description is given that it is a rifle designed to defeat laser resistant armor. No mechanic is given to express this ability.

p.255 col.2 and p.256 col.1 "1. CV-213 Robot Variable Laser Rifle (1):" It is described as being able to defeat laser resistant armor. Here we have a mechanic to express this ability. The JA-9 and JA-11 need page number references back to this weapon.

The Techno-Hound Headhunter and Mercenary Warrior both receive Computer Operation, but do not receive Literacy (the pre-requisite) as a starting skill.

Rogue Scholar "Storyteller & Teacher" ability is confusing. Can the Scholar teach a secondary skill to a person even if they do not have an available slot at the time?

There is no cost for Ley-Line Walker armor.

RUE p.131 col.2 under "8. Construction Cost of the Device.": "[...] is the average price for purchasing such a magical item on the Black Barket!" "Barket" should be "Market".

RUE p.137 col.2 under "Lightning Rod:": The listed PPE Activation Cost is 14. Lightning Rod has 40 PPE in spells, and uses Cr22,000 in Red Zircons for the Primary Gem (Cr2,000/carat = 11 carats). The forumla for determining the PPE Activation Cost is: (40 x 4 x 10) / 11 = 146 / 20 = 8 PPE. 14 PPE <> 8 PPE.

Look at the XP chart for the Elemental Fusionist. The Level is not offset from the XP range needed.

In addition to the Headhunter, the Robot Pilot OCC has Computer Operation but does not receive Literacy.

The Coalition Grunt has Robot Combat Basic, but no Pilot Robot or Power Armor skill

RevRifts wrote:Also an editing issue, p. 98 2 col. end of 2nd paragraph under the Wilderness Scout description we have "...traverse the wilderness without leaving a leaving a trace that he was there." Should probably read "...traverse the wilderness without leaving a trace he was there." [The word "that" is extra and unnecessary, although I won't pick all those out except in areas where another editing mistake was made.]

Huh? Your printing must be different than mine somehow. The mistake I found in that section is this:

Warwolf wrote:Page 98, second paragraph, last sentence: ...and traverse the wilderness without leaving a leaving a trace that he was there.

Warwolf wrote:

RevRifts wrote:Also an editing issue, p. 98 2 col. end of 2nd paragraph under the Wilderness Scout description we have "...traverse the wilderness without leaving a leaving a trace that he was there." Should probably read "...traverse the wilderness without leaving a trace he was there." [The word "that" is extra and unnecessary, although I won't pick all those out except in areas where another editing mistake was made.]

Huh? Your printing must be different than mine somehow. The mistake I found in that section is this:

Warwolf wrote:Page 98, second paragraph, last sentence: ...and traverse the wilderness without leaving a leaving a trace that he was there.

Mine has the extra 'leaving a' as well. Maybe RevRifts just didn't catch the duplication. I know I didn't see it until my fifth or sixth reading of the text.

RevRifts wrote:Or maybe you two just didn't catch my duplication. Notice that I typed in the duplication and then included what I thought should be the correction. After all, that was the entire reason I mentioned the passage to begin with.

Ok, I was confused when I first read it. Now I see what you were getting at. However, I feel "that" should remain part of the sentence.

While "leaving a trace he was there" is a common dialectial form, the use of "that" is still generally preferred so as to clarify that "he was there" is a subordinate clause. On the other hand, everything after "trace" is extraneous, and could be dropped without adversely affecting the meaning of the sentence.

True, it a matter of personal preference.

Who knew Tinker was an English major?

Warwolf wrote:True, it a matter of personal preference.

Who knew Tinker was an English major?

Engineering actually, but I did get an A in College Composition.

hello everyone

I have been reading the RUE and i am kinda annoyed with all the changes they have made (IMO for no reason) - like the burts rules disappearing, the lack of increased power for sorcerors and psychics on and near leylines and nexus points. Also the less than detailed description of available cybernetics and bionics as well as the juicers PP bonus missing (making it inferior to any other juicer OCC and type, and even some other more common OCCs). The inconsistency between the rules in this RUE and the rules presented in the Book of Magic, concerning the number of attacks it takes to cast spells and on what is low, medium and high level spells. I mean this can only confuse future players (and old ones). On several occasions i have expressed my opinion and maybe gone a little overboard with criticism - sorry.

The RUE has some problems (few) but ultimately its a great book with a lot of cool stuff in it. I personally love the artwork, any additional artwork in future books would be great. It very much qualifies to stand alone as a Rulesbook for the rifts setting. KS himself writes in the "Final Thoughts" chapter of the book, that including everything he wanted to the RUE would have made it a 576 page book. And while i can understand why that could be a problem i really wish that the book would have been released with everything included and 576 pages - i have a right to dream dont i ?

I do wish though that the writers at palladium would stop fixing things that work and maybe start fixing things that are - well - not so good. Im talking background info on the Prometheans and many of the other races that we know almost nothing about. Same thing with weapons, armor and equipment descriptions, please be more detailed and specific. that was all for now.

c ya all

has the offical errata been posted yet its been a wile?

Riftmaker wrote:has the offical errata been posted yet its been a wile?

I second this.

Sureshot wrote:

Riftmaker wrote:has the offical errata been posted yet its been a wile?

I second this.

Nothing that I've seen. All we can do is wait fellas.

I found an interesting omission, and it seems to date all the way back to the RMB.

It seems the Dog Boys don't get WP blunt. Now, maybe I'm mistaken, but isn't their standard-issue neural mace a blunt weapon? Unless they all use it unskilled...

From what I read in Rifter 32 we are either going to see the errata in Rifter 33 and eventually on the site. UR will probably be seeing a corrected second printing by the end of the year.

Then again I am not holding my breath.

Pg. 136, Description of the TK-Klyer, Primary spell entry: Telekinesis. That spell no longer appears on the list of invocations, formerly a 3rd level invocation.
Was this spell intentionally left out, if so, why to TW items detailed in R:UE still showing it as a requirement.

edit:
It does appear on the list in Book of Magic, however as it seems to be a staple TW spell, it should be in the R:UE

ALL Ley Line Walkers are illiterate - since they do not get
literacy as an OCC skill, but since literacy is in Communications,
they can only get radio:basic from this category.

Same for languages, and so on.

(Sorry, if it was already mentioned)

Adios
KLM

KLM wrote:ALL Ley Line Walkers are illiterate - since they do not get
literacy as an OCC skill, but since literacy is in Communications,
they can only get radio:basic from this category.

Same for languages, and so on.

(Sorry, if it was already mentioned)

Adios
KLM

Actually, quite a few of the OCC's are under this same problem. Funny though.

Dark Brandon wrote:

KLM wrote:ALL Ley Line Walkers are illiterate - since they do not get
literacy as an OCC skill, but since literacy is in Communications,
they can only get radio:basic from this category.

Same for languages, and so on.

(Sorry, if it was already mentioned)

Adios
KLM

Actually, quite a few of the OCC's are under this same problem. Funny though.

Actually, literacy can be taken as a secondary skill.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dark Brandon wrote:

KLM wrote:ALL Ley Line Walkers are illiterate - since they do not get
literacy as an OCC skill, but since literacy is in Communications,
they can only get radio:basic from this category.

Same for languages, and so on.

(Sorry, if it was already mentioned)

Adios
KLM

Actually, quite a few of the OCC's are under this same problem. Funny though.

Actually, literacy can be taken as a secondary skill.

He's right, it can.

Besides, it states on page 191 under Magic scrolls that 70% of all people (including spellcasters) on rifts earth are illiterate. It kind of implys that spellcasters don't learn their spells by reading them in books and such. Perhaps they learn from other spellcasters, or from books on tape...

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this or not, but now all missiles, not just minis, are unguided. The only exceptions are long range and multi-warhead missiles. This means that in effect every missile is dumb-fired and there is no realistic possibility of striking things that are further than a mile away. In effect, this makes short range and medium missiles superflurous, since after the first mile, you better pray that your target stands still while the missiles are coming their way otherwise you just wasted your missiles and your cash.

Can anyone else see why this is bad on so many levels?

devillin wrote:I don't know if anyone else has noticed this or not, but now all missiles, not just minis, are unguided. The only exceptions are long range and multi-warhead missiles. This means that in effect every missile is dumb-fired and there is no realistic possibility of striking things that are further than a mile away. In effect, this makes short range and medium missiles superflurous, since after the first mile, you better pray that your target stands still while the missiles are coming their way otherwise you just wasted your missiles and your cash.

Can anyone else see why this is bad on so many levels?

I noticed that almost as soon as I got the book, and yes it makes little sense.

If you want to discuss it further you should probably start a thread, keep this one for errors and such.

Kalinda wrote:I noticed that almost as soon as I got the book, and yes it makes little sense.

If you want to discuss it further you should probably start a thread, keep this one for errors and such.

I just thought it made so little sense, it had to be a mistake.

As for an actual mistake, how about for WP Submachine-Gun where they list a damage rating in the Damage: section, then list another damage in the Typical Payload: section. Which is it?

Was the Coalition PSI- battalion not mentioned on purpose or was it a room issue?

I know this is mainly and MDC game, but the only SDC mele weapons I found listed were a few knive and a machete in the common gear section.

Nemo235 wrote:I know this is mainly and MDC game, but the only SDC mele weapons I found listed were a few knive and a machete in the common gear section.

See the Ancient Weapon Proficiencies, pages 326-328.

Pg. 204

Electric Arc spell needs to be rewritten.

The example given is by the old rules. As per new rules, with level 1-4 spells being cast in 1 action, should be "This means a character with 4 attacks per melee round uses up one acttack to cast the spell leaving him with 3 electric attacks possible that meleer round.".

Blight wrote:Was the Coalition PSI- battalion not mentioned on purpose or was it a room issue?

Well, IIRC, it wasn't in the Original Main Book. Psi-Bat was described in WB 12: Psyscape...

Possibly an oversight, maybe not...maybe just an Oddity...

Juicers have Juicer assassin rifles...but do not have access to the sniper skill.

I believe the formatting in the Combat Cyborg O.C.C has been mentioned already, where the end of Section 4. Legs and Locomotion, and all of 5 and 6 are in front of the Statistics Section. Also, the book contradicts itself several times on Combat Cyborgs and what type of P.S. they use.

on p45 in the O.C.C flavor text its states:
"In fact, Combat Robots possess Robot Strength and can deliver a Mega-Damage punch or kick in combat, double damage when the individual winds up for a power punch (counts as two melee attacks)"

Then in section 3 Arms and Hands, of Statistics for Full Conversion Cyborgs:
"Maximum Attributes: Robot P.S. Starts at 24, but the maximum is 36. Robot Strength enables the 'Borg to inflict Mega-Damage even with a normal punch. (Note: Non-Combat full conversion 'Borgs and partial 'Borgs get Bionic/Augmented P.S.) See Strength tables in the Rules Section."

So, we go back to the rules, on page 281, right under the speed chart it says this:
"Superhuman Men at Arms who have undergone some type of augmentation, like Full Conversion Cyborgs and Headhunters (bionics)... all posses a level of strength that trancends even exceptional human P.S.; see the Augmented Strength listing." Combat cyborgs are not mentioned in the following segment on Robotic P.S.

Then again on page 285 in the strength/damage tables it again places Cyborgs in the Augmented listing. Under Robot Strength & Damage it says this:
"Remeber, 'Borgs are not as powerful as 'bots."
Aren't Full conversion 'Borgs robots for most all physical purposes?

cut and paste errors.

Yemeth42 wrote:I believe the formatting in the Combat Cyborg O.C.C has been mentioned already, where the end of Section 4. Legs and Locomotion, and all of 5 and 6 are in front of the Statistics Section. Also, the book contradicts itself several times on Combat Cyborgs and what type of P.S. they use.

on p45 in the O.C.C flavor text its states:
"In fact, Combat Robots possess Robot Strength and can deliver a Mega-Damage punch or kick in combat, double damage when the individual winds up for a power punch (counts as two melee attacks)"

Then in section 3 Arms and Hands, of Statistics for Full Conversion Cyborgs:
"Maximum Attributes: Robot P.S. Starts at 24, but the maximum is 36. Robot Strength enables the 'Borg to inflict Mega-Damage even with a normal punch. (Note: Non-Combat full conversion 'Borgs and partial 'Borgs get Bionic/Augmented P.S.) See Strength tables in the Rules Section."

So, we go back to the rules, on page 281, right under the speed chart it says this:
"Superhuman Men at Arms who have undergone some type of augmentation, like Full Conversion Cyborgs and Headhunters (bionics)... all posses a level of strength that trancends even exceptional human P.S.; see the Augmented Strength listing." Combat cyborgs are not mentioned in the following segment on Robotic P.S.

Then again on page 285 in the strength/damage tables it again places Cyborgs in the Augmented listing. Under Robot Strength & Damage it says this:
"Remeber, 'Borgs are not as powerful as 'bots."
Aren't Full conversion 'Borgs robots for most all physical purposes?

If im not mistaken, the Combat Borg OCC does have Robot strength, where the old school slave borg (still a full conversion) did not as well as partial (now defined as Headhunters) borgs which still have "augmented strength". It is prolly cut and paste errors, but it was not layed out very well.

Rifter_Richeta wrote:Something else that seems off to me.

Ley Line Walkers can't get any literacy skills.

I've always viewed mages as scholarly, but they get no OCC literacy skills
and since language and literacy skills are now under Communications and the only "other" Communication skill a LL Walker can pick is Radio Basic (can't even learn other languages?!? ), doesn't look like it's happening.

Seems wrong to me.

They can still select languages and literacy as a secondary skill.

Remember, most people on Rifts Earth are illiterate.

~ Josh

Josh Sinsapaugh wrote:

Rifter_Richeta wrote:Something else that seems off to me.

Ley Line Walkers can't get any literacy skills.

I've always viewed mages as scholarly, but they get no OCC literacy skills
and since language and literacy skills are now under Communications and the only "other" Communication skill a LL Walker can pick is Radio Basic (can't even learn other languages?!? ), doesn't look like it's happening.

Seems wrong to me.

They can still select languages and literacy as a secondary skill.

Remember, most people on Rifts Earth are illiterate.

~ Josh

IMO the percentages for mages to be illeterate would be oppisite of the normal population. Its much harder to learn a spell without the ability to read so few mages would lack this ability.

Thinyser wrote:

Josh Sinsapaugh wrote:

Rifter_Richeta wrote:Something else that seems off to me.

Ley Line Walkers can't get any literacy skills.

I've always viewed mages as scholarly, but they get no OCC literacy skills
and since language and literacy skills are now under Communications and the only "other" Communication skill a LL Walker can pick is Radio Basic (can't even learn other languages?!? ), doesn't look like it's happening.

Seems wrong to me.

They can still select languages and literacy as a secondary skill.

Remember, most people on Rifts Earth are illiterate.

~ Josh

IMO the percentages for mages to be illeterate would be oppisite of the normal population. Its much harder to learn a spell without the ability to read so few mages would lack this ability.

I am not convinced.

One of the ways to learn a spell is to have a higher level spell caster teach it to you.

A character might "level up" during a span that he hasn't read anything, he still learns a spell.

~ Josh

Josh Sinsapaugh wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

Josh Sinsapaugh wrote:

Rifter_Richeta wrote:Something else that seems off to me.

Ley Line Walkers can't get any literacy skills.

I've always viewed mages as scholarly, but they get no OCC literacy skills
and since language and literacy skills are now under Communications and the only "other" Communication skill a LL Walker can pick is Radio Basic (can't even learn other languages?!? ), doesn't look like it's happening.

Seems wrong to me.

They can still select languages and literacy as a secondary skill.

Remember, most people on Rifts Earth are illiterate.

~ Josh

IMO the percentages for mages to be illeterate would be oppisite of the normal population. Its much harder to learn a spell without the ability to read so few mages would lack this ability.

I am not convinced.

One of the ways to learn a spell is to have a higher level spell caster teach it to you.

A character might "level up" during a span that he hasn't read anything, he still learns a spell.

~ Josh

By game mechanics only yes you still learn your spell, but if I were going for realism (which i often dont try for that much) I would say that the mage needs to either study under a instructor as you suggest or study the spell on their own. The second option would require literacy IMO.
Thus it follows since most mages are "self taught" most are literate (at least in my world).

Thinyser wrote:By game mechanics only yes you still learn your spell, but if I were going for realism (which i often dont try for that much) I would say that the mage needs to either study under a instructor as you suggest or study the spell on their own. The second option would require literacy IMO.
Thus it follows since most mages are "self taught" most are literate (at least in my world).

Well, since most mages don't have spellbooks, most learn spells by being taught. Those that study the spell, could very well have learned the spell before hand, but have only recently become able to cast it, which would make it understandable for them to have a low literacy rate.

Dark Brandon wrote:

Thinyser wrote:By game mechanics only yes you still learn your spell, but if I were going for realism (which i often dont try for that much) I would say that the mage needs to either study under a instructor as you suggest or study the spell on their own. The second option would require literacy IMO.
Thus it follows since most mages are "self taught" most are literate (at least in my world).

Well, since most mages don't have spellbooks, most learn spells by being taught. Those that study the spell, could very well have learned the spell before hand, but have only recently become able to cast it, which would make it understandable for them to have a low literacy rate.

No they dont have spell books because the dont need to re-memorize the spell after each casting like in D&D.

Why carry a 5-10 pound book when all you need is to learn the spell once and enough PPE to cast it?

They could simply learn it from a scroll, then either sell the scroll or keep it for later use. This way they only have a few scrolls on them at any one time, the ones they are learning and the ones that they have already learnt but have not yet used or sold.

Hey guys, maybe you could start a thread about the literacy issue we can save this thread for reporting errors?

Just a thought.

Edited to keep from going off topic.

Rifter_Richeta wrote:

Kalinda wrote:Hey guys, maybe you could start a thread about the literacy issue we can save this thread for reporting errors?

Just a thought.

Well, it's really still on topic.

It's obvious that there's confusion about the issue that I originally brought up that led to the discussion.

It seems to fit here just like all the other errata/possible errata that's been contested and/or discussed here.

From the very first post in this thread.

I know someone started this, but let's keep it, if possible under one location.
That way Wayne or someone can come along and snatch them all up and make a PDF of fixes and they'll have a nice list of fixes for 2nd printing.

Let's keep it focused on just listing errata.

(Bolding mine)

I know that there are a lot of extraneous posts in the thread already, but that's no excuse to add more. Take the arguments to another thread so the PB staffers don't have to wade through them to find the errors we've found.

As covered in Conversion Book One, any race with attribute stats greater than 3D6, must roll perfect (ie 24) in order to qualify for a 5th D6 roll.

Orko wrote:In RUE it says that if you roll 17 or 18 with 3D6 you get to roll one more time.

But what happens when a race has attibutes of 4D6.

Something like that has to be adressed in the main book.
I has to be an errata.

It's 16, 17 or 18.

Are there any races in the Main Book with a 4D6 attribute?

~ Josh

Rifter_Richeta wrote:

Kalinda wrote:Hey guys, maybe you could start a thread about the literacy issue we can save this thread for reporting errors?

Just a thought.

Well, it's really still on topic.

It's obvious that there's confusion about the issue that I originally brought up that led to the discussion.

It seems to fit here just like all the other errata/possible errata that's been contested and/or discussed here.

Plus there are always those things that only certain people view as mistakes...things that are in contention.

Palladium SHOULD NOT use this thread to find out what needs fixin', lists should be made and E-mailed.
~ Josh

Josh Sinsapaugh wrote:

Rifter_Richeta wrote:

Kalinda wrote:Hey guys, maybe you could start a thread about the literacy issue we can save this thread for reporting errors?

Just a thought.

Well, it's really still on topic.

It's obvious that there's confusion about the issue that I originally brought up that led to the discussion.

It seems to fit here just like all the other errata/possible errata that's been contested and/or discussed here.

Plus there are always those things that only certain people view as mistakes...things that are in contention.

Palladium SHOULD NOT use this thread to find out what needs fixin', lists should be made and E-mailed.
~ Josh

Agreed on both points

No, it means anyone writing a worldbook with races that use anything other than 3d6 should have indicated what is considered exceptional for the race. CB1 and the main book shouldn't have to cover this at all. But that's one of the idiosyncracies we all deal with daily in Rifts.


*supports the push for a Palladium continuity editor*

One of the things holding back the errata was work on the Best of The Rifters book one hopes with that out of the way they will finally get to it.

As for not using this thread for errata sorry but i disagree. Do you know how long it's going to take before all the mistakes are mailed in. The errata is already about six months late I do not want to wait another six months for it to come out. Not using their own forum to verify for mistakes in RUE would be a HUGE step backward imo.

Orko wrote:In RUE it says that if you roll 17 or 18 with 3D6 you get to roll one more time.

But what happens when a race has attibutes of 4D6.

Something like that has to be adressed in the main book.
I has to be an errata.

Here is a SIMPLE list for "Exceptional Attributes" :

1d6 = "6"
2d6 = "11,12"
3d6 = "16,17,18"
4d6 = "21,22,23,24"
5d6 = "26,27,28,29,30"
6d6 = "31,32,33,34,35,36"

Notice a Pattern ??
Good