Forums of the Megaverse®

Giant2005 wrote:In my Madhaven book, he doesn't have Invulnerability.
He has Physical Perfection, Mega-Wings and Energy Expulsion: Light.

It is a first printing if that matters.

Invulnerability
An Impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible M.D.C. Juggernaut! Has a physical M.D.C. of 700 and regenerates 1D6x10 M.D.C. every minute (4 melees). gases, drugs, chemicals, poisons, toxins, and radiation will effect the invulnerable person, but are reduced to half their usual potenc (half damage, half duration, effect). The character is only, truely, vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, all of which have full effect. Also add 1D6 to the P.E. and 1D4 to the P.S. attribute, and + 20% to save vs coma/death (this is in addition to any P.E. bonus).

glitterboy2098 wrote:seriously, people argue over this when it actually got covered in a book?

Rifts Conversion Book 1 unrevised: pg47

Invulnerability
An Impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible M.D.C. Juggernaut! Has a physical M.D.C. of 700 and regenerates 1D6x10 M.D.C. every minute (4 melees). gases, drugs, chemicals, poisons, toxins, and radiation will effect the invulnerable person, but are reduced to half their usual potenc (half damage, half duration, effect). The character is only, truely, vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, all of which have full effect. Also add 1D6 to the P.E. and 1D4 to the P.S. attribute, and + 20% to save vs coma/death (this is in addition to any P.E. bonus).

did this not get included in the revised version or something?

DhAkael wrote:2) I would audit the PC so hard it would scream for the IRS to come put it out of its misery.

glitterboy2098 wrote:seriously, people argue over this when it actually got covered in a book?

Rifts Conversion Book 1 unrevised: pg47

Invulnerability
An Impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible M.D.C. Juggernaut! Has a physical M.D.C. of 700 and regenerates 1D6x10 M.D.C. every minute (4 melees). gases, drugs, chemicals, poisons, toxins, and radiation will effect the invulnerable person, but are reduced to half their usual potenc (half damage, half duration, effect). The character is only, truely, vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, all of which have full effect. Also add 1D6 to the P.E. and 1D4 to the P.S. attribute, and + 20% to save vs coma/death (this is in addition to any P.E. bonus).

did this not get included in the revised version or something?

Because the abbreviated translation of the power in CB1 does not specify that the character is invulnerable as a rule, some people read the text to mean that he is not, but those people are mistaken.
The 700 MDC does not replace the invulnerability of the HU version, it only replaces the boosted SDC, which is only part of the power.
Reading the rest of the CB1 description, notice that while it does not specify that the character is impervious to harm as a rule, it does specify the exceptions to that rule.
Gases, drugs, etc. "will affect the invulnerable person," is specified because as a rule, nothing else will.
For this same reason, the text specifies that the character is only vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, which "have full effect."
This would not need to be stated if the character was simply an MDC being, with no actual invulnerability to anything.
It is stated because the Invulnerability power does in fact make one invulnerable, with a few listed exceptions.

It's actually clearly stated that the character is only truly vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons (and is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc.)
If you can think of another way to interpret that sentence logically, let me know.

Either the power description means:
a) The the character is invulnerable as a rule, but is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc., and is fully vulnerable to magic and psionics
or
b) The character is vulnerable as a rule, but is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc., and is vulnerable to magic and psionics.

The former makes sense.
The latter does not- there would be no reason to state vulnerability to magic/psionics if vulnerability were the natural state.

If the GM looks at the text, sees that the character is an almost indestructible juggernaut, then sees a list of stated exceptions to the invulnerability, then decides that all this adds up to the character not being invulnerable, then the GM is wrong.
I mean, if you (or anybody) can show me another viable explanation of the power that fits the text, I'll listen, but if the character isn't invulnerable, why list vulnerabilities?
Why specify, "the character is only vulnerable to...." followed by a handful of specific examples, if he's vulnerable to everything as a rule?

Also, note that the power descriptions in CB1 often assume that the reader is familiar with the HU version of the power.
"Control Elemental Forces: Air," for example, doesn't list or describe the full extent of the powers, only refers to them.
Same with CEF: Earth, CEF: Water, and CEF: Fire.
Same with Darkness Control.
Same with Gravity Manipulation.
Same with Intangibility.
In many cases, there is a note along the lines of "all other aspects are unchanged."
This is because what CB1 does, for the most part, is describes the changes in the powers.
If it's not described in CB1, logically, it is not changed.

HU2 states:
"An impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible juggernaut," just as CB1 does.
"The character is only, truly, venerable to psionics, spell magic, magic illusions and magic weapons, all of which have full effect," which is an only slightly less succinct version of what CB1 says.

flatline wrote:

DhAkael wrote:2) I would audit the PC so hard it would scream for the IRS to come put it out of its misery.

What do you mean when you say "audit the PC"?

--flatline

Killer Cyborg wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:seriously, people argue over this when it actually got covered in a book?

Rifts Conversion Book 1 unrevised: pg47

Invulnerability
An Impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible M.D.C. Juggernaut! Has a physical M.D.C. of 700 and regenerates 1D6x10 M.D.C. every minute (4 melees). gases, drugs, chemicals, poisons, toxins, and radiation will effect the invulnerable person, but are reduced to half their usual potenc (half damage, half duration, effect). The character is only, truely, vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, all of which have full effect. Also add 1D6 to the P.E. and 1D4 to the P.S. attribute, and + 20% to save vs coma/death (this is in addition to any P.E. bonus).

did this not get included in the revised version or something?

Part of the issue is that the conversion of the power does not specify whether that 700 MDC is in addition to actually being invulnerable, or whether it is in place of it.

Pretty much everybody thinks that the answer is obvious.
Pretty much everybody disagrees on what the answer IS.

My take on it is here:

Because the abbreviated translation of the power in CB1 does not specify that the character is invulnerable as a rule, some people read the text to mean that he is not, but those people are mistaken.
The 700 MDC does not replace the invulnerability of the HU version, it only replaces the boosted SDC, which is only part of the power.
Reading the rest of the CB1 description, notice that while it does not specify that the character is impervious to harm as a rule, it does specify the exceptions to that rule.
Gases, drugs, etc. "will affect the invulnerable person," is specified because as a rule, nothing else will.
For this same reason, the text specifies that the character is only vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, which "have full effect."
This would not need to be stated if the character was simply an MDC being, with no actual invulnerability to anything.
It is stated because the Invulnerability power does in fact make one invulnerable, with a few listed exceptions.

And from later in that same thread:

It's actually clearly stated that the character is only truly vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons (and is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc.)
If you can think of another way to interpret that sentence logically, let me know.

Either the power description means:
a) The the character is invulnerable as a rule, but is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc., and is fully vulnerable to magic and psionics
or
b) The character is vulnerable as a rule, but is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc., and is vulnerable to magic and psionics.

The former makes sense.
The latter does not- there would be no reason to state vulnerability to magic/psionics if vulnerability were the natural state.

and:

If the GM looks at the text, sees that the character is an almost indestructible juggernaut, then sees a list of stated exceptions to the invulnerability, then decides that all this adds up to the character not being invulnerable, then the GM is wrong.
I mean, if you (or anybody) can show me another viable explanation of the power that fits the text, I'll listen, but if the character isn't invulnerable, why list vulnerabilities?
Why specify, "the character is only vulnerable to...." followed by a handful of specific examples, if he's vulnerable to everything as a rule?

and

Also, note that the power descriptions in CB1 often assume that the reader is familiar with the HU version of the power.
"Control Elemental Forces: Air," for example, doesn't list or describe the full extent of the powers, only refers to them.
Same with CEF: Earth, CEF: Water, and CEF: Fire.
Same with Darkness Control.
Same with Gravity Manipulation.
Same with Intangibility.
In many cases, there is a note along the lines of "all other aspects are unchanged."
This is because what CB1 does, for the most part, is describes the changes in the powers.
If it's not described in CB1, logically, it is not changed.

HU2 states:
"An impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible juggernaut," just as CB1 does.
"The character is only, truly, venerable to psionics, spell magic, magic illusions and magic weapons, all of which have full effect," which is an only slightly less succinct version of what CB1 says.

DhAkael wrote:

flatline wrote:

DhAkael wrote:2) I would audit the PC so hard it would scream for the IRS to come put it out of its misery.

What do you mean when you say "audit the PC"?

--flatline

exactly what I said; go over it line by line and number by number, making sure each book used in creation of the PC was open to the relevent section and making sure each and every "I" was dotted and "T" crossed by the letter and law of the books.
Yes. I HATE rules lawyers but when I have a player try and shaft my campiagn I will shaft 'em right back in the worst red-tape spewing beaurcratic way.

Akashic Soldier wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:seriously, people argue over this when it actually got covered in a book?

Rifts Conversion Book 1 unrevised: pg47

Invulnerability
An Impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible M.D.C. Juggernaut! Has a physical M.D.C. of 700 and regenerates 1D6x10 M.D.C. every minute (4 melees). gases, drugs, chemicals, poisons, toxins, and radiation will effect the invulnerable person, but are reduced to half their usual potenc (half damage, half duration, effect). The character is only, truly, vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, all of which have full effect. Also add 1D6 to the P.E. and 1D4 to the P.S. attribute, and + 20% to save vs coma/death (this is in addition to any P.E. bonus).

did this not get included in the revised version or something?

Part of the issue is that the conversion of the power does not specify whether that 700 MDC is in addition to actually being invulnerable, or whether it is in place of it.

Pretty much everybody thinks that the answer is obvious.
Pretty much everybody disagrees on what the answer IS.

My take on it is here:

Because the abbreviated translation of the power in CB1 does not specify that the character is invulnerable as a rule, some people read the text to mean that he is not, but those people are mistaken.
The 700 MDC does not replace the invulnerability of the HU version, it only replaces the boosted SDC, which is only part of the power.
Reading the rest of the CB1 description, notice that while it does not specify that the character is impervious to harm as a rule, it does specify the exceptions to that rule.
Gases, drugs, etc. "will affect the invulnerable person," is specified because as a rule, nothing else will.
For this same reason, the text specifies that the character is only vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons, which "have full effect."
This would not need to be stated if the character was simply an MDC being, with no actual invulnerability to anything.
It is stated because the Invulnerability power does in fact make one invulnerable, with a few listed exceptions.

And from later in that same thread:

It's actually clearly stated that the character is only truly vulnerable to psionics, magic, and magic weapons (and is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc.)
If you can think of another way to interpret that sentence logically, let me know.

Either the power description means:
a) The the character is invulnerable as a rule, but is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc., and is fully vulnerable to magic and psionics
or
b) The character is vulnerable as a rule, but is partially vulnerable to gasses, etc., and is vulnerable to magic and psionics.

The former makes sense.
The latter does not- there would be no reason to state vulnerability to magic/psionics if vulnerability were the natural state.

and:

If the GM looks at the text, sees that the character is an almost indestructible juggernaut, then sees a list of stated exceptions to the invulnerability, then decides that all this adds up to the character not being invulnerable, then the GM is wrong.
I mean, if you (or anybody) can show me another viable explanation of the power that fits the text, I'll listen, but if the character isn't invulnerable, why list vulnerabilities?
Why specify, "the character is only vulnerable to...." followed by a handful of specific examples, if he's vulnerable to everything as a rule?

and

Also, note that the power descriptions in CB1 often assume that the reader is familiar with the HU version of the power.
"Control Elemental Forces: Air," for example, doesn't list or describe the full extent of the powers, only refers to them.
Same with CEF: Earth, CEF: Water, and CEF: Fire.
Same with Darkness Control.
Same with Gravity Manipulation.
Same with Intangibility.
In many cases, there is a note along the lines of "all other aspects are unchanged."
This is because what CB1 does, for the most part, is describes the changes in the powers.
If it's not described in CB1, logically, it is not changed.

HU2 states:
"An impressive power that makes the character an almost indestructible juggernaut," just as CB1 does.
"The character is only, truly, venerable to psionics, spell magic, magic illusions and magic weapons, all of which have full effect," which is an only slightly less succinct version of what CB1 says.

All valid points but my friend you are overlooking something!

HU is an SDC environment. Lets imagine that you have a being with say 700 M.D.C. there... he's basically an unstoppable Juggernaut. You step things up to a place like Rifts earth where my moped is made out of a plastic 100 times more resilient than the bunker that they have to hide the president of the united states in and Mr. M.D. Juggernaut might seem like a solid wall of ass-kicking furry but maybe he's not quite so invincible anymore. I mean with the power of things on the planet... is anything really truly indestructible?

Rune weapons and magic excluded.

flatline wrote:I don't think I've ever seen a GM be that thorough with a character before.

--flatline

flatline wrote:Ah. All GMs eyeball new characters, but you're actually talking about recalculating bonuses, skills, and such. I don't think I've ever seen a GM be that thorough with a character before.

--flatline

Killer Cyborg wrote:

flatline wrote:Ah. All GMs eyeball new characters, but you're actually talking about recalculating bonuses, skills, and such. I don't think I've ever seen a GM be that thorough with a character before.

--flatline

I used to do it routinely, before I realized that everybody was likely to die regardless.
Then, as I got more experienced as a GM and player, I still did it from time to time, if I had reason to be suspicious of a player.

flatline wrote:The average life expectancy of a character in our Rifts campaigns was short enough that sometimes it wasn't even worth the player's time to calculate skill values unless the character actually survived long enough to level up...

--flatline

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:The average life expectancy of a character in our Rifts campaigns was short enough that sometimes it wasn't even worth the player's time to calculate skill values unless the character actually survived long enough to level up...

--flatline

What a nightmare! What were you guys up against?!

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:The average life expectancy of a character in our Rifts campaigns was short enough that sometimes it wasn't even worth the player's time to calculate skill values unless the character actually survived long enough to level up...

--flatline

What a nightmare! What were you guys up against?!

flatline wrote:

Akashic Soldier wrote:

flatline wrote:The average life expectancy of a character in our Rifts campaigns was short enough that sometimes it wasn't even worth the player's time to calculate skill values unless the character actually survived long enough to level up...

--flatline

What a nightmare! What were you guys up against?!

Mostly other players. We often had lots of inter-party conflict until we settled on a party whose members could tolerate each other.

--flatline

flatline wrote:Once you get into the campaign with a team that works well together, it matters little if they were the original characters or replacement characters. The party would usually stabilize by the 2nd or 3rd session of a campaign.

--flatline

flatline wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

flatline wrote:Ah. All GMs eyeball new characters, but you're actually talking about recalculating bonuses, skills, and such. I don't think I've ever seen a GM be that thorough with a character before.

--flatline

I used to do it routinely, before I realized that everybody was likely to die regardless.
Then, as I got more experienced as a GM and player, I still did it from time to time, if I had reason to be suspicious of a player.

The average life expectancy of a character in our Rifts campaigns was short enough that sometimes it wasn't even worth the player's time to calculate skill values unless the character actually survived long enough to level up...

Edit: now that I think about it, the GM would often approve the character concept and bring the character into play before anything was even written down on the character sheet, although if you didn't at least have your combat stats figured out by combat time, he'd contrive a reason to keep you out of it ("oops! the vehicle door is jammed! Won't unjam until you're done with your character...").

--flatline

DhAkael wrote:*shrug*
I've already established my own Madhaven well before the book came out.
That being said, the 'canon' book is good. I just don't need it is all.

As to the invulnerability issue? Its never come up.
Seriously... no one has been STUPID enough to even think of asking to play an invulnerable PC in my campaign. EVER.
Because;
1) I use the Un-revised *looks for high priced lawyers and Kevin Siembiada doing a Rumplestiltskin temper tamtrum* Conversion book 1 write up for super powahs..and yeah, it's not all that. Just a whack load of MDC, regeneration and half damage from conventional attacks. It does NOT make one immune to damage.
2) I would audit the PC so hard it would scream for the IRS to come put it out of its misery.

So yeah.

Akashic Soldier wrote:And that sounds like a game I would have rather drank poison than participated in. One of my biggest hang ups is player on player conflict. I like my players to band together against whatever hell I unleash against them. Not an attack on you buddy, just the situation is one that (from my point of view) seemed to suck in a big way!

Balabanto wrote:My players have this problem where some of them don't always realize the consequences of their actions. And then other PC's get mad when they realize that those actions, usually taken independantly, have thrown the entire group under the bus.

flatline wrote:

Balabanto wrote:My players have this problem where some of them don't always realize the consequences of their actions. And then other PC's get mad when they realize that those actions, usually taken independantly, have thrown the entire group under the bus.

And, thus, life lessons are learned.

--flatline

Balabanto wrote:

flatline wrote:

Balabanto wrote:My players have this problem where some of them don't always realize the consequences of their actions. And then other PC's get mad when they realize that those actions, usually taken independantly, have thrown the entire group under the bus.

And, thus, life lessons are learned.

--flatline

Well, that depends on what you mean by "Learned," doesn't it?