Do natural 20s to strike always surpass zombie AR and hurt?

[Axelmania]

When it comes to natural AR, the ideas of 'hitting' and 'doing damage' appear to be distinct. Pg 181:

5-14 may hit, especially at close range, but does not surpass the A.R. 14 and does NO DAMAGE.

In a thread I just posted every quote I could find talks about natural 20s always HITTING... but I can't find anything about them ALWAYS surpassing AR.

A natural 20 obviously is higher than 14, but there are a lot of interesting ways to get penalties in the books which would reduce it below that amount. The most obviously example being the -10 to strike from blindness, which would reduce it to 10, below the AR.

This would seem to mean, even if you are relying on natural 20s to hit (because you have bad bonuses, or lots of penalties) that a guaranteed hit isn't guaranteed damage, because your modified roll still needs to surpass AR.

If I'm wrong, can someone show me in the book that would say otherwise?

[Epically]

It doesn't matter if you have -100 to strike. A natural 20 will always hit/succeed, just like a natural 1 will always miss/fail.

[Axelmania]

Hit/Succeed are different ideas, as I pointed out. The book says natural 20s always hit, not that they always surpass AR. I don't know if DR addresses natural 1s at all.

[Mr. Jays]

"A roll of Natural 20 is always a hit and a Critical Strike (double damage), unless the defender also rolls a Natural 20." p. 173 Dead Reign RPG

This says to to me that it always not just deals damage, but double damage. Unless the defender also rolls a Nat 20, of course. If it's really at big deal to you one way or another, you can always house rule it whatever way you want.

[Axelmania]

But does double damage inflict damage to something prohibited from receiving damage due to other rules?

A normal human punch or a normal metal sword swing to a vampire, for example, doesn't harm them on natural 20s because of their limited invulnerability.

Armor Rating is a separate rule from hitting. You can hit something without surpassing natural AR.

Modifiers allow the possibility of a roll which is 20 yet due to penalties (like -10 to blindness or something) is below AR. Still high enough to hit (although it could be a -30, natural 20s always HIT) but not enough to hit the chink (surpass the AR) which is required to do damage.

This would apply to things like artificial AR like body armor too, not just natural AR like zombies.

If someone is wearing AR 14 armor and their attackerhas -6 to strike for some reason and rolls a natural 20 (final outcome 14 to strike), the 20 guarantees they hit even if the person rolls 19 to dodge (due to the natural 20 rule) but it's still not above the AR, so I think you would still just damage the armor (or nothing at all, if you're talking zombies)

[dreicunan]

This is a great example of why AR works better when the actual number on the die has to beat the AR (assuming that it gets past any active defense by the target), not the modified result. (modified result still has to actually hit, of course). No chance of this issue coming up and makes armor useful again (but makes natural AR very powerful).

[Unfortunate Son]

A Nat always inflicts damage over AR. Its ludicrous to even think otherwise. RTFB my man.

[Axelmania]

There is no rule anywhere saying that Natural 20s always inflict damage, just that they always hit.

This would mean that they would always hit the neck/head (even if penalties dropped it down to 0) but surpassing the AR14 to actually damage the flesh is another matter.

[Unfortunate Son]

So, we're going to ignore where it says it always succeeds? And now I know you are trolling.

[eliakon]

There is no rule anywhere saying that Natural 20s always inflict damage, just that they always hit.

This would mean that they would always hit the neck/head (even if penalties dropped it down to 0) but surpassing the AR14 to actually damage the flesh is another matter.

Page 173 has the rule your looking for Always a hit and a Critical Strike.
A Critical Strike always inflicts double the usual amount damage.
You can not have a Critical Strike if you do not penetrate A.R.
This is because you can not both "inflict double damage" and "does no damage"
The words "Inflict" and "does not" are mutually exclusive.
Since the canon states that at n20 will always cause a critical strike, and it does not state that a zombie gets an exemption to this rule the rule holds
That is how rules work. The presumption is that they are applied in the situation that they govern unless there is a specific exemption to their application.

[Axelmania]

So, we're going to ignore where it says it always succeeds? And now I know you are trolling.

Which page are you quoting?

Also why do you think "succeed" means "inflict damage" instead of "hit"?

In Rifts for example, I can roll a natural 20 to punch a dragon, that doesn't mean I will necessarily DAMAGE the dragon.

Page 173 has the rule your looking for Always a hit and a Critical Strike.

Here's what I can see:

173, left column, before STEP 3:
A roll of a Natural 20 is always a hit and a Critical Strike (double damage), unless the defender also rolls a Natural 20.

174, left column, before STEP 5:
Critical Strikes do double damage! Combined Critical Strikes, like a Natural Twenty and a jump attack, do triple damage. Add the damage bonus to the roll before doubling or tripling damage. A Natural (unmodified) Twenty is always a Critical Strike.

Of course "hit" is irrelevant to "did I hit accurately enough to bypass AR".

A Critical Strike always inflicts double the usual amount damage.
You can not have a Critical Strike if you do not penetrate A.R.
This is because you can not both "inflict double damage" and "does no damage"
The words "Inflict" and "does not" are mutually exclusive.

I'm still unsure exactly what you're quoting from, but rolling a Critical Strike does not in any way guarantee that you hit an opponent or that you bypass an opponent's AR. Page 176 HTH Basic gives a Critical strike on an unmodified 19 at level 6 for example.

If you roll a 19 and have -10 to strike due to various penalties, your modified roll of 9 would still hit your target (unless they parried or dodged) but it would not bypass their AR. If you somehow had -15 worth of penalties to strike and your modified roll was 4, you wouldn't even hit the target at all.

This is proof that a Critical Strike does not guarantee damage. Critical Strike just means that in the situations where you CAN inflict damage (you do not miss, a defense roll doesn't beat your strike, you surpass AR, you are using a weapon which can harm the enemy) that it is doubled.

I can Critical Strike a vampire with my fists for hours, it won't hurt them because I'm a mere human, I need to have Supernatural PS to harm vampires. Critical Strikes are not a magic bypass to the usual rules, they do not bypass immunity so why would they bypass AR?

Since the canon states that at n20 will always cause a critical strike, and it does not state that a zombie gets an exemption to this rule the rule holds
That is how rules work. The presumption is that they are applied in the situation that they govern unless there is a specific exemption to their application.

The specific exemption is: when penalties are enough to bring your modified roll below AR. Natural 20s' guaranteed hitting is not a guarantee for damage. Hit only means that you hit a broad target, not that you hit them accurately enough to bypass armor chinks.

We already know natural 20s to strike are not guaranteed hits (natural 20s can dodge/parry them) so they are certainly not guaranteed damage.

[Unfortunate Son]

It flat out says it hits and does double damage. You just quoted it. And page 185 says it inflicts double damage. Not to mention conventional RPG wisdom always has it hit and inflict double. You are playing a pedantic approach here and it beats me has this has garnered the attention it has. If it always hits, it surpasses AR. If it inflicts double damage, it does damage (well triple on a zombie head but I digress). Maybe a more thorough reading is needed on your part.

[Axelmania]

What it says is:

Critical Strike (double damage)

This explains what a critical strike is, that critical strikes double damage.

Strikes below natural AR do 0 damage. 0 times 2 is 0.

[Ulairi]

What it says is:

Critical Strike (double damage)

This explains what a critical strike is, that critical strikes double damage.

Strikes below natural AR do 0 damage. 0 times 2 is 0.

It does damage and bypasses DR. It says it inflicts double damage.

[ScottBernard]

What it says is:

Critical Strike (double damage)

This explains what a critical strike is, that critical strikes double damage.

Strikes below natural AR do 0 damage. 0 times 2 is 0.

Man what. Your own quote says not only damage, but double damage. Why is this so difficult?

[dreicunan]

I think that rules as intended the natural 20 would bypass, but after reading the exact wording of things in Dead Reign, especially how the word "hit" is used in the section on natural AR on page 181, and I can see how someone might think that if you had a bunch of penalties on your strike roll you might roll a natural 20 but the modified result ends up 14 or lower, and you do no damage. I don't think that is what was intended, but I can't find a rule that says that upon rolling a natural 20 modifiers no longer apply. Absent that, I can't exclude the interpretation of the rules that they do apply to natural 20s, with the caveat that no matter how low it goes it still hits. So against a human in armor, you'd damage their armor. Against a zombie, you'd do double damage for 0.

It is similar to how you can roll a natural 20 to strike with a boom gun against a vampire and do a critical hit for no damage.

Once again, I don't think that was the intention, but I can't rule it out, either.

[Tick]

When it comes to natural AR, the ideas of 'hitting' and 'doing damage' appear to be distinct. Pg 181:

5-14 may hit, especially at close range, but does not surpass the A.R. 14 and does NO DAMAGE.

In a thread I just posted every quote I could find talks about natural 20s always HITTING... but I can't find anything about them ALWAYS surpassing AR.

A natural 20 obviously is higher than 14, but there are a lot of interesting ways to get penalties in the books which would reduce it below that amount. The most obviously example being the -10 to strike from blindness, which would reduce it to 10, below the AR.

This would seem to mean, even if you are relying on natural 20s to hit (because you have bad bonuses, or lots of penalties) that a guaranteed hit isn't guaranteed damage, because your modified roll still needs to surpass AR.

If I'm wrong, can someone show me in the book that would say otherwise?

20 always hit and will double damage. It will not bypass natural S.D.C./A.R. so it will not go directly to Hit points. Only a called shot "Death blow" will do that. Even then it is the game masters discretion as to by passing Naturally high A.R./S.D.C.... For zombies it is made clear that the S.D.C. must be depleted first. in the DR book. in HU the damages goes to hit points regardless if a Death blow is called.
1 roll always misses... everyone is correct on this note.

[eliakon]

[sup][/sup]

I think that rules as intended the natural 20 would bypass, but after reading the exact wording of things in Dead Reign, especially how the word "hit" is used in the section on natural AR on page 181, and I can see how someone might think that if you had a bunch of penalties on your strike roll you might roll a natural 20 but the modified result ends up 14 or lower, and you do no damage. I don't think that is what was intended, but I can't find a rule that says that upon rolling a natural 20 modifiers no longer apply. Absent that, I can't exclude the interpretation of the rules that they do apply to natural 20s, with the caveat that no matter how low it goes it still hits. So against a human in armor, you'd damage their armor. Against a zombie, you'd do double damage for 0.

It is similar to how you can roll a natural 20 to strike with a boom gun against a vampire and do a critical hit for no damage.

Once again, I don't think that was the intention, but I can't rule it out, either.

I would say that the statement "A natural twenty" is the wording.
It doesn't say "A natural twenty that is not reduced by other modifiers" it says "if you roll a natural twenty then..." that means that if you roll a n20 then you stop at that step and skip straight on to the 'do double damage' step the penalties and bonuses don't matter because they are skipped.
As such... the 20 ALWAYS surpasses the AR.
Since the AR is not 21.
Basically it is not a linear A-B-C-D check list, it is a flow chart
Step 1 Roll Dice
If 20 go to step 3
If 1 and if and only if using the critical failure rules then go to step 4, otherwise go to step 2
If 2-19 then go to step 2
Step 2 apply all modifiers to roll
If Melee attack and roll is 5+ then go to step 5 if 1-4 then go to step 9
If Ranged attack and roll is 8+ go to step 5 if 1-7 then go to step 9
Step 3
Roll damage, double this and apply to target
Step 4
Apply critical failure penalty
Step 5
Compare roll to target AR
If Roll exceeds AR go to step 6
If Roll does not exceed normal AR go to step 7
If roll does not exceed natural AR go to step 8
Step 6
Roll Damage and apply to target
Step 7
Roll damage and apply to the Armor
Step 8
Attack hits, but does no damage
Step 9
Attack Misses

[dreicunan]

[sup][/sup]

I think that rules as intended the natural 20 would bypass, but after reading the exact wording of things in Dead Reign, especially how the word "hit" is used in the section on natural AR on page 181, and I can see how someone might think that if you had a bunch of penalties on your strike roll you might roll a natural 20 but the modified result ends up 14 or lower, and you do no damage. I don't think that is what was intended, but I can't find a rule that says that upon rolling a natural 20 modifiers no longer apply. Absent that, I can't exclude the interpretation of the rules that they do apply to natural 20s, with the caveat that no matter how low it goes it still hits. So against a human in armor, you'd damage their armor. Against a zombie, you'd do double damage for 0.

It is similar to how you can roll a natural 20 to strike with a boom gun against a vampire and do a critical hit for no damage.

Once again, I don't think that was the intention, but I can't rule it out, either.

I would say that the statement "A natural twenty" is the wording.
It doesn't say "A natural twenty that is not reduced by other modifiers" it says "if you roll a natural twenty then..." that means that if you roll a n20 then you stop at that step and skip straight on to the 'do double damage' step the penalties and bonuses don't matter because they are skipped.
As such... the 20 ALWAYS surpasses the AR.

But the book defines what "natural" means for us. Under "death blow" it says "The attack is often limited in hand to hand combat to the roll of a 'Natural' (no bonuses apply) high number...." The "natural 20" rule itself a few pages later says "A Natural 20 is rolling the highest possible number (20) without adding any bonuses to the number rolled." The most natural reading of this is that all "natural 20" means is that you rolled a 20. In fact, given that it says that bonuses do not apply, as opposed to modifiers or bonuses and penalties, I can see how someone would read that a "natural" number could still be subject to penalties for the purposes of seeing if it overcomes AR or not. The rule says that a natural 20 always succeeds or beats an opponents roll, and AR is not a "roll," but a target number.

While your flow chart is how most people run it, and is indeed what I believe is intended, there isn't actually a clear statement in Dead Reign to indicate beyond a shadow of the doubt that it should be run that way.

[eliakon]

[sup][/sup]

I think that rules as intended the natural 20 would bypass, but after reading the exact wording of things in Dead Reign, especially how the word "hit" is used in the section on natural AR on page 181, and I can see how someone might think that if you had a bunch of penalties on your strike roll you might roll a natural 20 but the modified result ends up 14 or lower, and you do no damage. I don't think that is what was intended, but I can't find a rule that says that upon rolling a natural 20 modifiers no longer apply. Absent that, I can't exclude the interpretation of the rules that they do apply to natural 20s, with the caveat that no matter how low it goes it still hits. So against a human in armor, you'd damage their armor. Against a zombie, you'd do double damage for 0.

It is similar to how you can roll a natural 20 to strike with a boom gun against a vampire and do a critical hit for no damage.

Once again, I don't think that was the intention, but I can't rule it out, either.

I would say that the statement "A natural twenty" is the wording.
It doesn't say "A natural twenty that is not reduced by other modifiers" it says "if you roll a natural twenty then..." that means that if you roll a n20 then you stop at that step and skip straight on to the 'do double damage' step the penalties and bonuses don't matter because they are skipped.
As such... the 20 ALWAYS surpasses the AR.

But the book defines what "natural" means for us. Under "death blow" it says "The attack is often limited in hand to hand combat to the roll of a 'Natural' (no bonuses apply) high number...." The "natural 20" rule itself a few pages later says "A Natural 20 is rolling the highest possible number (20) without adding any bonuses to the number rolled." The most natural reading of this is that all "natural 20" means is that you rolled a 20. In fact, given that it says that bonuses do not apply, as opposed to modifiers or bonuses and penalties, I can see how someone would read that a "natural" number could still be subject to penalties for the purposes of seeing if it overcomes AR or not. The rule says that a natural 20 always succeeds or beats an opponents roll, and AR is not a "roll," but a target number.

While your flow chart is how most people run it, and is indeed what I believe is intended, there isn't actually a clear statement in Dead Reign to indicate beyond a shadow of the doubt that it should be run that way.

It is though
It does not JUST say that it beats an opponents roll. it says it automatically hits and does damage.
Period.
It hits. Period
It inflicts double damage. Period.
If AR is able to apply then it will NOT inflict double damage.
Thus it will require a house rule to change the canon to allow that to happen because the books give us a flat, unequivocal statement that a natural 20 always hits and always does double damage. It does not have any qualifier about "unless there is a modifier that lowers the roll to be below the zombies AR in which case it does nothing" if that were the case it would be "a natural 20 will, if it ends up doing damage will do twice as much damage as normal" or some such. As that is NOT what is stated, then that is not what the rule is.
The people wanting to have the AR be able to stop the n20 will need to provide an explicit statement from the rules stating that modifiers DO apply to n20s for the purpose of calculating if it penetrates AR or not. Otherwise as written they are totally and utterly irrelevant.

[dreicunan]

[sup][/sup]

I think that rules as intended the natural 20 would bypass, but after reading the exact wording of things in Dead Reign, especially how the word "hit" is used in the section on natural AR on page 181, and I can see how someone might think that if you had a bunch of penalties on your strike roll you might roll a natural 20 but the modified result ends up 14 or lower, and you do no damage. I don't think that is what was intended, but I can't find a rule that says that upon rolling a natural 20 modifiers no longer apply. Absent that, I can't exclude the interpretation of the rules that they do apply to natural 20s, with the caveat that no matter how low it goes it still hits. So against a human in armor, you'd damage their armor. Against a zombie, you'd do double damage for 0.

It is similar to how you can roll a natural 20 to strike with a boom gun against a vampire and do a critical hit for no damage.

Once again, I don't think that was the intention, but I can't rule it out, either.

I would say that the statement "A natural twenty" is the wording.
It doesn't say "A natural twenty that is not reduced by other modifiers" it says "if you roll a natural twenty then..." that means that if you roll a n20 then you stop at that step and skip straight on to the 'do double damage' step the penalties and bonuses don't matter because they are skipped.
As such... the 20 ALWAYS surpasses the AR.

But the book defines what "natural" means for us. Under "death blow" it says "The attack is often limited in hand to hand combat to the roll of a 'Natural' (no bonuses apply) high number...." The "natural 20" rule itself a few pages later says "A Natural 20 is rolling the highest possible number (20) without adding any bonuses to the number rolled." The most natural reading of this is that all "natural 20" means is that you rolled a 20. In fact, given that it says that bonuses do not apply, as opposed to modifiers or bonuses and penalties, I can see how someone would read that a "natural" number could still be subject to penalties for the purposes of seeing if it overcomes AR or not. The rule says that a natural 20 always succeeds or beats an opponents roll, and AR is not a "roll," but a target number.

While your flow chart is how most people run it, and is indeed what I believe is intended, there isn't actually a clear statement in Dead Reign to indicate beyond a shadow of the doubt that it should be run that way.

It is though
It does not JUST say that it beats an opponents roll. it says it automatically hits and does damage.
Period.
It hits. Period
It inflicts double damage. Period.
If AR is able to apply then it will NOT inflict double damage.
Thus it will require a house rule to change the canon to allow that to happen because the books give us a flat, unequivocal statement that a natural 20 always hits and always does double damage. It does not have any qualifier about "unless there is a modifier that lowers the roll to be below the zombies AR in which case it does nothing" if that were the case it would be "a natural 20 will, if it ends up doing damage will do twice as much damage as normal" or some such. As that is NOT what is stated, then that is not what the rule is.
The people wanting to have the AR be able to stop the n20 will need to provide an explicit statement from the rules stating that modifiers DO apply to n20s for the purpose of calculating if it penetrates AR or not. Otherwise as written they are totally and utterly irrelevant.

Cases in Palladium's game lines where a natural 20 would not allow for the dealing of damage have already been cited (a mere mortal human punching a werewolf or a vampire, for example), and yet the natural 20 rule doesn't mention those exceptions. Since we know that it doesn't, and we know that the exceptions exist, the lack of a qualifier means nothing. We already know from those cases that a natural 20 is not actually a guarantee of doing damage, so one cannot argue that a natural 20 ALWAYS inflicts damage, only that it is always a critical strike. As Axelmania already pointed out, 0x2=0.

What one need to produces to make it clear that Axelmania's interpretation is not possible (and I'd love it if someone could produce it) is a statement that no modifiers of any kind, or no penalties, apply to a natural 20. Because all I've found in Dead Reign and other game lines are statements that bonuses don't apply, and bonuses are not the only kind of modifiers. Well, or a statement that penalties are actually considered "negative bonuses" or something like that. Due to that, I can't find anything that actually fully rules out Axelmania's interpretation (despite the fact that I don't ultimately agree with it).

Heck, as written, since it only specifies that bonuses don't apply I'm not fully sure that we can disprove the interpretation that a natural 20 is only possible if there are no penalties to strike! (And to be clear, I'm not arguing for that interpretation, as I definitely don't think that it was intended that way.)

[Axelmania]

It does damage and bypasses DR. It says it inflicts double damage.

Every instance of something saying "double damage" is not the same as saying "bypasses AR". For example in Nightbane pg 134 the 5th Charm Weapon ritual mentions "a sword that normally inflicts 1D8 damage will do 2D8 against Nightspawn or other
supernatural beings". This doesn't mean if you roll 5 to hit it will bypass a Hound's AR. A similar "allowing it to inflict double
damage to supernatural creatures" exists for the 8th level "Temporary Enchantment". Damage-doubling statements are not AR-bypass statements.

What it says is:

Critical Strike (double damage)

This explains what a critical strike is, that critical strikes double damage.

Strikes below natural AR do 0 damage. 0 times 2 is 0.

Man what. Your own quote says not only damage, but double damage. Why is this so difficult?

Rolls below natural AR do no damage. Can you multiply zero by two?

If you rolled below a robot's AR in Heroes Unlimited but above your critical limit, do you think it would hurt them? I think I'll go start a thread about that.

20 always hit and will double damage.
..
1 roll always misses... everyone is correct on this note.

I thought that was a house rule in most cases, I can't remember which if any rule books have rules on natural 1s.

If you mean modified rolls, well, modified 1-4s always miss, more broadly.

I would say that the statement "A natural twenty" is the wording.
It doesn't say "A natural twenty that is not reduced by other modifiers" it says "if you roll a natural twenty then..." that means that if you roll a n20 then you stop at that step and skip straight on to the 'do double damage' step the penalties and bonuses don't matter because they are skipped.

By this logic, natural 20s can also bypass immunities to damage. After all if "no damage" doesn't matter for natural AR, why should it matter for immunity to damage types?

it says it automatically hits and does damage.
..
It inflicts double damage. Period.

What are you doubling though?

Page 36 under Zombie Armor Rating:

any roll between 6-14 may hit the monster, but the zombie doesn't feel the impact, doesn't feel pain, and does NOT take damage

page 181

5-14 may hit, especially at close range, but does not surpass the AR 14 and does NO DAMAGE
Unless a roll to strike is higher than the zombie's Natural AR 14 it doesn't matter what the weapon is, it inflicts no damage.
You can stab, hit or shoot a zombie all day without inflicting damage unless your roll to strike is 15 (with modifiers/bonuses) or higher

I underlined a word in that last part for emphasis. WITH MODIFIERS. As in, if modifiers (penalties obviously being a modifier) result in the roll not being 15+, it does no damage.

"No" is an amount. It is 0. You can apply whatever math you like to that. Half of 0 is 0. Double or triple 0 is 0.

The people wanting to have the AR be able to stop the n20 will need to provide an explicit statement from the rules stating that modifiers DO apply to n20s for the purpose of calculating if it penetrates AR or not. Otherwise as written they are totally and utterly irrelevant.

I provided a quote from 181 about modifiers. It does not require singling out natural 20s any more than it does any other form of damage-doubling.

Instances we are told to ignore AR exist. One is the point-blank can't-miss attack on page 182, which only applies to firearms. That said, there's an "if you prefer" option where the author IMPLORES gamers to actually roll a D20 for a 1 to miss and a 20 to crit, 2-19 being normal. Though since it says "as usual" I think modifiers would apply here. What doesn't apply is the usual AR rules (needing to surpass 14) or even the usual hitting rules (needing to surpass 4) since even a 2 can hit.

I can't remember others, though I imagine stuff like walking through fire would apply, or automatic damage taken from being set on fire, or falling off a building, or similar situations where you don't bother with strike rolls at all.

That could just be house rules though, RAW it might well be that beings with even a NAR of 6 are suddenly immune to all damage which doesn't make rolls to hit. *shrug*

all I've found in Dead Reign and other game lines are statements that bonuses don't apply, and bonuses are not the only kind of modifiers. Well, or a statement that penalties are actually considered "negative bonuses" or something like that. Due to that, I can't find anything that actually fully rules out Axelmania's interpretation (despite the fact that I don't ultimately agree with it).

Heck, as written, since it only specifies that bonuses don't apply I'm not fully sure that we can disprove the interpretation that a natural 20 is only possible if there are no penalties to strike! (And to be clear, I'm not arguing for that interpretation, as I definitely don't think that it was intended that way.)

A natural 20 is still a natural 20 (an automatic "hit" which cannot be beaten by anything other than a natural defense") even if penalties result in it being a modified 19 or lower for purposes of surpassing AR.

Or in terms of called shots in older games: being an automatic "hit" doesn't mean you actually made your called shot. A natural 20 to strike with -10 in penalties bringing it below the 12 needed for called shots in older games (this is no longer how called shots work in RUE / Dead Reign / Shadow Chronicles, of course) would have just been a normal hit on the main body.

Which part about bonuses not applying are you referring to? If someone rolled a natural 20 and had -8 to strike and +6 to strike, I'd like to think the end result would be a -2 for a modified 18, still enough to surpass zombie AR, and not a modified 12, which would not be.

[eliakon]

[sup][/sup]

I think that rules as intended the natural 20 would bypass, but after reading the exact wording of things in Dead Reign, especially how the word "hit" is used in the section on natural AR on page 181, and I can see how someone might think that if you had a bunch of penalties on your strike roll you might roll a natural 20 but the modified result ends up 14 or lower, and you do no damage. I don't think that is what was intended, but I can't find a rule that says that upon rolling a natural 20 modifiers no longer apply. Absent that, I can't exclude the interpretation of the rules that they do apply to natural 20s, with the caveat that no matter how low it goes it still hits. So against a human in armor, you'd damage their armor. Against a zombie, you'd do double damage for 0.

It is similar to how you can roll a natural 20 to strike with a boom gun against a vampire and do a critical hit for no damage.

Once again, I don't think that was the intention, but I can't rule it out, either.

I would say that the statement "A natural twenty" is the wording.
It doesn't say "A natural twenty that is not reduced by other modifiers" it says "if you roll a natural twenty then..." that means that if you roll a n20 then you stop at that step and skip straight on to the 'do double damage' step the penalties and bonuses don't matter because they are skipped.
As such... the 20 ALWAYS surpasses the AR.

But the book defines what "natural" means for us. Under "death blow" it says "The attack is often limited in hand to hand combat to the roll of a 'Natural' (no bonuses apply) high number...." The "natural 20" rule itself a few pages later says "A Natural 20 is rolling the highest possible number (20) without adding any bonuses to the number rolled." The most natural reading of this is that all "natural 20" means is that you rolled a 20. In fact, given that it says that bonuses do not apply, as opposed to modifiers or bonuses and penalties, I can see how someone would read that a "natural" number could still be subject to penalties for the purposes of seeing if it overcomes AR or not. The rule says that a natural 20 always succeeds or beats an opponents roll, and AR is not a "roll," but a target number.

While your flow chart is how most people run it, and is indeed what I believe is intended, there isn't actually a clear statement in Dead Reign to indicate beyond a shadow of the doubt that it should be run that way.

It is though
It does not JUST say that it beats an opponents roll. it says it automatically hits and does damage.
Period.
It hits. Period
It inflicts double damage. Period.
If AR is able to apply then it will NOT inflict double damage.
Thus it will require a house rule to change the canon to allow that to happen because the books give us a flat, unequivocal statement that a natural 20 always hits and always does double damage. It does not have any qualifier about "unless there is a modifier that lowers the roll to be below the zombies AR in which case it does nothing" if that were the case it would be "a natural 20 will, if it ends up doing damage will do twice as much damage as normal" or some such. As that is NOT what is stated, then that is not what the rule is.
The people wanting to have the AR be able to stop the n20 will need to provide an explicit statement from the rules stating that modifiers DO apply to n20s for the purpose of calculating if it penetrates AR or not. Otherwise as written they are totally and utterly irrelevant.

Cases in Palladium's game lines where a natural 20 would not allow for the dealing of damage have already been cited (a mere mortal human punching a werewolf or a vampire, for example), and yet the natural 20 rule doesn't mention those exceptions. Since we know that it doesn't, and we know that the exceptions exist, the lack of a qualifier means nothing. We already know from those cases that a natural 20 is not actually a guarantee of doing damage, so one cannot argue that a natural 20 ALWAYS inflicts damage, only that it is always a critical strike. As Axelmania already pointed out, 0x2=0.

What one need to produces to make it clear that Axelmania's interpretation is not possible (and I'd love it if someone could produce it) is a statement that no modifiers of any kind, or no penalties, apply to a natural 20. Because all I've found in Dead Reign and other game lines are statements that bonuses don't apply, and bonuses are not the only kind of modifiers. Well, or a statement that penalties are actually considered "negative bonuses" or something like that. Due to that, I can't find anything that actually fully rules out Axelmania's interpretation (despite the fact that I don't ultimately agree with it).

Heck, as written, since it only specifies that bonuses don't apply I'm not fully sure that we can disprove the interpretation that a natural 20 is only possible if there are no penalties to strike! (And to be clear, I'm not arguing for that interpretation, as I definitely don't think that it was intended that way.)

Actually those DO matter.
The human rolls their damage (lets say 1d6) doubles it...
Applies it to the Creature. The creature then negates the damage because it has an ability that always negates damage from those sources regardless.
BUT that damage (lets say 3x2 so 6) will be what is used to calculate knock down for example. Which still applies.
The ability to negate damage is not the same as AR. Do not conflate the two.
Negation means that the damage doesn't exist. Period. Nothing, regardless of rolls and modifies will ever damage the subject.
Armor Rating though can be bypassed, and if bypassed the subject takes damage.
They are NOT the same, and the rules for the first do not apply to the second.
The better demonstration of this is to take your example to its logical extreme.
Because humans can not damage vampires
Then no matter what they roll they will not damage them.
Therefore the statement that you roll damage after determining hits is invalid.
Therefore no one can damage anyone because there is an example of when someone can not damage something.
It is absurd and demonstrates the absurdity of trying to argue that being immune to a specific form of damage proves that damage rolls do not happen at all which is what you are in fact stating by claiming that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability in every and all respects.
AKA it is a fallacy.

[dreicunan]

The better demonstration of this is to take your example to its logical extreme.
Because humans can not damage vampires
Then no matter what they roll they will not damage them.
Therefore the statement that you roll damage after determining hits is invalid.
Therefore no one can damage anyone because there is an example of when someone can not damage something.
It is absurd and demonstrates the absurdity of trying to argue that being immune to a specific form of damage proves that damage rolls do not happen at all which is what you are in fact stating by claiming that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability in every and all respects.
AKA it is a fallacy.

Yeah, that is a fallacy, but only on your part as you constructed a strawman. I never argued that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability. I did point out that there are situations in which a natural 20 is going to end up not inflicting any damage. You do indeed roll for damage after determining if something is a hit. A hit on a creature with a natural AR can be a hit that inflicts no damage (though yes, I suppose that one might still roll for the damage if using knockback rules). If you've found a clear and unequivocal statement that a natural 20 always beats AR, please share it.

[Axelmania]

BUT that damage (lets say 3x2 so 6) will be what is used to calculate knock down for example. Which still applies.

That could be useful, I remember knockdown rules for vampires in Rifts, can't remember if they made it into Dead Reign. Do they exist in one of the SDC systems?

In the case of rolling under natural AR, I guess that means kinetic damage should always be rolled.

How does that work with bullets and the like though? Or stabbing weapons?

the absurdity of trying to argue that being immune to a specific form of damage proves that damage rolls do not happen at all which is what you are in fact stating by claiming that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability in every and all respects. AKA it is a fallacy.

I'm having trouble following this back and forth with dreicunan Using invulnerability as an example of a way besides AR to take no damage from things isn't necessarily saying it's identical.

There are ways to bypass AR or reduce it which don't exist for powers like that.

[eliakon]

The better demonstration of this is to take your example to its logical extreme.
Because humans can not damage vampires
Then no matter what they roll they will not damage them.
Therefore the statement that you roll damage after determining hits is invalid.
Therefore no one can damage anyone because there is an example of when someone can not damage something.
It is absurd and demonstrates the absurdity of trying to argue that being immune to a specific form of damage proves that damage rolls do not happen at all which is what you are in fact stating by claiming that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability in every and all respects.
AKA it is a fallacy.

Yeah, that is a fallacy, but only on your part as you constructed a strawman. I never argued that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability. I did point out that there are situations in which a natural 20 is going to end up not inflicting any damage. You do indeed roll for damage after determining if something is a hit. A hit on a creature with a natural AR can be a hit that inflicts no damage (though yes, I suppose that one might still roll for the damage if using knockback rules). If you've found a clear and unequivocal statement that a natural 20 always beats AR, please share it.

No. You are saying that a hit doesn't count as a hit if it doesn't do damage.
And that if there is any way that there might not be damage then damage should always be ignored.
That is explicitly stating that nAR is the same as invulnerability (only better).
Besides throwing out the entire point of having the n20 rule in the first place, it literally does make nAR into invulnerability+.

[dreicunan]

The better demonstration of this is to take your example to its logical extreme.
Because humans can not damage vampires
Then no matter what they roll they will not damage them.
Therefore the statement that you roll damage after determining hits is invalid.
Therefore no one can damage anyone because there is an example of when someone can not damage something.
It is absurd and demonstrates the absurdity of trying to argue that being immune to a specific form of damage proves that damage rolls do not happen at all which is what you are in fact stating by claiming that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability in every and all respects.
AKA it is a fallacy.

Yeah, that is a fallacy, but only on your part as you constructed a strawman. I never argued that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability. I did point out that there are situations in which a natural 20 is going to end up not inflicting any damage. You do indeed roll for damage after determining if something is a hit. A hit on a creature with a natural AR can be a hit that inflicts no damage (though yes, I suppose that one might still roll for the damage if using knockback rules). If you've found a clear and unequivocal statement that a natural 20 always beats AR, please share it.

No. You are saying that a hit doesn't count as a hit if it doesn't do damage.
And that if there is any way that there might not be damage then damage should always be ignored.
That is explicitly stating that nAR is the same as invulnerability (only better).
Besides throwing out the entire point of having the n20 rule in the first place, it literally does make nAR into invulnerability+.

Palladium's own definition of a hit makes it possible for a hit to not result in the inflicting of damage. I can roll a 16 against an opponent with Natural AR 17. It hits him, because it is higher than 6, and I can roll damage to see if there is knockback, but no damage is inflicted. Palladium has separated the term hit from doing damage, not me!

Also, it is Palladium's rules for natural AR that state that hits that don't beat it inflict no damage (except against death blows, where the death blow still inflicts SDC damage). That is not the same as being invulnerable, and I'm confused as to why you think that I am arguing that they are the same thing (let alone that natural AR is better when it is beatable with a good roll while invulnerability is not). I only brought it up to show that a natural 20 does not automatically mean that damage is actually inflicted.

[eliakon]

Okay lets try walking through this again.
following the canon combat steps not the simplified home versions that most people play
Step 1 (initiative) you roll initiative.
Step 2a (determining hit) the person with highest initiative rolls to strike
<flow interrupt> n20 rule says you automatically hit so you skip directly from roll to step 3
Step 2b apply all bonuses (and penalties)
Step 2c determine if the strike is a hit.
Step 3 if the strike successfully hits (we skip here automatically because we hit and do have never applied the bonuses or penalties) the defender may parry or dodge (or other defense) the high roll wins and ties go to the defender. Under the special rules for n20s it says that a n20 beats any other roll.
Step 4 if the strike successfully hits determine if the strike penetrates the AR. We come into this step with a20 showing. Thus any AR of 19 or less is penetrated and any AR or 20 or greater is not penetrated.
Step 4b roll damage dice. at this stage apply all normal damage modifiers to the attack as normal.
<flow interrupt> the n20 rule states that the damage from 4b is doubled.
Step 4c defender may roll with impact at the cost of one melee action
End that attack, move on to the next highest initiative number.

Since the modifiers were never applied it doesn't matter how much they were.
Which is why it is still possible to harm people with wild shots and the like. With out this rule it is quite easy to have an AR of 1 provide complete immunity in more than a few cases, not to mention making things like zombies or vehicles effectively immune to gunfire (there are a LOT of penalties to high tech ranged combat but very few bonuses making it ludicrously easy for the flimsiest armors providing absolute protection from weapons fire from all but the most skilled antagonists... which negates the entire idea of the 'lucky shot' in the first place.

Example if you do not have the WP in the fire arm you are using (which is pretty common) you start with a flat -3.
so we are at 17 before we add in anything else
If its a burst, or at night, or the zombie is running, or you have to take a wild shot its starting to look like it sucks to be you.
And no matter what you do unless you have WP heavy you can fire all day into a zombie putting holes in it but not harming it with that 50cal machinegun (your n20s just turn into 12s. So sad)

<edit> In the damage calculation I made an error.
calculate the base damage of the attack. THEN apply any multiples that apply to the attack. Multiples are added not sequential so two X2 multiples become a X3 not a X4.
My error.

[dreicunan]

Okay lets try walking through this again.
following the canon combat steps not the simplified home versions that most people play
Step 1 (initiative) you roll initiative.
Step 2a (determining hit) the person with highest initiative rolls to strike
<flow interrupt> n20 rule says you automatically hit so you skip directly from roll to step 3
Step 2b apply all bonuses (and penalties)
Step 2c determine if the strike is a hit.
Step 3 if the strike successfully hits (we skip here automatically because we hit and do have never applied the bonuses or penalties) the defender may parry or dodge (or other defense) the high roll wins and ties go to the defender. Under the special rules for n20s it says that a n20 beats any other roll.
Step 4 if the strike successfully hits determine if the strike penetrates the AR. We come into this step with a20 showing. Thus any AR of 19 or less is penetrated and any AR or 20 or greater is not penetrated.
Step 4b roll damage dice. at this stage apply all normal damage modifiers to the attack as normal.
<flow interrupt> the n20 rule states that the damage from 4b is doubled.
Step 4c defender may roll with impact at the cost of one melee action
End that attack, move on to the next highest initiative number.

Since the modifiers were never applied it doesn't matter how much they were.
Which is why it is still possible to harm people with wild shots and the like. With out this rule it is quite easy to have an AR of 1 provide complete immunity in more than a few cases, not to mention making things like zombies or vehicles effectively immune to gunfire (there are a LOT of penalties to high tech ranged combat but very few bonuses making it ludicrously easy for the flimsiest armors providing absolute protection from weapons fire from all but the most skilled antagonists... which negates the entire idea of the 'lucky shot' in the first place.

Example if you do not have the WP in the fire arm you are using (which is pretty common) you start with a flat -3.
so we are at 17 before we add in anything else
If its a burst, or at night, or the zombie is running, or you have to take a wild shot its starting to look like it sucks to be you.
And no matter what you do unless you have WP heavy you can fire all day into a zombie putting holes in it but not harming it with that 50cal machinegun (your n20s just turn into 12s. So sad)

<edit> In the damage calculation I made an error.
calculate the base damage of the attack. THEN apply any multiples that apply to the attack. Multiples are added not sequential so two X2 multiples become a X3 not a X4.
My error.

Now, if Palladium did give something an AR of 20, does that mean that a natural 20 can't beat it but a roll of 19+2 for 21 can?

I think, perhaps, that we (or just I) may have gotten hung up on the idea that bonuses don't apply as a proscriptive rather than a descriptive issue. In other words, the statements about the bonuses are all just extra ways to make it clear that this means a 20 is showing on the d20. Bonuses and penalties still apply, they just don't normally matter.

Once again, I agree with your interpretation overall (except for the bonuses and penalties not applying thing), and in fact I think that a nat 20 beating AR is the intention, but I am still looking for an unequivocal statement in the rules that explicitly says that. I'm unaware of a flow chart that spells it out the way that you did.

[Axelmania]

..
I never argued that AR is to be treated identically to Invulnerability.
..

..
That is explicitly stating that nAR is the same as invulnerability (only better).
Besides throwing out the entire point of having the n20 rule in the first place, it literally does make nAR into invulnerability+.

Is anyone else having difficulty following the back-and-forth here? I'm wondering if we could backtrace to whatever it was you two originally said to each other? I'm not sure what statements are being interpreted here.

<flow interrupt> n20 rule says you automatically hit so you skip directly from roll to step 3
Step 2b apply all bonuses (and penalties)
..
(we skip here automatically because we hit and do have never applied the bonuses or penalties)

I don't see how this is true. While a natural 20 hits regardless of penalties or bonuses, I don't see it saying anywhere not to apply bonuses or penalties as they might apply for other purposes, like passing AR, getting extra damage on higher modified totals, or hitting what you called instead of hitting the main body (old system, no longer applicable)

Step 4 if the strike successfully hits determine if the strike penetrates the AR. We come into this step with a20 showing. Thus any AR of 19 or less is penetrated and any AR or 20 or greater is not penetrated.

I don't see support for this view. I believe a +1 to strike allows a natural 20 to beat AR 20+, while a -1 to strike only beats AR 18 or less on a natural 20.

Since the modifiers were never applied it doesn't matter how much they were.

I haven't seen evidence provided that you do not apply modifiers, though.

Which is why it is still possible to harm people with wild shots and the like.

Wild Shots are -6 to strike, that's a modified 14 on a natural 20. That's still plenty likely to bypass a lot of AR. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.

With out this rule it is quite easy to have an AR of 1 provide complete immunity in more than a few cases,

A natural AR of 1 requires a modified 2 or higher to surpass. This would only provide "complete immunity" to a natural 20 in the case of penalties of -18 or worse.

making things like zombies or vehicles effectively immune to gunfire (there are a LOT of penalties to high tech ranged combat but very few bonuses making it ludicrously easy for the flimsiest armors providing absolute protection from weapons fire from all but the most skilled antagonists... which negates the entire idea of the 'lucky shot' in the first place.

Having situations where penalties can accrue to bring a 20 down to AR isn't the same as immunity.

I don't really have a problem with a guy high on cocaine shooting a pistol from a mile away being unable to damage a zombie, personally.

What sort of situations are you imagining that you consider it a problem that penalties will reduce a natural 20 by -6 down to 14, failing to bypass a zombie's AR?

Example if you do not have the WP in the fire arm you are using (which is pretty common) you start with a flat -3.
so we are at 17 before we add in anything else

If its a burst, or at night, or the zombie is running, or you have to take a wild shot its starting to look like it sucks to be you.

It sounds like you are applying the same penalty twice here.

Page 179 mentions if you lack WP you are -3 to strike with burst attacks. This is repeated on the bottom of 180's left column and also the bottom of 180's right column.

A modified 17 will still surpass the NAR of 14.

You are correct that wild shots from untrained people are a problem. The -6 for this reduces the 20 to a 14, and will not surpass AR.

And no matter what you do unless you have WP heavy you can fire all day into a zombie putting holes in it but not harming it with that 50cal machinegun (your n20s just turn into 12s. So sad)

Keep in mind the "close combat firearm rules" on page 182 though.
1) pressed against (implied to be less than 1 inch by next section minimum) automatically bypasses AR.
2) 1-24 inches is +7 to strike the main body, +3 to strike head/neck/limb
2.5) greater than 2 feet, less than 3 feet: zombie sweet spot?
3) 3-15 feet: +2 to strike main body, +1 others
4) beyond 15: your concerns apply

While 179 says "1D20 with no bonuses", I think some GMs might interpret that as "none of the below bonuses which WP impart" rather than "no bonuses whatsoever", given that 183 doesn't mention anything about needing a WP to get the benefits.

Also, even if you do apply 179 to neutralize 183's bonuses, the "can't miss" (less than 1 inch) category is NOT a bonus, it is automatic AR bypass, so it would still apply to people without WP no matter what.