kinetic damage and power armor

[Esckey]

Well in a car crash what happens is that your car hits (whatever), you hit your car, and your organs hit each other and you.

In the case of getting hit in the head while wearing a helmet and still getting a concussion, helmet adds alot of protection, with out it you could probably split your skull, with it just a concussion cause your stationary brain gets hit by your moving skull

[grandmaster z0b]

That said why do people still suffer concussions wearing helmets? At the very least whip-lash from damn near every kinetic hit and a knock down. think about it its basically plate armor, maybe with some environmental hoodaddies. have your nearest ultimate larp dork who owns plate armor suit up and crack him in the chest with a bat. ask him if it hurts.

plus its always fun to wack people with a bat. (currently hiding my small collection of swords)

Don't ask LARP dorks - they rarely know anything about real armor, you need to ask a re-enactor. Unfortunately the only real re-enacting I know about in America is civil war. Anyway I'm extremely familiar with wearing armor and I've been struck in the head with swords and axes more times than I remember and I've never really been hurt. Helmets are not just hard shells, they would all have various layers of padding about an inch think all up, in fact of all the places to be hit when wearing armor often the helmet is the safest as it has the most protection.
I have been hit almost full force in the breastplate with a two handed axe (blunt but correct weight and made of steel) and it dosen't hurt or impart all that much energy into you. The guy that hit me was a 6'3 blacksmith built like a tank, I'm only 5'6 but I only moved back a bit and it left a dint in my breastplate (I've left it in it looks cool).

[Shiva7]

People in MD armour do take damage... 1 SDC for every 10 MD of kinetic damage. Power arour is strong enough to prevent any damage to the pilot.

[grandmaster z0b]

there is that. maybe I am wrong. I don't think so. cause I am also right.

I don't know if your talking to me but I can tell you that I'm not lying, but then again what would I know? I've never been hit by a rail gun blast but who has? I have only been training with arms and armor for 15 years (since I was 11) but that shouldn't mean anything.

When you have a authentic steel breast plate that's been made specifically for you and have been hit by weapon then you may understand.

Oh and if I've miss-interpreted your post I apologise

[Athos]

got to thinking about railguns and kinetic/concussion(shockwaves) and mdc armor. unless the armors have counter inertial compensators (or something have no idea what the 'tech' would actually be) getting hit with an object that is accelerated to a high enough speed to do md, then when it hits armor, wouldn't the kinetic energy proceed through the armor, and body turning it to jelly?

md damage from lasers can be accounted by mdc alloy spreading heat over the whole armor so its energy is diffuse. kinetic energy is much more difficult to diffuse.

anyway just ranting a little bit....

Modern tank armor is being designed to be reactive in the same way that I would imagine rifts armor works. When hit, it counter explodes that panel to create an opposite directional explosion. The idea is that there are panels of armor, each like airbags, that when hit with enough force, "counter-explode" the incoming round to neutralize it.

[Dustin Fireblade]

People in MD armour do take damage... 1 SDC for every 10 MD of kinetic damage. Power arour is strong enough to prevent any damage to the pilot.

Yep what I do, just keep it simple like that

[The Galactus Kid]

Is that an official rule?

Anyway, to keep players away from the "I take the railgun blast, and keep running" situations, I use the knock down table in the RIFTS GMG.

[Athos]

oops double post

[Athos]

Is that an official rule?

Rifts Main Book page 12

[Shiva7]

Is that an official rule?

Anyway, to keep players away from the "I take the railgun blast, and keep running" situations, I use the knock down table in the RIFTS GMG.

Knockdown rules should most definitely apply to all kinetic damage.

[Nekira Sudacne]

the MDC armor absorbs it all. it's like shooting a tank. not enough really goes though.

[Shiva7]

the MDC armor absorbs it all. it's like shooting a tank. not enough really goes though.

Sorry, but kinetic energy doesn't just get absorbed with out an equal and opposite reaction

By your logic, driving a car into an armoured person would do no damage and would not knock them down because a tank would neiter take damage nor get knocked back.

[Dr. Doom III]

Sorry, but kinetic energy doesn't just get absorbed with out an equal and opposite reaction

By your logic, driving a car into an armoured person would do no damage and would not knock them down because a tank would neiter take damage nor get knocked back.

The reaction is the projectile bounces off.

[Dr. Doom III]

f=ma

A man being hit by any of the kinetic weapons is going to go flying. Especially if you buy the line that a rail gun does 100-500 times more damage (more force) than a regular bullet.

Does someone firing the weapon that fires this projectile go flying too?
Equal and opposite and all that.

[Shiva7]

Sorry, but kinetic energy doesn't just get absorbed with out an equal and opposite reaction

By your logic, driving a car into an armoured person would do no damage and would not knock them down because a tank would neiter take damage nor get knocked back.

The reaction is the projectile bounces off.

You know better than that Doom, the Knockdown rules apply for any kinetic attack over 10 MD. The rules are optional, but that is why I said they should apply, not that they must.

Also, the Railguns have strength requirments for the operators, that is why you don't usually see no-augmented soldiers using them unless they are mounted ona tripod or vehicle.

As for a car crashing into an armoured person, the victim would certainly get knocked down and take damage according to the rules on page 12 of the RMB.

MDC body armour doesn't turn a person into a tank.

[Dr. Doom III]

MDC body armour doesn't turn a person into a tank.

Actually it does.

[Killer Cyborg]

Is that an official rule?

Rifts Main Book page 12

Works for explosions, not railguns.

[Nekira Sudacne]

the MDC armor absorbs it all. it's like shooting a tank. not enough really goes though.

Sorry, but kinetic energy doesn't just get absorbed with out an equal and opposite reaction

By your logic, driving a car into an armoured person would do no damage and would not knock them down because a tank would neiter take damage nor get knocked back.

you don't take damage. rail guns don't knock people over.

let me put it this way, if there WAS damage to the person inside the armor for rail gun damage, there would be rules for it.

sinse there are none, it's logical that there is something in the armor that makes it so no damage carries over.

[Shiva7]

you don't take damage. rail guns don't knock people over.

let me put it this way, if there WAS damage to the person inside the armor for rail gun damage, there would be rules for it.

sinse there are none, it's logical that there is something in the armor that makes it so no damage carries over.

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

[Dr. Doom III]

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

Knock back/down does not equal hurt.

[Nekira Sudacne]

you don't take damage. rail guns don't knock people over.

let me put it this way, if there WAS damage to the person inside the armor for rail gun damage, there would be rules for it.

sinse there are none, it's logical that there is something in the armor that makes it so no damage carries over.

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

similar, not actually, therefor, except for knocking people down, the rules for inside damage do not apply.

[Borast]

Modern tank armor is being designed to be reactive in the same way that I would imagine rifts armor works. When hit, it counter explodes that panel to create an opposite directional explosion. The idea is that there are panels of armor, each like airbags, that when hit with enough force, "counter-explode" the incoming round to neutralize it.

Which is why the "newest" tank rounds and Anti-Armour missiles have a probe on the "nose"... The probe sets-off the RA, and the shell then impacts the newly revealed armour section. Or atleast it's what I've heard...

[Athos]

For every improvement there must be a counter improvement. That is why technology advances so fast in certain fields.

I haven't seen the probe nosed rounds ( I got out of the Army in '92 so my knowledge is out of date these days ) but it is a logical improvement. Imagine a couple hundred years of advancements like this and I can see why "modern" weapons cannot hurt MDC technology.

[Borast]

The idea was first encountered by myself while playing carwars in high school...

One thing SJG always did was research... ALL of the weapons systems and ammunitions were based on RL items.

[Shiva7]

you don't take damage. rail guns don't knock people over.

let me put it this way, if there WAS damage to the person inside the armor for rail gun damage, there would be rules for it.

sinse there are none, it's logical that there is something in the armor that makes it so no damage carries over.

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

similar, not actually, therefor, except for knocking people down, the rules for inside damage do not apply.

Where did "similar" come from? The force of a rail gun in equal to a mini-missile (explosive), thus the 10MDC = 1 SDC rule can apply.

There for Rail guns can do both, knock back/down and hurt people in armour, but if you want to ignore what is written, then there's not much I can do to make understand the rules.

[Vrykolas2k]

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

Knock back/down does not equal hurt.

Agrees with Doom, to large extent. Now, if a rail-gun shoots you in the arm or leg, you're going to go spinning. Whether you are injured would depend upon how much of the energy is absorbed. I play rugby, and I get knocked around quite a bit but... usually, I wouldn't consider myself to have taken any damage. Guys somtimes wear thin pads on the field and it seems to help... and that padding is VERY thin.

[Killer Cyborg]

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

The passage you quote doesn't say in what way a railgun burst is "the equivilant" of a mini-missile.
From the context, I'd say it is referring to the damage capacity... which is NOT the same as the force.

[PigLickJF]

"Also, the force of an attack, especially from missiles and rail guns, may knock a character off his feet." RMB, p. 12.

"The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivalent of a mini-missile." CB1, p. 9

So indeed, railguns can be considered akin to explosions. The force they pack has the ability to hurt people in MDC armour.

The passage you quote doesn't say in what way a railgun burst is "the equivilant" of a mini-missile.
From the context, I'd say it is referring to the damage capacity... which is NOT the same as the force.

Actually, I'd say according to context it does mean the force, but only insofar as it applies to knockback, which is what the rest of the paragraph goes on to describe. If railgun blasts were included in the list of things that damage through armor, it should have appeared someplace up in the prvious scetion which described just that, but it doesn't.

Although personally, I think allowing railguns to both do knockback and apply SDC damage through armor is a decent ruling, but it's defeinitely not canon.

PigLick

[Killer Cyborg]

I'd say according to context it does mean the force, but only insofar as it applies to knockback, which is what the rest of the paragraph goes on to describe.

I was referring to the quote in the Conversion Book (p.9) that he was citing.

It was in a section dissusing the rates of fire for various MD weapons
The context is this:

"The rail gun is a machin-gun like weapon designed to fire controlled and predesigned bursts. Typically, a burst fires 30 to 40 rounds with every one shot. Thus, a character with five attacks per melee can shoot five bursts for a total of 150 to 200 rounds. The damage listing for an individual round is given for informational purposes only. Each burst is given a mega-damage range (6d6, 1d4x10, etc.) for quick game combat. The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivilant of a mini-missile. NOTE: It takes about one melee action to reload a railgun ammo-drum/belt."

The sentence seems tossed in at random, so the precist context is unclear, but it has nothing to do with knockdown.
Since the sentence comes right after listing the damage for an average railgun burst, and since the next paragraph discusses automatic energy weapons doing "the samage damage as a rail gun by firing one long burst", it seems to me that the only reason for the comparison is that the damage is comperable.

[PigLickJF]

I'd say according to context it does mean the force, but only insofar as it applies to knockback, which is what the rest of the paragraph goes on to describe.

I was referring to the quote in the Conversion Book (p.9) that he was citing.

It was in a section dissusing the rates of fire for various MD weapons
The context is this:

"The rail gun is a machin-gun like weapon designed to fire controlled and predesigned bursts. Typically, a burst fires 30 to 40 rounds with every one shot. Thus, a character with five attacks per melee can shoot five bursts for a total of 150 to 200 rounds. The damage listing for an individual round is given for informational purposes only. Each burst is given a mega-damage range (6d6, 1d4x10, etc.) for quick game combat. The concentrated burst from a rail gun is the equivilant of a mini-missile. NOTE: It takes about one melee action to reload a railgun ammo-drum/belt."

The sentence seems tossed in at random, so the precist context is unclear, but it has nothing to do with knockdown.
Since the sentence comes right after listing the damage for an average railgun burst, and since the next paragraph discusses automatic energy weapons doing "the samage damage as a rail gun by firing one long burst", it seems to me that the only reason for the comparison is that the damage is comperable.

Ah, ok, I'm with ya. I agree that sentence is thrown in there pretty randomly, so who knows what the heck KS meant. Either way it seems pretty clear that, by canon, railguns dont' do SDC damage against targets wearing MDC armor.

PigLick

[Shiva7]

The passage you quote doesn't say in what way a railgun burst is "the equivilant" of a mini-missile.
From the context, I'd say it is referring to the damage capacity... which is NOT the same as the force.

It is the kinetic energy of the explosive, the force of the blast wave that does the damage and the knockdown, they are llinked. You can't have a devastting HE blast without a powerful knockdown.

Railguns are kinetic energy weapons. It is the force of the impact that does the damage, and if the damage is equal to an explsive, than so must the force be. So indeed, Railguns are the equivalent of Mini-missiles.

Heck, the Knockdown rules even include heavy energy blasts, which have far less kinetic force than both rail guns and missiles, yet they can knock a human in armour down if the damage exceeds 10 MD.

Explain the differece between a person in armour taking a HE mini-missile to the chest and a person in armour taking a MD punch doing the same amount of damage.

[Killer Cyborg]

Well, the difference is this:

According to the rules, the explosive damage will damage the SDC person inside the armor.
The punch will not.

[grandmaster z0b]

as to the knock back part of the argument I challenge anyone to armor up in any sort of person armor and I will sacrifice my fist to see if they react to it. now think of something moving much faster hitting a solid object. if the object doesnt give(like jello or a sdc wall) there will be knockback.

I volunteer! Next time your in the southern hemisphere I'll get armored up and you can punch me as many times as you want (before you break your fist/wrist). My brother did this to me the other day and the breastplate buckled in for a microsecond and then sprang back. This is what happens to the momentum of a strike in real armor. If armor is too hard (and therefore too brittle) it is not good protection because it would transfer all the energy into the wearer.
Real armor works because it is strong and flexible, also don't forget that inch of padding between you and the armor, which will absorb a lot of the impact.
Actually this is the problem I have with some of the descriptions (both pictoral and literary) of Rifts armor. It looks too much like hard thick plates with no articulation or padding.

[grandmaster z0b]

man your missing the point. you get hit with enough kinetic energy you will bounce back. your friend the blacksmith hit you with a blunted axe?! good for you I bet you at the very least started to shift back to counter the impact.

I think your missing the point, in your last post you said punch and I responded to your post saying I have been punched in armor and I didn't move back. I explained that because armor should be flexible the kinetics are taken by the movement of the armor and not by your body.
Look dude, unless you have some example or evidence don't just contradict me, or did you think this was an intelligent response ?

there is that. maybe I am wrong. I don't think so. cause I am also right.

Yes I did move a little when I was hit by my mate, but I'm talking my torso moved an inch backward, and yeah I was bracing myself. But I wasn't arguing that this is what I was arguing

have your nearest ultimate larp dork who owns plate armor suit up and crack him in the chest with a bat. ask him if it hurts.

It dosen't hurt, shure you can feel the impact but it dosen't hurt.

[SkyeFyre]

Ok... on the same topic. I just thought I'd ask in here instead of starting an entirely new thread.

The other night in our gaming session one of the players had gotten his hand on a japanese SAMAS power armor. Now the rest of the party was busy running (or one guy was fighting) a GlitterBoy... (The guy fighting died... roll up a new character) anyways... the guy piloting the SAMAS flew around shooting at the Glitterboy for a while and then decided that a better way to take it out would be to simply kill the pilot. So he dived down at top speed 330mph or something if I recall correctly... anyways that was still overkill. Now he smashed into the glitterboy, and then smashed him into the ground at the same speed. According to the rule for damage while in armor, would the glitterboy pilot take the damage?

The way I had the outcome. Both the player AND the glitterboy pilot took the same amount of damage, because both were impacting at an extremely high speed, putting the GB pilot into a coma and injuring the player, but the player would survive to fight another day. So... my question is... did I handle this correctly? If so... I think he's got a new way of dealing with power armor.

[Athos]

the guy piloting the SAMAS flew around shooting at the Glitterboy for a while and then decided that a better way to take it out would be to simply kill the pilot. So he dived down at top speed 330mph or something if I recall correctly... anyways that was still overkill. Now he smashed into the glitterboy, and then smashed him into the ground at the same speed. According to the rule for damage while in armor, would the glitterboy pilot take the damage?

The way I had the outcome. Both the player AND the glitterboy pilot took the same amount of damage, because both were impacting at an extremely high speed, putting the GB pilot into a coma and injuring the player, but the player would survive to fight another day. So... my question is... did I handle this correctly? If so... I think he's got a new way of dealing with power armor.

According to the Rifts Main Book page 12, both pilots would have taken 30d4 damage to SDC or hit points from that speed of a crash. That averages out to 75 points of damage. At that speed, according to the rules, there is a 100% chance of being stunned from the collision.

The logic is that even though the MD armor can take that kind of crash, the pilot inside is still "rattled and slammed around". The book calls this impact damage.

Yes, I think you have hit on a clever way for a high SDC pilot to take out a Glitter boy. Although if the Glitter Boy dodges and the SAMAS hits the ground at 330 mph, that would really suck for the SAMAS.

[grandmaster z0b]

Actually here's fun fact: Did you know that a mace is not designed to hit the main torso, but the opponent's head? It's not even made to dent a helm, but to shake the brain inside, which is what does damage. Which to me means that a boxer with adequete hand protection could do some damage to an opponent in body armour. After all most strikes are high chest/head area.

You're exactly right about the Mace, although it can be used against other areas (especially the joints) to good effect. I've also seen Maces leave large dents and even smash holes in plate. Unfortunately the boxer's hand just dosen't have the mass that a heavy weight on the end of a stick has (a mace), so it isn't quite the same.

If you take a baseball bat and smash it into an unarmoured man, he'll go 'ow' and fall down. If you take the same Louisville Slugger to a man in full plate, he'll fall down, minus the 'ow'. I should know, I've tried it. Replica Full Plate and my favourite bat. Broke it, but I knocked my physics teacher over.

Cool, what do you mean by Replica plate? Was it steel, did it have padding and was it made and fitted to your physics teacher? Also where did you hit him (I presume in the torso) and how much movement did he have in it? I'm not surprised he wasn't hurt, but usually people wouldn't even fall down unless he didn't have time to brace himself.

[Killer Cyborg]

the guy piloting the SAMAS flew around shooting at the Glitterboy for a while and then decided that a better way to take it out would be to simply kill the pilot. So he dived down at top speed 330mph or something if I recall correctly... anyways that was still overkill. Now he smashed into the glitterboy, and then smashed him into the ground at the same speed. According to the rule for damage while in armor, would the glitterboy pilot take the damage?

First, a simple answer:

Main Rifts Book, p. 12 (italics added)
"A character in body armor or human sized power armor can also suffer impact damage from falls at great height, or high speed crashes, or from explosions."

The Glitterboy is definitely NOT human sized. It's 10' tall.
The SAMAS is 8' tall, so I'd say that it doesn't qualify either.
Technically, neither pilot would take damage from the crash.


Now for a more elaborate answer:

On the other hand, if you really think that the crash should damage the pilots, you could look at both suits of Power Armor as Vehicles.
Rifts does not seem to have damage specifically for vehicle crashes, but HU2 does so I'll use it.
On p.89, under Damage & Crash rules, we get the following results:

The Glitterboy weighs more out of the two suits, so its weight is used to determine damage. Since the crash occurred at speeds less than 720 MPH, the damage would be 1d8 per 10 mph.
So that would be 33d8 SDC to each vehicle.
Characters "wearing seat belts or space suits take only half damage from crashes. Characters not wearing seat belts and suits take double damage from crashes.
The GB's Pilot suit would count as a space suit, so he would only take half damage.
The SAMAS pilot is wearing only the SAMAS armor, which may or may not count as a space suit.

One more thing to consider is that these rules were written for standard Vehicles, not Power Armor.
While most vehicles cannot effectively Roll With Impact, power armor can.
So I'd allow the Glitterboy to roll with impact.

The GB pilot would take roughly 33d4 SDC, and be able to roll for half damage. Basically the way you did things.
The SAMAS would take either 33d8 SDC or 33d4 SDC depending on GM interpretation, and he would NOT be able to roll with impact.

Or you could choose to count the power armor as a Suit and a Vehicle... in which case the Glitterboy's damage would be halved twice (once for the GB armor, and once for the pilot armor) and the SAMAS' damage would be halved only once.
Meaning the SAMAS pilot would take 33d4 SDC and the GB pilot would take 15d4 SDC (with the ability to roll for half).

[Neo]

hehe still giggling about how my subject brings the physics dorks out

Hey I like Physics! and Dorks! Horray for people smarter then me!

[Killer Cyborg]

Hey I like Physics! and Dorks!

You like dorks...?
Not that there's anything wrong with that....

[grandmaster z0b]

If you take a baseball bat and smash it into an unarmoured man, he'll go 'ow' and fall down. If you take the same Louisville Slugger to a man in full plate, he'll fall down, minus the 'ow'. I should know, I've tried it. Replica Full Plate and my favourite bat. Broke it, but I knocked my physics teacher over.

Cool, what do you mean by Replica plate? Was it steel, did it have padding and was it made and fitted to your physics teacher? Also where did you hit him (I presume in the torso) and how much movement did he have in it? I'm not surprised he wasn't hurt, but usually people wouldn't even fall down unless he didn't have time to brace himself.

Actually, momentum of the blow did it. He was well braced, and I was/am not a big boy. As for the term 'replica' means it was crafted out of modern steel, more protective for it's weight (It weighed the assumed 40 lbs. all told.) and it had softer padding. In fact according to Mr. Lark, it was as close to a full weight movie replica as one could afford. (Did I mention the kook was rich, and he teached science cuz he loved it? God I miss him. He took me to a couple of SCA events as he was an avid SCA'er...)

warning going significantly off topic

The SCA's arms and armour aren't necessarily a really good indication of accuracy, that's not exactly what they're into. That's why they're called the SCA (Society for Creative Anachronisms [or something]) they don't recreate history, they recreate it as they'd like it to be. They're "swords" are sticks of Rattan (like bamboo), and I've seen some really good SCA armor but also some weird and wacky armor. I'm in a similar group but we use almost totally authentic metal weapons and armor (see me below with armor and sword in guard position). Making things the way they were made originally makes a big difference, they had hundreds of years of warfare to test the designs so you realise they knew exactly what they were doing.
Note: I'm not trying to prove any superiority here or put down the SCA, I'm just pointing out that if you want to know how armor works it's best to go to the original sources - or ask me

EDIT: because I keep making idiotic mistakes

[sHaka]

People in MD armour do take damage... 1 SDC for every 10 MD of kinetic damage. Power arour is strong enough to prevent any damage to the pilot.

I use this system for most high powered impacts, whether through explosions or rail-gun blasts. It might not be realistic, but if I wanted realism i'd have given up on RIFTS years ago.

As far as high speed crashes go, I work out the MDC damage that the armour takes, then apply 1 SDC damage to the pilot, passengers for every 10 MDC. I don't allow to vehicle occupants to roll for impact, they just get hurt (which I think is quite realistic). Quick, simple and allows my game to continue rather than turn into a physics symposium.