Forums of the Megaverse®

I've been mulling this concept over for about a month now, and I wanted to lay out the framework to see what you people think of it.

SDC and MDC are so abstract that it brings about dumb oversights within the game. For instance, a well-trained combatant (someone with a high + to strike) can "beat-up" an M1-Abrams with his bare fists, destroying the tank; all he has to do is beat the AR.

So what I propose is a different SDC/MDC system; a "rating" system. It works like this...

Say (for example) an inch thick plate of steel effectively repelled any an all small arms fire without degrading. Now say the "largest" of the small arms was 7.62mm FMJ rifle round. The round fired does 5d6 damage, so the armour has a protection rating of 5d6. Now, a special solid-core 7.62 round is used that does 6d6 damage; that would do an effective 1d6 damage past the armour to the structure itself.

It is important to note the type of dice as well, as this will affect all weaponry in the future. The next level of protection say is an Abrams' Chotbram armour (or whatever it's called); this armour has a protection factor of 5d8. Unless a weapon does d8 type damage, it will not penetrate the armour unless it is has an order of magnitude behind the blow equal to the number of d8's the armour protects against (6d6 will not penetrate, but 50d6 will). Count every 10 dice of the lower damage type as one dice of the higher for armour penetration purposes. any actual damage that get through though is done to the full amount rolled.
The example of this would be 6d8 would do 1d8 damage past the Abram's armour, and 56d6 would do 5d6 past it.

You will have to play around with weapon damages for a while to achieve an acceptable balance, or you can wait for me to do it.

Weapon types will also change; the higher the dice type will indicate the quality of attack, where as the number of dice indicates the force. Higher quality weaponry will always penetrate lower quality armour to a point; 1d8 will be blocked by 10d6 armour for instance.


So, what do you think?

I like the idea, In theory, and it would make a good game mechanic.

Applying it to palladium, however, is a little cumbersome.

I say run with it, and use it as part of your own game system.

Batts

Iczer wrote:Applying it to palladium, however, is a little cumbersome.

Cumbersome?

Elaborate.

gadrin wrote:I think he means that most GMs already know what types of things they'd allow and won't allow, like someone beating up a tank with his bare-hands.

In a comic book game it makes sense, in Rifts much less so. In other words when player punches tank, hand breaks; no roll for AR, no damage to tank, you still have one good hand left. Another punch ?

Supernatural strength? Robotic Strength? Juiced? These are all exceptions to that rule. Others could include a sufficiently padded glove, like a sap-glove. These provide excellent cusioning; I know because I've hit a cement pillar with one on and I didn't even flinch at the minute amount of pain associated with it.

gadrin wrote:That sort of thing. I think most of PB's melee is already slow and drawn out, adding more die-rolls to the process seems to complicate things further, but you have to decide for yourself.

Which brings me to my next post. This is the crucial part that I completely forgot about, as I was in a hurry.

PART II

This next bit will help speed up combat immensely when coupled with the above. It also helps curve the power of previously "choice" weapons, such as the NG45-LP or the JA-12.

Cut all SDC and MDC in half.
This coupled with the increased damage weapons will do (haven't offered a sample of those yet) will make combat more realistic and gritty, yet keep that heroic edge the MDC environment provides. Your body armour will still have 20-50 points of MDC, but now that man-portable heavy plasma weapon will shorten up the fight considerably - offering that PC's will be able to quickly decide whether fight or flight is in order.

A good example of this would be the NG Mobile Gun. That cannon it sports is large and useless. It does the same damage a man-portable weapon. But change the dice so that it is doing like 8-10d8 ( the equivalent of 2d4x10) and now it anihilates personal body armour while maintaining excellent protection against small-arms fire (would have like 5d8 armour rating in addition to MDC).

Another option with this system is that any weapon not capable of breaking the armour rating would be to have it do minimum damage (assuming it's MDC versus MDC of course).

This would require a large amount of damage type conversion on your part, or you could wait for me to detail the specifics of weapon changes here.

Another note: this also shows an artificial "cap" that weapons can achieve while damaging a target. A high-powered laser (for example) can only destroy so much before it punches a pin-hole out the other side. That lasers might be restricted to say 3 dice of a type might reflect this. Weak laser do 3d4, modern lasers do 3d6, vehicular and PA laser weapons do 3d8, and large laser cannons do 3d10 damage. The increases would be minimal from one stage to another when damaging a target, but you can see that the larger, more powerful lasers scythe through armour like it was nothing.

PART III

Damage conversion. This is easy for me because Rifts rules actually help in this manner. Gun details in the books is detailed and plentiful, with real-world accuracy even if the rules interpret the stats funny sometimes.

The first step here is to make a unified stat for weapon groups and types. This can be based on the physical characteristics of the weapon.
Small arms, usually anything smaller than a .50 calibre machinegun round does xd6 type damage. For lasers and other energy weapons, any man-sized rifle or pistol falls into this category (for now). Also, low-tech plasma weapons (like the C-27, but not the C-29) fall under this category as well. All these weapons do xd6 damage.

Larger weapons, specifically railguns and "giant" versions of pistols and rifles do xd8 damage. This also includes Most plasma weaponry, regardless of size. weapons that are .50 calibre or larger, up to 40mm do xd8 damage as well. Most mini-missiles do xd8 damage as well.

The largest weapons, such as "giant" railguns, main cannons, and energy weapons only heftable by giant robots do xd10 damage. Short-range and futher missiles do xd10 damage as well.


Unfortunately I have to leave right now (thought I had more time), so part three here just became part three A.

More later.

PART III-B

Gauging the weapon.

This is where the "tough" part comes into play here. You've gotta eye-ball weaponry so that it is doing appropriate damage.

This I will suggest having a damage cap. for. That is, weaponry of a given category does 1-6dx damage. The weaker the weapon, the lower the dice. An AK-47 does 5d6 per round fired. A Desert Eagle does 4d6 per round fired. Feel free to modify this damage further with a plus (or minus!) up to the number of dice used. For instance if you wanted to differenciate between the D. Eagle and the S&W 500 you could say that the S&W 500 does 4d6+2.

Thoughts on this method - There has always been something that has bothered me with firearms within games; it's that they have the gun and not the round fired with the damage listed. It's like listing that .22's will forever deal only 2d6 SDC, when if you've ever seen a .22 magnum or a .22 hornet in action, you know this is not the case. Obviously we can't get into such elaboration as to how much grain is in a bullet, the shape, the powder charge, etc... as this is "anal". We'll just eyeball the guns, offering that maybe some do more than others based on a more arbitrary scale. Within reason.
Obviously energy weapons cause a problem for this method; but we can counter-act this by looking at what they've got going on in the book.
On average, lasers do a maximum of 3d6 per shot. Particle Beams do more. Plasma does even more than this, but the ranges are affected in reverse (re: lasers shoot further).

For these weapons, look at their physical characteristics. The particle beam cannon mounted on top of the Jager PA suit for instance is an awful weapon as-is. You could use almost a dozen other weapons that are more cost efficient than it is. Change its damage type though (say to 5d8) and all of a sudden armoured targets are nothing to it. This works well against those unarmoured gargoyles as well since they have half their normal MDC amount. All this tends to make battles go a little quicker, save on the constant revolving door to the repair shops, and instill a hint of realism and fear into the game (will my armour hold?). People tend to watch how much MDC they've taken, as if its "power level" were measureable and monitored by some kind of dragonball Z scouter. Now it's more like, "that was an effective hit, can't take too many more of those or I'm toast!" Or " The armour will hold! keep up the attack!"

Unfortunately I don't have access to my books here (at work) so I can't pick through and show some conversions on the matter. This really is a double-edged sword too as if I were at home with my books, I'd just be temped to play Company of Heroes. But I will try to resist my perfered form of crack to offer up a usable list of weapons.


PART IV

The d4. I've purposely avoided this die-type because of its special use and interaction within this system.

The d4 type damage doesn't break armour in the usual fashion; it does often go over the limit though. Armour has its two values added together to resist d4 type damage; 1d6 armour (the lightest of flakjackets) would have protection 7.
This may seem like an additional complication for the system, but it elaborates on two types of damage; bludgeoning (or crushing) and fire or flame-like weapons. Weapons that deal say 3d4 MD fire have a good chance of just washing over and cooking those inside. For instance, that light flakjacket will protect against the fire a little bit, but on a good roll the wearer is done for.
That is, he takes the excess damage right through the jacket!

Normally the Jacket's MD would suck this up, but instead he is taking the brunt of the flame. This is different of EBA and ABC approved vehicles; instead of dealing straight mega-damage to the occupants, killing them instantly, they instead 1d4x10 SDC for every full 4 points of MD that gets through (that is, 1-4 deals 1d4x10, 5-8 deals 2d4x10, etc...). MD creatures just take the MD (obviously). This is also true of crushing attacks, to a lesser extent.Crushing your opponent is a tough proposition - especially since your damage will most likely be significantly reduced.

I've yet to work out a proper (or rather satisfying) method for strength damage, but it will work something like this.
Strength-based attacks can be used in one of two ways; adding to weapon damage, or crushing your opponent. Unless you happen to be an absolute freak of nature with "normal" strength (re: not augmented, robotic, or supernatural), you're unlikely to be able to squish an armoured opponent.
But if you happen to have any of the above (in brackets), you can use your strength (now added in d4's instead of any previous numbers or dice) to your roll (and this will probably be the only dice you will roll!). Wrestling (the skill) will have an obvious advantage to this, what with the "crushing attack" offered and all. You can add this to your roll. Work this out like you would a grapple attempt (you gotta get ahold of your target in order to squish it). A crushing attempt takes the full round of 4 melee actions, which ever comes first (no waiting 'til your last action just to crush either - this is up to the GM obviously). I figured this would be a good marker for how easy it is to crush opponents with supernatural strength.
Alternately you can just hit your foe with a heavy object, instead doing half damage (since d4's do not break any type of armour) divided again in half to your opponent and his armour. This is with a bludgeoning weapon.

Attacks made based on strength and some other type of weapon (like claws or a spear) do regular damage based on the weapon. If the weapon cannot pierce the armour, it instead does damage to the armour as if it were a d4 (add the overall value together, then subtract that total from the damage). Your average sword (3d6) will cut into personal body armour regardless of quality (1-3d6) but by how much is now more appropriate (that 3d6 will cut the armour about 50% of the time).
Get abitrary with the damage of melee weapons! If a soldier charges into a foe with bayonet at the end of a rifle, offer that he does 1-2d6 extra on that charge.
With lighter vibro-weapons (like knives) their use is now more against foes without full eba, or no armour at all. These weapons can still cut into an MD material, but they'll do something like 1 MD per minute of cutting. Luckly you can't dull the vibro-field.

I'll clarify this stuff in a summary post. If you want me to, that is.


Final note there; most weapons will see a MAJOR reduction in damage, notably explosives and fire. This might seem like a nerf, but What I will say is that these weapons are now dealing massive area damage to a target. All appropriate locations capable of taking damage do so. If the hand of a creature has 10 MD and your flame-thrower is doing 2d4 MD, his hand as well as his arm, leg, torso, etc... are taking 2d4 MD. If you feel this is too deadly, You can instead take all the extra damage and just apply it against the main body. Shape-charged explosives are best relegated to do this.

Hey, this leads me onto another train of thought. Prepare for Part V....

PART V

The hit locations.

Many games, both computer and table-top do get into the hit locations of a target. In Palladium I always felt it was just a little cumbersome and clunky to offer hit locations that took multiple shots to destroy, and were very hard to hit for a simple "disable" attempt. Shooting the exhaust of a SAMAS suit for instance is no easy task; the penalties often make your cost effectiveness go out the window, ensuring that only main-body hits will be used.

In addition, this makes the previous part IV elaboration on fire and explosive attacks super-deadly. What I propose is that the number of locations be either simplified or reduced.

You do not need a "hand" location to hit, but rather an abitrary "hitting the hand with this weapon will disable it" works. An arm location is good; large enough that it justifies it's own "spot" Humans (for instance) would be Head, Torso, Arm(L), Arm(R), Leg(L) and Leg (R).

Creatures with unique anatomy might have a few extra hit locations, like a centaur's legs would be divided into (Lrear), (Rrear), (Lfront), and (Rfront). If a creature is some type of tentacle monster, you might offer that clusters of tentacles instead are a single location. PA might have 8-10 locations, Like sensors and weapon(s), or Wing(L), Wing(R), and jetpack.

At any given point where fire or an explosive would exceed 10x the damage (due to a massive amount of hit locations) look at what is actually going on. Fire can wash all over your opponent, and a man-sized and shaped target should never take more than a single hit's worth of damage to all locations. If you find though that it's a bit rough hitting a centaur with 8 locations worth of single hit damage, maybe offer that the front legs and back legs each count as a single location for this purpose.

Armour system, revised and smoothed out.


Based around some suggestions I have recieved from my players/GM, I have changed how the system works.
As a quick note, I will list examples that do not reflect the current stats items/rules of the game. These are because we (myself and my group) have modified these items for our play-style.

Just some background here; my group doesn't use the ratio of 100:1 SDC:MDC, we use 30-40 SDC = 1 MDC. Not because any of us have a hard time fathoming why MDC is so much stronger, but that we A- don't use the GI Joe armour rule, and B- want SDC to mean something in this MDC world. We worked it to the point that small to medium arms fire won't crack MDC material, even on a max. damage roll, and are in the process or doing a system were burst-fire isn't just a higher total of the weapons' abilities but rather a grouping of single bullet hits.

Okay, on to the armour.

The categories are still the same; fire/crushing weapons - d4 damage, personal weapons - d6 damage, heavy weapons - d8 damage, PA/giant weapons - d10 damage, and now the addition of massive weapons, at d12/ d20 damage.

The dice type (represented as dX) indicates what type of armour the weapon is effective against. Armour has a similar damage rating, evenly matched with the weapon categories their protective against. Armour also has additional indications of what type of protection it offers; a flak-jacket for instance is considered partial armour, as well as soft armour, meaning that fire or crushing attacks work especially well since the armour cannot effectively protect against these.

The new rules go as follows;
Weapon damage that exceeds the armour rating does normal damage.
Weapon damage that equals the armour rating does half damage.
Weapon damage that is less than the armour rating, but still has the same dice type does minimum damage.

Examples of this are as follows;
Tom Slinger is using an NG-45 LP and is doing 4d6 damage per shot to a raider who is wearing Gladiator armour. The Gladiator armour has an armour rating of 3d6, so Mr. Slinger does full normal damage.
Later in Tom's career he is duking it out with a guy in Crusader heavy armour, which has an armour rating of 4d6. Tom is doing 4d6/2 damage (or 2d6 damage if you prefer).
Tom, at the end of his rope finds himself having to square off against a CS cyborg in Heavy 'Borg armour, which has an armour rating of 6d6. Tom is only doing 4 damage per hit - not good.

The rules for attacking armours outside of your category;
If your weapon's dice type is higher than the opponent's armour rating type (example; d6 versus d4), then you deal full damage regardless of how many dice the armour rating is (example; 1d6 does full damage to d4 rating armour, even if it was 6d4).
If your weapon's dice type is a single dice type lower than the opponents' armour rating, but the number of dice used exceeds the armours' dice number, you deal half damage.
If your weapon only deals damage equal to the dice of the higher-valued armour, you deal minimum damage.
If your weapon deals less dice than the higher valued armour, you deal no damage.
If the opponent's armour is two dice categories higher (example; d6 damage versus d10 armour rating) you deal no damage, regardless of the amount of dice.

Currently I am in the process of changing over all weapons and armour (in the books I own) over to this new system; these are in addition to some more realistic weapon changes I'm doing (like increased ranges, and proper bonuses to certain things)

This is just one step of my rules re-write, but the armour system works well as an insert into any game.
Just follow these basics;
Personal armour
Armour that is considered light should have a rating of no more than 3d6 - good enough to help stop the average rifle.
Armour that is considered heavy should have a rating of 4d6 or higher (up to 6d6) depending on the technology used. An example of this is the Crusader armour, which has a rating of 4d6, while the CS heavy armour would have a rating of 5d6, and the Borg version at 6d6.
Concealable armour should have a rating of 1-2d6; good enough to help stop light rifles and pistols only.

Powered Armour, light vehicles, and light giant robots
Should have an armour rating similar to that of personal armour, but use a d8 instead. Exceptionally heavy or experimental PA/vehicles, such as the Glitterboy would have a low d10 rating instead.

Medium and heavy military vehicles, such as heavy APCs and heavy giant robots, and Medium or heavier tanks would have an armour rating of d10. I'd keep these numbers low, like 1-4d10 at most.

Another possiblity would be that only the main body of the vehicle or tank has a rating of d10, while specific locations (such as leg joints or tank cannons/weapons) have a d8 rating. This IMO is the best way of doing it; tanks are supposed to be tough, and this way they are, and require extra effort just to disable!
This other method is what I'm contemplating on doing; that way characters can still use their personal firearms or heavy firearms against these vehicles, but now they have to be tactical with them, otherwise their bashing a rock with their head-method will result in failure.

That was always something I never liked about Rifts; that if you didn't kill it right away, just keep shooting, it'll die eventually. Which is why I would often threaten to simply use the Ork Supakustom Mastablasta.
Now there is a reason not to spam weak but cheap firearms; that bursting a pair of 7.62mm rifles does not do equal damage to that of a 120mm cannon.

Revisions Part II, Additions


As with the previous parts before I revised everything, MDC and SDC of item protection is cut in half. This means that a suit of 100 MD armour goes to 50 MDC.

Currently this might seem unfair when fighting things like Titan Juicers (who have 1000's of SDC, which under my lowered MDC:SDC ratio makes them way tougher), but they too would see an SDC reduction. Numbers for this though are currently unavailable.

Also, many of you will note that now exceptionally strong characters have a major advantage - this advantage will be diminished (damage-wise).

The theories behind all this are logical to a point, but are mainly for streamlining the inconsistencies. The off-topic ramblings of where this started from go as follows (this is a conversation I had with myself - note that I am not crazy, nor am I Megatron, I just have a habit of talking out-loud to fully understand my own thoughts).

Does it make sense that a really strong Titan Juicer can collapse a modern, but SDC tank with a single hit, yet he can barely lift an everyday SUV?
No! the lift to strength/damage ratio is waaaay out of proportion.
So what can we do, beyond lowering damage and upping the lift capabilities? I mean, remaking the strength chart is an option. But I done THAT before for my own game (under works), and that hasn't turned out good. Ever.
There is an idea though that I like very much; lift capability based on personal weight. Clearly supernaturally strong things will be able to lift more, but that lift capability was never properly represented by size. I mean, take a run-o-the-mill vampire and an old dragon; the vampire could have a PS of 30S, while the dragon might have a PS of 100S. While the dragon can lift more, and does more damage, absolutely none of that is from size and weight. Technically speaking the vampire is an ant, and the dragon is an infant for strength purposes - the vamp can lift many, many times it's own weight and causes damage waaay out of proportion for its size. Meanwhile old baby-arms can't actually lift his own weight (or even half his weight), and does less damage than he would just falling on someone.
WHAT SENSE DOES THAT MAKE?! (yes, I yell at myself)
So what we should do is offer a lift ratio based on your own weight, rather than based on strength.

The basic design is that basic lifting is done based on a fraction of your weight. You can lift 1/2 your weight with a strength score between 10-19 for instance. The problem is, this is based on human sized and weighted people. This formula does work the larger and smaller you get, but is screwed up when it comes to damage.


On-topic, this is why I'm having such a tough time figuring out a good damage ratio based on strength. I know that I should include a damage margin based on weight, but the formula feels time-consuming so I've been putting off doing it.


Type d4 damage.
Heat, cold, and pressure (ie: being crushed) does this type of damage. When you freeze inside your armour, or a boiled alive, or have a titan juicer trying to bring the sides of your helmet together (with your head still in it), you take damage through your armour. Some armours provide excellent protection against this, but others (like dog-pack riot armour) does not. Most armours are effective against d4 damage, but are often not immune. While it might seem illogical that a tank takes damage from a flame-thrower, you would be partially mistaken. In our modern world, the tanks of today are still affected by fire; they can over-heat, or have internal circuitry fuse and burn out. These problems in Rifts are represented by damage. The difference here though is that effective damage is dependant on the heat of the weapon, and the grade of the armour.

The example of this is as follows.
Say you have a MD flamethower (it likely gouts plasma instead of actual fire, like the Wellington Industries one) that deals 4d4 MD. under the above revised armour rules, this would do no damage to armour with a rating of 4d6 or higher. BUT because d4 damage is special, it seeps though the armour.
-Any time an armour would not protect against an area attack effectively (such as a suit of MD armour that was only partial coverage, or a tank with an open top) the wearer takes full damage (in the case of a large vehicle, the attack would have to reasonably affect those inside, such as the flame entering the vehicle, or rimming the open entrance with occupants in close proximity).
-Even under full protection, the wearer takes some damage through the armour. usually the minimum amount possible, coverted to SDC as neccessary.
-The armour/vehicle itself takes minimum damage from the attack, unless the armour in question is atleast two grades higher (d8) and has an equal amount of dice. D10 armour only takes minimum damage if it has less dice than the attack does (4d4 fire will deal minimum damage to 3d10 armour for instance).
-People wearing powered armour or in a military-grade vehicle (a Mountaineer ATV would count for this purpose, but a BigBoss would not) are generally safe from any heat damage, as are people protected by force fields.

Cold and crushing damage will be elaborated on just a bit later (maybe tonight, maybe tomorrow) but as of right now I have to cut this post short.

Please offer comments, critiques and suggestions.

Revisions, Stage II

This is the second time I have revised this system, as the more I test it, the more I find problems.

Okay, I have noticed that certain weapons near the ends of their spectrums are simply useless. For example, a weapon that did 6d6/2 damage against 6d6 armour is way better than a weapon dealing the full 1d8 or 2d8 damage. So this system needs a revision (again). These things happen, and only through testing can we perfect things.


I've also modified things abit so that more infantry weapons would be useful against heavily armoured targets.

The scale still goes as follows;

1d6 2d6 3d6 4d6 5d6 6d6 / 1d8 2d8 3d8 4d8 5d8 6d8 / 1d10 2d10 3d10 4d10 5d10 6d10

If you find yourself doing the same type but less dice, than you are doing minimum damage. +damage is completely negated.
An example of this is doing 3d6+3 to a 4d6 armour. You would only be doing 3 damage per hit.

If you find that your weapon does exactly the same dice and type, then you are doing half-damage (or minimum, if you happen to roll low). +damage is also cut in half (rounded down).
An example of this would be doing 4d6+1 to 4d6 armour. You would be doing 4d6+1 /2(min:4), or 2d6(min:4).

If you find yourself doing the same type but more dice, then you deal full normal damage.
An example of this would be doing 5d6 to 4d6 armour. You do 5d6 as normal.

Now this next part gets abit fuzzy for a proper solution that doesn't involve heavy math. I have been contemplating on just doubling the damage, but this offers that doing 3d6 (6d6 cut in-half) to 6d6 armour is still better than 1d8.

So instead the current solution is that your do +2 dice to the category below.
An example of this is a 1d8 weapon does 3d8 damage to armours of 1-6d6. 2d8 would be 4d8, etc...

Now, for weaponry that does two or more categories of difference (d10's to d6's), they do +4 dice, and they are treated as if maximum damage is rolled. So 1d10 would do 5d10 maxed (50) to any armour with a rating of 1-6d6.

It might seem that getting 8d8 (a range of 8-64) would be your better option, but realistically you can't achieve the same damage average (36 compared to 50). It might seem super-powerful to get a 1d10 weapon then, but that is because it's supposed to be.

d10 weaponry is for things like medium armour-piercing missiles, and heavy main cannons. The boomgun would be doing 1d10 damage (for instance). Now this might seem like a major damage-nerf, but in actuality it is doing about the same.
(some math on the subject)
Normally the boomgun does 3d6x10 damage, with a range of 30-180 points, and a damage average of 105. Since this damage upgrade, the boomgun does 1d10 points of damage, meaning that it will always (well, almost always) be an effective weapon against most targets. additionally the boomgun would destroy most personal body armour in a single hit; this has not changed. As all MDC values have been cut in half, personal body armour went from 80-100 for heavy to 45-50; the boomgun still destroys this armour in a single hit.

There are still some "flaws" to be sorted out, like how a boomgun used to be able to destroy a SAMAS in like 2 hits, while now it takes about 7-8 (15 avg. against 120MDC). But now there is a real reason to use called shots; something the game made all but pointless before (trust me on this).

You might be thinking that things like tanks are all but invincible now to boomgun fire due to a previous post here about locational armour rating. This is intentional as I didn't want to create the same situation Rifts is currently in; that a Glitterboy could just slug it out with a machine that for every logical reason is superior - and would win. Now that Glitterboy pilot has a reason to fire on the move, and to pick out locations to strike at. Pounding the frontal armour of a linebacker is no longer a tactically sound combat option for the Glitterboy; he must take out specific locations - as the versimilitude or real-life would dictate.

This also makes the game less about chance and more about skill; back to the "Glitterboy versus a SAMAS" example, those wings and jet-fans have a relatively low MD total, something the Glitterboy could strike and disable in a single hit. This means that the skilled pilot of a Glitterboy acts more like the armoured sniper he's supposed to be instead of the armoured killbot he is.

Part 2.II coming up next...

gadrin wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:Revisions, Stage II

This is the second time I have revised this system, as the more I test it, the more I find problems.

Pretty soon you'll be like half the guys on this BBS: "I'm going to make my own RPG!!!"

Soon? I'm there, and have been for quite some time.
It started with the idea for a setting, and has since began to roll on square wheels.

That said, these rules changes to the Palladium system aren't so much a different RPG as they are a system for a RPG (Rifts) that actually makes sense and works without injuring the Dog's mind here.

gadrin wrote:My GM system is simple: "If it's stupid, it doesn't work."

There's a great war-story from one of the posters on this BBS...

Player: "I go Hand to Hand with the Dragon!"

GM: "He's mega-damage...roll to hit..."

Player: "Natural 20!"

>

See, your above account wounds me like a knife. Where stupidity can win the day by virtue of luck is not something I enjoy seeing or playing with. For me, versimilitude is what makes a game worth while.

Shadowmagic wrote:I read almost all of your proposed system until I came to a simple conclusion. Your different armor armor classes of d4, d6 etc is really a more complicated version of the gap between SDC and MDC. That being said, just dropping the MDC sytem and going all SDC with no AR system in place would work just as well, simpler too.

It's not though. All damage is the same as far as MD is concerned. 1 MD is still 1 MD whether it's from a laser rifle or a boomgun. This is the biggest distinction. An armour that can take 50 MDC will survive quite a while against a 3d6 laser weapon, where as it gets eliminated by the boomgun instantly.
BUT stronger, military-grade 'bots and PA tend to have a bit more survivability. This was done this way because a tank shouldn't have to fear ten guys with laser rifles.

Have you read some of my other posts (not in this thread)? I mentioned in one an Ork SupaKustomMastaBlasta. This idea was pulled from Warhammer (Gorka Morka I believe); duct-tape a bunch of guns together to make a superior weapon. Currently this idea has great merit in Rifts. Take a look at the NG 101 or 202 railguns. They offer 6d6 or 1d4x10 MD at a range of 4000 feet. They weigh about 150Lbs or 225 Lbs with ammo though. And their cost is high.

Meanwhile, take a gander at the JA-9 variable laser Rifle. 2d6 at 4000 feet with a variable frequiency. The weight is almost nothing, and the cost is only 20,000cr. If you bought 5 of them you have the damage potencial of the 202 at the same range, though you're looking at 1/10th the weight and about 1/2 the cost.

Buy enough of these weapons (like 50) and you've got a super-weapon sasily mounted on a tank chasis (which are cheap; you can get a retro-fitted bradley for under 100,000cr).

This gun platform is doing 1d6x100 for less than a suit of SAMAS PA costs. Power becomes a problem though, so lets say you buy a nuclear reactor to power the weapon specifically; that's around another 300,000 (at most). either way you can take atleast one for every SAMAS, and they don't even cost as much. You could have an almost 10:1 ratio against a Glitterboy!

This is all a mechanical flaw in the game. Why buy more expensive but only minorly beneficial weaponry when a bit of enginuity gives you an "I win" button against the majority of threats on Rifts Earth?

So by changing this dynamic, by having there be a reason not to do this, the game becomes more believeable. That taking a Wilks' pistol offers a true advantage over an NG-57 ion pistol.

Shadowmagic wrote:I think what you are trying to do is very interesting and can add a lot more diversity to weapon damage and capacity to withstand it. I just think there are many way you could go that are much simpler.

Try this on for size: Multipliers

Say you want 6 levels of separation. Here is the beginning of a chart for an example:

1) Fists, small weapons, low caliber firearms:Includes die ranges d4-3d4, 1d6-2d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12. This gives a damage multiplier of 1, no change.

2)Medium to large HTH weapons and medium caliber firearms: Includes die ranges 4d4-6d4, 3d6-4d6, 2d8-3d8, 2d10, 2d12, d20. This gives a damage multiplier of 1.25.

Fist and strength damage is something I've been working on; I may consider your above imput on the matter.

Shadowmagic wrote:That's easy enough for weapons but, personal body armor, vehicles and Bots need to be assigned a power level to receive their damage capacity ratio. This system is still not super simple but, it eliminates the overlap problem you are having with die classing.

Overlapping?

Revisions Stage II, part 2

Example armours and weapons.

At home I have a file with around 140 weapons I've updated to a "standard" level. The standard is weapons deal a uniform amount based on ammunition type, weapon type, and a general eyeball from myself.

It looks like this...
Laser rifle; 3d6
Ion rifle: 4d6
Particle-beam rifle 5d6

Laser pistol 2d6
Ion pistol 3d6
Particle-beam pistol 4d6

This is further modified by weapons with the descriptor of...
"old"; -1 dice
"light"; -1 dice
"heavy"; +1 dice
"super" or "max" or similar; +2 dice

This is a very general template I used, and there are exceptions.

Also, I gave plasma weaponry a basis of 1d8 for older or lighter plasma cannons (like the C27) and 2d8 for heavier or newer versions (like the C29).

This is the "rough draft", as many of these weapons propose + damage, which is something I do not want to do away with.

Rifle-grenades, mini-grenades, and mini-missiles now follow a company or continental "standard" for ammo size, much the same to e-clips. Coalition weaponry and ammo (for example) differs from the North American standard. With their trade-agreements and such, this will remain the case for quite some time. Quebec-manufactured weaponry still uses CS-standard sizes - not that either side cares enough to change their entire weapons line over for.

Unless otherwise noted, most grenade-launchers (like the wellington models) use the standard rifle-grenade.

All told, this has been a monumental task of repetative proportions. Most guns don't really change, but there is now a clear distinction of why fighting a tank with an infantry rifle is a really, really dumb idea.

Currently I'm working on the ammo loads and ranges for weapons; this portion more ties into other shooting rules I have developed, but I'll give you an example right now.

Laser weapons and range-changes...
less than 600 feet becomes 1000 feet
601-800 feet becomes 1500 feet
801-1000 feet becomes 2000 feet
1001-1300 feet becomes 2500 feet
1301-1600 feet becomes 3000 feet
1601-1800 feet becomes 3500 feet
1801-2300 feet becomes 4000 feet
2301-2900 feet becomes 5000 feet
2901+ feet becomes 1 mile.

e-clip ammo
Short does 20 in laser pistols and 15 in laser rifles.
Long does 40 in laser pistols and 30 in laser rifles.

Ion weapons use about 20% more energy, thus they have their ammo capacity reduced accordingly.
Short does 16 in ion pistols and 12 in ion rifles.
Long does 32 in ion pistols and 24 in ion rifles.

Particle weapons use about 30% more energy.
Short does 14 in particle pistols and 10 in particle rifles.
Long does 27 in particle pistols and 20 in particle rifles.


Remember that this is all rough-draft work, and that nothing is adamant. Each weapon has it's own quirks and flaws, and advantages. I've reduced these weapons down to this level though so that I could work from a "cleaner" model.

EDIT: I suppose I didn't include any sample armours. That'll come next...

Dog_O_War wrote:I've been mulling this concept over for about a month now, and I wanted to lay out the framework to see what you people think of it.

SDC and MDC are so abstract that it brings about dumb oversights within the game. For instance, a well-trained combatant (someone with a high + to strike) can "beat-up" an M1-Abrams with his bare fists, destroying the tank; all he has to do is beat the AR.

So what I propose is a different SDC/MDC system; a "rating" system. It works like this...

Say (for example) an inch thick plate of steel effectively repelled any an all small arms fire without degrading. Now say the "largest" of the small arms was 7.62mm FMJ rifle round. The round fired does 5d6 damage, so the armour has a protection rating of 5d6. Now, a special solid-core 7.62 round is used that does 6d6 damage; that would do an effective 1d6 damage past the armour to the structure itself.

It is important to note the type of dice as well, as this will affect all weaponry in the future. The next level of protection say is an Abrams' Chotbram armour (or whatever it's called); this armour has a protection factor of 5d8. Unless a weapon does d8 type damage, it will not penetrate the armour unless it is has an order of magnitude behind the blow equal to the number of d8's the armour protects against (6d6 will not penetrate, but 50d6 will). Count every 10 dice of the lower damage type as one dice of the higher for armour penetration purposes. any actual damage that get through though is done to the full amount rolled.
The example of this would be 6d8 would do 1d8 damage past the Abram's armour, and 56d6 would do 5d6 past it.

You will have to play around with weapon damages for a while to achieve an acceptable balance, or you can wait for me to do it.

Weapon types will also change; the higher the dice type will indicate the quality of attack, where as the number of dice indicates the force. Higher quality weaponry will always penetrate lower quality armour to a point; 1d8 will be blocked by 10d6 armour for instance.


So, what do you think?

Interesting...
A bit complex...

Why not just use a damage reduction system?
quick and dirty DR system (untested)
1. Assign a DR (appropriate to the armored object).
2. Armor "absorbs" an amount of damage per hit equal to the DR before damage is allocated.
3. there is no upper limit on DR

for example lets use the 1" plate example above.
DR would be 18 (average roll on 5d6) so it would "absorb" or negate 18 points of damage before taking any damage at all.

Keep in mind the number I chose was arbitrary you could just as easily use 30 (max on 5d6) as the DR.

You think to hard..... and your rules are too complicated....Just do as below and eliminate M.D.C. and use a bit of common sense and your RPG life will be easier (Note I don't care about/play for realism, if that's what you want in a game the Palladium system ISN'T for you and you should look elsewhere)... :


Here is my proven Rifts M.D.C. to S.D.C. Conversion rules (Requires Heros Unlimited Second Edition to Use).....

Here are some conversion Rates for the Rifts RPG (also applicable to the Chaos Earth, Splicers, and the New Robotech RPGs) to convert M.D.C. power armor , bots , vehicles and weapons to the S.D.C. system. Multiply by the Listed amounts to get S.D.C.

M.D. Times 2 is now the S.D.C. damage for vibro-blades .

M.D. Times 2 is now the S.D.C. damage for hand-held Small Arms type weapons .

M.D. Times 3 (Tmes 2 for Man-sized Railguns) is now the S.D.C. damage for heavy or power armor mounted weapons (Includes Hand Grenades and the grenades used in Grenade Launchers), also note that Railguns do their converted burst damage in M.D. as S.D.C. per a singe shot (I.E. a C-40R SAMAS Railgun now does 2D4x10 S.D.C. per a single round) and that bursts from railguns should be treated as exacty the same as those of Machineguns.

M.D.Times 10 is now the S.D.C. damage for heavy vehicle mounted weapons (Includes the Glitter Boy's Boom-Gun).

M.D. Times 5 is now the S.D.C. damage for explosives/missiles.

M.D.C. Times 3 is now the S.D.C. for body armor (this puts Plastic-Man roughly equivalent with riot armor) and ALL Rifts, Robotech and Splicers High-Tech Body Armor has the equivalent of Natural/Robot A.R.

M.D.C. Times 3 is now the S.D.C. for power armor , cyborgs , small vehicles, and man-sized robots (this gives a Death's Head SAMAS 750 S.D.C., about as much as a mack truck) and ALL Bionic Systems and Military Vehicles have an equivalent of Natural/Robot A.R.

M.D.C. Times 3 is now the S.D.C. for M.D.C. tanks, conventional vehicles that are larger than man sized, ships , submarines, Glitter Boys and Giant Robots (this gives the largest Iron Heart Armaments tank something like 1900 S.D.C., which is better but still in the same ballpark as an M-1 Abrams at 1500 S.D.C.), and also ALL Military Vehcles have an equivalent of Natural/Robot A.R.

M.D.C. Times 1 to Times 10 for truly massive things (starships, Chi-Town, etc). The balance on these kinds of things varies dramatically (See the below notes on A.R. for these).

The Armor Rating of Different Types of Armor : The only other consideration for armor is to assign an Armor Rating (A.R.).

Most padded, plastic, and light vests and body armor like the Huntsman, Urban Warrior, Juicer, and Plastic Man armor are A.R. 13. Strong and lightweight body armors like the Bushman, Gladiator, Crusader, Explorer and full plate body armor will likely have an A.R. 15 or 16. Most power armor have an A.R. of 16 to 17 and so do human sized robots, like Skelebots, and giant robots, heavy robot vehices like the Coalition Spider Skull Walkers, tanks, APCs, etc., have and A.R. of 18. The Armor Ratings for bionic and robotic characters are likely to be in the range of at A.R. 11 or 12 for light armor, about 14 or 15 for medium armor, and 16 or 17 for heavy armor, and a 18 MAXIMUM for heavy full plate armor.

Vehicles like the Big Boss and the various car and airplane-like vehicles have an A.R. of 6 to 8, but armored vehicles like the Mountaineer A.T.V. have an A.R. of 13 to 14. Old Style Military Vehicles , the Coalition Mark V APC, Death’s Head Transports, and other tank, APC, military Aircraft and combat vehicles have an A.R. of 17. The old CS Sky Cycle has an A.R. of 14 but the new ones have an A.R. of 16.

Force Fields and Magic Barriers usually have an A.R. of 19 or 20, allowing the force field to absorb all or most of the damage. When all of the force field’s S.D.C. is used up it’s destroyed/gone. The Armor of Ithan spell provides an A.R. of 18 and 200 S.D.C. points.

Notes: Only the following weapons have a prayer of EVEN SLIGHTLY damaging Tanks/Armored Vehicles, Large Robot Vehicles and Heavy Power Armor (Glitterboys, CS Terror Trooper, Ulti-Max, etc, etc...): super Powers of Superhuman P.S. and Supunatural P.S., Magic/Psionic Weapons/Spells/Powers, Heavy Macineguns (.50 inch, 12.7mm and 14.5mm), Auto-Cannons, Energy Weapons, Any Weapon Listed as a Anti-Armor/Tank Weapon, and ANY Weapon Converted to the S.D.C. System Using these Rules that ORIGINALLY was listed as doing Mega-Damage.

Physical Strength of Robots, Power Armor, Cyborgs, and Juicers: Use these rules for the raw Physical Strength (P.S.) Of the items and individuals.

Exo-skeleton body armor and Partial Conversion Cyborgs and Juicers (Anything with Augmented Physical Strength) have a physical strength equal to the Heroes Unlimited Minor Super Ability: Extraordinary Physical Strength.

Power Armor, Full Conversion Cyborgs and Giant Robots (Anything with Robot Physical Strength) have an equivalent physical strength to the Heroes Unlimited Major Super Ability: Super Human Physical Strength.

Creatures/Items/Powers that possess/grant Supernatural Physical Stength have, well, the equivalent of the Heros Unlimited Major Super Ability: Supernatural Physical Strength.

NOTE: For magical and supernatural creatures, spells, and creations just use the rules on page 31 of the Rifts Conversion Book One Revised Edition to turn them into S.D.C./Hit Point equivalent creatures/spells, then take a look at how they stat out and modify them to your liking.

Please take this in the best possible way.


I would never willingly subject myself to those rules. They continue to use every extremely flawed system this game has to offer.


This is why the rules I put forth are so complicated and different than those in the book. It is because they have very little to do with the actual Palladium rules, but can work within the current system.

Dog_O_War wrote:Please take this in the best possible way.


I would never willingly subject myself to those rules. They continue to use every extremely flawed system this game has to offer.


This is why the rules I put forth are so complicated and different than those in the book. It is because they have very little to do with the actual Palladium rules, but can work within the current system.

*Shrugs* Their only failing is they aren't meant to be realistic..... And that's what you're asking for in a system dude.... If you find the palladium system "extremely flawed" why continue to mess around with it when you'd be happier with something else? This is'nt a cop out or anything as the palladium system isn't meant to be "Realistic".... I'm mostly happy with the system as is... It's not realistic, but then again I don't want it that way (If you do, more power too you and best of luck in your games). I've noticed every RPG system has it's flaws.... They only really bad flaw I've found with the paladium system is a lack of examples and clarifications in the books on how the rules work. Other then that I find it fairly solid, and have used it for close too two decades without problems.... Many of your examples above are kind of silly, like being able to take out a tank with your bare hands and puny normal human P.S., when you've NEVER been able to do this in palladium (infact there are numerous examples hidden in various palladium books explaining you CAN'T.....) The Palladium system assumes you use common sense as a GM rather the have every rule/example spelled out for you (Though some clarification and more examples would be nice). What your trying to do isn't wrong, but it's adding extra complexty to things that I feel are ok as is, in the name of realism, which the palladium system wasn't intended to provide.

panzerfaust wrote:*Shrugs* Their only failing is they aren't meant to be realistic..... And that's what you're asking for in a system dude.... If you find the palladium system "extremely flawed" why continue to mess around with it when you'd be happier with something else? This is'nt a cop out or anything as the palladium system isn't meant to be "Realistic".... I'm mostly happy with the system as is... It's not realistic, but then again I don't want it that way (If you do, more power too you and best of luck in your games). I've noticed every RPG system has it's flaws.... They only really bad flaw I've found with the paladium system is a lack of examples and clarifications in the books on how the rules work. Other then that I find it fairly solid, and have used it for close too two decades without problems.... Many of your examples above are kind of silly, like being able to take out a tank with your bare hands and puny normal human P.S., when you've NEVER been able to do this in palladium (infact there are numerous examples hidden in various palladium books explaining you CAN'T.....) The Palladium system assumes you use common sense as a GM rather the have every rule/example spelled out for you (Though some clarification and more examples would be nice). What your trying to do isn't wrong, but it's adding extra complexty to things that I feel are ok as is, in the name of realism, which the palladium system wasn't intended to provide.

I'm not looking for realistic - I'm looking for versimilitude and symbiosis within the game and the rules.

To put it simply - these changes I've put forth have very little effect on the low-end level; players still take the same amount of effective hits as they used to. I've just reduced the numbers to represent this.

Meanwhile, without having the game turn into the Dragonball Z RPG, I've done up a power-scale more representative of how I believe it should be - not what is the most realistic (I'd have to FIREBALL! myself if I did). I believe that when I shoot a missile or fire the main cannon of a tank, it should have a greater effect than an infantry laser-rifle fired 3 times.