Quote from: Spinachcat;380674I played with KS at his Open House event and like Dave Arneson and several other RPG designers I've met, he couldn't care about the RAW.   Hell, Dave had us narrate our saving throws.  KS is all about the pacing and the action and the dice were just there for success/fail and flavor.

Good lord, that's frustrating. Why would you play one way and write your game another way!?! That's doubly frustrating when pages are devoted to explaining why RIFTS Ultimate was no an update to the rules, because they were perfect and unchanging.

Obviously we are all free to ignore the RAW as much as we want to. But if you're a game designer, and you think your game plays best one way, but write the rules another way . . . .argh!

If it wouldn't hurt a whole lot I'd be pulling my hair out right about now.

Quote from: Atomic Scotsman;380681Good lord, that's frustrating. Why would you play one way and write your game another way!?! That's doubly frustrating when pages are devoted to explaining why RIFTS Ultimate was no an update to the rules, because they were perfect and unchanging.

Obviously we are all free to ignore the RAW as much as we want to. But if you're a game designer, and you think your game plays best one way, but write the rules another way . . . .argh!

If it wouldn't hurt a whole lot I'd be pulling my hair out right about now.

Agree 100 fucking %. It makes me bleed out the ears. Why put up the fight of constantly refusing to update a system that you as the designer don't even play as you wrote it? :jaw-dropping: All the while continuing to piss off the very people you are trying to sell to, by ignoring their views and belittling them.  :banghead: I gotto stop now before I go on a KS bashing spree and derail the thread...

I wonder if KS actually writes a lot of bullshit about why no RIFTS 2e, when in fact the real reason he doesn't do it is because he recognizes that releasing an all new edition would be a long-term strategic blunder?

If so, its a pity he doesn't just out and out say that.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Atomic Scotsman;380681Why would you play one way and write your game another way!?!

I asked KS this exact question at the Open House after I played in his very kickass event.  He is a really fun GM.

Remember that KS is truly Old School, began playing RPGs when D&D was often a stack of mimeographs passed between college kids, not even photocopies and everybody was houseruling every which way.  Obviously he was affected by RQ, Traveller and the host of late 70s RPGs as he developed his own system he debuted in the early 80s.  

KS is also a Detroit guy, close to the original hobby explosion so he was feeding off that original energy that was so infectious among the early adopters of our hobby.

Somewhere along the line, KS developed the belief that a good system had a strong core mechanic and lots of "other stuff" and every GM would decide how much of the "other stuff" to use in their game.  

Not surprising really - look at AD&D.  Major success and most of us threw out speed factors, weapon vs. armor, psionics, bards, material components, grappling and nobody gave a shit.   And since most of us played without minis or battlemaps, most AD&Ders pretty much tossed out movement, ranges and turning radius rules except to hand wave them about.

KS really believes that RAW is a choice and you don't have to obey 10% and he does state this in his very well written GM's Guide for Rifts - BUT - I do know he contradicts himself when he talks in RUE about how the RAW is perfect.

But hell, maybe KS has a point.  Chaosium and Palladium are slinging the same system after 25 years and their books are on the shelves of game stores and book stores whereas 1000 other systems (maybe much better systems) are long dead and gone.

Gotta respect longevity in the marketplace.   Especially one with as much volatile turnover as RPGs.

Quote from: RPGPundit;380825I wonder if KS actually writes a lot of bullshit about why no RIFTS 2e, when in fact the real reason he doesn't do it is because he recognizes that releasing an all new edition would be a long-term strategic blunder?

KS is caught in a bind.  If 2e is not compatible with 1e, then all his 1e stock is worthless and his back catalog is his bread and butter.  Also, there is no evidence in the marketplace that says a totally new 2e would sell better than just continuing with 1e.   It would be a huge risk.

Personally, I think it would be a good risk because the IP is better than the system and even the IP needs an overhaul into the 21st century, especially considering how far the IP has drifted from the original concepts.

But I don't have my livelihood sitting on that risk.   He does and its easy for us with no stake in the game to be armchair quarterbacks.

Spinachcat:

I writer games the way I play them. Interestingly enough, it always makes me wonder about other designers. "If you didn't write something you'd use, why the hell did you write it?"

Quote from: Silverlion;380835Spinachcat:

I writer games the way I play them. Interestingly enough, it always makes me wonder about other designers. "If you didn't write something you'd use, why the hell did you write it?"

The joke just writes itself.

Quote from: RPGPundit;380351Wait... is that a GNOME in your avatar?!!

RPGPundit

No one here but us dwarves..?

Quote from: Novastar;380836The joke just writes itself.

I can't type worth a damn I do type rather quickly, just not well.

I'm gearing up to run a Rifts one-shot at a local convention, and want to figure out what my combat protocol will look like.

Here's what I'm thinking about currently:

- All characters have MDC body armor. The amount of ablative MDC points remaining in your armor is the primary damage track, like hit points in 4E. If you run out of that in a combat, you're dead, but you can reset that track by salvaging a new suit of armor. (Is there a RAW way to regenerate damage to your existing suit?)

- Characters also have SDC and hit points. I don't plan to make the scenario force people to get out of their MDC armor and fight with clubs or anything, so these will function mostly as a kind of alternate damage track, like surges in 4E. Things that do SDC/HP damage even through your armor - impact from crashes, maybe psychic/magic power - are meaningful because you can't ditch that damage just by getting into new armor.

- All characters get four attacks they can do per round. (Is it reasonable to assume that I could design all the pre-gens to make this true at 1st level?)

- The basic to-hit roll is a 5 or better, since armor rating doesn't apply to MDC. Pluses to hit (+1 for burst, +4 for aimed, no?) will make this almost always hit (absent called shots). So dodging (or, rarely, parrying) is the interesting part of combat, which is a deal where you try to roll better on a d20 than the roll that hit you, right?

The example in the rules, where during each round everyone goes around and does their first attack that round, and then figures out whether they'll use their next attack that round to block the first one, and then goes around and resolves their second attack, seems really clunky to me. So what I'm thinking is a combat procedure where either:

- you roll all four d20 as a handful, and then figure out how they're assigned to attacks or dodges (perhaps using initiative to say who has to assign them first)
- you roll all four in a back-and-forth sequence within one player's turn before moving on to the next player
- you cut the turn duration into four parts, so that each player takes a turn with only one action in it, or in half so that you get two actions (e.g. one attack and one defense), following the line of reasoning Delta talks about here.

I'd be interested to hear descriptions of how people do the alternation of attacks within a round in play!

Tavis,

- I believe RIFTS: Mercenaries has rules for repairing armor, but they aren't worth much. Too long, and far too expensive for most player's taste (especially if they can just steal another guys).

- More record-keeping = slower gameplay. Especially for a Con game, you should look to make combat simpler, rather than more complex.

- Using R:UE, yes, since any HTH training gets you 4 attacks per round (I despise this rule, personally; once again, more attacks = slower gameplay).

- IIRC, a 5 hits in HTH, an 8 is needed to hit for Ranged weapons (12 for a Called Shot, i.e. Head shot). This is when opposed rolls to Hit and Dodge come into play (though I remember a Dodge applying to all attacks in a given round...).

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;379538I tend to house rule that an entirely different syustem be used preferably one that isnt so broken beyond repair that its a hindrance to play like the palladium system is these days.

*SNORT!*

Best answer to this question EVAH!

(KS threatening to have site sued unless thread is removed in 5...4...3...)

Quote from: Novastar;380655I also favor reducing the MDC to SDC ratio to 10:1 instead of 100:1

Other than that, I use a simplified Skill System, and basically the older set of rules for Palladium, and it runs easily enough to avoid most kerfunckles...

If that's the case you should look into the fusion system, which does things similar to that...

Quote from: Spinachcat;380833Somewhere along the line, KS developed the belief that a good system had a strong core mechanic and lots of "other stuff" and every GM would decide how much of the "other stuff" to use in their game.

Palladium certainly does have lots of "other stuff" . . .

. . .make of that what you will.

Quote from: Spinachcat;380833. . . he does state this in his very well written GM's Guide for Rifts - BUT - I do know he contradicts himself when he talks in RUE about how the RAW is perfect.

GM Guide: We must have read two different books. Mine wasn't very well written.

RUE: a ridiculous number of pages was dedicated to justifying the lack of system updates, ego stroking, and just plain stupidity. And then later there was an apology about leaving stuff out of RUE due to space constraints -how about cutting the pointless editorials and putting in that usable game content you had to leave out!?!

I honestly can't comment on whether or not there were contradictions. For one thing it's been a year or two since I read RUE, and I gave it away a while ago. But also, it was such a trippy read that it was more like descending into the diary of a madman -lots of vivid imagery and swirly colors, but when it was all over I didn't know what had happened to me and I couldn't find my pants.

I will say this, and I mean it in a good way; KS is less an RPG Publisher, and more an RPG Experience. I've been enjoying the ride one and off for almost 20yrs now.

Quote from: Spinachcat;380834Personally, I think it would be a good risk because the IP is better than the system and even the IP needs an overhaul into the 21st century, especially considering how far the IP has drifted from the original concepts.

But I don't have my livelihood sitting on that risk.   He does and its easy for us with no stake in the game to be armchair quarterbacks.

I can agree with this.

In a market that is shrinking you need to stand out to survive.  

And as someone who is self-employed and earning a living in comics books (which have a lot of parallels with RPGs) I fell like I can say that as a player, not an armchair dude.

Quote from: Cylonophile;380987*SNORT!*

Best answer to this question EVAH!

(KS threatening to have site sued unless thread is removed in 5...4...3...)

LOL, truly.

I LOVE the IP -but good lord, I want some game mechanics for the 21st Century.

A side tangent, Spinachcat mentioned going to the open house. It would be great to hear more about the open house. I heard fascinating tales of how the GMs would house rule their Palladium games that were run there. One particular house rule regarding initiative sounded interesting.

The player would divide his initiative roll by his number of attacks. Then he would act on his roll, roll - the calculation, etc... Sounded easy to implement and gave a person a chance to act multiple times before someone else attacked.

Thanks for all the replies. I like the following (personal opinion/bias, etc...):
1. Skills are all 40%+
2. Everyone gets 4 attacks.
3. Changing the way MDC works (not sure how to implement this)

I am still not sold on the roll with punch/fall but it seems to work very well for those that employ this mechanic.

Can the system's experience levels be taken out? It would break alot but I am curious if it can/has been done?

No Levels
1. Skills are easy. Use the BRP skill advancement method at the end of a session.
2. What about HTH combat? Use an advancement mechanic similar to the BRP style but with a d10 instead of a d100? An advancement would be another level in that fighting style.
3. Hit points? Do hit points need to escalate since everyone has the buffer of SDC? And hit points aren't worth much against an MDC weapon.
4. Spells?  I am stumped on this one....